The URL can be used to link to this page

17-105642CITY OF Federal Way Centered on Opportunity July 25, 2019 Mr. Eric LaBrie ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC 33400 8th Avenue South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 Pric labri�esmdviLc0mm CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com FILE Re: File #17-105642-UP; PROCESS III PROJECT APPROVAL DaVita Healthcare Office Park, 3201 South 323�d Street, Federal Way Dear Mr. LaBrie: Jim Ferrell, Mayor The Community Development Department has completed an administrative land use review of the proposed DaVita Healthcare Office Park project located next to the traffic circle at 32nd Avenue South and South 323rd Street The applicant proposes construction of a 54.5-foot-tall, 164,386 square -foot office building with 221 parking spaces, and associated site work, on a parcel totaling 5.22 acres (parcel 2154650110). A parking lot with 469 spaces and associated site work is proposed on two adjacent parcels located to the north, totaling 6.32 acres (parcels 2154650060 and 2154650090). The Process III Master Land Use application submitted November 22, 2017, with subsequent resubmittals December 8, 2017, September 12, 2018, October 31, 2018, November 9, 2018, February 28, 2019, April 23, 2019, and May 15, 2019, is hereby approved with conditions based on the enclosed findings of fact, incorporated into this decision in full, and the following conclusions based on those facts: 1. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan; 2. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with applicable zoning regulations in effect on August 23, 1994 (Federal Way City Code [FWCC]) and procedural requirements of current code (Federal Way Revised Code (F'WRCI); 3. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent withh the public health, safety, and welfare; 4. As conditioned, the streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the anticipated demand from the proposal; 5. As conditioned, the proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration; and 6. As conditioned, traffic safety impacts for all modes of transportation, both on and off site, are adequately mitigated. The remainder of this letter outlines the land use review process required for this particular site improvement; summarizes the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) process; lists conditions of the land use decision; and provides other procedural information. This land use decision does not authorize initiation of construction activities. Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 2 of 3 July 25, 2019 REVIEW PROCESS The proposal is subject to the provisions of the 1994 Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre -Annexation Development Agreement (CZA) and zoning regulations in effect on August 23, 1994 (FWCC). Any Larocedural requirements must meet eurren.t code (FWRC). The site is within the Office Park (OP-1) zoning district. Office is a permitted use in this zone pVrsumt to CZA Exhibit D, Section III. The proposed use, not exempt from SEPA, is procedurally revie.Wed under Use Process III, Project Approval. The Director of Community Development makes a written decision on the application based on the criteria listed under F IRC 19.65.100. SEPA PROCESS The City of Federal Way issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on May 3, 2019, pursuant to Warhington.Adminii1raidve Code (WAC) 197-11-350, Following review of the environmental checklist, the city determined the proposal would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment and an Entironmentallmpad Statement would not be required. A SEPA appeal was filed on June 7, 2019, and was voluntarily withdrawn on]uly 23, 201.9. A SEPA Addendum was issued on June 28, 2019, due to an increase in the building size and number of parking spaces from 161,280 square feet and 681 spaces in the original proposal to 164,386 square feet and 690 spaces. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditions of approval, which are listed in Finding of Fact #27 in Exhibit "A," are reasonably necessary to limit or minimize any undesirable effects of granting application approval. BUILDING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS This Process III land use decision does not constitute a building permit, or authorize clearing/grading activities. Building permits and an engineering permit have been submitted and are under review (city files 18- 105626-CO, 19-100500-CO, and 19-105630-EN). If you have any questions regarding building permit submittal, please contact the Permit Center at 253-835-2607. or nen-rd center cr cityoffe-deralway.com. REQUESTS FOR CHANGE OF VALUATION Per FWRC 19.65.100(4)(i), affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes, notwithstanding any program of revaluation. APPROVAL DURATION Per FWRC 19.15.100t2} "the applicant must substantially complete construction for the development activity, use of land, or other actions approved, and complete the applicable conditions listed in the use process III decision within five years after the final decision of the city on the matter, or the decision becomes void. If a land use petition is filed under Chapter 36.70C RCW in Ding County. superior court, the time limits of this section are automatically extended by the length of time between the commencernent and final termination of that litigation. If the development activity, use of land, or other action approved under this chapter includes phased construction, the time limits of this section may be extended in the decision on the application to allow for completion of subsequent phases." Time extensions to the decision may be requested prior to the lapse of approval following the provisions listed in FWRC 19.15.110. Doc LD. 79414 17-105642-00-L P M Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 3 of 3 July 25, 2019 APPEALS Per FWRC 19.05.360, the effective date of issuance is three calendar days following the date of this letter, or July 28, 2019. Pursuant to FWRC 19.65.120(1), this land use decision may be appealed by the applicant, any person who submitted written comments or information, any person who has specifically requested a copy of the decision, or the city. Pursuant to FWRC 19,65.120(2), a written notice of appeal must be delivered to the Community Development Department within 14 calendar days after issuance of the decision of the director, or August 12, 2019. The appeal must be accompanied by cash or a check, payable to the city of Federal Way, in the amount of the fee as established by the city. The notice of appeal must contain: a statement identifying the decision being appealed, along with a copy of the decision; a statement of the alleged errors in the director's decision, including identification of specific factual findings and conclusions of the director disputed by the person filing the appeal; and the appellant's name, address, telephone number, and fax number, and any other information to facilitate communications with the appellant. Appeals are governed by process IV (Federal Way Hearing Examiner). CLOSING This land use decision does not waive compliance with future City of Federal Way codes, policies, and standards relating to this development. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Senior Planner Stacey Welsh at 253-835-2634, or stacey.wel h citvoffederalway.c m. Sincerely, /X It/k Brian Davis Community Development Director enc: Exhibit "A" Findings for Project Approval Approved Elevations Approved Site Plan Approved Landscape Plan c: Stacey Welsh, Senior Planner Kevin Peterson, Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Warns & Sewer District Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue John Wilson, King County Assessor, #AMYI-AS-0708, 500 4th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 Ramin Paxooki, WSDOT, Loo Raw •dot.wa . v Arthur Richey, artho chey@vita. o Savanna Nagorski Savanna. N ars i c civil m UP III Commenters SEPA Commenters D- I.D. 79414 17-105642-00-UP RAMIN PAZOOKI WSDOT SOUTH KING COUNTY CAMERON KUKES MIKE SWIRES PO BOX 330310 WSDOT WSDOT SEATTLE WA 98133-9710 kukesc wsdot.wa. ov swiresm _ wsdot.wa.gov ram in. pazookiAwsdot.wa. gov CHASE WAKEFIELD (SALEM LAND) BP OLYMPIC PIPE LINE 600 SW 39TH ST RENTON WA 98057 chase. wakefield b .com ROSE LESMITH KING COUNTY ROAD SERVICES Rose. LeSm ith @ki ngcou n ty_.gov JOHN WILSON KING COUNTY ASSESSOR #ADM-AS-0708 500 4T" AVE SEATTLE, WA 98104 Assessol'.I I1fo(.d K i nL,Count,y-Gov KOORUS TAHGHIGHI 33205 38T" AVE S FEDERAL WAY WA 98001 koorust �yahoo.com ARTHUR RICHEY arth ur. rich ey@davita.com COURTNEY KAYLOR MCCULLOUGH HILL LEARY PS 701 FIFTH AVE STE 6600 SEATTLE WA 98104 courtne mhseattie.com SAVANNA NAGORSKI Savanna. Nagorski(aesmcivi I.com MY or vl� Federal Way Exhibit A Findings for Project Approval Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.65, "Process III Project Approval" DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, File #17-105642-UP The Director of Community Development hereby makes the following findings pursuant to content requirements of the Process III written decision as set forth in Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.65.100(4). These findings are based on review of city documents and items submitted by the applicant and received November 22, 2017, December 8, 2017, September 12, 2018, October 31, 2018, November 9, 2018, February 28, 2019, April 23, 2019, and May 15, 2019. Abbreviations referenced: Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC, current code); Federal Way City Code (FWCC, 1994 code); Concomitant Zoning Agreement (CZA); and CZA Exhibit D (OP-1 regulations). 1. Proposal — The proposal has been revised since the original November 2017, submittal of the DaVita Healthcare Office Park, which included construction of a 48.5-foot-tall, 200,000 square -foot office building with basement parking, 706 parking stalls, and associated site work. The revised proposal is a 54.5-foot-tall, 164,386 square -foot office building (160,493 square foot building with 3,893 square feet of horizontal projections for a total area of 164,386 square feet) with 2211 parking spaces, and associated site work, on a parcel totaling 5.22 acres (parcel 2154650110). A parking lot with 469 parking spaces and associated site work is proposed on two adjacent parcels located to the north totaling 6.32 acres (parcels 2154650060 and 2154650090), and is part of the proposed action. A future building expansion from 164,386 square feet to 200,000 square feet on the east side of the proposed building is noted in the resubmitted documents. According to the applicant's submittal, "should the future expansion to 200,000 square feet occur, 667 parking spaces will be required and provided in the proposed extension area of the parking lot." The current proposal includes 690 parking spaces which exceeds the requirement for the 164,386 square foot building. The building expansion outline as indicated on the site plan would occur in an area that will be developed with parking and landscaping for the current proposal. The building expansion would alter the built site and it is has not been demonstrated how it would comply with requirements, in particular those for parking and landscaping. No design for the expansion has been submitted, and according to the applicant, timing of the expansion is not known. The expansion is conceptual and as a result, was not included in the SEPA determination and is not approved as part of this land use decision. Land use and environmental application submittals and building permit review of the expansion are required at the time the expansion is proposed. 1 The May 14, 2019, submitted site plan (Sheet ST-01) prepared by ESM (resubmitted May 15, 2019), states "Parking: 689 vehicle stalls (469 North Lot and 220 South Lot)"; however, the drawing shows 221 spaces in the south lot, which changes the total to 690 parking spaces. DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 1 of 14 Since the original submittal, a Boundary Line Adjustment and Lot Line Elimination have been recorded (city files 18-100789-SU & 18-100790-SU), altcring the subject property, which was originally four parcels. The common boundary line for the northern two parcels was adjusted and the common boundary line between the southern two parcels was eliminated. A condition of approval will require future submittals related to this project to contain the properties' most current legal descriptions and parcel numbers. A November 22, 2017, letter from McGranahan Architects describes pedestrian links with the existing DaVita building located off -site to the west will be reinforced by re -working existing planter islands to provide clear and direct connections between primary building entries and outdoor seating areas. These improvements are shown on the site plan for the land use resubmittal. These are off -site improvements are not being reviewed or approved as part of this Use Process III land use application, as they are located on a separate property under different ownership and cannot be considered part of the subject property. That off -site work requires its own Use Process land use application. The thresholds that determine the required land use application are contained within FWRC 19.15.030. Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designation —The proposal is subject to the provisions of the 1994 Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre -Annexation Development Agreement (CZA) and zoning regulations in effect on August 23, 1994 (FWCC). Any procedural requirements must meet current code (FWRC). Zoning for the subject property is Office Park (OP-1). Office is a permitted use in the OP-1 zone pursuant to CZA Exhibit D, Section III. The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) designation for the subject property is Office Park. The city considered an amendment to the FWCP to realign the extension of South 32e Street east of I-5 (city file 18-105198-UP), FWCP Map III-3 depicted a five -lane east -west principal collector road (South 32e Street extension) extending from I-5 to 32°d Avenue South. As part of the comprehensive plan amendment, the South 324 h Street extension was realigned to terminate at Weyerhaeuser Way South instead of 32°a Avenue South. Without the comprehensive plan amendment, the applicant would have been expected to dedicate right-of-way and construct improvements for the portion of the road extension abutting and within the subject property. As the comprehensive plan amendment was approved by the City Council on April 2, 2019, the development is released from those required street improvements and right-of-way dedication. Site Plan Review Process — The project requires review under Process III, Project Approval. The Director of Community Development makes a written decision on the application based on the criteria listed under FWRC 19.65.100. 4. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) — The proposed improvements exceed categorical exemption levels pursuant to Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11-800. The city issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on May 3, 2019 (city file 17-105643-SE). The threshold determination continent period ended May 17, 2019, and the appeal period cndcd June 7, 2019.The city received two comment letters during the public comment period on the DNS. The city considered all comments received. A SEPA appeal was filed on June 7, 2019, and was voluntarily withdrawn on July 23, 2019. A SEPA Addendum was issued on June 28, 2019 (city file 19-103118-SE), due to an increase in the building size and number of parking spaces from 161,280 square feet and 681 spaces in the original proposal to 164,386 square feet and 690 spaces. 5. Public Notice — Pursuant to Process III regulations, a Notice of Application (NOA) was published in the Federal Way Mirror, posted on the subject property, posted on each of the official notification DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 2 of 14 boards of the city and public libraries located within the city, and mailed to the persons receiving the property tax statements for all property within 300 feet of each boundary of the subject property on December 29, 2017. One written comment letter on the application and one request to receive copies of the SEPA threshold determination and Use Process decision were received. At a later date, comments were received from WSDOT. Pursuant to SEPA regulations, notice of the DNS was published in the Federal Way Mirror, posted on the subject property, posted on each of the official public notification boards of the city and public libraries, mailed to all owners of real property as shown in the records of the county assessor located within 300 feet of the site, emailed to agencies, and sent to people who provided comments in response to the NOA, on May 3, 2019. Two written comment letters were received on the DNS. 6. Public Comments — Two comment letters were received on the application; the comments relate to parking, stormwater, and transportation. Two comment letters regarding transportation issues were received on the DNS. The DNS comments also discuss the separate Woodbridge (formerly Greenline) projects currently under review by the city. In relation to these separate projects, the comments received by the city variously assert that cumulative SEPA review is required. The city has carefully and thoroughly considered each of the comments received as part of the city's review of the application. All of these comments will be included within the administrative record for this proposal and will accompany the application throughout the city's project review process. The city provides the following response with respect to the comments requesting cumulative SEPA review. A portion of the former Weyerhaeuser Campus was sold to DaVita, who is not affiliated with IRG, the proponent of the Woodbridge (formerly Greenline) projects. A master plan is not proposed or otherwise requested by any of these applicants, and no applicable statutory or local code provision allows the city to unilaterally require preparation of a master plan. Applicants have also elected to submit separate complete application submittals for the DaVita project and for the other projects on the Woodbridge Campus, which the city is required by law to process. (Also see the finding below regarding "cumulative impacts analysis.") And unless there are significant adverse environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated, a SEPA Determination of Significance requiring preparation of an EIS is inappropriate. The city's SEPA Responsible Official has determined that this standard has not been met with respect to the project. Finally, the city is generally prohibited from requiring an applicant to provide mitigation of a project to an extent that exceeds the project's anticipated impacts. The city accordingly cannot require the DaVita project to mitigate an impact that it does not cause or otherwise contribute to. 7. Bulk & Dimensional Requirements — Per Section III.D of the OP-1 regulations, the development standards shall conform to those identified by the corresponding use in the OP zone (FWCC 22-826). The section also states that provisions of the FWCC relating to lot coverage, fagade measurement, modulation, parking between structures and streets, and minimum lot sizes for non-residential uses shall not apply. FWCC 22-826, the use zone chart for office use in the OP zone, specifies the following building setbacks: front — 50 feet; side and rear — 20 feet. Also, the first 25 feet of the required front yard must be landscaped and contain a three -foot -high berm or three -foot -high dense, sight obscuring vegetation. Parking and driving areas may be located in the second 25 feet of the required 50 foot front yard. Per Section III.D of the OP-1 regulations and FWCC 22-826, the maximum building height is 35 feet above average building elevation (ABE). The proposed building height is 54.5 feet, which is 19.5 feet greater than the maximum allowed. Per FWCC 22-826, Note #1, if approved through Process II (now Use Process III), the height of a structure may exceed 35 feet above average building elevation, if- DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 3 of 14 (a) The subject property does not adjoin a low density zone; a. The subject property does not adjoin a low density zone; it is surrounded by Office Park (OP-1) and Corporate Park (CP-1) zoning. (b) Each required yard abutting the structure is increased 1 'for each 1 ' the structure exceeds 35' above average building elevation; a. According to the submitted site plan, each required yard abutting the structure is increased at least 1 foot for each 1 foot the structure exceeds 35 feet above average building elevation as follows: front: 50'+19.5' = 69.5% side/rear: 20'+19.5, = 395. The site plan demonstrates compliance with the required yards, except in some areas where it shows patios and an entry plaza along the west side of the building. After a discussion with the applicant's consultant about this area, there are two -foot tall planters and three- foot tall benches planned. These are considered improvements that exceed the limitations allowed in FWCC 22-1133. To ensure compliance with code requirements, a condition of approval shall state that no structures or improvements may be in a required yard except as permitted by FWCC 22-1133. (c) The increased height will not block any views designated by the Comprehensive Plan; and a. The increased height will not block any views designated by the comprehensive plan, as there are no views designated by the comprehensive plan in the area of the proposed site development. (d) The increased height is either in character with surrounding uses or consistent with desirable development in the area of the subject property as established by the Comprehensive Plan. a. The proposed building is three stories and surrounding buildings range from one to four stories. The increased height is in character with surrounding uses. 8. Parking Requirements —Per Section III.13 of the OP-1 regulations and FWCC 22-826, required parking is one parking space per 300 square feet of gross floor area (gfa) for office (164,386/300=548 spaces required). The site plan depicts 221 on -site parking spaces and 469 off -site parking spaces for a total of 690 spaces. Per FWCC 22-1421(a)(1) and (2), the required number of parking spaces shall be provided on the subject property or on a lot adjoining the subject property, if that lot is in a zone that permits the use conducted on the subject property. Per FWCC 22-1421(b), "If the parking is located on a lot other than the lot containing the use which generates the parking space requirements, the owner of the lot containing the parking must sign a covenant or other instrument, in a form acceptable to the city attorney, requiring that the lot be devoted in whole or in part to required parking for the use on another lot. The applicant must record this statement with the county to run with all affected properties." Off -site parking is proposed, and stand-alone parcels are proposed to be used for parking. All three parcels have the same zoning designation and are considered adjoining as they are either adjacent or are located directly across the street. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall provide documentation in compliance with FWCC 22-1421(b) for city review prior to issuance of a building permit. After city review and approval, the documentation shall be recorded by the applicant and a copy provided to the city. 9. Landscaping —Per Section III.D of the OP-1 regulations and FWCC 22-1566(h), Type III landscaping ten feet in width shall be provided along all property lines abutting public rights -of -way and access DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 4 of 14 easements, and Type III landscaping five feet in width shall be provided along all other perimeter lot lines. Per FWCC 22-826 Note #3, the first 25 feet of the required front yard must be landscaped and contain a three -foot -high berm, or three -foot -high dense, sight obscuring vegetation. Parking and driving areas may be located in the second 25 feet of the required front yard. Per FWCC 22-1564(z), landscaping is not required along the interior lot lines within a development where parking is being shared, which is applicable to the two parking lot parcels (northern parcels). The submitted landscaping plan demonstrates compliance with these requirements. FWCC 22-1567(e)(1) requires parking areas adjacent to public right-of-way to incorporate berms at least three feet in height within perimeter landscape areas, or through other means as listed in the code section to reduce the visual impact of parking areas and screen automobiles. This applies to the western (32nd Avenue South) and southern (South 323rd Street) boundaries of the stand-alone parking lot, and the northern (South 323rd Street) boundary of the building lot. The submitted landscaping plan demonstrates compliance with these requirements. Per FWCC 22-1564(w), "All loading areas shall be fully screened from public right of way or non- industrial/manufacturing uses with Type I landscaping." The site plan shows a loading area on the south side of the building. The elevation drawing notes the loading area will have an overhead coiling door access to internal solid waste and recycling facility. Screening with Type I landscaping is provided. Per FWCC 22-1565(a)(1), ground level mechanical or electrical equipment and utility installations must be screened with Type I landscaping to provide a solid sight barrier. Application materials note there will be a pad mounted electrical transformer along the south side of the building and it will be screened by Type I landscaping. The submitted landscaping plan demonstrates compliance with this requirement. Per FWCC 22-1567(b)(1)(a)(ii), interior parking lot landscaping is required at the rate of 22 square feet of Type IV landscaping per parking stall, when 50 or more parking stalls are provided. As 690 parking stalls are provided, 15,180 square feet of parking lot landscaping is required (690 x 22 = 15,180). The submitted landscape plan states 689 parking stalls are proposed and the total amount of interior parking lot landscaping proposed is 20,604 square feet, which exceeds the required amount. If the number of parking spaces increases such that the required parking lot landscaping exceeds the 20,604 square feet shown, then additional parking lot landscaping will be required. Per FWCC 22-1564(o), "In order to reduce irrigation requirements, design principles using xeriscape techniques are encouraged. In meeting water conservation goals, and to deliver appropriate amounts of water necessary to maintain planted vegetation, species that are not drought tolerant should be grouped together and have irrigation systems, and be separated from any other irrigation system provided for drought tolerant species." FWCC 22-1564(t) states, "All permanent lawn or sod areas shall have permanent irrigation systems." The plan shows a lawn to be planted near the west side of the building. Subsequently, the applicant's consultant has indicated that area will be planted with drought tolerant grass and have temporary irrigation installed. A condition of approval shall require the building permit plan set to include details regarding the irrigation system. 10. Tree Retention/Replacement — Pursuant to FWCC 22-1568, the development must retain or replace 25 percent of the existing significant trees on site. All three parcels are considered to be a "subject property." According to the submittal, the property contains 199 significant trees. Sheet TR-01 (Tree Retention Plan) states the applicant will retain 9 significant trees and provide 41 replacement trees in accordance with the provisions of FWCC 22-1568, to account for 50 tree credits, meeting the 25 percent required. Of note, the Significant Tree Table on Sheet TR-01 includes Tree 3070; however, DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 5 of 14 the drawing does not show that tree as being retained and shows Tree 3149 instead. The landscaping plan shows tree retention and proposed plantings consistent with the Tree Retention Plan and code provisions. 11. Forest Practices — A Forest Practices Class IV -General Application is required, as more than 5,000 board feet of merchantable timber will be harvested from the property in conjunction with the development activity. Per FWRC 19.120.200(1)(a), "A Class IV — General application shall be approved based on an approved clearing and grading plan and tree and vegetation retention plan and prior to conducting forest practices on the project site." The submitted forest practices application lacks sufficient detail required under section #9 of the application. Application revisions with additional detail provided by the applicant are necessary. A condition of approval will require the applicant to obtain forest practices approval prior to issuance of the building permit. 12. Critical Areas The applicant submitted a critical areas report prepared by Talasaea, which was subsequently revised and resubmitted for review. The most recent version is "Existing Conditions Report, File #17-1036540-00-PC, DaVita Office Parcels, Federal Way, Washington," revised September 6, 2018. The report was sent to the city's consultant, ESA, for a peer review. Over a course of reviews, ESA completed a site visit and reviewed relevant documents. Per ESA's November 12, 2018, review memorandum to the city, "According to the Existing Conditions Report, no critical areas were observed onsite. However, one wetland, Wetland FB, is located approximately 133 feet east of the southeast corner of Parcel E. An additional wetland, Wetland FA was originally identified as occurring along the southern boundary of Parcel E. However, as documented in the Existing Conditions Report, this feature was later found to not support the three wetland parameters and was therefore not delineated as wetland." 13. Tacoma Smelter Plume — The former Asarco copper smelter in Tacoma caused widespread soil contamination with lead and arsenic in parts of King, Pierce, Kitsap, and Thurston counties. This 1,000 square mile area is known as the Tacoma Smelter Plume. The state cleanup level for arsenic is 20 parts per million (ppm). According to Department of Ecology mapping checked in 2019, the subject property is located in the Tacoma Smelter Plume detect area containing under 20 ppm arsenic; therefore, testing of site soils is not applicable. 14. Clearing & Grading — The vacant site is partially forested with the remainder as open grass area. There is an 18 foot elevation change across the property from the west to the east on the building parcel (southern lot) and a 32 foot elevation change over the parking lot parcels (northern lots). The preliminary cut/fill analysis is: 15,400 cubic yards stripping, 26,750 cubic yards cut, 13,500 cubic yards fill) and 13,250 cubic yards net cut. The applicant submitted a geotechnical report, September 7, 2018, "Geotechnical Engineering Services Revised Report, DaVita Office Park Federal Way, Washington," prepared by GeoEngineers. The report states, "Based on the results of our subsurface exploration and testing program, it is our opinion that the site is generally suited for the proposed development. We understand that some cuts and minor fills will be required to construct the office structure. Up to 4 to 8 feet of cut and fill will be required for the proposed parking lot, primarily around the borders. Slightly greater cut will be required in the southwest corner." Land surface modification activities will be reviewed for consistency with applicable standards set forth in FWCC Division 7 and Chapter 19.120 FWRC as part of construction permitting. 15. Design Guidelines — Per Section III.D of the OP-1 regulations, the development standards shall conform to those identified by the corresponding use in the OP zone (FWCC 22-826). The section DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 6 of 14 also states that provisions of the FWCC relating to lot coverage, fagade measurement, modulation, parking between structures and streets, and minimum lot sizes for non-residential uses shall not apply. The FWCC states that one of the purposes of site plan review is, "To encourage proposals that embody good design principles that will result in high quality development on the Subject property." The city adopted non-residential community design guidelines in 1996, after the effective date of the CZA. In the September 18, 2017, Pre -Application Summary Letter for the DaVita project, the applicant was encouraged to incorporate the adopted design guidelines to the extent possible. The architect provided an August 31, 2018, design narrative, which discusses building design and materials, and pedestrian connectivity, plaza, and amenities. Pedestrian connections are shown across the parking lot site in the north/south and east/west directions. FWCC 22-1564(u) requires building walls which are uninterrupted by window, door, or other architectural feature, that are 240 square feet or greater in area, and not located on a property line, to be screened by landscaping. The elevation drawings show compliant building walls. 16. Rooftop Mechanical Equipment —Per FWCC 22-960(a), rooftop mechanical equipment and similar appurtenances that extend above the roofline are proposed to be surrounded by a solid sight -obscuring screen that is integrated into the architecture of the building and obscures the view of the appurtenances from adjacent streets and properties. The submittal shows screening for rooftop mechanical equipment. 17. Garbage/Recycling — The submittal indicates there will not be a trash enclosure outside of the building envelope on the site. Solid waste and recycling will be located on the first floor within the building and accessible to collection via an overhead rolling door on the south side of the building. As a condition of approval at the time of building plan submittal, show the shared storage space in the interior plans. Demonstrate how the roll up door and exterior loading area can be accessed by service vehicles (show related features such as loading dock, curb cuts, paving, and/or an accessible drive aisle). If the concept is to always store containers in the interior of the building, the plans should show the designated custodial service/limited access area as well as the related wastewater drainage to sanitary sewer. Provide details oh any related odor control or ventilation features as well. If there are interior chutes that will be used to move wastes from upper floors to the custodial service area, please show these in the interior plans. If plans change to storing waste containers outdoors, exterior plans must show the screening and enclosures with sight -obscuring walls and gates, and demonstrate adequate access for service vehicles. For reference, FWCC 22-949 provides requirements for garbage receptacle and dumpster placement and screening. Per FWCC 22-1564(d), "All trash enclosures shall be screened from abutting properties and/or public rights of way by a 100 percent sight -obscuring fence or wall and appropriate landscape screen." Per FWCC 22-1564(b), "All outside storage areas shall be fully screened by Type I landscaping a minimum of five feet in width, as described in section 22-1565(a), unless determined by the community development review committee (CDRC) that such screening is not necessary because stored materials are not visually obtrusive." Whether inside or outside the building, a Spill Prevention Plan shall be submitted for review for the solid waste and recycling area/enclosure. 18. Lighting — The proposal includes outdoor lighting. Per FWCC 22-954(c), "The applicant shall select, place and direct light sources both directable and nondirectable so that glare produced by any light source, to the maximum extent possible, does not extend to adjacent properties or to the right-of- DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 7 of 14 way." The applicant submitted a lighting plan as part of their engineering permit (18-105630-EN) submittal. On the building parcel, the maximum off -site light spill level is 4.1 horizontal footcandles (fc) in one location near the southern property line. On the parking lot parcel, the maximum off -site light spill level is 1.4 horizontal fc in one location near the eastern property line. Light spill along South 323rd Street will peak at 3.0 horizontal fc and at 0.6 along 32nd Avenue South. For reference, an average fc rating for an active building entrance is 2 fc. Considering the projected lighting levels and adjacent uses, no glare problems are anticipated. 19. Additional Permitting — Additional permitting, such as engineering review and a building permit, are required for site development. Building permits and an engineering permit have been submitted and are under review (city files 18-105626-CO, 19-100500-CO, and 18-105630-EN). It is the applicant's responsibility to identify and obtain all required state, federal, or other agency permits as may be required. 20. Transportation — The underlying parcels were created under the East Campus Corporate Park Parcel 1 Binding Site Plan (BSP). No appeals of the Parcel 1 BSP and/its accompanying SEPA determination were filed. As part of the Parcel 1 BSP development approval, traffic impacts of future development were identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by The Transpo Group, and were appropriately mitigated. At full built -out of approximately 700,000 square feet of gross floor area, the East Campus Corporate Park BSP was estimated to generate 1,109 weekday PM peak hour trips. To date, including the proposed DaVita development, the total developed gross floor area is approximately 650,000 square feet and 1,007 weekday PM peak hour trips. The traffic conditions at high -volume intersections in the area are not higher than estimated in the original TIA (total PM peak entering volume at SR 5 and South 320ffi Street interchange, SR 99/South 320d' Street, South 320d' Street/23`d Avenue South, etc.). Additional mitigation and analysis would be required if the total gross floor area, or PM trips from the Parcel 1 BSP, exceed the approved environmental determination threshold on the property. As a component of the Use Process III application, projects undergo traffic concurrency analysis pursuant to the state Growth Management Act (GMA); applicable goals and policies of the FWCP; and Chapter 19.90 FWRC, "Transportation Concurrency Management." A Capacity Reserve Certificate was issued in January 2018 pursuant to Chapter 19.90 FWRC. No appeal of this certificate was filed. The analysis performed under Chapter 19.90 FWRC is cumulative, necessarily taking into consideration all previous Capacity Reserve Certificates that have been issued for other local developments. The number of new PM peak hour vehicle trips generated by the proposed DaVita project is 276, and these trips are deemed vested in the system for purposes of the city's traffic concurrency analysis. As part of the traffic concurrency analysis, four state ramp intersections (SR 5/South 320d' Street and SR 18/Weyerhaeuser Way South) were analyzed for meeting the City of Federal Way adopted Level of Service Standard (LOS) and WSDOT LOS threshold as specified in the WSDOT Development Service Manual. These four ramp intersections are anticipated to operate at acceptable levels (v/c 0.98 and LOS D or better) during the PM peak hours with the proposed development. Furthermore, SR 18 and SR 5 are classified as highways of statewide significant (HSS) and are exempt from the concurrency requirements of the GMA. RCW 36.070A.070(6)(a)(iii)(C). A traffic study limited to site access and AM peak period was commissioned by the applicant and submitted for review, "Updated Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed DaVita Single -Tenant Office —Federal Way, WA, TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest," November 9, 2018. The AM peak period study intersections also include SR 5 and South 320t' Street interchange, which would be impacted by more than 25 AM trips. The SR-5 and South 320d' Street study ramp intersections are anticipated to operate at acceptable levels (LOS C or better) during the AM peak DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 8 of 14 I-) hours with the proposed development. The Public Works Traffic Division has the following comments, which are informational only: a) The v/c ratio shown in the traffic report is based on the maximum v/c ratio for all lane groups. This is not consistent with the adopted LOS standards, which is based on intersection vehicle -to - capacity (v/c) ratio (Xc). b) The LOS for signalized intersections within the City Center is based on an average vehicle -to - capacity (v/c) ratio of 1.1 or less. Study intersections #1, #2, and #3 are located within the City Center, and as such, individual intersection v/c ratio would not apply. c) The city concurs with the recommendation in the traffic report to modify the roundabout splitter island and install a new rectangular rapid flashing beacon (RRFB) to increase pedestrian safety. Regarding the plan submittal, the following shall be conditions of approval: a) The pedestrian improvements (splitter islands and RRFB) at the roundabout shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall construct these improvements. b) The proposed north -south 20-font pedestrian access easement between South 32P Street and the future road (South 324t' Street extension as shown on Sheet ST-01) shall be set aside as a Tract "X" for future pedestrian path at such time deemed necessary by the city. Additional transportation related matters are addressed below. 21. Transportation Agency Comments WSDOT provided comments to the city regarding the DaVita project on January 23, 2019; the comments were forwarded to the applicant. WSDOT's mitigation request at that time was, "As mitigation for the cumulative impacts from the Weyerhaeuser campus developments, W SDOT requests that the PM peak hour be analyzed to determine impacts." After the DNS was issued, WSDOT commented a second time asking for cumulative analysis of DaVita and other Greenline (now Woodbridge) projects that are also currently pending on the former Weyerhaeuser property. The comment letter states, in part, "A PM peak hour analysis of the cumulative projects is required to evaluate system deficiencies and identify improvements as mitigation." After the DNS was issued, King County Road Services Division commented, "King County requests that Federal Way conduct additional traffic evaluation to better understand and address these anticipated impacts and recommend appropriately scaled mitigation measures." The proposed DaVita project falls within the scope of the previous Parcel 1 BSP development approval; the traffic impacts of future development on this site were identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by The Transpo Group as part of the Parcel 1 BSP development approval process and have been appropriately mitigated. The DaVita proposal was reviewed for conformity with the previous environmental determination on the property (SEP98-0039). To date, including the DaVita development, the total developed gross floor area and PM peak hour trips have not exceeded the previously approved threshold. The traffic conditions at high -volume intersections in the area are not higher than estimated in the original TIA (total PM peak entering volume at SR 5 and South 320'h Street interchange, SR 99/South 32(Y" Street, South 320'b Street/23`d Avenue South, etc-). A concurrency analysis was performed for the PM peak hour and development trips are vested in the city's concurrency system under Chapter 19.90 FWRC for cumulative analysis of future developments. Please refer to Finding #25 with respect to cumulative impacts specifically. 22. Stormwater — The project will be required to meet the requirements of the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and the City of Federal Way Addendum to that manual. The DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 9 of 14 project is subject to the Conservation Flow Control and Enhanced Basic Water Quality treatment standards of the KCSWDM. Based on analysis provided by the applicant's engineer, the existing stormwater pond developed for the East Campus Corporate Park Parcel 1 can accommodate this development without modification. The Public Works Department concurs with this analysis, and therefore, no additional flow control improvements are required. Water Quality treatment will be provided for all pollution -generating impervious surfaces by means of facilities that meet the Enhanced Basic standard. 23. Water/Sewer — Lakehaven Water & Sewer District is the water and sewer service provider. Lakehaven issued certificates of water and sewer availability in November 2017 and updates in April 2019; certificates are valid for one-year from the date of issuance. DaVita has a Developer Extension Agreement in place with Lakehaven. Water plans, including an irrigation meter for each site (building and parking lot), were approved on March 26, 2019. 24. South King Fire & Rescue — South King Fire & Rescue reviewed the application and has the following comments, listed here as information and to be addressed at building permit. ■ The required fire flow for this project is 4000 gallons per minute. A Certificate of Water Availability including a hydraulic fire flow model shall be requested from the water district and provided at the time of building permit application. • This project will require four fire hydrant(s) in approved* locations. • The number of hydrants and locations specified on page SD-01 are sufficient for this project. • *Hydrant(s) spacing along access roads and location in relationship to buildings and sprinkler FDC shall be approved by Fire Marshal's Office. ■ Fire hydrants shall be in service prior to and during the time of construction. • Fire apparatus access roads shall comply with all requirements of Fire Access Policy 10.006: http://southkingfire.org/DocumentCenter/HomeNiew/24. • Designated and marked fire lanes may be required for emergency access. This may be done during the plans check or prior to building final. Requirements and marking options can be found in FWRC Title 8 at: lft://www.codepubliship&.com/WA/FederalWa�+1 • Fire apparatus access roads shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. • All vehicle access gates shall comply with gate policy: south€ ingfire.orglDocumentCenterlHo_rneNi_ew/21. ■ A recessed fire department "Knox" brand key box shall be installed on the building near the front entrance. Location(s) will be approved by the plan reviewer or Deputy Fire Marshal onsite. • An NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system is required. • An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in all occupancies where the total floor area included within the surrounding exterior walls on all floor levels, including basements, exceeds 5,000 square feet. Fire walls shall not be considered to separate a building to enable deletion of the required automatic fire -extinguishing system. • The system demand pressure (to the source) required in a hydraulically designed automatic fire sprinkler system shall be at least 10 percent less than the correlative water supply curve pressure. • A Class 1 Standpipe is required. DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 10 of 14 ■ A Class I standpipe system is required in buildings where the floor level of the highest story is located more than 30 feet above the lowest level of the fire department vehicle access. + A fire alarm system is required. + City code requires an automatic fire detection system in all buildings exceeding 3,000 square feet gross floor area. The fire alarm system is required to monitor the sprinkler system, including water flow. Provide full notification as required by NFPA 72. Complete coverage smoke detection is not required for this project. This fire detection system shall be monitored by an approved central and/or remote station. + All buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public safety communication system at the exterior of the building: http://souffildngfire.org/DocumentCenterNiew/279. 25. Cumulative Impacts Analysis — Consistent with past practice, SEPA, the FWRC, and as a component of its review of the DaVita proposal, the city evaluated the project for potential cumulative impacts. The scope of the city's review in this regard was twofold. In addition to the SEPA cumulative impact analysis codified at WAC 197-11-060(3)(b), the city's evaluation analyzed the likelihood that one or more direct impacts of the DaVita proposal would require mitigation due to the cumulative effect of such impact(s) when aggregated with the similar impacts of future development in the immediate vicinity of the DaVita project site. The city carefully analyzed the potential need for additional mitigation under this framework —particular with respect to traffic concerns —and ultimately did not identify any such cumulative impacts as a result of its evaluation. There are other proposed projects on the former Weyerhaeuser Campus within proximity of the proposed DaVita project: i.e., Woodbridge Building "A" (formerly Greenline Warehouse "A"), Woodbridge Building `B" (formerly Greenline Warehouse `B"), and the Woodbridge Corporate Park (formerly Greenline Business Park). From a proximity standpoint, the Woodbridge Corporate Park is proposed directly south of the proposed DaVita building. However, the DaVita and Woodbridge projects do not share a common owner, applicant, parcel, access point, utility facilities, or zoning designation. In addition, pursuant to WAC 197-11-060(3)(b), it is clear that DaVita can proceed without Woodbridge Building "A," Woodbridge Building `B," and the Woodbridge Corporate Park, and is not reliant in any manner upon completion of any of the Woodbridge projects in order to proceed. DaVita does not depend on any of the Woodbridge projects as justification for its implementation and the projects are not interdependent parts of a larger proposal. DaVita and the Woodbridge projects do not meet the WAC 197-11-060(3)(b) threshold to require evaluation in the same environmental document. 26. Director's Decision Criteria — The Director of Community Development makes a written decision on the application based on the criteria listed under FWRC 19.65.100(2)(a): a. The proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan; i. The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) designation for -the subject property is Office Park. The Revised 2015 FWCP contains the following goals and policies: o LUG8: Create office and office park development that is known regionally, nationally, and internationally for its design and function. DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 11 of 14 o According to the applicant, "the building will be sited with its primary entrance facing 32"d Avenue South, with a strong visual and pedestrian connection to the existing office building located to the west of the site. The primary facades (north and south elevations) are articulated through a series of vertical "panels" of varying width and finish and varying width punched window openings, recalling an array of tree trunks and the original forested condition of the site and its environs. In addition to carve outs at the main entry and a one-story recess at an outdoor patio on the south, framed recesses occur at stair/lounge locations on north and south elevations. The design of this project is consistent with other development surrounding this property and within the East Campus Corporate Park." o LUG9: Work collaboratively to evaluate and realize the potential of the (former) Weyerhaeuser properties in East Campus. o The former Weyerhaeuser properties in East Campus are privately owned. The proposed office building will continue types of development anticipated for that area. o LUP 49: In the East Campus Office Park area, encourage quality development that will complement existing uses and take advantage of good access to I-5, Highway 18 and future light rail as well as proximity to the City Center. o The proposed office building will complement existing uses in the area. The office will continue types of development anticipated for that area. The site has proximity to the City Center and regional road network. b. The proposal is consistent with all applicable provisions of the FWRC; i. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with applicable zoning regulations in effect on August 23, 1994 (FWCC) and procedural requirements of current code (FWRC), as detailed in this report. c. The proposal is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare; i. The Community Development and Public Works Departments, along with Lakehaven Water & Sewer District and South King Fire & Rescue, have reviewed the project for conformance with codes designed to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Additional details will be reviewed at the building/ engineering permit stage. The applicant submitted a narrative regarding the standards in FWRC 19.65.100(2)(a). This narrative states that a Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) checklist is included with the application and that it addresses specific attributes of public health, safety, and welfare. No CPTED checklist was submitted with the application. Submittal is not required, as CPTED is part of current code design guidelines that do not apply to the project per the CZA. d. The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the anticipated demand from the proposal; i. See the Transportation, Water & Sewer, Stormwater, and Conditions of Approval related sections of this report. DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 12 of 14 e. The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration; and i. Access to the site will be provided via 32"d Avenue South and South 323`d Street. See the Transportation related and Conditions of Approval sections of this report. f. Traffic safety impacts for all modes of transportation, both on and off site, are adequately mitigated. i. See the Transportation related and Conditions of Approval sections of this report. 27. Conditions of Approval — The following conditions of approval are attached to the Process III decision: 1. Future submittals related to this project shall contain the properties' current legal descriptions and parcel numbers. 2. No structures or improvements may be in a required yard except as permitted by FWCC 22-1133. 3. Provide documentation in compliance with FWCC 22-1421(b) prior to issuance of a building permit. After city review and approval, the documentation shall be recorded by the applicant and a copy provided to the city. 4. The landscaping plan submitted with the building permit shall include details regarding the irrigation system. 5. The applicant shall obtain forest practices approval prior to issuance of the building permit. 6. At time of building plan submittal, show the shared storage space for the garbage/recycling in the interior plans. Demonstrate how the roll up door and exterior loading area can be accessed by service vehicles (show related features such as loading dock, curb cuts, paving, and/or an accessible drive aisle). If the concept is to always store containers in the interior of the building, the plans shall show the designated custodial service/limited access area as well as the related wastewater drainage to sanitary sewer. Provide details on any related odor control or ventilation features as well. If there are interior chutes that will be used to move wastes from upper floors to the custodial service area, show these in the interior plans. 7. The pedestrian improvements (splitter islands and RRFB) at the roundabout shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall construct these improvements. 8. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the proposed north -south 20-foot pedestrian access easement between South 323rd Street and the future road (South 320 Street extension as shown on Sheet ST-01) shall be set aside as a Tract "X" for a future pedestrian path at such time deemed necessary by the city. DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Page 13 of 14 CONCLUSION As conditioned, the proposed site plan application has been determined to be consistent with the FWCP; with all applicable provisions of the FWCC and FWRC; and with the public health, safety, and welfare. The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the anticipated demand from the proposal, and the proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration for access. The proposed development is consistent with Process III, Project Approval, decisional criteria required under Chapter 19.65 FWRC. The proposed site plan and application attachments have been reviewed for compliance with the FWCP, pertinent zoning regulations, and all other applicable city regulations. Final construction drawings will be reviewed for compliance with specific regulations, conditions of approval, and other applicable city requirements. This decision shall not waive compliance with future City of Federal Way codes, policies, and standards relating to this development. Prepared by: Stacey Welsh, Senior Planner DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project, Exhibit "A" — Findings For Project Approval Date: July 25, 2019 17-105642-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79415 Page 14 of 14 CITY OF �7k Federal Way C(?ntered on Opportunity August 16, 2019 Washington State Department of Revenue Forest Tax Section PO Box 47472 Olympia, WA 98504-7472 FILE Re: File #17-105642-00-UP; FOREST PRACTICES CLASS IV -GENERAL DaVita Healthcare Office Park, Federal Way, WA King County Tax Parcels 215465-0060, 215465-0090, 215465-0110 Dear DOR Representative: CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor Please find enclosed a copy of a Forest Practices Class IV -General permit application that was reviewed and approved in conjunction with the above -referenced commercial project within Federal Way, Washington city limits. Please contact the with any questions you may have on the proposed project and related forest practices activity on the subject site. Sincerely, Ao/ _1Z_/1e411— Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner enc: forest Pacdcr-•s Applieatian Site flan (SI-Ol), Clearing and Grading Plan (GR-01), ESM Consulting Engineers L1,C, May 14, 2019 Existing Conditions.{FCC-U7), Tree Retention P]an (I'R-01), ESM Consulting engineers LLC, April 29, 2019 c; Genesis KC Development, ATIN: RE legal, Amy DeColibus, 2000 16t1, Street, Denver, CO 80202; 1 . i It • t� :vita. r Mortensen Construction, Nate Jenkins, 10230 NJ'; Points Drive, Ste 300, Kirkland, WA 98033; na • • ' tt•�lrlrten,1o11,Cnm FSM Consulting Engineers, LLC, Eric L.aBrie, 33400 8th Avenue South, Suite 205, Federal Way, WA 98003, !YI •-1: ri Lt L•'17 'ir'j 'Slnl Doc ID 79496 17-105642-00-UP Davila HealthCare �r R E S U BM I -Pr ffENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8`h Avenue South CITY OF Fax 2Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 JUL�� 253-835-2607; Fa53-835-2609 Federal Way « cr:1I��r1 �6fil CRY OF FEDERAL WAY , C+CAiMtJ NM DEVELOPMENT FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION CLASS IV - GENERAL TYPE OR PRINT IN INK 1. Landowner, Timber Owner, and Operator information Legal Name of LANDOWNER Legal Name of TIMBER OWNER Legal Name of OPERATOR Arthur Richey TBD Nate Jenkins at Mortenson Construction c/o Genesis KC Development Mailing Address: Mailing Address: Mailing Address: 10230 NE Points 2000 16th ST Drive, Ste 300 ATTN: RE Legal, Amy DeColibus City, State, Zip City, State, Zip City, State, Zip Kirkland, WA Denver, CO 80202 98033 Phone (918)810-3700 Phone ( ) Phone (425)497-6610 arthur.r. iche @davita.com Email: y Email: Email: nate jenkinsOmortenson.com 2. Contact Person information Name Phone ( 253 )838-6113 Eric LaBrie C/o ESM Consulting Engineers p �;,, eric.labrie@esmcivii.com 3. Enter the Applicable City of Federal Way Development Permit Application Number(s): 17-105642-UP . 17-105643-SE 4. Enter the Forest Tax Reporting Account Number of the Timber Owner: N/A For tax reporting information or to receive a tax number, call the Department of Revenue at 1-800-548-8829, 5. Legal description where the forest practices will occur. Parcel Number Within '/ section of: Section Townshi Range E/W 21546 5-0110 -NE 16 21 04 215465-0120 NW 15 21 04 215465-0060 NW 15 21 04 215465-0090 NW 15 21 04 6. Answer each question as it applies to your proposed forest practice. No ( ) Yes Is the activity within the "Natural Environment" as regulated by Federal Way Revised Code (FVWRC) Title 15, "Shoreline Management"? Bulletin 4072 — November 10, 2016 Page 1 of 2 k:/Handouts/Forest Practices Application ( ) No .,(,Yes Is the activity within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area and its associated buffer area (wetland, stream, wellhead capture area, and/or geologically hazardous area)? ( ) No i ✓ Yes Have you reviewed Lhis forest practices activity area to detera ine whether it may involve historic sites and/or.Native American cultural resources? 7. What is the intended future use of the land proposed to be logged? () Single Family Residence ( ) Residential Subdivision (includes plats and short plats) () Commercial or Multifamily Residential ✓ Other Office Park B. How much merchantable timber are you cutting and/or removing? Complete the table below and indentify all timber harvest and salvage activity boundaries on the site plan. Unit # Acres (net) Volume of Merchantable Timber to be harvested(board feet Percent (%) of Total Merchantable Timber on site. 9.64 108,000 94% 9. Summarize below the proposed timber harvest method, how the site will be accessed, and the proposed timing of the timber harvest within the context of the overall project timeline. There are 190 significant trees that have potential to be utilized for merchantable timber purposes. The method used includes feller buncher to cut trees and a chain saw for smaller trees and shrubs. A processor/grinder will be on site for tree branches and stumps. Material will be hauled off site in dump trucks and trailers. Harvest will begin once clearing the site has commenced, upon issuance of the associated permits in Summer of 2019. Site access will be located at the proposed project entrances adjacent to 32nd Ave S and S 323rd St. We affirm that the information contained herein is true and understand that this proposed forest practice is subject to the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120, "Clearing, Grading, and Tree and Vegetation Retention," as well as all other federal, state, or local regulations. Compliance with the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120 does not ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act or other federal, state, or local laws. Signature of LANDOWNER Signature of TIMBER OWNER Signature of OPERATOR (If different than landowner) (If diff in cnt than landowner) Oi TaW%WmdWArthurRichey Arthur D.«.,it,wffic*. DlgltOyalgrxdbyOkr"rRichey Arthur > bry' Arthur r �� :" p=(p,ry eu.peW>a e,Gp�fl�pwMrRa A . u=Da-Art „rryalsgrthui rlchey@davita,com �us gy RR 1n p�� email=arthural<hey@davlta.com, 2019,oa2216:1a:17 -05'00' emall-arthur dcheyedavita,com, Ai�y pala•$11:pC.2216:12:31 -05'00' l e: Date: 2019A92216:1603-05'00' 4/22/19 4/22/19 4122/19 Date: Date: Date: Department Review for Office Use Only) Department of Revenue Notified (da ): Pp Date Approved: _ • `��` �� 9 Comments/Conditions: 0 4 c rvJ nt,s Col" r-1etr vv k e.., a Bulletin #072 — November 10, 2016 Page 2 of 2 k:/Handouts/Forest Practices Application . , — , - nl,�--.z I I N"d 311S ra ....... AUVd Boi=wo sndNVO ISV3 -IV3HVIIAV(l ONCSH�NIHVd BLIVOH-L co Ik-& W, fly 2zN �.AY I U M Ina ok Env- WM DNlav%D OW !IP"310 >iuvd aou-Ao sndvmvc) -Lsva ONI'SLONIENd 3UVOHIW3H VIIAVG E; CL ONI'S83N-LbVd allVOHllV3H V_LlAV(3 >iHvd Eiou=io sndvqvo _LSV3 — — — — — — — — — - — — — — — — — — - - - - - - - - - I m AHVd BOi=j=jo sndvqvo -Lsv3 CEO 0NI'SW3NIkdVd 3WVOHI-1V3H VIIAVa w w z 9 w jdg M Stacey Welsh From: Kari Cimmer Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 1:54 PM To: 'Arthur.Richey@davita.com'; 'nate Jenkins@mortenson.com'; 'eric.labrie@esmcivil.com' Cc: Stacey Welsh Subject: Davita Healthcare Forest Practces Application Attachments: 17-105642 Davita Healthcare FPA.pdf Good afternoon, Attached you will find a copy of the letter, forest practices application, and associated supporting documentation. Please let me know if you have trouble receiving the documents. A hard copy is being sent to the Dept. of Revenue today. A hard copy will be sent to you in the mail. Thank you, K.4. cam, cPr Administration & Permit Center Supervisor Amanda Administrator A..- Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone: 253.835.2629 1 Alt: 253.835.2607 1 Fax: 253.835.2609 www.cityoffederalway.com Karic@)cityoffederalway.com Permit Center Hours, Mon - Fri 9:00 am to 4:00 pm 1 4ik Federal OF Way �� DEr�MFNT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 JUL , �p,g 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 w► Nk,.citvo1T'ederalway.com .CrrE°ice waPMEN - FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION CLASS IV - GENERAL TYPE OR PRINT IN INK 7 I ..,..A T:� "— I'I.a -A n^r rM^r Infnrmnl!Inn Legal Name of LANDOWNER Legal Name of TIMBER OWNER Legal Name of OPERATOR Arthur Richey c/o Genesis KC Development T B D Nate Jenkins at Mortenson Construction Mailing Address: Mailing Address: Mailing Address: 10230 NE Points 2000 16th ST Drive, Ste 300 ATTN: RE Legal, Amy DeColibus City, State, Zip City, State, Zip City, State, Zip Kirkland, WA Denver, CO 80202 98033 Phone (918)810-3700 Phone ( ) Phone (425) 497-6610 Email: arthur.richey@davita.com Email: Email: natejenkins@mortenson.com 2. Contact Person Information Name Phone ( 253 )B38-6113 Eric LaBrie c/o ESM Consulting Engineers Email: eric.labrie@esmcivil.com 3. Enter the Applicable City of Federal Way Development Permit Application Number(s): 17-105642-UP. 17-105643-SE 4. Enter the Forest Tax Reporting Account Number of the Timber Owner: N/A For tax reporting information or to receive a tax number, call the Department of Revenue at 1-800-548-8829, 5. Legal description where the forest practices will occur. Parcel Number Within'/a section of: Section Township Range EIW 215465-0110 N E 16 21 04 215465-0120 NW 15 21 04 215465-0060 NW 15 21 04 215465-0090 NW 15 21 04 6. Answer each question as it applies to your proposed forest practice. No ( ) Yes Is the activity within the "Natural Environment" as regulated by Federal Way Revised Code (F)VRC) Title 15, "Shoreline Management"? Bulletin #072 — November 10, 2016 Page 1 of 2 k:/Handouts/Forest Practices Application ( ) No �/ , Yes Is the activity within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area and its associated buffer area (wetland, stream, wellhead capture area, and/or geologically hazardous area)? ( ) No I ✓ Yes Have you reviewed this forest practices activity area to determine whether it may involve historic sites.and/or Native American cultural resources? 7. What is the intended future use of the land proposed to be logged? Single Family Residence Residential Subdivision (includes plats and short plats) Commercial or Multifamily Residential ✓ Other Office Park 8. How much merchantable timber are you cutting and/or removing? Complete the table below and indentify all timber harvest and salvage activity boundaries on the site plan. Unit # Acres (net) Volume of Merchantable Timber to be harvested (board feet) Percent (%) of Total Merchantable Timber on site. 9.64 108,000 94% 9. Summarize below the proposed timber harvest method, how the site will be accessed, and the proposed timing of the timber harvest within the context of the overall project timeline. There are 190 significant trees that have potential to be utilized for merchantable timber purposes. The method used includes using a feller buncher to cut trees and a chain saw for smaller trees and shrubs. A processor/grinder will be on site for tree branches and stumps. Material will be hauled off site in dump trucks and trailers. Harvest will begin once clearing the site has commenced, upon issuance of the associated permits in Summer of 2019. Site access will be located at the proposed project entrances adjacent to 32nd Ave S and S 323rd St. We affirm that the information contained herein is true and understand that this proposed forest practice is subject to the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120, "Clearing, Grading, and Tree and Vegetation Retention," as well as all other federal, state, or local regulations. Compliance with the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120 does not ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act or other federal, state, or local laws. Signature of LANDOWNER Signature of TIMBER OWNER Signature of OPERATOR (If different than landowner) (If different than landowner) Digitally Arthur 9 y skjned by Arthur Richey DN: cn�Anhur tic hey, �t Digitally signed by Arthur Richey Arthur DN: cn=Arthur Richey, /� Arthur Digitally Signed by Arthu r Richey Arthur —Genesis,—Davita, {••1 -Genesis, ou=Davita, 1 DN:c-Anhur Fkhey, o�Gvnesls, e.011—th u r.richey"Ota.com •9DS pate:7019.Og221{;11-OS'00' em l� ail=arthucrichey@davltacom, �{ me. c=US ou=Davita, ur. email=arthrichey@davi[a com, -US 11� Date: 201A 042216:14:17-OS'00'y �, TTDale: 2019,Oq.2216:16:03 -05'00' 4/22/19 4/22/19 4/22/19 Date: Date: Date: Department Review for Office Use Only) Department of Revenue Notified (date): Date Approved: Comments/Conditions: Na V,,4i G� � Cwi �l G, n P.,•a••�.-�'a- i 1 ; .. � �.. off! L�.�., �-L.� �.��r., ,. Bulletin #072 — November 10, 2016 Page 2 of 2 k:/Handouts/Forest Practices Application Stacey Welsh From: Tina Piety Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 3:22 PM To: 'Eric Labrie' Cc: 'Pazooki, Ramin (PazookR@wsdot.wa.gov)'; 'arthur.richey@davita.com'; 'savanna.nagorski@esmcivil.com'; 'assessor.info@kingcounty.gov'; 'chase.wakefield@bp.com'; 'kukesc@wsdot.wa.gov'; 'swiresm@wsdot.wa.gov'; 'koorust@yahoo.com'; 'courtney@mhseattle.com'; 'Rose.lesmith@kingcounty.gov'; Stacey Welsh; 'Brian Asbury'; Chris Cahan Subject: DaVita Healthcare Office Park Attachments: Project Approval.pdf, Exhibit A Findings for Project Approval.pdf, 2019 Elevation Site and Landscape Plans.pdf Hello, Attached you will find a letter and enclosures for the DaVita Healthcare Office Park project. A hard copy has been mailed. Please contact Senior Planner Stacey Welsh at 253-835-2634, or stacey.welsh@cityoffederalway_.com, if you have any comments and/or questions regarding this letter. Regards, E. Tina Piety, CAP, OM Administrative Assistant II A Federal Way Community Development Department 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2601 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.citvoffederalway.com CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMXJNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RESUBMITTAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 5-17-19 TO: Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Greg Kirk, Plans Examiner Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue FROM: Stacey Welsh, Senior Planner FOR DRC MTG. ON: None, please provide comments/conditions FILE NUMBER(s): 17-105642-UP RELATED FILE NOS.: 17-105643-SE, 17-105644-SM, 17-104985-CN, 17-103654-PC PROJECT NAME: DAVITA HEALTHCARE OFFICE PARK PROJECT ADDRESS: *NO SITE ADDRESS* PARCEL NUMBER: 215465-0060, -0090, -0110 ZONING DISTRICT: OP-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Development of an office building and additional parking for DaVita (project is now planned in 2 phases with the first phase being 162,000 sq. ft. bldg.) LAND USE PERMITS: UP & SEPA PROJECT CONTACT: ESM Consulting Engineers Laura Bartenhagen 33400 8tn Ave South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 MATERIALS SUBMITTED: Resubmittal Information Form Response Letter Certificates of W/S Availability Building Area Calculations Revised Use Process III Plan Set Revised Elevations RESUBMITTED MAY 15 2019 CrIY OF FEDERAL WAY COM.MUNrrY DEVELOPMENT FMin-1 ENGINEERS I.LC May 15, 2019 Ms. Stacey Welsh Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33325 8th Ave S Federal Way, WA 98003 Re: Files #17-105642-UP & 18-105630-EN PROCESS III AND EN PERMIT UPDATES DaVita Healthcare Office Park, Federal Way Dear Stacey: Job No. 1884-001-015 On behalf of DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc and Genesis KC Development, LLC, ESM Consulting Engineers presents the updated Process III and EN Permit plans to the City of Federal Way for the DaVita Healthcare Office Park proposal. This revision addresses comments received on April 8, 2019 from the City of Federal Way. The Summary of Changes letter that was previously submitted still applies. Please find the following enclosed materials as part of this resubmittal. 1. Comment Responses for Land Use Approval (this letter); 2. Revised Process III Plan Set (8 copies); 3. Revised Building Elevations (4 copies); 4. Revised Construction Plans for the EN Permit (4 copies); 5. Updated Water and Sewer Availability Certificate (2 copies). In an effort to provide concise and direct responses, we have copied the review comments below in italics and our responses are in bold. Some general comments that have been noted and will be addressed at a later date have been removed to simplify this letter. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT- PLANNING DMS/ON Stacey Welsh, (253) 835-2634, Stace . welsh221 offederalwa .com 1. Comments below are based on materials submitted for the land use application, not the building permits The building permits have not gone through a land use technical review, as the land use application is still in process A brief examination of the building permit site plan revealed differences in certain items than what is shown on the land use site plan. This concern was discussed with ESM, who followed up with a February 28,, 2019, letter explaining the differences between the land use and building permit materials, which was helpful The building permit drawings EF 8th Ave S Ste 205 Tel (253) 838 6113 Everett (425) 297 9900 Civil Engineering Land Planning al Way WA 98003 Fax (253) 838 7104 Toll Free (800) 345 5694 Land Surveying Landscape Architecture www esmcivil corn 3D Laser Scanning GIS Ms. Stacey Welsh May 15, 2019 Page 2 attached to that letter were not reviewed. Moving forward, the land use application materials and building permit materials need to match; revise and resubmit land use application materials as necessary. The revised Process III and EN Construction Plans have been revised to correspond with one another. Additionally, the anticipated revised building plans will incorporate the same details but may provide additional measurements or other specifications as required by the IBC. 3. Future submittals related to this project must contain the properties' most current legal descriptions and parcel numbers Parcel numbers have been updated on the Cover sheets, and legal descriptions have been updated on the Existing Conditions sheets. 4. Provide documentation in compliance with Federal Way City Code (FWCC) 22-1421(b). The applicant will provide a signed covenant for the off -site parking lot 5. Revise the landscaping plan to: a. Address the provision of ten feet of Type 111 landscaping along property lines abutting access easements where an inadequate amount is shown on the drawing submitted with the land use -7pplication, which includes the northwest corner and along the eastern property line of the pallvi?g lot parcels Five feet of Type 111 landscaping is required along the western property line of the building parcel as well (FWCC 22-15661hj) Ten -foot Type III landscaping along property lines abutting access easements are now provided, including the northwest comer and southeast comer. The additional 5-foot Type III landscaping is provided along the western property line of the building parcel. b. Demonstrate detailed compliance with FWCC 22-1567(e)(1) Landscape island sizes have been updated to a maximum of 305 SF each that is counted towards the minimum required. c. Show the transformer and associated landscape screening per FWCC 22-1565(a)(1) The transformer pad and associated landscape screening is provided. Ms. Stacey Welsh May 15, 2019 Page 3 d. Include details regarding the irrigation system. The landscape plan states, "Per FWCC 22-1564(o-0,, irrigation shall be provided to establish new plantings The irrigation system will be designed to include separate irrigation zones for landscape perimeter buffer (where there are new plantings), lawn, and interior parking lot areas -No oth er irriga tion details are provided in the submittal. See FWCC 22 1564(0) and FWCC 22-1564(0 The plan shows lawn to be planted near the west side of the building. We are working to confirm that the section of lawn shown on the landscape plans will be lawn - the intent is to provide drought tolerant landscaping. Temporary irrigation plans have been approved with Lakehaven. e. Show the following corrected items: i On Sheet LA-01: 1. Parking lot landscaping islands that separate head -to -head parking stalls shall be eight feet in width per FWCC 22-1567(c) For both parking lot areas, the majority of parking lot landscape islands that separate head -to -head parking stalls do not meet this standard. The width of landscaping in these areas must be increased. Head -to -head parking stalls have been increased to 8' widths. Parking stalls are incorporating 2' overhand where applicable. 2. Tree 952 identified on Sheet TR-01 is missing from Sheet LA-01; correct the discrepancy and verify whether any significant tree calculations are affected. The discrepancy and significant tree calculations have been updated. 3. The note located in the lower right portion of the sheet regarding the Concomitant Agreement and vegetation remaining does not apply within the OP- 1 zone. The note has been removed. 4. The large text box on the sheet located north of South 323 rd Street on Lot J needs correction, as it references code that applies in the PO zone. Ms. Stacey Welsh May 15, 2019 Page 4 The text has been updated to reflect the correct OP zone. ii Sheet LA-02 contains some code text that does not apply to the project or that needs to be corrected; see the enclosed red line markup drawing. The notes and code references have been updated as necessary. 6. The plan shows retention of five trees (tree numbers. 958 959, 962, 963, and 964) that the tree assessment recommends removal of for safety as the trees are non viable As these trees are not part of the significant tree retention count they should be removed per the applicants arbonsts recommendation. Update materials submitted accordingly to reflect this action. The five trees are proposed to be removed. 7. The applicant is proposing that as part of the significant tree count tree numbers 952,, 960,, and 961 can each count as two trees, per FWCC 22- 1568(c)(3) However these trees do not meet any of the criteria contained within FWCC 22-1568000-c) The significant tree count must be adjusted and additional trees eitherretained orplanted, and shown on the landscaping plan. The significant tree count has been adjusted. The calculations no longer include this provision for counting trees with double credit Additional replacement trees are proposed. 9. Pedestrian connections on the parking lot site shall be continuous, without breaks across 'the site; meaning the distinct pavement texture and color shall extend across asphalt drive aisles The same applies to the building parcel, in particular the connection located cast of the building frontage across the parking lot to the driveway access off of South 3231d The correct surface typing for the pedestrian pathways have been updated. 10. The applicants submittal indicates that "The only location with blank walls in excess of 240 sf are located at the primary conference rooms along the west building elevation, where the walls provide a backdrop to landscaping elements 'It is unclear from the submittal elevation drawing and landscaping plan where this location is and how the landscaping satisfies FWCC 22-1564(u), which requires planting to include trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Revise the elevation drawings and landscaping plan to demonstrate compliance with FWCC 22 156461) Ms. Stacey Welsh May 15, 2019 Page 5 Additional landscaping around the perimeter of the building has been provided to comply. 11, Submit a lighting plan for verification of compliance with FWCC 22-954(c) Ught poles and lighting features are included on the revised landscape plans. 12. Lakehaven issued certificates ofavailability in November2017; certificates are valid for one-year Updated certificates of water and sewer availability shall be submitted. Lakehaven has provided updated certificates as of 4/9/2019, included with this submittal. Lakehaven Water and Sewer plans have been approved by Lakehaven, with a recorded Developer Extension Agreement, King County Instrument #20190501000021. PUBLIC WORKS - DEVELOPMENT SERI/10ES DIMS/ON Kevin Peterson, (253) 835-2734, kevin..petersorrG�cityoffederalwaYcom ENGINEERING 13. Show the required street frontage improvements -new, wider sidewalks and wider planter strips At the direction of the applicant and City officials, we have not included the frontage improvements on the site plan. 14. Provide a street cross-section that depicts both the existing roadway improvements and right-of-way, and the new improvements with the proposed new right-of-way. At the direction of the applicant and City officials, we have not included the frontage improvements on the site plan. 15. It does not appear that water quality treatment is being provided for the northern portion of the "satellite" pal kir2g lot Please show a water quality treatment facility for this portion of the paririf7g lot Water quality treatment facilities are shown on both portions of the subject property. SOLID WASTEAND RECYCLING Comments 16-18 will be addressed with the building -related permits. Ms. Stacey Welsh May 15, 2019 Page 6 PUBLIC WORKS - TR4FRC DMSION SaradyLong, (253) 835- 2 74 3, saraA /0 1 Lq OCR ofederalwa .com 20. The following comments on the TIA are from WSDOT a. There are four project proposals within the Federal Way campus (former Weyerhaeuser campus)- Warehouse A, Warehouse B, Da Vita, and Greenline The traffic impact analysis (77A) for DaV! a incorporated new trips generated for the office building, but did not include traffic volume generated by the Warehouse .� Warehouse B, and Greenline proposals The projects should be analyzed together. Separate TIAs have been submitted for Warehouse A Warehouse B, and Da Vita projects, so it is assumed the projects will be developed within a similar timeframe. The projects are within the same campus, so the cumulative traffic generated will have an impact on the 1-5 and South 3201h Street southbound and northbound ramp terminal intersections adjacent to the campus To determine the impact and level of mitigation, the project proposals should be analyzed together. The ramp capacity at South 3201h Street from southbound 1-5 and to northbound 1-5 should also be analyzed. The DaVita project and the Woodbridge (former Weyerhaeuser) projects are completely separate projects, property owners and applicants. We recommend that interested parties consolidate the results from all reports provided for a succinct value where concerns may arise. Furthermore, traffic mitigation for the DaVita project have been completed as they were included as part of the East Campus Corporate Park BSP. b. In the AM peak hour, the Da Vita project is anticipated to add 62 new trips to the intersection of the southbound 1-5 off -ramp and South 3201h Street. The project exceeds the vehicular trip threshold in the Developer Services Manual for determining whether a highway Improvement should be requested. The PM peak hour was not included in the analysis The cumulative impact of these developments will affect the operation of the transportation network and the interstate. As mitigation for the cumulative impacts from the Weyerhaeuser campus developments, WSDOT requests that the PM peak hour be analyzed to determine impacts Ms. Stacey Welsh May 15, 2019 Page 7 Traffic Mitigation for this project was included as part of the East Campus Corporate Park BSP. No further traffic mitigation for this project is required. Sincerely, SAVANNA NAGORSKI, M.S. Planner/GIS Analyst islesm-jobs11884100110151documentl letter-017.docx RESUBMITTED #.Lakehaven WATER & SEWER DISTRICT MAY 15 2019 CITY GF FEDERAL war COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �U ATER__CERTxFIGI4TE}_v1ILWr.ITY Lakehaven Water & sewer District - Development Engineering Section 31623 - 1st Ave S * PO Box 4249 # Federal Way, WA 98063-4249 Telephone: 253-945-1581 or 253-945-1580 * Email: DE@Lakehaven.org This certificate is intended to provide the applicant, land use agencies &/or public health departments with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to delay, or deny, water service based upon capacity &/or supply limitations in Lakehaven's or Other Purveyor's system facilities. Proposed Land Use: ❑ Building Permit-SFR ❑ Building Permit-MFR ❑ Building Permlt-Other ❑ Subdivision ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Binding Site Plan ❑ Rezone ❑ Boundary Line Adjustment ® Other (specify/describe) Office park site Develonment Tax Parcel Number(s): 215 65-0060. -009D, &110. -012Q Site Address: 32XX S 323rd St Lakehaven GIS Grid: L-09/M-09 Ex. Bldg. Area to Remain: N/A sf New Bldg. Area Proposed: 85.011 s Applicant's Name: Genesis KC Development WATER SYSTEM INFonMATION 1. ❑ water service can be provided by service connection to an existing " diameter water main that Is approximately feet from the site. 2. ® Water service for the site will require an improvement to Lakehaven's water distribution system of: ❑ a. feet of " diameter water main to reach the site; and/or ® b. The construction of a water distribution system on the site; and/or ❑ c. A major portion of Lakehaven's comprehensive water system plan would need to be implemented and/or constructed; and/or ® d. Other (describe): Lakehaven Devela e Extens.1on Agreerngrit reguire 3. ® a. The existing water system Is In conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehenslve Water System Plan. ❑ b. The existing water system is not in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehenslve Water System Plan and an Amendment to thls Plan will be required. This may cause a delay In Issuance of land use approvals or permits. 4. ® a. The subject property is within the corporate limits of Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of water service outside of Lakehaven's water service area. ❑ b. Annexatlon or Boundary Review Board approval will be necessary to provide service. S. Water service is subject to: ® a. Payment of connection charges (to be determined by Lakehaven); ® b. Proof or reservation of easement(s) as required by Lakehaven; ® c. Other: Water Service Cvnnectia p i' a i ns re uir d, DE Agreement #2 aboveLmUat be a ted b Lakehave rlo service connection activa i n. Comments/special conditions: The nearest fire hydrants will be on the Property (actual locations TBD by Lakehaven & fire marshal). System hydraulic model resuits (FF #227, copy attached), at no less than 20 psi, indicate that Lakehaven's standard maximum allowable liquid velocity of 10 ft/s is exceeded at a fire flow rate above 5,20Q GPM (approximate). This flow figure depicts the theoretical performance of the water distribution system under high demand conditions. Fire flow rates greater than this may be accommodated through water distribution system Improvements, contact Lakehaven for additional informatlon. 578 Pressure Zone Est. Meter Elevation(s)-GIS: High 458+/-, Low 444+/- Est. Pressure Range at Meter(s) (psi): 49-64 I hereby certify that the above water system Information Is true. This certification shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of signature. Name: BRIAN ASBURY Title: DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR Signature: Date: i >� % I61 L� GAD t vv.*js uN-CE0N6FP 2154650060 2154650090 2154650110 2154650120 wtr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 1 of 2 2154650060 2154650090 2154650110 2154650120 wtr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 2 of 2 LAKE]HAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT Hydraulic -Model -Calculated Fire Flow Estimate Request/Reporting Form EequestedBy: John Jensen Date: 09/15/06 ehalf Of: Smith Fire S stems for East Cain us Office Park LOCATION OF FLOW TEST liacili#y Ma 1/a Section: M-9 Approx. Street Intersection: 32" Avenue South & South 321st Place A roximate Elevation = 470' MSL See additional descri tion below and attached Results Bert By: Date: 09/18/06 Model Run No.: Ross T 95LUDNFF.INP Condition Pressure si FF#227 Flow Static 43 0 1 2 Flow rate at which flow velocities within the water 22 5,200 system will not exceed 10 feet per second (fps) (District flow velocity standard for its distribution tern)5,500 3 Flow rate at no less than 20 si residual ressure 20 4 The MAXIMUM AVAILABLE FIRE FLOW RATE 36 2,500 listed here for the specified location is TO BE USED FOR DESIGN PURPOSES and is the least of values in either Row 2 or Row 3, or the District's provided Fire Flow Standard for the local land use. NOTE: The fire flow analysis was performed at the existing pipeline intersection at the "imaginary" intersection of 32 Avenue South and South 321st Place near an existing fire hydrant. On -site fire flow estimates may need to be determined during design of any on -site water system improvements and extensions. There is no guarantee that the District's hydraulic model results will represent actual system performance. Model results depict the theoretical performance of the water system under conservative operating conditions, including peals hour domestic water consumption, low storage tank levels, and no well or booster pumps running. Actual field measurements may be desired for design purposes. M-9 ttLakehaven WATER & SEWER DISTRICT Lakehaven Water & Sewer District - Development Engineering Section 31623 - 1st Ave S * PO Box 4249 * Federal Way, WA 98063-4249 Telephone: 253-945-1581 or 253-945-1580 * Email: DE@Lakehaven.org This certificate is intended to provide the applicant, land use agencies &/or public health departments with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to delay, or deny, sewer service based upon capacity &/or supply limitations in Lakehaven's or Other Purveyor's system facilities. Proposed Land Use: ❑ Building Permit-SFR ❑ Building Permit-MFR ❑ Building Permit -Other ❑ Subdivision ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Binding Site Plan ❑ Rezone ❑ Boundary Line Adjustment ® Other (specify/describe) Office Park Site Development Tax Parcel Number(s): 215465-0060, -0090, -0110, -0120 Site Address: 32XX S 323rd St Lakehaven GIs Grid: L-09/M-09 Ex. Bldg. Area to Remain: A sf New Bldg. Area Proposed: 85,011 sf Applicant's Name: ,Genesis KC Development SEWER SYSTEM it4FORMATION 1. ® Sewer service can 4e provided by service connection to an existing 8" diameter sewer main that Is on the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed land use. 2. ❑ Sewer service for the site will require an improvement to Lakehaven's sanitary sewer system of: ❑ a. Feet of " diameter sewer main or trunk to reach the site; and/or ❑ b. The construction of a sanitary sewer collection system on the site; and/or ❑ c. A major portion of Lakehaven's comprehensive wastewater system plan would need to be implemented and/or constructed; and/or ❑ d. Other (describe): 3. ® a. The existing sewer system Is In conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Wastewater System Plan. ❑ b. The existing sewer system Is not in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Wastewater System plan and an Amendment to this Plan will be required. This may cause a delay In Issuance of land use approvals or permits. 4. ® a. The proposed site land use is within the corporate limits of Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of sewer service outside of Lakehaven's sewer service area. ❑ b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board approval will be necessary to provide service. S. Sewer service Is subject to: ® a. Payment of connection charges (to be determined by Lakehaven); ® b. Proof or reservation of easement(s) as required by Lakehaven; ® c. Other: Sewer Service Connection Permit required:. Comments/special conditions: I hereby certify that the above sewer system Information Is true. This certification shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of signature. Name: BRIAN ASBURY Title: DEVELOPMENJ_EINGINEERINUPERVJSQ Signature: ��-�--�� All •X�--. Date: 0 1 zz 7//_� Coup/ v om UN - cO"&&P 2154650060 2154650090 2154650110 2154650120 swr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 1 of 2 2154650060 2154650090 2154650110 2154650120 swr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 2 of 2 cn C Do --I O D rn 0 41 CO w O U) T W co w U) n rn w co rn Cl) T T r O O O O O O X X X c w CO N rn o cn N cn n T Cn OO cn N T T 0 cUn , w o cc 00 --A0 � IV 11 r Cn U) cn Cn y n -n -n -n x m D N 0 00 o� W mmm2 SN II II II ;u Cn ? o p rn y m O W x co v w UlC) � � O 0 -n++vZi Dm m � wv ao � D u o ic cn m O D CDx v 00 Dov m OOn c-4i� m cJn c7 -DI o m o0 cn�o m r- zZ D O 0 r O -< r W O c D r r Z m c� D m D = O Z7 m 2 D Z O Z m ni mmmD u u u li20 O D 4Ln r�) D G r ro � + m D O cnoozm O cn+ C, — < _ co m pDo �co G) r m o Daocn56 DO m o v -- I 2 Cn D -n m- z r O X - m O -n _ > O D x 0 D Z u � w < C-ri o rn C N D V' r cn r T n O T r 2 r 2 m D 2 r C7 D W r m m O c m m m z O T cn m n O z 0 90 � m v G17Y OF PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way Federal Way 98835-6325 Fax 2709 253-835-2700;Fax 253-835-2709 ►vmv.di affeticralway.coin CA PA CITY RESERVE CERTIFICATE (CRC) This CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION is made this 17'4 day of January 2018 by the City of Federal Way (COFW), a political subdivision of the State of Washington (hereinafter called the "City"). WHEREAS, the developer intends to develop the property described as DaVita llealthcare Office Park Wav reviewed under City file CN Number(s) 17-104985-00-CN (hereinafter called the "development"); and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A requires that the City adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development approval if the development causes the level of service on a transportation facility to decline below the standards adopted in the comprehensive plan, unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of the development are made concurrent with the development; and WHEREAS, the City adopted its comprehensive plan in November 1995; and WHEREAS, Chapter 19 of the COFW Revised Code was amended by the creation of Chapter 19.90 Division III on June 10, 2006 by Ordinance 06-525 effective January 1, 2007; and NOW, THEREFORE, a concurrency certificate is issued for the development of 161,280 SF Office Building based on the facts and conditions set forth herein. Development Parameters This CONCURRENCY DETERMINATION is based on the following development: Development type: Single -Tenant Office Building Development size: 161,280 sq. ft. Property address: Unknown Federal Way, WA 98003 Parcel No. (s): 215465-0060, -0090, -0110, -0120 Number of New PM Peak Hour Vehicles Trips Generated: 276 Validity of Concurrency Determination This CAPACITY RESERVE CERTIFICATE is valid only for the specific development approval consistent with the development parameters and the City file number contained within this certificate. If the development is changed, expired, cancelled or withdrawn, it will be subjected to reevaluation for concurrency purposes. Terms of the Capacity Reserve Certificate This CAPACITY RESERVE CERTIFICATE is valid until the underlying development permit expires, is withdrawn or cancelled, whichever occurs first. 41 Approved By: Date: Z �� Printed Name: Erik Preston P.E Title: Senior Traffic EnEineer 44k CITY Federala� Way R E S U B ii/i I TT E DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 APR 2 3 2019 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 ww w.citvoffederalway_com CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CO-MMUNfTY DEVELOPMENW FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION CLASS IV - GENERAL TYPE OR PRINT IN INK __.�....... ..- T:.... L.P1...r...r --A 11..ern+nr Infnrmnfinn Legal Name of LANDOWNER Legal Name of TIMBER OWNER Legal Name of OPERATOR Arthur Richey TBD Nate Jenkins at Mortenson Construction c/o Genesis KC Development Mailing Address: Mailing Address: Mailing Address: 10230 NE Points 2000 16th ST Drive, Ste 300 ATTN: RE Legal, Amy DeColibus City, State, Zip City, State, Zip City, State, Zip Kirkland, WA Denver, CO 80202 98033 Phone (918)810-3700 Phone ( ) Phone (429 497-6610 Email:arthur.richey@davita.com Email: Email: nate.jenkins@mortenson.com Pnrenn Irnfnrrnnfinn Name Phone (253)838-6113 Eric LaBrie c/o ESM Consulting Engineers Email: eric.labrie@esmcivil.com 3. Enter the Applicable City of Federal Way Development Permit Application Number(s): J17-105642-UP . 17-105643-SE 4. Enter the Forest Tax Reporting Account Number of the Timber Owner: N/A For tax reporting information or to receive a tax number, call the Department of Revenue at 1-800-548-8829. 5. Legal description where the forest practices will occur. Parcel Number Within '/ section of: Section Township Range E/W 215465-0110 NE 16 21 04 215465-0120 NW 15 21 04 215465-0060 NW 15 21 04 215465-0090 NW 15 21 04 6. Answer each question as it applies to your proposed forest practice. No ( ) Yes Is the activity within the "Natural Environment" as regulated by Federal Way Revised Code (FVWRC) Title 15, "Shoreline Management"? Bulletin #072 —November 10, 2016 Page 1 of 2 k:/Handouts/Forest Practices Application ( ) No ✓ Yes Is the activity within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area and its associated buffer area (wetland, stream, wellhead capture area, and/or geologically hazardous area)? ( ) No i ✓ Yes Have you reviewed this forest practices activity area to determine whether it may involve historic sites and/or Native American cultural resources? 7. What is the intended future use of the land proposed to be logged? ( ) Single Family Residence ( ) Residential Subdivision (includes plats and short plats) ( ) Commercial or Multifamily Residential ✓ Other Office Park 8. How much merchantable timber are you cutting and/or removing? Complete the table below and indentify all timber harvest and salvage activity boundaries on the site plan. Unit # Acres (net) Volume of Merchantable Timber to be harvested(board feet Percent (%) of Total Merchantable Timber on site. 9.64 1 108,000 94% 9. Summarize below the proposed timber harvest method, how the site will be accessed, and the proposed timing of the timber harvest within the context of the overall project timeline. According to a survey conducted by ESM Consulting Engineers and Tree Assessment provided by Gilles Consulting, there are 341 trees on the entire site. Of those trees, 293 are viable/healthy while 199 are classified as significant. This project proposes to retain all healthy trees outside of the grading limits of the project, including 9 significant trees. That leaves 190 significant trees that have potential to be utilized for merchantable timber purposes. The total yield and details of the harvest are to be determined. We affirm that the information contained herein is true and understand that this proposed forest practice is subject to the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120, "Clearing, Grading, and Tree and Vegetation Retention," as well as all other federal, state, or local regulations. Compliance with the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120 does not ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act or other federal, state, or local laws. Signature of LANDOWNER Signature of TIMBER OWNER Signature of OPERATOR (If different than landowner) (If different than landowner) Arthur Digitallysignod by Arthur Richey DN: cn=Arthur ftkhey, Dlglrallr signed by Ail hur Richey Arthur DN:Cn=Rrl hur Richey, /� Arthur h U r Dlgltally signed by Arthur Rlchcy o=Genesis, ou=Davila, o=Grre lc uu-DaAu. DN: cn=Arthur ftichq, G-Cwmm ou=Davila, email=arthunriche @davita,comc=US �Q`11/''1/'� V ,c=US y Date: 2019.04.2216;12:31 -05'00' email=arthur.rlchey@davtta com, email=arthur.richey@davitacom, / c=US j'jm{y,&e; Date 2019.041216:14:17 -05'00' f' fV Date:2014.041216:1693 -05'00' Riche 4/22/19 4/22/19 4/22/19 Date: Date: Date: Department Review (For Office Use Only) Department of Revenue Notified (date): Date Approved: Comments/Conditions: Bulletin #072 — November 10, 2016 Page 2 of 2 k:/Handouts/Forest Practices Application RESUBMITTED FEB 2 8 2U19 February 28, 2019 Ms. Stacey Welsh Senior Planner City of Federal Way Dept. of Community Development 33325 8th Avenue S Federal Way, WA 98003 Job No. 1884-001-015 RE: Summary of Changes - Process III with SEPA and Construction Plan Details DaVita Healthcare Office Park, Federal Way Dear Ms. Welsh: On behalf of DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc. and Genesis KC Development, LLC, ESM Consulting Engineers is submitting this summary of changes between the Process III land use application with SEPA submitted to the City of Federal Way on September 12, 2018, and the building and construction plans submitted to the City in November 2018 and February 2019 with expected revisions to follow. The goal with the submitted construction plans is to align with the land use code as applied with the Process III and SEPA application. Any changes that have or will occur are due to the innate variations that come from a preliminary design to a final, constructible design. Outlined below is a brief description of any significant changes related to land use. The plans in progress reflect the changes noted in this letter and will be implemented into the final design of the project For reference, please see the included site plan exhibits (not for official review). ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: BUILDING AREA HEIGHT AND SETBACKS Both the proposed building area (SF) and height have been reduced since the September 2018 Process III application. The square footage of the building area is now proposed at 160,493 GSF. Horizontal projections, including roof overhangs, total an additional 3,893 SF. The modified area of the building is still well within the maximum capacity of 200,000 SF allowed for the remaining property of the East Campus Office Park. As the height of the building has been reduced, the required setbacks have also been reduced. However, neither the previous or current site plan propose a building footprint that is close to the required setbacks that are imposed due to the proposed height exceeding the maximum allowed. 33400 8th Ave S Ste 205 Tel (253) 838 6113 Everett (425) 297 9900 F3D ivil Engineering Land Planning Federal Way WA 98003 Fax (253) 838 7104 Toll Free (800) 345 5694 and Surveying Landscape Architecture www esmciviL com Laser Scanning GIS Ms. Stacey Welsh February 28, 2019 Page 2 BUILDING STATISTICS P-III LAND USE 9/12/2018 BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION PLANS 54'-6" Height 57'-6" Increase from Max Height of 35' 22'-6" 19'-6" Area 161,280 SF 1601493 SF Overall Standard Required Meet Meet SETBACKS REQUIRED w/ ADDITIONAL HEIGHT Front 72'-6" 69'-6" Rear 42'-6" 39'-6" Side (West) 42'-6" 39'-6" Side (East) 42'-6" 39'-6" PROVIDED Front 96'-4" Rear 100'-10" Side (West) 44'-2" Side (East) 242'-4" Overall Standard Required Exceed PARKING Minor adjustments were made to the parking areas on the southern lot of the project. This includes: widening and narrowing of perimeter parking islands and pedestrian walkways, adding 8 more parking stalls, adjusting the placement of handicap parking stalls, and adjusting the placement and count of electrical vehicle charging station stalls. The quantity of parking stalls still meets and exceeds the standard 1 unit per 300 square feet of building area. PARKING STALLS P-III LAND USE 9/12/2018 BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION PLANS Total Stalls Provided 681 689 North Parking Lot 470 469 South Parking Lot 211 220 Electric Vehicle (EV) 34 35 Accessible 14 14 Overall Standard Required Meet Meet Ms. Stacey Welsh February 28, 2019 Page 3 LANDSCAPING AND TREE RETENTION Final landscaping design was included in the recent construction plan sets. Specific details regarding plant types, sizes and locations are shown densely in the required landscape areas on site, in addition to area where landscaping is used for aesthetic purposes. There are several more trees included in the updated plans that meet the requirements of a replacement tree. TREE RETENTION Required Significant Tree Retention (credit Replacement Replacement - Landscape Areas P-III LAND USE BUILDING AND 9/12/2018 1 CONSTRUCTION PLANS 50 50 12 9 13) 3-1/2" Caliper 1 (16) 3" Caliper/ 10' Height Maximum Allowed (25) 3-1/2" Caliper (25) 3-1/2" Caliper Overall Standard Required Meet Meet LAND USE REVIEW AND CONDITIONS We understand that issuing the Process III Land Use and SERA decisions is delayed due to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the realignment of S 3241h Street. However, as the final materials required for the Land Use review were submitted on November 9, 2018 and the 2"d Reading at City Council for the Comp Plan Amendment is schedule out to April 2, 2019, there is close to 5 months before the SEPA decision can be issued. With the scheduling of the Process III approval timeline, an additional 2-week comment period is required for the SEPA determination before the Land Use decision can be issued. Thereafter, an additional 2-week appeal period applies to the Land Use decision. This takes the Process III and SEPA approvals to May 3, 2019 at the earliest - a total of nearly 6 months from the time the last materials were submittal for this project's Process III and SEPA applications. Due to this extended review and approval period that is not due to the responsibility of the applicant or the City's land use review team for this project, we kindly ask that any comments, concerns and conditions that could or would apply to the Land Use decision become available to the applicant prior to scheduled Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTO meeting scheduled on March 4, 2019 for the Comp Plan Amendment review or at the soonest possible date. The intent of receiving the comments and conditions in advance is to make sure all land use items are addressed in any building, construction and final engineering revisions prior to the Process III and SEPA approvals. Of course, the goal here is to begin site construction at the earliest possible date. Ms. Stacey Welsh February 28, 2019 Page 4 We hope this summary helps alleviate some of the concern of proposed changes related to land use requirements. Thank you for your considerations and if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 253-838-6113. Sincerely, ESM CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LLC k-l�' SAVANNA NAGORSKI, M.S. Planner/GIS Analyst Enc: As noted CC: Jim Hilger, DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc. Arthur Richey, Team Genesis Mark Kinney, Team Genesis Todd Olsen, McGranahan Architects Iles m8lenghesm-jobs11884100110151documentlletter-015.docx A PORTION OF N\' j4 OF SECTION 15 AND THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T. 21 N., R. 4 E., W.M. KING COU'--';, WASHINGTON DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS GROSS SITE AREA: 502.244 S.F. (11.5 AC.) RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION: 13,452 S.F. (0-31 AC,) PUBLIC PURPOSED LANDS: 7,460 S.F. (0.17 AC_) NET SITE AREA: 481,332 S.F. (11.05 AC.) PROPOSED BUILDING AREA: 160,493 S.F. (3 STORIES) PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT: 54,5' ABE (19.5'>MAXIMUM ALLOWED) MINIMUM SETBACK ADJUSTMENTS: FRONT: 50' MIN + 19,5' = 69.5' INTERIOR/REAR: 20' MIN + 19,5' = 39.5' PROPOSED PARKING: 689 VEHICLE STALLS (469 NORTH LOT AND 220 SOUTH LOT) - STANDARD: 9'X18' (MIN) - AISLE WIDTH: 25' (TYP), 26' (FIRE ACCESS) - 14 ADA ACCESSIBLE - 2 AS VAN STALLS - 1 W/ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATION - 5% OF THE TOTAL PARKING STALLS PROVIDE ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS PARKING REGULAR STALLS 644 COMPACT STALLS Y 0 HANDICAP PARKING STALLS 10 HANDICAP PARKING EV STALLS 4 ELECTRICAL VEHICLE STALL 31 TOTAL = 6139 NOTES I, SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DIMENSIONS/DETAILS FOR INTERIOR PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS, PLAZAS, AND OTHER HARDSCAPES- n SCALE: 1" = 50' 50 25 0 50 100 CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2' DATUM: N.G.V.D. 29 SEE SHEET ST-02 FOR CONTINUATION STA, 64+66.52. 21,74' LT, / - - - - - - - - -3D' COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY I N 89115'52" W L-103-69, R=60-00, 5'- HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE SIGN (TYP.) I 99 02 1 - - - - - - - APPROACK SEE COF DWG NO.JBBIAL7' 15' EX. PUBLIC SANITARY 4�g;30, R=9000 G:3-6A ON SHEEP DSEWER MEMENT10' EX PRIVATE STORM / 62+� � •� 65+00 66�oo +90 6e+ooS 323RD ST 69.00 70+00DRAINAGE EASEMENT' / 25' PROPOSED 9' EX, WATER-- R=15'.5.= 72.5 eU4pHG a STREETSCAPE AREA EASEMENT STA, 64+67.67, 21.80' RT. SETBACK LINE o - I - -- 3D' COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY '� (PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAIF _ _ / 6' `- _ _ ___ - __— - ✓`� 33-6SHE[T DT 0WG -�IV - 47' - 5' 4•• R/W DEDICATIONO r% _ NO 15' CA. PRVATE $IWTASTf - - - - I $Ev�R EASEMENT n.7sR- �.:r-' 0' - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - 1 J TT (1) 7' STEP ,�� o LLLI- e R=3p I EXISTING V STRCET$WF AREA % LOT 11 El �S IIII - � fLRORE LIGHT POLE I R.515' EXPANSION (TYP,) PROPOSED 20, PEDESTRIAN T t: It-y - - ACCESS EASEMENT GFF-ICEI'P,j I r--- -- - �- �r C 215465-0080 9'X16' STALLS WITH 2' ) OVERHANG AT 26' FIRE LANE I 1 STREETSCAPE (TYP-) (rrP-) -6 STORMWATER 16" LANDSCAPE CURB (TYP.) ENTRY PLAZA ROOF LINE (TYP.)POND I 2154650160 FIRE ACCESS AND PEDESTRIAN 160,493 SF w CONNECTIVITY PROPOSED WITH I �'z DIFFERENT USE PROCESS - 3 STORY BUILDING 1 pj PARKING LOT MODIFICATIONEX GFF=455.00 6 1FASCNE111AS / WEHANOD ► �/ 'I I 42-5- BUILDING ADA ACCESSIBLE I ' I SETBACK LINE STALL (TYP) 42.5 BUILDING SETBACK LINE ( I I /AC f C I w� PATIO 5' SIDEWALK (TYP.) — _ — — ' 9' MR) FIRE LANE (TYP) r / • , , r5m < > - - - - - - - - T LOADR40 R=32 I / 15' EX. PUfiLIC I i C V v I / wETLANO , I WATER EAaMitIT ELECTRIC VEHICLE 1DEX. GAS j 26' FIRE CHARGING STATION (TYP,) I I EASEMENT ROUTE (TYP.) / \ ---- - 42 BUILDING K SETBACK LINE / I � / CORi'01 „TE F/;I=sIG e1621049056 8� PERMIT NO. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 15 APPROVAL DATE Know What'sb910W. SIGNATURE Call before you dig. 1 A PORTION OF N`___'�/4 OF SECTION 15 AND THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T. 21 N., R. 4 E., W.M. KING COU�j, WASHINGTON OP-1 OP-1 OFFICE PARK OFFICE PARK OP-1 I I I OFFICE PARK I [ 15' EX. WATER EASEMENT LJ r 2 1 - OFFICE PARK 1 I I 1 I 40' EX. RECIPROCAL DRIVEWAY 1 AND Ut IY FJISELIEMT 107 1I, I J I , I L=44,5I• R 5,30.0L1 5' PROPOSED � =4-81 N 88'68�5h LANDSCAPE AREA I �. t-------- ^^ r 4' EX. GAS EASEMENT I I I I r I OP-1 OFFICE PART R-645' 25' EX STREETSCAPE AR ER 1 A-7[' R=9- (TYP.) - I THIS AISLE 1 I I I �^ r I I I 5' PROPOSED I OP-1 I �� I I n- I'le I LANDSCAPED AREA OFFICE PAPK I I r �3 jr j 11 25' Ie, 19 �' 25 Ix' I I III I I. II r r8 Z5• 1g 1a b' I[ INGRESS,PEGRESS AND {' 9'%16' STALLS WITH 2' OVERHANG +f I _!8' Ig. I LmLfn[S EASEMENT La j- 2 I I p II _ AT STREETSCAPE (TYP.) f+ i 1g• p + 1 +f 1 S' PEXSTRW OP-1 { f r PATH [rt'.) I OFFICE PARK V I' I N 9'45'16' E 1 l rr. .' 25. -`B' - 1 I I I A27.92• EI N 0'44'08" E I I 1 I , 1 k.?a' R+5' 643.54' I I E r k.1s' trrr.) [rm•1 .sl I ! LI 9' R/W DEDICATION I I + yy + 26' (TYP.) I - -- 5' EX. WATER _ •r f R-15 EASEMENT�- 1 I j r 8 r 'a' xs• ,8. �' I 2" PROPOSED 1g STREETSCAPE AREA r M1� 18' 73- 6 R_150' I I I I } I I � � 15' (lYp.) )a. zs' 15 STEPS ® 6" EACH Lo f J I J uuo r I Jr o i f ' f++ 1 I, I OFFICE PARK I / R-1p05- ISLAND RAMP, I) L I W a I SEE DETAIL THIS— SHEET (TYP.)— 9 \� I I w a DP-1 UGH, POLE (rM.) I } 1i I. }I OFFICE PAH, I I -25' R-9- VW,) �(1w745- , ,INS ISLC N I ItL=101.40, Ra40,00• �,If-i9.5) R=V I I JI 1� _ _ 15R-B3• 10� 15' EX PUBLIC f s- - -- --R--------- I 1 SANITARY Sd~WEF I N — — �-----------N 69'15'S2" W--- — — _ — — EASEMENT i 1 -- 42gprlENi — 63+DO —� - g[ip5 65+00 66+00 Y - - 6�+0o S 3MRD ST ea.ou as.aD 70+00 . • p=B1,7S 9'X16' STALLS WITH 2' OVERHANG - I - _ CAPE AT STREETSTYP. ..� J. l : � �ti . •�- ` � - ( ) - - - _ - - _ - - (FU6L1C RIGHT of WAY) SEE SHEET ST-01 FOR CONTINUATION n } SCALE: 1" = 50' so 25 P so 100 CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2' DATUM: N.G.V.D. 29 5' jtm.) I I RAMP (TYP.) TOP OF CURB FLUSH WITH 1• J I' PAVEMENT OULMOSE AT END _ OF CURB (TYP.) CONCRETE WALK (TYP.)_ PERMIT NO. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY APPROVAL DATE Know what's WOW. SIGNATURE Call before you dig. LANDSCAPE CALIGULA ~\IS V!& INUAM PARK6,r,i L NDSWE AW, PER 1994 FWCC, ARTICLE XVII; LANDSCAPING, SECTION 22-1567(b)(1)(n): 22 SQUARE FEET OF TYPE N LANDSCAPING IS REQUIRED PER PARKING STALL. • NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS= 689 X 22 SF/STALL= 15,158 SF OF LANDSCAPING REQUIRED • TOTAL SF OF INTERIOR PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING PROPOSED= 28.299 SF R TI Ii' PER 1994 FWCC, ARTICLE XVII; LANDSCAPING, SECTION 22-1564(f): • AT LEAST 25% OF NEW LANDSCAPE MATERIALS MUST BE DROUGHT TOLERANT. • 90% OF PROPOSED LANDSCAPING IS DROUGHT TOLERANT r nrW-ER (25 )PROPOSED LARGER 3-1/REPLACEMENT TREES PER 19922-1568(C)(1)(9)- TYP. SYM.RETENTION CALCULATIONS ON I r I + r I + I 945, 25' E% STREETSCAPE AREA 1 1 1 I 1 I I ! I. I I I I 1 944 I + 7 PER FWCC+22-826(3), 25' KOLP E6 FRONT YARD LANDSCAPING WITH THREE-FOOT HIGH DENSE, SIGHT OBSCURING VEGETATION- TYPICAL SYMBOL. SUPPLEMENT LANDSCAPING AS REQUIRED TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT WITHIN THE 1 OVERLAPPING 25' EXISTING STREETSCAPE + AREA LANDSCAPE EASEM NT. 1 200 +rr r + f i 1 r r ) A PORTION OF OF SECTION 15 AND THE NE 114 OF SECTION 16, T. 21 N., R. 4 E., W.M. KING COUP—' WASHINGTON m NUTE:�TREE-5 IN UNDISTURBED AREA$ r WHICH ARE VIABLE BUT DO NOT QUALIFY II AREA FOR REPLACEMENT EES- AS SIGNIFICANT TREES SHOULD REMAIN I EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE TO HE (115 PROPOSED 3" CALIPER UNDISTURBED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT RETAINED, (9) TOTAL- TYPICAL REP✓:ACENINT TREES PER 1994 FWCC POSSIBLE. ALL NON -VIABLE TREES WILL W SYMBOL REFER TO SHEET TR-01 22-1568(5)(o)- TYP SYM, REFER TO REMOVED. REFER TO ARBORIST'S REPORT !! 1! FOR TREE RETENTION PLAN TABLE TREE RETENTION CALCULATIONS ON SHEET FOR TREE SPECIES. CONDITION AND 1! + I AND CALCULATIONS, RECOLIMENgATIONI5 r o �!114 • a a o ® `s �. 7iEXISTING NON-SIGNIFICA T TREE TO a52 EXISTING STREET TREE- TYP, 1999 1r ' D lro O 1 ! r rr 10 r D + + r+ j + I '998 r+ I If 5' M WATER +! r r EASEMENT + , r I + 4' EX. GAS p+ i (D + r f FASEWENT r b + + r1fo (D10 1 I+ 1995 r++ + EXISTING STREET FIWNTAGE I+ + LANDSCAPING- TYP. I r+ O • REMOVE STREET TREES F+ I (D WHERE CONFLICT WITH t +r INGRESS// EGRESS- r a t995 r+r 0, Cc)• _ Ir 1 €) + 1 r r I O 1 + rr r r r > + - ! + i 1 j 261 I _ � Ir f O 0 D .fro r 10 :7 + + r +1 'I 0 r (D c) o r r+ ! I r ' �� I+k 991 1 10 (D d r + rr r rr � 1 + R ! rig 1-1/2" CALIPER PERIMETER PARKING LOT DECIDUOUS TREE- TYP. SYM. REFER TC PLANT LEGEND ON SHEET LA-03 tea. a - 53 46$ / LIGHTING- TYP, 478 \ r 132 EXISTING VEOETA ION T J REMAIN UNDISTURBED, BARE GROUND TO BE HYDROSEEDED WITH EROSION CONTROL MIX. REFER TO SHEET LA-02 + FOR SPFCIFICATION. Iv 232 SQUARE FOOTAG LOT ISLAND- Ty 10 1 � X i `Yy 968 } y Wo- I -� O p C O C 0= t + 0 0 0 5' WIDTH TYPE RI VISUAL O ❑'{1 SCREEN- SEE NOTE THIS 1 SHEET SMALL PERIMETER PARKING LOT EVERGREEN TREE- TYP. _ 0 I. 514 SYM. REFER TO PLANT L Q LEGEND ON SHEET LA-03 1W O 47 C O 10 Q INTERIOR PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING PER 1994 FWCC, _ ARTICLE XVII; LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING- 7YA, SECTION 22-1567 TYP. PLANT 1 SYM. REFER TO PLANT LEGEND ON SHEET LA-03 r` Q �a7$ 38a SEE SHEET LA-02 FOR CONTINUATION 1-1/2" MIN CALIPER INTERIOR PARKING LOT DECIDUOUS PARKING ISLAND TREE PER 1994 FWCC, ARTICLE XVI; LANDSCAPING. SECTION 22-1564 REFER TO PLANT LEGEND ON SHEET LA-03. MIIIIIII.Js, I I I I I _ ) I 1 I I I I I I J -I 'r I 7 ! SCALE: 1 " = 20' I I xa to o zo +a CONTOUR INTERVAL=2' I I DATUM: N.G.V.D. 29 I ]-PROTECT IN PLACE EX, YARD DRAIN 30' EX. PRIVATE INGRESS, EGRESS AND 1 UTILITIES EASEMENT L-0T 1 I � • I• ;j KEYMAP I ! i L.07 2 I I I I I I I 1 PER 1994 FWCC, ARTICLE XVII; LANDSCAPING, SECTION 22-1566(d)(3)- PROVIDE TYPE III LANDSCAPING 5' IN WIDTH ALONG ALL PERIMETER LOT LINES, EXCEPT PROPERTY LINES ABUTTING PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF -WAY. SUPPLEMENT EXISTING VEGETATION WITH ADDITIONAL SHRUBS I AND TREES OR INSTALL A MIX OF I, EVERGREEN AND DECIDUOUS TREES WITH I LARGE SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVER TO ! MEET TYPE III VISUAL SCREENING ALONG ALL PROPERTY LINES NOT ABUTTING A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, I , I I I ) j K IT ow wN I's 138 1 OW. + Call before you dig. I I I PERMIT NO• CITY OF FEDERAL WAY APPROVAL DATE SIGNATURE COMPOST SPECIFIGRTIONS A PORTION OF N-11/4 OF SECTION 15 AND THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T. 21 N., R. 4 E., W.M. KING COUP"mil', WASHINGTON 1 BIORETENTION SOIL MEDIA STANDARD SPECIFIC PER KC SWDM REFERENCE 11-C COMPOST SPECIFICATIONS (CONT'D) HYDROSEED MIX FOR LAWN AREAS HYDROSEED ORCHARD MIX FOR ALL EXPOSED AREAS 11-C.1 COMPOST COMPOST PRODUCTS SHALL BE THE RESULT OF THE BIOLOGICAL ECOLOGYFOR THE SPECIFIED METHODS SHALL PERFORM THE ANALYSES. PROPORTION MIXTURE BELOW SPECIFIED AS A RATIO BY WEIGHT: DEGRADATION AND TRANSFORMATION OF UNCONTAMINATED BIOLOGICAL LAB ANALYSIS SHALL BE FOR THE COMPOST DELIVERED ON SITE FOR NAME BY WEIGHT GERMINAAON NAME PROPORTION BY WFIG Q PEACEM 7URRY S IN8I1�1 ORGANIC MATERIALS UNDER CONTROLLED CONDITIONS DESIGNED TO PROJECT USE TRIPLE BLEND PERENNIAL 70% 90 PROMOTE AEROBIC DECOMPOSITION COMPOST SHALL BE STABLE WITH REGARD TO OXYGEN CONSUMPTION, 3= A COPY OF THE STA LABORATORY'S SEAL OF TESTING ASSURANCE RYEGRASS- TURF QUALITY 'ELF' PERENNIAL RYEGRASS 607 69 90 30% BS CARBON DIOXIDE GENERATION, AND SEED GERMINATION AND SEEDLING STA CERTIFICATION AS ISSUED BY THE U.S COMPOSTING COUNCIL, OR FINE FESCUE 30% 90 CREEPING RED FESCUE 19.9 10% BS VIGOR, COMPOST SHALL BE MATURE WITH REGARD TO ITS SUITABILITY A COPY OF THE ECOLOGY -CERTIFIED LABORATORY'S ACCREDITATION FOR - HARD FESCUE 9,8 FOR USE IN STORMWATER FACILITIES AND BMPS, POST -CONSTRUCTION THE SPECIFIED METHODS. SOIL AMENDMENT, GENERAL LANDSCAPING, OR AN EROSION CONTROL 6-8 LBS. / 1,000 S.F. HYDROSEED APPLICATION RATE: 220 LBS. / ACRE BMP AS DEFINED BELOW. • COMPOST SHALL BE TESTED AT A MINIMUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SOIL AMENDMENT REQUIREMENTS NOTE FERTILIZER APPLICATION RATE: 435 LBS. / ACRE OF 10-20-20 N-P-K SLOW RELEASE LLS COMPOSTING COUNCIL 'TESTING METHODS FOR THE EXAMINATION OF PER THE KC SWDM: WOOD FIBER MULCH APPLICATION RATE: 2,000 LBS. / ACRE COMPOST AND COMPOSTING'(TMECC), AS ESTABLISHED IN THE SEED ALL AREAS THAT ARE BARE GROUND AND AT LEAST 18" FROM ANY TACKIFIER APPLICATION RATE: 40 LBS. / ACRE, J-TACK OR EQUIVALENT ' L OF TESTING C OMPOSTING COUNC LS SEA MUST BE F N PERVIOUS SURFACES US THE SOIL MOISTURE HOLDING CAPACITY 0 NEW PLANTED TREE OR SHRUB. ASSURANCE' PROORAM. MOST WASHINGTON COMPOST FACtU1IES { ) WITH WITH KCC W@A KCC 16.HE PROTECTED IN ATHE (IL AND NOW USE 1HESE TESTS. ALL TESTS MUST BE DONE ON CC4fp051 DUr4CE TOPSOIL RETAINED MAXIMUM REQUIRES THAT THE DUFF LAYER OR NATNT TOPSOIL BE RETAINED TO THE MAXIMUM USE APPROXIMATELY 9-10 LBS, OF 10-20-20 N-P-K FERTILIZER PER NOTES SCREENED FOR ITS INTENDED USE. SCEXTENT SPECIFICATIONIOM- PRACTICABLE. KCC 1HL$7.100(G) REQUIRES SOIL AMENDMENT TO MITIGATE FOR 1,DD0 � RE FEET, AND APPROXMATELY 45 46 LBS. 0 F WOOD SEED ALL AREAS THAT ARE BARE GROUND AND AT LEAST 18" FROM ANY PLANTED TREE OR FI 11-C.1,A SPECIFICATION 1 COMPOST LOST MOISTURE HOLDING CAPACBT WHERE COMPACTION OR RE1.0VAL OF SOME OR ALL CELLULOSE FIBER MULCH PER 1,DDD SQUARE FEET IN ALL AREAS TO BE SHRUB, 1. COMPOST MUST BE PRODUCED A FACILITY THAT IS PERMITTED OF THE DUFF LAYER OR UNDERLYING TOPSOIL HAS OCCURRED. THE AMENDMENT MUST SEEDED.. TT BY THE JURISDICTIONAL HEALTH AUTHORITY, PERMITTED COMPOST FACILITIES IN WASH ARE INCLUDED ON A LIST AVAILABLE AT BE SUCH THAT THE REPLACED TOPSOIL IS A MINIMUM OF 8 INCHES THICK, UNLESS THE APPLICANT DEMONSTRATES THAT A DIFFERENT THICKNESS WILL PROVIDE CONDITIONS SEEDING SEASON IS LIMITED TO MARCH 1- MAY 15 & AUGUST 15- FOR OF 105EED• USE Y^8 LBS. OF SEED 11111 PER 1.000 50LIAFE TER, APPROXIMATELY -46 R-P-K PER 1,],O SSQUAROUARE FEET, W1D ROiUMATET-Y 55EED LBS. OF WOOD HTTP;�/WYNI.ECM.WA.GOV/PROGRAMS/5%7'll/ORGA111G5/$01L.HTML CY.WA.GV/ EQUIVALENT TO THE SOIL MOISTURE HOLDING CAPACtiI' NATIVE TO THE SITE, OCTOBER 1. CiO BERiIMULCLIZER ALL SEEDED. LBS. OF CELLULOSE FIBER MULCH PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET WALL AREAS 2. CWAP03T MUST MEET THE DEFIND•IDH OF 00MI 5TED MATERIAL" THE REPLACED TOPSOIL MUST HAVE AN ORGANIC COHIENT OF 5-107. DRY WEIGHT AND RO IM S E ADD APPROXIMATELY 1 LB. OF TACKIFIER PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET FOR SLOPES AS NECESSARY, IN WAG 173-350-100, AND MUST COMPLY WITH TESTING PARAMETERS A PH SUITABLE FOR THE PROPOSED SURFACE VEGETATION (FOR MOST SOILS IN KING SEED SHALL CONFORM TO STANDARDS FOR "CERTIFIED" GRASS SEED OR AND OTHER STANDARDS INCLUDING NOT EXCEEDING CONTAMINANT IDENTIFIED IN TABLE 220-8. TESTING PARAMETERS, IN WAG COUNTY, 4 INCHES OF WELL -ROTTED COMPOST TILLED INTO THE TOP B INCHES OF SOIL BETTER, AS OUTLINED IN WSDA 'RULES FOR SEED CERTIFICATION", LATEST SEEDING SEASON IS LIMITED MARCH 1- MAY 15 &AUGUST 15- OCTOBER 1 APPLY JUTE LIMITS 173-350-220; AND "PHYSICAL CONTAMINANTS'(AS DEFINED IN WAG IS SUFFICIENT TO ACHIEVE THE ORGANIC CONTENT STANDARD.) THE AMENDMENT MUST TAKE PLACE BETWEEN MAY 1 AND OCTOBER 1. THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR COMPOST FOR EDITION NETTING ON STEEP SLOPES BEFORE HYDROSEEDING APPLICATION. E 173-350-100) CONTENT LESS THAN 1% BY WEIGHT (TMECC SOIL AMENDMENT CAN BE FOUND IN REFERENCE 11-C SEED SHALL CONFORM TO STANDARDS FOR "CERTIFIED" GRASS SEED OR SERER, AS OUTLINED 0308-A) TOTAL, NOT TO EXCEED 0.25 PERCENT FILM PLASTIC BY IN WSDA "RULES FOR SEED CERTIFICATION", LATEST EDITION. DRY WEIGHT, 3. THE COMPOST PRODUCT MUST ORIGINATE A MINIMUM OF 65 SEE SHEET LA-01 FOR CONTINUATION PERCENT BY VCLUL1E ROM RECYCLED PLANT WASTE COMPRISED OF 25' EX STA{EISCAPE AREA 1 d ' n I 1 j c� f fr i KEYMAP SCALE: 1" - 20' zo to o as •D CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2' DATUM: N.G"V.D. 29 YARD DEBRIS, CROP RESIDUES, AND BULKING AGENTS AS THOSE � I TERM5 ARE DEFINED IN WAC173-350-100. A MAXIMUM OF 35 1 1 I ° ® ", (25) PROPOSED LARGER j- 4 CALIPER PERCENT BY VOLUME OF 'POST -CONSUMER FOOD WASTE" AS DEFINED .4-4 � ). 99A FWCE IN WAC 173-350-100 MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR RECYCLED PLANT fff 1 WASWMA BIOSOUDS, MANURE, AND/OR BEDDING STRAW OR WOOD CHIPS DR SHAVINGS CONTAINING ANIMAL EXCRETA ARE MDT ALLOWED. !H f 167 4, WOOD WASTE FROM CHEMICALLY TREATED LUMBER AND MANUFACTURED WOOD PRODUCTS CONTAINING ADHESIVES OR. ANY fT OTHER CHEWAL IS NOT ALUDWE% PAINTED AND STAINED WOOD. ARE 1H I NOT ALLOWELT; AND ONLY SAWOUST FROM VIRGIN LUMBER ALLOWED. N01 a !H 7I f Q ! 86 OTHER TOXIC OR OTHERWISE HARMFUL MATERIALS ARE ALLOWED. V% 3 11 7 (9 p±py 5. FOR HIGH -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT, LU MULTI -FAMILY, COMMERCIAL, AND INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS, AND ROAD o r1 1 1`f 85 i PROJECTS CONSIDERED HIGH HE PROJECTS, THE MANUFACTURER OR Q i Ir 1 + VENDOR SHALL PROVIDE TO THE END BUYER A LIST OF FEEDSTOCK a Ir ) 1 SOURCES BY PERCENTAGE BY VOLUME IN THE FINAL COMPOST PRODUCT. S2 11 I !! 6. COMPOST SHALL HAVE A MOISTURE CONTENT THAT HAS NO VISIBLE* + ! PER FWCC 22-82fi(3), 25' FREE WATER OR DUST PRODUCED WHEN HANDLING THE MATERIAL a +! Q REQUIRED.FRONT YARD 1 INTERIOR PARKING LOT 7, COMPOST SHALL HAVE AN ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT OF 40 PERCENT TO 65 PERCENT BY DRY WEIGHT AS DETERMINED BY LA►'1pSCAPl11G. WITH r LAAJpSCAPoNG PER .ig94 PWCG. LOSS OF IGNITION TEST METHOD ASTM D 2974, OR BY U.S. I\ THREE-FOOT HIGH DENSE, J A$TV;LE M. LANDSCHIP7N.G, COMPOSTING COUNCIL TMECC 05.07A "LOSS -ON -IGNITION ORGANIC 1 SIGHT OBSCURING VEGETATION- ilr SECTION 22-1567 PLANT TYP. MATTER METHOD (LOI'. Q Q ! LANDSCTYPICAL SYMBOL SUPPLEMENT LCOSYK REFER TO PLANT �r 1 D " O LANDSCAPING AS REQUIRED TO + r"EGikD ON SHEET LA-03 6. COMPOST SHALL HAVE A CARBON TO NITROGEN RATIO BELOW 25:1, \ MEET THIS REQUIREMENT WITHIN 1! ALTHOUGH THE CARBON TO NITROGEN RATIO MAY BE AS HIGH AS 35:1 /// i + THE OVERLAPPING 25' EXISTING I FOR PLANTINGS COMPOSED ENTIRELY OF PLANTS NATIVE TO THE PUGET Y i! SOUND LOWLANDS REGION. THE CARBON TO NITROGEN RATIO SHALL BE H STREETSCAPE AREA LANDSCAPE 10' EX. GAS EASEMENT EASEMENT. CALCULATED ON A DRY WEIGHT BASIS USING TMECC 5.02A ("CARBON 1 1 W \ O 142 2 127 TO NITROGEN RATIO"), Y'FIEi'I USES TMECC 04.01A, "ORGANIC CARBON" t \ Q \ Y DIVIDED BY THE DRY WEIGHT OF 'TOTAL N" (TMECC 04.02D). 9. COMPOST PH SHALL BE BETWEEN 6.0 AND 8.5 WHEN TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH U.S. COMPOSTING COUNCIL TMECC 04.11-A, "1:5 SLURRY PH" 1Q, SOLUBLE SALT CONTENT SHALL BE LESS THAN 4.0 DS/M (MMHOS/CM) WHEN TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH U.S, COMPOSTING \ ` \�� . f •� COUNCIL TMECC 04.10 "ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, 1:5 SLURRY \` \ METHOD, MASS BASIS". �✓\ ` O �\ -'196 11. COMPOST MATURITY INDICATORS FROM A CUCUMBER BIOASSAY {TMECC 055.05-A'GERVINA11ON SEEDLING E41EWNCE AND RELATIVE GROWTH MUST BE GREATER THAN 80% FOR BOTH EMERGENCE AND 206 VIGOR'). C� 12. STABILITY SHALL BE 7-MG CO2 C G OM DAY OR BELOW IN AS \ Q DETERMINED BY U.S. COMPOSTING COUNCIL TMECC 05.08-B + +� ® 'o .i "CARBON DIOXIDE EVOLUTION RATE . TO ESTABLISH LOW OXYGEN USE AND LOW CO2 GENERATION RATES, COMPOST SHALL BE SCREENED TO THE FINE COMPOST SIZE GRADATION SPECIFICATION IN SECTION 11-C.%C OF THIS REFERENCE 11-C"1.6 SPECIFICATION 2 COMPOST 1, SPECIFICATION 2 COMPOST MANUFACTURING, FEEDSTOCKS, AND 1-1/2" MIN, CALIPER INTERIOR PARKING TESTING ARE ALL IDENTICAL TO SPECIFICATION 1 COMPOST EXCEPT LOT DECIDUOUS PARKING ISLAND TREE THAT: PER 1994 FWCC, ARTICLE XVII; LANDSCAPING, A. A MAXIMUM OF 35 PERCENT BY VOLUME OF BIOSOLIDS OR TT TED FOR RECYCLED PLANT WASTE SECTION 22-1564. REFER TO PLANT LEGEND ON SHEET LA-03. - MANURE MAY BE SUBS U B. COMPOST MAY BE FINE OR COARSE GRADATION DEPENDING ON USE AND NEED TO MEET OTHER SCREENED MATERIAL QUALITY CRITERIA, C. CARBON TO NITROGEN RATIO MAY BE UP TO 40:1 FOR COARSE COMPOST TO BE USED AS A SURFACE MULCH (NOT IN A SOIL MIX). 11-C,I.0 COMPOST SCREENING SIZE GRADATIONS WHERE CCMPOST GRADATION IS SPECIFIED, IT MUST MEET THE FOLLOWNG SIZE RADATIONS WHEN TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE U.S. COMPOSTING COUNCIL -TEST METHODS FOR THE EXAMINATION OF COMPOST AND COMPOSTING'(TMECC) TEST METHOD 02.02-B. FINE COMPOST SHALL MEET THE FOLLOWING GRADATION BY DRY WEIGHT: MINIMUM PERCENT PASSING 2'SIEVE 100% MINIMUM PERCENT PASSING 1'SIEVE 99% MINIMUM PERCENT PASSING 5/8-SIEVE 90% a MINIMUM PERCENT PASSING �' SIEVE 75% 5 COARSE COMPOST SHALL MEET THE FOLLOWING GRADATION BY DRY WEIGHT: MINIMUM PERCENT PASSING 3-SIEVE 1007 i c MINIMUM PERCENT PASSING 1-SIEVE 90% MINIMUM PERCENT PASSING VSIEVE 70% MINIMUM PERCENT PASSING %'SIEVE 40% 11-C.1,D COMPOST ACCEPTANCE REQUIREMENTS - THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION TO THE KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PERMITTING AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (DPER) ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL: 1, IF THE MANUFACTURER IS NOT EXEMPT UNDER TABLE 220-A, TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR SOLID WASTE PERMIT EXEMPTIONS', A - COPY OF THE SOLID WASTE HANDLING PERMIT ISSUED TO THE P COMPOST MANUFACTURER BY THE JURISDICTIONAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH WAC 173-35D (MINIMUM FUNCTIONAL STANDARDS - FOR SOLID WASTE HAUDLING) OR FOR BIOSOLIDS COMPOSTS A COPY OF THE COVERAGE UNDER THE GENERAL PERMIT FOR 8HMUDS MANAGEMENT ISSUED TO THE MANUFACTURER BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY IN ACCORDANCE WITH WAG 173-308 (BIDSOLIDS is MANAGEM!Eq. 2. THE AAPIJCANT SHALL PROVIDE WRITTEN VERIFICATION AND LAB ANALYSES THAT THE MATERIAL COMPLIES WITH THE PROCESSES, TESTING, AND STANDARDS SPECIFIED IN WAG 173-350 AND THESE " SPECIFICATIONS. AN INDEPENDENT SEAL OF TESTING ASSURANCE (STA) r• PROGRAM CERTIFIED LABORATORYOR A LABORATORY ACCREDITED BY WA 4 1-1/2" CALIPER PERIMETER PARKING LOT DECIDUOUS TREE- TYP. SYM. REFER TO PLANT LEGEND ON SHEET ■ • +- �� al RCPLAOEfAEHT 1RLrt5 PER 1 22--1568[C)[1][yy)- jYP, SYM. REFER TO TREE RETENTION CALCl1IP.TTONS ON SHEET YR-01 J h � 57 PEfW1ETE1, PARKING ISLAND SMALL EVERGREEN TREE- �TYP. SYM. REFER TO PLANT LEGENDx i SHEET LA-03 l �1 LIGHTING- TYP. Azs Q L SOUARE FOOTAGE OF PARKING LOT ISLAND- TYPICAL F XISTING STREET FRONTAGE LANDSCAPING- NP, - - - f r-� - -REMOVE STREET TREES - - - - - - WHERE IN CONFLICT WITH INGRESS/ EGRESS, EXISTING STREET TREE- TYP. 1r 11 `!!` SEE SHEET LA-03 FOR CONTINUATION S 323RD ST (PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY) E - O 'I O ° ®� o C 30' EX. PRIVATE INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES EASEMENT O 1 � O Or • .I r) ' ~ �fc) O it o: O 0..� /Q/ Ux�WG, SECTION l lJ PQDM�TYPE DI r-� IAMOSCOWNG 5 IN �• .� 0 [� !.Z ' WIDTH. ALONG ALL PERIMETER LOT LINES, E;<CEPTCfP1 PROPERTY o ( LINES A&fFDNG PUBLIC RIOFTIS-OF-WAY. p 1-;L SUPPLEMENT CXIST1MO } 0 Oo�VEGETATION WITH ADDITIONAL SHRUBS P �� (5-.rAND TREES OR I MTALL A MIX OF O O 1 EVERGREEN AND I DECIDUOUS TREES .Os��--�� -- WITH LARGE SHRUBS _- __---- -- _� AND GROUNDCOVER TO MEET TYPE III VISUAL SCREENING ALONG ALL PROPVr LINES NOT ABUTTING A PUBLIC PERMIT NO. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY APPROVAL DATE ILROW Wh3S'S b8lOW. SIGNATURE Cali before you dig. P DIscPETx o aril m /Is/- ® mcc RE2 o /2s ou /oie z O z 3 U Q J a W w U IL L o 0 86 Ill z O > cn a Q LIJ d U IL 6 Y to U) 2 g w U o W 3 < W O U Joe ND.: 1BB9-o01-0'5 DWG NAME: Le-02 DESIGNED BY. MK DRAWN By - DATE: /t�/zu.y DBATE OF RINT: SEE SHEET LA-02 r 7 CONTINUATION A PORTION OF N1 25' FROM YARD TYPE III VISUAL LANDSCAPE eIMR- TYP. REFER TO PUNT LEGEND ON SHEET LA-03 EXISTING STREET FRONTAGE LANDSCAPING- TYR NOTE: REMOVE STREET TREES _ WHERE IN CONFLICT WITH INGRESS/ EGRESS, 10' EX. PRIVATE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT Cal SEE ARCHITECTURAL «, PLANS FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT PLANTER LOT H v HYDROSEEDED FINE LAWN- TYP. SYM. REFER TO SHEET LA-02 FOR SPECIFICATION '4 OF SECTION 15 AND THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T. 21 N., R. 4 E., W.M. KING COLIN-�1WASHINGTON ._ PLANT LEGEND (N= NATIVE PLANT SPECIES, D7 = DROUGHT TOLERANT PL ,T SPECIES. PLANT SIZES PER 1994 FWCC 22-1564 (g-U .� 5�� 25 a t G ANTI Q 4 >+ �w I,�hb ..._ REPLACpMENT TREES !R*-FER TO TR•017 t4 'RC S 'rl T I Psedolsuga menzleBll / DOIJGLAS FIR 10' MIN HT. 9 RILL AND BUSHY- SIZE PER 1994 FWCC 22 _II clrclnatum VINE MAPLE 5 STEM MIN, 10, MIN 1 RILL. BIB- SIZE PER 1994 FWGG HT" 3" CAL EQUIV. 22-IS6B(SXa) • \ \ !.1 �` Peedol.auga menzleBll / DOUGLAS FIR 12' MIN HT. 14 FULL AND BUSHY- SIZE PER IS54 RUCC 22-1560(CXIXg) `! �,• _.. �7Z \ • Fraxinue oxycarpa 'Raywood' / RAYWOOD 45H 3-1/2" CAL 4 FULL, BB- SIZE PER ISS4 FWCC _ 22-156MCXIXg) �c CAJma arla obtuse PIIICaldee C—pacLa' / COMPACT FE}L4�R4Y HINOKI CYr RE55 12, MIN HT. 1 FULL AND BU51-IY- SIZE PER 1954 FU,CG 22-1568(CXIXg) 41 TOTAL IEPLAC IMEW TIRM is 0 \ � 0• \\ E� �\ ~� SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PAR4(MG _LOT ISLAND- III TYPICAL SEE ARCAII RAL PCRNS FOR L40RE IDFpRAUTICH e .t� ,� XE 0 ooaoo: o o❑o❑ �op�oc�o a XE XE dOTr;•TREES IN UNDISTURBED AREAS WHICH ARE VINKE BUT DO NOT WALIFY _I AS SIGNIFICANT TREES SHOULD REMAIN I 15' EX PUBLIC UNDISTURBED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT. I WATER EASEMENT ISSIHLE. ALL NOO-VLABLE TREES WILL BE REMOVED REFER TO ARBORIST'S REPORT FOR TREE SPECIES CONDITION AND - EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE TO BE RETAINED, (9) TOTAL- TYPICAL SYMBOL. REFER TO SHEET TR-01 FOR TREE RETENTION PLAN TABLE AND CALCULATIONS, LIGHTING- TYP. LOW MIXED EVERGREEN AND DECIDUOUS PLANT SPECIES AT BUILDING FACADE- TYP, REFER TO PLANT LEGEND ON SHEET LA-03 ,- 0 (D o 0 o I^) o Gr 1-1/2" MIN. CALIPER INTERIDR PARKING' LOT DECIDUOUS PARKING ISLAND TREE PER 1994 FWCC, ARTICLE XVII; LANDSCAPING, SECTION 22-1564. REFER TO PLANT LEGEND THIS SHEET. TYPE I SOLID SCREEN — .LANDSCAPING AT LOADING DOCK AND PSE TRANSFORMER PAD PER FWCC 22-1565(a)(1) SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT BENCHES PERIMETER PARKING ISLAND SMALL EVERGREEN TREE- TYP. SYM. REFER TO PLANT 141 - LEGEND ON SHEET LA-03 n 51 WIDTH TYPE III VISUAL I ISCRE:EN- SEE NOTE THIS 160,493 SF 3 sTiaRY-BUIL©iNG FF=455.00 TREES: Picea sltcherols / 51TKA SPRUCE 6' MIN, HT. Teuga helerophylla / WESTERN HEMLOCK 6' MIN. H7 « Cornus 'Eddle'B 01te Wonder' / HYBRID FL DOGWOOD 1-12" CAL Fraxinue oxycarpa 'Raywood' / RAYWOOD ASH U-1/Y CAL CeuFlilroldes Compacta' / COMPACT 6' MIN HT. 5PRrHINOKI CYFAR.I Psedot-E36 menzleBll / DOUGLAS FIR 6' MIN HT. Acer clrclnat- / VINE MAPLE 5 STEM MIN, 6' MIN. HT. i Oi+ JNnlperus scopulorum M-ledore' / MEDORA COL JUNIPER 5 GALLON Cornus serlcea 'Balleyl' / BAILEY REOTWIG DOGWOOD 5 GALLON Splraea betullfolla 'luclda' / WHITE SPIRAEA 5 GALLON O ho Manla nervosa / LOW OREGON GRAPE 5 GALLON OMahonla aClulrollum / TALL OREGON GRAPE 5 GALLON vacclnlum ovatum / EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY 5 GALLON O Symphorlcarpos orblculat- / CORALBERRY 5 GALLON Rc plsocarpa / CLUSTERED ROSE 5 GALLON ( } ) Viburnum opulus 'Nanum' / DW, EUROPEAN CRANBERRY BUSH 5 GALLON Splraea Japonica 'Galen' / DOUBLE PLAY ARTISAN SPIRAEA 5 GALLON Dechampsle cespltose 'Northern Lights / TUFTED HAIRGRASS 5 GALLON � + 3 Telllma grandlflora / FRINGECUP 5 GALLON /'� I I Heuchera mlcranlM 'Palace Purple' / ALCM ROOT 5 GALLON ; `/ CeanotFua thgr lrollus 'Skylark' / CALIFORNIA WILD LILAC 5 GALLON 1-1— Idahoenele / IDAHO FESCUE 2 GALLON ( ~J 117.JJS PolyaLlchum munitum / WESTERN 5WKAFZ-_) FERN 2 GALLON O Armerla martlma 'Bloodstone' / BLOOD5TONE THRIFT 1 GALLON O G-111 rla -halloo / SALAL 1 GALLON 0 MIdllltatum /FALSE LILT OF THE VALLEY I GALLON GICOVER&. SODDED OR HYDROSEEDED LAIN AREA FULL, SPECIMEN QUALITY, i BrB OR CONTAINER SCALE: 1" = 20' 20 FULL, BAB 31 FULL, MATCHED, BAB 20 Io o 2O 40 CONTOUR INTERVAL=2' 63 FULL, MATCHED. BAB DATUM: N.G.V.D. 29 31 FULL, CONTAINER 38 FULL AND BUSHY 42 FULL, BAB 36 MINIMUM 45" HEIGHT rn� 110 MINIMUM 3 CANES AND 24" HEIGHT4 1 II MINIMUM 24' HEIGHT ddddllll j�� 1 413 MINIMUM II r 13 MINIMUM 18" HEIGHT 1 1 50 MINIMUM 24' HEIGHT I 35 MINIMUM 24' HEIGHT 1 64 MINIMUM 2A' HEIGHT 1 23 MINIKIM IS" WEI •e a. BI MINIMUM 16" HEIGHT 66 MINIMUM IB" HEIGHT 1 25 MRJIEWI W HEIGHT E Ill MINIMUM 12" HEIGHT 33 21 MINIMUM HEIGHT 18" MINIMUM IB" 1-SIGHT 166 MINIMUM 12' HEIGHT w 55 MINIMUM 12" HEIGHT KEYMAP 380 Mwvv, 4 12" HE K.,HT 20 MINIMUM 12" HEIGHT J uva-ursl / KINNIKINNICK �A-tostaphylos + + I GAL. 0 24" DC n, SP. V •/ `7 v v 17 0 CREEPING BRAMBLE 1. CAI., a 24" DJr. SP. NOTE: GROUNDCOVER SYMBOL SHOWN ON THE J PLANS IS DIAGRAMATIC IN AREAS OUTSIDE WHERE E)D 11 OF THE GRADING DAYLIGHT LINE, Fragarla chlloenele / COAST 67RAWDERRY THERE IS EXISTI DESIRABLE VEGETATION, D CS O O I GAL. s 24" O.G. 0 SP, DO NOT DISTURB. INSTALL GROIUNDCOVER _ r WHERE THERE 15 DISTURBANCE OR Asarum caudatum /WILD GINGER INVASIVES AT THE SPECIFIED ON -CENTER SPACING. I GAL. s 24" O.C. p SP. LANDSCAPE DESIGN THIS PROJECT IS VESTED LNDER THE 1994 CITY OF FEDERAL MUNICIPAL CODE NID A IU94 CONODYIIANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY AIIO THE PROPERLY OW14ER. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED OP-1. NIS LANDSCAPE PLA4 MELTS THE REOUIREMENTS OF A CO-1 PROJECT BASED ON THESE TWO REGULATING DOCUMENTS. o SPECIFICALLY: - PER 1994 FWCC SECTION XI- PARKING AREA LANDSCAPING SHALL SHOW (1) 2" CALIPER DECIDUOUS OR 5' HT. EVER TREE PER PARKING 1SUlID AND GRUUTLDCOVER SHALL BE PLANTED TO ACHIEVE 6DR _WEN COVERAGE WITFKN 2 YEARS. INTERIOR PAWIG LOT lAA>SCAYIFUC IS REQUIRED AT A RATE OF 22 SQUARE FEET OF TYPE N LANDSCAPING PER PARKING STALL. WHEN 50 OR MORE STALLS ARE PROVIDED, IDENTIFY THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL INTERIOR LANDSCAPING. PER 1994 FWCC CHAPTER 22. A Ar WIDTH PARK84G LEFT PERIMETER BUFFER 1"i REOUNRE9 1 ROW 4F 2' CALIPER DECIDUOUS OR 5' NT, EVERGREEN TREES AT 7LY [AN CLNIER FOR TNC LENGTH of THE STRIP, UP TO 25%. OF THE TREES MAY BE OECIDIUOUS OROIUNOCOVEP SHALL DE Pt VITED TO ACHIEVE 60% COVERAGE WINN 2 YEARS. MIURAI.M YNAT T THT REOUIII NTS OF 7195 SECTION. WIDTH OF TYPE III PARKING LOT WIMAPE SCREENING ADJACENT TO PUBLIC HIS -OF -WAY AND 10' R.IC ACCESS EASEMENTS IS REWIRED. 5' WIDTH OF TYPE III PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE SCREENING ON ALL • OTHER PROPERTY LINES IS REQUIRED. 301 PER THE CONCOMITANT AGREEMENT, SECTION XI. LANDSCAPING: ALL UNDEVELOPED AREA SHALL BE LEFT IN A NATIVE STATE SHALL BE DETERMINED BE COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING VEGETATION ALL PROPOSED VECLAND IN NEW PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING SHALL MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE 1994 FEDERAL WAY C MUNICIPAL CODE. —� IRRIGATION DESIGN NOTES O PER FWCC 22-1564(o-t), IRRIGATION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO ESTABLISH NEW PLANTINGS THE _ Q� IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL BE DESIGNED TO INCLUDE SEPARATE IRRIGATION ZONES FOR LANDSCAPE PACIPERTY VNE PERIMETER BUFFER (WHERE THERE ARE NEW PLANTINGS), LAWN, AND INTERIOR PARKING LOT AREAS. LANDSCAPE NOTES 1, GROUND COVERS SHALL BE PLANTED AND SPACED USING A TRIANGULAR PLANTING ARRANGEMENT, TO RESULT IN TOTAL COVERAGE OF LANDSCAPED AREA WITHIN TREE YEARS PURSUANT TO FWCC SECTION 22-1564(j) Z GRASS AND REQUIRED LANDSCAPING AREAS SHALL CONTAIN AT LEAST FOUR INCHES OF TOPSOIL AT FINISH GRADE PURSUANT TO FWCC SECTION 22-1564(I) 3. EXISTING CLAY OR SANDY SOILS SHALL DE AUGMENTED WITH AN ORGANIC SUPPLEMENT PURSUANT TO FWCC SECTION 22-1564(m). 4, LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE COVERED WITH AT LEAST TWO INCHES OF MULCH TO MINIMIZE EVAPORATION PURSUANT TO FWCC SECTION 22-1564(n) 5. SOIL IN PARKING LOT LANDSCAPED AREAS MUST BE NON -COMPACTED TO A DEPTH OF 18 INCHES PRIOR TO PLANTING OF ANY SHRUBS, TREES, OR GROUND COVERS PURSUANT TO FWCC SECTION 22-1564(yl PERMIT NO. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY O APPROVAL DATE Know what's belOW. Call boors you dig, SIGNATURE ,n sueumu Or n,iB�rB�e �� a ® 0/2E E,E 9 aN PEV. B:n no Z 0 O Z YQ 3 J w J w Z W J H- �^ _U LL L L p LL (!1 J Ld O o W Z o D g U � a Y 5 w L Q CO U) w U g w G /IC U) 3 W� C, O U Joe ND,: 1BB4-001-01. DWG, NAME: U-0 DESIGNED BY: ll1 01-N eY: n CHECKED BY: 27 aF Z O a Z Z O U LL 0 cn 9 g LU Lu co LL W SEE SHEET U �' OH CONTINUATION A PORTION OF N' /4 OF SECTION 15 AND THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T. 21 N., R. 4 E., W.M. KING COUN �NASHINGTON STAPLE TRE`E EXISTING NON -SIGNIFICANT TREE TO. - T . _ - 25' FRONT YARD R-TYPIII VISUAL EXISTING STREET FRONTAGE BE RETAINED- TYPICAL SYMEIUL. - 323RD ST - - - TO PUNAPE BUFFER- TSHYP, REFER _ _LANDSCAPING- TYP. , TO PUWT LEGEND ON SHEET REMOVE STREET TREES REFER TO SHEET TR-01 O FOR TREE - - (PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY) - - -- - �`-03 WHERE IN CONFLICT WITH B.r-0RC7-W RIBBER HOSE RETENTIDN PLAN TABLE AND OR VANIINYWT16 GAUGE CALCULATIONS. INGRESS/ EGRESS- GALVANIZED STEEL WIRE TIES DETAIL 301 B K. 3020 7 n3�22 -34� 3 3024 r - - -� 30 7 + i MAX21 PRUNE DISEASED AND _ _ - -� — -+ BRdCEN BRANGJES • Or L + aO+ Y L ABOVE 2x2 PINE TIRE E STAKES Oi O, _- ��O __O O �, 7 �� 'I 111�- SET STAKES PERPENDICULAR SEE HOSE t WIRE TIES, 7 �q] *Z ,ti� M�kc::11 I I ww TO PREVAILING WIND REMOVE BINDING TWINE 1 TOP ll f�•J4 •-. O O 2511 I I I v INSTALL "TREE BOOT" OR 19 OF BURLAP. D t. O O C3 c," p I x 0 --- - - _ _ _ _ IL PLANT Td EE 1"- IN LAWN A 2" SETTLED DEPTH FINE BLEND A _ II�y SAS SCALE: 1" C O ( O L__ J I- iO F d PLANT TREE I"-7" HIGHER [] 1 L 7,UN 124 NIDZS=R� BARK MULCH _--- -, I��..- S Q FERTILIZER TABLETS 201 10 0 70 ac _ I WATERING BASIN (4-)IGRAM-)0-10-5) CONTOUR INTERVAL=2' -IT i 0 I DATUM: N.G.V.D. 29 FI I E NYT7 I ! RAPLT` j j. i ' D r \ AMEND NATIVE SOIL W/ EXISTING SIGNIFICANT TREE TO BEV \ O� i 6' DEPTH 3-WAY MIX 6r�ARIFV PLANTING PIT 151 RETAINED, (9) TOTAL- TYPICAL 1W2S ii2 DI PLANTING SOIL _ 91DE5 AND BOTTOM SYMBOL. REFER TO SHEET TR-Ot SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS ( C� `� I UNDISTURBED GROUND •:�' I• - 6' DEEP 1411 NATIVE FOR TREE RETENTION PLAN TABLE FOR MORE INFORMATION L SQUARE FOOTAGE OF I I - 501E MOUND AND CALCULATIONS. ABOUT PLANTER Q PARKING LOT ISLAND- O 12" MIN FOR WOOD TYPICAL p STAKES a 16" FOR REBAR T o O Q lJ ( n • 0'•7I I , XD XD XD 14 LIGHTING- TYP. LOWMIXED EVERGREEN AND DECIDUOUS PLANT SPECIES AT BUILDING FACADE- TYP, REFER TO PLANT LEGEND ON SHEET LA-D3 160,493 SF 3 S SING FF=455.00 zi 1-1/2" MIN. CALIPER INTERIOR SW�D PARKING LOT DECIDUOUS PARKING ITREE PER 1994 FWGC, ARTICLE XVII; LANDSCAPING, SECTION 22-1564. REFER TO PLANT LEGEND ON SHEET LA-03. _ 1 ■�■`ice■■ 42a \137 © — \345 HGTE: TREES IN UNDIST1ME6 AREAS FIRE HYDRANT-TYP_ "- WHICH ARE VIABLE BUT DO NOT QUALIFY �--� AS SIGNIFICANT TREES SHOULD REMAIN 155 UNDISTURBED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT 9LE, ALL NON -VIABLE TREES WILL BE 151 REMOVED. REFER TO ARBORIST'S REPORT f FOR TREE SPECIES, CONDITION AND I I Q:1 RECO ME11DATIQNS r I 143 160 5' WIDTH TYPE III VISUAL -� SCREEN- SEE NOTE THIS — SHEET 339 41 IRF_I TES NOTI ON SUBJECT -J I I I •_ .� .vim - - - - -- weell �silk :91. st. :1�� ,... n,�Tr'. ! *, . ty ■_y y • o i �^ l a • R. I I�} IV I df 4 m� ml Flo 7x ROOTBALL UDIH IN HEAVY BOILS, AUGER B"z6' DEEP P} HOLE (OR THROJGH HARDPAN) FILL4 F u WITH CRASHED ROOK VERIFY GOOD DRAINAGE PRIOR TO PLANTNG DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING & STAKING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE I r9r4Pi.8 I.REE _ ✓•. •aJ PRUNE DISEASED AND 11ffinFpl>ZCEA T2J9B6R H05E BROKEN BRANCHES OR VINYL WITH 16 GAUGE y} _ AND ORE TIES, GALVANIZED STEEL WIRE TIES SE$ DETAIL ABOVE 34 PINE TREE STAKES DETAIL SET STAKES PERPENDICULAR TO PREVAILING WIND IN-GAPMATERIAL AND KEYMAP T}iop 1/ OrIEI W AIMNS BASIN FINISH GRADE 7' SETTLED DEPTH FINE GRADE BARK MULCH I ff "R:7 NATIVE 901E WlTil 6" GEPTFF 3•YieY MIX TOPSOIL _ SRTII 1I TABLETS lA-PI G1:FM-7�-U�-�JI 1S' MN ,-� SCARIFY PIT SIDES AND BOTTOM FRM NATIVE SOIL MOUND L 2- CONIFEROUS TREE PLANTING AND STAKING DETAIL_ NOT TO SCALE EQUAL SPACING A, Y 12 DIAAS PLANT OR A9 SHOWN ON DRAWING EDGE OF PAVING OR PLANTING BED SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER SPACING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 1 DI5EA5ED AND BROKEN BRANCHES REMOVE TOP 1/3 OF BURL All PL I- HIGHER 2- 6ET'TLFD DEPTH FINE THAN IN NURSERY GRADE BARK MULCH Filw GRADE FERTILIZER TABLETS S. • AMEND NATIVE SOIL WITH 6" DEPTH 3-WAY MIX TOPSOIL COMPACT AND WATER THOROUGHLY FIRM NATIVE SOIL MOUND )x ROOTISALL WOTH SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE r PERMIT NO. i CITY OF FEDERAL WAY c ° EASEMENT APPROVAL DATE : Knowwhat's balOW. CaII before you dlg. SIGNATURE 1 r:. { F 160,493 5F 7 / 3 StbA�'b t_15 G - + FF=455.00 A PORTION OF NT 1 /4 OF SECTION 15 AND THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 16, T. 21 N., R. 4 E., W.M. KING COUNT WASHINGTD I t I I....... © ' I O R1Y L vw--��- ---�- .r-+-��'vv NOTE:'TREES IN UNDISTURBED Wi - }s-yt FOR REPLACEMENT TREES- WHICH AL7REEE UT DO NOT OLE PNOP03ED 3� CAS7P£R % 10' HEIGHT AS SIEES SHOULD RE ►iOFJ•IENT TREES f¢R 1994FWCC UNDISTHE MAXIMUM I568(5)(a)- TYP. SYN REFER TO TREEPOSSIBLE ABLE TREES WILL NTION CALCULATIONS THIS SHEET AND REMOVEDARBORIST'S RE -OUT ON SHEET LA -DI FOCIES, CONDDION A ffRE' OOMM£NDATf- t r (25J PRDPpSED LARGER 3-1/2" CALIPER 1 t tl / . { REPIAC[MGII TREES PER 1994 FWCC I TYP. SYM. REFER TO TREE RETENTION CALCULATIONS THIS SHEET AND I I + LU+� / ,' .� CALL -BUT ON SHEET LA-01 / I �� t ®I EXISTING TREE LEGEND I i DESCRIPTION QUANTITY t «lfff it f ' HEALTHY SIGNIFICANT TREE TO BE RETAINED 9 SPECIES, DBH CALIPER SIZE PER ARBORIST'S REPORT II I FOR TREE TAG AND LOCATION, REFER TO TABLE THIS SHEET i957 - HEALTHY NON -SIGNIFICANT TREE TO BE RETAINED 9 + SPECIES, DBH CALIPER SIZE PER ARBORIST'S REPORT - t /FOR TREE TAG AND LOCATION, REFER TO TABLE THIS SHEET R i R I _ t�1/�J✓� 'L Tye`_ ICUDYED N I R a1 f A T• J WESTERN RED CEDAR I t - I � Ir IJ I w if ® PAF{c •�'{ - 7 • WESTERN HEMLOCK I —� t ) O ,� I • = - DOUGLAS FIR I + ,�1 RED ALDER I T J y1 \• �.r 1 I i MADRONA I/ / t j } 1 �Y\`1`• 3 y �. ® I - ..- - CHERRY f ,) goo � � -Q• -�� a I �' � , J BLACK COTTONWOODAEW I/ so I I I [•j BIG LEAF MAPLE ! y / SITKA SPRUCE AD - - -�--- -=-----_ ----- '-----------� we ______________ ___-----_--___—__--______ --------------------- -------- I Sao I a 11 I { � If•I I I I -[� `` ��tLj -�IIr C I I .-r�r�si-r � � I� STORMWATER WETLAND FC 1 1 ' POND (CAT.III) Pr\kc_ EL A I J - _.- - - r ,p^p - � I WETLAND FB / �- .•L..: 2� I (CAT. III) TREES NOT ON SUBJECT PARCEL- TYP. • PROF` ie LINE t' f N -� n F ' E%TCNT PORT ND DNS / 1 ) E� SCALE: 1" — 50' � 50 Y5 0 SP � •�•� CONTOUR INTERVAL = 2' DATUM: N.G.V.D. 29 RETAINED SIGNIFICANT TREE TABLE PER 1994 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 22-1568; SIGNIFICANT TREES DEFINITION: TREES AT LEAST 12" MH, IN GOOD HEALTH, NOT OBSCURING SAFE SIGHT DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS AND NOT INCLUDING RED ALDER, COTTONWOOD, POPLAR OR BIG LEAF MAPLE. TR N MB R I-ELH TRF O.ATION 946 (DOUGLAS FIR) 12" PARCEL B UNDEV, AREA 952 (DOUGLAS FIR) 25" PARCEL B UNDEV, AREA 960 (W. RED CEDAR) 17.B" PARCEL B UNDEV. AREA 961 (W. RED CEDAR) 15.9" PARCEL B UNDEV. AREA 3036 (W. RED CEDAR) 10,9", a5" PARCEL A PERIMETER 3037 (W. RED CEDAR) 12.6" PARCEL A PERIMETER 3070 (DOUGLAS FIR) 33.8" PARCEL A PERIMETER 3076 (W. RED CEDAR) 26.2- PARCEL A PERIMETER 3201 (DOUGLAS FIR) 24 3" PARCEL A PERIMETER TOTAL RETAJNED SIGNIFICANT TREES - 9 SIGNIFICANT TREE RETENTION CALCULATIONS PER THE 199i CONCOMITANT AGREEMENT EXHIBIT D POR OP-1 ZONE AND FWCC SEC. 22-1568, 25X RETENTION OF AU. 51GNI9CANT TREES WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY IS REWIRED- IF 25X CANNOT BE RETAINED. REPLACEMENT TREES ARE ALLOWED. TOTAL NUMBER OF ON -SITE SIGNIFICANT TREES = 199 25% REQUIRED RETENTION OF TOTAL NUMBER OF SIGNIFICANT TREES = 50 50 REQUIRED RETAINED - 9 RETAINED SIGNIFICANT TREES = (41) REPLACEMENT TREES REQUIRED PER FWCC 22-156B(G)(1)(9). UP TO ONE-HALF (OR 25) OF THE 25% SIGNIFICANT TREE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENT MAY BE SATISFIED BY PLANTING LARGER TREES IN REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREAS SUCH AS LANDSCAPE ISLANDS. BUFFERS AND PERIMETER LANDSCAPE AREAS. SUCH TREES SHALL BE A MIN. OF 12' HT, FOR EVERGREEN AND 3-1/2" CAL FOR DECIDUOUS TREES. PER 1994 FWCC SEC 22-156B(5)(o), WHEN REQUIRED SIGNIFICANT TREES CANNOT BE RETAINED, SIGNIFICANT TREES THAT ARE REMOVED MAY BE REPLACED WITH NEW EVERGREEN TREES THAT ARE A MINIMUM OF 10' IN HEIGHT OR DECIDUOUS TREES THAT ARE A MINIMUM OF 3" CALIPER (9) SIGNIFICANT TREE RETENTION CREDITS + (25) REPLACEMENT TREES IN REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREAS + (16) REPLACEMENT TREES IN UNDISTURBEI VEGETATION = 50 TREE CRETNIS . PERMIT NO. j CITY OF FEDERAL WAY APPROVAL DATE Know what's 6BInW. SIGNATURE Cal I before YOU dig, CITY OF �... Federal Way Centered on Opportunity April 8, 2019 Mr. Eric LaBrie ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC 33400 8th Avenue South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 eric.labCC7�r sm�m CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com FiLE Jim Ferrell, Mayor Re: Files #17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE; 2nd ROUND TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMENTS DaVita Healthcare Office Park, Federal Way Dear Mr. LaBrie: Per your request, city departments divisions have the following comments in .response to your September 12, 2018, October 31, 2018, November 9, 2018, and February 28, 2019, resubrrittals. This proposal is subject to the provisions of the 1994 Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre -Annexation Development Agreement (CZA), and Office Park Zone (OP-1) zoning regulations in effect on August 23, 1994, Any procedural requirements must meet today's codes (Federal W/ay Retired Code [FW q Title 19). Some comments provided herein are required and some are informative, while others may be applicable during future steps of the project. Questions regarding technical review comments should be addressed to the referenced staff representative. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT — PLANNING DIVISION Stacey Welsh, (253) 835-2634, state .weI h ci ffederalwa .corn 1. Comments below are based on materials submitted for the land use application, not the building permits. The building permits have not gone through a land use technical review, as the land use application is still in process. A brief examination of the building permit site plan revealed differences in certain items than what is shown on the land use site plan. This concern was discussed with ESM, who followed up with a February 28, 2019, letter explaining the differences between the land use and building permit materials, which was helpful. The building permit drawings attached to that letter were not reviewed. Moving forward, the land use application materials and building permit materials need to match; revise and resubmit land use application materials as necessary. a. Also, the February 28, 2019, letter from ESM noted above describes application processing timelines. To clarify, a SEPA threshold determination has a two week comment period followed by a three week appeal period. A Use Process III decision has a two week appeal period. 2. Technical comments made about an item on one sheet may necessitate changes to other related sheets and related documents. It is the applicant's responsibility to determine any such necessary adjustments. Please ensure consistent information is communicated throughout the plan set and associated application materials. Doc. LD. 78983 17-105642-00-LTP NIr. Eric LaBrie Page 2 of 5 April 8, 2019 3. Future submittals related to this project must contain the properties' most current legal descriptions and parcel numbers. 4. Provide documentation in compliance with Federal Way City Code (FWCC) 22-1421(b). 5. Revise the landscaping plan to: a) Address the provision of ten feet of Type III landscaping along property lines abutting access easements where an inadequate amount is shown on the drawing submitted with the land use application, which includes the northwest corner and along the eastern property line of the parking lot parcels. Five feet of Type III landscaping is required along the western property line of the building parcel as well (FWCC 22-1566[h]). b) Demonstrate detailed compliance with FWCC 22-1567(e)(1). c) Show the transformer and associated landscape screening per FWCC 22-1565(a)(1). d) Include details regarding the irrigation system. The landscape plan states, "Per FWCC 22-1564(o-t), irrigation shall be provided to establish new plantings. The irrigation system will be designed to include separate irrigation zones for landscape perimeter buffer (where there are new plantings), lawn, and interior parking lot areas." No other irrigation details are provided in the submittal. See FWCC 22-1564(o) and FWCC 22-1564(t). The plan shows lawn to be planted near the west side of the building. e) Show the following corrected items:. i. On Sheet LA-01: 1. Parking lot landscaping islands that separate head -to -head parking stalls shall be eight feet in width per FWCC 22-1567(c). For both parking lot areas, the majority of parking lot landscape islands that separate head -to -head parking stalls do not meet this standard. The width of landscaping in these areas must be increased. 2. Tree 952 identified on Sheet TR-01 is missing from Sheet LA-01; correct the discrepancy and verify whether any significant tree calculations are affected. 3. The note located in the lower right portion of the sheet regarding the Concomitant Agreement and vegetation remaining does not apply within the OP-1 zone. 4. The large text box on the sheet located north of South 3231d Street on Lot J needs correction, as it references code that applies in the PO zone. ii. Sheet LA-02 contains some code text that does not apply to the project, or that needs to be corrected; see the enclosed red line markup drawing. 6. The plan shows retention of five trees (tree numbers: 958, 959, 962, 963, and 964) that the tree assessment recommends removal of for safety as the trees are non -viable. As these trees are not part of the significant tree retention count, they should be removed per the applicant's arborist's recommendation. Update materials submitted accordingly to reflect this action. 7. The applicant is proposing that as part of the significant tree count, tree numbers 952, 960, and 961 can each count as two trees, per FWCC 22-1568(c)(3). However these trees do not meet any of the criteria contained within FWCC 22-1568(c)(3)(a-c). The significant tree count must be adjusted and additional trees either retained or planted, and shown on the landscaping plan. 17-105642-00-UP Doc. I.D. 78983 1ti1r. Eric LaBrie Page 3 of 5 April 8, 2019 8. The submitted Forest Practices Application lacks sufficient detail, including the volume of merchantable timber to be harvested (board feet) and the harvest method; among other details required under sections #8 and #9 of the application. Application revisions with additional details provided by the applicant are necessary. 9. Pedestrian connections on the parking lot site shall be continuous, without breaks across'the site; meaning the distinct pavement texture and color shall extend across asphalt drive aisles. The same applies to the building parcel, in particular the connection located east of the building frontage across the parking lot to the driveway access off of South 323=d. 10. The applicant's submittal indicates that "The only location with blank walls in excess of 240 sf are located at the primary conference rooms along the west building elevation, where the walls provide a backdrop to landscaping elements." It is unclear from the submitted elevation drawing and landscaping plan where this location is and how the landscaping satisfies FWCC 22-1564(u), which requires planting to include trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Revise the elevation drawings and landscaping plan to demonstrate compliance with FWCC 22-1564(u). 11. Submit a lighting plan for verification of compliance with FWCC 22-954(c). 12. Lakehaven issued certificates of availability in November 2017; certificates are valid for one-year. Updated certificates of water and sewer availability shall be submitted. PUBLIC WORKS — DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION Kevin Peterson, (253) 835-2734, kevin.12eterson@ciMffederalway.com Prior to land use approval, the following comments need to be addressed: ENGINEERING 13. Show the required street frontage improvements —new, wider sidewalks and wider planter strips. 14. Provide a street cross-section that depicts both the existing roadway improvements and right-of-way, and the new improvements with the proposed new right-of-way. 15. It does not appear that water quality treatment is being provided for the northern portion of the "satellite" parking lot. Please show a water quality treatment facility for this portion of the parking lot. SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING 16. For designing in accordance with space requirements in FWRC 19.125.150 Table A, show the shared storage space in the interior plans. Please demonstrate how the roll up door and exterior loading area can be accessed by service vehicles (show related features such as loading dock, curb cuts, paving, and/or an accessible drive aisle). If the concept is to always store containers in the interior of the building, the plans should show the designated custodial service/limited access area as well as the related wastewater drainage to sanitary sewer. Provide details on any related odor control or ventilation features as well. If there are interior chutes that will be used to move wastes from upper floors to the custodial service area, show these in the interior plans as well. Doc. I.D. 78983 17-103642-00-UP Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 4of5 April 8, 2019 17. If storing waste containers outdoors, these containers must be screened according to FWRC 19.125.010 et al. The exterior plans should show the screening and enclosures with sight -obscuring walls and gates, and demonstrate adequate access for service vehicles. 18. Whether inside or outside the building, a Spill Prevention Plan shall be submitted for review for the solid waste and recycling area/enclosure. PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC DIVISION Sarady Long, (253) 835-2743, sarady.long@ciiyoffedetLlway.com 19. City comments to follow at a later date. 20. The following comments on the TIA are from WSDOT: a. There are four project proposals within the Federal Way campus (former Weyerhaeuser campus): Warehouse A, Warehouse B, DaVita, and Greenline. The traffic impact analysis (TIA) for DaVita incorporated new trips generated for the office building, but did not include traffic volume generated by the Warehouse A, Warehouse B, and Greenline proposals. The projects should be analyzed together. Separate TIAs have been submitted for Warehouse A, Warehouse B, and DaVita projects, so it is assumed the projects will be developed within a similar timeframe. The projects are within the same campus, so the cumulative traffic generated will have an impact on the I-5 and South 3201h Street southbound and northbound ramp terminal intersections adjacent to the campus. To determine the impact and level of mitigation, the project proposals should be analyzed together. The ramp capacity at South 320th Street from southbound I-5 and to northbound I-5 should also be analyzed. b. In the AM peak hour, the DaVita project is anticipated to add 62 new trips to the intersection of the southbound I-5 off -ramp and South 3201h Street. The project exceeds the vehicular trip threshold in the Developer Services Manual for determining whether a highway improvement should be requested. The PM peak hour was not included in the analysis. The cumulative impact of these developments will affect the operation of the transportation network and the interstate. As mitigation for the cumulative impacts from the Weyerhaeuser campus developments, `NSDOT requests that the PM peak hour be analyzed to determine impacts. CLOSING Please be aware that this review does not preclude the city from requesting additional information or requiring conditions related to any topic, including those discussed above. Please submit revised application materials as appropriate, accompanied by the completed"Resubmittal Information Form" (enclosed). Pursuant to FWRC 19.15.050, if an applicant fails to provide additional information to the city within 180 days of being notified that such information is requested, the application shall be deemed null and void and the city shall have no duty to process, review, or issue any decisions with respect to such an application. 17-105642-00-UP Doc. I.D. 78983 Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 5 of 5 April 8, 2019 If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at stac .welsh a cit roffederalway.com, or 253 835-2634. Sincerely, i Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner enc: Resubmittal Information Form Sheet I-A-02 Mark Up c: Brian Davis, Community Development Director Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Felis Pahsvc, WSDOT, ' wed v Arthur Richey, Arthur richy@a davits.-nst_1 Savanna Nagorski,.S vanna. a nrski s i .e 17-105642-00-UP Doc. I.D. 78983 1 ORDINANCE NO. 19-865 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to amendments to the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, amending the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, and approving a City -initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment to realign the future extension of South 324th Street to connect to Weyerhaeuser Way South instead of 32nd Avenue South. (Amending Ordinance Nos. 90-43, 95-248, 96-270, 98- 330, 00-372, 01-405, 03-442, 04-460, 04461, 04-462, 05-490, 05-491, 05- 492, 07-558, 09-614, 10-671, 11-683,13.-736,13-745,15-796,15-798, and 18-843) WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act of 1990 as amended ("Chapter 36.70A RCW" or "GMA"), requires the City of Federal Way to adopt a comprehensive plan that includes a land use element (including a Comprehensive Plan Map, which has also historically been referred to as a land use map), housing element, capital facilities plan element, utilities element, economic development element, transportation element (including transportation system maps), and a parks and recreation element; and WHEREAS, the GMA also requires the City of Federal Way to adopt development regulations implementing its Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Federal Way City Council adopted its Comprehensive Plan with a Comprehensive Plan Map (the "Plan") on November 21, 1995, and adopted development regulations and Zoning Map implementing the Plan on July 2, 1996; and WHEREAS, the Federal Way City Council subsequently amended the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, and Zoning Map on: December 23, 1998, September 14, 2000, November 1, 2001, March 27, 2003, July 20, 2004, June 16, 2005, July 16, 2007, June 11, 2009, October 28, 2010, January 27, 2011, January 23, 2013, August 14, 2013, July 29, 2015, and January 26, 2018; and Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 1 of 12 WHEREAS, the City may consider Plan and development regulation amendments pursuant to Process VI, under Title 19 (Zoning and Development Code) of the Federal Way Revised Code ("FWRC"), Chapter 19.80 FWRC, and Chapter 19.35 FWRC; and WHEREAS, under RCW 36.70A.130, the Plan and development regulations are subject to continuing review and evaluation; however, subject to certain exceptions, the Plan maybe amended no more than one time per year; and WHEREAS, the Council considered this Comprehensive Plan amendment concurrently with another Comprehensive Plan amendment, Council Bill No. 755, both of which were evaluated cumulatively and will be acted on simultaneously and concurrently in order to comply with RCW 36.70A.130; and WHEREAS, the 2015 Comprehensive Plan shows a future extension of South 324th Street to cross Interstate 5 to connect to 32nd Avenue South; and WHEREAS, in October 2018, the City's Public Works Department initiated this Comprehensive Plan amendment to realign the future extension of South 324th Street to connect to Weyerhaeuser Way South instead of 32nd Avenue South; and WHEREAS, on November 1, 2018, the City complied with RCW 36.70A.106 when it notified the Department of Commerce of the City's intent to adopt this Comprehensive Plan amendment, which was acknowledged by the Department of Commerce on November 6, 2018; and WHEREAS, on December 21, 2018, the City's SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of Nonsignificance on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, the Determination of Nonsignificance was not appealed; and WHEREAS, the City's Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 20, 2019 , at the close of which it recommended Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment; and Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 2 of 12 WHEREAS, the Land Use and Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council considered the Comprehensive Plan amendment on March 4, 2019, and recommended approval of the same; and WHEREAS, the City Council, through its staff, Planning Commission, and Land Use and Transportation Committee, received, discussed, and considered the testimony, written comments, and material from the public, and considered the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment at its regular City Council meeting on March 19, 2019; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to approve the change in the Comprehensive Plan to realign the future extension of South 324th Street to connect to Weyerhaeuser Way South instead of 32nd Avenue South. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: - Section 1. Findings and Conclusions. (a) The Proposed Amendment to the text of the Comprehensive Plan, as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, to realign the future extension of South 324th Street to connect to Weyerhaeuser Way South instead of 32nd Avenue South (the "Proposed Amendment") is consistent with the following goals of Chapter 36.70A RCW: (i) Transportation. Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans. (ii) Economic development. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses and recruitment of new Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 3 of 12 Plan: businesses, recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. (iii)Public facilities and services. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards. (b) The Proposed Amendment is consistent with the following goals of the Comprehensive Transportation Goal (TG) 1 Maintain mobility through a safe, balanced, and integrated transportation system. Transportation Goal (TG) 3 Enhance community health, livability, and transportation by providing a connected system of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit ways that are integrated into a coordinated regional network. (c) The Proposed Amendment is consistent with the economic development vision (as stated in the Comprehensive Plan) to create a sustainable, diversified, and globally -focused economy. To achieve this vision, the City must diversify its employment base. In addition, the City must increase the overall number of jobs in order to improve the balance between jobs and households in the City. (d) The Proposed Amendment is consistent with the Council vision for the City of Federal Way, and will allow greater connectivity between the City Center and areas east of Interstate 5. Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 4 of 12 -�1 i (e) The Proposed Amendment is consistent with the goal of the King County Countywide Planning Policies that the region be served by an integrated, multi -modal transportation system that supports the regional vision for growth, efficiently moves people and goods, and is environmentally and functionally sustainable over the long term. (f) The Proposed Amendment is consistent with the Puget Sound Regional Council goal of VISION 2040 for long-range transportation planning by emphasizing transportation investments that offer greater mobility options. (g) The Proposed Amendment will not negatively impact open space, streams, lakes, wetlands, or the physical environment. (h) The Proposed Amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety and welfare, is in the best interest of the residents of the City, and is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW, VISION 2040, the Countywide Planning Policies, and the remainder of the Comprehensive Plan. (i) The Proposed Amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, and welfare, and is in the best interest of the public and the residents of the City. 0) The Proposed Amendment has complied with the appropriate processes under state law and the FWRC. Section 2. Comprehensive Plan Amendments Ado tion. The 1995 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, as thereafter amended in 1998, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2013, 2015, and 2018, copies of which are on file with the Office of the City Clerk, is amended as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. All related maps in the Comprehensive Plan shall be updated to reflect this amendment. Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 5 of 12 Section 3. Amendment Authority. The adoption of the Comprehensive Plan text amendment in Section 2 above is pursuant to the authority granted by Chapters 36.70A and 35A.63 RCW, and Chapters 19.35 and 19.80 FWRC. Section 4. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall not impact the validity of the remainder of the ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 5. Savings Clause. The 1995 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, as thereafter amended in 1998, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2015, and 2018 shall remain in full force and effect until this amendment becomes operative upon the effective date of this ordinance. Section 6. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto. Section 7. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect concurrently with Council Bill No. 755 and be in force five (5) days from and after its passage and publication, as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this 2nd day of April, 2019. [Signature Page to Follow] CITY OF FEDERAL WAYS Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 6 of 12 ATTEST: S"'PAANIE COURTNEY, C, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: 03/13/2019 04/02/2019 04/05/2019 04/10/2019 19-865 Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 7 of 12 EXHIBIT A Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 8 of 12 Table III-10 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) — 2016 to 2040 Capital Project List 95-17 SR 99: S 340` St - S 350St: Construct HOV lanes, install raised median; roundabout at 340`h St, turn lanes & 348" 17 1700 97-01 SW 336`h W / SW 340th St: 26`h P1 SW - Hoyt Rd SW: Signal Coordination 283 92-18b SR 161 @ S 356St: Add NB left-tum lane, EB right -turn lane, or install roundabout 14 4.100 92-18a S 356h St: SR 99 - SR 161: Widen to 5 lane, bike lanes sidewalks (13) 6,112 16-22 S 352St: SR 99 - SR 161: Extend 3 lane principal collector and signal at SR-99 8 5,619 16-23 Ci de: Traffic signal modifications 18 914 16-24 Citywide: Imlement Adaptive Traffic Control System 22 1,000 16-25 16`h Ave S: S 3441h St - S 348t" St: Add SB auxilia - lane 21 6,105 16-19 1" Ave S @ S 3281h St: Install raised median, improve access at 328`h 4 1,897 16-20 S 320`h St @ 20`h Ave S: Add 2id left -turn lanes EB, WB 5 2.856 16-21 Ci de Pedestrian Safety: Install mid -block crossinE treatments (28) 640 16-26 S 300 St P, 28`' Ave S: Add NB riht-tum lane, signal (7) 2,371 94-1 Ob SR 509: 9`h PI S - 16`h Ave S: Widen to 5 lanes, si al at 91h Pl S 8,794 07-06 1" Ave S P, SW 301" St: Install signal or roundabout 404 16-11 S`h Ave S a, S 3201h St: Add left -turn lanes NB, SB 485 16-13 S 324` 5t Interchange: Extend 5-lane minor arterial to 3j -Aver WeYeshaeuser Way South 134,587 07-07 1" Ave S @ S 308" St: Install signal or roundabout 404 07-04 Military Rd S @ S 296`h Pl: Install si al or roundabout 404 16-18 16`h Ave S S 34151 PI: Add si al 404 16-01 SR 99 P, S 288`h St: Add NB right -tam lane 452 98-32 13`h PI S: S 330`h St - S 332"d St: Extend 3 lane coiicetor 4,797 94-24 141h Ave S: S 312`h St - S 3161h St: Ring Road extension 5,472 93-08 S 316" St. SR 99 - 11 `h P1 S: RinE Road extension 8,291 01-05 SR 99 S 312`' St: Add 2"d NB left -turn lane 6 6.708 07-22 16'h Ave S: SR 99 - SR 18: Add HOV lanes 22,384 02-01 City Center Access (Phases I and 2): S 320 St @ 1-5 Bridge Widening: Add HOV lanes through interchange, reconstruct SE quadrant of interchange to realign ramps la & lb) 134,609 10-01 S 373`d St @ SR99: Add Si al or roundabout or two- wa left -turn lane 482 05-03 Weyerhaeuser Wy S , S 344`h W : Install roundabout 16 1.763 05-01 SR 509 @ 4th Ave S: Install roundabout 1,009 07-03 30'h Ave S (a. S 288`h St: Install signal or roundabout 404 Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 9 of 12 Table III-10 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) — 2016 to 2040 98-10c ]0`h Ave SW @ SW Campus Dr: Add SB right -turn lane 2) 1,229 16-09 SR 99 P, S 312`" St: Add 2"6 left -turn lane EB, WB, and WB right -turn lane 1,696 02-04 SR 18 SR 161: Add 3rd thru lane NB, SB. 3`d left -turn lane NB, SB 12.210 98-07 SW 336" y / SW 340" St: 26" PI SW - Hoyt Rd SW: Widen to 5 lanes (] 2) 21.821 98-15 Military Rd S: S 2881h St - S 300 St: Widen to 5 lanes 23,450 07-01 S Star Lake Rd , 251h Dr S: Install signal or roundabout 404 16-02 Military Rd S @ S 288` St: Add 2n° left -turn lanes and right -turn lanes castbound and westbound 2,326 98-10a SW 3441St: 12` Ave SW - 21" Ave SW: Extend 3-lane principal collector with bike lanes, sidewalks 3 10,164 99-02 S 320" St @ I" Ave S: Add 2" left lanes all legs, WB, SB right -turn lane, widen 1" Ave S to 5 lanes to S 31.61h St 15 10,460 98-01 S 304`h St @ SR 99: Add left -turn lanes on 304`h 1,454 10-01 S Star Lake Rd: @ Military Rd S: Add right -turn lane on S Star Lake Rd 401 16-15 16-16 SR 99 @ S 324" St: Add 2"d left -turn lanes NB, SB, and NB right -turn lane 21" Ave SW @ SW 336`h St: Add 2"1 left -turn lanes NB, SB, and SB right -turn lane 3,052 3,052 00-12 S 308`h St: 14`h Ave S - 18`h Ave S: Widen to 3 lanes 3,198 16-17 S 336` St: SR 99 - 20'h Ave S: Widen to 5 lanes, add 2n" left -turn lanes EB, WB @ SR 99 3.721 98-34 21s` Ave SW @ SW 3201St: Add WB left -turn lane, interconnect to 26` Ave SW (9) 6.169 92-22 ]"Ave S: S 348' St- S 356` St: Widen to 5 lanes, add 2" SB right -turn lane @ 356h 7,213 93-09 1" Ave S: S 3661h St - SR 99: Extend 2-lane road, signal or roundabout at SR 99 7,550 98-05 S 324`h St: SR 99 - 23'd Ave S: Widen to 5 lanes 10,552 92-20 47" Ave SW , SW 320" St: Signalize (10) 569 95-07 S 288"' St: 19`h Ave S - Milita Rd S: Widen to 5 lanes 12,364 93-07c 21" Ave SW: SW 344` St - SW 356` St: Widen to 5 lanes, add 2" SB right -turn lane P, 356" 21,639 92-14 Military Rd S: S Star Lake Rd - S 288'h St Widen to 5 lanes, sidewalks, and illumination 35,456 16-10 23`d Ave S: S 310 St - S 317'h St: Add NB lane 678 16-12 1 Ith PI S a_ S 320" St: Add 2"d NB left -turn lane 678 00-02 28`' Ave S @ S 312`h St: Add SB right -turn lane (11) 771 07-14 23`d Ave S 9, S 320`h St: Add SB left -turn lane, NB thru and right -turn lanes 8,705 98-13 SW 344" St & 351h Ave SW: 21" Ave SW - SW 340`h Street: Bike lanes, sidewalks 12.360 10-01 Mili Rd S R Camelot: Roundabout 1,392 01-03 SR 509 @ 26`h PI SW: Add WB left -turn lane 1,017 07-05 Military Rd S (a) S 2901 St: Install signal or roundabout 404 Ordinance No_ 19-865 Page 10 of 12 Table 111-10 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) — 2016 to 2040 14-01 Weyerhaeuser Wy S: S 336"' St - 33'd PI S: Widen to 5 lanes 2,826 92-23 S 304" St: SR 99 - 28`h Ave S: Widen to 3 lanes 11,513 16-03 SR 509 P, SW 301" St: Add WB right -turn lane 226 16-14 S 324'h St: I I" PI S - SR 99: Widen to 5 lanes 1,809 07-12 6`h Ave SW a, SW 320'h St: Install signal or roundabout 404 07-18 Military Rd S @ S 328"' St: Install signal or roundabout 404 92-06b S 356th St: l st Ave S - SR 99: Widen to 5 lanes 16,416 98-20 S 312'h St: 1" Ave S - 14'h Ave S: Widen to 5 lanes 28,726 07-20 SW Campus Dr: 1" Ave S - 2 1 " Ave SW: Add HOV lanes 63,956 16-07 SR 509 @ SW 3121h St: Add 2nd WB left -turn lane 904 93-12 SR 509 @ 47'h Ave SW: Install roundabout 1,009 05-04 S 312"' St 0 18'h Ave S: Install signal 404 98-17 S Star Lake Rd: S 272" St - Military Rd S: Widen to 3 lanes (see 10-1) for intersection improvement 9,327 98-39 1" Ave S: SW 301" St - SW 312" St: Widen to 3 lanes 11,725 98-24 Hoyt Rd SW: SW 320'h St - SW 340"' St: Widen to 3 lanes 12,059 93-07a 21" Ave SW: SW 312"' St - SW 3201h St: Widen to 5 lanes 12,364 16-04 SR 509 @ SW 3081h St: Install roundabout 1,346 16-05 SR 509 SW 306`h St/12`h Ave SW: Install roundabout 1,346 16-06 SR 509 16'h Ave SW: Install roundabout 1,346 16-08 8" Ave SW 9, SW 312" St: Install roundabout 1,346 94-11 S 308'h St: 5t' PI S - 8`h Ave S: Extend 2-lane street 1.938 07-13 SR 99 S 3201h St: Add NB right -turn lane 2,883 98-23 47'h Ave SW: SR 509 - SW 3181h St: Widen to 3 lanes 5,034 98-14 S 2881h St: Military Rd S -1-5: Widen to 5 lanes 11,541 94-10a SR 509: 1"Ave S - 91h Pl S: Widen to 3 lanes 15 634 94-17 SR 509. 151 Ave S - 161h Ave SW: Widen to 3 Ianes 29,846 05-02 City Center Couplet: S 316` SUS 324' St: 1 Vh PI S - 23 Ave S: Restripe for clockwise couplet 808 07-02 SR 99 @ S 288`h St: Add EB left -turn lane 1,131 07-15 25`h Ave S @ S 320`h St: Add 2nd EB left -turn lane, NB right -turn lane 13,001 98-18 28t" Ave S: S 304"' St - S 317'h St: Widen to 3 lanes 16,416 98-57 SR 509: 30'h Ave SW - 47'h Ave SW: Widen to 3 lanes 18,760 98-58 SR 509: 47`h Ave SW - West City Limits: Widen to 3 lanes 23,450 07-19 1"Wy S @ S 336h St: Add 2nd SB left -turn lane 7,365 Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 11 of 12 Table III-10 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) — 2016 to 2040 98-30 10" Ave SW SW 334`h St: Si alization or roundabout 404 11-01 21" Ave S S 320'h St: Install signal 404 98-26 S 320`h St 51h Ave S: Signalization 404 00-07 S 348`h St , 91h Ave S: Add 2"d SB left -turn lane 2,326 92-12 41h Ave S: S 312"' St - S 310 PI: improve vertical alignment 3,1978 95-02 S 312'h St: 23`d Ave S - 28'h Ave S: Widen to 3 lanes 7,461 98-31 SW 356`h St @ 13`h Wy SW/141h Ave SW: SiE2alization 404 07-16 Military Rd S & S 320'h St: Add 2"d NB left -turn lane 5,620 98-29 SW 320'h St @ I I" Ave SW: Signalization 404 14-02 SR 509 @ 30'h Ave SW: Install roundabout 1,009 98-28 SW 320`h St @ 7`h Ave SW: Signalization 404 98-19 S 3081h St: 81h Ave S - 141h Ave S: Install curb utter sidewalks 5,330 92-11 SW Campus Dr: I"Ave S - 71h Wy SW: Widen lanes/sidewalk 2,073 00-16 SR 99 @ Spring Valley Montessori School: Add NB left -turn lane 6,977 95-20 Milita Rd S: S 320'h St - SR 18: Widen to 3 lanes 38,373 00-06b S 314"' St: 20"' Ave S - 23rd Ave S: Add sidewalks and street lights (23) 2,665 98-41 151 Ave S: S 292"d St - S 312'h St: Shoulder improvement (24) 3,770 16-30 S 336`h St: SR 99 - 20'h Ave S: Add sidewalk north side (25) 639 16-29 21" Ave S: S 316'h St - S 3201h St: Install sidewalk on west side 26) 1,356 16-27 SR 509: 11 tb Pl S - 161h Ave S: Install sidewalk on south side 27 1,500 16-28 20`h Ave S & S 3161h St: I install sidewalk on east and south sides 29 395 98-39 91h Ave S: S 332"d St - S 348'h St: Widen for Bike Lanes 15,634 98-42 S Park & Ride Trail: SR99 (q) 352"d - S 348'h (a, 9"': Extend Trail 1,493 Ordinance No. 19-865 Page 12 of 12 Federal Way Mirror Friday, April 5, 2019 19 Cemetery Plots Auto E' Auctionsans LEGAL NOTICES o WASHINGTON Memori- al Park. Double Crypt, �.^ 4 � fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on •t UpperRower. Terrace 'Eve Thursday time, you may lose the case by de avh, and yyo�uu Garden Mausoleum Preview Every at rs am ` ~ t'+agg9A money, and proporty mn be taken with¢ul Section with beautiful Auction at pm Federal Via further warningfromtheeuir Y fountain. Ground level, There are other right raway. 11 you You play want Row 'W" Crypt 11. ORDINANCE SUMMARY to cal an anomry nghl away. fl you do not k lvwr an $16,000- Seller assumes t • At their April 2nd Regular Meeting the Federal Way allorney, you ay want to Call an attorney referral all closing costs and 7es4141ion l City Council passed the following ordinances: service 1f myou cannot rsttord an allorney, you may transfer fees. (31o)Sdt- ORDINANCE N0.19.855 be e!tglme far free "W sen1cas from a nr!nprdrrl le- �� 6732, Serious otters p� 1220 So. 3431d Street AN ORDINANCE of the Clay Of Federal Way, Wash- gal serNies program. Yai can ktate these nM- Appllances considered. Federal Way, 98003 profit groups at the Cartorna Legal Services Web Inglon, Eelaling to amendments 10 the Federal Way site (www.lewhelpoaliforKa.arg), tha Califomla NEW APPLIANCES AKC Poodle Puppies www.kenttowing.com Comprehensive Plan, amending th : Federal Way Courts Online Sell -Help Center (wwww,oeur1in- UPTO 70% OFF Teacups/TinyToys Comprehensive Plan, and approving a City-Initlaled of by cordacGng your local court All Manufacturer Small 3 Females, Black & NOFFKE'STOWING Comprehensive Pian amendment 10 realign the fur of county bar r walieban, NOTE and ora coon has a White, Brown & 1287 Valentine Ave Ilemeory don for waiytd area and COs15 on any set• plryg's. Denis, Scratches SE, Pacific, WA 98047 Pure faxlenslon of South 3241h Street to connect to element or arnilrauon award d 51p,pgp or more In a and Factory Imparlac, White, Chocolate. 3 253-850-0396 Weyerhaeuser Way South Instead of 32nd Avenue civil case. The court's lien must be paid before the tions Males 1 Red 12wks South. court will dismiss the case. Under Warranty* C Old, 2 Apricots 7 ABANDONED ORDINANCE NO.19-865 The name and address of the court is: For Inquiries, Call V,srt 3 Months. All Shots. Superior Court of California, County of Ventura 1 '1co Dv'da burlorvd Vary Sweet Boys. VEHICLE AN ORDINANCE of the City 01 kderaf Way, Wash- Hall of Justice 206-244-6966 Reserve Your puff AUCTION Ington, relating to amendments to the Federal Way 800 South Victoria Avenue, Ventura, CA 93009 of Love! Comprehensive Plan, amending the federal Way The name, address, and telephone number of plain - STAINLESS 36o-24&3612 WEDNESDAY Comprehonsive Plan, Comprehartsive Plan Map, tiff's attorney, or a Wild without an attorney, is: APPLIANCE and ZOAing Map, and approving a Gi!yinitia!ed All gall, Esq. (�rN124pB8] PACKAGE Flea Marketer 4/10/2019 Law Office of Ball &Yorke $1499 Comprehensive Plan amendmpri. and leg1sl81!ve 1001 Partridge Drive, Suite 330, Venfula, CA 93003 Refrigerator, Range & Baseball card: full sets, AT 12 NOON rezone of 56.06 acres located north 0! South 376th Fax No.: 805-642-4622, Phone No.: 005-642-5177 Dishwasher Tops never opened, Street, east of Interstate 5, from Single -Family Me- Date: June 22, 2018 'New Under Warranty' 1989 and 1990, $30.00 PREVIEW drum Density (R$ 35.0. one unit per 35,000 square Michael D. Planet, Clerk, by Amber Ramirez, Depu- 253-813-5612 PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF DAMAGES Call Credit Dept, 11 AM feed to Single- Family High Density IRS 7.2, ¢na ty 206-244-6966 Beanie Babies for Sale! unit per 7,200 square leer). Auctions/ Some from 1995; 6 forPUBLIC ONLINE AUC- �e full text of M ordinance Is available by con- [Code of Civil Procedure 425.11] Estate sales $25. Also small house-TIONS of seized cars on tactin the City Clerk's office at 253-635.2640. Superior Court of the State of CA, County of Ventu- hoid items.253-426-1533ig behalf of U.S, Customs gFederal Way DVD's from Jonn Wayne& Border Protection, Copies wall be mailed upon request, In accordance Case No: 56-2018 00513995•CU BC-VTA Public rluctipnf r n� to Kevin Costner 6/$20. U.S. Treasury, U.S. Mar- PubWin the City's fee schedule. Complaint filed: June 22, 2018 Lien /19 atosum_5a1� shots Service. No de- Published in the Federal Way Mirror April 5, 2019. p 4/19/19 at 10:00 AM - 253-426-1533 Estate sales posits! No 16a5gg!rr5aavww,a� #651266 Trial Date: Not Set 1975 KENTW 40/12 decide Trimmer Weed oteat�orAileeePrfnKcoca . Salvador CamachD, Plaintiff v. Jesus Armando Ca - mobile home— Whadrar Toro IV. 525, AubwNLakclan! AuclSculioneeX15 Kee 56-2018-00513995-CU-BC-VTA macho, Defendant 1969 OLDS 9e4T Blot* and Dearer grass SUMMONS Plaintiff, Salvador Camacho hereby submits his vehicle bog 14", Sao, Black and BIG MOVING SALE NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: Jesus Armando came- statement Dfdamag,p..M- rA Camelot Square Mobile Decker 14` SW. 2 etac- DOWNSIZING Mlsoetleneouie Auto& cho; and Does 1 to 25 Home Park Sp 330, foie Crahmens 1 horse April 6&7 Sat/Sun YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: Salvador w CODE OF CIVIL..RpCI #ARE, SECTION 425.11 3001 S 2eeth Street power Leaf Blowers $25 930am - spin without Plafnilff'S right ABANDONED Camacho Ph: 253-839-7575 each aera in excellentBedroom, kitchen, excellent NOTICEI You have been sued. The court may de- t0 assert, offer or additional damages at time of Condition. den and raining room VEHICLE tide against you without your being heard unless trial, or in accordance with proof. Call: (206) 772-6856 furniture. Power reds, AUCTION you respond within 30 days. Read the information Plaintiff's damages are in the following amount: Cemetery Plots lawn equipment, Special In below. Lawn Mower, $65. BBO/smoker, various Special and Compensatory Damages: $196,000.00 Gethsemane CemeteryTowing You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this sum - Fed Way Companion Scos25FHedzer STirnear, mist items enough to p5923 78th Ave S. mans and legal papers art served on your to life a General Damages: j200,000.OD Niche at eye level. Eleclrk, Black & Decker, lilt 1315house 49th St SE e! Kent, WA 98032 response at this court and Nava a copy Served on Attorneys fees: $15,000.00 Current value $7,323. 16 Inch & 17 kwoh, $25 Auburn the planliff. A wer or phone cap wait not protect Dated: March 22, 2019 Selling or SMO, each. Call: (2os) 772- Every Tuesday yn u• Your written response must be in propof t¢gal Law Office of Ball & Yorke pdsolleri�hplmaa.Gom secs at 11 AM brill d you want the court to hoar your rase. There Viewing at 10 AM may be a court form that you can use for your re- #1 Allen R. Ball, Esq. State Bar 24086 Allen Partrid a Drive, Suite 330 #1 Reach over a million Wanted/Trade (253) 854-7240 sparse. You aan tiro snese court loans arul more Ventura, CA 93003 potential customers Yamaha Golf Cart 48 informaton at the Ca "a Court Online Self -Help when you advertise in WANTED: Center (wwwxrourunto.ea.govJ%elfhelp), your County Published in the Federal Way Mirror March 29, Y bah syelem. Fully en- taw library, or the courlhousa n9areO yarn. 0 you April 5, 12,19, 2019 #849713 the Service Directory. Record LP's, 45's, dosed, charger, :spout cenrEol pay the filing fee, ask the court Clerk W a Call 800-388-2527 or Reel to Reel, wfnocrin, 2 stwage bas- STrack Tapes &CDs. kets. $2.900 wwwSoundClassBteds.com CALL TODAY! Call 253-838-9029. r aw— 206-499-5307 r , , r You've Got t! Reach the readers tlenfaler Wantaa the dailies mis Auto Events/ DONATE YOUR CAR Northwest's largest Auctions ma CHARITY. Receive V classified network maximum value of write Somebody r r in print and online. off for your taxes. Run- It! paces i82 in lal ali&}- Go online to phandnnod Vehicleping or not!�� Asking $12,000 www.SoundCla&sifieds.com All conditions accepted.■■ for both. OBO. 24f7 to find what you ill 2nd & th T Free pickup. Call for de - Full sale rice would be need or to place an ad. Every 2nd l cation-, tails, 855-635-4229. P For Ilse wlocation: $10,900Ao1. Call:1-800.388-2627 yywyy,SkyWaytow.Cem Reach thousands of Call 60147111 Monday -Friday or( 60) 990-2916 Bam-5pm, to speak with Preview f cam readers with one call Whatever you Leave a message. a sales representative . AUctlprt 1:3D pm 1-e00-38e-2527 need to part with - 'Ile r a34k 1R1dJ1 PRINTING FACILITY (EveretLWA) -Ad"mangSdn King CountySound erg Nbilshing's printing facility is interviewing -Alaldeen,WA . oulsidesats Countythese Kitsap fox muidple poshlons, Sound is the state's 13th -Whldh,ywrna WA Clalldrn County Snohomish County laagestprinter, serving as the printing partner . M°mmd,AAdrrAls1ng6n,Nrt, Jefferson County Whatcom County foe pubrrhen throdgbout Washington. Our full- -E—OAA service printing facility 1n Everett is over BO,000 -A,nI, WA Okanogan sgllarefiretwith myand quick fre"laes% -hui,b0A Pierce Coma y County located justwseenmfnu%fromthe 1-511-40,5 -A,ni^^,WA Op fountain i ty intetchaage with easy and quick access to Seattle, • oigeil9tnsya. wit l E Bellevue and the rest of the Puget Sound area. -Ew,A,WA work envi crime Of with opportunity for Positions that are available for the Printing Facility Rep°aeaaErltotlil advancement along with a Competitive indude onto^nacwA ,.,fits package including health insuran paid lime offloal and holidays) Press Operator An,AEnlMxlnm,nl Pm 1 i11k with employer match. General Press OperatorAccepting -Ponk9n,s,WA resumes at: Applkantsmust been9agingand gdal-oriented,or P°°IIbo,WA e Hit, Sound Publishing, InC With a good work ethic. to Include the ability to m,une,.wA Ever` ' ly mail : be punctual, is well as deldbie with their work -E""`" WA Everett, WA E; i, i' i schedule to Flex with the changing needs of the -Akidnn,WA business. As a requirement, applicants for the -5epe1v'WA oreayou are applying for. diivklg pesitlals must have a valid driver's license -'°""'"A and adon driving record, • spnn,n,h-in SOUND wA PUBLISHINGINC P"cadean, m°n For a list of our MOSr UMMjobopeningsAndtolearnmoreaboutusvisitourwvebille:www.ioundpubl!shing.tom your car, your truck, your boat, your house -the Sound Classifieds can help you do it. Call or go online today to place your ad. It's Easy! 1 In Print and Online! Stacey Welsh From: Palisoc, Felixberto <PalisoF@wsdot.wa.gov> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 12:10 PM To: Stacey Welsh Subject: Davita TIA Hi, Stacey. Below are our comments on the TIA. The proposed development is a 161,280 square feet single -tenant office building area. The project is located west of Weyerhaeuser Way and south of the I-5/S 320th St exit in Federal Way. Parking will be provided on the north and south side of S 323nd St. Vehicles can access the site by full access driveways on 32"d Ave S and S 323`d St and by the existing 32"d Ave/S 323rd St roundabout. The TIA provides trip generation, distribution, assignment and LOS for the proposed development. There are four project proposals within the Federal Way campus (former Weyerhaeuser campus): Warehouse A, Warehouse B, DaVita, and Greenline. The traffic impact analysis (TIA) for DaVita incorporated new trips generated for the office building, but did not include traffic volume generated by the Warehouse A, Warehouse B, and Greenline proposals. The projects should be analyzed together. Separate TIAs have been submitted for Warehouse A, Warehouse B, and DaVita projects, so it is assumed the projects will be developed within a similar timeframe. The projects are within the same campus, so the cumulative traffic generated will have an impact on the 1-5 and S 320" St southbound and northbound ramp terminal intersections adjacent to the campus. To determine the impact and level of mitigation, the project proposals should be analyzed together. The ramp capacity at S 320th St from southbound 1-5 and to northbound 1-5 should also be analyzed. 2. In the AM peak hour, the DaVita project is anticipated to add 62 new trips to the intersection of the southbound 1-5 off -ramp and S 320th St. The project exceeds the vehicular trip threshold in the Developer Services Manual for determining whether a highway improvement should be requested. The PM peak hour was not include in the analysis. The cumulative impact of these developments will affect the operation of the transportation network and the interstate. As mitigation for the cumulative impacts from the Weyerhaeuser campus developments, WSDOT requests that the PM peak hour be analyzed to determine impacts. Felix Accessed on 1-2-19 https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/dirtalert/ Accessed on 1-2-19 https.//fQrtress.wa.gov/ecy/dirtalert Accessed on 1-2-19 htt s: fortress.wa. ov ec dirtalert Accessed on 1-2-19 https://fortress.wa.gov/ecv/dirtalert 5309 Shilshole Avenue, NW Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 206.789.9658 phone 206.789.9684 fax memorandum date November 12, 2018 to Stacey Welsh, City of Federal Way Department of Community Development from Jessica Redman and Ilon Logan subject Critical Areas Review — DaVita Office Parcels www.esassoc.com At the request of the City of Federal Way (City), Environmental Science Associates (ESA) reviewed the Existing Conditions Report — DaVita Office Parcels (dated November 17, 2017) prepared by Talasaea Consultants Inc. and the DaVita Healthcare Partners East Campus Office Park Site Plan (dated November 22, 2017) for the 11.5- acre property at the intersection of 32nd Avenue South and South 323' Street in Federal Way, Washington. The site is currently undeveloped and comprised of four parcels (King County tax parcels 2154650060, 2154650090, 2154650110, and 2154650120). The reviewed documents refer to the four parcels as Parcels B, C, D, and E and were previously part of the Greenline Campus (formerly the Weyerhaeuser Campus), now owned by Federal Way Campus, LLC. In 2017, DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc. (DaVita) purchased the parcels from Federal Way Campus, LLC. DaVita is proposing to build a 200,000 square foot (SF), two-story corporate office building and associated office spaces. According to the Existing Conditions Report, no critical areas were observed onsite. However, one wetland, Wetland FB, is located approximately 133 feet east of the southeast corner of Parcel E. An additional wetland, Wetland FA was originally identified as occurring along the southern boundary of Parcel E. However, as documented in the Existing Conditions Report, this feature was later found to not support the three wetland parameters and was therefore not delineated as wetland. ESA conducted a site visit on February 1, 2018 to observe site conditions on the four parcels. Results of the document review and site visit were presented to the City in the technical memorandum titled Critical Areas Review — DaVita Office Parcels (dated February 22, 2018). ESA agreed with Talasaea's conclusion that no wetlands or streams or associated buffers are present on the DaVita office parcels. ESA also agreed on the location, boundary, and categorization of Wetland FB, located offsite. ESA also agreed that the area that was previously identified as Wetland FA, did not meet the three wetland parameters, as no hydric soils were observed during the February 1, 2018 site visit. However, in the February 22, 2018 memorandum, ESA did recommend the Existing Conditions Report be revised to include all relative items as required by FWRC 19.145 — Critical Areas Report. Per FWC 19.145(2), the submitted critical area report should include the identification and characterization of all critical areas adjacent to the proposed improvements. Therefore, it was recommended that the report be revised to include site photographs and the wetland data and rating forms for Wetland FB. We also Critical Areas Review — DaVita Office Parcels recommended wetland data forms for the area previously delineated as Wetland FA be included in the revision to provide documentation that this area does not meet wetland parameters. In response to the February 22, 2018 memorandum, Talasaea provided a revised version of the Existing Conditions Report (Revised September 6, 2018 and hereinafter referred to as the Revised Report) as well as a site plan prepared by ESM Consulting Engineers (ESM) and dated August 31, 2018. A Technical Review Comments Response memorandum was also submitted by ESM (dated September 11, 2018). According to the Revised Report and site plans, the project site is now comprised of three parcels (Parcels A, B, C). The site plan shows a proposed three-story 161,280 SF building and associated parking on Parcel A, and additional parking on Parcel B and C. It appears that the boundary lines of the original parcels have been redrawn so that the former Parcels D and E have been combined to form Parcel A. Additionally, Parcels B and C, which formerly were situated north and south of each other, have now been redrawn to be located east and west of each other. However, because the overall footprint of the project boundary has not changed between the originally reviewed Existing Conditions Report and the Revised Report, we do not see the revisions of parcel boundaries as affecting our conclusion that no critical areas, or associated buffers, exist onsite. The Revised Report includes site photographs and data and rating forms for Wetland FB as recommended in our February 22, 2018 memorandum, and as required by FWRC 19.145(2). No data sheets for the previously delineated Wetland FA were included in the Revised Report, as recommended. However, the Revised Report states that this area was evaluated by a representative from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who agreed with the determination that no critical areas are located on the site. This review by the federal agency and documentation in the Revised Report is sufficient for the City's critical areas review and therefore no additional information is needed regarding Wetland FA. We also found no issues or errors with the ESM's associated site plan and Technical Review Comments Response memorandum and have concluded that our comments and recommendations presented in our February 22, 2018 memo have been accurately and sufficiently addressed in the revised DaVita Office Parcel — Existing Conditions Report (Revised September 6, 2018). CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RESUBMITTAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 11-13-18 TO: Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer FROM: Stacey Welsh, Senior Planner FILE NUMBER(s): 17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE RELATED FILE NOS.: 17-105644-SM & 17-104985-CN & 17-103654-PC PROJECT NAME: DAVITA HEALTHCARE OFFICE PARK PROJECT ADDRESS: *NO SITE ADDRESS* PARCEL NUMBER: 215465-0060, -0090, -0110, -0120 ZONING DISTRICT: OP-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Development of an office building and additional parking for DaVita (project is now planned in 2 phases with the first phase being 162,000 sq. ft. bldg.) LAND USE PERMITS: UP & SEPA PROJECT CONTACT: ESM Consulting Engineers Laura Bartenhagen 33400 8th Ave South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 MATERIALS SUBMITTED: Traffic Study 1 Stacey Welsh From: Brian Asbury <BAsbury@lakehaven.org> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 11:22 AM To: Stacey Welsh Subject: Davita Healthcare Office Park (17-105642-UP, 17-105643-SE) Stacey, Lakehaven issued Certificates of Availability for the subject project on 11/9/17, and the project's civil engineering consultant has been in contact with Lakehaven recently regarding water system extension & service requirements. However, no other application has been submitted to Lakehaven that is necessary to be able to determine the applicant's specific requirements for connection to Lakehaven's water and/or sewer systems to serve the subject property. As previously noted, applicant will need to submit an application for either Developer Pre -Design Meeting or Developer Extension Agreement for Lakehaven to formally commence the water and/or sewer plan review process. Lakehaven encourages owners/developers/applicants to apply for Lakehaven processes separately to Lakehaven, and sufficiently early in the pre-design/planning phase to avoid delays in overall project development. Brian Asbury Development Engineering. � Lakehaven Lakeh rv9n L7E . .Si The contents of this email may be determined to be a public record and subject to disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56 regardless of any expectations or claims of confidentiality or privilege asserted. Savanna Naqorski From: Brian Gilles <bkgilles@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 12:10 PM To: Savanna Nagorski Cc: Laura Bartenhagen; Eric LaBrie; 'Jennifer Marriott' Subject: RE: DaVita SEPA and Technical Review (TAL-1604) Attachments: Re -Revised Tree Report, DaVita Lots A-C, 10-30-18.pdf Savanna and all: Here is the revised report. RESUBMITTED OCT 31 20 OF As requested by the City: COMMUNWN FEDERAL Section 10, Significant Trees: 1. #'s & percentages are corrected. 2. Sheet TR-01 is now Attachment 1. 3. Street Trees, were removed. a. Please note that the street trees were included to provide verification of presence, species, size, and condition for the Landscape Architect's work. b. Their numbers were always separated out of the number calculations and descriptions for the subject properties. 4. Attachment 4, Tree Protection Measures now references FWCC 22-1568(c)(6). a. That is, in the main narrative and in Attachment 4, it is spelled out that driplines were used as the Tree Protection Zone delineator. b. Unless the tree is Not Viable, then an entry of "n/a" was used to delineate "not applicable." c. Or, and finally, there area very few trees whose driplines extend over the north property line. i. The north Limits -of -Disturbance was recommended to be, "To the north property line." I'm in the office the rest of today and tomorrow if there are any questions. Regards, Brian K. Gilles, Consulting Arborist P.O. Box 2366 Kirkland, WA 98083-2366 Cell: 425-417-0850 www,GillesTreeConsultin .com 1 DaVita CBO Expansion Federal Way WA mcg-ARC project #1712.000 Meeting Agenda Project Introduction — Federal Way Building Department Date: October 31, 2018 Time: 9:00—10:00am Location: City Hall, Federal Way INTRODUCTION • Overall project description • The project consists on a new Corporate Business Office building capable of accommodating a minimum of 750 employees, working in an open office environment with support spaces including lounges, private offices and conference rooms. A conference area with the ability to host meetings of up to 500 attendees is also included on the first floor. • Construction type II-B, three stories, total area approximately 160,000GSF Office Occupancy: Business Group B ■ First Floor Conference: Assembly Group A PERMITTING • Early structure permit package -target submittaldate:ll/21/18 ij�/ • Foundations, primary structural steel • Submitted simultaneously with Civil Permit ■ Additional documentation required with submittal- underground services, life safety plans • Review timeline • Building permit —target submittal date: 12/21/18 • Mechanical and electrical documents included? • Deferred submittal timing -fire alarm, fire sprinklers, exit stairs • Additional documentation required with submittal ■ Review timeline OTHER ■ Applicable construction codes • Commercial building permit checklist 0 Plans review and permit fee calculation for budgeting L�f W /-e-� NfsV CITY OF �.� Federal Way Centered on Opportunity October 15, 2018 Ms. Ilon Logan ESA 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 goganiddtE;gssoc, rc im CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com Economic Development FILE Re: File #17-105642-UP; REQUEST FOR THIRD PARTY REVIEW DaVita Wetland Report, Parcels 215465-0060, 0090, 0110, & 0120, Federal Way Dear Ms. Logan: City staff is requesting review of the DaVita project resubmittal pursuant to the agreed terms of the on -call contract. Documents Provided: **Revised project materials provided for review** • Technical Review Comments Response, by ESM, September 11, 2018 (item #9 on page 7) • Existing Conditions Report — DaVita Office Parcels, by Talasaea, revised September 6, 2018 • Revised Clearing and Grading Plan (sheet GR-01; pdf page 7), by ESM, August 31, 2018 ■ Documents have been loaded to the city's ftp site: Fr F i fFe ralwa om oucboxlDaVi °/ 2 nit ° o? D ume 9-1 •1 ° a esu 'ttal o Please review items: 4, 7, and 11 at the link and as detailed above. Task Scope: ■ Review revised critical area report for property subject to 1994 Concomitant Zoning Agreement and current code F'WRC 19.145 for critical areas. • Conduct a site visit as necessary. ■ Provide written response to findings, recommendations, and -request additional information from applicant if needed. • Possible meeting with applicant's wetland biologist. • Review of resubmitted/corrected documents as needed. Please contact me at staff svels cityo federaiuray.eo>m, or 253-835-2634 if you have any questions regarding this task or if you anticipate the review cost exceeding the remaining funds available. Sincerely, Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner Doc. I.D. 78350 17-105642-00-UP CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RESUBMITTAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 10-12-18 TO: Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Scott Sproul, Building Official Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue FROM: Stacey Welsh, Senior Planner FOR DRC MTG. ON: 11-1-18 (internal mtg. to review resnbmittal) FILE NUMBER(s): 17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE RELATED FILE NOS.: 17-105644-SM & 17-104985-CN & 17-103654-PC PROJECT NAME: DAVITA HEALTHCARE OFFICE PARK PROJECT ADDRESS: *NO SITE ADDRESS* PARCEL NUMBER: 215465-0060, -0090, -0110, -0120 ZONING DISTRICT: OP-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Development of an office building and additional parking for DaVita (project is now planned in 2 phases with the first phase being 162,000 sq. ft. bldg.) LAND USE PERMITS: UP & SEPA PROJECT CONTACT: ESM Consulting Engineers Laura Bartenhagen 33400 8th Ave South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 MATERIALS SUBMITTED: See attached Cover Letter for list ***ESM has indicated there are 3 outstanding items that will be submitted at a later date: traffic report, revised tree report, and Forest Practices Application*** Stacey Welsh From: Eric LaBrie <eric.labrie@esmcivil.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 12:10 PM To: Stacey Welsh Cc: Arthur Richey; Mark Kinney; Savanna Nagorski; Laura Bartenhagen; Doc Hansen; Brian Davis Subject: RE: DaVita Healthcare, Process III and SEPA Materials (File #17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE) Hi Stacey, Your summary is correct. On 9/14 all consultants were directed to stop work on the project; therefore, the missing items were not submitted. We are following up with our traffic engineer and the arborist/forester to get you the three items noted as soon as possible. Our client's request for expedited review may be unrealistic based on current city policy; however, if there is anything that can be done while we are waiting on the missing items to be submitted (such as sending out the critical areas report), it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, ERIC LABRIE, A.I.C.P. ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC www.esmcivii.com From: Stacey Welsh <Stacey.Welsh@cityoffederalway.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 11:45 AM To: Eric LaBrie <eric.labrie@esmcivil.com> Cc: Arthur Richey <Arthur.Richey@davita.com>; Mark Kinney <Mark.Kinney@davita.com>; Savanna Nagorski <Savanna.Nagorski @esmcivil.com>; Laura Bartenhagen<laura.bartenhagen@esmcivil.com>; Doc Hansen <Robert. Hansen @cityoffedera lway.com>; Brian Davis <Brian.Davis@cityoffederalway.com> Subject: RE: DaVita Healthcare, Process III and SEPA Materials (File #17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE) Eric, I was out of the office from 10/3-10/8. Your message was received on 10-2-18. 1 would like to recap recent events to ensure the city's correct understanding regarding various messages on the resubmittal: 9-12-18: • A resubmittal in response to the city's 4-10-18 technical comment letter is received by the city. Via discussion at the counter, ESM indicated that there are three outstanding items that were to be resubmitted as follows: traffic report -by the end of the month; revised tree report -within a week; Forest Practices Application -within a week. 9-14-18 A request to withdraw the materials submitted on 9-12-18 is received by the city. The letter states, in part, "We have been instructed to withdraw the materials as they depict different plans than what was approved from the Public Works department on September 10 (letter received September 13) regarding right-of-way improvements". 10-2-18 An email is received by staff that states, in part, "We respectfully request that the City stop all review the materials as the applicant may withdraw the application in its entirety". An email is received by staff that states, in part, "Our client would like to take the DaVita project off of hold and they respectfully request your prompt attention and cooperation in working toward receipt of a land use decision by the end of this month (October, 2018)". The 9-12-18 submittal is incomplete. As of today the 3 outstanding items listed above still have not been submitted. When the withdrawal request was submitted, via discussion at the counter, ESM indicated that revised plans would be resubmitted to address the street modification decisions. Will ESM be resubmitting any other materials related to the DaVita project? The resubmittal will need to be routed for review by city staff and outside agencies. In addition the city's wetland consultant will need to review the resubmitted critical areas report. Technical review will take time. As you know from previous projects a SEPA determination, once issued, has a two week comment period followed by a three week appeal period. Land use decisions are issued at a time after the conclusion of the SEPA appeal period. These factors prevent a land use decision from being issued by the end of October 2018. Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner c.rr v Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2634 www.cityoffederalway.com From: Eric LaBrie Finailto:eric.iabrieCdesrncivil.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 4:33 PM To: Stacey Welsh Cc: Arthur Richey; Mark Kinney; Savanna Nagorski; Laura Bartenhagen; Doc Hansen Subject: RE: DaVita Healthcare, Process III and SEPA Materials (File #17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE) Importance: High Hello Stacey, Our client would like to take the DaVita project off of hold and they respectfully request your prompt attention and cooperation in working toward receipt of a land use decision by the end of this month (October, 2018). We recognize that this is a quick turn -around and whatever you can do to help achieve this goal is greatly appreciated by the applicant and DaVita. If you, or any other staff members, would like to meet to resolve any questions or concerns, we will make ourselves available immediately in an effort to make this project successful as quickly as possible. Please confirm receipt of this message, and we thank you for your attention to this project. ERIC LABRIE, A.I.C.P. ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC www.esmcivii.com From: Eric LaBrie Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 12:09 PM To: Stacey Welsh <Stacey.Welsht?a cityoffederalway, com> •l 7 Cc: Arthur Richey <Arthur.Richey@davita.com>; Mark Kinney <Mark.Kinne davita.com>; Savanna Nagorski <Savanna.NaRorski@esmcivil.com>; Laura Bartenhagen <laura.bartenhafen@esmcivil.com> Subject: DaVita Healthcare, Process III and SEPA Materials (File #17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE) Hi Stacey, As you know, on behalf of our client, we were requested to withdraw the Process III and SEPA materials that were submitted on September 12t", 2018 for the DaVita project reference above. I understand that the City will not return the application materials since they are now a part of the public record. We respectfully request that the City stop all review the materials as the applicant may withdraw the application in its entirety. I expect to know more before the response deadline of October 7th, 2018. Thank you. ERIC LABRIE, A.I.C.P. ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC President www.esmcivii.com eric.iahrie@esmcivi€.cQ—m Federal Way I Everett 33400 8th Avenue S, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 Tel: 253.838.6113 office 206.491.3415 cell 253.944.1503 direct Civil Engineering I Surveying I Land Planning i Landscape Architecture I GIS RE; JBMI77ED September 14, 2018 Ms. Stacey Welsh Senior Planner City of Federal Way Department of Community Development 33325 81h Avenue S Federal Way, WA 98003 SEP 14 2018 C MMUN� MY NBINEER5 L L C . Job No.1884-001-015 RE: Files #17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE Withdrawal of Materials from 9/12/2018 Process III and SEPA Submittal DaVita Healthcare Office Park, Federal Way Dear Ms. Welsh: Please accept this letter as a formal withdrawal of the materials submitted for the Process III and SEPA applications for the DaVita Healthcare Office Park proposal (File # 17-105642- UP & 17-105643-SE), submitted September 12, 2018. We have been instructed to withdraw the materials as they depict different plans than what was approved from the Public Works department on September 10 (letter received September 13) regarding right-of-way improvements. Thank you for your attention to this request. If you need any further information, please feel free to contact me at (253) 838-6113. Very truly yours, ESM CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LLC ERIC G. LaBRIE, A.I.C.P. - President CC: Arthur Richey, DaVita Mark Kinney, DaVita l�J Ikesm8l engrles m-jobs11884=11015Wocu mentl letter-014.docx 33400 8th Ave S Ste 205 Tel (253) 838 6113 Everett (425) 297 9900 Civil Engineering Land Planning Federal Way. WA 98003 Fax (253) 838 7104 Toll Free (600) 345 5694 Land Surveying Landscape Architecture www esmciviL com 3D Laser Scanning GIS Bob Ferguson ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Transportation & Public Construction Division PO Box 40113 • Olympia WA 98504-0113 • (360) 753-6126 July 23, 2019 Mark Orthmann Zach Lell City Attorney's Office Ogden Murphy Wallace City of Federal Way 901 5th Avenue, Suite 3500 33325 O' Avenue S, 2nd Floor Seattle, WA 98164 Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: SEPA DNS Appeal—DaVita Healthcare Office Park **ER 408 Communication** Dear Mark and Zach: Thank you for arranging for WSDOT, the City, and DaVita to meet and discuss the issues raised in WSDOT's appeal on July 16. At that meeting, WSDOT understood that the City would facilitate further collaboration between WSDOT, the City's planning and public works staff, TenW (the consulting firm that prepared the Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs) for the development for the Weyerhaeuser campus), and IRG (the developer of the remaining Weyerhaeuser parcels, including "Warehouse B" and "Greenline Business Park"). WSDOT also understood that the City would share its concurrency analysis at the PM peak hour for these parcels and for . "Warehouse A," which is also set for development within the Weyerhauser campus. WSDOT views this collaboration as critically important in maintaining a healthy community partnership with the City. It is WSDOT's hope that by sharing this information and engaging in an ongoing dialogue about the potential traffic impacts of this development, WSDOT can properly assess whether this development will cause any impacts to the state highway system, including Interstate 5. WSDOT will be reaching out to City staff directly to further discuss the traffic studies at issue for the Weyerhaeuser campus. In light of this, and based on the information the City has shared with WSDOT concerning the City's review of traffic impacts for the Weyerhaeuser campus historically and DaVita's traffic analysis specifically, WSDOT has agreed to dismiss its appeal of the City's Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the DaVita application. A copy of our motion to dismiss is enclosed with this letter. 0 7- ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON July 23, 2019 Page 2 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your professionalism in this matter. Sincerely, A�ge . MATT HUOT Assistant Attorney General Matt.Huot(a)atg wagov (360) 586-0641 MDH:BL Enclosure cc: Ann Gygi, counsel for DaVita Amit Ranade, counsel for DaVita Mike Cotten, WSDOT, NW Region Administrator Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region Development Services and Utilities Manager Case File I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER 8 FOR THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 9 In Re: No. 10 Appeal by Washington State Department MOTION FOR AN ORDER OF of Transportation (WSDOT) of the VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 11 Determination of Nonsignificance(DNS) for DaVita Healthcare Office Park (File 12 Number 17-105643-S.E.) 13 14 The Appellant, State of Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT), by and 15 through its attorneys of record hereby voluntarily withdraws its appeal of the Determination of 16 Nonsignificance issued by the City of Federal Way on May 3, 2019. This voluntary withdrawal 17 shall be with prejudice and without costs to any party. 18 DATED this Z;!� day of July 2019. 19 ROBERT W.FERGUSON Attorney General 20 21 �. 1 22 MATTHEW D. HUOT, WSBA 440606 Assistant Attorney General 23 Attorneys for Appellant, State of Washington Department of Transportation 24 (360) 586-0641 Matth-Huot@atg.wa.gov 25 MOTION FOR AN ORDER OF j ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON 26 VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL Transportation & Public Construction Division 7141 Clearwater Drive SW P.O, Box 40113 Olympia, WA 98504-0113 (360) 753-6126 Facsimile: (360) 586-6847 Im u 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I, Brenda Larson, an employee of the Transportation and Public Construction Division 3 of the Office of the Attorney General of Washington, certify that on this day true copies of the 4 Motion for an Order of Voluntary Dismissal was served on the following parties as indicated 5 below: 6 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER BE: City of Federal Way United States Mail 7 902 loth Street Tacoma WA 98405 8 Brian Davis _ B 9 City of Federal Way United States Mail Community Development Email 10 33325 8th Avenue S (brian.davis@cityoffederalway.com) Federal Way, WA 98003 11 Federal Way City Clerk's Office S B United States Mail 12 33325 8th Avenue Federal Way, WA 98003 13 D. Orthmann, Federal Way BE United States Mail 14 Deputy City Attomey. for City of 33325 8th Avenue S, 2nd floor 15 Federal Way, WA 98003 16 Ann Gygi BE: United States Mail 17 Amit Ranade Hillis Clark Martin & Peterson P.S. 18 999 Third Avenue, Suite 4600 Seattle WA 98104 19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the 20 21 foregoing is true and correct. 22 Dated this )'S day of July 2019 at Olympia, Washington. 23 24 BRENDA LARSON 25 Legal Assistant 26 MOTION FOR AN ORDER OF 2 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Transportation & Public Construction Division VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 7141 Cleanwater Drive SW P.O. Box 40113 Olympia, WA 98504-0113 (360) 753-6126 Facsimile: (360) 586-6847 CONSULTING ENGINEERS LLc September 11, 2018 Ms. Stacey Welsh Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33325 8t' Ave S Federal Way, WA 98003 Re: Files #17-105642-UP &17-105643SE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMENTS RESPONSE DaV'rta Healthcare Office Park, Federal Way Dear Stacey: Job No. 1884-001-015 RESUBMI17ED SEP 12 2018 C1TY OF G01 NTY FEDERAL On behalf of DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc and Genesis KC Development, LLC, ESM Consulting Engineers is pleased to provide the City of Federal Way with updated and revised application materials for the DaVita Healthcare Office Park proposal. This resubmittal includes materials that address comments received from various departments involved with review of the Process III and SEPA applications, dated April 20, 2018 from the City of Federal Way. In an effort to provide concise and direct responses, we have copied the review comments below in italics and our responses are in bold. Please find the following enclosed materials as part of this resubmittal. 1. Technical Review Comment Letter Responses (this letter); 2. Process III Design Criteria Narrative (4 copies); 3. Revised SEPA Checklist (8 copies); 4. Revised Process III Plan Set (8 copies); 5. Revised Building Elevations (4 copies); 6. Revised Statement of Architectural Design Intent (4 copies); 7. Revised Preliminary TIR and Level 1 Downstream Storm Drainage Analysis (4 copies); 8. Revised Existing Conditions Report (4 copies); 9. Revised Geotechnical Report (4 copies); 33400 8th Ave S Ste 205 Tel (253) 838 6113 Federat Way. WA 98003 Fax (253) 838 7104 www esmcivit corn Everett (425) 297 9900 Toll Free (800) 345 5694 II .I Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 2 R1&n11ZQq Division Comments Comprehensive Plan - The project is dependent on a proposed comprehensive plan amendment. Noted. Aspects of this project are dependent on a proposed Comprehensive Plan / Transportation Improvement Plan amendment USE PROCESS 'lll 2. Plan Set: a. On Sheet ST-01 under the Project Statistics section, no 'net site area" is provided. The Use Process 111 Submittal Requirements handout states: "Provide net site area, which is gross area minus critical areas, rights -of -way, private open space, and public purpose lands.' Net site area of 481,332 SF has been added to ST-01. This is calculated by subtracting the areas for the right-of-way dedication and pedestrian path easement from the gross site area b. On Sheet ST-01 show the building setbacks from properly lines to demonstrate compliance with Federal Way City Code (FWCC) 22-826(l)(b), whereby a building can exceed 35 feet in height if each required yard abutting the structure is increased one -foot for each one -foot the structure exceeds 35 feet above average building elevation. Sheet ST 01 has been updated to reflect the adjusted setbacks to accommodate a greater building height OP-1 Maximum Building Height: 35 ft Average Building Elevation: 57.5 ft Additional setback required: 22.5 ft Minimum Setback, Front 50 ft + 22.5 ft - 72.5 ft Minimum Setback, Side, Rear. 20 ft + 22.5 ft - 42.5 ft C. On Sheet LA-01: Demonstrate compliance with FWCC 22-826(3), which states the first 25 feet of the required front yard, starting from the stree4 must be landscaped and contain a three-foot high berm or three-foot high dense, sight obscuring vegetation. This vegetated area must run the entire length of the required front yard (except for driveway locations) The landscape plans have been updated to reflect a 25' wide strip of landscaping adjacent to the property line abutting the right-of-way with 3'-high, dense, sight obscuring vegetation. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 3 ii. There is a note in Tract C which states, 'maintain existing vegetation surrounding stormwater pond to maximum extent possible' Clarify this statemen4 as Tract C is not part of the submitted project and no work should occur there. The note in Tract C has been removed as it is not part of the project proposal and no work will occur in that area iii. Label the size of the parking lot landscape islands Square footage values have been added to parking lot landscape islands. d. Reconcile Sheets LA-01 and TR-01; Sheet LA-01 should only show existing trees that will remain after development Sheets LA 01 and TR-01 have been updated. LA-01 reflects retained trees and proposed landscaping, while TR-01 shows existing, retained, removed and replacement trees along with the tree retention calculations. e. Confirm correct sections of the CZ4 and FWCC are used by providing CZ4 and code citations on Sheets LA-01 and LA-02, as they pertain to the notes listed on the plans Applicable code citations have been added to sheets IA-01 and LA-02 upon confirming correct sections of the codes were applied. f. Update sheets as appropriate to reflect the proposed parking lot Boundary Line Adjustment (city Re 18-100789-00-SU) and building site Lot Line Elimination (city file 18-100790-00-SU). Plan sheets have been updated appropriately. 3. Elevations: a. Provide information that demonstrates how the average building elevation (ABE) and building height were calculated (see enclosed ABE definition which was also provided with the Preapplica h on Summary Letter) In addition, address ABE in relation to plan sheet GA-02 (site cross sections) Also see comment #17, below. Setbacks are indicated on the site plan and building heights are shown on exterior elevations/architectural plans. ABE calculation is as follows: Lowest elevation at exterior wall: 444.50 Reference datum (+5 ft) 449.50 First floor elevation: 455.00 Top of parapet elevation: 507.00 Average Building Elevation: 57.5 ft Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 4 Sheet GR-02 exhibits cross sections for the proposed building and grading, where the building's FF - 455. Cross section C displays the west/east elevations while cross section D displays south/north elevations. b. In the September 18, 2017, Preapplication Conference Summary Letter, one of the comments requested the submittal to provide details on location and screening for trash receptacles, ground mounted mechanical equipmen4 and rooftop mechanical equipment No details regarding the trash enclosure were provided. Per FWCC 22-1564(d), all trash enclosures shall be screened from abutting properties and/or public rights of way by a 100 percent sight -obscuring fence or wall and appropriate landscape screen. There are no trash enclosures outside of the building envelope on the site. Solid waste and recycling facilities are located on the first floor within the building footprint and accessible to outside collection via overhead rolling door. Refer to updated south building elevation. 2. Per FWCC 22-1564(b), all outside storage areas shall be fully screened by Type l landscaping a minimum of five feet in width, as described in section 22-1565(a), unless determined by the community development review committee (CDRC) that such screening is not necessary because stored materials are not visually obtrusive. There are no outside storage areas on the site. 3. Per FWCC 22-1565(a)(1), Type l landscaping is intended to provide a solid sight barrier to totally separate incompatible land uses This landscaping is typically found between residential and incompatible nonresidential land use zones e. manufacturing park and city center or residential, etc.), and around outdoor storage yards, service yards, loading areas, mechanical or electrical equipmen4 utility installations, trash receptacles, etc. At the south elevation, there is a loading zone with access, via overhead rolling door, to solid waste and recycling space. There will also be a PSE-provided pad mounted electrical transformer, which will be screened by Type I landscaping vegetation. l/. The elevation drawings provide detail on the location of mechanical units and daylight monitors on the roof, but insufficient screening detail/explanation. Will al/ the equipment be fully or partially screened and with what type of material? Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 5 1. Per FWCC 22-960(a) vents, mechanical penthouses, elevator equipment and similar appurtenances that extend above the roofline must be surrounded by a solid sight -obscuring screen that meets the following criterla: (a) The Screen must be integrated into the architecture of the building. (b) The screen must obscure the view of the appurtenances from adjacent streets and properties Screening of rooftop mechanical units is called out on the revised building elevations and will obscure view of units from S 323rd St to the north, and the existing building to the west C. Clarify the dark grey and neon green areas that the building appears to be sitting on. This is shown on all four elevations if these are platforms or retaining walls, provide additional details on purpose, height type of material, etc. Refer to revised building elevations - the finish grade of the site slopes to the east; revealing some areas of concrete foundation wall which will be screened by perimeter planting materials. d. It is difficult to determine compliance with FWCC Section 22-1564(u) (screening of blank walls) with the scale used on the elevations drawings Have the architect confirm compliance with the standard relating to blank wall areas greater than 240 square feet in area. The only location with blank walls in excess of 240 sf are located at the primary conference rooms along the west building elevation, where the walls provide a backdrop to landscaping elements. 5. Pedestrian Path: a. The November 22,, 2017, letter from McGranahan Architects describes a 12- foot non -motorized trail to be added along the east edge of the building site terminating at the southern edge of the property. Sheet ST-01 shows a 10- foot path that terminates approximately 60 feet north of the southern property line. Clarify what is proposed and update submitted materials accordingly. The site plan depicts a 20' access easement for public pedestrian access. The non -motorized trail easement was requested from the city to provide pedestrian connection from S 323w Street to the future S 324"' Street Since S 324t' is a future roadway whose alignment is unknown, there is no connection point or public destination available for this trail. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 6 Additionally, the easement location is proposed on the east side of the property to maintain connectivity of the proposed DaVita building to the existing DaVita building without public recreation crossing the campus. The proposed location will avoid conflicts with vehicles and pedestrians traveling between buildings. b. For functionality and safetypurposes, address pedestrian connectivity across the ,narking lot site in both the north/south and east/west directions Surrounding developments have implemented this feature in their site design. Pedestrian connectivity across, and crossing to, the proposed parking and buildings sites have been incorporated into the revised preliminary engineering plans. 6. Site Photos - No dates are provided on the photos for reference. Were pictures taken before or after the underbrush clearing reviewed under city file 17-104447-00 AD? if the photos were taken before, then photos submitted do not accurately reflect the project site. The photos included in the Site Photos submittal item were taken on August 22, 2017, prior to the underbrush clearing, yet the underbrush has since grown back However, recent photos from August 2018 have been incorporated into the revised Site Photos included with this resubmittal to depict the site's current signficant vegetation, location and improvements. 7. Parking: a. The amount of proposed parking varies throughout the submitted application documents, with the highest number being 724 stalls as listed in the T/A. The site plan states 706 stalls, but a count of stalls actually drawn on the plan (along with 150 basement stalls) totals 688. Clarify and correct all affected documents. For reference, the Notice of Application lists 706 stalls, as that is what is stated on the site plan. The amount of proposed parking has been revised and thoroughly reviewed in each document The total count of parking stalls proposed with the project is 681 stalls, including the 5% EV charging stations required and ADA stalls incorporated. b. As requested in the September 18, 2017, preapplication letter, since parking is proposed on an adjoining 104 provide documentation in compliance with FWCC Section 22-142 1 (a)(2)(b). The property owner of the project site containing the parking areas will sign a covenant or other instrument that requires that the lot be devoted in whole or in part to required parking for the use on another lot This covenant will be signed and recorded at the appropriate time. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 7 8. Off -Site Improvements- The November 22, 2017,, letter from McGranahan Architects describes pedestrian links with the existing Da Vita building to the west will be reinforced by re -working existing planter islands to provide clear and direct connections between primary building entries and outdoor seating areas. These are off site improvements that are not being reviewed or approved as part of this Use Process Ill land use application. That off -site work requires its own use process land use application. The thresholds to determine which land use application is required are contained within FWRC 19.15.030, The pedestrian connections between the proposed building and the existing DaVita office building to the west will consist of converting up to 10 existing parking stalls to widen existing landscape islands and provide new walkway and plantings. Total area impacted by this work will be approximately 3,200 SF within that existing lot Additionally, the modifications to the existing site will connect the proposed fire lane from this project These specific proposed improvements will be clarified and reviewed with a Land Use Process I application to be submitted at a later date. 9. Wetlands: a. Review and address the enclosed February 22, 2018, letter from the city's wetland consultant, ESA. A revised Exisffng Condi#ons Repodprovided by Talasaea is included in this resubmittal, which addresses comments from ESA- b. Figure 3 of the November 17,, 2017,, critical areas reportprepared by Talasaea Identifies Wetland FA as an existing wetland. However, the report text explains thatitis not wetland. Forclarity, add a note on Figure 3 that clarifies the situation. The revised report includes a note that clarifies the situation. c. No photographs of the site and critical areas or documentation of fieldworf� including field data sheets and rating system forms, were provided for the assessments of Wetlands FA and FB (see FWRC 19.145.080f21 and 19.145.410[21) Site photos, fieldwork documentation, data sheets and rating system forms are included in the revised Existing CondifiOns Report 10. Significant Trees: a. Tree evaluation report (prepared by Gilles Consulting, November 20, 2017), On page 3, under the Executive Summary, the "species' bulleted item needs correction, as the percentages shown exceed 100 and the number of trees discussed exceeds 406 (331 +80=411). Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 8 This has been updated in the revised Evaluation of Trees, which will be provided to the City soon. The values are now consistent and equal100%. # On page 4, the tree tag numbering description does not account for some of the tree numbers listed on plan set Sheet TR-01(trees 7-2 1), clarify and update documents as necessary. The report and plan sheet have been revised to reflect to correct tree tag numbers. iii. Attachment 1 should either show or refer to plan set Sheet Tf- 01, as they communicate different pieces of information. Attachment 1 has been updated. iv Street trees are included in the tree evaluation (4ttachment 2) Either clarify why these should be included for a tree count on private property, or remove street trees from the report Street trees have been removed from the revised tree evaluation. u Attachment 4 lists tree protection measures, including signage. The proposed text advises that Federal Way Code Compliance should be contacted with any concerns This contact should be revised to list the site superintendent's contact information, as this would be an active construcffon site under their direct supervision Nate Jenldns of Mortenson Construction in IGrldand will be the site superintendent He can be reached at: Nathan.jenldns®mortenson.com. vi FWCC Section 22-1568(c)(6) "Significant Trees," describes management practices that shall be observed on sites containing significant trees to provide protection. Without code citations or an explanation that the contents of Attachment 4 meet the 0 alternative protection methods in code, it is not clear that these measures have been incorporated. Attachment 4, Tree Protection Measures, in the Revised Evaluation of Trees has been updated to incorporate measures proposed in FWCC Section 22-1568(cX6). b. Sheet TR-01: Street trees are included in the tree evaluation report Clarify why these should be included for a tree count on private property, or remove street trees from the sheet Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 9 Street trees have been removed from the revised tree evaluation and are not included in the tree retention calculations. Remaining streets trees after driveways installed are shown on LA 01. A The sheet shows 46 significant trees on the property, and none are shown anywhere development will occur. The tree evaluation report lists 299 significant trees (out of 406 trees on the property) Revise this sheet to match the tree report and to comply with FWCC requirements for significant trees The report and plan sheets have been revised to reflect the correct number of trees. Only surveyed trees were taken into consideration for the previous tree retention plan - the retention calculations have since been updated to include all significant trees that the arborist identified on site. The internal trees on the property were not previously surveyed since the boundaries of the site construction/development were already delineated, however additional survey was completed to reflect the property's tree cluster for the purposes of estimating the cost of site development Al. If development will require the removal of more than 75 percent of the significant trees on site, significant trees are required to be replaced in an amount equal to 25 percent of the significant trees that existed on the subject property prior to commencing any development activity pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1568(c)(1)(a) Please show how this criterion is met The tree retention and replacement calculations have been updated to meet the requirements of FWCC 22-1568, acknowledging 50 (199 x .25) significant trees are required. Please see revised sheet TR-01 for the retention and replacement calculations. This project is able to retain 22 trees in total that would otherwise qualify as significant, while only 9 retained trees in total meet the size, health and species qualifications of a significant trees, per FWCC 1994.Of the 9 significant trees retained, 3 trees are in a tree grouping that qualifies them to be credited as two trees for the purposes of complying with the retention requirements (FWCC 22-1568(CX3)(A), resulting in significant tree retention credits of 12. Per FWCC 22-156801 KG), up to one-half of the total number of significant trees required can be satisfied with replacement trees (3- 112" caliper) in the required landscape areas. While there are 60 replacement trees proposed within the landscape areas of the parking lots, 25 of those count towards the retention credit calculations. To satisfy the 50 significant tree retention requirement; 13 additional replacement trees are proposed within the undeveloped areas of the site. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 10 iv After the Lot Line Elimination and Boundary Line Adjustment are completed, the four existing lots will be reduced to three. Each property must comply with the significant tree code requirements When the calculation of significant trees is completed, the three properties should not be aggregated, each must stand on its own to meet code requirements pertaining to signifcant trees City staff has advised this project to disregard this comment 11. Forest Practices - A Forest Practices Class IV -General Application is required if more than 5, 000 board feet of merchantable timber will be harvested from the property in conjunction with the development activity. The city will review the proposed Class IV -General Forest Practices in conjunction with SEPA review, and review of associated development permits or approvals A preliminary Forest Practices Class IV -General Application will be provided to the City of Federal Way soon. 12. Geotechn/cal Report- In Appendix A of the November 13,, 2017, report prepared by GeoEng/neers, amounts of proposed cut and fi/l for the project are indicated. The amounts listed differ from those provided on the submitted clearing and grading plan set Sheet GR-01 and SEPA Checklist Item #I.e. Clarify what is proposed and update materials accordingly. The proposed cut and fill for the project as represented on the revised site plan has been included in the Revised Geotechncca/ Report prepared by GeoEngineers, September 2018. The revised plan depicts a 13,250 CY net cut 13. TIR- The geotechnical report indicates the project area is Vashon till (Qvt). The 'Project Overview' section of the TIR refers to the geotechnical report and TIR Figure 1.4 for further information. Figure 1.4 sourced from the NRCS says it is Alderwood gravelly sandy loam AgB). Please clarify. Alderwood soils form from glacial till, as indicated in the 1973 NRCS. The geotechnical report also addresses this mapping indication and presents a more accurate representation due to explorations performed at the site, which encountered Vashon-age glacial till. To avoid confusion, Figure 1 A has been removed from the 11R. 14, Use Process N Decisional Criteria - Provide a narrative demonstrating how the proposal satisfies FWRC 19.65.100.2. You are encouraged to provide the same for the CZA. Please reference the included Process ///Decis/ona/Criteria Memorandum prepared by ESM Consulting Engineers that addresses this comment Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 11 15. Burden of Proof- In this letter, staff members have identified items that require the provision of additional information for review. During the Notice of Application comment period, the city received one public comment letter, which was provided to you on January 30, 2018 Review and address the comments to support your project Per FWRC 19.65.080.- 19.65.080, "Burden of Proof 'The applicant has the responsibility of convincing the director that; under the provisions of this chapter, the applicant is entitled to the requested decision. " This project only received one public comment letter during the comment period. Below is that comment italicized, and our responses in bold: "I -They state there will be 800-900 employees, 700 parking stalls, and no plans for expansion. There appears to be a discrepancy on the number of parking stalls and employees. If that is correct and it stands for permitting, they should be willing to add a parking deck to their proposed parking lot to provide additional parking; if needed; so that is a potential expansion that should be identified. " The site plan has been updated to reflect an initial, smaller building than previous proposed, with a future (time to be determined) expansion of the full 200,000 SF allowed building size. This project proposes to install the required amount of parldng stalls, including ADA accessible and Electrical Vehicle (EV) charging stations, appropriate for the OP/Office Park zone. FWCC Section 22-826 states that 1 parldng space is required for every 300 square feet of gross floor area The proposed building is 161,280 SF - therefore, 538 spaces are required. Should the future expansion to 200,000 square feet occur, 667 parldng spaces will be required and provided in the proposed extension area of the parking lot This project proposes to install 681 parking spaces for the initial phase, meeting and exceeding the currently proposed parldng requirements. `2 They state the storm water runoff will discharge into the regional stormwater pond. lam not familiar with the existing requirements of the pond. There should be a requirement for regular water quality monitoring (sampling and testing) either from their discharge into the pond or from the pond prior to discharge downgradient toward the Hylebos " Stormwater runoff from the site will be treated for enhanced water quality in filter vaults, prior to being discharged to the existing stormwater system that continues to the existing regional detention and water quality pond. The existing pond provides additional basic water quality treatment for both existing and proposed pollution generating areas. No additional water quality monitoring is required by City, County, or State codes. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 12 SEPA CHECKLIST 16. Approvals/Permits - An NPDES Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit and Forest Practices Class IV -General Application may be required for the project (checklist item #10) An NPDES Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit and Forest Practices application will be required for the project - this has been noted in the revised SEPA Checldlst 17. Plants- The checklist describes buffer enhancement with native trees and shrubs to be done as appropriate. Clarify what this refers to (checklist items #4.b and #5.d) The SEPA checklist has been updated to be more specific about the proposed landscaping. A 25' landscaping section along the perimeter of the properties fronting a street are included in the plans, using plants approved by the City of Federal Way. 18. Height- The checklist notes that proposed building height will not exceed 425 feet above grade. The submitted elevation drawings show 48.5 feet at the top ofparape4 please clarify (checklist items #6.b and # 10.a) Also see comment #3(a), above. The building height from finish grade at entry to top of parapet is 52.00 ft The ABE is 57.50 ft The revised SEPA Checldistnow reflects the correct information. 19. Transportation - Review the Public Works review comments below and revise the SEPA checklist and site plan as necessary to ensure accurate information is included. The SEPA checklist and site plan have been updated to reflect the accurate information that addresses comments from Public Works. Public Works Development Services Division Comments ENGINEERING PLANS 20. The project needs to be served with solid waste and recycling facilities, per FWRC 19.125.150. The plans need to depict how this will be accomplished. Solid waste and recycling facilities are located on the first floor within the building footprint and accessible to outside collection via overhead rolling door. Refer to updated south building elevation. Solid waste and recycling room is sized in accordance with 19.125.150 Table A utilizing 2 cubic yard containers, manually pulled for service and emptying. 21. Show property and right-of-way lines on the Section views on sheet GR-01. Property and ROW lines have been added to sheets GR-01 and GR-02. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 13 22. Identify and provide a dimension for the width of property to be dedicated for right-of-way. The 9' of right-of-way dedication along the perimeter of the properties fronting the streets has been dimensioned on the plan set 23. Final engineering plans (for the building permit) will need to be on 24" x36" (or 22' x34') paper, and the scale shall be > "20' Noted. TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT 24. There are references to King County mapping and other materials. These references need to be revised to indicate city mapping and reference material, for those materials that the city has available - Reference to the City of Federal Way Critical Areas Map has been added to Task 2 in Section 3 of the nR. 25. The downstream drainage analysis needs to be described, and include an "Offs#e Analysis Drainage System Table, "perReference 8-B of the 2016 King CountySurface Water Design Manual (KCSWDb V An "Off -site Analysis Drainage System Table" has been included with the T1R and reflects the information presented in the original projects Ofiske Analysis Drainage System Table for that development 26. Enhanced Basic Water Quality Treatment is required for this project The engineer states (under the Conditions and Requirements Summary) that water quality treatment for this project will be provided in the existing °regional" pond. It is also stated (under Section 4. Flow Control & Water Quality FacilifyAnalysis and Design), that the water quality standard can be reduced to Basic, if certain criteria are met. While the existing pond likely does meet the Basic Water Quality Treatment criteria, it is unlikely that the first criteria to reduce treatment to the Basic menu can be met, as it is very likely that one or more of the treatment options for Enhanced Basic can be provided on the project site. Additionally, the city will accept Enhanced Basic treatment facilities not identified in the KCSWDM, as long as those facilities have achieved G.U.LD. status under the Washington State Department of Ecologyguidelines Enhanced Basic Water Quality Treatment is now provided for the pollution generating surfaces within the project site, as shown on the plans and described in the TIR. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 14 27. The project is subject to the Conservation Flow Control standard. Since the existing detention pond was sized based on an older design standard and different analysis requirements, the existing stormwaterpond may ormaynot have adequate capacity and/or outflow release rates for this project There is no direct correlation between the old and new pond sizing criteria; however, based on our consultations with King County SWDM engineers, the following has been determined to be the appropriate approach in determining the flow control requirement for this project. a. Analyze the DaVita project utilizing the Level 1 Flow Control standard, and determine the required pond volume under that standard,• The required volume for compliance with the Level 1 Flow Control standard has been analyzed and is 3.62 acre-feet b. Analyze the Da�ita project utilizing the Level 3 Flow Control standard, and determine the required pond volume under that standard; The required volume for compliance with the Level 3 Flow Control standard has been analyzed and is 3.90 acre-feet C. The difference in volumes between the Level 1 and Level 3 Flow Control Standards is the volume that the Da Vita project needs to provide, either on - site, OR, the existing pond can be modified to provide the required volume. The difference in volumes is 3.90 - 3.62 - 0.28 acre-feet (12,197 cubic feet), which is provided in the existing regional detention pond surplus volume for the existing development Refer to the 11R for supporting calculations and hydrology model output 28. Some form of Flow Control BMP is required, if any type of BMP is proposed that requires infiltration, then infiltration testing shall be performed in the appropriate location(s) The project is proposing to use bio-retention (as verified to be feasible during final design) and perforated pipe connections. If the impervious area credited as mitigated is less than the threshold specified in Flow Control BMPs above, then a fee in lieu may be paid. Public Works Traffic Division Comments 29. The Public Works Traffic Division has finished its review of the submitted materials The following technical review items must be addressed prior to Public Works approval. Please note, these comments did not include comments from WSDOT. Traffic related comments/concerns by WSDOT must be addressed and approved by WSDOT. Noted. WSDOT comments will be addressed after we receive them. TENw, the traffic engineer on this project, will also address WSDOT comments as necessary. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 15 PLANS COMMENTS 30. The civil plans must depict the correct frontage improvement and right-of-way dedication along 32nd Avenue South and South 323rd Street This project is pending a road standards modification request, which includes waiving installation of frontage improvements. 31. The splitter island on the north leg of the roundabout should be modified to accommodate a pedestrian crossing. A pedestrian crosswalk has been added to the splitter island on the north leg of the roundabout 32. Show conceptual street fighting along the property frontage on 323rd A venue South, 32nd Avenue South, and Weyerhaeuser Way South on the plans Detailed design is not required at this time. Please note, the existing street lights will need to be upgraded to LED and shall meet current street light standards Adequate street lighting exists on the subject property's frontage. Maintaining the lights and upgrading them to LED is the responsibility of the City of Federal Wads Public Works department as they are located within the public right-of-way. 33. Provide rights -of -way dimensions on the plan. The 9' of right-of-way dedication along the perimeter of the properties fronting the streets has been dimensioned on the plan set 34. The north -south 20-foot pedestrian path between South 323rd Street and the future road South 324th Street extension should be relocated to the west side of the property and should be extended the entire length of the property. As discussed in the response for comment 5a, the site plan depicts a 20' access easement for public pedestrian access. The non -motorized trail easement was requested from the city to provide pedestrian connection from S 323,11 Street to the future S 324t' Street Since S 32411, is a future roadway whose alignment unknown, there is no connection point or public destination available for this trail. Additionally, the easement location is proposed on the east side of the property to maintain connectivity of the proposed DaVita building to the existing DaVita building without public recreation crossing the campus. The proposed location will avoid conflicts with vehicles and pedestrians traveling between buildings. 35. Accessible pedestrian path/connection should be provided within the internal parking lot and from the parking lot to the crossing at the roundabout Pedestrian connectivity across, and crossing to, the proposed parking and buildings sites have been incorporated into the revised preliminary engineering plans. ADA approved ramps are provided along each newly -proposed pedestrian crossing. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 16 7Z4 REVIEW COMMENTS 36. The city concurs with using the Transportation Engineer(ITE) Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition LUC 715 (Single Tennant Office Building) to estimate the trip generation for the development Noted. 37. The proposal to apply a four percent annual traffic growth rate to the existing counts to estimate horizon year volume is acceptable. Please note, typically the city uses a two percent annual growth rate. Noted. 38. The TIA should also address safe pedestrian access from the parking lot to the building. In addition to modifying the splitter island for accommodate pedestrian, RRFBs should be incorporated to increase pedestrian safety. An RRFB will be added to the east leg of the intersection and splitter island to accommodate pedestrians between the building and parking lot on north side of street A crosswalk crossing the northern splitter island is now included in the proposal. 39. Update the TIA to include AM peak hour study intersections impacted by 100 or more AM peak hour project trips These intersections were confirmed via email on October 23, 2017 The revised Traffic Impact Analysis will address weekday AM peak hour LOS analysis. 40. On page 21, of the 2019 Without Project AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume, the 2019 trips for AM and PM peak hours are not correctly depicted. The figure will be updated to reflect the correct number of AM and PM peak hour trips. 41. The city has reviewed and concurs that all proposed site access locations are anticipated to meet the adopted LOS standards Please include AM peak hour study intersections LOS. Noted. 42. Forward the updated TIA to WSDOT for technical review comments The revised Traffic ImpactAnafysis will be forwarded to WSDOT for review. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 17 SEPA CHECKLIST- TR4NSPORTA77ON 43. Transportation 14(c) - Revise this section to including the following improvements: a. Install planter strips, sidewalks, street lights, and right-of-way dedication on 32nd Avenue South and South 323rd Street b. Modify the roundabout to accommodate pedestrian crossing and adequate sight distance. c. Provide a 20-foot pedestrian connection between South 323rd Street and the future South 3241h Street extension. Appropriate revisions regarding proposed improvements have been made on the revised SEPA Checklist 44. Transportation 14(g) - A transportation impact fee has not been paid by this development However, traffic impacts (off -site) associated with this project were considered and appropriately mitigated under the Threshold Determination for the East Campus Parcel 1 Binding Site Plan (BSP) Revise this section accordingly. Revisions have been made to the SEPA checld st LAREHAVEN/ U77LI77FS REVEW 45. The applicant has completed and submitted to Lakehaven an application for Certificates of Availability, and Lakehaven issued these certificates on November 9, 2017 Noted. 46. The applicant will need to submit an application for either a Developer Pre - Design Meeting or Developer Extension Agreement for Lakehaven to formally commence the water and/or sewer plan review process. Lakehaven encourages owners/developers applicants to apply for Lakehaven processes separately to Lakehaven, and sufficiently early in the pre-designlplanning phase to avoid delays in overall project development. A Developer Extension Agreement application will be submitted to Lakehaven when further approval of this project is completed. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 18 SOUTH KING R9EAND RESCUE REVIEW 4T The required fire flow forthis project is 4000 gallons perminute. A Certificate of Water Availability, including a hydraulic fire flow model, shall be requested from the water district and provided at the time of building permit application. A previous Hydraulic -Model -Calculated Fire Flow Estimate was provided by Lakehaven Utilities, administered in 2006. The results showed 5,200 gpm at 22 PSI and 5,500 gpm at 20 PSI. An updated model will be provided at the time of building permit application. 48. This project will require four fire hydrant(s) in approved* locations There are two existing fire hydrants on public streets that are available for this project There will be at least two additional fire hydrants required within the complex. *Hydrant spacing along access roads and location in relationship to buildings and sprinkler FDC shall be approved by Fire Marshals Office. Three fire hydrants have been added to the proposed site in total: 2 of which surround the proposed building and 1 is adjacent to the proposed fire lane and access point from the entry to the existing access road of the adjacent property. 49. Existing fire hydrants on adjacent properties shall not be considered unless fire apparatus access roads extending between properties and easements are established to prevent obstructions of such roads One of the fire access roads extend toward the adjacent property and the project will remove the obstruction of the fire lane proposed. 50. Fire hydrants shall be in service prior to and during the time of construction. Noted. 51, Fire apparatus access roads shall comply with all requirements of Fire Access Policy 10006 There are two primary fire apparatus access routes proposed with this project The lanes are depicted on the site plan - the main fire access is from the eastern entry into the southern property, circling either to the front of the building to the existing entry of the neighboring site, or to the rear that extends into the existing neighboring site. Each fire lane is 26' wide, with the lane on the north of the building greater than 15' from the structure but less than 30' to accommodate aerial fire apparatus and equipment Comer along the fire lanes are measured with a 32' intemal radius and 40' outer radius. 52. The angles of approach, departure, and minimum ground clearance were not defined on this proposal. A "Fire Truck Movement Study" exhibit has been added to sheet GR-02 to demonstrate the angles of approach, departure and minimum ground clearance. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 19 53. Designated and marked fire lanes may be required for emergency access This may be done during the plans check or prior to building final. Requirements and marking options can be found in Title 8 of the FWRC :Ilwvvin!code ublishin .comIWAlFederalWa I The project currently proposes to implement provision (3) of FWRC 8.55.050 to mark fire lanes on site. 54. Fire apparatus access roads shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. Noted. This feature will be implemented during building review and/or construction. 55. All vehicle access gates shall comply with the gate policy. No gates are proposed with this project 56. A recessed fire department "Knox" brand key box shall be installed on the building near the front entrance. Location(s) will be approved by the plan reviewer or Deputy Fire Marshal onsite. Noted. This feature will be implemented during building review and/or construction. 57. An NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system is required. An automatic fire sprinklersystem shall be installed in all occupancies where the total floor area included within the surrounding exterior walls on all floor levels, including basements, exceeds 5,000 square feet Fire walls shall not be considered to separate a building to enable deletion of the required automatic fire -extinguishing system. Noted. This feature will be implemented during building review and/or construction. 58. The system demand pressure (to the source) required in a hydraulically designed automatic fire splinkler system shall be at least 10 percent less than the correlative water supply curve pressure. Noted. This feature will be implemented during building review and/or construction. 59. A fire alarm system is required. City code requires an automatic fire detection system in all buildings exceeding 3, 000 square feet gross floor area. The fire alarm system is required to monitor the sprinkler system including water flow Provide full notification as required by NFPA 72. Complete coverage smoke detection is not required for this project This fire detection system shall be monitored by an approved central and/or remote station. Noted. This feature will be implemented during building review and/or construction. Ms. Stacey Welsh September 11, 2018 Page 20 60. All buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public safety communication system at the exterior of the building. Exception: if the building is less than 35 feet in height as defined in the building code, Noted. This feature will be implemented during building review and/or construction. Sincerely, ESM CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LLC - � 0 12-x- LAURA BARTENHAGEN, P.E., LEED® AP Principal Enc: As Noted CC: Arthur Richey, DaVita Mark Kinney, DaVita Ilesm8lengrlesm-jobs11884100110151documentlletter-009.docx 1 MCCULLOUGH HILL LEAKY, PS RECEIVED- SEP 1 1 2018 September 10, 2018 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Marwan Salloum, P.E. Public Works Director City of Federal Way 33325 8th Ave. S. Federal Way, WA 98003 Re: Request for Impact Fee Credit Dear Mr. Salloum: We represent Federal Way Campus LLC ("Applicant"), the developer of the project known as the Greenline Business Park ("Project") and owner of the property on which the Project is located ("Property" - Pursuant to Federal Way Municipal Code ("City Code" or "FWMC' } 19.91.090, the Applicant seeks an Impact Fee Credit. The credit sought is for the dedication of ]and for the future extension of S. 324`' Street. This project is identified in the rate study as the basis for calculating the impact fee. The legal description of the land to be dedicated is attached as Exhibit A. The Applicant will not provide improvements in connection with the extension of S. 324 h Street so no credit is sought for improvements. The Applicant requests that this credit be applied to impact fees due in connection with development of the Greenline Business Park project ((File Nos. 17-105489- 00-UP & 17-105490-00-SE). This claim is timely because no impact fee has yet been paid and no building permit or change in use permit has yet been issued for this project. Sincerely, o C. McCullough cc: Mark Orthmann Client 701 Fifth Avenue • Suite 6600 • Seattle, Washington 98104 •206.812.3388 • Fax 206.812.3389 • www.mhseatde.com Greenline Business Park Job No.1886-001-016 July 5, 2018 C 0 N S U L T I N 0 E N G I N F E R S LLC_� ®10l (ar EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION The north 106 feet of Lot 2 of City of Federal Way Boundary Line Adjustment No. 17- 100455-SU as recorded under Recording No. 20171108900002, situate in the northeast quarter of Section 16, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, W.M., City of Federal Way, King County, Washington. Containing 222,640 square feet, (5.111 acres), more or less. Written By: CAF 11esm819ngftsm-jobs11886100110161documentild-008,doc fele-oT-aV 33400 8th Ave. S. Ste 205 Tel (253) 836 6113 Everett (425) 297 9900 L and PI og Federal Way. WA 98003 Fax (253) B38 7104 Toll Free (800) 345 5694 znd Surveyi— L andccape Prch,I—All B www.esmelvll.com ID Laser Scc,�—,q GIs 2111 Pacific, Suite 100 Tacoma. Washington 98402 Revised: August 31, 2018 Original: November 22, 2017 Mr. Eric LaBrie, AICP President ESM Consulting Engineers 33400 8th Ave South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 McGRANAHAN architects RESUBMITTED SEP 12 2018 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Re: DaVita Healthcare, Corporate Business Office, Revised Statement of Architectural Design Intent City of Federal Way File No.: 17-103654-00-PC; 17-105642-00-UP Dear Eric, The following Statement of Architectural Design Intent has been developed for the proposed corporate office building for DaVita Healthcare, and is intended to be a component of your Use Process III submittal for this project. In addition, responses are included to the Planning Division review comments, item 10.b - Design Guidelines, found in the City of Federal Way's Preapplication Summary Letter dated 09/18/17. This revised letter contains further information in response to the City of Federal Way's Technical Review Comments, dated April 10, 2018, and an update site plan for the project proposal. Additional site design related responses have been incorporated into ESM's response letter to the City's comments. STATEMENT OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN INTENT The proposed building is approximately 161,280 gross square feet (GSF) It will house, as its sole tenant, a corporate business office and ancillary uses such as conferencing space. The primary building entry is proposed at elevation 455FT, with three floors of approximately equal size stacked above grade. The building will have the ability to expand in the future to approximately 200,000 GSF. The future expansion will adjoin the east side of the building, and will consist of three stories of approximately 13,300GSF each, housing additional workstations and support spaces for the primary tenant. Intended to address future employee growth, there is currently no timeline for implementing the project expansion. The building will be sited with its primary entrance facing 32nd Avenue South, with a strong visual and pedestrian connection to the existing office building located to the west of the site. Building elevations will be modulated via a series of vertical "panels" of varying width, depth and finish, recalling an array of tree trunks and the original forested condition of the site and its environs. Metal panel screening, consistent with the building elevations, will be incorporated to adequately screen roof top equipment 1706.000 253 1 T 383 3084 253 F 383 3097 il 3 n Un www.mcgranah Mr. Eric LaBrie August 31, 2018 Page 2 from view of the adjoining property to the west and S323rd Street to the north. Along the primary north and south elevations, two three-story recesses signify exit stair and lounge/conference spaces. Where possible, mature evergreen trees along the perimeter of the property will be retained. A two-story tall carve -out of the building mass, with the third floor remaining to create a sheltering element, faces the primary entry drive and roundabout on S323rd Street signifying the main entry and provides a pedestrian plaza immediately adjacent to the primary building access. The plaza will consist of hardscape and landscape elements supporting pedestrian activities, and providing visual connections to both the adjacent parking lot to the north and the existing building to the west. Exterior finishes and colors will be compatible with the neighboring office building development west of 32"d Avenue S, and may include natural tones of brick, neutral metal panel cladding and warm tones of wood or wood composite panels along with aluminum framed punched windows and storefront glazing systems. Typical glazing will be tinted to maximize solar performance, with clear glazing used at primary and secondary entry points. Pedestrian access will be emphasized leading to the building, with accessible pathways separated from parking circulation and a pedestrian plaza at main entry. Landscaping elements will also focus on pedestrian interaction and views to natural plantings and/or courtyards. PLANNING DIVISION ITEM 10.6 (FILE 17-103654-00-PC) - DESIGN GUIDELINES Design Guidelines — it is recommended that the project incorporate these adopted design guidelines to the extent possible, with particular attention to the following elements: a. Pedestrian connections should be provided between properties to establish pedestrian links to adjacent buildings, parking, pedestrian areas, and public rights -of -way. A new crosswalk between the two project sites is proposed, crossing through the splitter island east of n the roundabout. An additional crosswalk is proposed crossing the splitter island north of the roundabout between an existing development and the proposed northern parking lot. Both crosswalks will be modified for ADA access compliance. Existing sidewalks along S 323rd Street will remain, and additional pedestrian walkways will link the new southern crosswalk to the building's entry plaza. Pedestrian links with the existing DaVita office building to the west will be reinforced by re -working existing planter islands to provide clear and direct connections between primary building entries and outdoor seating areas at the southern edge of each building. Proposed improvements offsite of the Mr. Eric LaBrie August 31, 2018 Page 3 incorporated parcels for this project, not including the public right-of-way, will be reviewed with the City of Federal Way in a separate land use process. b. A pedestrian plaza should be provided for the building adjacent to major entrances, and with connectivity to adjacent pedestrian areas and routes of travel. Pedestrian plazas and pedestrian crosswalks over drive aisles should be stamped concrete, as opposed to paving or striping, to clearly delineate such areas, for safety purposes as well as project aesthetics. The carve -out at the northwest corner of the building mass facing the primary entry drive and roundabout on S 323rd Street provides a pedestrian plaza immediately adjacent to the main entry. The plaza will consist of hardscape and landscape elements supporting pedestrian activities, and providing visual connections to both the adjacent parking lot to the north and the existing building to the west. Pedestrian pathways will converge at the plaza, and a surface change (stamped concrete or other paving material) at the entry drive will signal pedestrian crossings. The third floor overhang above the plaza provides sheltering cover for staff and visitors entering the building. c. The site should incorporate pedestrian -scale lighting; amenities such as bike racks and trash receptacles at appropriate locations. Pedestrian -scale lighting and other site amenities will be provided along all pedestrian routes. d. Overall building design should utilize a variety of colors, materials, textures, and methods of modulation and articulation. Building entrances should generally be oriented towards rights -of -way. Public entrances should be clearly recognizable from streets and internal circulation areas, and should utilize features such as varied roof lines and pitches, canopies, awnings, storefront windows, etc. The DaVita Corporate Business Office building will utilize a palette of materials similar in color, texture, 3 and form to the existing office building that they also occupy to the west of the proposed project. A campus -like feel will be developed between the two buildings through the incorporation of a similar a material vocabulary. This may include warm brick tones, exposed and painted concrete, warm wood -like panels or metal panels and aluminum framed glazing systems. The primary facades (north and south elevations) are articulated through a series of vertical "panels" of varying width and finish and varying width punched window openings, recalling an array of tree trunks and the original forested condition of the site and its environs. In addition to carve outs at the main Mr. Eric LaBrie August 31, 2018 Page 4 entry and a one-story recess at an outdoor patio on the south, framed recesses occur at stair/lounge locations on north and south elevations. The primary entry is created by a two-story carve out of the main envelope at the west end of the building, with an open pedestrian plaza sheltered by the third floor above. Acknowledging both the visitor approaching campus south -bound on 32"d Avenue South and the pedestrian traffic between buildings, the plaza enlivens the entry sequence and shifts the building scale. At the south west corner, a recess with added glazing and overhead canopy is provided, creating a south -facing outdoor courtyard for the building occupants. e. Ground -level glass adjacent to a street or pedestrian area should be of -non -glare, non -reflective glazing. Clear glass will be used at entries, all ground -level glass will be non -reflective, high performance glazing. f. Buildings built over parking should not appear to 'float" over the parking area, but should be linked with ground level uses or screening. Parking at grade under a building is discouraged unless the parking area is completely enclosed within the building, or wholly screened with walls and/or landscaped berms. No parking is proposed under the building. g. Parking structures and vehicle entrances should be designed to minimize views into the garage interior from surrounding streets. Methods to help minimize such views may include, but are not limited to, landscaping, planters, and decorative grilles and screens. No parking is proposed under the building. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments concerning this narrative. ro Sincerely, McGranahan Architects J � I f Todd Olson AIA, Senior Project Manager .0 _0.-r_S_ U. L J_ I K G F N 1; 1 N F E K S L L C -7 33400 8th Avenue South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98W3 Qr RESUBMITTED MEMORANDUM EP 12 2018 - -- - Y — COMWnTy DEVELOPMENT TO: DOC HANSEN, PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF FEDERAL WAY FROM: ERIC LABRIE, ESM CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LLC SUBJECT: DAVITA HEALTHCARE, CORPORATE BUSINESS OFFICE — #17-105642-UP FWRC 19.6S.100.0 AND CZA— USE PROCESS III DECISIONAL CRITERIA JOB NO: 1884-001-015 DATE: SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 In addition to the Statement of Architectural Design Intent provided by McGranahan Architects that addresses the City's community design guidelines, below is a narrative that demonstrates how the proposed project satisfies FWRC 19.65.100.2 and standards set by the Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre -Annexation Zoning Agreements (CZA). In an effort to provide concise and direct responses, we have copied the criteria below in italics and our responses are in bold. FWRC 19.65.1000 Decisional criteria. The director shall use the criteria listed in this subsection and the provisions of this title describing the requested decision in deciding upon the application. (a) The director may approve the application only if: (iJ It is consistent with the comprehensive plan; LUG1 Create an attractive welcomin and unctional built environment. This proposal meets design standards and zoning regulations set forth in the 1994 FWCC. With the implementation of safe pedestrian connectivity, guest plaza and landscape screening, this proposal is consistent with this goal. LUGS Create office and corporate park development that is known regionally, nationally, and internationally for its design and function. Per the Statement of Architectural Design Intent provided by McGranahan Architects, "the building will be sited with its primary entrance facing 32nd Avenue South, with a strong visual and pedestrian connection to the existing office building located to the west of the site. The primary facades (north and south elevations) are articulated through a series of vertical "panels" of varying width and finish and varying width punched window openings, recalling an array of tree trunks and the original forested condition of the site and its environs. In addition to carve outs at the main entry and a one-story recess at an outdoor patio on the south, framed recesses occur at stair/lounge locations on north and south Civil Engineering - Land Surveying - Project Management - Public Works - Land Planning - Landscape Architecture Phone 253.838.6113 800.345-5694 Fax 253.838.7104 elevations." The design of this project is consistent with other development surrounding this property and within the East Campus Corporate Park. (ii) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of this title; Various items mentioned in the applicant's response letter and revised site plans shovel conformance to the modified sections of Federal Way Code as permitted through the CZA. fli),-- t is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare, ill proposed DaVita Healthcare Office Park development is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare as acknowledged in the CZA. Please also refer to the included Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Checklist that addresses specific attributes of public healthy, safety and welfare. Furthermore, all access points and driving paths in the building and parking sites comply with the fire district's codes, in addition to the required infrastructure, such as sprinklers, hydrants and alarms, required by the district for public safety. (iv) The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the anticipated demand from the proposal, This proposal has received Certificates of both Water and Sewer Availability from Lakehaven Utility District — necessary utilities are provided adjacent to the site and will be improved for the project. This project is also dedicating 9' of right-of-way along all frontages of the properties to satisfy the ROW width along S 323'd St and 32"d Ave. All improvements along these two roadways are consistent with the surrounding sites, including sufficient street widths, bike lanes, turning lanes and safe pedestrian access. The improvements installed with the existing office park were done so in anticipation of an additional building of this size to be incorporated. Traffic mitigation fees, included those anticipated for the full development of the office park, were paid in full at the time the office park was originally constructed. (v) The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration, and Four access points are proposed in total for this project. 1) The southern, proposed building site provides access off the existing access road that stems from a roundabout to the adjacent, existing DaVita office building. 2) The other southern lot access point is directly from S 323`d Street. 3) Straight across from that access point is access into the northern property, the parking lot. 4) The parking lot's connectivity leads to and from a proposed access point from 32"d Ave S. The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration that supports pedestrian safety, connectivity and traffic distribution. Comment 41 from the Technical Review Comments provided by the City of Federal Way staff, dated April 10, 2018, states "The City has reviewed and concurs that all proposed site access locations are anticipated to meet the adopted LOS standards." 2 (vi) Traffic safety impacts for all modes of transportation, both on and off site, are adequately mitigated. Traffic impacts (off -site) associated with this project were appropriately mitigated under the Threshold Determination for the East Campus Parcel 1 Binding Site Plan (BSP). Additionally, safe pedestrian access is incorporated into the proposed project plan by providing two crosswalks at the roundabout and a designated pedestrian path through the parking lots. (b) if the application is subject to the requirements of Chapter 19.115 FWRC, Community Design Guidelines, the director shall also use the following criteria in deciding upon an application: This proposal is not subject to the requirements of the Community Design Guidelines. However, design principals have been addressed and applied to the project. Please refer to the Statement of Architectural Design Intent provided by McGranahan Architects. Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre -Annexation Zoning Agreements CZA -1994 Exhibit D -- Office Park Zone OP-1 does not provide a design criterion specific to this property and proposed development. However, Section 1: Purpose and Objectives outlines the intent for development within the OP-1 zone. This Office Park Zone (OP-1) is established to facilities the development of office parks that would develop compatibly with the adjacent Corporate Park Zone, consistent with the following objectives: A. To encourage development for a wide variety of business uses that are compatible with adjacent uses and the uses allowed in the Corporate Park Zone. The neighboring office building to the west is directly associated with this proposal to develop a complete DaVita Healthcare office park/campus. This office park use proposal is compatible with the uses proposed within the Corporate Park Zone, and the other existing businesses in East Campus, offering a variety of employment and economic development opportunities within the City of Federal Way. B. To allow a core of retail uses within the Business Park in a manner that takes advantage of the zone's proximity to the freeway system. The proposed Office Park is situated with easy access to Weyerhaeuser Way S and S 320t' St, providing connectivity to both 1-5 and Highway 18 without interfering with other uses within the City. Retail opportunities are provided within the East Campus Corporate Park, OP-1 zone adjacent to this property, while this property is located the furthest distance from the freeway system and lacks desirability for retail uses. It is consistent with neighboring office uses. C. To ensure that development by the present and future owners is governed in appropriate development standards to protect the public's general health and welfare. The Use Process III review process for this proposed project incorporates the most current, appropriate development standards that the City deems necessary for this jurisdiction, in addition to applying the zoning code standards from FWCC in 1994. 3 King County Map Davita Healthcare Reference map Site Photos L AW . ?Tr-. -'"�'� , - h�.-Y3 ,. :. :; wad,,:•.... is -: .�..�.• ► r��,.,•�^ +•r +' k f.**, fy:wwlFi"�•' +��.. ''i� ::� �. 'y.vrf�i�_ 1� _ }3$^32D57a . ` •t .3120 !.a �.:-ih „ 2{i2 w T I' r, �' at2432 ,�Z �d9 r: * ' r►� ":�' `, Z{i{ JIV7 ��'►'� 3'�105N. North �3 zvzr�3 a + -i ;` �; s•'ioJ TV MIN T2 Q-1176 y.� vl.;fir ,-.1 Ir �4Y .1rri 'eF.vr.r.... t• �'� {A r 7 ' :y' .r ' r „� it 3 i► 3 0 `8:118 '3' �a• 3 '; 4 1' t.. r tip: �, ., �►, , 322�i0 - :�. »f.� Ad:_�a_ �'�lr�+` -�X: � ��a= _;' .i /L ,�/j� 5 �' ♦'� t.r�;' 'r``•� wf" . , � _ .i�r T�j r'►' ti: ,•�. • ' •'R,� !_'i .. �1 !' ` i �.' 4i: `J ��. .�yf r. •.�� Y_ -� .iR _ b ` .. :4 t� ,�. � T,7Y711.�•�{ . ..� �2125+ � 3'2r2� 1+ ` �� : wF x, =i' ```?r s � ....._ ... _ � f��.:� � . r �737 ,� � '� �{� � �:82 9�`�'• '�3'�; �3 �2Up +' �. 1. 382'1 N. West _ y r ra ,Y.. n A.i� iid i� f. T•Ak ^ LL� ��i,�1 + � •:� � •�a'+�•'x ,� ., � �; :iQQ, N. East x�"'.; :_'.�-`.; . :��►.� +�•; •T '221�_ ,,� a��x�c�= r ' �. Tr -�.•.r ...i--�•�-- wry..•-.�...-��•�..,«' �:Y i''� y ..},� ..•iC.' •.+�•'�^ r • r�.. •i f �j� R�.�D' Y Sy'.s V1. �: . * Y F } • r r 1� 322'25 32r2Vit. �r}._A •s''-• . . e= ma,(�S. North 1 & 2 .�� :;.f5�• ��3 :: 7 ' f�3'2'3 a `3-22t ilk i .tip •. � - R. i • r _� y ��, .. �� 22+��' � � �• y .-•mot � •. Iry 2275 t ^4 1F c� z '� ' ' `.32� ,~ r= N. South �• ';."" _s r 32263 ; R - S. East .. �$,,� S. West 1 �'t r r3 •; 3 S 04 4 •� .a�. �[ .� - S. South i . ,�"'� VW •._ T•_ - AEI The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County Date: 8/22/2017 King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is SEP 12$ not intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, CIS CE,,,E , but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County. Notes: _ CfiY OF FEDERAL WAY pwll�f _777�77 DAVITA HEALTHCARE N. EAST �ST DAVITA HEALTHCARE N. SOUTH r -qm- --AltA 1 �+ 6� �•~�" � � pit � ->�A�2 r Ave 20 ol �„ F' '� � r� .'fir• �• : r"= +l rl.u. i . r' Yea g .. r -t55 '�Y .• .S . 7 �• �.r f w N I�iG''y .� ,_ - - ems.-��:�•,r �"'�-`,/� - - - y l ^ r • _ * r rat .�.." ' __ft� ,,gy,,�pp ��: � ... � +'• • �> �� e�y� '��,•�• ter'• , �:` ;z �k' ;�_ ••_ •� 'R •` 1 f irr �'r, � �wt.ra. �e� � ,'�i� ,.. - y�yJ '� :.° a+; �r��• a L.tkl , ae 4 Aw f A� 14 Al Al - dk •f /{ .� f t � •' r :�'� ►rs �' 1. � u:' � ly � I . Gaggle •,'.,,�'!' � r -� .:y,�- ,, i � '� ��,�••}��v-1 , �• - ,_ r ��z•'y.' _ _��.�"��+tip ` � s � 4*7 :�.ti .,�, ,fir : ,�,� i . •�,, , ; ' • -4 - - w 5 •. r� t. y ice:. {u��h •t-��;ri do "S; • Y �'•Y f "� air ",'� P t.• - i J •iY • • , s1 CITY OF Federal Way Centered on Opportunity September 10, 2018 Mr. Eric LaBrie ESM Consulting Engineers LLC 33400 8th Ave South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 eric.labrie_.esmciyil.corn Re: Files #17-105642-UP & #17-105643-SE; NOTICE OF PENDING EXPIRATION DaVita Healthcare Office Park, Federal Way Dear Mr. LaBrie: LM F . CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor Our records indicate that on April 10, 2018, a technical review letter was sent to you pertaining to Use Process Application #17-105642-UP and SEPA file #17-105643-SE for the DaVita project. On March 23, 2018, April 19, 2018, May 25, 2018, and July 17, 2018, you requested extensions for processing SEPA. The most recent request was for a 90-day extension, which ends on October 16, 2018. Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.15.050(1) states that if an applicant does not provide additional information to the city within 180 days of being notified by mail that such information is requested, the application shall be deemed null and void and the city shall have no duty to process, review, or issue any decisions with respect to such an application. This letter serves as a reminder that no resubmittal has been received in response to the above listed technical review letter (copy enclosed). The closing paragraph of the April 10, 2018, letter contains information regarding FWRC 19.15.050. With regard to the application, per FWRC 19.15.050.2, no less than 30 days prior to the lapse of the 180- day notification by the city, the applicant may submit a written request in the form of a letter with supporting evidence to the department requesting an extension of the time limits and document the following: (a) That circumstances beyond the applicant's control prevent compliance with the time limits; (b) That the applicant is making substantial progress in responding to the request for information so that review of the application can be furthered when that information is submitted; and (c) The number of additional calendar days necessary to provide the requested information. Per FWRC 19.15.050.3, the Community Development Director is authorized to review requests for extensions to the 180-day time limit and decide upon them based on responses to the above listed criteria. Requests for extensions can be submitted to the City of Federal Way Permit Center (permitcenter(_ cityoffederalway.coili, 253-835-2607, 33325 8"' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003) Mr. LaBrie September 10, 2018 Page 2 along with a Resubmittal Form. If you do not turn in a project resubmittal or request an extension for these applications, they will become null and void on October 7, 2018. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at stacey,welsh@cityoffederalway.com, or253-835-2634. Sincerely, Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner enc: Technical Review Letter, April 10, 2018 Resubmittal Information Form c: Brian Davis, Community Development Director, via email Robert "Doc" Hansen, Planning Manager, via email Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, via email Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue, via email Arthur Richey, Arthur.Richgy@davita.com davita.com Savanna Nagorski, 5avanna.Na9—,orskiQesmcivi [.corn 17-105642-00-UP Doc, I.D. 78245 C 0 N 5 U L T 1 N G E N G I N E E R S L L C August 24, 2018 Job No. 1884-001-015 RESUBMITTED Mr. EJ Walsh AUG 2 4 7010 Deputy Public Works Director City of Federal Way Cm' OF FEDERAL WAY 33325 81h Avenue S COMMUNE DEVELOPMENT Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: DaVita Healthcare Office Building - Pedestrian Trail Dedication City File No.: 17-105642-00-UP; 17-105644-00-SM Dear Mr. Walsh: In reviewing the City's request for dedication and installation of the public trail across the DaVita site, we have also found additional information that relates to the previously discussed sidewalk/bike trail along the eastern property line. Upon further review of applicable codes and agreements regarding the proposed DaVita site, more specifically the CZA, it is evident that the City of Federal Way has agreed "not to require any dedication or conveyance of the Property or any portion for public purposes.." Please refer to page 10, point 13 Open Space of the Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre -Annexation Zoning Agreement (CZA) for the complete agreement regarding Open Space for all properties represented on Exhibit A-2. The condition regarding vicinity to State shoreline within this agreement does not apply to this property. We understand this CZA agreement may assist in your decision to waive the requested dedication and improvements for a 20' pedestrian path between S 323td Street and the potential S 3241h Street. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact me at (253) 838-6113 and I would be happy to discuss them with you. Sincerely, ESM CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LLC, ERIC G. LaBRIE, AI.C.P. President Ilesm8lengrlesm-jobs11884100110151docu mentl letter-012.docx F.3400 8th Ave S Ste 205 Tat (253) 838 L113 Everett (425) 297 9900 Civil Engineering Land Planning rat Way WA 98003 Fax (253) 838 7104 Toll Free (800) 345 5694 Land Surveying Landscape Archileclure www.esmciviL com 3D Laser Scanning GIs ciYr of �.� Federal Way April10, 2018 Mr. Eric LaBrie ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC 33400 8," Avenue South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 eric.labrieC�7.esmcivil. c2_m Re: Files #17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE; TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMENTS DaVita Healthcare Office Park, Federal Way Dear Mr. LaBrie: CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Jim Ferrell, Mayor FILE City departments/divisions have the following comments in response to your November 22, 2017, and December 8, 2017, submittals. This proposal is subject to the provisions of the 1994 Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre -Annexation Development Agreement (CZA), and Office Park Zone (OP-1) zoning regulations in effect on August 23, 1994. Any procedural requirements must meet today's codes (Federal Way Revised Code [FWRq Title 19). Some comments provided herein are required and some are informative, while others may be applicable during future steps of the project. Comments in this letter need to be addressed prior to issuance of a SEPA threshold determination and land use application decision, or as otherwise noted. Questions regarding technical review comments should be addressed to the referenced staff representative. Stacey Welsh — Planning Division, (253) 835-2634, . t5 acev.nrelsh@cityoffedetalway.coxn 1. General— Technical comments made about an item on one sheet may necessitate changes to other related sheets and related documents. It is the applicant's responsibility to determine any such necessary adjustments. Please ensure consistent information is communicated throughout the plan set and associated application materials. Comprehensive Plan— The project is dependent on a proposed comprehensive plan amendment. USE PROCESS III 3. Plan Set— Please address the following comments: a. On Sheet ST-01 under the Project Statistics section, no "net site area" is provided. The Use Process III Submittal Requirements handout states: "Provide net site area, which is gross area minus critical areas, rights -of -way, private open space, and public purpose lands." b. On Sheet ST-01 show the building setbacks from property lines to demonstrate compliance with Federal Way City Code (FWCC) 22-826(1)(b), whereby a building can exceed 35 feet in height if each required yard abutting the structure is increased one -foot for each one -foot the structure exceeds 35 feet above average building elevation. c. On Sheet LA-01: Mx. Eric LaBrie Page 2of9 April 10, 2018 i. Demonstrate compliance with FWCC 22-826(3), which states the first 25 feet of the required front yard, starting from the street, must be landscaped and contain a three-foot high berm or three-foot high dense, sight obscuring vegetation. This vegetated area must run the entire length of the required front yard (except for driveway locations). ii. There is a note in Tract C which states, "maintain existing vegetation surrounding stormwater pond to maximum extent possible". Clarify this statement, as Tract C is not part of the submitted pro .ert,and no work should occur there. ~3 iii.. babel the size of the parking lot landscape islands. d: Reconcile Sheets LA-01 and TR-01; Sheet LA-01 should only show existing trees that will remain after development. e. Confirm correct sections of the CZA and FWCC are used by providing CZA and code citations on Sheets LA-01 and LA-02, as they pertain to the notes listed on the plans. f. Update sheets as appropriate to reflect the proposed parking lot Boundary Line Adjustment (city file 18-100789-00-SU) and building site Lot Line Elitnviation (city file 18-100790-00-SU). 4. Elevations Please address the following comments: a. Provide information that demonstrates how the average building elevation (ABE) and building height were calculated (see enclosed ABE definition, which was also provided with the Preapplication Summary Letter). In addition, address ABE in relation to plan sheet GR-02 (site cross sections). Also see comment #17, below. b. In the September 18, 2017, Preapplication Conference Summary Letter, one of the comments requested the submittal to provide details on location and screening for trash receptacles, ground mounted mechanical equipment, and rooftop mechanical equipment. i. No details regarding the trash enclosure were provided. 1. Per FWCC 22-1564(d), all trash enclosures shall be screened from abutting properties and/or public rights of way by a 100 percent sight -obscuring fence or wall and appropriate landscape screen. 2. Per FWCC 22-1564(b), all outside storage areas shall be fully screened by Type I landscaping a minimum of five feet in width, as described in section 22-1565(a), unless determined by the community development review committee (CDRC) that such screening is not necessary because stored materials are not visually obtrusive. 3. Per FWCC 22-1565(a)(1), Type I landscaping is intended to provide a solid sight barrier to totally separate incompatible land uses. This landscaping is typically found between residential and incompatible nonresidential land use zones (i.e. manufacturing park and city center or residential, etc.), and around outdoor storage yards, service yards, loading areas, mechanical or electrical equipment, utility installations, trash receptacles, etc. ii. The elevation drawings provide detail on the location of mechanical units and daylight monitors on the roof, but insufficient screening detail/explanation. Will all the equipment be fully or partially screened and with what type of material? 1. Per FWCC 22-960(a), vents, mechanical penthouses, elevator equipment, and similar appurtenances that extend above the roofline must be surrounded by a solid sight -obscuring screen that meets the following criteria: (a) The screen must be integrated into the architecture of the building. (b) The screen must obscure the view of the appurtenances from adjacent streets and properties. 17-105642-00-UP Do LD. 77285 Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 3 of 9 April 10, 2018 c. Clarify the dark grey and neon green areas that the building appears to be sitting on. This is shown on all four elevations. If these are platforms or retaining walls, provide additional details on purpose, height, type of material, etc. d. It is difficult to determine compliance with FWCC Section 22-1564(u) (screening of blank walls) with the scale used on the elevations drawings. Have the architect confirm compliance with the standard relating to blank wall areas greater than 240 square feet in area. 5. Pedestrian Path Please address the following comments: a. The November 22, 2017, letter from McGranahan Architects describes a 12-foot non -motorized trail to be added along the east edge of the building site terminating at the southern edge of the property. Sheet ST-01 shows a 10-foot path that terminates approximately 60 feet north of the southern property line. Clarify what is proposed and update submitted materials accordingly. b. For functionality and safety purposes, address pedestrian connectivity across the parking lot site in both the north/south and east/west directions. Surrounding developments have implemented this feature in their site design. 6. Site Photos— No dates are provided on the photos for reference. Were pictures taken before or after the underbrush clearing reviewed under city file 17-104447-00-AD? If the photos were taken before, then photos submitted do not accurately reflect the project site. 7. Parking— Please address the following comments: a. The amount of proposed parking varies throughout the submitted application documents, with the highest number being 724 stalls as listed in the TIA. The site plan states 706 stalls, but a count of stalls actually drawn on the plan (along with 150 basement stalls) totals 688. Clarify and correct all affected documents. For reference, the Notice of Application lists 706 stalls, as that is what is stated on the site plan. b. As requested in the September 18, 2017, preapplication letter, since parking is proposed on an adjoining lot, provide documentation in compliance with FWCC Section 22-1421(a)(2)(b). 8. Off -Site Improvements— The November 22, 2017, letter from McGranahan Architects describes pedestrian links with the existing DaVita building to the west will be reinforced by re -working existing planter islands to provide clear and direct connections between primary building entries and outdoor seating areas. These are off -site improvements that are not being reviewed or approved as part of this Use Process III land use application. That off -site work requires its own use process land use application. The thresholds to determine which land use application is required are contained within FWRC 19.15.030. Wetlands— Please address the following comments: a. Review and address the enclosed February 22, 2018, letter from the city's wetland consultant, ESA. b. Figure 3 of the November 17, 2017, critical areas report prepared by Talasaea identifies Wetland FA as an existing wetland. However, the report text explains that it is not a wetland. For clarity, add a note on Figure 3 that clarifies the situation. c. No photographs of the site and critical areas or documentation of fieldwork, including field data sheets and rating system forms, were provided for the assessments of Wetlands FA and FB (see FWRC 19.145.080[2] and 19.145.410[2]). 10. Significant Trees — Please address the following comments: a. Tree evaluation report (prepared by Gilles Consulting, November 20, 2017): i. On page 3, under the Executive Summary, the "species" bulleted item needs correction, as the percentages shown exceed 100, and the number.of trees discussed exceeds 406 (331+80=411). Doc. I.D. 77285 17-105642-00-UP Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 4 of 9 Apri110, 2018 ii. On page 4, the tree tag numbering description does not account for some of the tree numbers listed on plan set Sheet TR-01 (trees 7-21), clarify and update documents as necessary. iii. Attachment 1 should either show or refer to plan set Sheet TR-01, as they communicate different pieces of information. iv. Street trees are included in the tree evaluation (Attachment 2). Either clarify why these should be included for a tree count on private property, or remove street trees from the report. v. Attachment 4 lists tree protection measures, including signage. The proposed text advises that Federal Way Code Compliance should be contacted with any concerns. This contact should be revised to the list the site superintendent's contact information, as this would be an active construction site under their direct supervision. vi. FWCC Section 22-1568(c)(6), "Significant Trees," describes management practices that shall be observed on sites containing significant trees to provide protection. Without code citations or an explanation that the contents of Attachment 4 meet the (f) alternative protection methods in code, it is not clear that these measures have been incorporated. b. Sheet TR-01: i. Street trees are included in the tree evaluation report. Clarify why these should be included for a tree count on private property, or remove street trees from the sheet. ii. The sheet shows 46 significant trees on the property, and none are shown anywhere development will occur. The tree evaluation report lists 209 significant trees (out of 406 trees on the property). Revise this sheet to match the tree report and to comply with FWCC requirements for significant trees. iii. If development will require the removal of more than 75 percent of the significant trees on -site, significant trees are required to be replaced in an amount equal to 25 percent of the significant trees that existed on the subject property prior to commencing any development activity pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1568(c)(1)(a). Please show how this criterion is met. iv. After the Lot Line Elimination and Boundary Line Adjustment are completed, the four existing lots will be reduced to three. Each property must comply with the significant tree code requirements. When the calculation of significant trees is completed, the three properties should not be aggregated, each must stand on its own to meet code requirements pertaining to significant trees. 11. Forest Practices — A Forest Practices Class IV -General Application is required if more than 5,000 board feet of merchantable timber will be harvested from the property in conjunction with the development activity. The city will review the proposed Class IV -General Forest Practices in conjunction with SEPA review, and review of associated development permits or approvals. 12. Geotechnical Report — In Appendix A of the November 13, 2017, report prepared by GeoEngineers, amounts of proposed cut and fill for the project are indicated. The amounts listed differ from those provided on the submitted clearing and grading plan set Sheet GR-01 and SEPA Checklist Item #1.e. Clarify what is proposed and update materials accordingly. 13. TIR— The geotechnical report indicates the project area is Vashon till (Qvt). The "Project Overview" section of the TIR refers to the geotechnical report and TIR Figure 1.4 for further information. Figure 1.4 sourced from the NRCS says it is Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgB). Please clarify. 14. Use Process III Decisional Criteria — Provide a narrative demonstrating how the proposal satisfies FWRC 19.65.100.2. You are encouraged to provide the same for the CZA. 17-105642-00-UP Doc I.D. 77285 f Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 5 of 9 April 10, 2018 15. Burden of Proof— In this letter, staff members have identified items that require the provision of additional information for review. During the Notice of Application comment period, the city received one public comment letter, which was provided to you on January 30, 2018. Review and address the comments to support your project. Per FWRC 19.65.080: 19.65.080, "Burden of Proof' "The applicant has the responsibility of convincing the director that, under the provisions of this chapter, the applicant is entitled to the requested decision." SEPA CHECKLIST 16. Approvalsl Permits — An NPDES Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit and Forest Practices Class IV -General Application may be required for the project (checklist item #10). 17. Plants The checklist describes buffer enhancement with native trees and shrubs to be done as appropriate. Clarify what this refers to (checklist items #4.b and #5.d). 18. Height— The checklist notes that proposed building height will not exceed 42.5 feet above grade. The submitted elevation drawings show 48.5 feet at the top of parapet, please clarify (checklist items #6.b and #10.a). Also see comment #3(a), above. 19. Transportation — Review the Public Works review comments below, and revise the SEPA checklist and site plan as necessary to ensure accurate information is included. Kevin Peterson — Public Works Development Services Division, (253) 835-2734, kevin.peters ong cityoffede rabyay. c om ENGINEERING PLANS 20. The project needs to be served with solid waste and recycling facilities, per FWRC 19.125.150. The plans need to depict how this will be accomplished. 21. Show property and right-of-way lines on the Section views on sheet GR-01. 22. Identify and provide a dimension for the width of property to be dedicated for right-of-way. 23. Final engineering plans (for the building permit) will need to be on 24" x36" (or 22" x34") paper, and the scale shall be 1"=20'. TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT 24. There are references to King County mapping and other materials. These references need to be revised to indicate city mapping and reference material, for those materials that the city has available. 25. The downstream drainage analysis needs to be described, and include an "Off -site Analysis Drainage System Table," per Reference 8-B of the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDNV . 26. Enhanced Basic Water Quality Treatment is required for this project. The engineer states (under the Conditions and Requirements Summary) that water quality treatment for this project will be provided in the existing "regional" pond. It is also stated (under Section 4. Flow Control & Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design), that the water quality standard can be reduced to Basic, if certain criteria are met. While the existing pond likely does meet the Basic Water Quality Treatment criteria, it is unlikely that the first criteria to reduce treatment to the Basic menu can be met, as it is very likely that one or more of the treatment 17-105642-00-UP Doc I.D. 77285 Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 6 of 9 April 10, 2018 options for Enhanced Basic can be provided on the project site. Additionally, the city will accept Enhanced Basic treatment facilities not identified in the KCSWDM, as long as those facilities have achieved G.U.L.D. status under the Washington State Department of Ecology guidelines. 27. The project is subject to the Conservation Flow Control standard. Since the existing detention pond was sized based on an older design standard and different analysis requirements, the existing stormwater pond may or may not have adequate capacity and/or outflow release rates for this project. There is no direct correlation between the old and new pond sizing criteria; however, based on our consultations with King County SWDM engineers, the following has been determined to be the appropriate approach in determining the flow control requirement for this project: a. Analyze the DaVita project utilizing the Level 1 Flow Control standard, and determine the required pond volume under that standard; b. Analyze the DaVita project utilizing the Level 3 Flow Control standard, and determine the required pond volume under that standard; c. The difference in volumes between the Level 1 and Level 3 Flow Control Standards is the volume that the DaVita project needs to provide, either on -site, OR, the existing pond can be modified to provide the required volume. 28. Some form of Flow Control BMP is required. If any type of BMP is proposed that requires infiltration, then infiltration testing shall be performed in the appropriate location(s). Sarady Long — Public Works Traffic Division (253) 835-2743, sarady.long@cityoffederalway.com 29. The Public Works Traffic Division has finished its review of the submitted materials. The following technical review items must be addressed prior to Public Works approval. Please note, these comments did not include comments from WSDOT. Traffic related comments/concerns by WSDOT must be addressed and approved by WSDOT. PLANS COMMENTS 30. The civil plans must depict the correct frontage improvement and right-of-way dedication along 32nd Avenue South and South 323rd Street. 31. The splitter island on the north leg of the roundabout should be modified to accommodate a pedestrian crossing. 32. Show conceptual street lighting along the property frontage on 323rd Avenue South, 32nd Avenue South, and Weyerhaeuser Way South on the plans. Detailed design is not required at this time. Please note, the existing street lights will need to be upgraded to LED and shall meet current street light standards. 33. Provide rights -of -way dimensions on the plan. 34. The north -south 20-foot pedestrian path between South 323,d Street and the future road South 324th Street extension should be relocated to the west side of the property and should be extended the entire length of the property. 35. Accessible pedestrian path/connection should be provided within the internal parking lot and from the parking lot to the crossing at the roundabout. TIA REVIEW COMMENTS 36. The city concurs with using the Transportation Engineer (ITE) Trip Generation Manual 90th Edition LUC 715 (Single Tennant Office Building) to estimate the trip generation for the development. 17-105642-00-UP Doc La 77285 Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 7 of 9 April 10, 2018 37. The proposal to apply a four percent annual traffic growth rate to the existing counts to estimate horizon year volume is acceptable. Please note, typically the xity uses a two percent annual growth rate. 38. The TIA should also address safe pedestrian access from the parking lot to the building. In addition to modifying the splitter island for accommodate pedestrian, RRFBs should be incorporated to increase pedestrian safety. 39. Update the TIA to include AM peak hour study intersections impacted by 100 or more AM peak hour project trips. These intersections were confirmed via email on October 23, 2017. 40. On page 21, of the 2019 Without -Project AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume, the 2019 trips for AM and PM peak hours are not correctly depicted. 41. The city has reviewed and concurs that all proposed site access locations are anticipated to meet the adopted LOS standards. Please include AM peak hour study intersections LOS. 42. Forward the updated TLA to WSDOT for technical review comments. SEPA CHECKLIST — TRANSPORTATION 43. Transportation 14(c) — Revise this section to including the following improvements: a. Install planter strips, sidewalks, street lights, and right-of-way dedication on 32nd Avenue South and South 323,d Street. b. Modify the roundabout to accommodate pedestrian crossing and adequate sight distance. c. Provide a 20-foot pedestrian connection between South 3231d Street and the future South 324th Street extension. 44. Transportation 14(g) — A transportation impact fee has not been paid by this development. However, traffic impacts (off -site) associated with this project were considered and appropriately mitigated under the Threshold Determination for the East Campus Parcel 1 Binding Site Plan (BSP). Revise this section accordingly. Brian Asbury — Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, (253) 946-5407, basbuty@lakehaven.org 45. The applicant has completed and submitted to Lakehaven an application for Certificates of Availability, and Lakehaven issued these certificates on November 9, 2017. 46. The applicant will need to submit an application for either a Developer Pre -Design Meeting or Developer Extension Agreement for Lakehaven to formally commence the water and/or sewer plan review process. Lakehaven encourages owners/developers/applicants to apply for Lakehaven processes separately to Lakehaven, and sufficiently early in the pre-design/planning phase to avoid delays in overall project development. Chris Cahan — South King Fire & Rescue, (253) 946-7243, hris.cahan outhlan fire.orc, WATER SUPPLY 47. The required fire flow for this project is 4000 gallons per minute. A Certificate of WaterAvailability, including a bydraulic fire flow model, shall be requested from the water district and provided at the time of building permit application. 17-105642-00-UP Doc I.D. 77285 Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 8 of 9 April 10, 2018 FIRE HYDRANTS 48. This project will require four fire hydrant(s) in approved* locations. There are two existing fire hydrants on public streets that are available for this project. There will be at least two additional fire hydrants required within the complex. 49. Existing fire hydrants on adjacent properties shall not be considered unless fire apparatus access roads extending between properties and easements are established to prevent obstructions of such roads. 50. *Hydrant spacing along access roads and location in relationship to buildings and sprinkler FDC shall be approved by Fire Marshal's Office. 51. Fire hydrants shall be in service prior to and during the time of construction. EMERGENCY ACCESS 52. Fire apparatus access roads shall comply with all requhments of Fire Access Policy 10.006 (enclosed). 53. The angles of approach, departure, and minimum ground clearance were not defined on this proposal. 54. Designated and marked fire lanes may be required for emergency access. This may be done during the plans check or prior to building final. Requirements and marking options can be found in Title 8 of the FWRC: ht�p:ILu� wur.codepubiishing.eomlWfiLi'edualW�uL. 55. Fire apparatus access roads shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. VEHICLE ACCESS GATES 56. All vehicle access gates shall comply with the gate policy (contact SKFR for updated policy). FIRE DEPARTMENT LOCK BOX 57. A secured fire department "Knox" brand key box shall be installed on the building near the front entrance. Location(s) will be approved by the plan reviewer or Deputy Fire Marshal onsite. FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM 58. An NFPA 13 fire sprinkler ystem isnVumd. 59. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in all occupancies where the total floor area included within the surrounding exterior walls on all floor levels, including basements, exceeds 5,000 square feet. Fire walls shall not be considered to separate a building to enable deletion of the required automatic fire - extinguishing system. 60. The system demand pressure (to the source) required in a hydraulically designed automatic fire sprinkler system shall be at least 10 percent less than the correlative water supply curve pressure. FIRE ALARM 61. Afire alarm ystem is required 62. City code requires an automatic fire detection system in all buildings exceeding 3,000 square feet gross floor area. The fire alarm system is required to monitor the sprinkler system including water flow. Provide full notification as required by NFPA 72. Covketa coverage smoke detection is not required for this project. This fire detection system shall be monitored by an approved central and/or remote station. 17-105642-00-UP Doc. I.D. 77285 Mr. Eric LaBrie Page 9 of 9 April 10, 2018 EMERGENCY RESPONDER RADIO COVERAGE 63. All buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public safety communication system at the exterior of the building. Exception: if the building is less than 35 feet in height as defined in the building code. CLOSING Please be aware that this review does not preclude the city from requesting additional information related to any of the topics discussed above. Please submit revised application materials as appropriate, accompanied by the completed "Resubmittal Information Form" (enclosed). Pursuant to FWRC 19.15.050, if an applicant fails to provide additional information to the city within 180 days of being notified that such information is requested, the application shall be deemed null and void and the city shall have no duty to process, review, or issue any decisions with respect to such an application. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at stacev.,%velsh@citvoffederalway.com, or 253 835-2634. Sincerely, Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner enc: ABE Definition February 22, 2018, Memo from ESA Fire Access Policy Resubmittal Information Form c: Brian Davis, Community Development Director Robert "Doc" Hansen, Planning Manager Jim Harris, Planner Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue Felix Palisoc, WSDOT, PAsr f ivs Je t. a . av Arthur Richey, arthLir.richcy.@d,,ivita.com Savanna Nagorslci, rtivarinn,i�la�rc�nl:i[Ce�mCi<<il.crarn 17-105642-00-UP Doc. I.D. 77285 ES"Y A 5309 Shilshole Avenue, NW Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 206.789.9658 phone 206.789.9684 fax memorandum date February 22, 2018 to Stacey Welsh, City of Federal Way Department of Community Development from Jessica Redman and Ilon Logan subject Critical Areas Review — DaVita Office Parcels WWVIAl SdISSOC.00n'I At the request of the City of Federal Way (City), Environmental Science Associates (ESA) reviewed the Existing Conditions Report — DaVita Office Parcels (dated November 17, 2017) prepared by Talasaea Consultants Inc. for the 11.5-acre property at the intersection of 32❑d Avenue South and South 323rd Street in Federal Way, Washington. The site is currently undeveloped and comprised of four parcels (King County tax parcels 2154650060, 2154650090, 2154650110, and 2154650120). The parcels were previously part of the Greenline Campus (formerly the Weyerhaeuser Campus), now owned by Federal Way Campus, LLC. DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc. (DaVita) purchased the parcels in July 2017 from Federal Way Campus, LLC. DaVita is proposing to build a 200,000 square foot (SF), two-story corporate office building and associated office spaces. ESA previously reviewed wetland determinations throughout the Greenline Campus and an existing conditions report for the Greenline Headquarters and Tech Center Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) projects. ESA biologists conducted four site visits for the BLA projects which occurred in May, June, and August, 2017. Results of the wetland verifications for the Tech Center BLA project were presented to the City in the Existing Conditions Report — Tech Center Boundary Line Adjustment .technical memo (ESA memo dated August 22", 2017). The northernmost boundary of the Greenline Tech Center site lies immediately south of the southernmost DaVita parcels. Site Background and Purpose of Review In 1994, the Weyerhauser Company entered into a pre -annexation zoning agreement with the City, known as the Concomitant Agreement, to ensure that once annexed, the Weyerhauser Company Campus was developed "with maximum flexibility which will insure optimal development, while preserving the unique natural features of the site" (Weyerhauser Company Concomitant Pre- Annexation Zoning Agreement, 1994). The purpose of this review is to determine if the proposed project is in compliance with Concomitant Agreement and Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145 —Environmentally Critical Areas. Review of Documents ESA reviewed the Existing Conditions Report — DaVita Office Parcels (dated November 17, 2017 and hereinafter referred to as the Report) and the DaVita Healthcare Partners East Campus Office Park Site Plan (dated Critical Areas Review — DaVita Office Parcels November 22, 2017 and hereinafter referred to as the Site Plan) prepared by ESM Consulting Engineers. The Report and Site Plan refer to the four parcels as Parcels B, C, D, and E; with B and C located north of S 323rd Street and Parcel D and E located to the south. According to the Report, no wetlands or streams occur onsite. One wetland, Wetland FB, occurs offsite to the east and was delineated as part of a larger effort for Federal Way Campus, LLC. Talasaea categorized this wetland as a Category III wetland with a Habitat Score of 4, and is required a 60-foot buffer per Federal Way Revised Code (F)vVRC) 19.145.420(2). During previous delineation efforts in December 2015 by Talasaea, an additional wetland (Wetland FA) was identified on the site. This wetland is located on the southern portion of the DaVita site and continues onto the Greenline Tech Center parcel to the south. Sometime after the delineation effort, the applicant cleared the site of understory vegetation to address safety concerns. Post -clearing, Talasaea revisited the site and observed a series of constructed rock check dams that became visible once vegetation had been cleared. According to Talasaea, these rock check dams influenced site hydrology by impeding surface water and creating ponded areas. These features, in combination with additional soil investigations that showed a lack of hydric soil indicators, led Talasaea to conclude that Wetland FA was not a wetland. No wetland data form or rating forms for Wetland FA were included with the submittal. Results of Site Visit ESA biologists Jessica Redman and Christina Hersum conducted a field visit on February 1, 2018 to observe site conditions. No wetland or streams were observed on Parcels B or C. Grasses are dominant on the eastern portion of these parcels and conifer forest dominated by Douglas fir is present to the west. Other upland vegetation is interspersed throughout and includes primarily invasive species such as Himalayan blackberry and Scot's broom. The southern parcels (D and E) are also dominated by grasses to the east and Douglas fir to the west. In the southern portion, stakes or flagging were still present around the boundaries of Wetland FA and FB at the time of ESA's field visit, which made them easy to locate. ESA reviewed and agreed with the delineated boundary of Wetland FB offsite to the east. We also agree with the rating and buffer assignment. Based on our review of the Site Plan, it appears that given the 60-foot buffer required by FWRC, the proposed development will not impact the wetland or the wetland buffer. In our review of Wetland FA, we observed water actively flowing down a grassy slope into the area flagged as Wetland FA. The water is then impounded by a rock dam up to approximately 6-8 inches deep before spilling over the top of the dam. Downstream of the rock dam, water flowed through an unvegetated, shallow channel before continuing downslope to a forested area on the Greenline parcel to the south. Surface water quickly infiltrated into an area dominated by upland vegetation (western red cedar and sword fern). Using a handheld auger, ESA took several soil samples in the impounded area and channel, none of which contained hydric soil indicators. Based on the lack of hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils, we agree that area flagged as Wetland FA does not support wetland conditions. In addition to Wetland FA, we observed several other areas of inundation that were staked and appeared to be areas that had been previously identified by Talasaea. However, none of these areas were noted in the Report. Based on a telephone conversation with Jennifer Marriott of Talasaea (February 12, 2018), these areas were inundated areas largely lacking vegetation and too wet at the time of the December 2015 delineation effort to observe soil conditions. They were flagged and a second site visit was planned for when the soil could be Critical Areas Review— DaVita Office Parcels observed. When Talasaea revisited these areas, they not observe hydric soil indicators and found that these areas were similar to the area flagged as Wetland FA. Therefore, these areas were not documented as wetlands in the Report. The flags were not removed from the field. ESA took several soil samples throughout these flagged areas and did not observe hydric soil indicators. The majority of the soils we observed had high concentrations of gravel and sand, which according to Talasaea, was likely fill material from the construction of a stormwater pond on the adjacent parcel to the east. Portions of the site have been graded and the modification of the topography of the site has likely led to the large areas of inundation. However, water also quickly infiltrates throughout the site, which inhibits the formation of wetland conditions. Conclusion and Recommendations ESA agrees with Talasaea's conclusion that no wetlands or streams or associated buffers are present on the reviewed DaVita office parcels. However, we recommend the Report be revised to include all relative items as required by FWRC 19.145 — Critical Areas Report. Per FWC 19.145(2), the submitted critical area report should include the identification and characterization of all critical areas adjacent to the proposed improvements. We recommend that the report be revised to include site photographs and the wetland data and rating forms for Wetland FB. We also recommend wetland data forms for the area previously delineated as Wetland FA be included in the revision to provide support that this area does not meet the three wetland parameters. Page I of 1 . 7.7 32oZ •10 http://gismaps.kingcounty.gov/arcgis/restldirectories/aregisoutput/PrintingIPrintingServic... 12/14/2017 CITY OF Federal Way WETLAND CONSULTANT AUTHORIZATION FORM Date: December 6, 2017 City: Community Development Department 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 Consultant: Ilon Logan, ESA 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 iloean r7 rsassac.com Project: DaVita — Aletland Report Parcels 215465-0060, 0090, 0110, & 0120 File No.: 17-105642-UP Project Proponent. ESM Consulting Engineers 33400 81h Avenue South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 erir•l ie(7esmcsgii.cam City Staff Contact: Senior Planner Stacey Welsh — 253.835.2634, stktM.welsh@ciiyoffederA)-,vay.com Project Background: Applicant has proposed a 200,000 square -foot office building and parking on a site with potential wetlands. Documents Provided: a Critical Areas Report — DaVta Office Parcels, by Talasaea, November 17, 2017 (item 018 in ftp folder) 0 Cover Letter & Narrative by ESM (item 001 in ftp folder) a Process III Plan Set by ESM (item 012 in ftp folder) O Documents are available on the city's ftp site: ederakwa .com outbax DaV °/o Su i to %20Documents / Task Scope: P Review wetland report for property subject to 1994 Concomitant Zoning Agreement and current code FWRC 19.145 for critical areas. ■ Conduct site visit as necessary. • Provide written response to findings, recommendations, and request additional information from applicant if needed. • Possible meeting with applicant's wetland biologist, • Review of resubmitted/corrected documents as needed. W. 17.103642 UP Page 1 of 2 Doc ID 76950 Task Schedule: Provide a task cost estimate ASAP. Review work is not authorized until authorized in writing by city. �} r Task Cost: Not to exceed SI0 without a prior written amendment to this Task Authorization. Acceptance: (City Stafo Date Digitally signed by Mark Kinney Mark Kinney � e: cn=Mark Kinney, o vitas a, , c=Team Genesis, 'email=mark.kinney@davita.com, c=US 1 /24/18 Date: 2018.01.241524:09-06'00' (Applicant) Date I 1A I? 105642AT Page 2 of 2 Doc ID 76950 Stacey Welsh From: Stacey Welsh Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 10:26 AM To: Ping Inquiry Subject: FW: Comments on Davita Proposal From: Koorus Tahghighi [ma iIto: koorust@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 10:24 AM To: Stacey Welsh Subject: Comments on Davita Proposal Ms. Welsh: I reviewed the SEPA checklist for the proposed office space and parking lot development by Davita. My comments are: 1-They state there will be 800-900 employees, 700 parking stalls, and no plans for expansion. There appears to be a discrepancy on the number of parking stalls and employees. If that is correct and it stands for permitting, they should be willing to add a parking deck to their proposed parking lot to provide additional parking, if needed; so that is a potential expansion that should be identified. 2-They state the stormwater runoff will discharge into the regional stormwater pond. I am not familiar with the existing requirements of the pond. There should be a requirement for regular water quality monitoring (sampling and testing) either from their discharge into the pond or from the pond prior to discharge downgradient toward the Hylebos. Regards, Koorus Tahghighi Federal Way Resident 33205 38th Ave S Federal Way, WA 98001 i FCITederal Way RESUBMITTED JAN 0 3 2018 CfTY OF FEDEPAL WAY COMMUN[7y 0EVELOPMEN DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003-6325 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cit offederaiwa .com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 1, "t Ak-f-- hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/orosted to or at each of the attached addresses on 049 �r . 2017. Project Name bA V File Number(s) 1 1 -) 05(o qa - (Jig `- /i 05-(Q Ll 3-- f Signature Date L2-:2,"'6 A-�e4k 1--7-- K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc Posting Sites: —.ilr ►.��1■ . I't—. .fiZ, .�►�i. ��_ '_1*hf L��1` . r .ram-��■e•►�-- - r 8 t t" Subject Site - K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sltes.doc r � � , d{ "T •� '�1 ��. 'fit 7-44 YrR 1� ti, f ! . AL 11 i CITY OF Federal Way CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor 7 December 19, 201k Mr. Eric LaBrie ESM Consulting Engineers LLC 33400 8th Avenue South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 eric.Uti cr esmei_ . om FILE Re: File #17-105642-UP; WETLAND CONSULTANT REVIEW ESTIMATE DaVita Healthcare Office Park — Wetland Delineation Review Dear Mr. LaBrie: Enclosed please find the consultant task authorization with a scope -of -work for review of the critical areas report. The department's wetland consultant, ESA, was asked to provide an estimate for their review of information prepared by Talasaea. The normal course of action is for the city to set up an account to be funded by the applicant and drawn down by the work performed by ESA. Please note that if any of the funds are not used, they will be returned to the applicant. A check in the amount of $4,955.00, payable to the City of Federal Way, and signature on the enclosed consultant authorization form, must be submitted before the review will begin. Please note —this fee covers a specific scope -of -work. Additional reviews or meetings beyond that identified in the scope -of -work will require a supplemental cost and authorization. Following receipt, I will authorize ESA to begin their formal review. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your project, please contact me at 253-835-2634, or stac .welsh ci ffederalway.corn. Sincerely, Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner enc: Wetland Consultant Authorization Form City of Federal Way Invoice Doc. I.D. 77081 File #17-105642-00-UP A�k CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003-6325 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityoffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 1, J�l61-r GJ CJ-f �- hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: f Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or>posted to or at each of the attached addresses on )e- C v9 .2017. Project Name b 4 V �G`" I I �d 14, ('z't 0 9, U 64 ` File Number(s) i T - / 016 tt � -- Ur '" [ -7 ^ f 0 5 (,o L�-) f c- Signature u7�Date K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc Posting Sites: Federal Way City Hall - 33325 8t" Avenue Federal Way Regional Library - 34200 1 It Way South Federal Way 320t" Branch Library - 848 South 320t" Street uj i K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc 4%L CITY OF VZ�:� Federal Way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name: DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project Description: Construction of a 48.5-foot-tall, 200,000 square -foot office building with basement parking, 706 parking stalls, and associated site work on an 11.5-acre site. Applicant: Arthur Richey, DaVita, 6245 South Victor Avenue, Tulsa, OK 74136 Agent: ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC, 33400 8a' Avenue South, Suite 205, Federal Way, WA 98003 Project Location: Next to traffic circle at 32nd Avenue South and South 3231d Street, Federal Way, WA, King County Parcels 215465-0060, -0090, -0110, & -0120 Date of Application: November 22, 2017 Date of Notice of Application: December 29, 2017 Date Determined Complete: December 20, 2017 Public Comments Due: January 16, 2018 Requested Decision and Other Permits Included with this Application: The applicant requests a Use Process III decision (file #17-105642-UP) issued by the Director of Community Development pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.65. Additional permits and/or approvals in conjunction with the Use Process III decision include a threshold determination pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Rules WAC 197-11 (file #17-105643-SE), Transportation Concurrency (file #17-104985-CN), Street Modification (file #17-105644-SM), Boundary Line Adjustment, and Forest Practices Class IV General Permit. Environmental Documents: Environmental Checklist, Wetland Report, Geotechnical Report, Tree Inventory, Transportation Impact Analysis, Stormwater Technical Information Report, Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance, East Campus Parcel 1 Binding Site Plan (application number SEP98-0039). Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Mitigation: Weyerhaeuser Company Pre -Annexation Concomitant and Zoning Agreement and applicable 1994 development codes, including Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Protection"; Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management"; and Chapter 22, "Zoning." Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: The project will be reviewed for consistency with all applicable codes and regulations including the Weyerhaeuser Company Pre -Annexation Concomitant and Zoning Agreement, which vests the project to regulations in place in 1994; FWRC 19.145; 2016 King Count' Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way; and the Public Works Department Development Standards. Any procedural requirements must meet today's codes (FWRC Title 19). Public Comment & Appeals: The official project file is available for public review at the Community Development Department (City Hall, 2nd Floor, 33325 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003). Any person may submit written comments on the Use Process III application to the Director of Community Development by January 16, 2018. Only the applicant, persons who submit written comments to the director, or persons who specifically request a copy of the original decision may appeal the director's decision. Comments sent by email should be directed to: lanns i offederal a .com. Availability of File and Environmental Documents: The official project file and referenced environmental documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the Community Development Department (address above). Staff Contact: Senior Planner Stacey Welsh, 253-835-2634, stacey.welsh cityoffederalway.com Printed in the Federal Way Mirror December 29, 2017 Fk 17-105642-UP Doc ID 77049 V tC - f`O yam+ M C aU y c_ c` a.y+ U ¢ y o c0 y= L N 7 C` y` m �aXiavaci caa `� O�m�O o��m�p_dE.r a� 0a'c,E a�a� C, E t° y EL_- o c c 3r�LL > �aE" E --• -N 3 y c aci o m� o _ d Q LL c U C C U O Q _ C E, N E O O U C 7 U N O E m ` M= O) 2 _ w (a On d C V W O O_ r+ C> y E v1 •� O O_ N U i C ^ U U N c iL-+ T� 2i OU.i C @D C d 0 .0 G) (/� 'O aci ? LU c0 N c`mi y 7 U N m _ a) O f0 O O a' c al m •� ... 0 ar a ad aLn E r CO� o c- E._ E O a rna)L �ncEv 'vac d3 c a» a>m �'- c S Ec cam- `" - O ea a� c pp •j co a� ca o> c_ >�� Lis = 3 c o ` o c O c a E ad•-•� aQ• C,._, ac!.'� MEoNT VE E y>>,a+m~ 3 LL+=-iva a"c •> •'�L 3 OQ y w O vac OLp UU a�•- E c�a o C- > YOV c'o ��'� O� oU c is V a�iY a� � EU+L" c w �a y c� � A N= U p)N C� N cl N caV N y U-0 E N EOcow of V-c n a• -co ac�c-a E `O,-c'o^`° �Eo yN mUN o O �a `Y E�'a- ¢ � E E= o ai o� ` aca t° aci v O��a�ycn�¢��t�eo�o�ac� ycaM=cNj+'�d�� O>> oLL a� c p ac p cna _ ac o c, a� c o o ii•- E ai ?"''L c•En��a-0 7. C �p > a`� o� :ELU E� w U E c a�T c> a/ U 0 0 3 aJ —� .`__' ^ l- � i5 d a� ¢ a d a 0 0 C O C "E O _ U IV T� y E ar C E �a C L >+ y C O L— CL ate-• (mD C M o E C�rnV c c-:EE�a�m ��r�+m 0-ce coQ�= v»YoE HcCa� ON �N a0 cm Z`oc Y �• oyr cvi a�V �Q •�E:Fi y .� >v�E°� r'oUT V �cn u?:^ 0 2' �'U V Vic° +,, �!' y 2c cl o" E ie- �a f°''�' E1 CO `n ar rn a a�' ate. >.a c v, a�No �c� a ad"a c c a� a>._ c T- _�a c c�� c - a � >c•',o E= a 3 o y o 3 mch av C, mo L U. mc�om a�� ar>>�o�rnaoc�coa+aE-> am��,u� co �� rL U �dNU V 7 y U i•+ > 0� E E a:= OC"7 m O OO U U t3 a) Q E > "> C tnN >i O_N o h. c� co 03 Q M ti 0 w N M> am c M Q O 2 y c O h p�'C Z O M M % O O N E O c U tC a a >� w m O_ 'i? o W c`o a OO Ord"_<n o c _ y c0= cn c.-- ~Q M M a� O N s QN 2 U }' c� 0� cr7¢id m� `'��O=IG C�¢ E.� a- O� m � J c c` min N E aEiN E UoT `V h �Q y E c yaw aa o c +TWO co.=y - m�UEr N y-0-ar�v aw ccZJc of co om cO.i in c>o O m -2N a C L a> N E o �' C7 C.7 o is = T may+ Eiy ocOL;r-o�a�LL2,!5 >_;� E. Z �c o c-� >:; w2 oN m > v a�v�"co Tay c ¢�`� o= h y 0, 0 o E E goo �E�� ` o ��E ��m� s=a 2 U O L 1� of _ C 0 0� C v m m Lu 2 0 CN ai O_ z E 0_� m 0.g jy OL d V�O---�U 7Q C aO H•- C` Lb � w o C V ¢0 C O m o 1249 ' poT� w �� N O coO r= O -_ U3 O .� y id y W-0 .L•-! a- I� [0.� c~ c �a a 0 <� ocn c� is O C'G Lj_ h= dQ 3 o-rTv•i�- cLi c 10 LL N _ (� Y ccC O N V C V a aJ a= O W 11') c N Y 4t cm c` ate+ d o H U O E �o Cc¢~� io Ur QE E � ¢ y y oo o a.' c w.2 Lo Chi +-� c.-. wMvoYo..�v700 4avoEv dam. �'� v�� a' _o V Z D o C c W U J O s ¢ a+ Z O a0-. N U c E a ti E > •- W v V c a0 Q y..y u(n i2 000Va/+-'D`a COr O yc c ZN �' •aQ N O chi m E W c O 0= m a� mj O c¢T rc rc 7 v•- > >� c Cm �;c E y¢ ¢¢ o- -w D 0 0 d 3 y ace 5 w r c� �v w U H cn a.• c� 0 r7 r ffJ A q') ►r►�itit�f�' oo � o � w ^, O � � a bb 2 � N v7 4 N un c2. U aA 'A z 3 cn ^" ol 9 � Stacey Welsh From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Good Morning Stacey, Matt Reider <Matt.Reider@esmcivil.com> Friday, December 29, 2017 10:12 AM Stacey Welsh Savanna Nagorski RE: DaVita notice NoLU_DaVita.pdf Attached is the declaration of distribution and site photos. Let me know if you would like a hard copy. Thank you, MATT REIDER ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC www.esmcivii.com From: Savanna Nagorski Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2017 1:23 PM To: Stacey Welsh Cc: Matt Reider Subject. RE: DaVita notice Hi Stacey, Thank you for the notice. Matt will be by tomorrow afternoon to pick up the materials and will be taking care of the posting by the end of the week since I will be out later this week. Savanna Nagorski, MS ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC www.esmcivii.com From: Stacey Welsh [manta:Stacey.Welsh@cityoffederalway� Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2017 11:23 AM To: Savanna Nagorski Subject: DaVita notice Savanna, Two notice boards are ready to be picked up for posting at Will Call at the front desk in the Permit Center. There is also a Declaration of Distribution that will need to be signed by whoever puts the boards up and returned to the Permit Center once completed. The boards must be up on the project site by the close of city business this Friday. City Hall is closing at noon on Friday. Place one board on the northern lots facing 32"d Ave S. and one on the southern lots facing S 323rd St. closer to the pond. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner --- DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003-6325 CITY OF 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 I www.aityoffe_deralway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION l hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/orosted to or at each of the attached addresses on 2017 Project Name �� V i � r ►'Q d�4 C,- () f-� L J' � File Number(s) Signature ram-- Date KAPLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declarailon of Dlsidbution with Posting Sites.doc Posting Sites: r r 1 it 3 ,n e ,fir �q� n Subject Site — ! 0 C> ti A\e-v1\ s 10� --ten b, K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declarotlon of Distribution wlth Posiing Sites.doc a 4111- . e 42 06, Noupy 3sn oNv-i casocloma 210 U) ioiloN oriona > cn Cl) o. Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cifyoffederalwQy.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION k E. Tina Piety hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: El Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed Oe-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on December 26 ---1 2017. Project Name DaVita Healthcare Office Park File Number(s) 17-105642-UP, 17-105643-SE, 17-104985-CN. &I7-105644-SM Signature /_' Date December 27, 2017 K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 12/27/2017 11:23:00 AM MA11,_ CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name: DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project Description: Construction of a 48.5-foot-tall, 200,000 square -foot office building with basement parking, 706 parking stalls, and associated site work on an 11.5-acre site. Applicant: Arthur Richey, DaVita, 6245 South Victor Avenue, Tulsa, OK 74136 Agent: ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC, 33400 8rh Avenue South, Suite 205, Federal Way, WA 98003 Project Location: Next to traffic circle at 32^d Avenue South and South 323{d Street, Federal Way, WA, King County Parcels 215465-0060, -0090, -0110, & -0120 Date of Application: November 22, 2017 Date of Notice of Application: December 29, 2017 Date Determined Complete: December 20, 2017 Public Comments Due: January 16, 2018 Requested Decision and Other Permits Included with this Application: The applicant requests a Use Process III decision (file #17-105642-UP) issued by the Director of Community Development pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.65. Additional permits and/or approvals in conjunction with the Use Process III decision include a threshold determination pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Rules WAC 197-11 (file #17-105643-SE), Transportation Concurrency (file #17-104985-CN), Street Modification (file #17-105644-SM), Boundary Line Adjustment, and Forest Practices Class IV General Permit. Environmental Documents: Environmental Checklist, Wetland Report, Geotechnical Report, Tree Inventory, Transportation Impact Analysis, Stormwater Technical Information Report, Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance, East Campus Parcel 1 Binding Site Plan (application number SEP98-0039). Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Mitigation: Weyerhaeuser Company Pre -Annexation Concomitant and Zoning Agreement and applicable 1994 development codes, including Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Protection"; Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management"; and Chapter 22, "Zoning." Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: The project will be reviewed for consistency with all applicable codes and regulations including the Weyerhaeuser Company Pre -Annexation Concomitant and Zoning Agreement, which vests the project to regulations in place in 1994; FWRC 19.145; 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way; and the Public Works Department Development Standards. Any procedural requirements must meet today's codes (FWRC Title 19). Public Comment & Appeals: The official project file is available for public review at the Community Development Department (City Hall, 2.d Floor, 33325 81h Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003). Any person may submit written comments on the Use Process III application to the Director of Community Development by January 16, 2018. Only the applicant, persons who submit written comments to the director, or persons who specifically request a copy of the original decision may appeal the director's decision. Comments sent by email should be directed to: planning(@,cityoffederalway..com. Availability of File and Environmental Documents: The official project file and referenced environmental documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the Community Development Department (address above). Staff Contact: Senior Planner Stacey Welsh, 253-835-2634, stacev.welsh@,citvoffederahva4.com Printed in the Federal Way Mirror December 29, 2017 Tina Piet. l From: Sent: Linda Miffs �Imills@kentreporter.com> To: Tuesday, December 26. 2017 2:54 Ply Subject: Tina Piety Re: Legal Notice HiTina, I received your notice (Davita NOA) to be published in the Federal 1 Way Mirror Friday December 29, 2017. Gale for Linda Linda Mills LegallPublic Notice Advertising - Obituary Representative Auburn, Bellevue,Reporters Covington/Maple Valley/Black Diamond, Issaquah/Samm and Renton Repartees, Federal Way Mirror, Seattle, Weedly, Snoqualmle Valley Record, and Okanogan Valley Gazette-Tribuneami ,Kirkland Direct:253-234-3506 Internal:36027 Fax:253-437-6016 19425 68th Ave. S., Ste A, Kent, WA 98082 Map Print. tes Onlin�es Madam SoundInfo �L On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Tina Piety <Tina.p1et ci oil ederalwa ,co1n> wrote: Hello Linda, Mercer Island, Redmond Please publish the attached legal notice (Davita NOA, 17-105642_ Mirror's issue. Please furnish an affidavit davit of publication. This is f uP) m Frida 's Thank you, or the Community Development account (12/29/17) Federal Way Tina E. Tina Piety, CAP -OM Administrative Assistant II Federal Way Community Development Department 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone: 25318` 3� Fax: 253/g�f com www.�i offeder_al wa . A t DEPART,►1E,NT OF CQ1MIUNII-V DE%'UO3P11E.N-r 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-70Q0, Fax 253-835-2609 www.cif affederalwa .com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION E. Tina Pie the State of Washington, that a: hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of 0 Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was � 0 mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at e December 26 ach of the attached addresses on 2077. Project Name File Number(s) _ 17- 1 uab4-SE 17- 104985-CN $ i 7- 105644-SM Signature ---J Date December 27 20I7 K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 72/27/2017 11:23:00 AM CITY OF 0 "'� Federal Way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name: DaVita Healthcare Office Park Project Description: Construction of buildin a 48.5-foot-tall, 200,000 s =rfr 11 5 act basement parking, 706 parking stalls, and associated sit W�oktoorifice V an Applicant: Arthur Richey, Da Vita, 6245 South Victor Avenue , M Consultin En Tulsa, OK 74136 Agent: ES Federal Way WA 98003 Engineers, LLC 33400 8� Avenue South, Suite 205,�%/�, �^ O Project Location: iVext to traffic c Street, Federal Wa , arcic at 32 usn1�S; }' WA, County Parcels 2 5465 d�G4 South and South 323, Date of �9U, -0110, Application: h'o T nber 22, 2017 Date of Notice of App"cation: December 29, 2017 Date Determined Complete: L3eccmbex 20, 2017 Requested Decision and Public Comments Due: decision Cale #17. Other Permits Included with Jatl:aarf 16, 2018 105642-Up) issued b _ this Application: me $ (F' Chapter 1 `9.65, Additional pezxnits a dreaar amConununi . D applicant requests a Use Process III threshold d evelapment pursuant to FaderullYf Trans �emunatian pursuant to Stgle Er»,imnme►ra pavals in conjunction with J Redred Cade partatton Concurrenc , the Use Process III decision include a and Forest Practices Crass IV(Ede #17-104985_CN �`! EPA) Rules XVAC 197-11 General Pe ), 5treer _ .10dification (file #17- (file #17.105643-SE), permit. t 10564q-.Slj jD, Bound Environmental Do �' Dine Adjustment, Documents: Environmental Checklists Wetland Report. Transpnr cane Impart rinal3rsis, Stomiwater Technical Information Report, h' Nansignificante, Fast C P rt, GeotethrucaI Report, Tree Inventory, Campus Parcel 1 Binding Site Plana P litigated Environmental Deterrm' Development Re (application number 5EP98-0039). Edon of Zoning t and appl to le used for Project Mitig "Ou: Weyerhaeuser Corn p Protection-, Agreement and applicable 1t394 d�welo rn�ent codes, intludin Chapter 20, "Sul4visions ; Chapter 21 g Federal ly/. Pan}' Pre annexation Concomitant and P `Surface and Cr Cade (FWCC) Chaprex 18, "Environmental Consisten Sroxmwarer:�fanagement"; and Chapter22, ° Zodlg„ Cy with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: The applicable codes and x egthe ions including the We3erhaeuser Com py Pre will be reviewed for con�tency Agre��t, which vests the project to re Pant Pre -Ann Concnnfirant and Zoe an M""alas amended by the Ci � ofFed dons in place in 1994 requirements must meet today', codes Way; and the public Lt7orks Department rtmen; 2016 ICiggCoun S� g partsnenr i7errrto lalerDcsi�� (F�RC Title 19). prrie�r! .ilandordc any Procedural Public Continent & A Department ppeais: The official project file is available for public review at the Community Development (City Hall, 2nd Floor 33325 8[1) Avenue South, Fed cflmments on the Use Process III application to the Director a Wa W applicant, Y. 980D3}. an tY eInpmenr Persons who submit written comments Y Person may submit written, decision may a mrnents to the director, o � Development by January 1G, 2018. Only the Y appeal the director's decision. Comments sent b , Persons who specifical] ] email should be directed to: Ylrequesta copy °£ the original Availability of File and Enr+imnsnertial Documents: are available fox public review d Tm�f e h r.cornm The afh,31 project file and ref �g normal business hours at Commurut3, t Department enviry Develop a nmental.documents Staff Contact: Senior Planner Stacey Welsh, 253-835- partment {address above), 2G34, t e -wel b a ci 'off, de alwa '.c. m Printed in the Fedora! W-V A mrDecember 29, 2017 File 17-105642_UP Doc ID 77049 M M � O p -r lMp M M M O 1p �p 00 00 N Cp' a O p p M 00 O ¢ m 00 00 Op0 opp Op O p O 3 300 00 Q¢¢¢ Q Q o 0 0 w ¢ 3 300 00 3 3 a a ¢ a o w �wa��z��¢aww �¢ ¢ w w w W v ��" Q O W Q Q Q ¢ O Q Q q Z Z LL. UCD U 0 0 'x o U) LLI w o k �* � F E" Ew- W o Lf1 Z �" W a' o 0 coo w W w N N ❑ W Worn U¢i 'SxX3xU �Q �Q�o �� wn w ,Q(n ON - v im UU¢cQ o� Q am N00 0 O O a � a M M" M O p N co00 a CC fl 0 0 N❑ O p O p O W N � n cq O.. 4r {� M 0.. Cl. a. N N N O N Cl p _N M o� M U oa 00 00 U U U w qo Q z ¢ w o GO Qw U LU a p 'T n w w w O F= U U .a 0 in rn �- E-� ❑ 0 o Q a ¢ rr Q w c w U w w w U U O U a� wwOR�:�o�<LD j 3 � ) W x re z Q x� ¢ a U U U w w LU w L w r� w U U U ¢ W 3 3 w w w W LU V) � ci C4 z ¢z ¢ C7 C7 w OOQ z d 00"o o o rn CN o 0 0 0 0 N v0 o o p o M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w o o 00 00 00 � p N C,4 o00 V N N N N N N N .h h r' N M (p N N N N N N N N co rn o clq LO co o N 04 Sep ember 2017 City of 3 r �' Parcel Citytof Federal Way 33325 8th Ave S. Fade Wey We. 98003 Federal Way Notification area (253)-835 - 7000 www.cRyoffederelwey. com `••yy i ••• C]" or King County Tax Parcels Scale: Federal Way Subject Property N 0 175 350 Feet 1 I This map Is Intended for uee as a graphical representation only. Notified Properties The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to Its accuracy. i 40k CITY OF A%�� Federal Way December 20, 2017 Mr. Eric LaBrie ESM Consulting Engineers LLC 33400 8`[' Avenue South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor eric.labrie esmcivil.com Re: Files #17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE; LETTER OF COMPLETE APPLICATION DaVita Healthcare Office Park, Federal Way Dear Mr. LaBrie: The Community Development Department is in receipt of your November 22, 2017, and December 8, 2017, project submittals. Your proposed project includes construction of a 200,000 square -foot office building and additional parking. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Please consider this correspondence a formal Letter of Complete Application. Pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.15.045 and 14.10.020, the application is deemed complete as of the date of this letter. The complete application determination is based on a review of your submittal relative to those requirements as set forth in FWRC 19.15.040 and 14.10.020. The submittal requirements are not intended to determine if an application conforms to the City of Federal Way codes; they are used only to determine if all required materials have been submitted. CLOSING Formal processing and review of your application will now begin. Technical review comments will follow at a later date. A Notice of Application will need to be posted on site, published in the Federal Way Mirror, posted on the city's official notice boards, and mailed to the persons within 300 feet of each boundary of the subject property within 14 days of this letter. Any questions concerning your applications may be directed to me at 253-835-2634, or stacey.welsh@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, ,�z., mil✓-��,2— Stacey Welsh, AICP Senior Planner Brian Davis, Community Development Director Jim Harris, Senior Planner Peter Lawrence, Plans Examiner, via email Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, via email Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue, via email Arthur Richey, 6245 South Victor Avenue, Tulsa, OK 74136, arthur.richeYndavita.com Doc, L D. 77028 4 Form No. 14 Subdivision Guarantee Guarantee No.: NCS-881568-WAl GUARANTEE Issued by First American Title Insurance Company 818 Stewart Street, Suite 800, Seattle, WA 98101 Title officer.- Chantale A. Stiller Anderson Phone; (206)728--0400 FAX.- (206)448-6348 -7 - PsO2-Do FP RESUBMITTED DEC 0 8 2017 MY OF FEDERAL WAY GOMMUNfrY DEVELOPME i FirstAmencan Tide Insurance Company Form No. 14 Guarantee No.: NCS-881568-WAl Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) Page No.: 1 c ti First American Title Insurance Company Nadonal Commercial Services 818 Stewart Street, Suite 800, Seattle, WA 98101 (206)728-0400 - (800)526-7544 FAX (206)448-6348 Chantale A. Stiller -Anderson 206-448-6286 cstiller@firstam.com SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE LIABILITY $ 2,000.00 ORDER NO.: NCS-881568-WAl FEE $ 750.00 TAX $ 75.75 YOUR REF.: Lot K First American Title Insurance Company a Corporation, herein called the Company Subject to the Liability Exclusions and Limitations set forth below and in Schedule A. GUARANTEES ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC herein called the Assured, against loss not exceeding the liability amount stated above which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. The Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amount of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall the Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth above. 3. This Guarantee is restricted to the use of the Assured for the purpose of providing title evidence as may be required when subdividing land pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 58.17, R.C.W., and the local regulations and ordinances adopted pursuant to said statute. It is not to be used as a basis for closing any transaction affecting title to said property. Dated: November 22, 2017 at 7:30 A.M. FirstAmencan Title Insurance Company Form No. 14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) SCHEDULE A The assurances referred to on the face page are: A. Title is vested in: Genesis KC Development, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Guarantee No.: NCS-881568-WAI Page No.: 2 B. That according to the Company's title plant records relative to the following described real property (including those records maintained and indexed by name), there are no other documents affecting title to said real property or any portion thereof, other than those shown below under Record Matters. The following matters are excluded from the coverage of this Guarantee: 1. Unpatented Mining Claims, reservations or exceptions in patents or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof. 2. Water rights, claims or title to water. 3. Tax Deeds to the State of Washington. 4. Documents pertaining to mineral estates. DESCRIPTION: PARCEL I: LOTS K AND L OF EAST CAMPUS CORPORATE PARK PARCEL 1 BINDING SITE PLAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 191 OF PLATS, PAGES 39 THROUGH 45, INCLUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL II: ALL NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS FOR INGRESS, EGRESS, AND UTILITIES AS ON THE FACE OF THE PLAT OF EAST CAMPUS CORPORATE PARK PARCEL 1 BINDING SITE PLAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 191 OF PLATS, PAGES 39 THROUGH 45, INCLUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL III: A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS, DRAINAGE, AND UTILITIES AS CREATED BY THAT DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, EASEMENTS & RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO QUADRANT EAST CAMPUS CORPORATE PARK PARCEL I RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 19990916001928. APN: 215465-0120-07 APN: 215465-0110-09 First American Tide Insurance Company Form No. 14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) RECORD MATTERS: Guarantee No.: NCS-881568-WAI Page No.: 3 1. General Taxes for the year 2018, in an amount not yet available, which cannot be paid until February 15, 2018. Tax Account No.: 215465-0110-09 Note: Taxes and charges for 2017 were paid in full in the amount of $14,366.27. (Affects Lot K) 2. General Taxes for the year 2018, in an amount not yet available, which cannot be paid until February 15, 2018. Tax Account No.: 215465-0120-07 Note: Taxes and charges for 2017 were paid in full in the amount of $14,147.55. (Affects Lot L) 3. Potential charges, for the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charge, as authorized under RCW 35.58 and King County Code 28.84.050. Said charges could apply for any property that connected to the King County Sewer Service area on or after February 1, 1990. Note: Properties located in Snohomish County and Pierce County may be subject to the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charges. To verify charges contact: (206) 296-1450 or CapChargeEscrow@kjngcounty.gov. 4. Facility Charges, if any, including but not limited to hook-up, or connection charges and latecomer charges for water or sewer facilities of Federal Way Water and Sewer District as disclosed by instrument recorded May 12, 1989 as Recording No. 8905120210. 5. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Agreement" regarding construction of sewer facilities recorded February 18, 1994 as Instrument No. 9402182159 of Official Records. By and between Federal Way Water and Sewer District and Weyerhauser Company, Incorporated. As of the Date of Policy, (A) no charges under this Exception have been assessed that are not yet due, and (B) no charges previously assessed that are now due and payable remain unpaid and outstanding. The lien created in Paragraph 26 of said agreement was released by instrument recorded under Recording No. 9512261712. 6. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 94-219" recorded October 26, 1994 as 9410260933 of Official Records. F/rstAmencan Title Insurance Company Form No. 14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) Guarantee No.: NCS-881568-WAl Page No.: 4 Reservations and exceptions, including the terms and conditions thereof Reserving: Minerals Reserved By: Recorded: Recording Information: Weyerhaeuser Company May 21, 1996 9605210333 8. Reservations and exceptions, including the terms and conditions thereof: Reserving: Mineral Rights Reserved By: Weyerhaeuser Company Recorded: December 10, 1998 Recording Information: 9812102519 Document re -recorded June 23, 1999 as Recording No. 990623002366 of Official Records. 9. Dedication, 15-foot ingress, egress and utility easement, 5-foot right of way easement, streetscape area and notes, as contained and/or delineated on the face of the Boundary Line Adjustment No. BLA 99-0002 recorded under Recording No. 9905129004, in King County, Washington. 10. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "License" recorded May 12, 1999 as 9905120886 of Official Records. 11. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "License" recorded June 4, 1999 as 9906041555 of Official Records. 12. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: August 17, 1999 as Recording No. 990817001304 In Favor of: Puget Sound Energy, Inc. For: Gas pipeline 13. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: September 3, 1999 as Recording No. 990903000828 In Favor of: Lakehaven Utility District For: Water facilities 14. Restrictions, conditions, dedications, notes, easements and provisions, but specifically excluding Notes 33 and 34 thereof, as contained and/or delineated on the face of the East Campus Corporate Park Parcel 1 Binding Site Plan No. BSP 98-0003 recorded in Volume 191 of Plats at Pages 39 through 45, in King County, Washington. 15. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: September 16, 1999 as Recording No. 990916001926 In Favor of: City of Federal Way, a Washington municipal corporation For: Stormwater treatment and detention facilities FirstAmerican Tide Insurance Company Form No. 14 Guarantee No.: NCS-881568-WAl Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) Page No.: 5 16. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: September 16, 1999 as Recording No. 990916001927 In Favor of: City of Federal Way, a Washington municipal corporation For: Public right of way 17 18. Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Easements & Restrictions Applicable to Quadrant East Campus Corporate Park Parcel I: Recorded: Recording No.: September 16, 1999 990916001928 Provision of the articles of incorporation and by-laws of the ECC1 Owner's Association, and any tax, fee, assessments or charges as may be levied by said association. A document entitled "Agreement", executed by and between The Quadrant Corporation and Lakehaven Utility District for construction of sewer and water distribution system recorded December 22, 1999, as Instrument No. 991222001643 of Official Records. 19. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled Notice of Waiver under Federal Way City Code Section 19-46, executed by and between City of Federal Way, a Washington municipal corporation and The Quadrant Corporation, a Washington corporation regarding refund of traffic impact fees, recorded March 21, 2000 as Instrument No. 20000321001498 of Official Records. 20. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: 21 22. 23. 24. 25. Recording Date: May 8, 2006 Recording Information: 20060508001642 In Favor of: Puget Sound Energy, Inc. For: Transmission, distribution and sale of gas and electricity Affects: Lot K Terms and conditions, including terms of release contained in Deed: Recorded: Recording No.: February 9, 2016 20160209001433 Evidence of the authority of the individual(s) to execute the forthcoming document for Genesis KC Development, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, copies of the current operating agreement should be submitted orior to closing. Title to vest in an incoming owner whose name is not disclosed. Such name must be furnished to us so that a name search may be made. Prior to issuance of an extended coverage policy, the Company will require an Owner's Affidavit be completed and submitted to the Company for approval prior to closing. The Company reserves the right to make any additional requirement as warranted. Matters of extended owner/purchaser coverage which are dependent upon are inspection and an ALTA survey of the property for determination of insurability. First American Tide Insurance Company Form No. 14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) Guarantee No.: NCS-881568-WAl Page No.: 6 Please submit a copy of the ALTA Survey at your earliest convenience for review. Our inspection will be held pending our review of the ALTA Survey and the result of said inspection will be furnished by supplemental report. 26. Unrecorded leaseholds, if any, rights of vendors and security agreement on personal property and rights of tenants, and secured parties to remove trade fixtures at the expiration of the term. First American Title Insurance Company Form No. 14 Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) INFORMATIONAL NOTES Guarantee No.: NCS-881568-WAl Page No.: 7 A. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upon it. First American Title insurance Company Form No. 14 Guarantee No.: NCS-881568-WAl Subdivision Guarantee (4-10-75) Page No.: 8 SCHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE OF THIS GUARANTEE 1. Except to the extent that specific assurance are provided in this Guarantee, the Company assumes no liability for loss or damage by reason of the following: (a) Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters against the title, whether or not shown by the public records. (b) (1) Taxes or assessments of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property; or, (2) Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not the matters excluded under (i) or (2) are shown by the records of the taxing authority or by the public records. (c) (1) Unpatented mining claims; (2) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (3) water rights, claims or titre to water, whether or not the matters excluded under (1), (2) or (3) are shown by the public records. 2. Notwithstanding any specific assurances which are provided in this Guarantee, the Company assumes no liability For loss or damage by reason of the following: (a) Defects, hens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters affecting the title to any property beyond the lines of the land expressly described in this Guarantee, or title to streets, roads, avenues, lanes, ways or waterways to which such land abuts, or the right to maintain therein vaults, tunnels, ramps, or any structure or improvements; or any rights or easements therein, unless such property, rights or easements are expressly and specifically set forth in said description. (b) Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, whether or not shown by the public records; (1) which are created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by one or more of the Assureds; (2) which result in no loss to the Assured; or (3) which do not result in the invalidity or potential invalidity of any judicial or non -judicial proceeding which is within the scope and purpose of the assurances provided. (c) The identity of any party shown or referred to in this Guarantee. (d) The validity, legal effect or priority or any matter shown or referred to in this Guarantee. GUARANTEE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS 1. Definition of Terms. The following terms when used in the Guarantee mean: (a) the "Assured": the party or parties named as the Assured in this Guarantee, or on a supplemental writing executed by the Company. (b) "land": the land described or referred to In this Guarantee, and Improvements affixed thereto which by taw constitute real property. The term "land" does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described or referred to In this Guarantee, nor any right, title, Interest; estate or easement In abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways or waterways. (c) "mortgage": mortgage, deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. (d) "public records" : records established under state statutes at Date of Guarantee for the purpose of imparting Constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without knowledge. (e) "date": the effective date. 2. Notice of Claim to be Given by Assured Claimant. An Assured shall notify the Company promptly in writing in case knowledge shall come to an Assured hereunder of any claim of title or interest which is adverse to the title to the estate or interest, as stated herein, and which might cause loss or damage for which the Company may be liable by virtue of this Guarantee. If prompt notice shall not be given to the Company, then all liability of the Company shall terminate with regard to the matter or maskers for which prompt notice is required; provided, however, that failure to notify the Company shall In no rase prejudice the rights of any Assured under this Guarantee unless the Company shall be prejudiced by the Failure and then only to the extent of the prejudice. 3. No Duty to Defend or Prosecute. The Company shall have no duty to defend or prosecute any action or proceeding to which the Assured Is a parry, notwithstanding the nature of any allegation in such action or proceeding. 4. Company's Option to Defend or Prosecute Actions; Duty of Assured Claimant to Cooperate. Even though the Company has no duty to defend or prosecute as set forth in Paragraph 3 above: (a) The Company shall have the right, at its sole option and cost, to institute and prosecute any action or proceeding, interpose a defense, as Ilmited In (b), or to do any other act which In Its opinion may be necessary or desirable to establish the title to the estate or interest as stated herein, or to establish the lien rights of the Assured, or to prevent or reduce loss or damage to the Assured. The Company may take any appropriate action under the terms of this Guarantee, whether or not it shall be liable hereunder, and shall not thereby concede liability or waive any provision of this Guarantee. If the Company shall exercise its rights under this paragraph, it shall do so diligently. (b) If the Company elects to exercise its options as stated In Paragraph 4(a) the Company shall have the right to select counsel of its choke (subject to the right of such Assured to abject for reasonable cause) to represent the Assured and shall not be liable for and will not pay the fees of any other counsel, nor will the Company pay any fees, costs or expenses incurred by an Assured in the defense of those causes of action which allege matters not covered by this Guarantee. (c) Whenever the Company shalt have brought an action or interposed a defense as permitted by the provisions of this Guarantee, the Company may pursue any litigation to final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction and expressly reserves the right, In its sole discretion, to appeal from an adverse judgment or order. (d) in all cases where this Guarantee permits the Company to prosecute or provide for the defense of any action or proceeding, an Assured shall secure to the Company the right to so prosecute or provide for the defense of any action or proceeding, and all appeals therein, and permit the Company to use, at its option, the name of such Assured for this purpose. Whenever requested by the Company, an Assured, at the Company's expense, shall give the Company all reasonable aid in any action or proceeding, securing evidence, obtaining witnesses, prosecuting or defending the action or lawful act which in the opinion of the Company may be necessary or desirable to establish the title to the estate or interest as stated herein, or to establish the lien rights of the Assured. If the Company Is prejudiced by the failure of the Assured to furnish the required cooperation, the Company's obligations to the Assured under the Guarantee shall terminate. S. Proof of Loss or Damage. In addition to and after the notices required under Section 2 of these Conditions and Stipulations have been provided to the Company, a proof of kiss or damage signed and sworn to by the Assured shall be furnished to the Company within ninety (90) days after the Assured shall ascertain the facts giving rise to the loss or damage. The proof of loss or damage shall describe the matters covered by thls Guarantee which constitute the basis of lass or damage and shall state, to the extent possible, the basis of calculating the amount of the Im or damage. If the Company is prejudiced by the failure of the Assured to provide the required proof of loss or damage, the Company's obligation to such Assured under the Guarantee shalt terminate. In addition, the Assured may reasonably be required to submit to examination under oath by any authorized representative of the Company and shall produce for examination, Inspection and copying, at such reasonable tames and places as may be designated by any authorized representative of the Company, all records, books, ledgers, checks, correspondence and memoranda, whether bearing a date before or after Date of Guarantee, which reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. Further, if requested by any authorized representative of the Company, the Assured shall grant its permission, in writing, for any authorized representative of the Company to examine, Inspect and copy all records, books, ledgers, checks, correspondence and memoranda in the custody or control of a third party, which reasonably pertain to the Less or Damage. All Information designated as confidential by the Assured provided to the Company, pursuant to this Section shall not be disclosed to others unless, in the reasonable judgment of the Company, it is necessary in the administration of the claim. Failure of the Assured to submit for examination under oath, produce other reasonably requested Information or grant permission to secure reasonably necessary Information from third parties as required In the above paragraph, unless prohibited by law or governmental regulation, shall terminate any liability of the Company under this Guarantee to the Assured for that claim. Form No. 1282 (Rev. 12/15/95) First American Title Insurance Company 6. Options to Pay or Otherwise Settle Claims: Termination of Liability. In case of a claim under this Guarantee, the Company shall have the following additional options: (a) To Pay or Tender Payment of the Amount of Liability or to Purchase the Indebtedness. The Company shall have the option to pay or settle or compromise for or in the name of the Assured any claim which could result in loss to the Assured within the coverage of this Guarantee, or to pay the full amount of this Guarantee or, if this Guarantee is issued for the benefit of a holder of a mortgage or a lienholder, the Company shall have the option to purchase the indebtedness secured by said mortgage or said lien for the amount owing thereon, together with any costs, reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses incurred by the Assured claimant which were authorized by the Company up to the time of purchase. Such purchase, payment or tender of payment of the full amount of the Guarantee shall terminate all liability of the Company hereunder. In the event after notice of claim has been given to the Company by the Assured the Company offers to purchase said indebtedness, the owner of such indebtedness shall transfer and assign said indebtedness, together with any collateral security, to the Company upon payment of the purchase price. Upon the exercise by the Company of the option provided for in Paragraph (a) the Company's obligation to the Assured under this Guarantee for the claimed loss or damage, other than to make the payment required in that paragraph, shall terminate, including any obligation to continue the defense or prosecution of any litigation for which the Company has exercised its options under Paragraph 4, and the Guarantee shall be surrendered to the Company for cancellation. (b) To Pay or Otherwise Settle With Parties Other Than the Assured or With the Assured Claimant. To pay or otherwise settle with other parties for or in the name of an Assured claimant any claim Assured against under this Guarantee, together with any costs, attorneys' fees and expenses incurred by the Assured claimant which were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment and which the Company is obligated to pay. Upon the exercise by the Company of the option provided for in Paragraph (b) the Company's obligation to the Assured under this Guarantee for the claimed loss or damage, other than to make the payment required in that paragraph, shall terminate, including any obligation to continue the defense or prosecution of any litigation for which the Company has exercised its options under Paragraph 4. 7. Determination and Extent of Liability. This Guarantee is a contract of Indemnity against actual monetary loss or damage sustained or incurred by the Assured claimant who has suffered loss or damage by reason of reliance upon the assurances set forth in this Guarantee and only to the extent herein described, and subject to the Exclusions From Coverage of This Guarantee. The Liability of the Company under this Guarantee to the Assured shall not exceed the least of: (a) the amount of liability stated in this Guarantee; (b) the amount of the unpaid principal indebtedness secured by the mortgage of an Assured mortgagee, as limited or provided under Section 6 of these Conditions and Stipulations or as reduced under Section 9 of these Conditions and Stipulations, at the time the loss or damage Assured against by this Guarantee occurs, together with interest thereon; or (c) the difference between the value of the estate or interest covered hereby as stated herein and the value of the estate or interest subject to any defect, lien or encumbrance Assured against by this Guarantee. 8. Limitation of Liability. (a) If the Company establishes the title, or removes the alleged defect, lien or encumbrance, or cures any other matter Assured against by this Guarantee in a reasonably diligent manner by any method, including litigation and the completion of any appeals therefrom, it shall have fully performed its obligations with respect to that matter and shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused thereby. (b) In the event of any litigation by the Company or with the Company's consent, the Company shall have no liability for loss or damage until there has been a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and disposition of all appeals therefrom, adverse to the title, as stated herein. (c) The Company shall not be liable for loss or damage to any Assured for liability voluntarily assumed by the Assured in settling any claim or suit without the prior written consent of the Company. 9. Reduction of Liability or Termination of Liability. All payments under this Guarantee, except payments made for costs, attorneys' fees and expenses pursuant to Paragraph 4 shall reduce the amount of liability pro tanto. 10. Payment of Loss. (a) No payment shall be made without producing this Guarantee for endorsement of the payment unless the Guarantee has been lost or destroyed, in which case proof of loss or destruction shall be furnished to the satisfaction of the Company. (b) When liability and the extent of loss or damage has been definitely fixed in accordance with these Conditions and Stipulations, the loss or damage shall be payable within thirty (30) days thereafter. 11. Subrogation Upon Payment or Settlement. Whenever the Company shall have settled and paid a claim under this Guarantee, all right of subrogation shall vest in the Company unaffected by any act of the Assured claimant. The Company shall be subrogated to and be entitled to all rights and remedies which the Assured would have had against any person or property in respect to the claim had this Guarantee not been issued. If requested by the Company, the Assured shall transfer to the Company all rights and remedies against any person or property necessary in order to perfect this right of subrogation. The Assured shall permit the Company to sue, compromise or settle in the name of the Assured and to use the name of the Assured in any transaction or litigation involving these rights or remedies. If a payment on account of a claim does not fully cover the loss of the Assured the Company shall be subrogated to all rights and remedies of the Assured after the Assured shall have recovered its principal, interest, and costs of collection. 12. Arbitration. Unless prohibited by applicable law, either the Company or the Assured may demand arbitration pursuant to the Title Insurance Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association. Arbitrable matters may include, but are not limited to, any controversy or claim between the Company and the Assured arising out of or relating to this Guarantee, any service of the Company in connection with its issuance or the breach of a Guarantee provision or other obligation. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Liability is $1,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Assured. All arbitrable matters when the amount of liability is in excess of $1,000,000 shall be arbitrated only when agreed to by both the Company and the Assured. The Rules in effect at Date of Guarantee shall be binding upon the parties. The award may include attorneys' fees only if the laws of the state in which the land is located permits a court to award attorneys' fees to a prevailing party. Judgment upon the award rendered by the Arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. The law of the situs of the land shall apply to an arbitration under the Title Insurance Arbitration Rules. A copy of the Rules may be obtained from the Company upon request. 13. Liability Limited to This Guarantee; Guarantee Entire Contract. (a) This Guarantee together with all endorsements, if any, attached hereto by the Company is the entire Guarantee and contract between the Assured and the Company. In interpreting any provision of this Guarantee, this Guarantee shall be construed as a whole. (b) Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to this Guarantee. (c) No amendment of or endorsement to this Guarantee can be made except by a writing endorsed hereon or attached hereto signed by either the President, a Vice President, the Secretary, an Assistant Secretary, or validating officer or authorized signatory of the Company. 14. Notices, Where Sent. All notices required to be given the Company and any statement in writing required to be furnished the Company shall include the number of this Guarantee and shall be addressed to the Company at 2 First American Way. Bldg. 2, Santa Ana, CA. 92707. Form No. 1282 (Rev. 12/15/95) First American Title Insurance Company CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMNXJNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 12-1-17 TO: Cole Elliott, Development Services Manager Peter Lawrence, Plans Examiner Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue Rob Van Orsow,. Solid Waste/Recycling Coordinator Tina Vaslet, Pierce Transit David Korthals, KC Metro FROM: Stacey Welsh, Senioi Planner FOR DRC MTG. ON: 12-14-17 FILE NUMBER (s): 17-105642-UP & 17-105643-SE RELATED FILE NOS.: 17-105644-SM & 17-104985-CN & 17-103654-PC PROJECT NAME: DAVITA HEALTHCARE OFFICE PARK PROJECT ADDRESS: *NO SITE ADDRESS* PARCEL NUMBER: 215465-0060, -0090, -0110, -0120 ZONING DISTRICT: OP-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Development of an approximately 200,000 square foot office building and additional parking for DaVita. LAND USE PERMITS: UP & SEPA PROJECT CONTACT: ESM Consulting Engineers Eric LaBrie 33400 8th Ave South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 MATERIALS SUBMITTED: See attached Cover Letter for list *If you need any materials besides what has been routed let me know. You can also find many items on the City's FTP site at: ftp:/Zftp.cityoffederalway.com/outbax then go to the "DaVita Submittal Documents" link. RECEIVED � 41k MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION NOV 2 2 2017 DEPARTMENT OF CommuNrrY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8s' Avenue South CITY OF " OF FEDERf�L WAY Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Federal40i;:tWay DEVELOPMENT 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityoffederalway.com APPLICATION NO(S) Date f 1 — Project Name Davita Healthcare Office Park Property Address/Location S 323rd St Federal Way, WA Parcel Number(s) 21546-0060, -0090 -0110 -0120 Project Description Development of a +/- 200,000 square foot offices ace building and additional parkin for Davita Healthearg, IQaWMIJIII aNILII Type of Permit Required Annexation Binding Site Plan Boundary Line Adjustment Comp Plan/Rezone Land Surface Modification _ Lot Line Elimination Preapplication Conference Process I (Director's Approval) Process II (SitePlan Review) X Process III (Project Approval) Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) Process VI X SEPA w/Project SEPA Only Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use _ Short Subdivision Subdivision Variance: Commercial/Residential Required Information OP-1 Zoning Designation Office Paris Comprehensive Plan Designation Value of Existing Improvements Value of Proposed Improvements International Building Code (IBC): B Occupancy Type II-B Construction Type Applicant Name: Arthur Richey Address: 6245 S Victor Ave City/State: Tulsa, OK Zip: 74136 Phone: (918) 810-3700 Fax: Email:a k .rictgpdayl c Signs '� Agent (if diffw4nt titan Applicant) Name: Eric LaBrie, ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC Address: 33400 8th Ave S, Suite 205 City/State: Federal Way, WA Zip: 98003 Phone: 253-838-6113 Fax: 253-838-7104 Email: eric.labrie@esmcivii.com Signature: ,;...-6 Owner Name: Genesis KC Development, LLC Address: Same as above City/State: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Signature: Bulletin #003 — January 1, 2011 Page 1 of 1 k \HandoutslMaster Land Use Application RECEIVRD NOV 2 2 2017 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT —CONSULTING ENGINEERS, Lac November 22, 2017 Mr. Robert "Doc' Hansen Planning Manager City of Federal Way Department of Community Development 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: Process III Land Use Application with SEPA DaVita Healthcare, Corporate Business Office Dear Mr. Hansen; Job No. 1884-001-015 On behalf of DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc. and Genesis KC Development, LLC, ESM Consulting Engineers is pleased to submit a Process III land use application with SEPA to the City of Federal Way for review and processing. DaVita is seeking to develop a new 200,000 SF corporate office building and associated parking spaces within the East Campus Corporate Park, as discussed in the pre -application meeting held on August 24, 2017. PROJECT NARRATIVE DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc. currently houses a portion of their corporate offices in an existing building located at 32275 32"d Avenue South. As the company continues to grow, they have decided to expand their corporate footprint in the City of Federal Way by creating a campus -like development utilizing the existing building and adjacent vacant land. To accomplish this vision, Genesis KC Development, LLC (the development arm of DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc.) recently purchased the four existing, undeveloped lots at the intersection of 32"d Avenue South and South 323rd Street, next to the existing DaVita office building. These lots are known as King County tax parcels 215465-0110, -0120, -0060 and -0090, which include approximately 11.5 acres of OP-1 zoned property in the East Campus Corporate Park (Lots F, I, K and U• DaVita intends to build a new office building to house corporate activities on the southern two lots, and construct additional parking necessary to support this building on the northern two lots. The parking lot to the north and the building to the south currently cross parcel boundary lines. As such, the City of Federal Way will require a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) to remove interior lot lines. The applicant, along with ESM Consulting Engineers, will submit for the BLA at a later date while this Process III land use application is reviewed by the City. ESM Federal Way ESM Everett Civil Engineer. b Land Planning 33400 Sth Ave S, Ste 205 1010 SE Everett Mall Way, Ste 210 Land Surveying Landscape Architecture Federal Way, WA 98003 Everett, WA 98208 253.838.6113tel 425.297.9900tel 3D Laser Scanning GIS 800.345 . 5694 tall free 800.345.5694 toll free 253.838 . 7104 fax 425.297.9901 fax www.esmcivil.com Mr. Robert "Doc" Hansen November 22, 2017 Page 2 The proposed office building will consist of two stories and will incorporate a portion of underground parking beneath the building to take advantage of the existing topography. The off -site parking lot is proposed to be an expansion of the existing DaVita parking lot to the west, with a total of approximately 700 new parking spaces. The parking lots connect via sidewalks and pedestrian pathways in order to serve both buildings. A non -motorized path is implemented from South 323`d Street to the South 323`d Street right-of-way that meanders through the east -side of the southern portion of the project, near the project's proposed office space building. Employees and visitors will also be provided with an entry plaza and staff patio, incorporated into the design of this proposal. LAND USE AND ZONING The project is located in the OP-1 zone, which is further defined and regulated by the Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre -Annexation Zoning Agreement, dated August 23, 1994 as well as the 1994 Federal Way City Code. As such, the basic development standards include the following: Allowed Use: Office Accessory Use: Parking lot, if approved by the Director Dev. Standards: OP zone, as defined by the 1994 FWCC Building Height: 35' from average building elevation, plus 1' of height for every 1' of additional setback provided. Front Yard: 50', including a 25' of landscaping. Side Yard: 20' Rear Yard: 20' Parking: 1 stall/300 sf of gross floor area for Office uses. ACCESS AND REQUEST FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY MODIFICATION Vehicular access is proposed directly from 32nd Avenue South and South 323`d Street, which will include internal connections to the existing DaVita parking lot. The existing intersection roundabout at 32"d Avenue South and South 323`d Street has been fully constructed, and there are no more undeveloped parcels along either roadway. This proposal includes 9-feet of right-of-way dedication for these road frontages in order to meet the 78-feet right-of-way standard for Type K streets. However, we do not anticipate the need to provide any additional frontage improvements across the subject property as depicted in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Please see the included "Request to Modify Frontage Improvements" letter to the Public Works Director for further justification. This request is consistent with a letter provided by the Mayor to Jim Hilger with DaVita, Inc. dated March 14, 2017. STORMWATER This portion of the East Campus Corporate Park was originally designed to direct stormwater flows to the existing detention pond located to the east of this site, within King County parcel # 215465-0160. The pond is privately owned and maintained by the East Campus Corporate Park Owners' Association. Mr. Robert "Doc" Hansel i November 22, 2017 Page 3 We understand that new development is not vested to the prior stormwater regulations; therefore, the project will be designed to meet the 2016 King County Stormwater Manual as amended and adopted by the City of Federal Way. At this time, we expect to be able to use the current pond which provides the additional capacity and water quality necessary to meet current standards. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND CRITICAL AREAS Due to the size of the project, SEPA review is required with this Land Use Application. We have included a current Environmental Checklist addressing the projects known impacts and have also included a copy of the Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignifrcance, East Campus Parcel > Binding Site Plan (Application No. SEP98-0039) from 1999. This determination was made based on the original land use review of the entire East Campus Office Park. No critical areas have been identified or delineated on the property. We have engaged a wetland biologist and a geotechnical engineer to review the site for potential critical areas. Included with this application are an Existing Conditions Report provided by Talasaea, and a Geotechnical Report provided by GeoEngineers. ACHTECTURAL DESIGN INTENT The proposed buildings represent superior quality by the voluntary integration of many community design details as prescribed in FWRC 19.115. The tallest height at the top of the proposed building parapet proposed at 42'-6" ABE grade. The principal exterior building materials will include an aluminum window system with low emissivity glazing, prefinished metal panels, painted concrete and/or brick veneer. No blank walls exist on the proposed buildings as a combination of vertical banding, mountain reveal patterns, varying window shapes, trellis features and overhangs are incorporated into the design. Please refer to the enclosed Building Elevations and Design Intent from McGranahan Architects regarding the building's construction type, occupancy and design narrative. SUBMITTAL MATERIALS Included with this Process III and SEPA submittal are the following application materials: 1. Project Narrative (this letter); 2. Completed Master Land Use Application; 3. Application Fee (check for $6,371.80); 4. Right-of-way Modification Request Fee ($270 included with the application fee); 5. Proof of Concurrency Application Submittal; 6. Pre -Application Summary Letter; 7. Title Report (2 copies); 8. Letters of Water and Sewer Availability (2 copies); 9. Site Photographs (8 copies); 10. Signed and Completed SEPA Checklist (8 copies); Mr. Robert "Doc" Hansen November 22, 2017 Page 4 11. Copy of 1999 Determination of Nonsignificance - SEP98-0039 (8 copies); 12. Process III Plan Set (8 copies); 13. Building Elevations/Design Intent 14. Preliminary Technical Information Report with Level One Downstream storm drainage analysis (4 copies) 15. Traffic Impact Analysis (4 copies); 16. Copy of 2000 TIP mitigation fees approval - SEP98-0039 (4 copies); 17. Tree Assessment (4 copies); 18. Existing Conditions Report (4 copies); 19. Geotechnical Report (4 copies); 20. Addressed and stamped envelopes (2 sets); 21. List of adjacent parcels and property owner addresses; and 22. Assessors Maps showing 300-foot boundary of the subject property. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 253-838-6113. Meanwhile, we look forward to receiving a notice of complete application within the next 28 days. Sincerely, ESM CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ERIC G. LaBRIE, A.I.C.P. President Enc: As noted CC: Jim Hilger, DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc. Arthur Richey, Team Genesis Mark Kinney, Team Genesis Todd Olsen, McGranahan Architects g:lesm-jobsl1884=1 M15Wocumentlletter-004.docx J RECEIVED MIRK TO WADW1` nB.PART%xiw' CITY OF 33325 8 h Avenue South Federal Wa OCY ��17 Federal Way ax 98003fi325 v 253-835-270U;Fax 253-835-2709 Way CM OF F ��FME wW.cit ffederalwa .com COMMUN 2017 TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY REVEEvv APPLICATION APPLICATION NO(S) l/ -7 — 1/ 7 YY — �A _ Date 1 ®-1 6 — 1 7 Project Name Davita Healthcare Office Park Property Addressaocation S 323rd St, Federal Way Parcel Number(s) 215465-0060, -0090, -0110, -0120 Project Description The project will include development of approximately 200,000 SF of new office space for Davita Healthcare. PRf1PERTY nWNRR APPLICANT fff different than Ownerl Type of Development permit to be applied for: Q Commercial ❑ Single Family (SF) ❑ Multifamily (ME) ❑ Subdivision ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ None (Feasibility only) ❑ Other Approval for City to perform Concarreney analysis: 0 Yes ❑ No If NO: Applicant's Traffic Engineer must perform Concurrency analysis consistent with City procedures; however, the application fee remains the same. UDEPrWTATRAWAwmye-Y CNTempt=M W Te .PWAFW Co c=vy Appl Mk -Bev. DWW16,&C Required Information — Application is incomplete and will be returned If not filled out. Gross Square Feet (Commercial) Existing None Proposed _ 200,000 SF Number of Dwelling Units Existing N/A _ p; rpas�d N/A Number of Employees Existing None Proposed 800-900 Parcel size (acres or square footage) ExiWnp 502,244 SF prppOSed 502,244 SF Has the property previously been reviewed for concurrency? Y"— No X If yes, date of original application N/A - Concurrency Permit No:.. _ Is this an amendment to an existing Concurrency Certificate? Yes No X Will the project be phased? No Development Build -Out Year 2018 Note: Q1YJ other projects constructed in phases shall be evaluated for concurrency as each phase is submitted for RppllMW develapnnut permlis. Ourc the raxuurrca y i ext result has been determined, any changes to the development project require additional review will be Med ou an hourly basis. Estimated Number of New Trip Generated by Project per Pre -application Summary: _2,250 daily trips If the applicant's engineer has prepared a trip generation analysis, please provide the following. If not, staff will calculate the trip generation based on the above information. Existing PM Peak Hour Trips (if applicable) _ N/A Proposed PM Peak Hour Trips _336 Net New PM Peak Hour Trips COMMR2M MST EXPIRAIMC 19.90) A Concurrency Reserve Certificate (CRC) is valid until the underlying development permit expires, is withdrawn or cancelled, whichever occurs first. In that case, a new concurrency application would be required. A Concurrency Reserve Certificate is valid only for the specific development approval consistent with the development parameters and City file number within the CRC issued. A Concurrency Reserve Certificate (CRC) runs with the land, and cannot be transferred to a different parcel. I have read the above information regarding expiration deadlines. I further understand that issuance of a concurrency certificate is not a guarantee that the City will issue a development permit or building permit. 216 Property OwnerlAgent Signature Date ul;S'.1i11'i'►tI R1�;Q111REAgF�N'i +� �!'Af'1•' 1. ��'t3M,Y Permit Submittal: The following items are required for all applications: ❑ Completed and signed Concurrency Application ❑ Concurrency Application Fee paid (See Below) Net New PM Peak Hour Trip I Less than 10 1 11 - 50 2017 Application Fee $1,620.00 1 $4,650.00 LADE"WVA7RA%ConazmacyWNTmpWeOcal Tdo WcWW Co mureiey AppBmLion Rev. Dw2016.doc 51 - 500 Greater than 500+ $8,505.00 $13,635.00 2111 Pacific. Suite 100 Tacoma. Washington 98402 November 22, 2017 Mr. Eric LaBrie, AICP President ESM Consulting Engineers 33400 81h Ave South, Suite 205 Federal Way, WA 98003 Re: DaVita Healthcare, Corporate Business Office Dear Eric, MCGRANAHANa,clitects RECEIVED CITY OF FED ERAl.WAY OOMMUNFI—Y ❑E11ri..OPME3,F1 The following Statement of Architectural Design Intent has been developed for the proposed corporate office building for DaVita Healthcare, and is intended to be a component of your Use Process III submittal for this project. In addition, responses are included to the Planning Division review comments, Item10 b)- Design Guidelines, found in the City of Federal Way's Preapplication Summary Letter dated 09/18/17. STATEMENT OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN INTENT The proposed building is approximately 200,000 gross square feet (GSF) and will house, as its primary tenant, a corporate business office and ancillary uses. Utilizing the existing site topography, the primary building entry is proposed at elevation 460FT, with a lower parking level of approximately 150 stalls and 19,400 GSF. The upper two floors of the building will each be approximately 90,300 GSF. The building will be sited with its primary entrance facing 32nd Avenue South, with a strong visual and pedestrian connection to the existing office building located to the west of the site. Building elevations will be modulated via a series of vertical "panels" of varying width and finish, recalling an array of tree trunks and the original forested condition of the site and its environs. Where possible, mature evergreen trees along the north, south and west edges of the property will be retained. A two-story shift of the building mass facing the primary entry drive and roundabout on S323rd Street signifies the main entry and provides a pedestrian plaza immediately adjacent to the primary building access. The plaza will consist of hardscape and landscape elements supporting pedestrian activities, and providing visual connections to both the adjacent parking lot to the north and the existing building to the west. Exterior finishes and colors will be compatible with the neighboring office building development west and south of 32nd Avenue S, and may include natural tones of brick, light painted concrete, and neutral metal panel cladding along with aluminum framed storefront and curtain wall glazing systems. Typical 17o5.000 253 T 383 3084 a www.mcgranahan.com Mr. Eric LaBrie November 22, 2017 Page 2 glazing will be tinted to maximize solar performance, with clear glazing used at primary and secondary entry points. Pedestrian access will be emphasized leading to the building, with accessible pathways separated from parking circulation and a pedestrian plaza at main entry. Landscaping elements will also focus on pedestrian interaction and views to natural plantings and/or courtyards. PLANNING DIVISION ITEM 10 B)- DESIGN GUIDELINES Design Guidelines — it is recommended that the project incorporate these adopted design guidelines to the extent possible, with particular attention to the following elements: a. Pedestrian connections should be provided between properties to establish pedestrian links to adjacent buildings, parking, pedestrian areas, and public rights -of -way. New crosswalk joining adjacent surface parking to the north of site will be incorporated adjacent to the roundabout, with the splitter island modified for ADA access. Existing sidewalks along S 3231 Street will remain, and additional pedestrian walkways will link the crosswalk to the building's entry plaza. Pedestrian links with the existing DaVita office building to the west will be reinforced by re -working existing planter islands to provide clear and direct connections between primary building entries and outdoor seating areas at the southern edge of each building. Along the east edge of the building site, a 12ft wide non -motorized trail will be added, accessible from the sidewalk along S 32311 Street and terminating at the southern edge of the property. b. A pedestrian plaza should be provided for the building adjacent to major entrances, and with connectivity to adjacent pedestrian areas and routes of travel. Pedestrian plazas and pedestrian crosswalks over drive aisles should be stamped concrete, as opposed to paving or striping, to clearly delineate such areas, for safety purposes as well as project aesthetics. 3 n U3 The shift at the northwest corner of the building mass facing the primary entry drive and roundabout on S323rd Street provides a pedestrian plaza immediately adjacent to the main entry. The plaza will consist of hardscape and landscape elements supporting pedestrian activities, and providing visual connections to both the adjacent parking lot to the north and the existing building to the west. Pedestrian pathways will converge at the plaza, and a surface change (stamped concrete) at the entry drive will signal pedestrian crossings. The entry plaza will be protected by a large canopy, which will also signify building entry as visitors approach from 32"d Avenue South. Mr. Eric LaBrie November 22, 2017 Page 3 c. The site should incorporate pedestrian -scale lighting; amenities such as bike racks and trash receptacles at appropriate locations. Pedestrian -scale lighting and other site amenities will be provided along pedestrian routes. d. Overall building design should utilize a variety of colors, materials, textures, and methods of modulation and articulation. Building entrances should generally be oriented towards rights -of -way. Public entrances should be clearly recognizable from streets and internal circulation areas, and should utilize features such as varied roof lines and pitches, canopies, awnings, storefront windows, etc. The DaVita Corporate Business Office building will utilize a palette of materials similar in color, texture, and form to the existing office building that they also occupy to the west of the proposed project. A campus -like feel will be developed between the two buildings through the incorporation of a similar material vocabulary. This may include warm brick tones, exposed and painted concrete, metal panels and aluminum framed glazing systems. The primary facades (north and south elevations) are articulated through a series of vertical "panels" of varying width and finish, recalling an array of tree trunks and the original forested condition of the site and its environs. The primary entry is created by a shift of the main two-story envelope at the west end of the building, with an open pedestrian plaza sheltered by a large canopy above. Acknowledging both the visitor approaching campus south -bound on 32"d Avenue South and the pedestrian traffic between buildings, the plaza enlivens the entry sequence and shifts the building scale. At the south west corner, the building form is angled to the north, opening space for a south -facing outdoor courtyard for the building occupants. 3 e. Ground -level glass adjacent to a street or pedestrian area should be of -non -glare, non -reflective to glazing. Clear glass will be utilized at entries, all ground -level glass will be non -reflective, high performance glazing. f. Buildings built over parking should not appear to 'float" over the parking area, but should be linked with ground level uses or screening. Parking at grade under a building is discouraged unless the parking area is completely enclosed within the building, or wholly screened with walls and/or landscaped berms. Mr. Eric LaBrie November 22, 2017 Page 4 The building works with existing site topography to allow at grade parking to slip under the primary entry floor. The building elevations are strongly tied to the earth, with vertical members running from parapet down to finish grade level. Openings between vertical members at parking level include screening members, to shield view of vehicles from offsite while maintaining an open garage configuration. g. Parking structures and vehicle entrances should be designed to minimize views into the garage interior from surrounding streets. Methods to help minimize such views may include, but are not limited to, landscaping, planters, and decorative grilles and screens. The entry into the lower parking level is from the east, and is not directly visible from S 3231d Street. Screening and plant material will be used to provide further diminish the visibility into the parking garage area. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments concerning this narrative. Sincerely, McGranahan Architects Todd Olson, AIA Senior Project Manager Distributions: Marc Gleason, McGranahan Architects Seong Shin, McGranahan Architects Kim Fong, McGranahan Architects 3 n Uo FEB 08 2000 16:45 FF'�RDRANT CORPORATION 425 646 8300 P.02/04 QUADRAW AWeyerhaeuser Company February 8, 2000 Mr. Cary M. Roe City of Federal Way 33530 1st Way S Federal Way, WA 98003 Dear Cary: Quadrant Pim, Suite 500 N.E. Bth at 112M P.O. Box 180 Salt wo, Washington 98009 Tel (425) 455 2900 Fax (425)646 8WO The Quadrant Corporation ("Quadrant") would like to proceed with completing the Voluntary Payment Agreements for payment of Traffic Improvement Plan fees ("TIP foes') on two conunercial sites we are developing in the City of Federal Way ("the City"). The subject properties are East Campus Parcel i (Application No: SEP98-0039) and East Campus Corporate Park Lot #3 (Application No: SEP98-0015), Quadrant would like to pay the TIP fees for each site in annual installments over either three or four years, as detailed below, beginning With first building occupancy. In the case of Parcel 1, that date is February 2000; for Lot #3, that date is March 2000, The proposed schedules are reasonably tied to possible building occupancies. Under the terms of the Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance ("MEDNS") for East Campus Parcel 1, dated February 9, 1999, issued by the City (copy attached), the applicant is required to either construct certain TIP projects listed In the MEDNS or fund the project's pro rata share of the TIP projects costs. The project's TIP fees total S1,060,400. The Binding Site Plan for Parcel 1 was recorded on September 16,1999. The first building being built in Parcel 1 is for Capital One and is scheduled to be completed in February 2000- Quadrant is requesting the City to agree to accept payment of the TIP fees based on the following schedule: Payment Date Amount Due February 8, 2000 $265,100 February 8, 2001 $265,100 February 8, 2002 $265,100_ February 7, 2003 $265,100 Total: $1,060,400 Quadrant shall pay the amounts indicated in the above table on the dates listed to satisfy the TIP fee requirement for Parcel 1. However, Quadrant hereby grants the City the right to request payment of, and Quadrant agrees to pay, the February 7, 2001 payment of $265,100 during the year 2000 if the City commences construction of the 23nd Avenue South road improvements during 2000. Such acceleration of the February 2003 payment shall be in addition to the scheduled Year 2000 payment. If the City does not commence construction of the 23" Avenue South road improvements during 2000, then the payment dates shall remain as shown in the above table. Under the terms of the Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance ("MEDNS'? for East Campus Corporate Park Lot 0, dated September 2, 1998, issued by the City (copy attached), tIte applicant is required to either construct certain TIP projects listed in the MEDNS or fund the project's pro rata share of the TIP projects costs. The project's TIP fees total $296,300. The Binding Site Plan for Lot 3 will be recorded this spring. The first building on Lot 3 is being built for Weyerhaeuser and is scheduled to be completed March 2000. Quadrant is requesting the City to accept payment of the TIP fees based on the following schedule: RECEIVED CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMIJNFiY DEVELOPMENT" FEB 08 2000 16:45 FR IDRANT CORPORATION 425 646 0300 Tr t2536614189 P.03iO4 Payment Date Amount Due March 1, 2000 $148,150 March 1, 2001 $74,075 March 1, 2002 $74,075 Total: $296,300 In consideration for the City's willingness to agree to these payment schedules rather than require payment in full at the time of building permit issuance, and to facilitate construction of the capital improvements Identified in the two MEDNS documents„ Quadrant herby waives and releases on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns all rights to receive a refund of fees paid or interest thereon if the City doers not spend these fees within five years of receipt, as otherwise required under City code. This waiver and release shall be effective for 10 years from the date of the City's receipt of the last payment as set forth above, and shall be a covenant running with the land and inure to the benefit of and bind Quadrant's successors, heirs and assigns. As additional consideration for the City's willingness to agree to these payment schedules, and to allow the City to proceed with construction of certain of -the traffic improvement projects identified in the MEDNS for each project, Quadrant agrees as follows: The City may apply Quadratt's annual TIP fees to any one or more of the traffic improvement projects identified in the two MEDNS documents, provided that, at the conclusion of construction of the identified projects, Quadrant's combined contribution to any one traffic improvement project shall not exceed the combined percentage of Quadrant's proportional share of such project for Parcel I and Lot 43, as set forth in the MEDNS documents. This requirement is not affected by the waiver of refund rights contained in the preceding paragraph. Thank you for your consideration of this request. By signing on the joint signature lines provided below, Quadrant and the City agree: that this letter constitutes a Voluntary Payment Agreement for East Campus Parcel 1 and Lot 3 developments_ Quadrant waives and releases, for itself and its successor and assigns, any claim or challenge to the traffic mitigation required by the two MFDNS documents, or to the legality of this Voluntary Agreement. This waiver shall also a covenant running with the land and inure to the benefit of and bind Quadrant's successors, heirs and assigns. Notice of the waivers contained herein, in a form acceptable to the City and Quadrant, sltall be recorded with the King County Auditor within thirty (30) days of the date of this Agreement Sincerely, y� Patrick S.Ail Assistant Vice Presi ent CITY OP AEDEl((AV WAY David�i. Moseley - City Manager Attachments: MEDNS for East MEDNS for East THE QUADRANT CO ORA By: George P, herwin, Jr. Vice President Parcel I, dated February 9, 1999 Corporate- Park Lot #3, dated September 2, 1999 FED 08 2000 16: 45 F—,(JADRANT CORPORATION 425 646 8300 --)912536614189 P. 04iO4 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day, personally appeared before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, David H. Moseley, to me known to be the City Manager of the City of Federal Way, a Washington municipal corporation, the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the said instrument. rr + �L Given under my hand and official seal this day of r' L , 2000, EILEEN ROBINSON STATE OF WASHINGTON NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES F29-02 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) } y {no signature) c ��lert (typed/printed name of notary) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. My commission expires: 1 'dl - b On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, George f. Sherwin. Jr., to me known to be the Vice President of Quadrant Corporation, the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said corporation. GIVEN my hand and official seal this jday of��2000. JUNE M. KIU-MER to nature) NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON YY1. >!C��Jee�' commiSSION EXPIRES (typed/printed name of notary) .11Jl.Yi,20M Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. my commission expires: 741193 CITY OF Federal Way Mr. Arthur Richey Senior Director of DaVita Development DaVita HealthCare Partners Inc. 2000 16th Street Denver, CO 80202 r hur. ich davit-g.com CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com FILE Jim Ferrell, Mayor August 10, 2016 Re: Timeline for the Review and Permitting for Construction of an Office Building in East Campus Dear Mr. Richey: We enjoyed meeting with you on July 21". Pursuant to your request during this meeting, the City has prepared a timeline for you to achieve occupancy of your proposed building. Enclosed are timelines that depict the process from the point of a preapplication conference to the occupancy of the building. The timelines are graphically presented in either business days or calendar days, and by the four review stages: Preapplication, Land Use Review, Building Permit, and Construction. They are illustrated by total calendar days, or by weeks for each review stage. Using the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC), which sets out timeframes for review of development applications, and based upon the time needed for construction and outfitting the building, it would result in a total of 912 calendar days, or 2.5 years. This timeline is based on the following assumptions: A complete application is submitted at every step of the process, i.e., at the preapplication stage, formal application (land use process), and building permit application stage. This means that all required materials and studies are submitted and during the City's review there is no need to request additional information. This also means that the timeline does not address review time associated with resubmitted materials. 2. There are no citizen -initiated appeals. Appeals can occur when a threshold determination (SEPA decision) is issued and when the land use process decision is'issued. 3. Adverse weather conditions do not delay site work or construction. As it pertains to your question on whether parking would be allowed as a stand-alone use on Lots F and I, FWRC 19.130.110 would allow this based on the following language: "(1) Unless otherwise specified in this title or modified in accordance with FWRC 19.130.090, the applicant shall provide the required number of parking spaces either: Mr. Arthur Richey Page 2 of 2 August 10, 2016 "(a) On the subject property; or "(b) On a lot adjoining the subject property, if that lot is in a zone that permits the use conducted on the subject property. "(2) If the parking is-lticated onn-a lot other than the lot containing the use which generates the parking space regdireijacQts, tl . owner of the lot containing the parking must sign a covenant or other instrument, in a form acceptable to the city attorney, requiring that the lot be devoted in whole or in part to required parking for the use on another lot. The applicant must record this statement with the county to run with all affected properties." According to FWRC 19.05.010, the definition of adjoining is as follows: "`Adjoining' means property that touches or is directly across a street from the subject property. For the purpose of height regulations, any portion of a structure which is 100 feet or more from a low density zone is not considered to be adjoining that zone." If parking is proposed for Lots F and I, there would need to be a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) to remove the interior lot lines. Alternatively, parking could be provided on Lots K and L, with a BLA being done to remove the interior lot lines between Lots H, K, and L. Also, in reviewing whether there were any critical areas on the lots, City zoning maps and the binding site plan for this property illustrate that there is a small wetland and a stream to the east of Lots K and L, which will need to be addressed. We hope that we have answered all of your questions and look forward to working with you. We also hope that the prepared timelines are helpful in facilitating planning on your side. Please contact Principal Planner Margaret Clark, AICP, at 253-835-2646, or mmgaret.clarkja citvoffederalway.com, if you have any comments and/or questions regarding this letter. Enclosures c: Jim Ferrell, Mayor Brian Wilson, Chief of Staff Tim Johnson, Economic Development Director Marwan Salloum, Public Works Director E J. Walsh, Deputy Public Works Director Margaret Clark, AICP, Principal Planner 080916 Comspondence.do- _ = l RECEIVED Lakehaven K0V 2 2 2017 WATER & SEWER DISTRICT CITY OF FEDEP L WAY COMMUNFN I~FIlELOPMENT Lakehaven Water & Sewer District - Development Engineering Section 31623 - 1st Ave S * PO Box 4249 * Federal Way, WA 98063-4249 Telephone: 253-945-1581 or 253-945-1580 * Email: DE@Lakehaven.org This certificate is intended to provide the applicant, land use agencies &/or public health departments with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to delay, or deny, water service based upon capacity &/or supply limitations in Lakehaven's or Other Purveyor's system facilities. Proposed Land Use: ❑ Building Permit-SFR ❑ Building Permit-MFR ❑ Building Permit -Other ❑ Subdivision ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Binding Site Plan ❑ Rezone ❑ Boundary Line Adjustment ® Other (specify/describe) Office Park Site D v Tax Parcel Number(s): 21 465-0 60 - 0<30 -0110 -0120 Site Address: 32XX S 323rd St Lakehaven GIs Grid: L-09/M-09 Ex. Bldg. Area to Remain: N/A sf New Bldg. Area Proposed: 85.011 sf Applicant's Name: Genesis KC Development WATER SYSTEM INFO TI 1. ❑ Water service can be provided by service connection to an existing " diameter water main that is approximately feet from the site. 2. ® Water service for the site will require an improvement to Lakehaven's water distribution system of: ❑ a. feet of " diameter water main to reach the site; and/or ® b. The construction of a water distribution system on the site; and/or ❑ c. A major portions of Lakehaven's comprehensive water system plan would need to be implemented and/or constructed; and/or ® d. Other (describe): Lakehaven Developer ExtessmollLgreement require . 3. ® a. The existing water system Is in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Water System Plan. ❑ b. The existing water system Is not in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Water System Plan and an Amendment to this Plan will be required. This may cause a delay In issuance of land use approvals or permits. 4. ® a. The subject property Is within the corporate limits of Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of water service outside of Lakehaven's water service area. ❑ b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board approval will be necessary to provide service. S. Water service is subject to: ® a. Payment of connection charges (to be determined by Lakehaven); ® b. Proof or reservation of easement(s) as required by Lakehaven; ® c. Other: Water Service Connection anoligations re wired. DE Agreement (*? above)must be acts ted b Lakehaven rior to servIce connection activation. Comments/special conditions: The nearest fire hydrants will be on the Property (actual locations TBD by Lakehaven & fire marshal). System hydraulic model results (FF #227, copy attached), at no less than 20 psi, Indicate that Lakehaven's standard maximum allowable liquid velocity of 10 ft/s is exceeded at a fire flow rate above 5,200 GPM (approximate). This flow figure depicts the theoretical performance of the water distribution system under high demand conditions. Fire flow rates greater than this may be accommodated through water distribution system improvements, contact Lakehaven for additional information. 578 Pressure Zone Est. Meter Elevation(s)-GIS: High 458+/-, Low 444+/- Est. Pressure Range at Meter(s) (psi): 49-64 I hereby certify that the above water system information is true. This certification shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of signature. Name: BRIAN ASBURY Title: DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR Signature: Date: ` a 7 1 2154650060 2154650090 2154650110 2154650120 wtr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 1 of 2 2154650060 2154650090 2154650110 2154650120 wtr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 2 of 2 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT Hydraulic -Model -Calculated Fire Flow Estimate Request/Reporting Form Requested By: John Jensen Date: 09/15/06 On Behalf Of- Smith Fire Systems for East Campus Office Park LOCATION OF FLOW TEST Facility ap V4 Section: M-9 Approx. Street Intersection: 32" Avenue South & South 321&� Place A roximate Elevation = 470' MSL See additional description below and attached NOTE: The fire flow analysis was performed at the existing pipeline intersection at the "imaginary" intersection of 32"a Avenue South and South 321st Place near an existing fire hydrant. On -site fire flow estimates may need to be determined during design of any on -site water system improvements and extensions. There is no guarantee that the District's hydraulic model results will represent actual system performance. Model results depict the theoretical performance of the water system under conservative operating conditions, including peak hour domestic water consumption, low storage tank levels, and no well or booster pumps running. Actual field measurements maybe desired for design purposes. M-9 LakehaVOU ' WATER & SEWER DISTRICT 1 Lakehaven Water & Sewer District - Development Engineering Section 31623 - 1st Ave S * PO Box 4249 * Federal Way, WA 98063-4249 Telephone: 253-945-1581 or 253-945-1580 * Email: DE@Lakehaven.org This certificate is intended to provide the applicant, land use agencies &/or public health departments with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to delay, or deny, sewer service based upon capacity &/or supply limitations in Lakehaven's or Other Purveyor's system facilities. Proposed Land Use: ❑ Building Permit-SFR ❑ Building Permit-MFR ❑ Building Permit -Other ❑ Subdivision ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Binding Site Plan ❑ Rezone ❑ Boundary Line Adjustment ® Other (specify/describe) ❑fFire PAR k_5ite Development Tax Parcel Number(s): 215465-0060 -n0 ❑ -Olio -0120 Site Address: 32XX S 323rd St Lakehaven GIS Grid: L-09/M-09 Ex. Bldg. Area to Remain: N/A sf New Bldg. Area Proposed: 85,011 Applicant's Name: Genesis KC Dev n SEWER SYSTEM INFORMATION 1. ® Sewer service can be provided by service connection to an existing _K diameter sewer main that is on the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed land use. 2. ❑ Sewer service for the site will require an improvement to Lakehaven's sanitary sewer system of: ❑ a. feet of " diameter sewer main or trunk to reach the site; and/or ❑ b. The construction of a sanitary sewer collection system on the site; and/or ❑ c. A major portion of Lakehaven's comprehensive wastewater system plan would need to be implemented and/or constructed; and/or ❑ d. Other (describe): 3. ® a. The existing sewer system Is in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Wastewater System Plan. ❑ b. The existing sewer system Is not In conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Wastewater System Plan and an Amendment to this Plan will be required. This may cause a delay In Issuance of land use approvals or permits. 4. ® a. The proposed site land use is within the corporate limits of Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of sewer service outside of Lakehaven's sewer service area. ❑ b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board approval will be necessary to provide service. S. Sewer service Is subject to: ® a. Payment of connection charges (to be determined by Lakehaven); ® b. Proof or reservation of easement(s) as required by Lakehaven; ® c. Other: SeWgr Service Connection Permit requfred.. Comments/special conditions: I hereby certify that the above sewer system information is true. This certification shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of signature. Name: BRIAN ASBURY Title: DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERINGERVISOR Signature: Date: �- 2154650060 2154650090 2154650110 2154650120 swr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 1 of 2 2154650060 2154650090 2154650110 2154650120 swr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 2 of 2 Geotechnical Engineering Services a �� ,1 3ItRevised Report DaVita Office Park Federal Way, Washington for DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc./Team Genesis September 7, 2018 GMENGINEER� 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940 Geotechn�ca� Engineering Services Revised Repoirt D aVGta Office Park Federafl Way, Washington File No. 23107-001-00 September 7, 2018 Prepared for: DaVita Inc. DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc./Team Genesis 6245 South Victor Avenue Tulsa, Oklahoma 74136 Attention: Arthur Richey, Senior Director, DaVita Development Program Prepared by: GeoEngineers, Inc. 1101 South Fawcett Avenue, Suite 200 Tacoma, Washington 98402 253.383.4940 LA- I f�/ Step en W. Helvey, LG, LEG, LHG Senior Engineering Geologist Debra C. Overbay, PE Associate SWH:DCO:tt �I I E.tzginecring Geologist 512 ti�x nse Q,p E6?i>td WAYN� HE�VE�'; Qtva c►4 wASNA� v � kyx,� �904 ti �U.� �EQf3T��1� Lilluo Disclaimer. Any electronic form, facsimile or hard copy of the original document (email, text, table, and/or figure), If provided, and any attachments are only a copy of the original document. The original document Is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official document of record. GMENGINEER� Table of Contents INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT UNDERSTANDING.................................................................................................1 SCOPEOF SERVICES...............................................................................................................................................1 SITECONDITIONS.....................................................................................................................................................2 SurfaceConditions...............................................................................................................................................2 MappedGeologic Conditions..............................................................................................................................3 SubsurfaceConditions........................................................................................................................................3 Summaryof Soil Conditions.........................................................................................................................3 Groundwater........................................................................................................ CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................3 Site Development and Earthwork.......................................................................................................................4 Strippingand Clearing..................................................................................................................................5 SubgradeEvaluation.....................................................................................................................................5 Excavation.....................................................................................................................................................5 ExcavationSupport.......................................................................................................................................5 WetWeather Construction...........................................................................................................................6 FillMaterials.........................................................................................................................................................7 On -site Soils...................................................................................................................................................7 SelectGranular Fill........................................................................................................................................8 PipeBedding.................................................................................................................................................8 CrushedRock................................................................................................................................................8 FillPlacement and Compaction..........................................................................................................................8 AreaFills and Bases......................................................................................................................................8 TrenchBackfill...............................................................................................................................................8 Temporary and Permanent Slopes.....................................................................................................................9 Groundwater and Drainage Considerations.......................................................................................................9 SeismicDesign Considerations...........................................................................................................................9 2015 IBC Seismic Design.............................................................................................................................9 FoundationSupport.......................................................................................................................................... 10 ShallowFoundations.................................................................................................................................. 10 BearingCapacity........................................................................................................................................ 10 Footing Bearing Surface Preparation........................................................................................................ 11 FoundationSettlement.............................................................................................................................. 11 LateralResistance .................. ................................................................................................................... 11 BuildingPad and Floor Slabs.................................................................................................................... 12 PavementRecommendations.......................................................................................................................... 12 PavementDesign....................................................................................................................................... 12 Stormwater Infiltration Evaluation................................................................................................................... 13 LIMITATIONS..........................................................................................................................................................13 GWENGINEER� September 7, 2018 Page i File No. 23107-001-00 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Plan APPENDICES Appendix A. DaVita Office Park Site Plan and Cross Sections Appendix B. Field Explorations and Laboratory Testing Figure B-1 - Key to Exploration Logs Figures B-2 and B-3 - Logs of Borings Figures B-4 through B-14 - Logs of Test Pits Figures B-15 and B-16 - Sieve Analysis Results Appendix C. Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use GWENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page ii File Na. 23107-001-00 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT UNDERSTANDING This revised report presents the results of our geotechnical engineering services for the proposed DaVita Inc. (DaVita) Office Park in Federal Way, Washington. Out initial report was submitted on November 13, 2017. We understand the site layout has changed since that time. The approximate location of the site is shown in Figure 1, Vicinity Map and in the Site Plan, Figure 2. Our understanding of the project is based on information provided by the design team, a project meeting on September 26, 2017, and our experience in the immediate site area on adjacent development projects. Revised concept grading and site plans were provided to us by ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC (ESM) on August 31, 2018. These documents are contained in Appendix A. We understand that the development covers four parcels totaling about 10.3 acres in size. The parcels are currently undeveloped and are located within an existing business park. Two parcels are located south of South 323rd Street and two are located north of South 323rd Street. An at -grade parking lot is planned for the northern parcels. This feature will contain about 460 parking stalls. Site grading in this area will result in shallow cuts (about 2 feet) in the west part of the site and some fills (up to about 8 feet) in the east/southeast. Slightly greater cut (up to about 8 feet) will be required in the southwest corner. A three-story building is planned for the southern parcels. This area slopes downward to the east at shallow inclinations. The building will cover about 57,760 square feet in plan view. At -grade parking areas are to be located east and south of the building. We understand the team desires to support the building on shallow foundations. Column loads will vary up to about 300 to 340 kips. SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of our services is to provide revised geotechnical engineering recommendations for the proposed DaVita Office Park Development. DaVita authorized our services on October 3, 2017. GeoEngineers, Inc. (GeoEngineers) performed the following tasks: 1. Reviewed readily available published geologic data and our in-house files for existing information on soil and groundwater conditions in the project vicinity. 2. Reviewed the proposed DaVita Office Park project plans provided by the design team. This included a proposed clearing and grading plan and site cross sections. Copies of these documents are contained in Appendix A. 3. Developed an exploration plan to supplement the existing data. Mobilized to the site to locate the proposed explorations. Coordinated utility locates for the explorations using the One -Call utility notification center and a private utility locate subcontracted to GeoEngineers. 4. Explored soil and groundwater conditions at the site by drilling two power borings to depths of about 21 feet below ground surface (bgs). Collected driven samples from split spoon samplers, and prepared detailed logs of the drilling resistance and subsurface soil and groundwater conditions encountered. We also completed 11 test pit explorations within the parcels. GWENGINEER� September7,2018 Pagel File No. 23107-001-00 5. Performed laboratory tests on selected soil samples obtained from the explorations to evaluate pertinent engineering characteristics. Bulk samples were obtained from the test pits directly from the backhoe bucket. Driven soil samples were collected from the borings. Tests included moisture content determinations, fines content determinations and particle size analyses. 6. Characterized site conditions based on our site observations, existing data review and the results of our supplemental subsurface exploration and testing. 7. Developed recommendations for site preparation and earthwork based on the data and our understanding of the proposed site development. We include an evaluation of the suitability of on -site soil for use as structural fill beneath the building and pavement areas. We also discuss gradation criteria for imported fill, possible adverse effects of weather on construction activities and suitability of on -site soil during wet weather conditions. 8. Provided geotechnical seismic design information in accordance with 2015 International Building Code (IBC) criteria. We also present our opinion on the potential for liquefaction and lateral spreading at the site. 9. Provided general recommendations for site drainage and control of groundwater. 10. Provided general shallow foundation design recommendations, including suitable bearing materials, allowable soil bearing pressure, subgrade preparation criteria, lateral load resistance values and estimated post -construction settlements. 11. Provided recommendations forsupport of on -grade floor slabs, including modulus of subgrade reaction, capillary break, vapor retarder and underslab drainage, as appropriate. 12. Provided lateral earth pressures for design of below -grade structures, such as, retaining walls and stormwater vault walls. Provided drainage recommendations for retaining/vault walls. 13. Provided a discussion of alternate foundation types that may be appropriate for the site, depending on the conditions encountered and the anticipated building loads. 14. Provided a discussion of suitability of site soils for stormwater infiltration, based on the geology, topography and grain -size analyses. 15. Provided layer thickness recommendations for asphalt concrete (AC) pavement design sections, including subgrade preparation and typical pavement sections for heavy and light traffic areas based on our experience. SITE CONDITIONS Surface Conditions The north parcels generally slope downward to the southeast from about Elevation 468 feet in the northwest corner to about Elevation 432 feet in the southeast corner. The south parcels generally slope downward to the east. The high point of the south area is a small knob in the northwest corner at about Elevation 464 feet. The low portion of the south area is the east site boundary at about Elevation 444 feet. All parcels are presently undeveloped. Most of the north parcels are vegetated with grass. The northwest portion is vegetated with a thick stand of fir trees. It appeared that the understory in this area had been recently cleared at the time of our work. Existing surface conditions in the south parcel areas consist of fir trees with a cleared understory in the west, and grass in the east. GEOENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page 2 File No 23107-001-00 Mapped Geologic Conditions General geologic conditions in the site vicinity were evaluated by reviewing "Geologic Map of the Poverty Bay 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, King and Pierce Counties, Washington, 2004" prepared for the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Native geologic materials mapped at and in the site vicinity consist of Vashon-age Glacial Till (map symbol Qvt). Vashon till was deposited by and directly beneath the advancing Vashon-age glacier as it moved south through the site area. The deposit typically consists of a dense to very dense mixture of silt, sand, gravel, cobbles and some boulders. The SCS map for the site indicates the surface soil material is Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (map symbol AgB). This soil type is derived from glacial till. Subsurface Conditions Subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the site were evaluated by completing two borings and 11 test pits at the site on October 19 and 20, 2017. Details of the field exploration and laboratory testing programs are presented in Appendix B. The approximate locations of all the explorations are shown in Figure 2. Summary of Soil Conditions Varying thicknesses of forest duff and/or topsoil and sod were encountered from ground surface to depths ranging from about 4 to 12 inches in most of the explorations. All explorations encountered and were terminated in glacial deposits. Dense to very dense glacial till was typically encountered beneath medium dense to dense weathered till. About 5 feet of medium dense fill was encountered in test pit TP-6. Asphalt concrete was encountered in test pit TP-5. Fill materials were not encountered in other explorations completed for this study. The fill in TP-6 consists of medium dense to dense silty sand and silty gravel. Weathered till and unweathered till encountered at the site generally consists of a mixture of silty gravel or silty sand with varying amounts of gravel, both containing occasional cobbles and boulders. Laboratory testingon samples obtained from the explorations yielded fines contents (material passingthe U.S. No. 200 sieve) ranging from 19 to 38 percent. In -place moisture contents ranged from 4 to 14 percent. Groundwater Groundwater was not observed in any of the explorations. Based on our experience, a seasonal perched groundwater table often forms on top of the dense to very dense glacial till material or where relatively permeable weathered till or surficial fill or outwash overlies the till. We expect groundwater seepage amounts and the depths at which it occurs will vary with season and precipitation. Zones of shallow perched groundwater should be expected/anticipated during the wetter winter and early spring months. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of our subsurface exploration and testing program, it is our opinion that the site is generally suited for the proposed development. We understand that some cuts and minor fills will be required to construct the office structure. Up to about 4 to 8 feet of cut and fill will be required for the GEoENGINEERS�I17 September 7, 2018 Page 3 File No. 23107-001-00 proposed parking lot, primarily around the borders. Slightly greater cut will be required in the southwest corner. A summary of the primary geotechnical considerations for the proposed building is provided below. The summary is presented for introductory purposes only and should be used in conjunction with the detailed recommendations presented in this report. r:: The native till and fill soils contain a moderate to high percentage of fines and are very sensitive to small changes in moisture content. These soils are susceptible to disturbance from construction traffic when the moisture content is more than a few percent above the optimum moisture content for compaction. These soils will be difficult, if not impossible, to work or compact when wet or if earthwork is performed in wet weather. Therefore, we recommend that earthwork be performed during the normally drier periods of the year. Moisture conditioning of site soils will be required in order to obtain the required compaction. E-- We anticipate that the native till and fill soils will only be suitable for use as structural fill during extended periods of dry weather. We recommend imported granular soils be used for structural fill if construction occurs during periods of wet weather. c! Graded areas should be protected before the onset of rainy weather because of the highly moisture sensitive character of much of the on -site soil. Sealing the surficial soils by rolling with a smooth -drum roller prior to periods of precipitation will help reduce the extent that these soils become wet or unstable. Additional wet weather considerations are discussed further in a following section. E! We recommend constructing temporary haul roads underlain by quarry spalls or coarse crushed ballast material to help protect subgrades from disturbance and degradation under construction traffic. u" Shallow foundations may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) where footings are founded on structural fill or the recompacted surficial native soils. If dense native till is exposed at foundation level, the allowable bearing pressure can be increased to 8,000 psf. Where existing fill is exposed at footing subgrade, we recommend a minimum 2-foot-thick zone of structural fill underlie the footings. All new fill placed at the site should be compacted to the structural fill standard described in this report. We recommend floor slabs be underlain by a minimum 4-inch-thick capillary break consisting of coarse aggregate with negligible sand or silt (similar to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials [AASHTO] Grading No. 67). Site Development and Earthwork Site development work will likely include removing existing trees and vegetation, stripping of forest duff, stripping of topsoil and root layers, stripping of unsuitable fill, excavation to create building grades in both areas and placing structural fill in select portions of the proposed parking lot area to achieve design grades. The site soils are highly moisture sensitive due to moderate to very high fines content. Grading and reuse of the on -site soils at this site will only be practical duringthe dry season (typically July through September). Moisture conditioning necessaryto obtain proper compaction of on -site soil will likely not be practical during the cooler and wetter winter months. Accordingly, we recommend a contingency be included in the project budget and schedule for export of unsuitable wet on -site soil and import of select granular soil if earthwork will occur in the winter months. GEOENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page 4 File No. 23107-001-00 Stripping and Clearing The existing trees, shrubs, grass, topsoil, unsuitable native soils, unused utilities and unsuitable fill soils should be stripped and removed from all proposed building and pavement areas. Based on our explorations, the depth of stripping to remove unsuitable surface organic materials should generally vary between 6 and 12 inches. Greater stripping depths will be required to remove localized zones of loose or organic -rich soil and tree roots. The primary root systems for trees and shrubs should be completely removed. Required stripping depths should be confirmed by the geotechnical engineer based on observations during the stripping operation. Stripped organic material should be transported off site for disposal or processed and used as fill in landscaping areas. Existing fill was encountered in TP-5 and TP-6. Additional fill will be required in this area to construct the parking lot. We recommend the subgrade be evaluate following stripping and any unsuitable zones or debris be removed as described below. Unsuitable fills might be present in other parts of the site not explored by ourtest pits and borings. The contractor should be prepared to selectively remove debris or other unsuitable materials if encountered in existing fill at this site. Subgrade Evaluation After stripping and excavation to planned subgrade is complete we recommend the exposed soil be proofrolled or probed and then compacted to a firm and unyielding condition. If dry weather conditions persist, we recommend that the subgrade be evaluated by proofrolling with a loaded dump truck or similar heavy rubber -tired construction equipment to identify soft, loose or unsuitable areas. The proofrolling should be conducted prior to placing fill. If the subgrade is prepared during or exposed to wet weather, we recommend that it be evaluated by probing with a steel probe rod. The proofrolling/probing should be observed by a qualified geotechnical engineer, who will evaluate the suitability of the subgrade. If soft or otherwise unsuitable areas revealed during proofrolling cannot be compacted to a stable and uniformly firm condition, we recommend that: (1) the subgrade soils be scarified (e.g., with a ripper or a farmer's disc), aerated and recompacted, or (2) the unsuitable soils be excavated to firm soil and replaced with structural fill, as recommended by the geotechnical engineer. Excavation We anticipate large dozers with rippers may be required for mass grading where the subgrade comprises unweathered glacial till. Conventional earthmoving equipment in proper working order should be capable of making necessary excavations for utilities and footings. Boulders and large cobbles are often present in glacial till and recessional outwash deposits in the area and will likely be encountered during grading and/or utility excavations. Accordingly, the contractor should be prepared to remove boulders, if encountered. Boulders may be removed from the site or buried in landscape areas. Voids caused by boulder removal must be backfilled with structural fill. Excavation Support Shallow excavations (4 feet or less) in dense glacial deposits should stand at near vertical inclinations, provided groundwater seepage is not present in the cut face. Excavations deeper than 4 feet must be shored or laid back at a stable slope if workers are required to enter. GMENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page 5 File No. 23107-001-00 Shoring for utility excavations must conform with the provisions of Title 296 Washington Administrative Code (WAC), Part N, "Excavation, Trenching and Shoring." Regardless of the soil type encountered in the excavation, shoring, trench boxes or sloped sidewalls will be required under Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA). While this report describes certain approaches to excavation and dewatering, the contract documents should specify that the contractor is responsible for selecting excavation and dewatering methods, monitoring the excavations for safety and providing shoring, as required, to protect personnel and adjacent structures. Wet Weather Construction Trafficability of the on -site soils will be severely limited during wet weather, or if the subgrade moisture content is more than a few percentage points above optimum. When wet, the on -site soils are susceptible to disturbance and generally will not provide adequate supportfor construction equipment. The on -site soils will be difficult, if not impossible, to adequately work or compact during periods of wet weather. Site Grading If site grading and fill placement occurs during wet weather conditions the following recommendations should be included in the development plan. Stripping and site preparation should be accomplished using track -mounted equipment and subgrade protection measures should be used. For example, a track - mounted excavator equipped with a smooth -edged bucket could be used working from the currently developed surface or a granular pad and loading into trucks supported on granular haul roads or working outward from the stripped surface. If the site subgrade is wet, it should be evaluated by probing with a steel rod, ratherthan by proofrolling. Soil that is disturbed duringsite preparation activities during wet conditions, as well as soft or loose zones identified during probing, should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill. Granular Haul Roads and Working Blankets Wet weather construction in the silty native or fill soils will require granular haul roads and granular pads under the building structures to protect the subgrade. If the pavement areas are constructed during wet weather, they will also require a granular working blanket. The use of granular haul roads will be necessary for support of construction traffic during the rainy season (typically from October through June). Based on our experience, 18 to 24 inches of sand and gravel (which could be gravel base or fill material), crushed rock or quarry spalls with little to no fines will be necessary to provide support for construction equipment. Use of a geotextile fabric can reduce mixing of the subgrade and road support materials. It also may reduce the thickness of surfacing required. If gravel base material is used, the temporary roads could be constructed above the finished subgrades and extra material bladed onto other areas of the site when the roads are no longer necessary. Wet -weather Fill We recommend fill placed during wet weather be select granular fill (pit run) or crushed rock as described in the "Fill Materials" section of this report. Erosion and Sedimentation Control The site will be susceptible to erosion during wet weather conditions, particularly if large segments of exposed subgrades are exposed to rainfall. Development and implementation of an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan should reduce the project impact on erosion -prone areas. The plan should be GEOENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page 6 File No. 23107-001-00 designed in accordance with applicable city, county and/or state standards. The plan should incorporate basic planning principles, including: i. Scheduling grading and construction to reduce soil exposure; I : Re -vegetating or mulching denuded areas; r- Directing runoff away from exposed soils; • Reducing the length and steepness of slopes with exposed soils; • Decreasing runoff velocities; ■ Preparing drainage ways and outlets to handle concentrated or increased runoff; • Confining sediment to the project site; and • Inspecting and maintaining control measures frequently. Some sloughing, erosion and raveling of exposed or disturbed soil on slopes should be expected, particularly if the work is completed during the wet season. We recommend that disturbed soil be restored promptly so that surface runoff does not become channeled. Temporary erosion protection should be used and maintained in areas with exposed or disturbed soils to help reduce erosion and transport of sediment to adjacent areas and receiving waters. Permanent erosion protection should be provided by paving, structure construction or landscape planting. Until the permanent erosion protection is established and the site is stabilized, site monitoring may be required by qualified personnel who will evaluate the effectiveness of the erosion control measures and recommend repairs and/or modifications as appropriate. Provision for modifications to the erosion control system based on monitoring observations should be included in the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan. The workability of material used as structural fill will depend on the gradation and moisture content of the soil. As the amount of fines (material passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) increases, soil becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content and adequate compaction becomes more difficult, if not impossible to achieve. We recommend that select granular fill or crushed rock be used as structural fill during the rainy season. The following paragraphs summarize the material requirements for fill and backfill. On -site Soils The native glacial till soils may be considered for use as structural fill during periods of extended dry weather, provided they can be properly moisture conditioned. Soils encountered in our explorations will be difficult, if not impossible, to work or adequately compact during periods of wet weather or if the in -place moisture condition of these soils is more than about 2 percent above optimum. On -site materials used as structural fill must be free of roots, organic matter and other deleterious materials and particles larger than 6 inches in diameter. GEOENGINEERSI�s' September7,2018 Pagel File No. 23107-001-00 Select Granular Fill Select granular fill (pit run) must consist of imported well -graded sand, sandy gravel, or crushed rock with a maximum particle size of 6 inches and less than 5 percent passing a U.S. No. 200 sieve. Organic matter, debris, or other deleterious material must not be present. We recommend that select granular fill used during periods of prolonged dry weather have less than about 12 percent passing a U.S. No. 200 sieve. Pipe Bedding Trench backfill for pipe zone bedding should consist of crushed, processed, or naturally occurring granular material free from deleterious material. The material should have a maximum particle size of 3/a inch and less than 10 percent passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve. The material must be free of roots, debris, organic matter, and other deleterious material. Crushed Rock Crushed rock fill must consist of clean, durable, crushed angular rock that has a maximum particle size of 4 inches, is well graded between coarse and fine sizes, and has less than 5 percent fines (material finer than a U.S. No. 200 sieve). A smaller maximum particle size will be required for some applications as discussed in other sections of this report. Gravel materials should be crushed to have at leasttwo fractured faces. Organic matter, debris, or other deleterious material must not be present. Fill Placement and Compaction Fill soils should be compacted at a moisture content near optimum. The maximum allowable moisture content varies with the soil gradation, and should be evaluated during construction. Fill and backfill material should be placed in uniform, horizontal lifts, and uniformly densified with vibratory compaction equipment. The maximum lift thickness will vary depending on the material and compaction equipment used, but should generally not exceed 10 inches in loose thickness. Area Fills and Bases Fill placed to raise site grades and aggregate base materials under foundations, slabs, and pavements should be placed on a prepared subgrade that consists of firm, inorganic native soils or compacted fill. Fill must be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density (MDD) determined by ASTM International (ASTM) Test Method D 1557 (modified Proctor). Where footings are founded on existing fill, the upper 2 feet of fill should be recompacted to the structural fill criteria (95 percent), or excavated and replaced with import structural fill. In pavement areas, the compaction criteria can be reduced to 92 percent below a depth of 2 feet from finished subgrade. During wet weather or in areas that are particularly sensitive to subgrade disturbance, we recommend placing a woven geotextile between the subgrade and the first lift of fill. The first lift, provided it is select granular fill, should be 10 inches thick and should be densified by static rolling until it supports the vibratory compaction equipment. Trench Backfill Backfill in the bedding and pipe zone should be compacted to 90 percent of the MDD as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557, or as recommended by the pipe manufacturer. GEoENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page 8 File No. 23107-001-00 In nonstructural areas, trench backfill above the pipe zone should be compacted to at least 85 percent of the MDD as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. Suitable native soils or select granular soils should be acceptable in non-structural areas. Within structural pavement areas, trench backfill placed above the pipe zone at depths greater than 2 feet below the finished subgrade should be compacted to at least 92 percent of the MDD and to 95 percent MDD when placed within 2 feet of finished subgrade. Trench backfill in structural areas should consist of select granular fill or crushed rock as described in the previous sections. Temporary and Permanent Slopes We recommend that permanent cut and fill slopes be inclined no steeperthan 2H:1V (horizontal to vertical). Flatter cut slopes may be necessary in areas where persistent groundwater seepage or zones of soft or loose soils are encountered. Temporary cut slopes should be inclined no steeperthan about 1H:1V provided seepage is not present. Surface loads should be kept at a minimum distance of at least one-half the depth of the cut away from the top of temporary slopes. Fill slopes should be carefully compacted on the slope face. Alternatively, the fill embankment can be over- built and cut backto expose properly compacted soil. To reduce the potential for erosion, newly constructed slopes should be planted or hydroseeded shortly after completion of grading. Some sloughing and raveling of the slopes should be expected until the vegetation is established. This may require localized repairs and reseeding. Temporary covering, such as heavy plastic sheeting, jute fabric, loose straw, or excelsior matting should be used to protect unvegetated slopes during periods of rainfall. Temporary cut slopes and shoring must comply with the provisions of Title 296 WAC, Part N, "Excavation, Trenching and Shoring." The contractor performing the work must have the primary responsibility for protection of workmen and adjacent improvements, determining whether shoring is required, and for establishing the safe inclination for open -cut slopes. Groundwater and Drainage Considerations We recommend that pavement surfaces be sloped so that surface drainage flows away from the proposed building. We recommend that all roof drains be collected in tightlines and routed into the storm drain system. Perched groundwater will likely develop on top of the very dense glacial till in unpaved areas during the rainy season, which may impact construction activities. We recommend a perimeter footing drain be constructed around the building footprint to capture perched groundwater zones. This is critical on glacial till sites due to the potential for perched groundwater flow, moving laterally on the glacial till contact and within cleaner sand seams in the till. Seismic Design Considerations 2015 IBC Seismic Design We recommend the parameters in Table 1 for use in seismic design in accordance with 2015 IBC. GWENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page 9 File No. 23107-001-00 TABLE 1 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS 2015 IBC Seismic Design Parameters Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods (Ss) 1.29g Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Periods (Si) 0.49g Site Class C Design Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) 0.54g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods (SDS) 0.86g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Periods (SDI) 0.43g Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction refers to a condition where vibration or shaking of the ground, usually from earthquake forces, results in development of excess pore pressures in loose, saturated soils and subsequent loss of strength in the deposit of soil so affected. In general, soils that are susceptible to liquefaction include loose to medium dense sands to silty sands that are below the water table. Based on the soil type, and relative density of the soils encountered, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction within the proposed development portion of the site area is low. Lateral Spreading Potential Lateral spreading related to seismic activity typically involves lateral displacement of large, surficial blocks of non -liquefied soil when a layer of underlying soil loses strength during seismic shaking. Lateral spreading usually develops in areas where sloping ground or large grade changes (including retaining walls) are present. Based on our understanding of the subsurface conditions and current site topography, it is our opinion that the risk of lateral spreading is low. Ground Rupture Because of the anticipated infrequent seismic event recurrence, the site location with respect to the nearest known active crustal faults and the presence of thick glacial deposits overlying bedrock, it is our opinion that the risk of ground rupture at the site due to crustal faulting is low. Foundation Support Shallow Foundations The proposed office building can be supported on continuous wall or isolated column footings established on undisturbed native soils, on structural fill placed over undisturbed native soils, or on a minimum 2-foot thickness of structural fill overlying existingfill soils. For preliminary purposes, we recommend that isolated column and continuous wall footings have minimum widths of 24 and 18 inches, respectively. The exterior footings should be established at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. The recommended minimum footing depth is greater than the anticipated frost depth. Interior footings can be founded a minimum of 12 inches below the top of the floor slab. Bearing Capacity We recommend that footings founded on recompacted surficial soils or new structural fill be proportioned using a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. If the building footings are founded on unweathered very dense glacial till, a maximum allowable soil bearing pressure of 8,000 psf could be GEOENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page 10 File No. 23107-001-00 considered. These bearing pressures apply to the total of dead and long-term live loads and may be increased by one-third when considering earthquake or wind loads. This is a net bearing pressure. The weight of the footing and overlying backfill can be ignored in calculating footing sizes. Footing Bearing Surface Preparation Footing excavations should be performed using a smooth -edged bucket to limit bearing surface disturbance. Loose or disturbed materials present at the base of footing excavations should be removed or compacted. Foundation bearing surfaces should not be exposed to standing water. If water infiltrates and pools in the excavation, it must be removed and the bearing surface reevaluated before placing structural fill or reinforcing steel. We recommend that an experienced geotechnical engineer observe all foundation excavations before reinforcing steel is placed, in order to confirm that adequate bearingsurfaces have been achieved and that the soil conditions are as anticipated. Unsuitable foundation subgrade soils must be removed and replaced with structural fill as recommended by the geotechnical engineer. It may be prudent to place a thin mud mat of lean concrete to protectthe bearingsurface if footing excavations are to remain open in wet weather. Foundation Settlement We estimate that settlements of footings designed and constructed as recommended will be less than 3/a inch, forthe anticipated loading conditions. Differential settlements between comparably loaded isolated column footings or along 50 feet of continuous footing is estimated to be less than V2 inch. Settlement is expected to occur rapidly as loads are applied. Lateral Resistance The ability of the soil to resist lateral loads is a function of frictional resistance which can develop on the base of footings and slabs and the passive resistance which can develop on the face of below -grade elements of the structure as these elements tend to move into the soil. For footings and floor slabs founded in accordance with the recommendations presented above, the allowable frictional resistance may be computed using a coefficient of friction of 0.35 applied to vertical dead -load forces. The allowable passive resistance on the face of footings, grade beams or other embedded foundation elements may be computed using an equivalent fluid density of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf)for undisturbed on -site soils or structural fill extending out from the face of the foundation element a distance at least equal to two and one-half times the depth of the element. This value can be increased to 450 pcf where the adjacent soils consist of undisturbed, very dense glacial till. The passive earth pressure and friction components may be combined provided that the passive component does not exceed two-thirds of the total. The passive earth pressure value is based on the assumptions that the adjacent grade is level and that groundwater remains below the base of the footing throughout the year. The top foot of soil should be neglected when calculating passive lateral earth pressures unless the foundation area is covered with pavement or is inside a building. The lateral resistance values include a safety factor of approximately 1.5. GMENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page 11 File No. 23107-001-00 Building Pad and Floor Slabs A modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) can be used for designing the building floor slab provided that the subgrade has been prepared in accordance with the "Subgrade Evaluation" section. We recommend that on -grade slabs be underlain by a minimum 4-inch-thick capillary break layer to reduce the potential for moisture migration into the slab. The capillary break material should consist of a coarse aggregate with negligible sand or silt similar to AASHTO Grading No. 67. The material should be placed as recommended in the "Fill Placement and Compaction" section. A vapor retarder should be used as necessary to control moisture penetration through the slab. This is especially important in areas where floor coverings, adhesives or tiles are planned. Pavement Recommendations Pavement Design Based on our experience, we provide typical asphalt concrete (AC) and Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement sections below. These pavement sections are typical for commercial facilities in this area but may not be adequate for heavy construction traffic loads such as those imposed by concrete transit mixers, dump trucks or cranes or for unusual design traffic conditions. Additional pavement thickness may be necessary to prevent pavement damage during construction or if anticipated truck traffic for this facility is higher than typical. We can provide a specific design if detailed truck traffic loading information is provided. The recommended sections assume that final improvements surrounding the pavement will be designed and constructed such that storm water or excess irrigation waterfrom landscape areas does not accumulate below the pavement section or pond on pavement surfaces. Pavement subgrade must be prepared as previously described. Crushed surfacing base course and subbase must be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of MDD (ASTM D 1577). Crushed surfacing base course must conform to applicable sections of 4-04 and 9-03.9(3) of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specifications. Hot mix asphalt must conform to applicable sections of 5-04, 9-02 and 9-03 of the WSDOT Standard Specifications. PCC must conform to applicable sections of 5-05, 9-01 and 9-03 of the WSDOT Standard Specifications. Standard -duty AC Pavement - Automobile Driveways and Parking Areas >` 2 inches of hot mix asphalt, class 1/2 inch, PG 58-22 4 inches of crushed surfacing base course F_ 6 inches of subbase consisting of select granular fill to provide uniform grading and pavement support, to maintain drainage, and to provide separation from fine-grained subgrade soil Native subgrade or structural fill prepared in accordance with the "Site Development and Earthwork" section Heavy-duty AC Pavement - Areas Subject to Truck Traffic L. 3 inches of hot mix asphalt, class Y2 inch, PG 58-22 GEoENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 : Page 12 File No. 23107-001-00 1.. 6 inches of crushed surfacing base course f, 6 inches of subbase consistingof select granular fill to provide a uniform gradingsurface and pavement support, to maintain drainage, and to provide separation from fine-grained subgrade soil Native subgrade or structural fill prepared accordance with the "Site Development and Earthwork" section PCC Pavement - Areas Subject to Heavy Truck Traffic I... 6 inches of PCC pavement (28-day compressive strength of 6,000 pound per square inch [psi] and a modulus of rupture of 600 psi) L 6 inches of crushed surfacing base course L: Native subgrade or structural fill prepared accordance with the "Site Development and Earthwork" section Stormwater Infiltration Evaluation As previously described the site soils generally consist of weathered till over unweathered till. Grain -size distribution analyses of these soils indicate fines contents ranging between about 19 to 38 percent. The unweathered till is typically in a dense to very dense condition and has very low permeability with respect to the vertical and horizontal flow of water. Based on the soil gradation data, and our experience, it is our opinion there is very limited infiltration potential at this site. Because of these factors we recommend that stormwater detention be used for site development. LIMITATIONS We have prepared this geotechnical report for use by DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc./Team Genesis and their agents for the proposed development project described in this report. The project agents may distribute copies of this report to authorized agents and regulatory agencies as may be required for the project. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with generally accepted practices in the field of geotechnical engineering in this area at the time this report was prepared. No warranty or other conditions express or implied should be understood. Please refer to Appendix C, "Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use", for additional information pertaining to use of this report. GWENGINEERi. September 7, 2018 Page 13 File No. 23107-001-00 5ltl:rlil 51 Q - S 3U2nd PI ,S 303rd St , J5.1G7nd L�. S 303rtt f 1 - =' c soil),A - 5 30•ith St s 301th R S 3U4d' 5t - - �•P y rmienit V,ay Hints n s w KH} Rtv�Ale ScnaCl Jr ra Labe U.11.11 t1e1-e11111Y rtI Srhoot L, s;U8[h st lh j� - -E S31 L` II It 51 5 312JtS� ® 312rh ;I Slvvl id\•Darts S 312:n 5 531211-, SSsl �, ! 5 11 311, SI 6111 �, 5315th Pi i 3150h St : 2 ,,,Jt y.•. S= 1 hlh St S 3 tbthM Gth 51 11 5 31601 51 ® H 5 [r— ich�ol 11'thst s3160hP1 53180'si 531t>; , SITE 3201h Sr S" 32UM SC 5 3201h 51 y j S $215t 51 32157 St South fnrnni�rls j - _ S 322no St the [an71-11 AI 1• r - - V' S - rede'a•WAY - "- C5 G 5 324th Se S 32.ah St } v „r!Fuot Vlay 1'k, f- "Vero j W,aY ! aJ N lMh it .4z S2: 8[h PI Si ish .- - 5 330dr St ? - - ,t 5 33211d St 5 Pcast ® 5 3330 Sr r; ' c e 3 33rd Sc S31f th 5•. 533G111 s[ s 33611, St 5336th•5[ y� zt� r �$ c � — 7 Gold Samanlnn r• U-h � 5 338th tit ,z �, w �^ a t [meuan lailh iiJl _ - [eni• S;4Uth St MITTS CORNER - s ;J2nd 51 S rd St • 1 S 344Itt Sl 1 Seal tie =~ r Renton Kent :aroma Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown are approximate. 2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official record of this communication. Data Source: Mapbox Open Street Map, 2017 Projection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 10N Way i S 344th 5[ N �V E S 2,000 0 2,000 Feet Vicinity Map DaVita Heathcare Partners Federal Way, Washington GEOENGINEERS r Figure 1 L Legend Site Boundary B-1+ Boring by GeoEngineers, 2017 TP-1* Test Pit by GeoEngineers, 2017 Notes: 1. The locations of all features shown are approximate. 2. This drawing is for information purposes. It is intended to assist in showing features discussed in an attached document. GeoEngineers, Inc. cannot guarantee the accuracy and content of electronic files. The master file is stored by GeoEngineers, Inc. and will serve as the official record ofthis communication. Data Source: Background from ESM Consulting Engineers, LLC dated 11/20/17. Vertical Datum: NGVD 29. Projection: NAD83 Washington State Planes, North Zone, US Foot. Cn � t71 100 0 100 Feet Site Plan DaVita Healthcare Partners Federal Way, Washington GMENGINEERS Figure 2 ►4PPENDIX B Field Explorations and Laboratory Testing APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING Field Explorations Two borings and 11 test pits were completed at the site on October 19 and 20, 2017. Borings were drilled to depths of about 21 feet. Test pits were excavated to depths ranging from 2.5 to 6 feet below ground surface (bgs). Test pits were excavated using a rubber -tired backhoe provided by Kelly's Excavating of Pacific, Washington. Borings were completed using tracked drilling equipment owned and operated by Holocene Drilling, Inc. of Puyallup, Washington. The site explorations were continuously monitored by a member of GeoEngineers staff. Our representative maintained a detailed log of the soils encountered, obtained soil samples and observed groundwater conditions. Figure 2 shows the approximate locations of the explorations. Explorations were mapped using commercial -grade global positioning system (GPS) equipment and should be considered accurate only to the extent implied by the method used. Soil samples were obtained from the borings using standard penetration tests (SPTs) performed in general conformance with ASTM International (ASTM) Test Method D 1586. The sampler was driven with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches or other indicated distance, into the soils is shown adjacent to the sample symbols on the boring logs. Disturbed samples were obtained from the split barrel for subsequent classification and index testing. Bulk soil samples from the test pits were collected directly from the backhoe bucket and placed in plastic bags. Soils encountered in the borings were classified in the field in general accordance with ASTM Standard Practice D 2488, the Standard Practice for the Classification of Soils (Visual -Manual Procedure), which is described in Figure 13-1. Soil classifications and sampling intervals are shown on the exploration logs. Inclined lines at the material contacts shown on the logs indicate uncertainty as to the exact contact elevation, rather than the inclination of the contact itself. Figures B-2 through 13-14 present the exploration logs. Laboratory Testing Soil samples obtained from the explorations were brought to our laboratory and reviewed to confirm field classifications. Selected samples were tested to determine their moisture content and grain -size distribution in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. The moisture content of selected samples was determined in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 2216. The test results are presented in the respective exploration logs. Grain -size distribution (sieve analyses) was conducted in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 422. Laboratory testing results are contained in the exploration logs and in Figures B-15 and B-16. GWENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page B-1 File No. 23107-001-00 SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SYMBOLS MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS GRAPH LETTER CLEAN GRAVELS o b° ° Gw WELL -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL• SAND MIXTURES GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOILS (UTTLE OR NO FINES) O 0 0 O C 0 0 GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES GRAVELS WITH FINES (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) GM SILTYGRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND- SILT MIXTURES COARSE GRAINED SOIL$ MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON NO 4SIEVE GC CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND - CLAY MIXTURES CLEAN SANDS sw WELL -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS MORE THAN 50% SAND $P POORLY -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SAND RETAINEDON NO 200 SIEVE AND SANDY (UTrLEOR NO FINES) SOILS SANDS WITH SM SILTY SANDS, SAND -SILT MIXTURES MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FINES G71ON PASSING CA J{� CLAYEY SANDS, SAND -CLAY MIXTURES ON NO 4 SIEVE (APPRECIABLEAMOUNT OF FINES) INORGANIC SILTS, ROCK FLOUR, ML CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO FINE SILTS AND CLAYS LESS LIQUIDLIMIT SO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS GRAINED SOILS OL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY MORE THAN 50% PASSING MH INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS SILTY SOILS NO 200 SIEVE CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMITGREATER THAN 50 i OH ORGANIC CLAYS AND SILTS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS NOTE: Multiple symbols are used to indicate borderline or dual soil classifications Sampler Symbol Descriptions ® 2.4-inch I.D. split barrel ® Standard Penetration Test (SPT) ■ Shelby tube ® Piston UDirect -Push m Bulk or grab ® Continuous Coring Blowcount is recorded for driven samplers as the number of blows required to advance sampler 12 inches (or distance noted). See exploration log for hammer weight and drop. "P" indicates sampler pushed using the weight of the drill rig. IIWOHII indicates sampler pushed using the weight of the hammer. SYMBOLS TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS GRAPH LETTER AC Asphalt Concrete CC Cement Concrete CR Crushed Rock/ Quarry Spalls SOD Sod/Forest Duff TS Topsoil Groundwater Contact TMeasured _ groundwater level in exploration, well, or piezometer Measured free product in well or piezomete Graphic Log Contact Distinct contact between soil strata _ Approximate contact between soil strata Material Description Contact Contact between geologic units r Contact between soil of the same geologic unit Laboratory / Field Tests %F Percent fines %G Percent gravel AL Atterberg limits CA Chemical analysis CP Laboratory compaction test CS Consolidation test DD Dry density DS Direct shear HA Hydrometer analysis MC Moisture content MD Moisture content and dry density Mohs Mohs hardness scale OC Organic Content PM Permeability or hydraulic conductivity PI Plasticity index PP Pocket penetrometer SA Sieve analysis TX Triaxial compression UC Unconfined compression VS Vane shear Sheen Classification NS No Visible Sheen SS Slight Sheen MS Moderate Sheen HS Heavy Sheen NOTE: The reader must refer to the discussion in the report text and the logs of explorations for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. Descriptions on the logs apply only at the specific exploration locations and at the time the explorations were made; they are not warranted to be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations or times. Key to Exploration Logs GMENGINEERS ,7 1 FigureB-1 Drilled 10/19/2017 10/19/2017 DeM (ft) 20.75 Surface Devation (ft) 462 Vertical Datum Latitude 47.31149 Longitude-M29278 Notes, Logged By RNM Checked By SWH Hammer Data System Datum Driller Holocene Drilling, Inc. Drilling 140 (lbs) / 30 (in) Drop Equipment DrilMet r' HollowstemAuger Dietrich D50 Drill Rig Groundwater not observed at time of exploration FIELD DATA v W N °' o MATERIAL o _ N w � 112 DESCRIPMON °� REMARKS L E > 0 N 0 •C L a l0 nE « C m C 0 ��,, m G U C7 2 C7 U 6 L: f Cg C fi S 14 20 1 gp Dark Sand trace silt S fk blid tine gravel and organic Topsoil; ; io organic rTlatena SM matter loose, moist) Brown with occasional orange mottling silly, sand, occasional fine gravel (medium dense, moist) (weathered till) Harder drilling at 2 feet GM Gray silty gravel with sand (very dense, moist) (fill) 5 18 66 2 5 24 S4 h`D b 10 12 50/6" 3 rk i i i i a 50/7 4 Occasional orange mottling Note: See Figure B-lfor explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on, Vertical approximated based on Log of Boring B-1 Project DaVita Healthcare Partners AJ ICJ Project Location: Federal Way, Washington Figure l-2 G EO E N G I N E S R �� Project Number: 23107-WI-W Sheet 1 of 1 17 10E[Ld 17 Total 21 Logged BY RNM Driller Holocene Drilling, Inc. Drilling Hollow -stem Auger Drilled 10/1 Depth (ft) Checked By SVVH Method Hammer JDrilling Dietrich D50 Drill Rig Surface Elevation (ft) 459 Vertical Datum D 140 (Ibs) / 30 (in) Drop Equipment Latitude 47.31105 System Groundwater not observed at time of exploration Longdude-122.29306 Datum Notes: FIELD DATA N E Y MATERIAL REMARKS o ' J C DESCRIPTION > O. 0, N o C 0 a CL m O .oc �p c W ❑ C m U° F C7 m 00 fU ii Cg s s 1 SM Dark brown silty sand with gravel, occasional organic matter (loose, moist) (topsoil) Hard drillingfrom Ito 11/2feet GM Brown silty gravel with sand (very dense, moist) (till) �h P 0 50/2, 2 Grab sample from cuttings no SPT recovery Less gravel in cuttings SM r Gray to brown with oomsional orange mottling silly 10 12 45 3 _ sand wtth gravel (dense, moist) (till)SA s 31 i [ shy 15 I 12 90/1r 4 — — — GM Gray silty gravel with sand (very dense, moist) (till) 6 73/10° 6 SA I i Note: See Figure &1 for explanation of symbols. Coordinates Data Souroe: Hmzontat approximated based on, Vertical approximated based on GPS (Rec) Log of Boring B-2 Project DaVita Healthcare Partners t G M E N G I N E E R S Project Location: Federal way, Washington Figure &3 Project Number. 23107-001-00 Sheet 1 of 1 Date Total Logged By RNM Excavator KelVs Excavating Groundwater not observed Excavated 10/20/2017 Depth (ft) 3.5 Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed Surface Elevation (ft) 456 Latitude 47.31345 Coordinate System Vertical Datum Longitude-IM29128 Horizontal Datum 2 Date Total Logged By RNM Excavator Kellys Excavating Groundwater not observed 10/20/2017 Excavated 2.5 Depth (ft) Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed Surface Elevation (ft) 464 Latitude 47.31313 Coordinate System Vertical Datum Longitude-=29209 Horizontal Datum SAMPLE E d MATERIAL REMARKS = w 'n DESCRIPMON 2 j :•+ '++ t a < < G y m p �U Ip iU lit � F F C7 C7U SPSM Dark brown sand with silt and gavel, occasao,^aI orpr)ic rrattPr (loose. maist){tap ili Brown with occasional orange mottling silty sand, occasional gravel and organic matter (medium dense, mast) (weathered till) bb� T 1 SM Gray with occasional orange mottling silty sand with gravel, occasional cobbles (very dense, moist) (till) bb 2I-TI 2 Refusal at 21/2feet Notes: See Figure B-lfor explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measuThe depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 1/2foot. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on, Vertical approximated based on GPS (Rec) Log of Test P'it TR2 Project DaVita Healthcare Partners G M E N G I N E E R �i / �� I Project Location: Federal way, Washington Figure B-5 ---�'� Project Number. 23107-001-00 sheet 1of Date 10/20/2017 Total 4 Logged BY RNM Excavator Kellys Excavating Groundwater not observed Excavated Depth (ft) Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed Surface Elevation (ft) 456 latitude 47.31315 Coordinate System Vertical Datum Longitude-1=29097 Horizontal Datum Date 10/20/2017 Total 3.5 Logged BY RNM Excavator Kellys Excavating Groundwater not observed Excavated Depth (ft) Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed Surface Elevation (ft) 458 latitude 47.31292 Coordinate System Vertical Datum Longtude-122.29135 Horizontal Datum Excavated 10/20/2017 Dotal 25 Logged BY RNM Excavator Kelly's Excavating Groundwater rat observed vated epth (ft) Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed Surface Devotion (ft) 455 Latitude 47.31255 Coordinate System Vertical Datum Longitude IM29176 Horizontal Datum SAMPLE 2 n y c MATERIAL REMARKS o DESCRIPTION 'p t > a c c «. 2 :2ar`- a 0 2 c c N a�i 12 a0 2.2 U OtS Lci l ftm silty sand, oc asional gravel and organic matter (loose, moist) {topsoil)2 to 3 Irdm asphaltic concrete I old road surface rsm Gray to brown silty sand with gravel, occasional organic matter (medium dense, moist) (fill) SM Gray to brown silty sand with gravel, occasional cobbles (dense to very dense, moist) (till) h� a J-7 2 Refusal at 21/2feet Notes: See Figure B-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measuThe depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 1/2foot. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on, Vertical approximated based on GPS (Rec) Log of Test Pit TR5 Project Davrta Healthcare Partners G M E N G I N E E R5 Project Location: Federal Way, Washington j Figure B-8 Project Number. 23107-001-00 sheet 1 of 1 Date Total Excavated 10/20/2017 Depth (ft) 6 Surface Elevation (ft) 442 Vertical Datum SAMPLE a1 y a r E to O ."0.. O C � O m y CL N y lil 0 O u) E- N H C N H .3 O C C7 N O O ,p 00 sM Op' 1 ,y9 b g 1 SA �$ b 4 b31 5 0 � z 6 Logged By RNM Excavator Kellys Excavating Groundwater riot observed Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed Latitude 47.31234 Coordinate System Longitude-172.29101 Horizontal Datum MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Brown silty sand with fine gravel, occasional organic matter (medium dense, moist) (topsoil and fill) sM t Gray silty sand with gravel (medium dense to dense, moist) (fill) — — GM Brown silty gravel % sand, occasi oral cobbles and organic matter (medium dense, moist) (fill) SM I Gray silty sand with gravel, occasional cobbles (very dense, moist) (till) Refusal at 6 feet 10 1 19 REMARKS Notes: See Figure B-J. for explanation of symbols The depths on the tes: pit lags are based og an average of measuThe depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 1/2foot. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on, Vertical approximated based on GPS (Rec) Log of Test Flit TP-6 Project DaViita Healthcare Partners p Prot Location: Federal Way, Washington Figure &9 C] EO N �i N E E R Project Number: 23107-001-00 Sheet 1 of 1 Date Total Logged By RNM Excavator Kellys Excavating Groundwater not observed Excavated 10/20/2017 Depth (ft) 3.5 Checked By SVVH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed iurface Elevation (ft) 452 Latitude 47.31146 Coordinate System /ertical Datum Longitude 1?2 29204 Horizontal Datum SAMPLE n E a o J `2 MATERIAL REMARKS °' o �.. U) DESCRIPTION 9q L a N W C C i+ N Vl H H L a 2 cl 7 2j 2.2 C u1 2 accp i C 22 cc U � C7 C7 U U IL SM Dark brown silty sand, occasional fine gravel and organic matter (loose, moist) (topsoit) SM Brown with occasional Orange mottlingsittysand, occasional gravel Ah� and organic matter (roots) (medium dense, moist) (weathered till) t 0 2 sM I Gray silty sand with gravel (very dense, moist) (till) Refusal at 33/2feet Notes: See Figure B-1 fw erFlar,t ion of symbols. The depths on the test Ixt logs are based on an average of measuThe depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 1/2 foot Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on, Vertical approximated fused on GPS (Rec) Log of Test Pit TP-7 Project Davita Healthcare Partners GM E N G I N E E R S � Project Location: Federal Way, Washington Project Number: 23107-001-00 Figure of 1 1 Sheet 1 of 1 Date 10/20/2017 Total 3.5 Logged BY RNM Excavator Kellys Excavating Groundwater not observed Excavated Depth (ft) Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed i Surface Elevation (ft) 446 Latitude 47.31157 Coordinate system ✓ertical Datum Lonotude -=29154 Horizontal Datum Y y SAMPLE o MATERIAL d E a w DESCRIPTION < < W 0 F F C7 C7 U � U i� Cg sM Gray to brown silty sand, occasionai fine gravel and organic matter ((ocee, mom) (topsoil/weathered tin) sM Gray silty sand with gravel, occasional organic matter (medium dense, moist) (weathered till) ay l n 1 .: tpP ep 2 sM I Gray silty sand with gravel, occasional cobbles (very dense, moist) (till) Refusal at3Y2feet REMARKS Notes: See Figure &1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measuThe depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to Y2foot. Coordinates Data source: Horizontal approximated based on, Vertical approximated based on GPS (Rec) Log of Test Pit TP 8 Project DaVita Healthcare Partners G EO E N G I N E E RS Project Location: Federal Way, Washington Figure B-11 Project Number: 23107-001-00 Sheet 1 of 1 I Datevated 10/20/2017 ToialDept(fti 4 Logged By RNM Excavator Kellys Excavating Groundwater not observed Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed lurface Elevation (ft) Latitude 47.31108 Coordinate System 'ertical Datum 454 Longitude-12229261 Horizontal Datum SAMPLE c MATERIAL c o g DESCRIPTION REMARKS o V ba C C - a= y W a 0 N F N F l6 C7 2 A C7U p CC �U p �U SRSM Dark brown sand with silt, occasional fine gravel and organic matter (loose, moist) (topsoil) sM Gray to brown %ith occasional ordnge fnottl!rngsilty sand t+ith gravel, by9 occasional ❑rraric i attef (m ;urn dense, moist) (ueaviered till) f I I 1 • :•� � 01 ' P 3 2 SA Glut I Gray silty gravel with sand (very dense, moist) (till) Refusal at 4 feet, no groundwater 4 1 21 Notes: See Figure B-1 for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measuThe depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 1/2foot Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on, Vertical approxirnatit�d based on GPS (Rec) Log of Test Pit TR9 G E Project Davits Healthcare Partners Project Location: Federal way, Washington EO N G I N E E R5 Figure &12 Project Number: 23107MIM sheet 1 of 1 Date I Total Logged By RNM Excavator Kellys Excavating Groundwater not observed Excavated 10/20/2017 1 Depth(ft) 25 Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed Surface Elevation (ft) Latitude 47.3111 Coordinate System Vertical Datum 450 Longitude-122.29177 Horizontal Datum v SAMPLE MATERIAL REMARKS a e° v U DESCRIPTION O t W tc r V a H w O F F C7 CAS U Snit Brown to gray silty sand with gravel, occasional organic matter (medium derise, moist) (topsoil and weathered till) SM Gray with occasional orange mottling silty sand with gravel (dense, mast) (weathered till) eP� z 2 stet Gray silty sand with gravel, occasional cobbles (very dense, moist) (till) Refusal at2Y2feet Notes: See Figure 13-1for explanation of symbols. The depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measuThe depths on the test pit logs are based on an average of measurements across the test pit and should be considered accurate to 1/2 foot. Coordinates Data Source: Horizontal approximated based on, Vertical approximated based on GPS (Rec) Log of Test Pit TP-10 Project DaVrta Healthcare Partners G EO E N G N E E R S /, Project Location: Federal Way, Washington Figure B-13 - Project Number: 23107-001-00 sheet 1of 1 Date Total wed By RNM Excavator Kellys Excavating Groundwater not observed Excavated 10/20/2017 Depth (ft) 3 Checked By SWH Equipment Komatsu 140 Backhoe Caving not observed Surface Elevation (ft) latitude 47.31105 Coordinate System Vertical Datum 446 Longitude -=2914 Horizontal Datum MISSES �■�■■■�u��■■�� .................... .■■■■.■■■..■■■.■■■■■ .................... ■�■ .■....■■■.■.....■.■ IMMEMEMEMME MOMMOMME mmommomommmmommm NEW _�Yf m,�w;: I____ W • _ . ® ■■111'1'■■1��11111 ' ■.■■■■■■■.r�c�■■.... ........5� �,,,�US.1�...... _ __ _ __ __ _ _m m __ __ �L►m_I _��■____��_ __mm____j+_�!_FI�____i�_ ! ...,�lyJ!'iliiii!! �e ■1■1'1� ��1"1■111 ■� �� 111 ■'111 �� i................... mmmmmmmmmmmm ==== ■■■1'■■■■1■11111■"■ • 1 1 N bD N ti}p N Y �' N �3 �3 o 3 3 a ._ m a a� � > c > c � N � fA • O N U � U � O � O � N � fn i 7 N o � 00 CO � v d d � �--� N e-I o - 1�i6 � ei N N p= a m m mI- _ Q' Z W �a❑vo • IIIIIIIIIIIININIII ■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■moss■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ iii � � � � i►�i ��r��r �iii�� II � ��iii►r1�/.r iiii i ii i ii iii�■�li�!1'�liiii �!!� r!l�wARi�'r!!l.�lir!!l�Ilirs iii // ■�...�' ME■■■■■■■■ ■!'/.��r■■■ ■ ■■■■■■■■ ■■ �ff ■r/,■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ mr Imr�mmommommmmmmom /./_� i iiiii mm wiii i i i i iiii iiii ii i iiii i iiii • iiiiiiiiiii r!!!!!a!!!!!i!!!!!!� • ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ • r• c�c?� N N N m � � �� m m m •o m N (6 (0 (6 � o 0 0 U U U � � i�j 4O+ C C C d 7 V `n a � ai m v � � y c o � d a d aa ~ Z W ■ APPENDIX C Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use APPENDIX C REPORT LIMITATIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR USE' - This appendix provides information to help you manage your risks with respect to the use of this report. Read These Provisions Closely It is important to recognize that the geoscience practices (geotechnical engineering, geology and environmental science) rely on professional judgment and opinion to a greater extent than other engineering and natural science disciplines, where more precise and/or readily observable data may exist. To help clients better understand how this difference pertains to our services, GeoEngineers includes the following explanatory "limitations" provisions in its reports. Please confer with GeoEngineers if you need to know more how these "Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use" apply to your project or site. Geotechnical Services are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons and Projects This report has been prepared for DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc./Team Genesisforthe project specifically identified and described in the report. The information contained herein is not applicable to other sites or projects. GeoEngineers structures its services to meet the specific needs of its clients. No party other than the party to whom this report is addressed may rely on the product of our services unless we agree to such reliance in advance and in writing. Within the limitations of the agreed scope of services for the Project, and its schedule and budget, our services have been executed in accordance with our Agreement with DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc./Team Genesis dated September 28, 2017 and generally accepted geotechnical practices in this area at the time this report was prepared. We do not authorize, and will not be responsible for, the use of this report for any purposes or projects other than those identified in the report. A Geotechnical Engineering or Geologic Report is based on a Unique Set of Project -Specific Factors This report has been prepared for the proposed development, as described in this report, to be located in Federal Way, Washington. GeoEngineers considered a number of unique, project -specific factors when establishing the scope of services for this project and report. Unless GeoEngineers specifically indicates otherwise, it is important not to rely on this report if it was: c not prepared for you, i_ not prepared for your project, not prepared for the specific site explored, or i- completed before important project changes were made. 1 Developed based on material provided by ASFE, Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences; www.asfe.org. GWENGINEER� September 7, 2018 Page C-1 File No. 23107-001-00 For example, changes that can affect the applicability of this report include those that affect: r-.: the function of the proposed structure; * elevation, configuration, location, orientation or weight of the proposed structure; r composition of the design team; or rr project ownership. If changes occur after the date of this report, GeoEngineers cannot be responsible for any consequences of such changes in relation to this report unless we have been given the opportunity to review our interpretations and recommendations. Based on that review, we can provide written modifications or confirmation, as appropriate. Environmental Concerns are Not Covered Unless environmental services were specifically included in our scope of services, this report does not provide any environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations, including but not limited to, the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Subsurface Conditions Can Change This geotechnical or geologic report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. The findings and conclusions of this report may be affected by the passage of time, by man-made events such as construction on or adjacent to the site, new information or technology that becomes available subsequent to the report date, or by natural events such as floods, earthquakes, slope instability or groundwater fluctuations. If more than a few months have passed since issuance of our report or work product, or if any of the described events may have occurred, please contact GeoEngineers before applying this report for its intended purpose so that we may evaluate whether changed conditions affect the continued reliability or applicability of our conclusions and recommendations. Geotechnical and Geologic Findings are Professional Opinions Our interpretations of subsurface conditions are based on field observations from widely spaced sampling locations atthe site. Site exploration identifies the specific subsurface conditions only atthose points where subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. GeoEngineers reviewed field and laboratory data and then applied its professional judgment to render an informed opinion about subsurface conditions at other locations. Actual subsurface conditions may differ, sometimes significantly, from the opinions presented in this report. Our report, conclusions and interpretations are not a warranty of the actual subsurface conditions. Geotechnical Engineering Report Recommendations are Not Final We have developed the following recommendations based on data gathered from subsurface investigation(s). These investigations sample just a small percentage of a site to create a snapshot of the subsurface conditions elsewhere on the site. Such sampling on its own cannot provide a complete and accurate view of subsurface conditions for the entire site. Therefore, the recommendations included in this report are preliminary and should not be considered final. GeoEngineers' recommendations can be finalized only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. GeoEngineers cannot assume responsibility or liability for the recommendations in this report if we do not perform construction observation. GEoENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page C-2 File No. 23107-001-00 We recommend that you allow sufficient monitoring, testing and consultation during construction by GeoEngineers to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by the explorations, to provide recommendations for design changes if the conditions revealed during the work differ from those anticipated, and to evaluate whether earthwork activities are completed in accordance with our recommendations. Retaining GeoEngineers for construction observation forthis project is the most effective means of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. If another party performs field observation and confirms our expectations, the other party must take full responsibility for both the observations and recommendations. Please note, however, that another party would lack our project - specific knowledge and resources. A Geotechnical Engineering or Geologic Report Could Be Subject to Misinterpretation Misinterpretation of this report by members of the design team or by contractors can result in costly problems. GeoEngineers can help reduce the risks of misinterpretation by conferring with appropriate members of the design team after submittingthe report, reviewing pertinent elements of the design team's plans and specifications, participating in pre -bid and preconstruction conferences, and providing construction observation. Do Not Redraw the Exploration Logs Geotechnical engineers and geologists prepare final boring and testing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. The logs included in a geotechnical engineering or geologic report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but separating logs from the report can create a risk of misinterpretation. Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance To help reduce the risk of problems associated with unanticipated subsurface conditions, GeoEngineers recommends giving contractors the complete geotechnical engineering or geologic report, including these "Report Limitations and Guidelines for Use." When providing the report, you should preface it with a clearly written letter of transmittal that: r advises contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that its accuracy is limited; and r_: encourages contractors to confer with GeoEngineers and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. Contractors are Responsible for Site Safety on Their Own Construction Projects Our geotechnical recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's procedures, methods, schedule or management of the work site. The contractor is solely responsible for job site safety and for managing construction operations to minimize risks to on -site personnel and adjacent properties. GEoENGINEER� September 7, 2018 Page C-3 File No. 23107-001-00 Biological Pollutants GeoEngineers' Scope of Work specifically excludes the investigation, detection, prevention or assessment of the presence of Biological Pollutants. Accordingly, this report does not include any interpretations, recommendations, findings or conclusions regarding the detecting, assessing, preventing or abating of Biological Pollutants, and no conclusions or inferences should be drawn regarding Biological Pollutants as they may relate to this project. The term "Biological Pollutants" includes, but is not limited to, molds, fungi, spores, bacteria and viruses, and/or any of their byproducts. A Client that desires these specialized services is advised to obtain them from a consultant who offers services in this specialized field. GEOENGINEERS� September 7, 2018 Page C-4 File No. 23107-001-00 VTENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest MEMORANDUM DATE: November 9, 2018 TO: Rick Perez / Sarady Long City of Federal Way FROM: Jeff Schramm / Curtis Chin, P.E. TENW SUBJECT: Updated Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed DaVita Single -Tenant Office - Federal Way, WA TENW Project #5535 1 This memorandum summarizes the Updated Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) conducted for the proposed DaVita 1 single -tenant office development. The traffic analysis was updated at the request of the City to include weekday AM peak hour LOS, updated PM peak hour LOS at the site access, and to reflect the latest site 1 plan and new buildout year. This document includes a project description, trip generation estimate, trip distribution and assignment of project trips, and peak hour LOS analyses. Project Description The project site is located west of Weyerhaeuser Way S in the vicinity of S 323,d Street in the Federal Way 1 city limits. A vicinity map of the surrounding area is shown in Figure 1. The project includes the development of up to 161,280 square feet of single -tenant office building area on a site that is currently vacant. Parking for the project would be provided at an adjacent 470 stall surface lot located on the north side of S 323nd r Street, and 211 on -site stalls south of S 323nd Street located under and around the proposed building. ' Vehicular access to the site would be provided via a proposed full access driveway on 32nd Avenue S, a proposed full access driveway on S 323rd Street, and the west leg of the existing 321d Avenue S / S 3231d 1 Street roundabout. Improvements to the 32nd Avenue S / S 323,d Street roundabout are proposed to enhance 1 pedestrian circulation with the proposed project. The locations of the proposed site access locations are shown in the Figure 2 preliminary site plan concept. Project buildout is expected by 2020. Study Area To assess the traffic impacts associated with the proposed project, based on discussions with the City of Federal Way, weekday peak hour LOS analyses were conducted the following intersections and time periods: 1 . 23,d Avenue S / S 3201h Street (AM peak hour only) 2. S Gateway Center Plaza / 251h Avenue S / S 3201h Street (AM peak hour only) 3. Southbound 1-5 Ramps / S 320'h Street (AM peak hour only) 4. Northbound 1-5 Ramps / S 320'h Street (AM peak hour only) 5. 32nd Avenue S / S 320th Street (AM peak hour only) 6. 32nd Avenue S / S 323rd Street (AM and PM peak hours) 7. Weyerhaeuser Way S / S 3201h Street (AM peak hour only) 8. Proposed Site Driveway on S 323rd Street (AM and PM peak hours) 9. Proposed Site Driveway on 32nd Avenue S (AM and PM Peak Hours) Transportation Planning j Design I Traffic Impact & Operations 11400 SE 81h Street, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 j Office (425) 889-6747 • 1 .� ntertl8 ' . ' F' I�--� y r . •' '' . . Ib _'_' �'i=:+� !y .yam ,dS/. • u± N_ 7 ll0 1 �i �IS'31B[T �s.3zorn St � � � --_ - --- L s 3ztsm st -tip• k,I AkA k E �'j'• f rJ .�� . � a if' Rr orm r �r l m S .31 Lake ,, �� tom. 06 Gene l Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA ,�:��•. - r . � • �: � =gin: �;;` � + ��'-_-- - , -- Ise � -arl � ,' rr 1 •, .1 r•`['•.. ! � ' f r � � ll "avr,r 6 maw { - -- --- .` ,\ u Ya . Cud_'• l _I J JJ •L' 161,280 SF 3 S1 ORY BUILDING FF=455.00 T r. .. I vr�r. t: - - ---- ---------------- Figure 2: Preliminary Site Plan % TENW N (D 110' TO ;[ALE November 9, 2018 Page 3 Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita - Federal Way, WA Trip Generation The trip generation estimate for the proposed 161,280 sf DaVito single -tenant office development was based methodology documented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10'h edition for land use code (LUC) 715 (Single -Tenant Office Building). Table 1 summarizes the weekday daily, �j AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation estimates. Detailed trip generation calculations are included y in Attachment A. Table 1 — Trip Generation Summary New Trips Generated Time Period In Out Total Weekday Daily 907 907 1,814 Weekday AM Peak Hour 256 32 288 Weekday PM Peak Hour 41 235 276 As shown in Table 1, the proposed DaVita single -tenant office is estimated to generate 1 , 814 new weekday daily trips with 288 new trips occurring during the weekday AM peak hour (256 in, 32 out) and 276 new trips occurring during the weekday PM peak hour (41 in, 235 out). Traffic Volumes at Study Intersections and Site Driveways Existing weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic counts at the study intersections were conducted by All Traffic Data in 2017 and Traffic Data Gathering in 2018. The detailed traffic count data sheets are included in Attachment B. The existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections are shown in Figure 3. The weekday AM and PM peak hour trips generated by the proposed DaVita single -tenant office project were distributed and assigned through the study intersections based on the City's EMME/2 traffic model distribution plots provided by the City of Federal Way. The assignment of the weekday AM and PM peak hour project trips is shown graphically in Figure 4. The City's EMME/2 traffic model distribution plots are included in Attachment C. Based on discussions with the City of Federal Way transportation staff, future 2020 traffic volumes at the study intersections were estimated by applying a 2 percent annual growth rate to the existing counts to estimate future year 2020 weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes without the proposed project. The 2 percent annual growth rate accounts for traffic growth in existing traffic and from new development in the area. Future without -project traffic volumes during the weekday AM and PM peak hours are shown in Figure 5. Future weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed DaVita single -tenant project were estimated by adding the project trip assignment (shown in Figure 4) at the study intersections to the without - project traffic volumes (shown in Figure 5). Figure 6 illustrates the future weekday AM and PM peak hour with -project traffic volumes at the study intersections. TENW November Page4 Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita - Federal Way, WA j, S 312th Si A 10 5 312th St ::r w S 313VO OL S 314th St ➢ N `^ CID w S� S 316th St S 316th St S 315th PI S 317th St y > � S 316th PI N Y SGdnyec�� a N 131 8th St S 318th PI m '� 47 © 5 320th St S 321 st St S 320th St—©—© N 00 Q Q r - ' D > D t 1 m S 324th St m `m r + 1 0 L 5 323rd �l 0 $ �0, jo n p 4 y� J O S 328st 51a S 3301h St `n f 23rd Ave S / 5 320th St 107 voi uMi N P - 817 �150 sxa,cl R �/ 1�1 63� 815 i ^ 22 32nd Ave S / S 323rd St ' 85 1161 F31136) Cl) o S"M 3e (0) 0-'3 (31) 1 --0 (541 5---3p. S 6atewoy Center Blvd 1251hA}USIS3201h51 a 69 E-1,059 f u'25 �rm,sr � 4 26 cq n a 1.072 a 15� OWeyerhaeuser Way S / S 320th St F 670 121 310111 5! 824 --1- 5 33-y 7 3 3 � 1-5 SB Ramps / S 320th St F 738 �175 807 --30. 375�0 LEGEND Study Intersection t XX AM Peak Hour 1XX) (PM Peak Hour) t-5 NB konlps 1 5 3�0111 S! E 207 z F• 602 E I O tl M o CO 61 I s a - S3?n20d thAve S 1 3SI t- 695 sr..:. �-39 2 660 2. N (i) Figure 3: 2018 Existing Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 1407 TO SME TENW NovemberP215 Page S 314th St y S 316th StT S 316th St w S 317th St S3161hPI Z�' 04 N SOO S 318th PI 23rd Ave S / S 3201h SI *1-3 I�1 55 -� 3?n d Ave S / S 323rd St 4 132) a ,t.V.YtISr (31J4� Weyerhaeuser Wary 51 S 34131 St 1 S Acces E- 9 �Y S 1 J.w, )1 a Weyerhaeuser Way S / S 3201h St E- 37 �43 5 Ran. •. i S 312th St w N a ` �1 rD C/) S 323rd � I t-5 58 Ramps 1 5 3200% SI E t- 10 .." .51 3 96 --)o. 0 S 32" St / Site Access N 8 f�31 (7) �o s.»o�n sr 1 < N (5) 35 m i Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA S 312th St S 313M"N o S 315th PI 4 N < w S 318th St S 320th St S 321 st St UI.5 s�8 Ramp: 1 S 3201h SI �2 IsenU�.v 32nd Ave S 1 Ve ACCOM O N *—16 (128) 1`. i Ar:rep, `.fJlr I m rn �o Figure 4: Weekday Peak Hour Project Trip Assignment VTENW 32nd Ave S 1 S 3201h St 37 s iron, sr R J� y I I 172 LEGEND Study Intersection ® Site Access XX AM Peak Hour (XXI (PM Peak Hour) N (D NOT }O SCALE November 9, 2018 Page 6 Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA S 312th St 10 S 312th St ? w S 3131,c% S3141hSt D N �' < m $� a 1bt�` S 315ttSt S 316th St 53 ` O a S 315th PI 5 317th St CD H a S 3161h PI N D ,esy0, rn 5 �� S 318th St S 318th PI G� S 320th St S 321st St S 3201h St N N W a V 3 a D rn y D 1 (D 1 fJz S 324th St m 5 323r4t m a � a 0� f Z� S 328st St 4 �0- S 330th St `r 23rd Ave S / 5 320th St in N fB$0 awn•.. a t 66 - p 848 —.. M 23 __X 32nd Ave S / • S 323rd St 10— 88 (171 m o t- 32 1371 �► L# ra 1 lal 10) 0� (32) 1 (56] 5--)o. wey i oe uwT Way S / 5 as 1 sl 51 15 Access 72 c N F1,102 26 �1y� u�4 27 1,115 > K 16 Weyerhaeuser Ways / S 3201h St E- 697 Ar-126 JANII)I R 857 --). i 1� 34 r i-S SS Romps 1 S 3WH151 v = F 768 182 840 -s LEGEND ® Study Intersection t XX AM Peak Hour (XX) (PM Peak Hour) 1-5 NB Ramps / ' S 320th St �21S le t 626 h S3901n Sl R 1 t a O N 636 --0- 32ftd Avg S / 5 32011� 51 E- 723 � 41 s warn sl 2� 895 --). v ` m n 214� c N (D Figure 5: 2020 Without Project Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Ic Volumes NMTOSCAUE T E N W Page November 87 Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA S 312th Si A S 312th It w S 313M 31dth It n N 0S �' rye a S 316th St S 316th It y 5� O S 315th PI S 317th St w D S 3161h PI ro m cu S(P6 S 3181h It S 318th PI 'e S 320th It © S 321 st St S 320th It W � w N i1 U D Q r n > co S 324th It r" CD m 11 t 1 N S 823rcf. 1 Cb Q (b, 17, H p ¢yf S 328st St a a Q y Cr S 330th It I `f 23rd Ave 61 5 3201h Sl v �114 Ln Ln N F855 157 �t 3711rh SI 1 R �/ 1 t f 66� =cm 903 23 32nd Ave S / S 323rd St [V P 92 (49) =o a r°Q o F 32 (37) I (o) (63) 5 --4 (56) 5-a Weyerhaeuser Way S / S 341s151 / 5 Access �73 C �I F I,111 /� 11 �► H 46 t If 27 —4 v n o CN 1.205 -� 16 -� Weyerhaeuser Way S / S 320th Sf E- 734 169 '32 R �/ 866-> 1 f 34 ISB SB Ramps / S 3201h S1 P F 778 185 c 3T7s. S' 936...E S 390 S 323rd St / Site ACCeSs 0 o c 31 (7) 0) 0 o s F 121 (54) i �N s .V.Z6 sr �16(3) (0)0� 1 1 (130)9 0 C4 (5)35�� o is I-5 NB Ramps; ` 5 37i1lI, 51 -217 E!- 63`9 1 1 o Go 794 v M 32nd Ave 5 / • Sile Access a -o cv 16 1128) -inPAn:Fst t P O �o Figure 6: 2020 With -Project Weekday Peak Hour Traffic Volumes C9 TENW 32nd Ave S / S 320th Si F 723 S 34tl11.S1 78 2� 3B6 x LEGEND ® Study lnierseclion Site Access t XX AM Peak Hour (XXI (PM Peak Hour) N 1) Mwwwou November 9, 2018 Page 8 I r Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA Level of Service Analysis Existing 2018 and future 2020 weekday AM and PM peak hour level of service (LOS) analyses were conducted at the study intersections with and without the proposed DaVita single -tenant office development based on methodologies and procedures outlined in the latest Highway CapacilyManual (61h Edition). The LOS methodology is described in Attachment D. The Synchro Version 10.3 software package was used to determine LOS results at the study intersections. Tables 2 and Table 3 summarize the AM and PM peak hour LOS analysis results at the study intersections. The detailed LOS calculation sheets are included in Attachment D. Table 2 - Existing Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour LOS Summary 1 Study Intersection/Movement LOS 2018 Existing Delay sec v/c' AM PEAK HOUR Signalized 1.231d Ave S / S 320th St C 26.8 0.75 2. S Gateway Center Plaza / 25th Ave S / S 320th St A 8.1 0.71 3. Southbound 1-5 Ramps / S 320'h St C 25.8 0.83 4. Northbound 1-5 Ramps / S 320th St B 14.8 0.85 5. 32^d Ave S / S 3201h St A 1.6 0.55 7. Weyerhaeuser Way S / S 320th St A 3.6 0.61 Roundabout 6. 32nd Ave S / S 323rd St A 3.4 - Eastbound Approach A 2.7 0.01 Westbound Approach A 3.5 0.12 Southbound Approach A 3.3 0.06 PM PEAK HOUR Roundabout 1. 32nd Ave S / S 323rd St A 3.4 - Eastbound Approach A 3.5 0.09 Westbound Approach A 3.1 0.05 Southbound Aatarooch A 3.3 0.07 19 TENW 1. V/c shown of signalized intersections is the max Ytc ratio for all lane groups November 9, 2018 Page 9 Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA Table 3 - Future 2020 Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour LOS Summary 2020 Without -Project 2020 With -Project Delay Delay Study Intersection/Movement LOS (sec) v/c1 LOS sec v/c1 AM PEAK HOUR Signalized 1. 23rd Ave S / S 320th St C 27.2 0.86 C 27.8 0.87 2. S Gateway Center Plaza / 25th Ave S / S 320th St A 8.2 0.72 A 8.1 0.72 3. Southbound 1-5 Ramps / S 3201h St C 26.3 0.83 C 27.7 0.83 4. Northbound 1-5 Ramps / S 3201h St B 15.0 0.85 B 14.2 0.85 5. 32nd Ave S / S 3201h St A 1.6 0.58 A 2.5 0.60 7. Weyerhaeuser Way S / S 3201h St A 3.7 0.61 A 3.3 0.63 Roundabout 6.32^d Ave S / S 3231d St A 3.5 - A 3.8 - Eastbound Approach A 2.7 0.01 A 2.8 0.01 Westbound Approach A 3.6 0.12 A 3.7 0.13 Southbound Approach A 3.3 0.07 A 4.0 0.14 Stop Controlled A. S 323rd Street / Site Access Northbound Shared Left -Right - - A 9.5 0.01 Eastbound Left -Turn - - A 0.0 0.00 Westbound Left -Turn - - A 7.3 0.01 Southbound Shared Left -Right - - - B 10.0 0.01 B. 32"d Avenue S / Site Access Westbound Shared Left -Right - A 8.7 0.02 Westbound Shared Left -Right - A 7.6 0.10 PM PEAK HOUR Roundabout 6. 32"d Ave S / S 323rd St A 3.4 - A 3.6 - Eastbound Approach A 3.6 0.09 A 3.9 0.12 Westbound Approach A 3.1 0.05 A 3.5 0.08 Southbound Approach A 3.4 0.08 A 3.4 0.09 Stop Controlled A. S 323rd Street / Site Access Northbound Shared Left -Right - - - A 9.9 0.07 Eastbound Left -Turn - - A 0.0 0.00 Westbound Left -Turn - - A 7.5 0.00 Southbound Shared Left -Right - - - B 10.2 0.04 B. 32nd Avenue S / Site Access Westbound Shared Left -Right - - - B 10.0 0.16 Westbound Shared Left-Riclht - - - A 7.6 0.12 1. V/c shown at signalized Intersections is the max v/c ratio for all lane groups As shown in Table 3, the study intersections and site driveways are anticipated to operate at acceptable levels (LOS C or better) in 2020 without or with the proposed DaVita single -tenant office development during both the weekday AM and PM peak hours. Additionally, all v/c ratios are anticipated to be less than 1.2 for all movements at signalized intersections and less than 1.0 for all movements at unsignalized intersections, meeting City standards. V TENW NovembePage 10 l I I I I 1 F1 I I I J J Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA Pedestrian Access Parking for the project would be provided at two locations for the project: (1) an adjacent 470 stall surface lot located on the north side of S 323r1d Street, and (2) 211 on -site stalls under and around the proposed building south of S 323"d Street. Pedestrian access between the building and the parking lot on north side of 3231d will be accommodated by a new crosswalk on the east leg of the adjacent roundabout. The new crosswalk would include modification to the splitter island and a new rapid flash beacon (RRFB) to increase pedestrian safety. If you have any questions regarding the information presented in this memorandum, please feel free to contact me at (425) 250-0581 or schramm@tenw.com. %9 TENW November 9, 2018 Page 11 11 Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA ATTACHMENT A Trip Generation Calculations DaVita Federal Way Trip Generation Estimate Directional SDlit2 Trips Generated Land Use Area Units' ITE LUC2 Trip Rate2 In Out In Out Total DAILY Proposed Use: Single -Tenant Office Building 161,280 GFA 715 11.25 50% 50% 907 907 1,814 NET NEW DAILY TRIP GENERATION = 907 907 1,814 AM PEAK HOUR Propose_ Use: Single -Tenant Office Building3 161,280 GFA 715 eqn 89% 11% 256 32 288 NET NEW AM PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION = 256 32 288 PM PEAK HOUR Pry Single -Tenant Office Building3 161,280 GFA 715 eqn 15% 85% 41 235 276 NET NEW I'M PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION = 41 235 276 Notes: 1. GFA = Gross Floor Area. 2. Land Use Code, trip rates, and entering/eating splits based on ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, 2017. 3. AM and PM peak hour trip rate equations based on peak hour of generator. VTENW �J 11/9/2018 Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA ATTACHMENT B Existing Traffic Count Data S TTRA FFIC DATA GATHERING TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM TO 8:00 AM Peds = 5 i I E m 1,074 � m 0 0 M N 1107 817 150 235 E� u N U-Turn 0 234 a� IL 337 53 Bicvl des 0 50 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME IN 2,506 OUT 2,506 C 63 1 815 22 c 1 0 N '2 878 E 901 N 7 w m Peds = 7 118 0 Bicycles 194 U-Turn n 65 11 0 m N a 225 HV I PHF 0.81 NIB 2.6% 0.89 0.92 0.87 0.92 PHF = Peak Hour Factor HV = Heavy Vehicle 23rd Avenue S @ S 320th Street Federal Way, WA COUNTED BY: TDG DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 7/24/18 REDUCTION DATE: Fri. 7/27/18 TIME OF COUNT: 6:00 AM - 8:DD AM milli IIIIIIIII E1111��1111111111110911111 Emme C� g TTRA FFIC DATA GATHERING TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM TO 8:00 AM Peds = 2 v m > E 0 'm 114 � d c � U 0 0 3 38 2 74 m .. m ,, C9 1,110 00 u aU-Turn 1 26 1,114 1072 Bicycles 0 15 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME IN 2,422 OUT 2,422 13 1 5 19 c 0 0 42 E 37 N G m Peds = 4 69 1 0 Bicycles 1059 1,157 M 25 4 r U-Turn u 1 t HV I PHF SB 0.9% 0.75 NB 0.0% 0.71 WB 3.2% 0.81 EB 2.3% 0.90 INTRS. 2.6% 0.89 PHF = Peak Hour Factor HV = Heavy Vehicle Gateway Center Boulevard S/25th Avenue S @ S 320th Street Federal Way, WA COUNTED BY: TDG DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 7/24/18 REDUCTION DATE: Fri. 7/27/18 TIME OF COUNT: 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM mill ��■ego■ off■ NEMENIi J C �a TTRA FFIC DATA GATHERING TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM TO 8:00 AM Peds = 7 a E E U ~ m 561 m 0 0 `1 425 4 132 1,163 0 u aU-Turn 0 0 1,182 807 Bicycles 0 375 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME IN 2,656 OUT 2,656 a E c O m 554 nE Peds = 0 0 0 Bicycles 738 913 0 175 0 t5 U-Turn I I u y 1 HV I PHF SB 3.2% 0.77 NB #N/A #NIA WB 3.5% 0.80 EB 1.6% 0.85 INTRS. 2.6% 0.89 PHF = Peak Hour Factor HV = Heavy Vehicle 1-5 SIB Ramps @ S 320th Street Federal Way, WA COUNTED BY: TDG DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 7/24/18 REDUCTION DATE: Fri. 7/27/18 TIME OF COUNT: 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM 1 �14 |��©©©��,-■:2=f!! r -0-1 ` � � k lam.... ....... , . §!B`§j l��.;,■ ,:�r� � \\ ............. (\�� I �� ,� ,....7 - � § & : §) I d-� k« i;r:=!■!� - „ ■,�,■_!■ �)2k ;;;@f■,,|;,■�m9, � ! !� TTRA FFIC DATA GATHERING TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM TO 8:00 AM Peds = 2 I � N E _T w m F 7o 207 c 1 O J z 0 0 Ln — 0 0 0 T 9 55 0 u w d U-Turn 0 0 a 955 611 Bicycles 1 344 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME IN 2,515 OUT 2,515 a E m c O co z L9 COUNTED BY: TDG REDUCTION DATE: Tue. 8/28/18 393 0 1 358 E co 0 0 O 344 751 0° v LO D m Peds = 0 0 Bicycles 809 0 U-Turn n w v a> CL 969 HV I PHF SB #N/A #N/A NB 5.5% 0.94 WB 4.8% 0.93 EB 2.1% 0.93 INTRS. 4.0% 0.95 PHF = Peak Hour Factor HV = Heavy Vehicle 1-5 NB Ramps @ S 320th Street Federal Way, WA DATE OF COUNT: Wed. 8/15/18 TIME OF COUNT: 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM EIIII McNeill NINE �o�om�e■ _!; '•� ! TRAFFIC DATA GATHERING TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM TO 8:00 AM Peds = 1 712 0 u dU-Turn 1,068 Bicycles INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME IN 1,824 OUT 1,824 a� � F 3 m d p 0 0 ee 0 0 0 T N 17 1 0 5 a) 0 0 a) -ao 245 22 c N ei m F u a Peds = 2 0 695 39 1 E Bicycles 734 U-Turn ii W v a> a 865 HV I PHF SB #N/A #N/A NB 0.0% 0.61 WB 3.4% 0.77 EB 1.9% 0.88 INTRS. 2.5% 0.85 PHF = Peak Hour Factor HV = Heavy Vehicle 32nd Avenue S @ S 320th Street Federal Way, WA COUNTED BY: TDG DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 7/24/18 REDUCTION DATE: Fri. 7/27/18 TIME OF COUNT: 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM k§ §§ � ��•■�§e §�§§! ■ /©�� ©!«E!:§a:■, . § ! / ! � n;lr§! ;■ , R !, ! � ��,.,,. �!■� � - ;��.-.,. �. l...... . ® \ ( } I )� l...... ...... ..� , |� | �� y; n�l,e�==■■■■! „ ®|E`!§,#ww:.�;;��t,,, ; § 1z TrafficAll Data (303) 216-2439 www.aIItrafficdata.net Peak Hour All Vehicles 58 84 Location: 2 32ND AVE S & S 323RD ST AM Date and Start Time: Thursday, November 2, 2017 Peak Hour: 07:15 AM - 08:15 AM LDWY .. «� 1 L li 63 a t_ 30 � 114 f W 178 E 30 s 0 � s -'nn trC.1 I r f Heavy Vehicles Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk -O� L r4 0 wtw S HV% PHF EB 0.0% 030 WB 0.0% 066 NB SB 1.7% 0.76 All 0.6% 0.71 Traffic Counts - All Vehicles DWY S 323RD ST 32ND AVE S Interval Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Rolling Start Time U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right Total Hour 7:00 AM 0 1 2 0 0 0 4 15 0 2 0 3 27 167 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 15 0 0 0 9 33 178 7:30 AM 0 1 4 0 1 0 5 18 0 1 0 14 44 173 7:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 32 0 1 0 18 63 163 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 18 0 1 0 14 38 124 8:15 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 13 0 0 0 7 28 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 13 1 0 0 11 34 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8 0 1 0 9 24 1 Count Total 0 3 7 0 2 0 55 132 1 6 0 85 291 Peak Hour 0 1 5 0 1 0 30 83 0 3 0 55 178 Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Interval Heavy Vehicles Interval Pedestrians/Bicycles on Crosswalk Start Time EB NB WB SB Total Start Time EB NB WB SB Total 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 7:15AM 0 0 0 0 7:15AM 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 8:00 AM 0 0 1 1 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 8:15AM 0 0 0 0 8:15AM 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 0 1 1 2 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 1 2 3 Count Total 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 1 1 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 All Traffic Data 6. (303) 216-2439 www.aIItraffiedata.net Peak Hour All Vehicles 77 46 Location: 3 32ND AVE S & S 323RD ST PM Date and Start Time: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 Peak Hour: 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM Heavy Vehicles 0 0 H 1 a L Jl Ll1 c�.Jl Lh`o 42. 1 35 53 0 4-0 N 0 m N YV 211 E � 0 VV E s3 53 . S r 0 123 .�-► 0 0 g r 0 .� 0 0 0 0 �rl C.0 q '1 f rG i 1 � o —11 o . e r o c v o F I 1 0 0 0 0 HV% PHF EB 0.0% 0.74 WB 0.0% 0.64 NB 0.0% 0.00 SB 0.0% 0.77 All 0.0% 0.80 Traffic Counts -All Vehicles DAVITA ACCESS S 323RD ST Interval Eastbound Westbound Northbound Start Time U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru Right U-Turn Left Thru 1 4:00 PM 0 5 23 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 4:15PM 0 9 7 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 10 11 0 0 0 11 9 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 6 12 0 0 0 8 5 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 8 7 0 0 0 8 2 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 3 11 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 8 6 0 0 0 10 5 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 3 9 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 Count Total 0 52 86 0 0 0 57 26 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 30 53 0 0 0 35 16 0 0 0 Traffic Counts - Heavy Vehicles and Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk Interval Hea�Vehides Interval PedeslrianslBicydes on Crosswalk Start Time EB NB WB S8 Total Start Time EB NB WB SB Total 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:15PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 Pedestrians/Bicycles in Crosswalk _ it U-Turn 32ND AVE S Southbound Left Thru Right Total Rolling Hour 0 0 19 0 1 56 211 0 0 14 0 1 41 206 0 0 23 0 2 66 201 0 0 14 0 3 48 178 0 0 26 0 0 51 161 0 0 17 0 2 36 0 0 12 0 2 43 0 0 15 0 0 31 0 0 140 0 11 372 0 0 70 0 7 211 TTRAFFIC DATA GATHERING TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:00 AM TO 8:00 AM S 320th Street U Turn 0 824 857 0 33 Bicycles INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME IN 1,862 OUT 1,862 Bicycles S 3201h 6 00 1 791 121 0 co �/DE65 149 d 0 1 y 7 [O m 154 214 ��Peds0 U-Tum 973 HV I PHF NB 1.9% 0.71 WB 2.7% 0.70 EB 1.9% 0.86 INTRS. 2.2% 0.86 HV = Heavy Vehicles PHF = Peak Hour Factor Weyerhaeuser Way S @ S 320th Street Federal Way, WA COUNTED BY: TDG DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 7/24/18 REDUCTION DATE: Fri. 7/27/18 TIME OF COUNT: 6:00 AM - 8:00 AM ii0111�lC■ Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita- Federal Way, WA ATTACHMENT C EMME/2 Traffic Model Distribution Plot LA ti s ,a HIW LODGE AI PEASL:1 `�tJ 5 3AY F11Lf l &x z S Mt r11 l l 1 1 l 1 1 1 I I J I J •7 a w x � � If/ Q > i A 4 t Y �4 t ' ■ -__ l n At r q Jn• . i., er ks .t.. t. c •6 � s s� 1+ Is{S awn y g B iTIt LS i ., •a a k ~ T1d H1p s :G Hl:l ilf , ' ■ { 14 a r e � S 3;,d t• ` � � O ' S Id 115 \\ I z I I - � q 6 ■ q ' 4 i _. Jw; !ry tt - _ rt r i 1 .' hvl SAI ..... _'r'1 .. Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita— Federal Way, WA ATTACHMENT D LOS Methodology & Calculations Updated Traffic Impact Analysis DaVita— Federal Way, WA Level of Service Methodology Level of service calculations for intersections were based on methodology and procedures outlined in the 2016 update of the Highway Capaclly Manual, Transportation Research Board (HCM 61h Edition) using Synchro 10.3 traffic analysis software. LOS generally refers to the degree of congestion on a roadway or intersection. It is a measure of vehicle operating speed, travel time, travel delays, and driving comfort. A letter scale from A to F generally describes intersection LOS. At signalized intersections, LOS A represents free -flow conditions (motorists experience little or no delays), and LOS F represents forced -flow conditions where motorists experience an average delay in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle. The LOS reported for signalized intersections represents the average control delay (sec/veh) and can be reported for the overall intersection, for each approach, and for each lane group (additional v/c ratio criteria apply to lane group LOS only). The LOS reported at stop -controlled intersections is based on the average control delay and can be reported for each controlled minor approach, controlled minor lane group, and controlled major -street movement (and for the overall intersection at all -way stop controlled intersections. Additional v/c ratio criteria apply to lane group or movement LOS only). Table D1 outlines the current HCM 61h Edition LOS criteria for signalized and stop -controlled intersections based on these methodologies. Table D1 LOS Criteria for Signalized and Stop Controlled Intersections' SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS STOP -CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS LOS by Volume -to LOS by Volume -to Capacity [V/C1 Ratio2 Capacity WC] RatiO3 Control Delay Control Delay sec/veh) <_ 1.0 > 1.0 sec/veh s 1.0 > 1.0 <_10 A F :510 A F J >10to<_20 B F >10to<_15 B F >20to<_35 C F > 15to<_25 C F >35to<_55 D F >25to<_35 D F >55to<_80 E F >35to<_50 E F > 80 F F > 50 F F 1 Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2016. 2 For approach -based and intersection -wide assessments at signals, LOS is defined solely by control delay. 3 For two-way stop controlled intersections, the LOS criteria apply to each lane on a given approach and to each approach on the minor street. LOS is not calculated for major -street approaches or for the intersection as a whole at two-way stop controlled intersections. For approach -based and intersection -wide assessments at all -way stop controlled intersections, LOS is solely defined by control delay. a Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: 23th Ave S & S 320th St 11/06/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SSR Lane Configurations )) ++T )) tti� Vi + r Vii T Traffic Volume (vph) 64 815 22 150 817 107 11 65 118 234 53 50 Future Volume (vph) 64 815 22 150 817 107 11 65 118 234 53 50 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 5% -5% 1 % 0% Storage Length (ft) 225 0 300 0 275 0 300 0 Storage Lanes 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 35 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 822 540 617 481 Travel Time (s) 16.0 10.5 14.0 10.9 Confl. Peds. (#Ihr) 1 13 5 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 11% 11% 11% 5% 5% 5% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 16 6 10 10 4 16 4 16 6 6 10 4 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 9.5 28.5 10.5 30.5 9.5 41.5 10.5 9.5 43.5 Total Split (s) 15.0 51.0 20.0 56.0 15.0 43.0 20.0 26.0 54.0 Total Split (%) 10.7% 36.4% 14.3% 40.0% 10.7% 30.7% 14.3% 18.6% 38.6% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 140 Offset: 17 (12%), Referenced to phase 4:EBT and 8:WBT, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 95 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering C.. 4, Ana Dk.- 1. 99fh Avc e R c T9n+h c+ t02 �r1 �03 --004,R) I ■ 66 05 � 0811R) 0 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: 23th Ave S & S 320th St 1llosl2o18 -'V { *-- 4-- 4\ t .,* --,. Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations )) ttT M ttT V, t r M T Traffic Volume (veh/h) 64 815 22 150 817 107 11 65 118 234 53 50 Future Volume (veh/h) 64 815 22 150 817 107 11 65 118 234 53 50 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hlln 1708 1708 1708 2052 2052 2052 1731 1731 1731 1826 1826 1826 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 70 886 24 163 888 116 12 71 13 254 58 54 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 11 11 11 5 5 5 Cap, veh/h 968 2808 76 217 1766 230 104 164 220 297 102 95 Arrive On Green 0.31 0.61 0.60 0.11 0.72 0.71 0.06 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.12 0.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 3156 4602 124 3791 4895 636 1649 1731 1410 3374 848 789 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 70 598 312 163 676 328 12 71 13 254 0 112 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hlln 1578 1555 1617 1895 1867 1797 1649 1731 1410 1687 0 1637 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.2 13.0 13.0 5.8 11.1 11.3 1.0 5.4 0.8 10.4 0.0 9.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.2 13.0 13.0 5.8 11.1 11.3 1.0 5.4 0.8 10.4 0.0 9.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.35 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.48 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 968 1897 987 217 1347 648 104 164 220 297 0 196 V/C Ratio(X) 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.75 0.50 0.51 0.12 0.43 0.06 0.86 0.00 0.57 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 968 1897 987 393 1347 648 118 458 460 506 0 561 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.4 13.2 13.2 61.0 14.0 14.3 61.9 59.8 30.2 63.0 0.0 58.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.9 1.3 2.7 0.2 0.7 0.0 2.9 0.0 1.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/In 1.5 8.1 8.5 4.9 6.7 7.0 0.7 4.4 0.6 8.1 0.0 6.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.4 13.6 14.0 62.9 15.3 17.0 62.1 60.5 30.3 65.8 0.0 59.3 LnGrp LOS C B B E B B E E C E A E Approach Vol, veh/h 980 1167 96 366 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.2 22.4 56.6 63.8 Approach LOS B C E E Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.3 19.3 13.5 89.9 13.8 22.8 47.4 56.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 5.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.5 37.5 14.5 46.5 10.5 48.5 10.5 50.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 12.4 7.4 7.8 15.0 3.0 11.1 4.2 13.3 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 0.4 0.4 0.2 8.5 0.0 0.6 0.0 10.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 26.8 HCM 6th LOS C DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: 25th Ave S/S Gateway Center Blvd & S 320th St 11/0612018 -.4--► -r *-- 4.- 4\ I * / 1 t 4/ Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) ++T ) tti i T 1� Traffic Volume (vph) 27 1072 15 29 1059 69 13 5 19 74 2 38 Future Volume (vph) 27 1072 15 29 1059 69 13 5 19 74 2 38 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -1% 2% -1% Storage Length (ft) 100 0 200 0 125 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 35 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 540 436 603 348 Travel Time (s) 10.5 8.5 16.4 9.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 4 2 8 3 3 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 1 % 1 % 1 % Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 6 0 0 2 0 2 0 6 6 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA D.P+P NA D.P+P NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 8 4 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 7 4 3 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 9.5 21.5 10.0 31.0 10.0 39.0 10.0 37.0 Total Split (s) 17.0 67.0 17.0 67.0 15.0 39.0 17.0 41.0 Total Split (%) 12.1 % 47.9% 12.1 % 47.9% 10.7% 27.9% 12.1 % 29.3% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length:140 Offset: 135 (96%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering Splits and Phases: 2: 25th Ave S/S Gateway Center Blvd & S 320th St 06 CR} �5 04 4\ 07 1 ' 08 ■M NMI77i DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing -AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2: 25th Ave S/S Gateway Center Blvd & S 320th St 11/06/2018 4- k' 4\ t 4/ .,.* --.,V Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) +0� ) ++T T I T Traffic Volume (veh/h) 27 1072 15 29 1059 69 13 5 19 74 2 38 Future Volume (veh/h) 27 1072 15 29 1059 69 13 5 19 74 2 38 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow,veh/h/In 1847 1847 1847 1894 1894 1894 1876 1876 1876 1924 1924 1924 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 30 1204 17 33 1190 78 15 6 21 83 2 43 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 3 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 Cap, veh/h 514 3634 51 47 2196 144 169 29 103 196 7 156 Arrive On Green 0.58 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.89 0.87 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.10 0.10 Sat Flow, veh/h 1759 5122 72 1804 4958 325 1787 349 1221 1833 71 1521 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 30 790 431 33 827 441 15 0 27 83 0 45 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hlln 1759 1681 1834 1804 1724 1835 1787 0 1569 1833 0 1592 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 7.4 7.5 1.1 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 3.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 7.4 7.5 1.1 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 3.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.78 1.00 0.96 Lane Grp Cap(c),vehlh 514 2385 1301 47 1527 813 169 0 132 196 0 163 V/C Ratio(X) 0.06 0.33 0.33 0.71 0.54 0.54 0.09 0.00 0.20 0.42 0.00 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 514 2385 1301 155 1527 813 269 0 370 290 0 398 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.8 0.0 0.0 65.9 4.9 5.0 55.8 0.0 59.8 61.0 0.0 58.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.3 0.6 6.7 1.3 2.4 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.0 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/In 0.8 0.2 0.4 2.2 3.5 4.2 0.9 0.0 1.6 5.2 0.0 2.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.8 0.3 0.6 72.5 6.2 7.4 55.9 0.0 60.0 61.5 0.0 58.4 LnGrp LOS C A A E A A E A E E A E Approach Vol, veh/h 1251 1301 42 128 Approach Delay, s/veh 0.9 8.3 58.6 60.4 Approach LOS A A E E Timer-Assi g nedPhs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.6 103.8 9.8 17.8 45.4 67.0 7.2 20.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 62.5 12.0 34.0 12.5 62.0 10.0 36.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 4.5 2.0 2.0 4.2 3.0 9.5 3.1 5.7 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 0.0 14.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 15.2 0.0 0.2 Intersection Surninaty HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.1 HCM 6th LOS A DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: 1-5 SB On Ramp/1-5 SB Off Ramp & S 320th St 11/06/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SST SBR Lane Configurations ++ r vj tt I *T W Traffic Volume (vph) 0 807 375 175 738 0 0 0 0 132 4 425 Future Volume (vph) 0 807 375 175 738 0 0 0 0 132 4 425 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1% 0% 2% 2% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 150 0 0 0 600 600 Storage Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 35 45 35 Link Distance (ft) 436 708 1090 1165 Travel Time (s) 8.5 13.8 16.5 22.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 4% 0% 0% 0% 3% 3% 3% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 4 4 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 49% Turn Type NA Perm D.P+P NA Split NA custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 4 45 Permitted Phases 2 2 Detector Phase 2 2 1 6 4 4 45 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 15.0 32.0 22.0 22.0 Total Split (s) 78.0 78.0 32.0 95.0 30.0 30.0 Total Split (%) 55.7% 55.7% 22.9% 67.9% 21.4% 21.4% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length:140 Offset: 107 (76%), Referenced to phase 2:EBWB and 6:WBT, Start of Red Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering ;p5ttss and Phases: 3: 1-5 SB On Rampli-5 SB Off Ramp & S 3ZUth St 65 06 fR1 i s --- - - DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: 1-5 SB On Ramp/1-5 SB Off Ramp & S 320th St 11/06/2018 ---* -10. -'V 'e- 4-'-I * 1 i Movement EBL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r tt 1 4 r(r Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 807 375 175 738 0 0 0 0 132 4 425 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 807 375 175 738 0 0 0 0 132 4 425 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hAn 0 1864 1864 1841 1841 0 1832 1832 1832 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 907 421 197 829 0 151 0 478 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 4 4 0 3 3 3 Cap, veh/h 0 2549 1119 342 2812 0 433 0 579 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.10 1.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3636 1555 1753 3589 0 3476 0 4645 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 907 421 197 829 0 151 0 478 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hAn 0 1771 1555 1753 1749 0 1738 0 1548 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 29.9 31.7 4.5 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 14.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 29.9 31.7 4.5 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 14.1 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2549 1119 342 2812 0 433 0 579 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.36 0.38 0.58 0.29 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.83 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2549 1119 595 2812 0 621 0 829 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.33 0.33 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 26.3 27.1 9.7 0.0 0.0 56.1 0.0 59.8 Incr Delay (d2), slveh 0.0 0.4 0.9 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 3.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),slveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),vehAn 0.0 20.4 19.4 3.3 0.2 0.0 4.4 0.0 17.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 26.7 28.0 10.2 0.3 0.0 56.3 0.0 62.9 LnGrp LOS A C C B A A E A E Approach Vol, veh/h 1328 1026 628 Approach Delay, s/veh 27.1 2.2 61.3 Approach LOS C A E Timer - Assigned Ph 1 2 4 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.8 105.8 22.4 117.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 27.0 73.0 25.0 90.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+l1), s 6.5 33.7 16.1 2.0 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 0.3 11.0 1.4 9.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.8 HCM 6th LOS C Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: 1-5 NB Off Ramp/1-5 NB On Ram2 & S 320th St 11/06/2018 -.* --I. --v *-- '.- 4\ } I 1 i Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt +T 4.) Traffic Volume (vph) 0 611 0 0 602 207 393 0 358 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 0 611 0 0 602 207 393 0 358 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1% -1% 2% 3% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 125 250 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 40 35 45 Link Distance (ft) 356 748 1418 1053 Travel Time (s) 6.9 12.8 27.6 16.0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 6% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 10% Turn Type NA NA Split NA Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases ---� Detector Phase 2 6 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 16.0 24.0 24.0 Total Split (s) 29.0 29.0 41.0 41.0 Total Split (%) 41.4% 41.4% 58.6% 58.6% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) E 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ' Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) ` 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 70 Actuated Cycle Length: 70 Offset: 50 (71%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Red Natural Cycle: 45 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-08-15 Traffic Data Gathering Splits and Phases: 4:1-5 NB Off Rampll-5 NB On Ramp & S 320th St --M 06 04 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 4: 1-5 NB Off Ramp/1-5 NB On Ramp & S 320th St --,N. --* #e *-- 4- t 1I11/06/2018 i -V Movement ESL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt 0 41� Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 611 0 0 602 207 393 0 358 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 611 0 0 602 207 393 0 358 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hAn 0 1864 0 0 1864 1864 1788 1788 1788 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 643 0 0 634 0 396 26 377 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 0 0 5 5 6 6 6 Cap, veh/h 0 1927 0 1927 529 31 444 Arrive On Green 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.30 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3729 0 0 3729 0 1689 98 1418 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 643 0 0 634 0 396 0 403 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhAn 0 1771 0 0 1771 0 1689 0 1516 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.9 0.0 14.7 0.0 17.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.9 0.0 14.7 0.0 17.5 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.94 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1927 0 1927 529 0 475 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.75 0.00 0.85 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 1927 0 1927 869 0 780 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.6 0.0 21.6 0.0 22.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.8 0.0 2.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),vehfin 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 8.3 0.0 9.2 0.0 10.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 18.0 0.0 22.4 0.0 25.2 Ln Grp LOS A A A B C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 643 A 634 A 799 Approach Delay, s/veh 0.5 18.0 23.8 Approach LOS A B C Timer -Assi nedPhs 2 4 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 43.1 26.9 43.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 36.0 24.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+l1), s 2.0 19.5 12.9 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 6.7 2.5 4.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 14.8 HCM 6th LOS B (Votes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: 32nd Ave S & S 320th St 11/06/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I tt r tT 1� 4 Traffic Volume (vph) 2 860 206 39 695 0 17 0 5 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 2 860 206 39 695 0 17 0 5 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -3% 0% Storage Length (ft) 150 450 250 0 150 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 40 40 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 748 828 879 340 Travel Time (s) 12.8 14.1 24.0 9.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type D.P+P NA Perm D,P+P NA Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 8 4 4 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 33.0 33.0 15.0 15.0 29.5 29.5 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 77.0 77.0 17.0 79.0 31.0 31.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (%) 10.7% 55.0% 55.0% 12.1% 56.4% 22.1% 22.1% 10.7% 10.7% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length:140 Actuated Cycle Length: 140 Offset: 132 (94%), Referenced to phase 4:EBWB and 8:EBWB, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 95 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering Splits and Phases: 5: 32nd Ave S & S 320th St 1 62 1 *06 - -1-04 (R) F 0-'08 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 5: 32nd Ave S & S 320th St 4- I * 111/06/2018 i 4/ --io. 'e- Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r Vi tT I 4 Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 860 206 39 695 0 17 0 5 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 860 206 39 695 0 17 0 5 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1870 1870 1870 1856 1856 1856 2018 2018 2018 1900 1900 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 1012 218 46 818 0 20 0 6 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cap, veh/h 636 1828 814 912 3060 0 49 0 43 0 1 0 Arrive On Green 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1582 1767 3618 0 1891 0 1682 0 1885 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 1012 218 46 818 0 20 0 6 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1781 1777 1582 1767 1763 0 1891 0 1682 0 1885 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 636 1828 814 912 3060 0 49 0 43 0 1 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.55 0.27 0.05 0.27 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 759 1828 814 912 3060 0 358 0 318 0 135 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.96 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 67.1 0.0 67.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.1 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),vehAn 0.0 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.0 69.2 0.0 67.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A E A E A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 1232 864 26 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 1.1 0.2 68.8 0.0 Approach LOS A A E Timer -Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.1 54.9 77.0 0.0 5.4 126.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.5 12.0 72.0 11.0 10.0 74.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+l1), s 3.5 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 0.0 0.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 11.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrt Delay 1.6 HCM 6th LOS A DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S 11106/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT WBU WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 4 y Traffic Volume (vph) 1 5 1 30 83 3 55 Future Volume (vph) 1 5 1 30 83 3 55 Ideal Flow (yphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1960 1900 Iwo Link Speed (mph) 35 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 312 266 268 Travel Time (s) 6.1 7.3 7.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 2% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Yield Yield Yield lnter-secvori Scrnina Area Type: Other Control Type: Roundabout DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Roundabout 6: S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S 11/06/2018 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Approach 3.4 A EB We SS Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 8 160 81 Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 8 160 83 Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 5 1 43 Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 121 12 118 Ped Vol Crossing Leg, Nh 0 0 0 Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 Approach Delay, s/veh 2.7 3.5 3.3 Approach LOS A A A Lane Lett Left Left Designated Moves LT LTR LR Assumed Moves LT LTR LR RT Channelized Lane Utii 1.000 1.000 1.000 Follow -Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 Entry Flow, veh/h 8 160 83 Cap_Entry Lane, veh/h 1373 1378 132 Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 1.000 0.976 Flow Entry, vehm . 8 160 81 Cap Entry, veh_/h 1373 1378 1289 V/C Ratio 0.006 0.116 0.063 Control Delay, s_/veh 2.7 3.5 3.3 LOS A A A 95th %otile Queue, veh 0 0 0 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Weyerhaeuser Way S & S 320th St 11/06/2018 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations ++ r tt )y r Traffic Volume (vph) 824 33 121 670 65 149 Future Volume (vph) 824 33 121 670 65 149 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 125 250 275 Storage Lanes 0 2 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 40 40 35 Link Distance (ft) 828 1963 571 Travel Time (s) 14.1 33.5 11.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 0 2 2 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 50% Turn Type NA Perm D.P+P NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 4 Detector Phase 2 2 1 6 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 34.0 34.0 15.0 15.0 31.0 31.0 Total Split (s) 78.0 78.0 26.0 104.0 36.0 36.0 Total Split (%) 55.7% 55.7% 18.6% 74.3% 25.7% 25.7% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length:140 Offset: 139 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:EBWB and 6:WBT, Start of 1 st Green Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering plits and Phases: 7: Weyerhaeuser Way S & S 32Uth St 4,61 -0102 04 s 4- 06 049 - DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: Weyerhaeuser Way S & S 320th St 11/06/2018 --P� I'* Ir *-- 14\ 70* Movement EBT EBR WSL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations ++ r ++ )y r Traffic Volume (veh/h) 824 33 121 670 65 149 Future Volume (veh/h) 824 33 121 670 65 149 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hAn 1870 1870 1856 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 958 0 141 779 76 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 3 3 2 2 Cap, veh/h 2947 1314 596 3162 125 55 Arrive On Green 1.00 0.00 0.04 0.90 0.04 0.04 Sat Flow. veh/h 3647 1596 1767 3618 3548 1572 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 958 0 141 779 76 9 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehmAn 1777 1585 1767 1763 1774 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1,6 4.1 3.0 0,8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.6 4.1 3.0 0,8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 2047 1314 596 3162 125 55 V/C Ratio(X) 0.33 0.00 0.24 0.25 0.61 0.16 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2947 1314 805 3162 798 354 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.94 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.0 66.6 65.5 Incr Delay_(d2), s/veh 03 0.0 0.1 0.2 1.8 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 "/vile BackOfQ(95%),vehAn 0.2 0.0 0.5 0.8 2.5 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 0.3 0.0 1.5 1.1 68.4 66.0 Ln Grp LOS A A A A E E Approach Vol, vehlh 958 920 85 Approach Delay, sfveh 0.3 1.2 68.1 Approach LOS A A E Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 121.1 9.4 130.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 " 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.5 73.0 31.5 " 1 E2 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll ), s 3.6 2.0 5.0 6.1 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 0.2 14.2 0.2 10.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrs Delay 3.6 HCM 6th LOS A Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: S 323rd St & 32th Ave S 11/06/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR 5BL SBR Lane Configurations *' 1� y Traffic Volume (vph) 31 54 36 16 71 7 Future Volume (vph) 31 54 36 16 71 7 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Link Speed (mph) 35 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 312 266 268 Travel Time (s) 6.1 7.3 7.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Shared Lane Traffic (%)�� Sign Control Yield Yield Yield intersection SummaryY Area Type: Other Control Type: Roundabout DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - PM Peak Hour HCM 6th Roundabout 6: S 323rd St & 32th Ave S Intersection 11/06/2018 Intersection Delay, slveh Intersection LOS Approach 3.4 A EB WB SB Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flow, vehlh - - 107 65 98 -- Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 107 65 98 Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 89 39 45 Vehicles Exiting, vehlh 54 157 59 Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 Approach Delay, slveh 3.5 3.1 3.3 Approach LOS A A A Lane Left Left Left Designated Moves LT TR LR Assumed Moves LT TR LR RT Channelized Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 Follow -Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 Entry Flow, vehlh 107 65 98 Cap Entry Lane, vehlh 1260 1326 1318 Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 Flow Entry, veh/h 107 65 98 Cap Entry, vehlh 1260 1326 1318 VIC Ratio _ 0.085 0.049 0.074 Control Delay, s_Ive_h 3.5 3.1 3.3 LOS A A A 95th %tile Queue, veh 0 0 0 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2018 Existing - PM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: 23th Ave S & S 320th St 1110612018 ,-* --► --v *-- t Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR _9__B_L7mlK8BT SBR Lane Configurations )) ttT+ )) ttT t r T Traffic Volume (vph) 67 848 23 156 850 111 11 68 123 243 55 52 Future Volume (vph) 67 848 23 156 850 111 11 68 123 243 55 52 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 5% -5% 1 % 0% Storage Length (ft) 225 0 300 0 275 0 300 0 Storage Lanes 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 35 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 822 540 617 481 Travel Time (s) 16.0 10.5 14.0 10.9 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 13 5 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 11 % 11 % 11 % 5% 5% 5% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 16 6 10 10 4 16 4 16 6 6 10 4 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 9.5 28.5 10.5 30.5 9.5 41.5 10.5 9.5 43.5 { Total Split (s) 15.0 51.0 20.0 56.0 15.0 43.0 20.0 26.0 54.0 Total Split (%) 10.7% 36.4% 14.3% 40.0% 10.7% 30.7% 14.3% 18.6% 38.6% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length:140 Offset: 17 (12%), Referenced to phase 4:EBT and 8:WBT, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 95 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering and Phases: 1: 23th Ave S & S 320th St 05 003 10104 M DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: 23th Ave S & S 320th St ,-* * 111/06/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations )) ++'+ M +tT Vi t r T Traffic Volume (veh/h) 67 848 23 156 850 111 11 68 123 243 55 52 Future Volume (veh/h) 67 848 23 156 850 111 11 68 123 243 55 52 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehm/In 1708 1708 1708 2052 2052 2052 1731 1731 1731 1826 1826 1826 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 73 922 25 170 924 121 12 74 16 264 60 57 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 11 11 11 5 5 5 Cap, veh/h 954 2779 75 224 1765 230 107 166 225 307 103 97 Arrive On Green 0.30 0.60 0.60 0.12 0.72 0.71 0.06 0.10 0.10 0.09 0.12 0.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 3156 4602 125 3791 4893 638 1649 1731 1410 3374 839 797 Grp Volume(v), vehm 73 623 324 170 704 341 12 74 16 264 0 117 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1578 1555 1617 1895 1867 1797 1649 1731 1410 1687 0 1636 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.3 13.9 13.9 6.1 11.8 12.1 1.0 5.7 1.0 10.8 0.0 9.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.3 13.9 13.9 6.1 11.8 12.1 1.0 5.7 1.0 10.8 0.0 9.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.36 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.49 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 954 1878 977 224 1347 648 107 166 225 307 0 200 V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.33 0.33 0.76 0.52 0.53 0.11 0.44 0.07 0.86 0.00 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 954 1878 977 393 1347 648 118 458 462 506 0 561 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.9 13.7 13.8 60.8 14.1 14.4 61.7 59.7 29.8 62.7 0.0 58.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.5 0.9 1.9 1.4 2.9 0.2 0.7 0.0 4.1 0.0 1.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/In 1.6 8.5 9.0 5.1 7.0 7.3 0.7 4.5 0.7 8.4 0.0 7.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 34.9 14.2 14.7 62.7 15.5 17.3 61.8 60.4 29.8 66.8 0.0 59.2 LnGrp LOS C B B E B B E E C E A E Approach Vol, veh/h 1020 1215 102 381 Approach Delay, s/veh 15.8 22.6 55.8 64.5 Approach LOS B C E E Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.7 19.5 13.8 89.0 14.1 23.1 46.8 56.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 5.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.5 37.5 14.5 46.5 10.5 48.5 10.5 50.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 12.8 7.7 8.1 15.9 3.0 11.5 4.3 14.1 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 0.4 0.4 0.2 8.8 0.0 0.7 0.1 10.7 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctd Delay 27.2 HCM 6th LOS C DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: 25th Ave S/S Gateway Center Blvd & S 320th St 1I11/06/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) ' tt" Vi ++I I-) T I T Traffic Volume (vph) 28 1115 16 30 1102 72 14 5 20 77 2 40 Future Volume (vph) 28 1115 16 30 1102 72 14 5 20 77 2 40 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -1% 2% -1% Storage Length (ft) 100 0 200 0 125 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 35 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 540 436 603 348 Travel Time (s) 10.5 8.5 16.4 9.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 4 2 8 3 3 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 1 % 1 % 1 % Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 6 0 0 2 0 2 0 6 6 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA D.P+P NA D.P+P NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 8 4 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 7 4 3 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 9.5 21.5 10.0 31.0 10.0 39.0 10.0 37.0 Total Split (s) 17.0 67.0 17.0 67.0 15.0 39.0 17.0 41.0 Total Split (%) 12.1% 47.9% 12.1% 47.9% 10.7% 27.9% 12.1% 29.3% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 140 Offset: 135 (96%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering ;plus and Phases: 2: 25th Ave S/S Gateway Center Blvd & S 320th St f01 -1102 A) 104 I 433 Oo (R) 05 07 08 M. DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2: 25th Ave S/S Gateway Center Blvd & S 320th St 11/06/2018 --* --1'--* f *-- I, -I * `` 1 t 4/ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ) ++T tti T Vi T Traffic Volume (vehlh) 28 1115 16 30 1102 72 14 5 20 77 2 40 Future Volume (veh/h) 28 1115 16 30 1102 72 14 5 20 77 2 40 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehlhlln 1847 1847 1847 1894 1894 1894 1876 1876 1876 1924 1924 1924 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 31 1253 18 34 1238 81 16 6 22 87 2 45 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 3 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 Cap,vehlh 514 3629 52 47 2196 144 168 28 104 195 7 156 Arrive On Green 0.58 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.89 0.87 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.10 0.10 Sat Flow, veh/h 1759 5121 74 1804 4958 324 1787 336 1231 1833 68 1524 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 31 822 449 34 861 458 16 0 28 87 0 47 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/In 1759 1681 1833 1804 1724 1835 1787 0 1567 1833 0 1591 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.6 8.0 8.1 1.1 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 3.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.6 8.0 8.1 1.1 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 3.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.79 1.00 0.96 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 514 2382 1299 47 1527 813 168 0 132 195 0 162 V/C Ratio(X) 0.06 0.35 0.35 0.72 0.56 0.56 0.10 0.00 0.21 0.45 0.00 0.29 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 514 2382 1299 155 1527 813 266 0 369 289 0 398 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(l) 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.8 0.0 0.0 65.8 4.9 5.0 55.8 0.0 59.8 61.2 0.0 58.2 Incr Delay (d2), slveh 0.0 0.4 0.7 6.8 1.4 2.6 0.1 0.0- 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),vehfIn 0.8 0.2 0.4 2.3 3.6 4.4 0.9 0.0 1.7 5.5 0.0 2.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.8 0.4 0.7 72.7 6.3 7.6 55.9 0.0 60.1 61.8 0.0 58.5 LnGrp LOS C A A E A A E A E E A E Approach Vol, veh/h 1302 1353 44 134 Approach Delay, s/veh 1.0 8.4 58.6 60.6 Approach LOS A A E E Tinier -Assi nedPhs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.7 103.7 9.8 17.8 45.4 67.0 7.3 20.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 62.5 12.0 34.0 12.5 62.0 10.0 36.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 4.6 2.0 2.0 4.3 3.1 10.1 3.1 5.8 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 0.0 15.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 16.1 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctri Delay 8.2 HCM 6th LOS A DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: 1-5 SB On Ramp/1-5 SB Off Ramp & S 320th St 111/06/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r tt I *T W Traffic Volume (vph) 0 840 390 182 768 0 0 0 0 137 4 442 Future Volume (vph) 0 840 390 182 768 0 0 0 0 137 4 442 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1% 0% 2% 2% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 150 0 0 0 600 600 Storage Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 35 45 35 Link Distance (ft) 436 708 1090 1165 Travel Time (s) 8.5 13.8 16.5 22.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 4% 0% 0% 0% 3% 3% 3% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 4 4 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 49% Turn Type NA Perm D.P+P NA Split NA custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 4 45 Permitted Phases 2 2 Detector Phase 2 2 1 6 4 4 45 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 15.0 32.0 22.0 22.0 Total Split (s) 78.0 78.0 32.0 95.0 30.0 30.0 Total Split (%) 55.7% 55.7% 22.9% 67.9% 21.4% 21.4% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length:140 Actuated Cycle Length:140 Offset: 107 (76%), Referenced to phase 2:EBWB and 6:WBT, Start of Red Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering & S 320th St DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: 1-5 SB On Ramp/1-5 SB Off Ramp & S 32Oth St --* -0. f- *-- 4- 1I11/06/2018 i 4/ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR S8L SOT SBR Lane Configurations ++ r f f I *T M Traffic Volume (vehm) 0 840 390 182 768 0 0 0 0 137 4 442 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 840 390 182 768 0 0 0 0 137 4 442 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hAn 0 1864 1864 1841 1841 0 1832 1832 1832 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 944 438 204 863 0 157 0 497 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 4 4 0 3 3 3 Cap, veh/h 0 2527 1109 329 2797 0 447 0 598 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.10 1.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3636 1555 1753 3589 0 3476 0 4645 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 944 438 204 863 0 157 0 497 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hAn 0 1771 1555 1753 1749 0 1738 0 1548 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 31.3 33.2 4.7 0.0 0.0 5.8 0.0 14.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 31.3 33.2 4.7 0.0 0.0 5.8 0.0 14.6 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2527 1109 329 2797 0 447 0 598 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.37 0.39 0.62 0.31 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.83 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 2527 1109 579 2797 0 621 0 829 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.33 0.33 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter([) 0.00 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 27.3 28.0 10.8 0.0 0.0 55.7 0.0 59.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.4 1.0 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 3.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(95%),vehAn 0.0 21.2 20.2 4.0 0.2 0.0 4.6 0.0 18.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 27.7 29.0 11.6 0.3 0.0 55.8 0.0 63.2 LnGrp LOS A C C B A A E A E Approach Vol, veh/h 1382 1067 654 Approach Delay, s/veh 28.1 2.4 61.4 Approach LOS C A E Timer -Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.1 104.9 23.0 117.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 27.0 73.0 25.0 90.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 6.7 35.2 16.6 2.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 11.6 1.4 9.7 Intersection Summary HCM 6th CM Delay 26.3 HCM 6th LOS C Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: 1-5 NB Off Ramp/1-5 NB On Ramp & S 320th St * 111/06/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt +T Vi *T+ Traffic Volume (vph) 0 636 0 0 626 215 409 0 372 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 0 636 0 0 626 215 409 0 372 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1% -1% 2% 3% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 125 250 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 40 35 45 Link Distance (ft) 356 748 1418 1053 Travel Time (s) 6.9 12.8 27.6 16.0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 6% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#mr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 10% Turn Type NA NA Split NA Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 2 6 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 16.0 24.0 24.0 Total Split (s) 29.0 29.0 41.0 41.0 Total Split (%) 41.4% 41.4% 58.6% 58.6% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 70 Actuated Cycle Length: 70 Offset: 50 (71 %), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Red Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-08-15 Traffic Data Gathering Splits and Phases: 4:1-5 NB Off Ramp1l-5 NB On Ramp & S 320th St 4404 fR' 06 (R) _1111 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour 0 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 4: 1-5 NB Off Ramp/1-5 NB On Ramp & S 320th St 11/06/2018 Movement E8L EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NST NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ++ +T 41� Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 636 0 0 626 215 409 0 372 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 636 0 0 626 215 409 0 372 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hAn 0 1864 0 0 1864 1864 1788 1788 1788 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 669 0 0 659 0 412 27 392 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 0 0 5 5 6 6 6 Cap, veh/h 0 1888 0 1888 547 32 460 Arrive On Green 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3729 0 0 3729 0 1689 98 1419 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 669 0 0 659 0 412 0 419 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hAn 0 1771 0 0 1771 0 1689 0 1516 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 15.3 0.0 18.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 15.3 0.0 18.1 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.94 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1888 0 1888 547 0 491 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.35 0.75 0.00 0.85 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1888 0 1888 869 0 780 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.97 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 21.2 0.0 22.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.8 0.0 3.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),vehAn 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 8.8 0.0 9.5 0.0 10.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 18.7 0.0 21.9 0.0 25.6 LnG LOS A A A B C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 669 A 659 A 831 Approach Delay, slveh 0.5 18.7 23.8 Approach LOS A B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 42.3 27.7 42.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 36.0 24.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 2.0 20.1 13.4 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 7.0 2.5 4.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.0 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour J I Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: 32nd Ave S & S 320th St 11/06/2018 'A --,, -I;v 4 *-- A A\ I 7* t4� Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT 5BR Lane Configurations I tt r tT+ I T+ 4 Traffic Volume (vph) 2 895 214 41 723 0 18 0 5 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 2 895 214 41 723 0 18 0 5 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -3% 0% Storage Length (ft) 150 450 250 0 150 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 40 40 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 748 828 879 340 Travel Time (s) 12.8 14.1 24.0 9.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type D.P+P NA Perm D.P+P NA Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 8 4 4 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 33.0 33.0 15.0 15.0 29.5 29.5 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 77.0 77.0 17.0 79.0 31.0 31.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (%) 10.7% 55.0% 55.0% 12.1% 56.4% 22.1% 22.1% 10.7% 10.7% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None Intersection Summ Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length:140 Offset: 132 (94%), Referenced to phase 4:EBWB and 8:EBWB, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 95 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering Snlitc and Phases• 5- 32nd Ave S & S 320th St DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 5: 32nd Ave S & S 320th St 11/06/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r +T+ 1� 41� Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 895 214 41 723 0 18 0 5 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 895 214 41 723 0 18 0 5 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hAn 1870 1870 1870 1856 1856 1856 2018 2018 2018 1900 1900 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 1053 227 48 851 0 21 0 6 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cap, veh/h 618 1828 814 901 3058 0 50 0 44 0 1 0 Arrive On Green 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.71 1.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1582 1767 3618 0 1891 0 1682 0 1885 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 1053 227 48 851 0 21 0 6 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hlln 1781 1777 1582 1767 1763 0 1891 0 1682 0 1885 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 618 1828 814 901 3058 0 50 0 44 0 1 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.58 0.28 0.05 0.28 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 741 1828 814 901 3058 0 358 0 318 0 135 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.95 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 67.1 0.0 67.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), slveh 0.0 1.2 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/In 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 1.2 1.2 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.0 69.2 0.0 67.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A E A E A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 1282 899 27 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 1.2 0.2 68.9 0.0 Approach LOS A A E Timer- Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.2 54.8 77.0 0.0 5.4 126.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.5 12.0 72.0 11.0 10.0 74.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 3.5 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 0.0 0.0 17.1 0.0 0.0 11.8 Fnterseotion Summary HCM 6th Ctd Delay 1.6 HCM 6th LOS A DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S 11/06/2018 _10. *-- A., W Lane GrouE EBL FBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations *T 41� V Traffic Volume (vph) 1 5 32 88 3 58 Future Volume (vph) 1 5 32 88 3 58 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Link Speed (mph) 35 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 312 266 268 Travel Time (s) 6.1 7.3 7.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 2% .Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Yield Yield Yield lntarsedt on Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Roundabout DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Roundabout 6: S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S 11/06/2018 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh 3.5 Intersection LOS A Approach EB WB SB Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 8 169 86 Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 8 169 88 Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 4 1 45 Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 129 11 125 Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 Approach Delay, s/veh 2.7 3.6 3.3 Approach LOS A A A Lane Left Lett Left Designated Moves LT LTR LR Assumed Moves LT LTR LR RT Channelized Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 Follow -Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 Entry Flow, veh/h 8 169 88 Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 1374 1378 1318 Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 1.0.00 0.977 Flow Entry, veh/h 8 169 86 Cap Entry, veh/h 1374 1378 1288 V/C Ratio 0.006 0.123 6.667 Control Delay, s/_veh_ 2.7 3.6 3.3 LOS A A A 95th %tile Queue, veh 0 0 0 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Weyerhaeuser Way S & S 32Oth St 11/06/2018 __10. -IV 4\ /01 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tt r* Vi tt )y Traffic Volume (vph) 857 34 126 697 68 155 Future Volume (vph) 857 34 126 697 68 155 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 125 250 275 Storage Lanes 0 2 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 40 40 35 Link Distance (ft) 828 1963 571 Travel Time (s) 14.1 33.5 11.1 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 0 2 2 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 50% Turn Type NA Perm D.P+P NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 Permitted Phases 2 2 4 Detector Phase 2 2 1 6 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 34.0 34.0 15.0 15.0 31.0 31.0 Total Split (s) 78.0 78.0 26.0 104.0 36.0 36.0 Total Split (%) 55.7% 55.7% 18.6% 74.3% 25.7% 25.7% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None Intersection Summa Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 140 Offset: 139 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:EBWB and 6:WBT, Start of 1 st Green Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering Cnfitc nnrl Phnece• 7- 1AWovorhnamor Wnv C R R 39nth Rf f31 -P02 (R3 04 5 66 �rR) w4.s - DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: Weyerhaeuser Way S & S 320th St 11/06/2018 --. -'IV 41- 4--- I*\ /01 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations ++ r tt )Y F Traffic Volume (veh/h) 857 34 126 697 68 155 Future Volume (veh/h) 857 34 126 697 68 155 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hAn 1870 1870 1856 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 997 0 147 810 79 9 Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 3 3 2 2 Cap, veh/h 2943 1313 578 3159 129 57 Arrive On Green 1.00 0.00 0.04 0.90 0.04 0.04 Sat Flow, veh/h 3647 1585 1767 3618 3548 1572 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 997 0 147 810 79 9 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hAn 1777 1585 1767 1763 1774 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 1.7 4.3 3.1 0.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 1.7 4.3 3.1 0.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 2943 1313 578 3159 129 57 V/C Ratio(X) 0.34 0.00 0.25 0.26 0.61 0.16 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 2943 1313 787 3159 798 354 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.94 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.0 66.5 65.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 1.8 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 "/oile BackOfQ(95%),vehAn 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.8 2.6 0.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh _ LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.3 0.0 1.5 1.2 68.3 65.9 LnGrp LOS A A A A E E Approach Vol, veh/h 997 . - 957 88 Approach Delay, s/veh 0.3 1.2 68.0 Approach LOS A A E Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 _ Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 120.9 9.6 130.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 " 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.5 73.0 31.5 * 1 E2 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+l1), s 3.7 2.0 5.1 6.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 15.1 0.2 11.1 nterseclion Summa HCM 6th Ctrs Delay 3.7 HCM 6th LOS A Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: S 323rd St & 32th Ave S 11/06/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT . WBT WBR SBL SBR - Lane Configurations 4 1� y Traffic Volume (vph) 32 56 37 17 74 7 Future Volume (vph) 32 56 37 17 74 7 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Link Speed (mph) 35 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 312 266 268 Travel Time (s) 6.1 7.3 7.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0°% 0°% Shared Lane Traffic (-%) Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Roundabout DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - PM Peak Hour HCM 6th Roundabout 6: S 323rd St & 32th Ave S 11/06/2018 Intersection Intersection Delay, slveh Intersection LOS Approach 3.4 A ES WB S6 Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 110 67 102 Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 110 67 102 Vehicles Circulating, yeh1h 93 40 46 Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 55 163 61 Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 Approach Delay, slveh 3.6 3.1 3.4 Approach LOS A A A Lane Left Left Left - Designated Moves Designated LT TR LR Assumed Moves LT TR LR RT Channelized Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 Follow -Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 Entry Flow, veh/h 110 67 102 Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 1255 1325 1317 Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 Flow Entry, veh/h 110 67 102 Cap Entry, veh/h 1255 1325 1317 V/C Ratio 0.088 0.051 0.077 Control Delay, s/veh 3.6 3.1 3.4 LOS A A A 95th %tile Queue, veh 0 0 0 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 Baseline - PM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: 23th Ave S & S 320th St 11/09/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations )) tti� )) ++T + r Vii T Traffic Volume (vph) 67 903 23 157 855 114 11 68 137 264 55 52 Future Volume (vph) 67 903 23 157 855 114 11 68 137 264 55 52 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 5% -5% 1 % 0% Storage Length (ft) 225 0 300 0 275 0 300 0 Storage Lanes 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 35 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 822 540 617 481 Travel Time (s) 16.0 10.5 14.0 10.9 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 13 5 7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles(%) 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 11% 11% 11% 5% 5% 5% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 16 6 10 10 4 16 4 16 6 6 10 4 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA Prot NA pm+ov Prot NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 Detector Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 3 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 9.5 28.5 10.5 30.5 9.5 41.5 10.5 9.5 43.5 Total Split (s) 15.0 51.0 20.0 56.0 15.0 43.0 20.0 26.0 54.0 Total Split (%) 10.7% 36.4% 14.3% 40.0% 10.7% 30.7% 14.3% 18.6% 38.6% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 5.5 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 140 Offset: 17 (12%), Referenced to phase 4:EBT and 8:WBT, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 95 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering izni;fr i Dhnonc• 1. ),Afh Avn S R. C Agnfh Cf 1 02J 1 �ta4 fR) Q9 8 S s I ■ G5 05 08 ;Ri 7i��0:7 - s DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: 23th Ave S & S 320th St ' f-*-- A., 4\ t 1I11/09/2018 t 4/ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1) +tT )) tI.T. + ? )11 T Traffic Volume (veh/h) 67 903 23 157 855 114 11 68 137 264 55 52 Future Volume (veh/h) 67 903 23 157 855 114 11 68 137 264 55 52 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.98 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1708 1708 1708 2052 2052 2052 1731 1731 1731 1826 1826 1826 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 73 982 25 171 929 124 12 74 31 287 60 57 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 3 3 3 3 11 11 11 5 5 5 Cap,vehlh 931 2750 70 225 1760 234 118 167 226 330 103 97 Arrive On Green 0.30 0.60 0.59 0.12 0.72 0.71 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 3156 4611 117 3791 4880 649 1649 1731 1410 3374 839 797 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 73 662 345 171 710 343 12 74 31 287 0 117 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hlln 1578 1555 1619 1895 1867 1795 1649 1731 1410 1687 0 1636 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.3 15.3 15.3 6.1 12.0 12.2 1.0 5.6 2.0 11.7 0.0 9.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.3 15.3 15.3 6.1 12.0 12.2 1.0 5.6 2.0 11.7 0.0 9.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.36 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.49 Lane Grp Cap(c),veh/h 931 1855 966 225 1347 647 118 167 226 330 0 200 V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.36 0.36 0.76 0.53 0.53 0.10 0.44 0.14 0.87 0.00 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 931 1855 966 393 1347 647 118 458 463 506 0 561 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 35.6 14.5 14.5 60.7 14.1 14.4 60.7 59.7 29.6 62.3 0.0 58.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.9 1.4 2.9 0.1 0.7 0.1 6.6 0.0 1.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/In 1.6 9.2 9.7 5.1 7.1 7.4 0.7 4.5 1.4 9.2 0.0 7.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 35.6 15.0 15.5 62.6 15.5 17.3 60.9 60.4 29.7 68.9 0.0 59.2 LnGrp LOS D B B E B B E E C E A E Approach Vol, veh/h 1080 1224 117 404 Approach Delay, s/veh 16.6 22.6 52.3 66.1 Approach LOS B C D E Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 18.7 19.5 13.8 88.0 15.1 23.1 45.8 56.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.5 5.5 4.5 4.5 5.5 4.5 5.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.5 37.5 14.5 46.5 10.5 48.5 10.5 50.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.7 7.6 8.1 17.3 3.0 11.5 4.3 14.2 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 0.5 0.4 0.2 9.4 0.0 0.7 0.1 10.8 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 27.8 HCM 6th LOS C DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 2: 25th Ave S/S Gateway Center Blvd & S 320th St --P� -,* *-- 4-- 4\ t 1I11/09/2018 t 4/ Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I ++T ) ++T I T T Traffic Volume (vph) 28 1205 16 30 1111 73 14 5 20 83 2 40 Future Volume (vph) 28 1205 16 30 1111 73 14 5 20 83 2 40 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 2% -1 % 2% -1 % Storage Length (ft) 100 0 200 0 125 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 35 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 540 436 603 348 Travel Time (s) 10.5 8.5 16.4 9.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 4 2 8 3 3 8 Peak Hour Factor �* 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 1 % 1 % 1 % Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 6 0 0 2 0 2 0 6 6 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type Prot NA Prot NA D.P+P NA D.P+P NA Protected Phases 5 2 1 6 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 8 4 Detector Phase 5 2 1 6 7 4 3 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 9.5 21.5 10.0 31.0 10.0 39.0 10.0 37.0 Total Split (s) 17.0 67.0 17.0 67.0 15.0 39.0 17.0 41.0 Total Split (%) ' 12.1% 47.9% 12.1% 47.9% 10.7% 27.9% 12.1% 29.3% Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 5.0 5.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None C-Max None C-Max None None None None fintersect on Summa Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length:140 Offset: 135 (96%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering Qn14, end Dk 0 9- 9r,+h 411n Q/Q (.af&IA IO (:cntor Rlvil R. R 99nth Ct - O1 (R) Sr '133 in 67 s 39 s i7 a 06 (R) 05 07 I ■ 08 57S _ s Lys is DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2: 25th Ave S/S Gateway Center Blvd & S 320th St --* -,* *-- *-- t 1I11/09/2018 # --I. Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations ►j t+ fir ) +tT T I T Traffic Volume (veh/h) 28 1205 16 30 1111 73 14 5 20 83 2 40 Future Volume (veh/h) 28 1205 16 30 1111 73 14 5 20 83 2 40 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.97 0.98 0.98 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.99 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 1847 1847 1847 1894 1894 1894 1876 1876 1876 1924 1924 1924 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 31 1354 18 34 1248 82 16 6 22 93 2 45 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 3 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 Cap, veh/h 513 3633 48 47 2195 144 169 28 104 196 7 156 Arrive On Green 0.58 1.00 1.00 0.05 0.89 0.87 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.10 0.10 Sat Flow, veh/h 1759 5127 68 1804 4957 326 1787 336 1231 1833 68 1524 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 31 888 484 34 868 462 16 0 28 93 0 47 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hAn 1759 1681 1834 1804 1724 1835 1787 0 1567 1833 0 1591 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.6 8.1 8.3 1.1 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 3.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.6 8.1 8.3 1.1 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 3.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.18 1.00 0.79 1.00 0.96 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 513 2381 1300 47 1527 813 169 0 132 196 0 163 V/C Ratio(X) 0.06 0.37 0.37 0.72 0.57 0.57 0.09 0.00 0.21 0.48 0.00 0.29 Avail Cap(c_a), vehlh 513 2381 1300 155 1527 813 267 0 369 289 0 398 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.92 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.9 0.0 0.0 65.8 4.9 5.0 55.8 0.0 59.8 61.4 0.0 58.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.4 0.7 6.8 1.4 2.7 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °/wile BackOfQ(95%),veh/In 0.8 0.2 0.5 2.3 3.7 4.5 0.9 0.0 1.7 5.9 0.0 2.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.9 0.4 0.7 72.7 6.3 7.7 55.9 0.0 60.1 62.1 0.0 58.5 LnGrp LOS C A A E A A E A E E A E Approach Vol, veh/h 1403 1364 44 140 Approach Delay, s/veh 1.0 8.4 58.5 60.9 Approach LOS A A E E Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.7 103.7 9.9 17.8 45.4 67.0 7.3 20.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.0 62.5 12.0 34.0 12.5 62.0 10.0 36.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 4.6 2.0 2.0 4.3 3.1 10.3 3.1 5.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 17.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 16.3 0.0 0.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctd Delay 8.1 HCM 6th LOS A DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: 1-5 SB On Ramp/1-5 SB Off Ramp & S 320th St 1I11/09/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SSR Lane Configurations tt r tt 1 4 W Traffic Volume (vph) 0 936 390 185 778 0 0 0 0 199 4 442 Future Volume (vph) 0 936 390 185 778 0 0 0 0 199 4 442 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1 % 0% 2% 2% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 150 0 0 0 600 600 Storage Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 35 45 35 Link Distance (ft) 436 708 1090 1165 Travel Time (s) 8.5 13.8 16.5 22.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 4% 0% 0% 0% 3% 3% 3% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 4 4 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 49% Turn Type NA Penn D.P+P NA Split NA custom Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 4 45 Permitted Phases 2 2 Detector Phase 2 2 1 6 4 4 45 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 23.0 23.0 15.0 32.0 22.0 22.0 Total Split (s) 78.0 78.0 32.0 95.0 30.0 30.0 Total Split (%) 55.7% 55.7% 22.9% 67.9% 21.4% 21.4% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None rttersection 5u_mmary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 140 Offset:107 (76%), Referenced to phase 2:EBWB and 6:WBT, Start of Red Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering Q li1 c Ana DkZ• Lr. CR On Pmmnll-r. CR r)ff Pnrrn R C T)0fh Ct 41"01 _I +D 2 (R) 04 3L s] S 05 06 (R) 15s 1 1195S DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 3: 1-5 SB On Ramp/1-5 SB Off Ramp & S 320th St --p- -,* 4 4- -6\ 1I11/09/2018 i 4/ Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r ++ V1 4 W Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 936 390 185 778 0 0 0 0 199 4 442 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 936 390 185 778 0 0 0 0 199 4 442 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hAn 0 1864 1864 1841 1841 0 1832 1832 1832 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1052 438 208 874 0 227 0 497 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 4 4 0 3 3 3 Cap, veh/h 0 2521 1106 302 2794 0 451 0 602 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.10 1.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3636 1555 1753 3589 0 3476 0 4645 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 1052 438 208 874 0 227 0 497 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hAn 0 1171 1555 1753 1749 0 1738 0 1548 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 35.3 33.3 4.9 0.0 0.0 8.5 0.0 14.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 35.3 33.3 4.9 0.0 0.0 8.5 0.0 14.6 Prop In Lane 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 2521 1106 302 2794 0 451 0 602 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.42 0.40 0.69 0.31 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.83 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 2521 1106 549 2794 621 0 829 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.33 0.33 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 0.93 0.93 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 28.9 28.2 13.9 0.0 0.0 56.7 0.0 59.4 Incr Delay (d2), slveh 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.1 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 3.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),vehAn 0.0 23.4 20.1 5.6 0.2 0.0 6.8 0.0 18.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 29.4 29.2 15.0 0.3 0.0 57.1 0.0 62.9 LnGrp LOS A C C B A A E A E Approach Vol, veh/h 1490 1082 - - - - 724 Approach Delay, s/veh 29.3 3.1 61 A Approach LOS C A E Timer -Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 -- Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.2 104.6 23.2 116.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 27.0 73.0 25.0 90.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+l1), s 6.9 37.3 16.6 2.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 13.1 1.6 9.9 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrt Delay 27.7 HCM 6th LOS C Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. J DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 4: 1-5 NB Off Ramp/1-5 NB On Ramp & S 320th St 11 --1' *-- *�- 4\ 1I11/09/2018 i 4/ Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt +I Vi + Traffic Volume (vph) 0 794 0 0 639 217 409 0 386 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 0 794 0 0 639 217 409 0 386 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 1% -1% 2% 3% Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 125 250 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 35 40 35 45 Link Distance (ft) 356 748 1418 1053 Travel Time (s) 6.9 12.8 27.6 16.0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 2 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 6% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 10% Turn Type NA NA Split NA Protected Phases 2 6 4 4 Permitted Phases Detector Phase 2 6 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 16.0 24.0 24.0 Total Split (s) 29.0 29.0 41.0 41.0 Total Split (%) 41.4% 41.4% 58.6% 58.6% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None None intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 70 Actuated Cycle Length: 70 Offset: 50 (71%), Referenced to phase 2:EBT and 6:WBT, Start of Red Natural Cycle: 50 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-08-15 Traffic Data Gathering C.,Gt, -A Dl.A• I AIR Off Q7 - 11-9, AIR fln Pmmn R C 39nfh Rt 02 (R) 41t04 - - - 8- 06 ) s DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 4: 1-5 NB Off Ramp/1-5 NB On Ramp & S 320th St 11/09/2018 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt tT+ *T+ Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 794 0 0 639 217 409 0 386 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 794 0 0 639 217 409 0 386 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/In 0 1864 0 0 1864 1864 1788 1788 1788 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 836 0 0 673 0 418 17 406 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 0 0 5 5 6 6 6 Cap, veh/h 0 1875 0 1875 554 20 475 Arrive On Green 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.31 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 3729 0 0 3729 0 1689 61 1450 111111, Grp Volume(v), vehlh 0 836 0 0 673 0 418 0 423 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh/In 0 1771 0 0 1771 0 1689 0 1511 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.7 0.0 15.5 0.0 18.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.7 0.0 15.5 0.0 18.4 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.96 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 0 1875 0 1875 554 0 495 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.36 0.75 0.00 0.85 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 0 1875 0 1875 869 0 777 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.97 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.4 0.0 21.0 0.0 22.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.8 0.0 3.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),slveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/In 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 9.0 0.0 9.6 0.0 10.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 21.8 0.0 25.7 LnGrp LOS A A A B C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 836 A 673 A 841 Approach Delay, s/veh 0.8 19.0 23.8 Approach LOS A B C Timer - Assioned Phs Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 42.0 28.0 42.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 24.0 36.0 24.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.0 20.4 13.7 Green Ext Time (p-c), s 9.0 2.6 4.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrs Delay 14.2 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 5: 32nd Ave S & S 320th St 11/09/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r* t1l" 1� Traffic Volume (vph) 2 895 386 78 723 0 33 0 14 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 2 895 386 78 723 0 33 0 14 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) 0% 0% -3% 0% Storage Length (ft) 150 450 250 0 150 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 40 40 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 748 828 879 340 Travel Time (s) 12.8 14.1 24.0 9.3 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 1 2 2 1 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Turn Type D.P+P NA Perm D.P+P NA Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 8 4 4 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 15.0 33.0 33.0 15.0 15.0 29.5 29.5 15.0 15.0 Total Split (s) 15.0 77.0 77.0 17.0 79.0 31.0 31.0 15.0 15.0 Total Split (%) 10.7% 55.0% 55.0% 12.1% 56.4% 22.1% 22.1% 10.7% 10.7% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.0 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 5.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lead Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None None None nters6clkn Sumin a Area Type: Other Cycle Length:140 Actuated Cycle Length: 140 Offset: 132 (94%), Referenced to phase 4:EBWB and 8:EBWB, Start of 1st Green Natural Cycle: 95 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering Cnlifc and Phneaa- 5. 39nrl Ava R R C 39nth (Zt �1 02�n �S g 8� 07 08 (R) DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 5: 32nd Ave S & S 320th St ' --V 4-- AQ t 111/09/2018 # Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r tT1 T Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 895 386 78 723 0 33 0 14 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 2 895 386 78 723 0 33 0 14 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehlhlln 1870 1870 1870 1856 1856 1856 2018 2018 2018 1900 1900 1900 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 2 1053 408 92 851 0 39 0 16 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cap, veh/h 613 1828 814 851 3030 0 65 0 58 0 1 0 Arrive On Green 0.01 1.00 1.00 0.70 1.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1582 1767 3618 0 1891 0 1682 0 1885 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 2 1053 408 92 851 0 39 0 16 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hAn 1781 1777 1582 1767 1763 0 1891 0 1682 0 1885 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 613 1828 814 851 3030 0 65 0 58 0 1 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.58 0.50 0.11 0.28 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 735 1828 814 851 3030 0 358 0 318 0 135 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.95 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 66.6 0.0 66.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.1 1.9 0.0 0.2 0.0 3.3 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °/wile BackOfQ(95%),vehlln 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.2 0.2 0.0 2.6 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 1.3 1.1 1.9 0.7 0.2 0.0 69.9 0.0 67.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A E A E A A A Approach Vol, veh/h 1463 943 55 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 1.4 0.3 69.2 0.0 Approach LOS A A E Timer - Assi ned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.3 53.7 77.0 0.0 5.4 125.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 26.5 12.0 72.0 11.0 10.0 74.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 4.8 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.1 18.1 0.0 0.0 11.8 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctd Delay 2.5 HCM 6th LOS A DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S 11/09/2018 � � ■-- � \I. 'Lane Group EBL EBT W8T WBR S8L SBR Lane Configurations #' 41� y Traffic Volume (vph) 5 5 32 92 38 94 Future Volume (vph) 5 5 32 92 38 94 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Link Speed (mph) 35 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 312 266 268 Travel Time (s) 6.1 7.3 7.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 2% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Roundabout DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Roundabout 6: S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S intersection 11/09/2018 Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Approach 3.8 A EB WB SS Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 14 175 186 Demand Flow Rate, vehlh 14 175 190 Vehicles Circulating, vehm 55 7 45 Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 180 62 137 Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 Approach Delay, s/veh 2.8 3.7 4.0 Approach LOS A A A Lane Left Lett Left Designated Moves LT LTR LR Assumed Moves LT LTR LR RT Channelized Lane Utii 1.000 1.000 1.000 Follow -Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 Entry Flow, vehm 14 175 190 Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 1305 1370 1318 Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 1.000 0.979 Flow Entry, vehm 14 176 186 Cap Entry,veh/h 1305 1370 1290 WIC Ratio 0.011 0.128 0.144 Control Delay, slveh 2.8 3.7 4.0 LOS A A A 95th %tile Queue, veh 0 0 1 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 7: Weyerhaeuser WayS & S 320th St 11/09/2018 --I► "It I,' 4\ /01 Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations tt r Vi tt Viv r Traffic Volume (vph) 866 34 169 734 68 155 Future Volume (vph) 866 34 169 734 68 155 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 125 250 275 Storage Lanes 0 2 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Link Speed (mph) 40 40 35 Link Distance (ft) 828 1963 571 Travel Time (s) 14.1 33.5 11.1 Confl. Peds. (#mr) - Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% Bus Blockages (#/hr) 2 0 0 2 2 2 Shared Lane Traffic (%) 50% Turn Type NA Perm D.P+P NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 1 6 4 - - - - - Permitted Phases 2 2 4 Detector Phase 2 2 1 6 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 34.0 34.0 15.0 15.0 31.0 31.0 Total Split (s) 78.0 78.0 26.0 104.0 36.0 36.0 Total Split (%) 55.7% 55.7% 18.6% 74.3% 25.7% 25.7% Yellow Time (s) 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 All -Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 5.0 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode C-Max C-Max None C-Max None None Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length:140 Actuated Cycle Length:140 Offset: 139 (99%), Referenced to phase 2:EBWB and 6:WBT, Start of 1 st Green Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Description: 2018-07-24 Traffic Data Gathering splits and Phases: 7: Weyerhaeuser Way S & S 320th St 1 I --*02 ) 04 06 (R) 1049 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: Weyerhaeuser Way S & S 320th St 11/09/2018 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NER Lane Configurations tt ++ )y if Traffic Volume (vehm) 866 34 169 734 68 155 Future Volume (veh/h) 866 34 169 734 68 155 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 Work Zone On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hAn 1870 1870 1856 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 1007 0 197 853 79 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.86 - Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 3 3 2 2 Pap, veh/h 2945 1314 575 3161 126 56 - Arrive On Green 1.00 0.00 0.04 0.90 0.04 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3647 1585 1767 3618 3548 1572 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 1007 0 197 853 79 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hAn 1777 1585 1767 1763 1774 1572 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 2.4 4.6 3.1 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 2.4 4.6 3.1 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 2945 1314 575 3161 126 56 V/C Ratio(X) 0.34 0.00 0.34 0.27 0.63 0.00 Avail Cap(c a), veh/h 2945 1314 783 3161 798 354 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.0 66.6 0.0 _ Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 1.9 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),vehAn 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.8 2.6 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.3 0.0 1.6 1.2 68.5 0.0I LnGrp LOS A A A A E A Approach Vol, veh/h 1007 1050 79 Approach Delay, s/veh 0.3 1.3 68.5 Approach LOS A A E Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 - - Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 121.0 9.5 130.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 5.0 4.5 * 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 21.5 73.0 31.5 ' 1 E2J Max Q Clear Time (g_c+ll), s 4.4 2.0 5.1 6.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 15.3 0.2 12.0 Intersection Summa HCM 6th Ctrs Delay 3.3 HCM 6th LOS A Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 8: Site Access & S 323rd St 11/09/2018 Lane Group ESL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBI_ NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '* Vi 1� 41 4 Traffic Volume (vph) 0 9 35 16 121 31 4 0 2 6 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 0 9 35 16 121 31 4 0 2 6 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1,900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -5% 5% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100� 100 100 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 266 208 214 171 Travel Time (s) 7.3 5.7 5.8 4.7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Growth Factor 200% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 11% 3% 3% 0% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Intersection Surnmary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 8: Site Access & S 323rd St 11/09/2018 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh Movement 1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBi WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 'fir I T 41� 41� Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 9 35 16 121 31 4 0 2 6 0 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 9 35 16 121 31 4 0 2 6 0 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - None - - None - - None Storage Length 10 10 - - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - Grade, % - -5 - 5 - - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 11 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Mvmt Flow 0 10 38 17 132 34 4 0 2 7 0 0 Ma orlMinor Ma or1 Ma'or2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 166 0 0 48 0 0 212 229 29 213 231 149 Stage 1 - - - - - - 29 29 - 183 183 - Stage 2 - - - - 183 200 - 30 48 - Critical Hdwy 4.13 - - 4.13 - - 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - - 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.227 - - 2.227 - 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1406 - - 1553 - 143 669 1043 742 667 995 Stage 1 - - - - 985 869 - 816 746 - Stage 2 - - - - - 816 734 - 984 853 - Platoon blocked, % - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1406 - - 1553 737 662 1043 735 660 895 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 723 649 - 726 652 - Stage 1 - - - - - 985 869 - 816 738 - Stage 2 - - - - 807 726 - 982 853 - EB WB NB SS HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.7 9.5 10 HCM LOS A B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLril E8L EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBLn1 Capacity (vehlh) 805 1406 - 1553 - - 726 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.008 - - 0.011 - - 0.009 HCM Control Delay (s) 9,5 0 - 7.3 - - 10 HCM Lane LOS A A - - A - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 0 - 0 - - 0 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 9: 32nd Ave S & Site Access 11/09/2018 ,(' 4- t \0. 4 Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Y 1 + Traffic Volume (vph) 0 16 65 0 138 209 Future Volume (vph) 0 16 65 0 138 209 Ideal Flow'(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 10 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 186 268 879 Tim-e- I Time (s) 5.1 7.3 24.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) _ 3°Io 3% 4% 3°l0 3°% 2% Shared Lane Traffic_ (%) Sign Control Stop Free Free Intersection SumMa Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 9: 32nd Ave S & Site Access 11/09/2018 Intersection Int Delay, slveh Movement 2.8 WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Y T+ Traffic Vol, vehlh 0 16 65 0 138 209 Future Vol, vehlh 0 16 55 0 138 209 Conflicting Peds, #Jhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - - - 10 - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 4 3 3 2 Mvmt Flow 0 17 71 0 150 227 MaiurlMinor Minorf-T Maori Ma or2 Conflicting Flow All 598 71 0 0 71 0 Stage 1 71 - - - - Stage 2 527 - - - - Critical Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4.13 _ Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - 2,227 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 464 989 - - 1523 - Stage 1 949 - - - - Stage 2 590 - - - - - Platoon blocked, % - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 419 989 - - 1523 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 467 - - - - Stage 1 949 - - - - - Stage 2 532 - - - Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, S 8.7 0 3 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLnl SBL SBT Capacity (vehlh) - - 989 1523 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio - - 0.018 0.098 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 8.7 7.6 - HCM Lane LOS - - A A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0.3 - DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - AM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 6: S 323rd St & 32th Ave S 11108/2018 Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 1� y Traffic Volume (vph) 63 56 37 49 79 12 Future Volume (vph) 63 56 37 49 79 12 ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Link Speed (mph) 35 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 312 266 268 Travel Time (s) 6.1 7.3 7.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 Heavy Vehicles {°Io) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Yield Yield Yield Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Roundabout DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - PM Peak Hour HCM 6th Roundabout 6: S 323rd St & 32th Ave S 11/08/2018 Intersection Intersection Delay, s/veh Intersection LOS Approach 3.6 A EB WB SB Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 149 107 114 Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 149 107 114 Vehicles Circulating, vehm 99 79 46 Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 61 169 140 Ped Vol Crossing Leg, # 1h 0 0 0 Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 Approach Delay, s/veh 3.9 3.5 3.4 Approach LOS A A A Lane Lett Lett Leff Designated Moves LT TR LR Assumed Moves LT TR LR RT Channelized Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 Follow -Up Headway, s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway, s 4.976 4.976 4.976 Entry Flow, vehm 149 107 114 Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 1247 1273 1317 Entry HV Adj Factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 Flow Entry, veh/h 149 107 114 Cap Entry, veh/h 1247 1273 1317 V/C Ratio 0.119 0.084 0.087 Control Delay, s/veh 3.9 3.5 3.4 LOS A A A 95th %tile Queue, veh 0 0 0 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - PM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 8: Site Access & S 323rd St 11/08/2018 --* --► -'V { *-- k t 1 4/ Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL N8T NBR SBL SST SBR Lane Configurations Vj 1� I 1� + + Traffic Volume (vph) 0 130 5 3 54 7 32 0 15 29 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 0 130 5 3 54 7 32 0 15 29 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Grade (%) -5% 5% 0% 0% Storage Length (ft) 10 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 100 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 266 208 214 171 Travel Time (s) 7.3 5.7 5.8 4.7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Growth Factor 200% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 0% 3% 3% 0% 3% 3% 3% 30/. 3% 3% 3% Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Intersection summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - PM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 8: Site Access & S 323rd St 11/08/2018 Intersection Int Delay, slveh 2.9 Movement E8L EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I 1 T *T* 4+ Traffic Vol, vehlh 0 130 5 3 54 7 32 0 15 29 0 0 Future Vol, vehlh 0 130 5 3 54 7 32 0 15 29 0 0 Conflicting Peds, #Ihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized - - None - - None - None - - None Storage Length 10 - - 10 - - - - - - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 1 - _ 1 - Grade, % - -5 - - 5 - 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles_, % 3 0 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Mvmt Flow 0 141 5 3 59 8 35 0 16 32 0 0 Ma'orlMinor Ma or1 Ma'or2 Minorl Minor2 Conflicting Flow Al 67 0 0 146 0 0 213 217 144 221 215 63 Stage 1 - - - - - - 144 144 - 69 69 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 69 73 - 152 146 - Critical Hdwy 4.13 - - 4.13 - - 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - - 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 - Critical H _ y Stg 2 - - - - - - - - 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.227 - - 2.227 - - 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 PotCap-1 Maneuver 1528 - - 1430 - - 742 679 901 733 681 999 Stage - - - - - 856 776 - 939 835 - Stage 2 - - - - - - 939 832 - 848 774 - Platoon blocked, % - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1528 - - 1430 741 678 901 718 680 999 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 743 673 - 723 673 - Staw 1 - - - - - - 856 776 - 939 833 - Stage 2 - 937 830 - 833 774 - Approach EB WB NiB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0 0.4 9.9 10.2 HCM LOS A B Minor LanelMaior Mvmt NBLn! EBL EBT EBR WBL WST Wi3R S�Ln1 Capacity {vehlh) 787 1528 - - 1430 - - 723 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.065 - - 0.002 - - 0.044 HCM Control Delay (s} 9.9 0 - - 7.5 - - 10.2 HCM Lane LOS A A - - A - - B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 0 - - 0 - - 0.1 DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - PM Peak Hour Lanes, Volumes, Timings 9: 32th Ave S & Site Access 11108/2018 t 1 Lane Group WBL WBR N6T NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Y T+ t Traffic Volume (vph) 0 128 169 0 21 69 Future Volume (vph) 0 128 169 0 21 69 ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 10 Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 Link Speed (mph) 25 25 25 Link Distance (ft) 186 268 439 Travel Time (s) 5.1 7.3 12.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 3% 3% 0% 3% 3% 0%° Shared Lane Traffic (%) Sign Control Stop Free Free intersedon Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - PM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 9: 32th Ave S & Site Access 11/08/2018 Intersection Int Delay, slveh Movement 3.7 WBL WBR t+tBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Y T} Traffic Vol, vehlh 0 128 169 0 21 69 Future Vol, vehlh 0 128 169 0 21 69 Conflicting Peds, #1hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 - 10 - Veh in Median Storage, # 1 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 3 3 0 3 3 0 Mvmt Flow 0 139 184 0 23 75 MajorWinor Minorl Maorl Ma or2 Conflicting Flow All 305 184 0 0 184 0 Stage 1 184 - - - - - Stage 2 121 - - - - Criticai Hdwy 6.43 6.23 - - 4,13 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.43 - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.43 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 3.327 - 2.227 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 685 856 - - 1385 - Stage 1 845 - - - Stage 2 902 - - - - Platoon blocked, % - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 673 856 - - 1385 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 701 - - - Stage 1 845 - - - - - Stage 2 887 - - - - - Approach We NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 10 0 1.8 HCM LOS B Minor Lane)Maior Mvrnt NBT NBRWBLril SBL SBT Capacity (vehlh) - - 856 1385 HCM Lane VIC Ratio - - 0.163 0.016 HCM Control Delay (s) - _ 10 7.6 - HCM Lane LOS - B A - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0,6 0.1 - DaVita Federal Way Synchro 10 Report 2020 With Project - PM Peak Hour RESUsMITTED OCT 31 20 crry OF FEDERAL WAY CpMMlJN D YF1 EHia Gilles Consulting Brian K. Gilles 4 2 5 - 8 2 2 - 4 9 9 4 EVALUATION OF TREES AT DaVita Lots A, B, & C At the Intersection of South 32311 Street & 32" Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 Re -Revised October 30, 2018 November 20, 2017 PREPARED FOR: Davita Healthcare Partners, Inc. / Team Genesis 6425 South Victor Avenue Tulsa, OK 74136 PREPARED BY: GILLES CONSULTING Brian K. Gilles, Consulting Arborist ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist # RCA-418 ISA TRAQ Qualified ISA TRAQ Certified Instructor N0IFIC .TNWTR CH.".. C 743 CERTIFIED ARBORIST fax: 425-822-6314 email: bkgilles@comcast.net P.O. Box 2366 Kirkland, WA 98083 Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32" d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 2 of 53 CONTENTS ASSIGNMENT.................................................................................................................. 3 METHODOLOGY Additional Testing..... Failure.... ......................................................................................... 3 ......................................................................................_.. 4 4 OBSERVATIONS............................................................................................................. 4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMAMNDATIONS Tree Protection Measures ...... .................................. 7 .................... 7 WAIVER OF LIABILITY............................................................................................... S ATTACHMENTS........................................................................................................... 10 Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 3 of 53 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A total of 341 trees were evaluated and documented on the four lots of the project. They can be summarized as follows: ■ Species: A total of 19 different species were observed and documented on the site. ■ 10 Species are native. ■ 9 Species are non-native landscape trees. 28 of the 341 trees, or 8.2% are non-native species. 313 of the trees, or 91.8% are native species. 0 0 0 • Health: 0 0 48 trees were rated as Non -Viable. 293 trees were rated as Viable. ASSIGNMENT Gilles Consulting was contracted to evaluate the trees DaVita Lots A through D at the. intersection of South 323`d Street and 3211 Avenue South in Federal Way, Washington. The four lots are listed in the King County Assessor's web site as being Parcel Numbers: 2154650090, 2154650060, 2154650120, and 2154650110. The property is being developed and the City of Federal Way requires an analysis of the trees as part of the permit process. This report provides the analysis. The information in this report must be utilized to create a Tree Plan as required by Federal Way Code. METHODOLOGY To evaluate the trees, as well as to prepare this report, I drew upon my 30+ years of experience in the field of arboriculture and my formal education in natural resources management, dendrology, forest ecology, plant identification, and plant physiology. I followed the protocol of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) for tree risk assessment. Published in 2011, the Best Management Practices, Tree Risk Assessment, ANSNI A300 Part 9 was developed to aid in the interpretation of professional standards and guide work practices based upon current science and technology. Using this process, now called the Tree Risk Assessment Qualification, or TRAQ for short, I performed a Level Two assessment which included looking at the overall health of the tree as well as the site conditions. This is a scientifically based process to look at the entire site, surrounding land and soil, as well as a complete look the trees themselves. In examining each tree, I looked at such factors as: size, vigor, canopy and foliage condition, density of needles, injury, insect activity, root damage and root collar health, crown health, evidence of disease -causing bacteria, fungi or virus, dead wood and hanging limbs. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 4 of 53 Additional Testing The trees all presented signs and/or symptoms that were readily discernible using the visual tree evaluation system of a Level II Tree Risk Assignment. These signs and/or symptoms indicate extensive internal decay and/or structural defects in some trees and solid trunks and lack of disease in others. Therefore, no additional tests were performed during this site visit. Failure While no one can predict with absolute certainty which trees will or will not fail, we can, by using this scientific process, assess which trees are most likely to fail and take appropriate action to minimize injury and damage. Tree Tags The trees were tagged and numbered 801 through 900, 946 through 1,000, and 3,001 through 3,205. The tags are made of shiny aluminum approximately one inch by three inches in size and are attached to the tree with staples and a one foot strip of brightly colored survey tape. The tags were placed as high as possible to minimize their removal and were generally placed on the south sides of the trees to make them easier to see in low light conditions. Please refer to Attachment 1 Tree Be erence Flan for an orientation to the site and the approximate location of the trees. OBSERVATIONS The properties consist of four lot at the intersection of South 323rd Street and 32nd Avenue South. Lots 2154650090 and 2154650060 are east of 32nd Avenue South. Lots 2154650110 and 2154650120 are south of South 323' Street. The properties are relatively flat with not a lot of elevation changes. The eastern half of Lots 2154650090 and 2154650060 are mostly cleared and covered with a dense stand of grass. The eastern half of lot 2154650120 is also open grass. The rest of the areas are densely forested with a combination of predominately native trees and some landscape trees scattered randomly about the properties. The underbrush of the forested areas have been recently cleared and mulched leaving a relatively open forest. The trees can be summarized as follows: • Tree Health: Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 5 of 53 CURRENT HEALTH SUMMARY Rating # of Trees % Dead 10 2.9% Dying 12 3.5% Poor 26 7.6% Fair 104 30.5% Good 106 31.1 % Very Good 61 17.9% Excellent 22 6.5% Total: 341 100.0% + Viability: o Trees rated as Dead, Dying, or in Poor Condition are Non -Viable trees. o Trees rated as Fair, Good, Very Good, or Excellent are Viable Trees. VIABILITY SUMMARY Condition # of Trees % Non -Viable 48 14.1 % Viable 293 85.9% Total: 341 100.0% Species: o A total of 19 species were observed on the properties. They are: SPECIES SUMMARY Species # of Trees % American Beech, Fagus grandiflora 2 0.6% Bitter Cherry, Prunus emarginata 3 0.9% Black Cottonwood, Populus trichocarpa 14 4.1 % Big Leaf Maple, Acer macrophyllum 1 15 4.4% Douglas Fir, Pseudotsuga menziezii 187 54.8% Engelmann Spruce,.Picea engelmannii I 1 0.3% Green Ash, Fraxinus pennsylvanica 7 2.1 % Norway Maple, Acer platanoides 2 0.6% Norway Spruce, Picea abies 4 1.2% Paperbark Birch, Betula papyrifera 4 1.2% Pacific Crabapple, Malus fusca 5 1.5% Pacific Madrone, Arbutus menziesii 1 0.3% Pacific Willow, Salix lasiandra 3 0.9% Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32111 Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 6 of 53 Red Alder, Alnus rubra 17 5.0% Small Leaf Linden, Tilia cordata 3 0.9% Sugar Maple, Acer saccharum 3 0.9% Western Hemlock, Tsuga heterophylla 10 2.9% Western Larch (Tamarack), Larix occidentalis 2 0.6% Western Red Cedar, Thuja plicata 58 17.0% Total: 341 100.0% Status: o Based upon size and condition rating, as noted in the FWCC, trees are rated as Not Significant or Significant. STATUS SUMMARY Status # of Trees % Not Significant 142 41.6% Significant 199 58.4% Total: 341 100.0% Of the 142 Not Significant Trees, noted above, 48 are Not Significant because they are Non -Viable. They have a Current Health Rating of Dead, Dying, or Poor. They pose a risk to life and property. However, 94 of the 142 Not Significant trees are so because they are below the minimum size threshold. They have a Current Health Rating of Fair, Good, Very Good, or Excellent. If they are in a location that they can be retained, they are worthy of the energy to protect and retain. They are cheaper than replacement trees and are already providing multiple benefits to the property and to the community. In an effort to present the information and conclusions for each tree in a manner that is clear and easy to understand, as well as to save paper, I have included a detailed spreadsheet, Attachnient 2 Tree InventorylCondition Spreadsheet. All the same information from the ISA Tree Hazard Form is included in this spreadsheet and the attached glossary. The descriptions on the spreadsheet were left brief in order to include as much pertinent information as possible and to make the report manageable. The attached glossary provides a detailed description of the terms used in the spreadsheet and in this report. It can be found in Attachment 3, Glossary. A brief review of these terms and descriptions will enable the reader to rapidly move through the spreadsheet and better understand the information. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32" d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 7 of 53 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOM MNDATIONS LOCATION SUMMARY Location # of Trees % Lot A 170 49.9% Lots B & C 171 50.1 % Tota I : 341 100.0% Therefore, a minimum of 50 Significant Trees must be retained or replanted on Lots A, B & C. Tree Protection Measures Retaining existing trees almost always pays a large return on the final development product. Properties with mature trees are more valuable and provide multiple benefits to the community. In order for trees to survive the stresses placed upon them in the construction process, tree protection must be planned in advance of equipment arrival on site. If tree protection is not planned integral with the design and layout of the project, the trees will suffer needlessly and possibly die. With proper preparation, often costing little or nothing extra to the project budget, trees can survive and thrive after construction. This is critical for tree survival because damage prevention is the single most effective treatment for trees on construction sites. Once trees are damaged., the treatment options available are limited. The minimum Tree Protection Measures in Attachment 4 Tree Protection Measures are on three separate sheets that can be copied and introduced into all relevant documents such as site plans, permit applications and conditions of approval, and bid documents so that everyone involved is aware of the requirements. These Tree Protection Measures are intended to be generic in nature. They will need to be adjusted to the specific circumstances of your site that takes into account the location of improvements and the locations of the trees. For those trees that are recommended for Remove for Safety, if there is room, it is highly recommended that the trees be converted to Habitat Trees, Nurse Logs, and Brush Piles where ever space and safety allow. These are three very important elements in the sustaining of healthy populations of desirable wildlife such as song birds, frogs, and salamanders. Please refer to Attachment 5, Habitat Tree, Nurse Log, and Brush Pile Creation and Benefits for important information on these critical elements. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 8 of 53 Please note, as noted in FWCC Section 22-1568(c)(6), "Significant Trees, " the driplines were used as the basis for the Tree Protection Zones. However, two exceptions were made: • For Non -Viable trees, it was assumed that they will be removed as part of the clearing and grading process. Therefore, they were given a Limits -of -Disturbance of "n/a, " meaning not applicable. • Trees that are located near a property line the Limits -of -Disturbance was given to be from the tree to that property line. WAIVER OF LIABILITY There are many conditions affecting a tree's health and stability, which may be present and cannot be ascertained, such as, root rot, previous or unexposed construction damage, internal cracks, stem rot and more which may be hidden. Changes in circumstances and conditions can also cause a rapid deterioration of a tree's health and stability. Adverse weather conditions can dramatically affect the health and safety of a tree in a very short amount of time. While I have used every reasonable means to examine these trees, this evaluation represents my opinion of the tree health at this point in time. These findings do not guarantee future safety nor are they predictions of future events. The tree evaluation consists of an external visual inspection of an individual tree's root flare, trunk, and canopy from the ground only unless otherwise specified. The inspection may also consist of taking trunk or root soundings for sound comparisons to aid the evaluator in determining the possible extent of decay within a tree. Soundings are only an aid to the evaluation process and do not replace the use of other more sophisticated diagnostic tools for determining the extent of decay within a tree. As conditions change, it is the responsibility of the property owners to schedule additional site visits by the necessary professionals to ensure that the long-term success of the project is ensured. It is the responsibility of the property owner to obtain all required permits from city, county, state, or federal agencies. It is the responsibility of the property owner to comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and permit conditions. If there is a homeowners association, it is the responsibility of the property owner to comply with all Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R's) that apply to tree pruning and tree removal. This tree evaluation is to be used to inform and guide the client in the management of their trees. This in no way implies that the evaluator is responsible for performing recommended actions or using other methods or tools to further determine the extent of internal tree problems without written authorization from the client. Furthermore, the evaluator in no way holds that the opinions and recommendations are the only actions required to insure that the tree will not fail. A second opinion is recommended. The client shall hold the evaluator harmless for any and all injuries or damages incurred if the Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323`d St & 32°1 Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 9 of 53 evaluator's recommendations are not followed or for acts of nature beyond the evaluator's reasonable expectations, such as severe winds, excessive rains, heavy snow loads, etc. This report and all attachments, enclosures, and references, are confidential and are for the use of the client concerned. They may not be reproduced, used in any way, or disseminated in any form without the prior consent of the client concerned and Gilles Consulting. Thank you for calling Gilles Consulting for your arboricultural needs. Sincerely, Brian K. Gilles, Consulting Arborist ISA Certified Arborist # PN-0260A ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist # RCA-418 ISA TRAQ Qualified ISA TRAQ Certified Instructor Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 3231d St & 32°a Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 10 of 53 ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT 1 - TREE PLAN .................................................. ............................ 11 ATTACHMENT 2 - TREE INVENTORY/CONDITIONS SPREADSHEET ................ 12 ATTACHMENT 3 - GLOSSARY. 39 ATTACHMENT 4 - TREE PROTECTION MEASURES .............................................. 44 ATTACHMENT 5 - HABITAT TREE, NURSE LOG, BRUSH PILE CREATION AND BENEFITS............................................................................................................... ......... 49 ATTACHMENT 6 - BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................... 52 Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32Dd Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 11 of 53 ATTACHMENT 1 - TREE PLAN Tree Retention Plan prepared by ESM. ---T t J;e, L It "Lail I 1452 s: .rD — ...... f _ r _ •�-_ - _.r- ,I �•-'`dye. ,. ._... - .__.__. .- --` z �• i q � �`i'=�-.w . � � y vr=v�n,'"E�`�?.wnr a �- ---- � `— r9 �� a3@:� is 9�7�'i iG:'i':.I;.•i�e:]!]]..;s:�if � �� ;-�-' za}:� +� i eYiee9.63�'y4i.f1�N�.ke+lle wiM B§^ 9 dsB oy T—To 6. I �•.3 w: DAVITA HEALTHCARE PARTNERS. INC ®7�•• ••,•, ��I�� (�ri [] EAST CAMPUS OFFICE PARK IAXNr1U•1W FJ.'1 - F1. �• 4.. Q 00 N O y N O o ON a3U i Cd M A 0 z O N 4 O a) b N cl O Q y •RS G •N M > 00 v� o v M N O M .b � N o 0 O U P4 Y N Y Q v c m U)00 0 C vi U O m d t E a) m ` E.- r y a) — N N d a) L O` y- to Co °) C 2 a O Y = = C E T c 2 m `) m p `p N W U.2 y fp U C C -0 O) C O w y N a c c - mo a) cZiaC co _ 0a jN L O a 0 L.+ +L.+ a) m` y 0 E o •�• a) 0 O E y N C m N p w fn U 0 a) t 0 .0 = .y m a) L L O 0 > m 0 c ca y O N L'a 'C a) E m w 0 N d 0 m a) = +L-' YO C N m d (6 Y L .FO fn CL N y C y `� C p O .L.. > la 0-0 d 7 e0+ m C (6 C '� C N y> 0 m O O � L 0 > N w N w •� a C :t- y O y N w m m L m E L O m N y C U U) @ w D m L M m N J = c Y m o r Y c .m c d L v� 0 m 3 a ° ay) m O` m y C T a) C 0 _m 0 m ` O 2 .. +.+ w C m v O .L-1 m o y y c y C c a) 0) O '0 N CLU > 3 '� 0 c m m w 7 m c c w y.0 o N a) o = G a) N E L 'E w O m 0 0 O w O V) O C C O Co W > O O a) c O a) Lp m c '_ E O tLn 0 C p L O d C V L •OU yO ZoW N LN% O E E ca r O O U N O U) 0 y E Ua)~c L -ra Ca Ec -,.d O y 0N0N ) m zQ O@ Z 0 y `• 0. H Z e0+ y = U ._3 G y � U) y L H '� O� v) E C O G C 0 0 U C E 2 C '� E U) W a' E ` )0 � L . i0 U y O .N 3 ° c (7 c"axi O O v rn 04 c C Y H ut�, U m e N ��, o mo 3 a (D O a) =L O y 0 _ycm cc 0)y J E i O z,,E 0 L O 'a v fa E ry 3 .. 0 3 «� 0p m U m 2 rn a m O O 0 w V ti O U i► O m O O U O 0 C) > w 2 tom y 3 mn = 0 Q N W Z # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # Q 47 U) J af/) T = O fn _ O y _ O fA _ O y _ O fA _ O y _ O U) _ O V) _ O w _ 0 w _ O w _ O w _ O w _ O 0 _ O U) _ O U) _ O (/) _ O F. _ _ _ = 0 = 7 = —a) = _ _ _ _ _ = a) () ) d �. U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 C O U a) U 0 U a) C 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 U a) U 0 U 0 U a) C O C O y O H ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ U ❑ ❑ ❑ U ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ U U C z a W wa) 16 c o :6 m m n m F Um U as .N > W c = ° a) G C S a c 0 O y d' U 2 = l`.1 a7 % G C m m E C O W i a1 Q:s Y m = m , y N O U O H a a1 �0 m U v o E O V a 00 3 N y a U lXa ¢ U G 3 V Q~ O V Mn m o n a°)i 2 m ai 0 m E = a) 3i m` LL m C u) (A m y J i0 aEi S a�i wa) al U U la y Ma m Q T T a) J c G C C a) ya E Y d O c a) m m 0 �c )c a) m y y y m z E m m 'm o= o o m m m ate) t W Q ¢ m m ❑ w 0 z z a a a w m co a) o a) 0 o u o a _ d¢ E )i LL Q a m E in o 5_ a J L t m m¢ wCD z M a i U) o a a a¢ m m m❑ z a a cn d '0 # N # r) # a # (D QL Q) C C C C C C C C C_ C_ 9 C �moami dm`oa q m NO � m�.fEni ' «o'- U2. -&t N3 � Uom RECOMMENDATION a0 m y 0 mTO y y 22 aam�E�Ea a al da a yE ii i p a a a a VIABILITY m m s m w y m m s m m y m m s m m s m m s m m s m s m s m s m m s y <15 U U U U U m U U U E U U < U U STATUS .6 m m m m m m m 2m m m m m CURRENT HEALTH o o o Z' o o m Z o om 0 o m a RATING t9 a (7 t7 > t7 U'p x w > p C9 C a C9 > C7 LL w COMMENTS a ROOTS '•'� ROOT COLLAR > a m um r n >, v m w$ c pp Q Q Q Q p Q Q Q Q z Q z Q z z EL a z z z z z z z TRUNK OI 'm L t U) � z Ol m O) C t C m m L C 3 3 OI Y L C 3 ap O c a5 m W O) co w :� n N n W ti 4 y (0 h an CROWN CONDITION d m m Imq N N N m m N N Q Im/1 N c m m c FOLIAGE c c c to w Q c Q TE- c E C7 U1 c E C7 V1 c E E E C7 (n E c_ E c_SYMMETRY m LCR o m e v e m o m 0 rn 0 m rn m m e m e m e m e o m c+� m U West N N N N N m &O O �0 N C A East N N <O O N V N O N a N & O m N 0 pi South &D N N ED O N a N O N O N m zo O' m N N E J North N �O N N N N W - W N to DRIP LINE N N N N N BDN m DBH N V m m M N ci N m C E t t t t t t a a a a v SPECIES K a iE K K fr x 3 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 m TREE# mom moN mom moa mom mom mon mom mom m.o N TREE LOCATION 1O J m U J 00 �% J m �% J m U J m U J m U o0 J m U J (� U J m U '3 .0 J m U 2.6 JmV 4 of '2 aS J m V J m V of ui?t z tof m d d m d PROPERTY m m m m o m m m m d m o m m o m m o m m o m m m m m n ao�o . (0a o a o Na U)a Na �a a co a- teaN)aa U M tap t.- M Q 00 ctl a�U i u a A° Oo �w v q � h O ? b � N � M W 00 Y \ VI O .o M M O M .b � N O N O N U N f-. N Y Y .m &D m C y m C yj m C m C yj m 0 RECOMMENDATION m m m 'ymo m mm mm >om EcEmo $mC o E?cN a aEmc nEm -ER nE ° _ E 0 n a a a a VIABILITY m m m m m w m m m m m m m m m m m w m m m m m m m m m o m r STATUS < o c or 0 c or 0 o �c Z '� rn « rn �c 'c rn o w c m o o is Z 'c rn u �c c m K c rn m c c m 1 o w Z 'c rn �a m o is Z m U w rn < o c rn (n (o (n (n (n (n (o (n 01 (o (n L (o fn in CURRENT HEALTH `- Z o o o `o RATING LL LL LL LL j LL lL LL IL U. IL (L N 0 COMMENTS 2 x BD 2 c v ROOTS ROOT COLLAR g S z �z z �z z z N TRUNK L Ol 'm L O) 'm L W 'w « O) 'w « OI 'm L .2) {D U 'T L OI L OI L Ol L W L O) L 0 « LM U1 O1 (o m to w F- (o N M U 0) N N CROWN CONDITION rn m o� m rn m a, 2 £ m rn m m > n rn d rn m $ m rn m rn m rn E2 ami m 3 p FOLIAGE m rn m m rn m m m m m m rn m m m m m m m rn m d u1 ¢ W m rn m m m m m `m m m T d m rn m `m m rn m `m m rn m d m N n p SYMMETRYc7y i E c E c E c E E c E '' E '' E '' E c E �_ E '' E c E E E CD LCR 0 o e e e e o 0 0 o e e o e m 0 c West N ED N N ;t ED W 60 N O N W A East N N N Z. 6DN O Qo _N O C South m N in ED a o c w m m o ao E J North N &D m N N ;;t 60 io iA ZN O N ED DRIP LINE `r N W N N ;t ro m Z. o �2 m n DBH o 60 i- a; eD in a 4 'i E E E E E E E ¢ E E E E E E E v SPECIES a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL � a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL TREE m-'o m— w—w .—M 0)NO G N � 07 NN p NM W Na ODN l W N D mn N TREE LOCATION B.6 om U l3-G o U a5 omU 2.6 U a U �aU 4.a U mU SalU o o(o 12.60 afU o a3U �J 003 afU om 3a o, J J m J3 J4 M JM J M J m J3 co J3 �n t Co am mn o am ms o ad mn o am mn o �Um mn o aUm mn o a'6m mo` a« mn o a-u n o a« m mPROPERTY o am mn o a« mn o om N te Na wa tea No - a Cnan �¢. Wa Cl)�a COu In U I Q M bD l� M O r. — h 00 O(V O Q O N ~ 3U� W�a cd 2r � o z b °° w � to b '5 N M F1" m C C C _ C C C C C C c C C m RECOMMENDATION w ��$}m�QQ._.o C l3 m o O C ® m o C m❑- C °J 4 C y m o m C m❑ o� w B m C m o s}G3--}i"i m Y! m W m m g m o �£ o� o }Tip or«o m m S m 2r: o o � •o-s � om $ nE m a n o a 00 VIABILITY m c- z m m a m m n Z> m a y m a y m a y m a y m n y m n s m S m S m S m n S m 5 A STATUS C r U O )E Zc C m C m O Z'c� C U � rn C fmJ K - co) C U O )F Z'c rn C U !F c m C U O )F Z'c rn C U O )F Z'c m C U K c ❑, C m !F c rn C U 'C 'c rn r m � 'c m C !F E c 0' rn 'w rn (n rn 'm in m m m m m in in m w CURRENT HEALTH o `o o o Z o ` o o o Z o o o Z o o o Z o RATING �j a 0 LL m o > C7 LL o U C7 > > (m7 > > '(' COMMENTS v ROOTS ROOT COLLAR ¢ ¢ ¢ z ¢ z ¢ z zz zz zz ❑ z z z z z z z z N TRUNK L 50(a L o LO Lm .2) m Lm Lm L1 Lm) `m LO m m L—� m t ts0q ) _i L,sOn (n ( LL m (n n C ` ` CROWN CONDITION o m m> m m �o O FOLIAGE a � m C m m m o m o 0 o p C o C 0 % c E, 'm E, m E, c i. iD �, m i. m E, i D E. m i. ` m SYMMETRY �� C7 (n m C9 (n c9w C9m C7 (n Ow ao LCR o a o 0 0 o e e e e e m O W03t O N N &D ZD N m E N W N tD C m N East m o N iv N Z. iD N W iD N eo E.iD o � South o� o N iv N iD iD '(o� 'ao iD N m io E J �- North N N Z. m tD N (D DRIP LINE m N N N N W N t7 t7 ap aD O 1� V N rD N E E E E E E E E E E E E E E a SPECIES IL ❑ IL ❑ L ❑ L ❑ IL ❑ lL ❑ 'L ❑ IL ❑ LL ❑ 11 ❑ 11 ❑ IL ❑ L ❑ IL ❑ TREE# mN W mN m MO O Mr I . ZM M I .D ©M)O aDM�D m M f� W MaD W Mm dOQ O ©�� N TREELOCATION °aU .20 0 °ao 0 o0 oJ °ma °aT o°a o,o o°a0 (o oo°a 0 mu co oJ Mo offl J o JMo 42.6 03T0 J maT J m mU mU m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m PROPERTY m m nn o �a m m an o Na m m an o tea` m m an o (na` m m an o (na m an o (na m as o tea` an o (na` an o (na` an o (n(L an o (na a o �n o an o i I• M 00 � M C) r. 00 � N O G4 3� > 0 z C UI o m 6 j mo Vm Cm N� m dN om m $m (mO d $ omo m mo mNm6 RECOMMENDATION o -'6 0om0 om omo m «C ao 10 t 0 0 o o S m o ym.t o 0_0r0 Emm � $mf� NUi mmf- m E E 0 EaE 0 0 aE E E aE a E a E E_2-0 a m a E a E ILL 'd ILL 0 IEL 0 ii 0 ii 0 ILL 0 10- 0 10- 0 ILL 0 ILL 0 111- VIABILITY m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m y s s s 5 y s y s s y y C ! E STATUS !F e m K e m E m 0 k z •e m k z m k e m 0 is z •F m a m 0 is, z'e m K e m e m e m 0) in w to fn m m fn w 'rn to fn CURRENT HEALTH m o m oo m o •�� m o .B� .B .B RATING (� (' (� ILLLL w ILLLL m LL LL LL LL 3 m o 1° COMMENTS ov_ m N N y oa co e ROOTS ' " ROOT COLLAR z z z z z z z z z z z z N TRUNK L m m L m w L Lm m « m 'm L 0m 'm L m m L m 'm L m 'm L m 'm L m 'm L m 'm L m 'm co S co S b m m m m m m CROWN CONDITION m m m m d 0 m m m m w m m d m m m m p FOLIAGE m C m m N rn m rn m rn IU C m rn m rn m rn m rn m SYMMETRY c E c E U U c E n, (7 vJ E `m n, O U c E m �, C7 y `m E C7 (n c E c E u) c E 0 w E c E c E � LCR o o -Ie -Ie e -I e o e e m L1 C West iA b aD ;T ED m N N q ;4- East eo b ao v io El m Z. N N o N N w Q South m '' m zo o N a, N J North fo io bo ;t ZIP N N m DRIP LINE °D tO eo ro m o N ZN - N ;;T N in DBH m m m a a 4 m ur 4 o W in ;o r N o m E E E E E E E E E E E E a SPECIES a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL a. LL a LL a LL a LL "r TREE# cOaN man maa °°v'n mvm mar mvm - - - min- - - — - - - min- N LOCATION omU a 0 oa 0 SaUYaU' a 3 o .gym wJo 3aTREE Um J JN m m m m 13� m m m J3a m J m m m V m m U r m T m m m m m m m PROPERTY m a n o m a n o m a n o m o n o m a n o m a n o m a n o m n o m a n o m a n o m a n o m a n o Ua` Wna Na (na moo_ In rnLL` In a- moo` rnLL` cna co a. U o to vn 4. 00 N O O O O �I a3U�� o A� z o_o �w E" O .b •g C N � M jp� 00 Ln Y \ en v M N M b Ln41 6J O N r. O i U N i-i N m m C N bm�ia m m d C Ih -�o¢• d�Ti CE'' m md�9 —vti Cmn 3 Smd Ccr >o m m o :m_ d�--m�i0n.7W.. "r�- .md 'umO_a m N $p Em M$'yy $m -A m 0 j0�=RECOMMENDATION m Lo $ ti C1nm m �-� qNppC E � a a 10 r VIABILITY m m 5 m m y m m y m m 5 m a m z —> m 0 m z —> d m y m m y m m y m m y m m 5 d y m 5 m m y STATUS 'F - o Z C m o �c Z C m C m m o k Z C m m o z •C m U �c C m U C U m C m U o �c Z .E m m o k z •C m m C m o Z C m o Z C pCURRENT HEALTH o ` o RATING LL LL LL IL il LL Uo r LmL LmL Ummr LNL LmL d m U L COMMENTS a a 0 v ROOTS o 0 < m ¢ ¢ ROOT COLLAR z z z z z z z z z z z z z m TRUNK C n L N LLm N w N N U in tsi7 U) U) h Y c m m m m m m m m m T m m m m� m N N N l0 m N m m N N CROWN CONDITION `m > m `m m` `m m m > > > m m m m > FOLIAGE T m L A m N `m N u F m m lV m m m T m T m N m m m m m SYMMETRY c E m m E m E 0to i, C7y m i , aco Uq 0o m LCR in o m m o m o in �m o ur ur o ur d d West O ZD N zo O &D N C A -E m East 0 20 a Z, N ro o m 0 South o Z. N r° Er 42 J � North o in ;T ZN N ua DRIP LINE o fD N w ur DBH i� of o m o C6 in C-� in m or o °° W E E E E E E E a E a E a E a E a E a E a E a e SPECIES a LL ❑ a LL ❑ a LL ❑ a LL ❑ a LL ❑ a LL ❑ LL ❑ LL ❑ LL ❑ LL ❑ LL ❑ LL ❑ LL ❑ LL O "r TREE W�nv m�nm Wurm rov+r- err ev murm WWo Wm� mmN Wmm Wmv Wm�n WWm mm� N TREE LOCATION oJ °maUJ °ma °ma>. oJ °maU oJ oJ `ma>U m J 0 o°a U J m Joma>. Jo J JaoJo UL U yC m yL d yL m �JL �JL UL m �JL d �)L m m L m m , V L m m UL m m iJ an d PROPERTYteo` m m d m m m m m m m m o m m o '^on aon a0o s aoo a NLLo` Uao` Uo a Ua ULL Ua a UULL LL ULL Ua a z 00 C C C C C E C C C N y w 6 2 m m m O6 mo m m N mO m N O m mmO m wUI RECOMMENDATION ".roo ,50-s>-« O O .---6 O -'6 > .2 9— > `mm .6. o3 mo5.2, : fitom§ mE o mro$o mro3 02 ��omo°lYEo m aE nE LE m aEa aEm aEm aEm aE E m`E < Li a a a° IL a a ao ao °D VIABILITY m B m m n m m a m m a m m a m m a m m a m m n m m a m m n m m a m m c 0 m s s y s s s s y s s s z> STATUS < !E !E !E o � 'c o is o is �c E o w c m (0 rn f0 c m f0 c m (7 Z m (0 Z 'E m t0 'c m (0 Z 'c m 0) 'E m (0 rn f0 - rn f0 Z 'c 0 (n m CURRENT HEALTH o o o o RATING IL IL LL0 IL LL LL LL 0 m W) COMMENTS $ o o m T a ROOTS m ` lL ROOT COLLAR ❑¢ ¢ ppQ ppQ ❑ p ppQ ppQ ❑ ❑ pQ :`- Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z LL TRUNK N 10 L m 'm L D! 'm L m '�om L Lm y t ami�'�`"'� L OI L m L m L m L m •�" y# C m c ro Y U) U)(n co J Z U) N (0 (n U ami J O m m m S m m m m CROWN CONDITION m m T m m .L_• m `m m m p m 12 m d 2 m m m m` m m FOLIAGE o� m rn `m rn iP m m m m m m m m m m d m m m m m m m m m m m m m `m m m m m m SYMMETRY c E (7 c E C7 c E (7 c E c7 c E. `�' E c E `� c E � E � E E E (n (n U) U) O m m LCR m e m e o m o u) e m e o o 0 o 0 e 0 e o in m West m N 7 ip ip (D m m East ;t E w N io _y 0 South 0 aD O N Z. E. &D � N E J n North ;t ro N oo o N iN v m m io u DRIP LINE !2 a FD N W N ;t ED ro &o m DBH in €0 in m o o a t2 o l v E E E E E o E E E E E E a SPECIES a 1 a IL a IL a IL a ll a LL a LL a IL a ll a IL a. ll M TREE mmm mmm mno mn.- mnN mnm mnv mnm mnm mI mnm mnm N TREE LOCATION '3 m I3al 7as U 3 .a U 4.0 6 U Jm J m o J« J" mT T m T �•, T TU T PROPERTY m m an o m an o m m nn o m m as 0 m m an o m m an o m m an n o m m an o m m an o m m an o m m an n o m m an n o ) (�Li Ua Ua` U) a- ) �a Na Ua` U) a- Ua U) EL Ua (tea` U M bQ� M tn 00 0 ¢ O ON 01 a3� U, �' �3� o A � Z �w t4l vi O d N O.Q M P4 > 00 Y \ Cn O .d M M O N r-' M 'b � N O N O P4 U P4 rn 7-. 6J Y Y _ �C! SI �i � C �Lonu � Cop � C N � � •� pry m C N � mmN Nm CO` RECOMMENDATION $oa m uLm siin � m Un �wm smS Smm sp5 m PVl oommom p matam .No.s�o .' �•�t,sSi O )ov O O �-pd- �p �m pCO .m� 2,E:mO`' .r`O OEs?'G` .=smmiS Q3 aE a a (L (L a a ap VIABILITY m a m y m a m s m a m y m a m s m a m s m a m s m m m m m m m a a a a n a a m m m m m m m s s s s s s s r STATUS mm U !E rn U 'G rn m o z< rn U !F rn m U o z< rn m U !F rn m m m m m m m U U U U U U U o w o v= o v= c !c !c z� z� z� < rn m a 2) Amrn rn fn U5 fn to 0)fn 0)m fn fn In fn <n CURRENT HEALTH L, o •� � L' o 'm RATING 0 LL LL i i� LL LL LL LL LL � 0 0 LL 0 COMMENTS ROOTS ^' ROOT COLLAR ¢ li ¢ ❑ z ❑ z ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ z z z z z zz z z z zz t L L N TRUNK Om 5 O) '� O) 'm N O) ' � O) '��'� 0) co O) 21 2) O) O) 0) co N (D N Y m m C m m m m m m m O) m Ol N m OI 0 T $ 0) N 0) N m 0! 0) 0) O) O) m N N m m m Ea0 m CROWN CONDITION m � 0 �m `m C d m m m d m m> o FOLIAGE m c m rn m m m m d m m rn m m rn `m a, rn rn rn rn m r ❑ Q Q ❑ Q Q Q >. �. .� E, E. E. E. d E, m i, m �• 2 e) SYMMETRY ao LCR m O West m t! N t0 O O O <O C m N East ro N a o 0 0 a co fio South m io 'r N o 0 o io ro '3 E J North r° 'o N v io 0 0 o m v m w ro DRIP LINE Er 'r N ;;t o 0 o ZD m ro DBH N N Iq W N O [O r N of of `r cli E E E E E E E E E E E E E a a a a a a a v SPECIES a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL a LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ") TREE # aD a0 0 a0 W W W N W W M W W a m 0 W W [p m W r ro W W m a0 O ro O O tD 0) W T N N TREE LOCATION '316 3as 3oa '3al JmU '3otl �mU '3of �mU '3otl '3as '3va 3oe '4oe '3c5 sad �mU JftIV JmV JmV JmV JmV JmV JmU JmU �mU d m d m d m d m m m d m PROPERTY m m nn m m an o m an o m m an o m an o m m an o m m m m a an an an as an an o o o o o o o o (0 a- rna` COa` na` en a` (no- Ana Una` Na U)a` Ana` 0na` Na N C yj -Omod:O m C yj m m C N m N C N m C N m N C N d m w 'io mO m m YI m m m C N omO m d ' odm OCm RECOMMENDATION o od.O om.O omOm o o m�O m uam�i aE o�o�o amd aEY o nEm omom an o - o $E n m nE m 5 ._§o nE m nmm a . a a a E 'a E a m nE is m d I d aa u� a VIABILITY m m m m m m m m m m m m m w m m m m m m m m m m m m s s s s s s s s y s s s s STATUS rn (4 (n 'c (n E U)U) !EZ 'o w c m U)U) !EZ c rn 'o f c rn (n E c rn (n Z 'o !c c rn (A Z 'o k � fn !E'c (n U) CURRENT HEALTH 10 a a ao vo ci m a O > o o. LL o o > C9 oRATING > C7 '^ COMMENTS m Y T n U a 10 a a Tm a 'a ROOTS :S - '•'° ROOT COLLAR ¢ ❑ ❑ z ❑ z ❑ z ❑ z z z zz zz zz z z zz z N TRUNK is 5 p m rn a 2' L m L rn m L m m L m m N in c� N io of C n m L 2-m L m 5 b b m N N N rn N co co '.�- Y rn rn y a CROWN CONDITION m m m 2 m 2 m a m FOLIAGE m d m c m rn t0 m rn 10 m rn 10 m rn a d m m rn m d m m m m m m m m m cm m m cm m SYMMETRY m E, v� m E E •m E. c T m E .� >, '� c i, `� c i, `� aci E m E aci E c i, C� r/Tj Um cn U' (n U' cn U' cn at LCR e n e e e o 0 0 o e e e o m u c West N N N N o N io tD N w m N N ;T N ;�t East N N N N O N to N a N m N_ ❑ G m South N N O E. V ` N W V E J c` North N N N N � C Om O S ra ra0 co DRIP LINE N N N to `'° N N i4 m nt w DBH o v in a> .m- io ii m i� 't �2 m in o M io N a a a a a a a a a C t t a SPECIES LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL of w `° TREE# mom mma mm� mmm mmr mmar mrnm moo mvm mvn rnam morn rnu�o N TREE LOCATION .6 �mU 42cd 303 m d 0ED m 000 m Jm� � U B d 0co moo 0m moo Jm 20 JmU 2oa �mU '.3 as 0m0 ed �'003 2 a JmU d d d m m m a a PROPERTY m an o m an 0 o m an o m m an � o m an n o a an � o a m an O o m m an 0 tea` a m an 0 tea` m m �n O. m an o m an 0 Na` m an 0 tea` tea` �a Na` Na cn a- �a Na` Na` tea` U en OA l� M O y � ON 4l d � O o o N a g U bb A � Z 0 o > b N � M 00 Y \ V] O .o M M O N r' M d r 4. Q O •U O O Y d C d m C Ul C $ C mbmo C C m CN $od O O C m COm C > -O m 2>.m mOm�onm� FY o = o> > EN« �oom.o•s i>om Eym m >• m mm� «omN°$o�EmRECOMMENDATION -oAm 2CO>>q-0 m Eo NommtNoo am mSowm 2 aEm � mE E K En m 0. Il and a a 0. VIABILITY s Z o > zs mz > s s Z Z m 5 r STATUS m ow z .F m m m m ow z .� o�c z 'E m E 0 m w c m m o� z- m o� z .� o w z .� m m = m m = c m ow z E m o� z E m U) 0) U) o CURRENTRATING HEALTH o ; ; LL (L o > a a COMMENTS n v• c °� t$ m n o'er U dc3m 1Fmo m m . 'U dc3m aK HZ v ROOTS 0 0 0 o 0 0- a � EL o mo o Ta mo mo "•' Q � ❑ p p aR � mm a p �� it ROOT COLLAR ROOT Z Z Z m Z Z Z N °m' w m Z o 0 o y m 0.m m a'� am am r TRUNK m 'b OI OI T �Z m T C m C n m N m(2 � «m (n U) (n U N N m U d U)Y U m « a m Oc « d m m m CROWN CONDITION m m 0 m m c> cm m ¢> m` FOLIAGE h m N m m N m 0 O m m O N m a`i n C m C m m U) U SYMMETRY E E �� E c7h E 6 m ` E m� c E E �� E �� m c E 0w E �� _ �, g� m E ON m LCR u� o ro e r o e m e N o m o r o e m e m o in 0 u� m G West N O C N N E. N C nA _N East N O W ED ED T N N bo N p South 7 N O W T N N m N E r North ro N ED C O O C F. rD ` N N aD N ram w DRIP LINE N O m &4 &D ZD N N N DBH m N N r O M OD W W 0 r u1 N E E n E a SPECIES 3 Q 3 0 3 a 3 a 3 3 3 3 3 m TREE# minim m�nN minor mina min u� mww mine min ao - - - mroo mm� mmN mmN a TREE LOCATION o°tlU o°b0 "O o`60 o°8U o°a0 oM0 o°d0 o°�0 o0 L) o°�U o°�0 o°d0 J m>. Jm>, Jm>. Jm Jm>. Jm>. Jm Jm J03 Jm Jm Jm Jm UL T1L UL F1L UL V L yL m UC m UL m m L1L m m UL m m yL m m UC m m PROPERTY m m a s m m B a m m n a m m a s m m a s o m m a s o m a s o m n a o a s o a s o a s o a n o a n o 2 (a 2 U) (L o Na o �a tea` tea` Na CO EL Na Na` Na` Na �m C C C C C C N m N Nm N«NmdmCy mJ O O Ul m mm .oC m0 C N mm CO mO ymJm TRECOMMENDATION pmUdJ pYmmJ .pm 6 p '- > U U mp :G m t m r mr E E f N£ ° m 2 E 0 m' 0 0 a 0 6 a E 0 m a E 0 m a E 0 m a E 0 0. �U a a a a a a a 'a a °D VIAVIABILITYZ m �- m m a m a m a m a m a m a m z n m m m a m a m a m n y S y 5 5 5 Z S y > 5 STATUS C o ,� C m U w C m U o !c '� C m U o !c '2 C m U o !c 'c C m U o !c 'c C U o w 'c C U o f 'c C m U o� 'c y m U.6. o� 'c C m !E 'c C m U E C m U o w 'c Z "� m N c rn fn Z rn V7 Z rn fA Z rn f7 Z rn fn Z rn 'm Z rn fn Z rn N Z m fq Z rn to c rn fn Z rn fA CURRENT HEALTH m o 2 0 2 0 `o `o o RATING p LL LL U. j 0 j U° ao a° (9° LL LL LL J COMMENTS 'S� awe m $ � O O 0 U « 0 m0 �0 e ROOTS 0 '1Oc o 'mt o K ww U)w 0 Q Q Q Q 0 Q Q ROOT COLLAR m � a Z Z Q Z Z o. m m Q Z Z Z Z m m 10 l0 T m C E y TRUNK m- m K m 'id m id rn o a U o 2-6U r Jam- T m _ro y o m m m U li LL N H F U d a o tq ,k N T m P � CROWN CONDITION 0 m c a`i m m m m m T m c m m o m x m> mQ � rn m x Q m x m x m x m x Q m> �Q x rn m x Q FOLIAGE `o m Q Q Q Q a+ SYMMETRY T E c E c E c E c E c E c E c E E c E c E '� 0 w C9 w 0 co CD w C7 cn C7 w c7 w 0 w C7 w � W LCR 0 m 0 m 0 r o c� e v v o ro e v e io o 0o 0 0 n 0 m y U c West i&o i&c a Eq N ;;t F. b b irc m East c i�o N ip b b it m O ° South m &D b ;t i° ;;t b b p ro E J n North -m C 'r &D ;T Z-4 b N ;t c° ;;t b b ip w DRIP LINE N DBH ° �N O O b (V O Ww4'in O Oo W N = 3 3 3 3 3 t v SPECIES 3 3 a m m m m m r ^' TREE# °"o `T a"a `^ °"Ofp mwo mmm c�,nm mno mr� mrN mrm mna mr�n mn�o N LOCATION v0 206 o U 306 m 2a6 o 306 2 a m a6 } oe 2.6 m 306 m Moo o m m o U oTREE In J ma J m J m m m Jm m JJ m JmJ J T T T T PROPERTY m m an o m m ao. o m m an o m m an o m m an o m m an J m m ao- 0 m m an o m m an J m m ao• J d m an J m m an o m m an J o J Na` tea` J c)a` J CO tea` o cna tea` tea` o Na o Na o Na tea` Na` 'Y C> CFI d 00 N O ce '❑ a (U Q3�7 0 0 Y z 00 w �r H 4. � h p ; b 0 Q � � N -c M > 00 Y \ .d M N M .d r N O N O U an In a� Y c w C C O WWm a m 0 O ym os «U m RECOMMENDATION __ m 3 m$ m mH�ry°o o o$ m q�� ' nE a a> w o o o R t_ m qmq �' nE $ p� r,,, :;ant_, $ m nE a $ nE KN m n �� U m $ m = x S n IL a a a VIABILITY m m y m m s m m s m o m Z. m m y m m y m � m Z> m 07. Z-> m m s m m s m m s m m y m m y m w y STATUS C m U 'F �� m C m U 'G '� m C m U "= ~ o'F z �� m C m U '� C m U !E � 0 C m U o �c z �� m C m U.6E o w z �� m C �� m C m �� C m U o �c z �< m C m _ m C m U !E C m U !E < m V1 (n <n (O (n f/1 N N co fn to to <n ID CURRENT HEALTH 15 V o m LL a 0 > o RATING C7 ❑ _Tup y m tD U a a m COMMENTS > n a IL — o m o m o ROOTS o o 0 2 0 o 0 a0 ❑ ❑ o m 2.2 ROOT COLLAR z Z y ro N to a z o m z z N m 'a z m am am TRUNK m cm 'J 'm m m 'm m in com w U U in m U U in in w n U c m 12 CROWN CONDITION x x x ¢ x x x ¢ mm m o FOLIAGE `m ❑ m ❑ ❑ o c m Q d p n U m p d ❑ c�//11 UJ Q c � o � m SYMMETRY Q U) C7 y c_T 'd' m c mE U y mE C7 to .mE � U' co mE�°% U' w 2 mE U co mE U to mE O co w LCR co u> in in in o o in o 0 0 o in m U West N N N c N N N N t7 N N C -E ? i+ m East N N N N O N m C V N a N aD ED CD N tT N O M GD a N <D N ip O. South (V N (V N O N m C a N a N c0 iA iA N a N O CD N N E J North N N (V N O N m C N 7 N W 2.- OD N a N O N E.a N [D N m DRIP LINE N N N O N N W N N n N N o DBH N N N W N N M M M v v a = _ a a a v a a a SPECIES 3 3 0 3 3 3 0 o o J m m 3 o 0 TREE# ... - - - - - - mm— - - - mmn rnmv rnmin mmm rnml� rnmao maorn mmo N TREE LOCATION o'YU o°tlU o°aU U oU o°a0 o°aU o°8U o`o0 olo o°d0 Jm o°5U Jm Jm Jm>. Jm Jm Jm Jm Jm>. Jm Jm J03 Jm Jm ..� m UL U� �JL UL �J� m UL m TJL m m UL m m FJL m m UL m m UC m m UL m m �L m m PROPERTYmao m m m m m m m o m m m m on an o an o an an non aon n nmao mao` mao Na ma ma Nama W m C_ m C_ is m _C m _C Iy0 ZG C W Ol V m L > m,D m O d OU mm O�� m O m j m o mJ O m UO mJ > m RECOMMENDATION ow E c 00o`omoo - mr - jm 2 o E m mJ nEm a aE a m aEm'aE aO_Gm E xm m x 'a a a a p 0 IL °D VIABILITY m C - Z w m - C Z m m m m m m w m m m m m w m m m o m zs m m 5 S S S S y 5 S STATUS C Z E rn C Z c rn C !c rn C 'c rn C m C �c rn C o, C !EZ m C c rn C Z c C Z c rn fA <!1 (n fA fq (q N M w Lm fA co CURRENT HEALTH `o 0 Z` 0 0 c m 0 Z' 0 `0 0 RATING a pm > Uo' ILL> CD Uo cmi '� f7 j ( ap m C7 w` pm-BEmam c= oCOMMENTS o c 9 E x E a J O m m U N U nC7 m NW O •� N` N p N U$ L� F a ROOTS o w c ROOT COLLAR a Z z z z z i z z z 0 z m m N TRUNK O1 mm« C t 0xo6 W O1 01 l _ mo-mm 65 V U LL e 0m U N UUaiLL ) ( l CROWN CONDITION m m m m m d m m 6 x o m` x x x $ x x x ami x x FOLIAGE C 0 m 0 N N 0 m y N N cn Q W o 0 o ¢> o 0 0 o SYMMETRY a 1p E i `mE E mE E `E cE �E m LCR o m o v 0 m m rn m r m v d U C West N C N W N C W East N C N N C _N 0 South N T N ;r 60 N T N i E J North N C N BD 7 N � O DRIP LINE N O N ;;t W N N N DBH N (V m pj in T N as 7 N mm of �ucdm m n n a n n E e SPECIES LL ¢ LL 9 LL 3 3 3 3 3 m `O TREEi mrn� mmN mmco mrnv mmin mw�n rnrnr mrnm rnmm �000 r000.- TREE LOCATION 9 a3 J ai U '3 a6 U 2 of .4 ca iR al 3.6 I3 06 v s a) m al J .5 J fn � m � m � co 0 03 0 00 0 1 � m � 03 p m v 0 >. PROPERTY m m an J o m m an J m m an o m m an J o m m an o d m as o m m an m m an o m m an m m an m m as 0 �a o Na tea` V)a` tea` J Na` J o CO EL J Na` J o Ia J o �a ya` to cn kn U O CD c+... 00 N O O c,Nkn N a3U (D w i�a A 3 ° Z 00 �w O > d O Q ;3cd M > 00 Y \ .p M M � M d 07 N O N O U N t. N a Y Y m mm 0 U N0 N U N 0 0 t m U0 N $ m C y m cmm O mYl .. m mOC 2 0 d W9 imo CpUm Vdw�l 1 m '.§2 -$mm-� 1on0 mw- m -§o=o -�m-t' omam§oa-.§o§a;fo m-$ iRECOMMENDATION m� 2 —m §dy� mEaEnEmnE eannnEmnEm daE m m n s ° a aa T° VIABILITY m m s m m y m m s m m s m m y d m y m m s m m y m m y m w y d m y m m s Ir STATUS m w c rn d OicD z'c rn m K 'c rn m w c rn d O K z'c rn m OiDc Z'c rn m O� Z'c rn m k rn m O K z'c m m Sc z'c m m 'c m U O K Z'c a w in m in rn m in rn m 'm in rn CURRENT HEALTH v o a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 v o o 0 0 0 o Z. o m 0 RATING o C7 0 C7 0 U' 0 U' 0 C7 0 U 0 C'J LL 0 0 O 'n N W N COMMENTS > j U0 ROOTS ROOT COLLAR < < < < T � o Q Q z z ❑ Q z z z z z aL� z z z z ai rn 0 u xf0 C m TRUNK 0 .2 x o FF q f U) F L� l LL N L T L T L t T 5 t CROWN CONDITION mL x x x x x x x x x x ¢ x m m m Ol Q N N y N N N N FOLIAGE Q w Q m SYMMETRY .� >• m �, cm �, �E'E >. m �, Om Oco 0co U' U 0U')0w cE •�E cE co w LCR e w v e a e m N e e a e e e o d U West N ;;t N Z. © Ifl N ao C d m East N N m G p. South O N O N aD (V CD - c0 N E. E J � North N ;;t m N m El) do co co N ao �o DRIP LINE N a `D N W zn aD 'D 'O N 00 of DBH �Tr m is a0 in 00 io o otl � N • D> lin in i0 f0 ip it iq cy rt0 NN nN wc0 YJ n E E E E a E m a SPECIES 3 �, LL LL U U U U 3 a U D- ❑ ❑ ❑ m m m m m m m TREE # '� O O N rt�J O O M t7 O O a t7 O O W •M 0 0 m [�1 O O C� O n'J O N m O �- M M O a t`') O N to O r <D a LOCATION o°a o°6o °ao°ao°s m m °s aU m o°a m °5 °5 oTREE m o°s U m JmU J m m d d m m m m m m m m PROPERTY m an m m an m m an o d an o m m an o m m an o m an o m an 0 m an o an o an o an o o COa o Na U) a` Na` CO a. ma` CO a. 'nL tea` tea` ma` Na Z' O a cc Q 3.. 4, O Q O cd W o is N 00 NO 0 C y 0 NO N 3U� a� a o z w �r i C C O mO 6 mO dOO .5 mO yj mO m y mO m'Om N U Od d 6 m 16 m m N y4 mG m m 2 CU go m m mjmO RECOMMENDATION O m C «USUJ UJSUJSU U J Omm S U O �-' U J O �-' --J 0S ••-' UJ O J m mL m« m m�.2 m w rE m m m :G d R« m m« m m« m m r m m r m .m r m -6-m iaO6i«� § m� a �a � �$EnnEnE � � dnEnEO§aEn E 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a -o o d d d d 0 d (L Id d d Q. 111 11 r VIABILITY m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m y s s s y y s s s y s s y 1` STATUS C m U !_ C m U 'c C m U o �c 'c C U 0 is 'c C m U �c C m U o is 'c ~ m U o �c 'c C m = C m U !E - C m U 0 !E 'c C m U 0 w 'c C m U 0 w 'c C m U o �c 'c c m m Z m Z m c m Z m Z m o1 rn Z m Z m Z m Z m U) fn u1 V1 co (U) V) (n w M U) fA V7 CURRENT HEALTH a0 0 0 0 o Za 0 RATING m 0 m 0 > 0 0 C7 m 0 > 0 m 0 > 0 m o > C7 m 0 > 0 d o m o m o 0 m o dS W 1p COMMENTS d v ROOTS .N m K ROOT COLLAR Q ¢ Q o z z z z z z z z z z a x 0 m aoL Lt 01 Ol W Ol n jp Ol OI m N m O) p U U U TRUNK 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm 'm yo m 'm 'm U1 to in U1 li (� w m U) 0) H H H $ « « « « « « « t t « CROWN CONDITION d m m m m x x m x m x m x m x m x m x m x m x m x m x x FOLIAGE m N m �, N m N m N d N d Imq `m m m N `m (9 rn w in- w U w ❑ ❑ Q' ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Q ❑ C7 m E 'm i. 'm i. o E, i, o E, 0 �, m E E m E m E 0 i, E e1 SYMMETRY C7 to C'J t 1 aOi (9 to U' w (9 U) '� a�i 0 y 0 o e o o e e e o o o e m LCR m m m r r r r r m co n m w m U C West N E. 2.4 &D &D m N N N m East m 0 0 South o N `° `° io ro b1 N N v N N y E J North N ZD ;;t ;;t tO � � &D `r m N N N 10 DRIP LINE oZ. ;;r Z. N m Zo io m N `t 20 10 DBH 01 N O m O o i0 o °a m V W O? j0 o °s w i0 cb of ip o i0 of a SPECIES t U t U k U t U t U t U t U t U C U a n a a 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 w` m m m TREE # M O N m M O M 0 [7 O M •h O M N 4'7 O M MM O M VM O M EOM O M <O M O M r M O M W M O M m •?� O O �M O V N TREE LOCATION J¢ J a J a J a J¢ J a J a J a J¢ J Q J¢ J a J a uf� wo ii Ti i> wo wo wo 0. To ow PROPERTY d m a n m m n a 0 m m a n o m m n a 0 m m ao m m a n o m m a o. m m a o m m a n o m m a n o m m a n o m m n o m m a n J o c/)0. Na J CD0 ( J U) a- J o Na o U)a )o J Na J Ua a J COa- C C C C C C C = RECOMMENDATION m p m m w p m > m O m w O 0m Ui m m omcon o«wmti00m2✓esi mo �_mo 22m -OCm im m�=. `a •o a m n ,a r m m �ooc oci :«G n� Eao o.o E E o a y aE m nE a y & r VIABILITY m a m y m a m s m a m s m a m y m a m s m a m s m n o m Z-> m a m y m a m y m a m s m a m y m n m s STATUS C m K Z C O) F0 C m !E C OI cn C m o Z 2 O) U) C m 1mE C O) 0)w C m !E C W C m !c C O) tl) C m o S Z C 01 (A C U o m: Z E 0) 47 (C(pp U C 01 co C U o �c z •C O) V) C U �c OI (n C m o -E Z C m N CURRENT HEALTH Zo o 0 0 o mm O o>� o a O O 0 LLRATING m C015 O O m m" O N O ... 1` cb m6 v> COMMENTS Eom0m 0 i, t m 0 =�oaNiaU $w °> N c o N N m m uJ N z a ROOTS a < S a ROOT COLLAR z z z z z z z z z z z z N TRUNK Ol 'm N 10 N_m U m O1 OI C L m n m fm_) 'T 21 C m m d W C fA H (q N c/) U N (0 J Ol Ol $ $ $ m N A N CROWN CONDITION > m m m rn¢ m `m > _ _ = m FOLIAGE m NW N O (n ¢ cr� W m N m m m m m m U "Os m (n U`' W m m m m o m Ol m > a z < < ¢ z c� om < w SYMMETRY E � � C T ,�, C T ,�, C T � V, � T M lO E E E. m T U) m r O U > e o o e e e e e o 0 ao LCR ro m m m co n m rn m in m r m u West N N N N N N N N N N W e A w East m N N N N N N N N N m 0 � South o M o N is N 20 N v N m N y N m N co N N N GJ E J North N N N N N N N N N N N zo m DRIP LINE N N N N N N N N N N W in DBH cd rn o of N o M o M N o16 M 0;M N t a rj a a a as 5 a ; L a v SPECIES 3 o o 0 0 0 o m < d (n U) M TREE# 'M07N M010O M M O.M •M O.a O-- MO-m mo-O MO-- N TREE LOCATION J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< "�• Wit=' ii �' i�t'' ii t±' Tit'" ii t'' G�' ii �' i�t� Wit=' i��' PROPERTY nn o an o an o an o an o an o an o an 0 an 0 �n o nn o an o tea` tea` V)a` ya` (na Wa` U)a` Na` tea` �a Na` �a U M bp l-- M O ' O W 00 N O QQ1 �000 YO Q N N A A 3r.Do z Fw O > d q > O N � M •> 00 V� O .d M M O N •--� M b It O N O P4 U a) a� Y Q �m m m r� •m 3 m _ _ m C yj 0 d y m C y m C Ul m m C a] `1 C al m C aj0. m m O) RECOMMENDATION U J m m 'o 0 U m a m sue- U m 5 U m 2 S U J m m 'o U J « i m r d a"om EN r m om. j o t om.... _6 � om $ m 0m Etn $ m mm 3 3 m aE m $' aE m a �v nE m aE m aE m aE o 0 ¢ a ii 10 10 a° ii a a aD VIABILITY m m o m m m m m m m m -0z m Z m H m a y Z> s 5 s y s z> s y s STATUS < m w c of (n m o w Z '- 6 (n m E rn (n m o k Z 'c rn (n m �c o`� (n _ m K c rn w m c m (n m o w Z 'c m to m � c rn (n m w c m (n < m K c rn to CURRENT HEALTH o c .0 m o C 0 Z' 0 0 RATING p LL > u LL LL > > COMMENTS '-Ern m o vip nc voi �e ami 0 n0 Gov mrm o c •w n a'� nmnm E m 0 3 o o o m D O o a U 3 z 10 Ip � o � N •, c a` 3 0 a m20' mK v K ROOTS o a o a o � 0 IL 0 a`X m o 0 a ¢ ¢ ❑¢ ¢ ROOT COLLAR z z m o; z z z z m z z z a`m m N TRUNK m 9 a m 'm 0 'm c c n m m � o N- m" `° N m O) 'm 0 m Ol m n co❑ U U i y w U U7 0cn y Y U yams c 0 CROWN CONDITION m 0 m m 0 C3 6 0 m o� 'v rn rn " E a, FOLIAGE0 m m m m > 0 m. w. E L m m m12 Q y 2 Z 0 Q ❑ ❑ Q L Z U W u r ❑ ❑ a SYMMETRY m E. C9w � % .� E, m >, m >, ` E. ` �, ` i, 0 E, OM a`i 0U) ` i. m LCR 0 rn o m e m e m e rn e m e m e in o in 0 rn 0 v m G C West a N 6D FD o N 6D N 6D N E. N a M o M iD N m East N &D &D N N N N Z. N O South a cm zo o m E0 60v o 6D E J North V N m E. o N m N 60 N 6D N a M o M 60 N m DRIP LINE N &D N N N N m N Ln DBH M 6 CD Ln O W M N M E �z E a C E E E V SPECIES LL LL N IL LL LL aE ❑ ❑ z 3 ❑ ❑ ❑ cn 0 M TREE Mo�DN rtno�DM�Mo�Da�Mom�n •Mo�Dm Momr MomoD Momrn Moro Mores MorN N TREE LOCATION a Q 0a 9a 0¢ 0a 0¢ PROPERTY m m a n 0 m m a n o m m a n J o m m a n J o m m a n o m m a n o m m a n J o m m S a 0 m m a s 0 m m a s o m m a n J o na �a ma �a ) Na n �a Na` n(L tea` Ana` Ma` cn to en v Q In Q00 3 N O O Q O N N a3U�to y >, � E 03 a, �3C7 > A ° Yca z �b 0 �w � On 00 En Y \ en .m M M � cq M 'b In N O � O U N Y. N Y Y c C xst`p mC m pn Yi C 'nn m pn s0o«m.U'�i_ � 2 -St p im tO RECOMMENDATION a-oa-:o.aQo_o _ui ty o iy mm�2-ai o . :G10 o n a c M. E a° [� a° x a a ri VIABILITY m a m s m a m s m a m y m a m y m a m y m a m y m a m s m a m s m a m s m m y m n m s m n m s m a m y STATUS m . m '."c C m z'C m C m o'c z C O_1 m K C m K C Ol m K C m m K C m !c C m C 0_1 r U o �c Z'C Ol U o is Z'C _m N U) U) _W _m _W U) CURRENT HEALTH 0 o m Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r RATINGLn W > > c7 c� c7 c� IL IL m C t m C o= c c COMMENTS o . ao_m m '0 E 'o omE W rn tj v ROOTS r o ¢ < S ROOT COLLAR z z auk z z z z z z z z z z t ml e {p U L ml 5 U L OI L O! L OI L Ol L m C l0 U N TRUNK 'm m r 'n 'm 'n m N co ( y Z 11 N fn Y N F V) m m m T m T T m CROWN CONDITION 2m> m m m m d m ami m m m m m C c FOLIAGE m m cn W o 0 0 > a a o ' a o a W a m SYMMETRYco (0 (0 �� u� E (b `u\i °u\i o ao LCR �n o o m West N N M W W N N N N N N D D C c A N East N N F. m io eo EliD N N a N 6.� N a N o N io iD 0 4 m South b N N N im m zo W o N <D N a N ao N a N o N iD ° J �- North N N &D W W N N N N N N FD m DRIP LINE N N W EO N N N N N N v> DBH N N N N N N m N m E E EL E t LL E E E aE a a a a v SPECIES o m 3 as o 0 a:p o 0 o m m TREE# Morco mon��mo��n m 0rm-n0 --------Momocoom�•momNc�omm��omaroom�n N TREE LOCATION Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja Ja m m m m m m m m m m m m m PROPERTY m m an � o Na` m an � o tea` m m an o U)a` m m an � o U) a- m m an � o U3a m m an 0 (na` m an 0 tea` m an � o CO a` an o U)a an � o cna an � o (n'L an � o Wa` an � o Na 00 Q O N O cc as U p' U 3�0 z o w Gn tA Q G7 N _My `[7 e) v M N M w O 0 O U a� u, a� Q C C C C C C 42 m c mSmc1rmJn OUmJ w«O °m� mm mm acU wm> 0 RECOMMENDATION O3 10 m UJ«S«.. N VJ m «YOaOmjm TO «dp `mm• «Om �m` Om Sm Up J o mN 'om.E m .Som o :c. om EU) •«.tom 6 m aE m aE c.§o�c3om m a m aE c.�om m aE a = m nE 0 m nE ap ii ap a.a a i 10 VIABILITY m mco m m m m m m m m m co a m a m o 5 m a 5 Z-> 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Z> y Z s mc f Ucm S2mU o m mVc o wUm Z or Z rn rn 'c Z c or rn Z 0 'wmUc Zio Lm rn or 'wmUc Z rn rn Z 'wSTATUS rn Z 'c rn m m in m m 'm in Un 'm in m in co CURRENTHEALTH o 0 o RATING LL o o ii i ti LL cl 0 co COMMENTS m o m o m o ROOTS o $ $ o $ o IL as a`a o m o m o ROOT COLLAR m ¢ ¢ ❑Q < n m a m Z m Z Z Z Z Z Z Z o m Z o m Z m am am N TRUNK U � Qi x a U U U 5 L L L j m �cm� U) LL! m in co H m rn m `m a $ 1° m m ` rn rn rn rn O m m 0 CROWN CONDITION c O ki Lo° m Q Q FOLIAGE Q v� w m m = iE ~ y an w fQ (n vat w N tan w N an w m rn w `m m rn 0 m E2 h (¢n w a Q 0 Q Q Q Q Q m Q T SYMMETRY E cE cE cE cE E m >, �E m cE >� SEE >. �E lQq E tQl� cE CO(, N QUl QN Qy Ur N � LCR e m o m e w e r o m e co o r 0 � 0 m o m e co 1b o n m U C West N M N tr ;t r0 N M O A East N b two N ED Z. N M m 0 N South N m N m `r m N m o E J North N Eq b N zo 4 ZD zo N Eq O DRIP LINE N N t7 it m N ro ;t o N iq t� Z o DBH O :b a, N m c0 °o L6m m 7! m e� m o m e SPECIES U 3 LL (n a a a a a a ❑ Z U U C7 C7 ❑ ❑ C7 M TREE# ".rl0O r0RMOWr•M------Wm--To----to---f.MOO�aO-r----tabm- N TREE LOCATION JQ JQ JQ JQ J Q JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ mwo"0 m m m m m m m wo m W 00 .0 m "o d PROPERTY an J 2 na J o m an J o m an J o m an J o m an J o . m an J o m m an J m m an J o m an o m an ow an o m m as 0 �a (na` Na Na` U)a lb a` fna o Ana CO a. J Una` J o Ana. J (0a` Na` A 18 M QA l` M (D C.' V') 000 N O d 0 cq cn boo ce w a� o z °° w � V) ki) GJ d d N M 4d b M N m W 0 Q 0 .y U N it N 2 r° C gt ag RECOMMENDATION - m m m m m VIABILITY m s s m m STATUS c c m rn 'm in o m m y cmi c rn in gy m m m y cmi c rn m m m m 5 cmi c rn m C o S« 7 «ti ii m m- i :S 2 y�°j m�ny�n�nk m m m m m m s s s cmi m o c c c rn rn rn m n 'm O >m o m K��nES�n m o m Z. o Z 2 rn m c C 2 m c P m ,{.' s 05 «'.2 Ta S m m m m m s s o is K Z'E rn rn (n m w o Q m m s i,°c_ c rn rn w 0 a m w s c m 'w CURRENT HEALTH Z' o o '� o m 0 a�i 0 ° m'� 0 0 RATING > c� c7 LL > Q > t7 LL LL a w LL c o C6 0 COMMENTS n3 mm m v ROOTS ROOT COLLAR < S @ ¢ S S ¢ �z z � S ❑ Z z z z m m z z z z z N TRUNK o� .m rn .m rn .� .L rn c` `� 3 10 v 3 rn .« m Y`o N m a, 5 '`° rn . rn 'm (n (n fn fn J H m y LL fn m N (n CROWN CONDITION m d m m m m m m 3 m 0 m FOLIAGEm03 m rn rn 0 cN9 N Q. w m m e+ SYMMETRY m c7 (n e e e o e e o o e o e e m LCR m V West N N N N N N N N N N N C A East (V N fV N fV N (V N a N fV N N ip V O N N N N i° N N �. South South � N cV N [V N V N N N a N FD V O N N tV N h N m E J N N N r North N N N N N N N N N N N m DRIP LINE N N N N N N N ZDD N N N N �n DBH � N N 16 N N N m r 0i N tD n v a a a n ¢ a a n Q E E E a SPECIES x p o o (n z o o a z o 0 0 TREE# �n�oo�»�o�c��aNm�o�n m-odin�o�n co�omin�or�»�om�n�orn m��ocn .-��m��N N TREE LOCATION J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ m m m m m m d m m m PROPERTY m m a n a 0 m m a n a 0 m m a n o m m a n a o (nLL m a n a o (na m m a n a o (nLL` m m a s a o na` m m a n a o m a n a o a n a n a o N o a n o B n o (na (nL n(L U M OA t- M 0 NO O v, SON —0Q O N On J2UhK, cd Q C m C c C C wo C m Zo= C C_ a 0 0 8wan, do .m2 momo RECOMMENDATION m t m B y m m 5 t m 2 $ m _sEa$E a m o m sE sEt� c mn 'E E N�m �2aEm m E ° c = IL a a° I .a I ° ci J .a a VIABILITY m m n m n m m m n m n m m m m m m o m 1` STATUS C K c rn C o K Z 'c m E !c c m C o Z 'c rn C 'c rn C c rn C o Z 'c rn C �c 'c rn E �c c rn 5 •c - rn C o K Z 'c rn C o �c Z 'c a C c (D td to w V) fn V1 fn to fn (n N Lm (0 u CURRENT HEALTH o o ot..m o o 0 RATING IL IL IL IL U lL IL a COMMENTS `m �« N 6 m m m rn '* ROOTS ROOT COLLAR m m z z m zz zz zz zz z z z zz zz zz m C 16 C TRUNK io a 'o. L c/) U) co U) H co co 40 U) H 4� W OI T l0 OI i0 OI N m CROWN CONDITIONd Qi m OI m OI m m m mm L -- m � m `m m m c m � m `m Y m `m m m e c m c ¢ Q rn Q w Q N m ¢ o, m rn Q rn d m m FOLIAGE m F w w w w m w m w w m (L ° SYMMETRY m �, m �, c_E �•. cE m /) rn m E E �E cE to �E C7 �E c_E •'E E rn m LCR e In e o o o o in e u� e o o ID 0 In o In e �n e In e o e in C West N N NZ. N N N N a N iD N Z. iD m N A East O N cD N N N tD N N N a N iD N b iD m N N 0 o South o N � cD N N N iD N � N N "v N iD N F. m m N E J New N N N N N N N E. N DRIP LINE N ro N N N ro N ;;T N N v N iD N iD iD do N N DBH N Q' N n cli C6 a6 con 16 1D not to N E n t E n m U lLLL LL `n ` E m E v SPECIES Q 3 o a 5 U LL m co LL 3 IL ° a (I ° m TREE iI -.---- --.-A --— Win — —- -M .-NO Mc-N � I.M�NN I��N ('1 •:n� Na c7� NI(1 N TREE LOCATION J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ Wit' T� z v 6 t —L' PROPERTY ow an o ow an o 0. as o m m an o m m an o m m an o m m an o m m as o m m an o m m an o m m an o m m an o m m an o CO - ) 0 W 6. Na U O O — kn I O O 41 00 r N O CO cn d o, O0O ena g U 6J bOA cd �3C7 > A o z 00 �w °d 5 M j 00 Y \ v� O .d M M O N ^-' M .b U7 O N O U a� w. O Y Y d C O C O O C C C C E c0i w30 rn C >o m C m2 >ERECOMMENDATION m mm m m0mon ��E -m- fl o3V mp=; 2 ceT0mo 52 E E N r•- 0E = n m n a a4 a a a VIABILITY m m y m o z; m m s m m z> m o m Z—> m m y m y m y m y m y m y m y r STATUS U !E U o !E Z� U o� Z� U o w Zc U o! z� U w _ _ E U _ !g rn U !� = z k Z= R. m yO w Z= rn m O! cn m u) rn u) rn u) rn u) Lm u) ) CURRENT HEALTH m o o m m � 24 o o a a RATING LL a co ° ° LL O O ii > (� 3m mm 1° COMMENTS a m n a a N 03 mo vj m o m o m� m� v ROOTS c o oo`o n o ao ' 0 m 0 m S �z z z ROOT COLLAR i Z m m m m z TRUNK c� C E•m _ a �, a=iK m20' m m nm s 5 4 H U rn in m rn � N w = m c i0 m > Y m a a $ m T T C m L t0 CROWN CONDITION m d d m m m `0 1° m> m m m el FOLIAGE f/J W fn !+� m m m m E y o N m rn Q w N N r t� o o ° d o m oz °—E > a 0 0 a a w e+ SYMMETRY E c c C7 cot j N try E E E c m LCR �n M m rn m z rn rn r rn m m C1 West N M m C `° C i.i N a N iv N a N m C m East iO N io M m C 10 C iv N a N iv N a N io m $Oath N m C m C iv N a N iN N N m E J North N � m m C m C (V N a N (V N a N Bo co DRIP LINE N m O O N N N N ZN i0 DBH N M N of N V I.:o N i0 M m N N N i0 o N i7 o M W N fV E n E iC t Eco t t t a v SPECIES LL a U U LL U m ° a m m m 3 ° 3 3 a 3 z TREE# Mr Nt0 MAN r c] N M N rn Mr MO �� Mr ��a-MN M�MM M�M� M�M�[l �h� Mf0 MGM r a TREE LOCATION Ja J¢ Ja J¢ Ja J¢ Ja Ja Ja Ja J¢ J¢ m m d m m m m m m m m m m m m PROPERTY m m 0 m o m m m m o m m c oo te S on Na n o Nan a no (a m` Wa a a UM bArM O I~ — Q0 �(VO O O Q O N M U N bOA cd Da Q 3 ° z H � 4. � Vl O N O N M W00 Y \ l%] O b M M O (V M b CIO O N O P4 N U Q-1/ GJ N Y Q N C C Cm — w w m m m m C w m m C N m m C 2 W m m C N m N m C N <0 m m C N RECOMMENDATION m V 'aVOm _m0 Fm�- 'aVOm Nmm 0 o E go «-$ o `�= . o fO a ¢ ai0�a o 3 �jmN um �mjN a 2�a`� ~ a a = a .a c0 'am a° VIABILITY m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m s y s s 5 s s s s s y s s r STATUS R. K c m w c rn K 'c rn m c rn o Z'c m o Z 'EZ'c rn v, rn o� rn rn rn fn (A (n fq (n (n tq (n co (n (n (n (n CURRENT HEALTH o o o L, o 0 2' o Z' o RATING IL U. 11 11 U- j 0 IL '^ COMMENTS ROOTS m ROOT COLLAR ¢ Z 4] a O T C m 0 Q Q Q ¢ a C m 0 Z Z dS Z Z Z au'nf z z z a� (V — m c N TRUNK 0 O o N i0 U Y T m 01 m n m m S _W m L. Ol m O1 m 0) m m m W m fq a li F- n n r n rn m w n w m n c m CROWN CONDITION c `m 1O `� m m 12 m > 0 > m m 0 m d 2 m 2 m 2 m 2 0 ¢' e FOLIAGE rn f0 m Q W rn m rn 1p m rn `` m rn T m rn m m € ='ul p m ° O m c rn 10 m c m c � Q W Q Q Q Q Q Q Q .0 Ill Z Q 4 w %cE c, i. EE `� E, >,w�SYMMETRY c E. 'm E, c E, c a to C9 co U' m U' w o LCR o o r e 0 r o 1n N e w M e 1n r o o r o 0 r e 0 w o 1n w e 1n w e uj rn o m rn 0 o w C West io N io N io i.i N in N i� io N io N m N BD o N W East io N 7o N N % N ZI) &I io N io N io N b o N _N 0 ry1 South io N Z. N ao iv N io N E0 En is N io N io N E. o N v E J North Fo N in N m i, N io N io N io N io N eo o N "v w DRIP LINE N N N N N N N W N 10 DBH ad N o ctj i0vl m a6 of oi vi N © N M m r N V o a a a a U v SPECIES LL LL LL n o 0 o w 3 0 o z 0 0 3 3 (L m TREE# vw m—t .n—a w,m m m m.-0 N TREE LOCATION J Q J Q J Q J Q J Q J¢ J Q J Q J Q J Q J Q J Q J Q it wo um om w u Fm"i um .m ii Wit=' PROPERTY m m an O an O an O O an O o an O an m w an O 00 an > o an O WO an O 00 as > o m m an O m m an O n Na` ) Na` wa` tea` Na` tea` tea` Na` tea` ma` Wa` tea` tea` U Q In a cd Q Q� 4, O O 7 W en Q rrl- en — O ' O (4. 00 N O Q rO M 3Ucd > 3� o z 0 w � > cV My 0000 Y \ .o M NO =) M .d G7 LID 41 O > 0 O U N N Y m S FEam c m A. C C C C c o mo 0 o m � m o H 4 L ri�� 'm-r mm aam og mm o r ,C 0 - m RECOMMENDATION m temC o E m om:t a cbtm o0o m5 mo .m-_w5 ��"'�o � aa� m IL m a a a a a I?a VIABILITY m y m 0 ZT m m m s m Z.T m m m 5 m m s m m y m m y m m s m m s m m m m m m 5 y y ^ STATUS C 'c rn C 'c rn (A C o w Z'c a (M C K c rn tq C 'c rn <q C m o Z rn tq y c m fn C o 'c'c z rn fq C �c 'ci=cc rn N C C C �c ! K rn rn rn (0 fn tl1 w CURRENT HEALTHm m 0 0 c m m 0 0 0 � o RATING LL > C7 C7 > C9 C9 O LL O LL f0 C Y COMMENTS IL m c ROOTS a o 0 as a tO ROOT COLLAR m a m v m 0m ¢ z z z z z z ¢ z z z z m m z ; m m z z N TRUNK 10 n m Ro' '`° m K 5 � mn °� T s Y g, m 5 C C m Lm m LL Zl U N U y wH U) l0 ~ y N m m $ m CROWN CONDITION m m ❑ x d x m x m x m x m m �� m ¢ d i ¢ x ¢ a' FOLIAGE Q v� W b n N m n N d N m m m W N m m Q W m m m 01 C m Om m Q ❑ v7 ❑ ❑ C7 ❑ Q Q ¢' SYMMETRY C T �' mT i� m T C7m mT �`� 0 T C7� m T Om m E Oco mE Om m T Um C> CE m a C aD LCR y Ct West m C O N m C O O N a t7 CD N ED N fV N iD m N C m m East f0 -m m o :r 0 m iv iD cD N �Q T� .South N m C O N m C c0 O N � t7 CD N OD N N N i0 20 N '+ E J ^ North m C p N m C io O N V t7 oD N m N tV N tD ED N DRIP LINE N ;;t W N ;4- N N N ED W N DBN ^a m i� iv m N io ro m a i� C6 o io iD inv, e SPECIES t t a LL Q a LL Q aE LL a a a LL LL LL TREE# m��nNi»r�n�n�nr�na�n��n�n•r��n�cen.wri»�inmin�inrnc��mo�»�m��n�mN�n�mm�»�mv N TREE LOCATION J Q J Q J Q J Q J¢ J Q J Q J Q J Q J Q J Q J Q J Q d m m d m m m m m m m m m m .0 .0 PROPERTY m m a s O m a n m m a o. m a n m m a n b m m a n .2 a n 0 m S n J. a n - n J. a n a n a n O m o J m , ma` .0 Na` Na` ). 0 tea` Na` Na` Na` Na ma` 0- Na` ma` ma` ma` 0 C C C C O O O O m m C N m m m C N Omm L ZO O m N N N O Nm W RECOMMENDATION >N o > m o N> o m mO mw U > o OmOm r o `mo - 0 m Ey Ey m E� o=o� ` E�m EE 'mm pOCo; o m« oCm m ai 0 a 0 0 i 0 LLm«o 2c�a 0 �mNmJ 0 IL 1 IL IL a (L a pp m ca m ca m °VIABILITY m c m m m m m caZ m ca> Z m aS m aS m aS > > z ^ STATUS C m ow 'c C m o� 'c C ow 'c C m ow 'E C m y U �c C m C m C m oK r u o�c C U o�c C m o� C m Z rn in Z rn U) Z m to Z rn VJ ,roc - rn V) c rn V) c rn 'a) c rn (n Z 'c rn In Z "c rn U)) Z 'E 0 V) Z 'c rn CIDM 'c m m CURRENT HEALTH 8c `oo o .� m .� c c Z` o 0 0 RATING a p a ❑ O LL LL o o > 0 0 0 COMMENTS m Y 0-6 a.s n m, c m 0 y �m mc N 'tV � t0 C Op m O p a m ry M oQ3` o a Tmi ao m v ROOTS c ROOT COLLAR z y n N n �Z �Z m w m w z Z z z z Z TRUNK °L .Ko r K m m LNm Am 'Lrn 2 'Lrn m L w Lm rn N Ummc ( UYm U) � w N N N N N m C m CROWN CONDITION m c m m m m m m m m m m K ❑ ❑ m > m > ❑ p m > m FOLIAGEF n r 0 m m m � m n w 12 m a w a+ SYMMETRY m E U'w m T �� C T �� c m j (7 c T c T �� A T �� c �� U't/) T m E C7U) m E C7m V) m LCR o m e m e rn o e u) e a e rn o m 0 m o rn e rn e r e �n m G C West C C \ c C bo ;;T N N C C N ;T N m East C C C C W N N C C N N _N p y South C C C C 5D N N C C N N E J ^ North m C m C m C m C � � N N m m w DRIP LINE r° b r° ;T N N N ;t N o DBH o ai c� pi c� cn ai vi m 16 N a, iv o> a n n n E a O SPECIES LL 3 EL LL LL LL L) g L LL ❑ 3 m ° ° 3 ° 3 3 m 3 ° ^' TREE# mr�o �n r-��tnm�aorm��om�n�rom�r�co�raan�r In rvm —rmm—rmin—rr mrm a TREE LOCATION JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ JQ Ti 0 f PROPERTY To as 2 To an o J To an J To ao. J 2 To an J 2 To an 2 mo nn J 2 mo an J o m. an J 2 do an J o m m an J 2 m w m nn J 2 ow an J o � a- COIL (00. (no- N a N 0. (0 a N d` N a- � d` N a W a N d` O c � yy C_ N C m@ c C IA w m C yy c m O m O@ m O m m 0 0 m 0 m >> Fr o E R =o E ro at°o o = Zm m yRECOMMENDATION o 0 EE g �om 2 cci K$a IL VIABILITY m c°D o Z - m m m m c m z > m s m m y m s m m m m m s s Z m Z m my m > r m OcNrn Z.c U K uo 1 U O rn co U rn n OU Zc rn V) Vrn f �fUon fNrnq ZAFc -STATUS Om m OZk'mc ZO'w rn m mc0 K'crn N n n Vco w CURRENT HEALTH o � o 0 0 0 � � o 0 0 RATING c9 LL CD a t7 C7 LL LL O (D a ❑ COMMENTS a ROOTS o o o $ 0 N ¢ < t9 ROOT COLLAR m N < Z Z ¢ Z a m O �+ < Z < Z a Z Z Z c Z m m a`m 'a m a TRUNK m ... c o a' Y m rn '� rn O Lm wio Y o '"' c.t.. m'o J rn c u E S m m `2 o m m� 3 fn U 11 m (q fn n N 'y (n J fq N tq O rn >' rn a " >' iE a a CROWN CONDITION m ❑ m O o m m o > m > o m m ❑ ❑ a x � x m` < x < x x m' m m OI m O) m Ol C m (7 c N c FOLIAGE m T c y w t m ~ ~ om < om ¢ o ¢ o y •E 'm " >� �E >^ �E >^ .•E m >^ .'E �E �E cE�E a SYMMETRY >. >. >� >� m LCR e e n o m e m e a o m o m co a o o e e N v r �o y G t Wes m C O N N N m C tF N a N V N <O a aD m m N N C C C A O <V m O 7 N i0 O iD m m N East C O N N C N N N N N C C ❑ m m South f0 C 0 N N N C1042 a N a N iv N m a m N N C C E J r North 42 C o N � iv N m C 'v N a N iv N m m m N N C C m DRIP LINE N N N N N N N i0 DBH N °a W O N M W O N r LAY O a a a a a a a a a < t a v SPECIES o 0 o p o 0 0 0 o m 3 TREE it n�nrn��wa•in�co�c�irooN•»�m�nc��aoa�M�m�no-r�voio�h�aorco�mw m�aom m�rna.��m� N TREE LOCATION J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< J< m m d m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m o m m m m m m s o aoaoaoPROPERTY oas aoo oo co a` U)a U)a w te w Na a teU)0s ti 00 NO O 90 N M Ub P" C7 0 z 00 w v C N �My O 0 Y \ b M N M b C/) N O N O O � U N w. N Q C •�0 C �l0 `10 C •N C ,A N C � C W t0 w m D m m C u4 0 d m C N 2= �O Lam' w L` O L` N m C N m m m C N mOm m m C N m O m N m C N m m m C N m O d m m C N m O m N m N m O 0 RECOMMENDATION 0 00 �� 0 0 m m 220 •� .222 F- m� O L .28 O O O Ew t« i«romi-.r-'' o o 1 Ey o E(n o ;� EN m om-«$om.«rom.«-om«rom«$ w om«rom m�a�m (L a�m�a� �i ri i i i I 0- a is VIABILITY e m y m y m Z> � m Z z2. s s s s s y s ^ STATUS m K C O) m k ml m o c Z 'C OI m o= Z .0 m o w Z .0 m is !E m w C m k •E m !E m m is C m m E m m w C O) fA (n U 0 N Lm (N 0 fn T U) L. fq N w fn U) CURRENT HEALTH o 0 o c m o 0 0 0 o RATING IL ❑ m ❑ a o O 0 O 0 O 0 O a o 0 O �Y • m m na COMMENTS m n u E 02 m Ud`3 v ROOTS a aW ROOT COLLAR o m y N Co m z z z z z z z am (D m° m m m r TRUNK C EL C_ �m W mK mm 'm 'm '21 m rnam am U1 U1 J aOiK U aoi� U U co (n _0 D) cow N N CROWN CONDITION ami m m `m ami ami m m m m d c `m t iu ❑ = a' o co ❑ ❑ ¢' ¢' x x ¢ m ¢ m x FOLIAGEm N m OI m N m m W m m1 Or OI n ❑mm ocn a SYMMETRY • E �E cE cE m .•E c� c �E cE cE E_E � LCR o m rn o m O e N o o ao o r e r e r o co 0 v 0 w U C West 10 o a m c m ZD iD FD 50 ;;f do iv pA East � C N C � C C ZD ED N N m N N ❑ South m C o N m C C m m C iD 7D F. N eo N © iv N E J ^ North T N C C C &D FO N N ;t W N DRIP LINE N O ;T O ED Z N N ;r a. N DBX ao of YD r N io ao •- o vi N m v in ro io rl: iv .4 io v N do eo N o a � io i0 o N t t t a a a a a a a a v SPECIES 3 a�a d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TREE 17�0)N !'1 rO] c'1 M�07 ih �D) �D [7� Oar �� W W M—MOW MN00 imN O M NON LINO MMN O V n OHO N TREE LOCATION J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ J¢ m m PROPERTY m m an m m aO o m m an � o m an � o /a m m an o m m as .2 m an o m m an o m m an U o m m an oo m m -.0 m m an 0 Na` m m an 0 tea` tea` tea` ) tea` Na` tea` �a tea` �a Na` tea` Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323`d St & 32" a Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 39 of 53 ATTACHMENT 3 - GLOSSARY Terms Used in This Report, on the Tree Condition / Inventory Spreadsheet, and Their Significance In an effort to clearly present the information for each tree in a manner that facilitates the reader's ability to understand the conclusions I have drawn for each tree, I have collected the information in a spreadsheet format. This spreadsheet was developed by Gilles Consulting based upon the Tree Risk Assessment in Urban Areas and the Urban/Rural Interface course manual and the Tree Risk Assessment Form, both sponsored by the Pacific Northwest Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture, and the Hazard Tree Evaluation Form from the book, The Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas, by Matheny and Clarke. The descriptions were left brief on the spreadsheet in an effort to include as much pertinent information as possible, to make the report manageable, and to avoid boring the reader with infinite levels of detail. However, a review of these terms and descriptions will allow the reader to rapidly move through the report and understand the information. 1) PROPERTY —Whether the tree is on or off the Subject Property, or a Right -of -Way tree. 2) TREE LOCATION —Relative placement of the tree. 3) TREE # —the unique tag number of each tree. 4) SPECIES —this describes the species of each tree with both most readily accepted common name and the officially accepted scientific name. 5) DBH Diameter Breast Height. This is the standard measurement of trees taken at 4.5 feet above the average ground level of the tree base. i) Occasionally it is not practical to measure a tree at 4.5 feet above the ground. The most representative area of the trunk near 4.5 feet is then measured and noted on the spreadsheet. For instance, a tree that forks at 4.5 feet can have an unusually large swelling at that point. The measurement is taken below the swelling and noted, e.g. `28.4" at 36"'. ii) Trees with multiple stems are listed as a "clump of x," with x being the number of trunks in the clump. Measurements may be given as an average of all the trunks, or individual measurements for each trunk may be listed. (1) Every effort is made to distinguish between a single tree with multiple stems and several trees growing close together at the bases. 6) DRIP LINE —the radius, the distance from the trunk to the furthest branch tips. 7) LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE— The boundary between the area of minimum protection around a tree and the allowable site disturbance as determined by a qualified professional. Distances from the center of the trunk were derived on a case by case basis looking at the unique circumstances of each property and each tree on that property. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 40 of 53 8) % LCR—Percentage of Live Crown Ratio. The relative proportion of green crown to overall tree height. This is an important indication of a tree's health. If a tree has a high percentage of Live Crown Ratio, it is likely producing enough photosynthetic activity to support the tree. If a tree has less than 30% to 40% LCR, it can create a shortage of needed energy and can indicate poor health and vigor. 9) SYAEMETRY—is the description of the form of the canopy, i.e., the balance or overall shape of the canopy and crown. This is the place I list any major defects in the canopy shape, e.g. does the tree have all its foliage on one side or in one unusual area? Symmetry can be important if there are additional defects in the tree such as rot pockets, cracks, loose roots, weak crown, etc. Symmetry is generally categorized as Generally Symmetrical, Minor Asymmetry or Major Asymmetry: i) Gen. S�m.--Generally Symmetrical. The canopy/foliage is generally even on all sides with spacing of scaffold branches typical for the species, both vertically and radially. ii) Min. Asym.—Minor Asymmetry. The canopy/foliage has a slightly irregular shape with more weight on one side, but appears to be no problem for the tree. iii) Mai. Asym.—Major Asymmetry. The canopy/foliage has a highly irregular shape for the species with the majority of the weight on one side of the tree. This can have a significant impact on the tree's stability, health and hazard potential —especially if other defects are noted such as cracks, rot, or root defects. 10) FOLIAGEBRANCH—describes the foliage of the tree in relation to a perfect specimen of that particular species. First the branch growth and foliage density is described, and then any signs or symptoms of stress and/or disease are noted. The condition of the foliage, or the branches and buds for deciduous trees in the dormant season, are important indications of a tree's health and vigor. i) For Deciduous trees in the dormant season: (1) The structure of the deciduous tree is visible. (2) The quantity and quality of buds indicates health, and is described as good bud set, average bud set, or poor bud set. These are abbreviated in the spreadsheet as: gbs, abs, or PBS. (3) The amount of annual shoot elongation is visible and is another major indication of tree health and vigor. This is described as: a) Excellent, Good, Average, or Short Shoot Elongation. These are abbreviated in the spreadsheet as ESE, GSE, ASE, or SSE. ii) For evergrcen trees year round and deciduous trees in leaf, the color and density of the foliage indicates if the tree is healthy or stressed, or if an insect infestation, a bacterial, fungal, or viral infection is present. Foliage is categorized on a scale from: (1) Dense —extremely thick foliage, an indication of healthy vigorous growth, (2) Good —thick foliage, thicker than average for the species, Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32°1 Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 41 of 53 (3) Normal/Average—thick foliage, average for the species, an indication of healthy growth, (4) Thin or in —needles and leaves becoming less dense so that sunlight readily passes through; an indication that the tree is under serious stress that could impact the long-term survivability and safety of the tree, (5) Sparse —few leaves or needles on the twigs, an indication that the tree is under extreme stress and could indicate the future death of the tree, (6) Necrosis —the presence of dead twigs and branchlets. This is another significant indication of tree health. A few dead twigs and branches are reasonably typical in most trees of size. However, if there are dead twigs and branchlets all over a certain portion of the tree, or all over the tree, these are indications of stress or attack that can have an impact on the tree's long-term health. (7) Hangers -----a term to describe a large branch or limb that has broken off but is still hanging up in the tree. These can be particularly dangerous in adverse weather conditions. 11) CROWN CONDITION —the crown is uppermost portion of the tree, generally considered the top 10 to 20% of the canopy or that part of the canopy above the main trunk in deciduous trees and above the secondary bark in evergreen trees. i) The condition of the tree's crown is a reflection of the overall health and vigor of the entire tree. The crown is one of the first places a tree will demonstrate stress and pathogenic attack such as root rot. ii) If the Crown Condition is healthy and strong, this is a good sign. If the crown condition is weak, broken out, or shows other signs of decline, it is an indication that the tree is under stress. It is such an important indication of health and vigor that this is the first place a trained forester or arborist looks to begin the evaluation of a tree. Current research reveals that, by the time trees with root rot show significant signs of decline in the crown, fully 50% or more of the roots have already rotted away. Crown Condition can be described as: (1) Health Crown —exceptional growth for the species. (2) Average Crown ---typical for the species. (3) Weak Crown thin spindly growth with thin or sparse needles. (4) Flagging Crown --describes a tree crown that is weak and unable to grow straight up. (5) Dying Crown —describes obvious decline that is nearing death. (6) Dead Crown —the crown has died due to pathological or physical injury. The tree is considered to have significant stress and/or weakness if the crown is dead. (7) Broken out —a formerly weak crown condition that has been broken off by adverse weather conditions or other mechanical means. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323`d St & 32°d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 42 of 53 (8) Regenerated or Regenerating —formerly broken out crowns that are now growing back. Regenerating crowns may appear healthy, average, or weak and indicate current health of the tree. (9) SUM essed—a term used to describe poor condition of an entire tree or just the crown. Suppressed crowns are those that are entirely below the general level of the canopy of surrounding trees which receive no direct sunlight. They are generally in poor health and vigor. Suppressed trees are generally trees that are smaller and growing in the shade of larger trees around them. They generally have thin or sparse needles, weak or missing crowns, and are prone to insect attack as well as bacterial and fungal infections. 12) TRUNK —this is the area to note any defects that can have an impact on the tree's stability or hazard potential. Typical things noted are: i) FORKED —bifurcation of branches or trunks that often occur at a narrow angle. ii) INCLUDED BARK a pattern of development at branch or trunk junctions where bark is turned inward rather than pushed out. This can be a serious structural defect in a tree that can and often does lead to failure of one or more of the branches or trunks, especially during severe, adverse weather conditions. iii) EPICORMIC GROWTH —this is generally seen as dense thick growth near the trunk of a tree. Although this looks like a healthy condition, it is, in fact the opposite. Trees with Epicormic Growth have used their reserve stores of energy in a last ditch effort to produce enough additional photosynthetic surface area to produce more sugars, starches and carbohydrates to support the continued growth of the tree. Generally speaking, when conifers in the Pacific Northwest exhibit heavy amounts of Epicormic Growth, they are not producing enough food to support their current mass and are already in serious decline. iv) INTERNAL STRUCTURAL WEAKNESS —a physical characteristic of the tree trunk, such as a kink, crack, rot pocket, or rot column that predisposes the tree trunk to failure at the point of greatest weakness. v) BOWED —a gradual curve of the trunk. This can indicate an Internal Structural Weakness or an overall weak tree. It can also indicate slow movement of soils or historic damage of the tree that has been corrected by the curved growth. vi) KINKED —a sharp angle in the tree trunk that indicates that the normal growth pattern is disrupted. Generally this means that the internal fibers and annual rings are weaker than straight trunks and prone to failure, especially in adverse weather conditions. vii)GROUND FLOWER —an area of deformed bark near the base of a tree trunk that indicates long-term root rot. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32°d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 43 of 53 13) ROOT COLLAR —this is the area where the trunk enters the soil and the buttress roots flare out away from the trunk into the soil. It is here that signs of rot, decay, insect infestation, or fungal or bacterial infection are noted. NAD stands for No Apparent Defects. 14) ROOTS —any abnormalities such as girdling roots, roots that wrap around the tree itself that strangle the cambium layer and kill the tree, are noted here. 15) COMMENTS this is the area to note any additional information that would not fit in the previous boxes or attributes about the tree that have bearing on the health and structure of the tree. 16) CURRENT HEALTH RATING —A description of the tree's general health ranging from dead, dying, poor, senescent, suppressed, fair, good, very good, to excellent. 17) STATUS —Based upon the 1994 Federal Way Code, does the tree qualify as Significant or Non -Significant. 18) VIABILITY —Based upon the Current Health Rating and the structural condition of the tree, is it healthy enough to consider retention or not. Is it Viable or Non -Viable? 19) RECOMAMNDATION— this is an estimate of whether or not the tree is of sufficient health, vigor, and structure that it is worth retaining. Specific recommendations for each tree are included in this column. They may include anything from pruning dead wood, mulching, aerating, injecting tree -based fertilizer into the root system, shortening into a habitat tree or wildlife snag, or to completely removing the tree. i) Potential to retain with tree protection measures: means that the tree appears to have the internal resources, the health and vigor, structural stability, and the wind firmness to be able to withstand the stresses of construction if development requirements and construction requirements allow. ii) Remove for Safety: means that the tree has a high potential to fail and cause either personal injury or property damage —in other words the tree has been declared a hazard tree and should be dealt with prior to the next large storm. NOTE: TREES WITH THE SAME DESCRIPTION AND DIFFERENT RATINGS: Two trees may have the same descriptions in the matrix boxes, one may be marked "Significant," while another may be marked "Non -Significant." The difference is in the degree of the description, i.e., "early necrosis" versus "advanced necrosis" for instance. Another example is "center rot" or `base rot". In a Western Red Cedar tree, the presence of low or even moderate rot is not significant and does not diminish the strength of the tree. However, low levels of rot in the base of a Douglas Fir tree, in an area known to have virulent pathogens present, is highly significant and predisposes that tree to windthrow. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32°d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 44 of 53 ATTACHMENT 4 - TREE PROTECTION MEASURES In order for trees to survive the stresses placed upon them in the construction process, tree protection must be planned in advance of equipment arrival on site. If tree protection is not planned integral with the design and layout of the project, the trees will suffer needlessly and will possibly die. With proper preparation, often costing little, or nothing extra to the project budget, trees can survive and thrive after construction. This is critical for tree survival because damage prevention is the single most effective treatment for trees on construction sites. Once trees are damaged, the treatment options available are limited. The following minimum Tree Protection Measures are included on three separate sheets so that they can be copied and introduced into all relevant documents such as site plans, permit applications and conditions of approval, and bid documents so that everyone involved is aware of the requirements. These Tree Protection Measures are intended to be generic in nature. They will need to be adjusted to the specific circumstances of your site that takes into account the location of improvements and the locations of the trees. Please note, as noted in FWCC Section 22-1568(c)(6), "Significant Trees, " the driplines were used as the basis for the Tree Protection Zones. However, two exceptions were made: • For Non -Viable trees, it was assumed that they will be removed as part of the clearing and grading process. Therefore, they were given a Limits -of -Disturbance of "n/a, " meaning not applicable. ■ Trees that are located near a property line the Limits -of -Disturbance was given to be from the tree to that property line. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323`d St & 32111 Ave S, Federal Way, WA. 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 45 of 53 TREE PROTECTION MEASURES 1. Tree Protection Fencing: a. Tree Protection Fences will need to be placed around each tree or group of trees to be retained. i. Tree Protection Fences are to be placed according to the Limits of Disturbance recommendations in Column 8 of Attachment 2, Tree Inventory/Condition Spreadsheet for each tree or group of trees to be saved. ii. The area inside the fences is the Tree Protection Zone. iii. The area outside the fences is the work zone or the construction zone. iv. Tree Protection Fences must be inspected prior to the beginning of any demolition or construction work activities. v. Nothing must be parked or stored within the Tree Protection Fences —no equipment, vehicles, soil, debris, or construction supplies of any sorts. b. Signs: i. The Tree Protection Fences need to be clearly marked with the following or similar text in four inch or larger letters: "TREE PROTECTION FENCE DO NOT ENTER THIS AREA DO NOT PARK OR STORE MATERIALS WITHIN THE PROTECTION AREA Any questions or concerns contact the Site Superintendent (Name, Cell Phone #, & Email Address to be determined when the contract is executed.)" 2. Cement Trucks: a. Cement trucks must not be allowed to deposit waste or wash out materials from their trucks within the Tree Protection Fences. 3. Canopy Pruning: a. The canopies of some of the retained trees may need to be properly pruned to allow building and construction clearance. b. Any pruning must be done by an International Society of Arboriculture, (ISA) Certified Arborist using current industry standard pruning techniques. (ANSI A300 Pruning Standards and ANSI Z131.1 Safety Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32na Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 46 of 53 Standards as well as all OSHA, WISHA, and local standards must be followed.) c. The pruning must be done from a lift truck to allow tip pruning and he smallest cuts possible or be done by a Certified Arborist using clean climbing techniques. Spikes, or gaffs, are not allowed. d. Plant debris can be chipped and utilized on site for the mulch under the trees. 5. Excavation: a. When excavation occurs near trees that are scheduled for retention, the following procedure must be followed to protect the long term survivability of the tree: b. An International Society of Arboriculture, (ISA) Certified Arborist must be working with all equipment operators. i. The Certified Arborist should be outfitted with a shovel, hand pruners, a pair of loppers, a handsaw, and a power saw (a "sawsall" is recommended). c. The Hoe: i. The hoe used at first must be a small landscape sized hoe with a thumb attachment. ii. The hoe must be placed to gently comb the soil away from the trunk using the depth of the tines as the limits of each pass. iii. When any roots of one inch diameter or greater, of the tree to be retained, is exposed, the Certified Arborist or assistant will: 1. Using hand tools, expose the root. 2. And, properly prune the root using the most appropriate sharp and clean tool from the list above. iv. This excavation procedure shall continue until Certified Arborist determines that the excavation is deep enough that no more significant roots will likely be exposed or the site superintendent confirms that the depth is adequate for the needs. d. A hoe can then continue the needed excavation either down to the required depth for the work being done, or further away if needed. 6. Putting Utilities Under the Root Zone: a. If it is necessary to place utilities within the dripline, it must be accomplished with trenchless technology such as boring under the root systems of trees (and other vegetation). This work shall be done under the supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist. b. This is to be accomplished by excavating a limited trench or pit on each side of the critical root zone of the tree and then hand digging or pushing the pipe through the soil under the tree. The closest pit walls shall be a Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32nd Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 47 of 53 minimum of 7 feet from the center of the tree and shall be sufficient depth to lay the pipe at the grade as shown on the plan and profile. c. Tunneling under the roots of trees shall be done under the supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist in an open trench by carefully excavating and hand digging around areas where large roots are exposed. No roots 1 inch in diameter or larger shall be cut. d. The contractor shall verify the vertical and horizontal location of existing utilities to avoid conflicts and maintain minimum clearances; adjustment shall be made to the grade of the new utility as required. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32" d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 48 of 53 Significant Existing Tree Continuous chain link Fencing Post @ Max 10' O.C. Install as shown on plans at dripline of tree(s) Six-foot high temporary chain link fence shall be placed as shown on plans. Fence shall com- pletely encircle tree(s). Install fence posts using pier blocks only. Avoid driving posts or stakes into major roots. Make a clean straight cut to remove damaged portion of root for all roots over 1" in diameter damaged during construction. Alf exposed roots shall be temporarily covered with damp burlap and covered with soils the same day, if possible, to prevent drying. If not possible, burlap must be kept moist at all times. Work with the protection fencing shall be done manually. No stockpiling of materials, soil, de- bris, vehicle traffic, or storage of equipment or machinery shall be allowed within the limit of the fencing. Cement trucks must not be allowed to deposit waste or wash out materials from their trucks within the Tree Protection Fences. The area within the Tree Protection Fencing must be covered with wood chips, hog fuel, or similar materials to a depth of 8 to 10 inches. The materials should be placed prior to be- ginning construction and remain until the Tree Protection Fencing is taken down. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323`d St & 32nd Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 49 of 53 ATTACHMENT 5 - HABITAT TREE, NURSE LOG, BRUSH PILE CREATION AND BENEFITS There are occasions where hazardous trees need not be completely removed. Shortening is the preferred method in these types of areas rather than complete removal. Standing dead trees, also known as "vertical structure " in forest ecology terms, provide important wildlife habitat. Recent studies at the University of Washington have shown that the third most significant reason for the decline of songbirds in the Puget Sound region is the lack of standing dead trees, nurse logs, and brush piles. (The primary reason for the decline of desirable wildlife is loss of habitat. The second reason is predation by dogs, cats, Grey Squirrels, and Opossums.) These studies reveal that as many as 54% of desirable urban wildlife utilize standing dead trees, nurse logs and brush piles on the ground in one or more important life cycle. For instance, Black Capped Chickadees must excavate a new cavity every spring in order to successfully mate and produce a brood of off spring. The opportunity exists here to remove the dangerous portions of these trees and leave the snags standing for wildlife. You can also place the upper trunk sections carefully on the ground as nurse logs. The logs, if in contact with the ground, soak up moisture and release it slowly throughout the summer. This supports plants and animals in the immediate area. Brush piles strategically placed for birds and mammals to use as safe areas also have important wildlife benefits. These two measures have the added benefit of reducing the cost because a tree service does not need to do as much clean up or removal. The tree service selected can spend a few extra minutes on the top of each snag to make the cut look like it was snapped off in the wind — jagged and irregular. This enhances the aesthetic appeal of the tree. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32" d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 50 of 53 VALUE OF BRUSH PILES In general, the concept of shelter is important to urban wildlife. In his book, Landscaping for Wildlife in the Pacific Northwest, Wildlife Biologist Russell Link writes, "Shelter, (also called cover) is a place to raise young, hide from predators, and avoid the heat, cold, and wind. Shelter also provides a place to feed, play, and rest safely. The quality of shelter is particularly important for young animals in a nest. Unlike an animal that can flee when a predator approaches, young birds or small mammals must rely entirely upon the cover and the camouflage of the nest itself." Different birds and mammals will use different parts of the brush pile as Table 1 Wildlife that use and average -size brush pile from page 123 of Mr. Link's book notes: TABLE 1. WILDLIFE THAT USE AN AVERAGE --SIZE BRUSH PILE Birds That Will Use the Inside of the Brush Pile: Birds That Will Use the Outside of the Brush Pile: Mammals That W ill Use the Inside of the Brush Pile: Reptiles and Amphibians That Will Use the Base of the Brush Pile: Bushtits Grouse Chipmunks Alligator Lizards Chickadees Hummingbirds Cottontail Rabbits Salamanders Dark -eyed Juncos Jays Fox Snakes Flycatchers Pheasants Ground Squirrels Toads Golden -crowned Sparrows Robins Mice Turtles Grouse Song Sparrows Rabbits Pheasants Towhees Shrews Quail Warblers Skunks Song Sparrows White -Crowned Sparrows Voles Thrushes Woodpeckers Weasels Towhees Woodrats White -Crowned Sparrows Wrens For instance, insects will be attracted to the inside of brush piles that will become food or other animals. "The inside of the pile can also protect wildlife from sun, rain, and predators. During strong winds, birds that would ordinarily use an evergreen tree for evening shelter may instead use a brush pile located on the ground out of the wind. Far into a pile, mammals and some birds find nesting cover in the tight network of strong twigs. The outside, where the sticks protrude from the pile, provides places for birds to perch and sign, preen, and catch insects. If the base of the pile contains large limbs or logs, salamanders, snakes, and lizards may hibernate there. Ants, worms, beetles, and other insects will life and feed in the rich soil beneath a pile. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 3231d St & 32" d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 51 of 53 When snow covers a brush pile, a complex array of snow free spaces and runways provides important habitat for protection and foraging by small mammals." From pages 122 & 123, Landscaping for Wildlife in the Pacific Northwest by Russell Link. Brush piles can be simple hand thrown piles of bio-debris and rocks or they can be large designed piles. A large brush pile from many trees piled together. This one is older with the foliage all fallen from the branches and twigs. But, it can provide cover for years. 1 — DRAIN TILE DRAIN TILE DRAIN TILE Cl An example of a simple Christmas tree brush pile. A schematic design for three more complex brush piles. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32" d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 52 of 53 ATTACHMENT 6 - BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Dirr, Michael A. Manual of Woody Landscape Plants, Their Identification, Ornamental Characteristics, Culture, Propagation, and Uses. Champaign: Stipes Publishing Company, 1990. 2. Dunster, Dr. Julian A., R.P.F., M.C.I.P. Documenting Evidence, Practical Guidance for Arborists, First Choice Books, Victoria, BC, Canada. 2014. 3. Eric Allen, et al. Common Tree Diseases of British Columbia. Victoria: Canadian Forest Service, 1996. 4. Goheen, Ellen Michaels and Elizabeth A Willhite, Field Guide to the Common Diseases and Insect Pests of Oregon and Washington Conifers, R6 NR-FID-PR- 01-06.2006. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. 5. Harris, Richard W, James Clark, and Nelda Matheny. Arboriculture, Integrated Management of Landscape Trees, Shrubs, and Vines. 4dz ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2004. 6. Johnson, Warren T. and Lyon, Howard H. Insects That Feed on Trees and Shrubs. Ithaca: Comstock Publishing Associates, 1991. 7. Link, Russell, Landscaping for Wildlife in the Pacific Northwest, The University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 1999. 8. Matheny, Nelda P. and Clark, James R. Evaluation of Hazard Trees. 2nd ed. Savoy: The International Society of Arboriculture Press, 1994. 9. Matheny, Nelda P. and Clark, James R. Trees & Development, A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees During Land Development. Savoy: The International Society of Arboriculture Press, 1998. 10. Mathews, Daniel. Cascade -- Olympic Natural History. Portland, Oregon: Raven Editions with the Portland Audubon Society, 1992. 11. Mattheck, Claus and Breloer, Helge. The Body Language of Trees, A Handbook for Failure Analysis. London: HMSO, 1994. Evaluation of Trees at DaVita Lots A — C At the Intersection of S 323rd St & 32" d Ave S, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gilles Consulting Re -Revised 10/30/18, Revised 5/14/18, November 20, 2017 Page 53 of 53 12. Pacific Northwest Chapter-ISA. Tree Risk Assessment in Urban Areas and the Urban/Rural Interface. Course Manual. Release 1.5. PNW-ISA: Silverton, Oregon, 2011. 13. Petrides, George A. and Wehr, Janet. A Field Guide to Eastern Trees, Eastern United States and Canada including the Midwest. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1998. 14. Scharpf, Robert F. Diseases of Pacific Coast Conifers. Albany, California: USDA Forest Service, Agriculture Handbook 521, rev. June 1993. 15. Schuler, Stanley, et al. Guide to Trees. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1977. 16. Sinclair, Wayne A., Lyon, Howard H., and Johnson, Warren T. Diseases of Trees and Shrubs. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1987. 17. Smiley, E. Thomas, Nelda Matheny, and Sharon Lilly, Tree Risk Assessment Best Management Practices, ANSI A300 Part 9: Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Management —Standard Practices (Tree Risk Assessment a. Tree Structure Assessment). The International Society of Arboriculture Press. Champaign. IL. 2011. 18. Watson, Gary W., and Neely, Dan, eds. Trees & Building Sites. Savoy: The International Society of Arboriculture Press, 1995.