Loading...
07-106874 (2)_OGDEN &� HY A . LACE r l_ l_ � ,\ r l V R N L 1 S \ I L A NV October 10. 2008 Carol A. NIcNeilly, CN1C City Clerk City of Federal Wiv P. O. Box 9718 Federal Way OVA 98063-9718 f 7JU N. Kai' Richards Legal Assistant 206.447.2231 krichards@onm-larr'.con? Re: Decision for Mirror Lake Highland Cottages Preliminary Plat, 07-106874-00-SU Dear Carol: At the request of Phil Olbrechts, enclosed is the executed original of the above -referenced document_ as \\'ell as a Declaration of Service by Mail_ 1-ery truly yours. OGDEN MURPHY WALLACE, P_L.L_C. N_ Kay Richards, Legal Assistant to Phil Olbrechts /n kr EnclOSur"eS j I'.\l1?U7 �')b I )1 )l � I • I iU� I 'IUUIil 11 lr j CITY OF Federal Way DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY MAIL Mirror Lake Highland Cottages Prelinunary Plat - 07-106874-00-SU I, N. Kay Richards, declare and state as follows: 1. I am a resident of the State of Washington and over the age of eighteen years. I am the Legal Assistant to the Hearing Examiner in this action. 2. On October 10, 2008, 1 mailed an executed copy via First Class U.S. Mail of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order in this matter to the following parties: William McCaffrey The WJM Studio 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116 Federal Way, WA 98023 Eden Toner 305 SW 313th Federal Way, WA 98023 Carl Hansen 30847 - 6th Pl. SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Simon Garcia 621 SW 312th Federal Way, WA 98023 Barbara Hartloff 31434 - 7th Pl. SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Pat Raine 31432 - 7th Pl. SW Federal Way, WA 98023 IP.A0707797 DOCA/13041 150015%, i James Knannlein 31418- 7th Pl.SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Duncan BIanchard 31460 - 7th Pl. SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Marylyn Gates 31604 7th P1. SW Federal Way, WA 98023 William J. Murphy 31315 2nd Avenue SW Federal Way, WA 98023 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct. da ! ate and Place �/ N. Kay Rich rds 2 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner RE: Bill McCaffrey, WJM Studios 07-106874-00-SU FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND RECOMMENDATION INTRODUCTION The applicant requests approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide 1.85 acres into 16 single- family cottage -housing units. The Examiner recommends approval subject to conditions recommended by staff. ORAL TESTIMONY Deb Barker, Federal Way Staff. Ms. Barker presented an overview of the staff report on behalf of the City. Her testimony, other than her presentation of the staff report, was in response to the public concerns raised during the hearing. First, she addressed the concern of the residents that too many trees were being removed. She noted that the applicant's plan actually exceeded the City's requirements regarding replacement of removed trees. She noted that the project exceeded the open space requirements stated in the Code, which was also a concern for many residents. Finally, she reassured the public that although there were concerns raised regarding the grading proposed for the site, there were further permits that still had to be applied for and examined by Cit_v departments before construction could begin. Bill McCaffrey, applicant. Mr. McCaffrey presented the history and background of the project. Specifically, he described the competitive process to be granted the cottage housing demonstration project. He noted that it was his proposition to create the development as a Low Impact Development (LID). In response to community concerns, he stated that he has not been misleading about his intentions with the project, and that the public has always been presented with the 16-unit plan, and not with the 12-unit plan as many residents contend. Also he disagreed with the statements made regarding the experimental nature of rain gardens proposed for the site. He testified that they were not experimental. They are currently in use in other developments in the City, and are intended to capture water at the source of the runoff and prevent damage to the lake. Rain gardens, he noted, are very good at capturing and controlling the flow of contaminants. Finally, he stated that he followed the recommendations of a hired arborist in order to save important trees on the property. Carl Hansen, resident. Mr. Hansen voiced few concerns regarding the project itself, and about the ingress and egress issues on 6`h Place. He wanted to make sure that the project and plat maps correctly stated the name of the road, as it appeared to be misnamed on the current mapping. { B FP707805. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/jl Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. I Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation i Simon Garcia, III, resident. Mr. Garcia also stated concerns regarding the main road, and the problem of runoff during heavy rains causing cars to hydroplane on the road. In addition he stated that stormwater runoff from the road often resulted in overflow onto his property down the road, and he hopes that such problems will be addressed in the planning and construction during the proposed widening of the road. Marilyn Gates, resident. Mrs. Gates first stated her concerns regarding the disruption of animals in the area, including coyotes, raccoons, and skunks, that due to the project would likely end up in her backyard. In addition, she was concerned about the ability of the lake to handle any further runoff, as it already submerges her property during the heavy rainfall of the winter months. Finally, she stated that she disagrees with the piecemeal development that the City is allowing around the lake, and that it is the cause of some of the major problems with the lake. David Toner, resident. Mr_ Toner first raised his concern regarding the lack of notice provided to him as a property owner with a partial ownership interest in the lake. Although his property is not within 300 feet of the project property, the lake is, and as a partial owner of the lake he believed he, along with all other partial owners, ought to have been notified regarding the SEPA determination process. His problem was that due to lack of notice, the property owners around the lake, who will be most affected by any harm to the lake, were unable to have a voice in the determination process. He also contends that the project needs an Enviromnental Impact Statement, and that because he did not receive notice he was unable to voice this concern to the City. In addition, he testified that he believed this project posed a great economic risk to the City, and that the adverse affects that will likely result from mass grading, removal of trees, and harm to the lake, are reason enough for this proposal to be denied. Richard Scott, resident. Mr. Scott also addressed the issue of lack of notice to those residents around the lake who are not within 300 feet of the subject property, but have partial ownership of the lake. In addition he opposed the proposed mass grading, and the removal of nearly all of the large trees on the property, as they are not only crucial to the geological integrity of the lake, but also the aesthetic quality. Bob Roper, resident. Mr. Roper has been monitoring the lake for over 12 years, from 1993 through 2005, and is concerned by the proposal because of the possible infiltration and flow into the lake that will occur. He lives on the lake, chairs the Land Use Committee of the Mirror Lake Residents Association, served on the Board of Directors for the Washington State Lake Protection Association, and is a chemical engineer. He is specifically concerned that the King County stormwater manual techniques are insufficient to prevent harm to the lake, especially in regards to the inadequacies of the proposed rain gardens for controlling stormwater runoff into the take. He submitted a letter into the record addressing these issues in great detail. He also stated concern regarding the cottage housing on the subject location because of its impact on the lake, I BFP707808.DOC; I / 13041.150015/) Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation and because it would allow double the density of the surrounding zoning districts. Finally, he proposed conditions to the approval of the plat if approved: reducing the housing to 12 units, reserving the south side of the property for water retention, providing for City maintenance of the ponds for the project, and a bond for remediation of future water problems. Eden Toner, resident. Mr. Toner also addressed the lack of notice received as a property owner in the area, like those that testified before him. He felt as though he was essentially excluded from the process. He also pointed out an easement that would allow lake access to 5 of the cottage homes. This would create problems for the property owners that own the lake and who are responsible for its maintenance, because the cottage home owners owe no duty to protect the lake. In addition, he disagreed with the proposal to remove all of the trees. Mr. Toner also testified that he felt as though the applicant had deceived the neighbors throughout this process, and that the applicant only went through the necessary motions in order to have this project approved_ Finally, he proposed conditions for the possible approval of the project: addition of retention ponds, retention of more trees on the property, fewer number of proposed units, and phased grading. Patricia Raine, resident. Ms. Raine testified mainly only to the wildlife problem that is likely to be created from the clearing of the subject property. Specifically, her concern regarded the increase in rats that come onto her property and into her house. James Knannlein, resident_ Mr. Knannlein testified that the quality of the lake has gone down as a result of other projects in the vicinity, and that it will continue to be adversely impacted if this project is approved. In addition he pointed out that there are significant important wildlife in the area, specifically osprey and eagles, and the impact on these animals habitats needs to be addressed in an Environmental Impact Statement prior to any further action on the project. Duncan Blanchard, resident. Mr. Blanchard testified primarily to his concerns regarding water retention on the subject property and the overflow of the lake that is likely to occur upon clearing the property and increasing impervious surfaces. He stated that he has installed more retention devices on his property for a single home than what is proposed for 16 homes. Barbara Hartloff, resident. Ms. Hartloff was primarily concerned with the deterioration of the quality of the lake, how overflow damages the properties, and how even minimal runoff makes a big impact on the lake, and by extension, the property owners. In addition she pointed out that the property owners on the lake were the ones responsible for its upkeep, that there is no City involvement or funds involved, and that this project will impact each of those property owners' interests_ She also stated her belief that an untested idea like the rain garden is simply not enough to prevent harm to the lake. William Murphy, resident. { BFP707808. DOC;1 / 1304 I.150015! ) Preliminary Plat RecornmendatI011 p_ 3 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation } Mr. Murphy has been involved in trying to clean the lake up for the past thirty years, and believes they have made progress, but that this project will be detrimental to any gain that has been made. Fish have been added to the lake, which have brought eagles and osprey to the area, but harm to the lake and clearing of the property will negatively impact that relationship. In regards to the City, he believes that they have upheld the Code, and are not protecting the residents, the property, or the environment. Additionally, he believes that the applicant has been deceptive in what he has presented to the community. Finally, he stated that even if the Hearing Examiner cannot hear a SEPA appeal, he is able to deny the proposal as it currently stands. Ann Dower, Federal Way Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer_ Ms. Dower currently works in the City Public Works Department, and has been there for 10 years, she is not a P.E., but has many years of experience working at that level. Ms. Dower specifically addressed the issue of stormwater for the project. She testified that the applicant has provided sufficient geotechnical reports and infiltration tests for the water situation, and that King County and the State Department of Ecology have advocated for this type of infiltration system in developments. She, and the rest of City staff, believes that the proposed system of several rain gardens, pervious pavement, infiltration gallery below the pavement, current soil conditions, and retention trenches will be a successful management system for the project. In response to a question from the Examiner regarding the longevity of this type of system, she is confident that the systems will work for this site, and that they will take care of the 100-year storm and beyond, as well as cover level 3 flow control and phosphorous flow into the lake. Also, she pointed out that infiltration systems in general, the category that rain gardens fall into, are the best method for controlling and filtering phosphorous. In addition, she stated that the development process is not finished, and that she and her department will continue to work with the applicant to further perfect the system. In response to Examiners question regarding monitoring of the system, she did state that monitoring issues have not been addressed at this stage, although she would be open to monitoring conditions, but that bonding will be required, and is also a proposed condition in the staff report. In addition, she said that because of the available open space planned for on the site, it would be possible to move the rain gardens or enlarge them if some type of failure does occur; however she does not see this as a likely occurrence. When asked by the Examiner about the water quality of the lake, she stated that there is a Public Works Department study from 2005 that indicates no trend towards degradation of the Mirror Lake water quality, and that no degradation is foreseen as a result of this project. In response to Mr. Garcia's concerns, Ms. Dower stated that the design standards require that water be captured and treated, that the design does not impact neighboring properties with erosion problems, and that if the impacts on Mr. Garcia's property can be addressed in this project, that will be done "during future planning with the applicant. Finally, in response to Mr. Roper's letter, she stated that she generally disagrees with its content, and that many departments within the City have reviewed setbacks proposed for the project. Some of his concerns are also specifically addressed in Exhibit H-3, and that other aspects of the staff report also address many of his, and other resident's, concerns. EXHIBITS See list of exhibits at p. 19 of the September 19, 2008, staff report prepared by Deb Barker. In addition, the following exhibits were presented and entered into the record during public hearing: BFP707808.DOC;1 / 13041 150015/; Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 4 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation Y: Letter from David Toner Z: Letter from Bob Roper Z-1: Letter from Eden Toner Z-2: Letter from Marla Ledin Z-3: Email from Marla Ledin FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: Applicant. The applicant is Bill McCaffrey of WJM Studios. 2. Hearin . The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the application at 2:00 p.m. at Federal Way City Hall on September 26, 2008. Substantive: 3. Site/Proposal Description. The applicant proposes to subdivide an approximate 1.85 acre parcel of land into 16-lots for establishment of single-family cottage housing units. The site, which consists of five parcels for a total of 1.85 acres, is a long and narrow parcel, 109 feet wide by 716 feet deep, with frontage onto SW 312`I' Street and 61h Place SW. A small house on the southernmost portion will be removed with plat development; the rest of the site is vacant. A 7- foot wide portion of the property extends northward approximately 140 feet, which has been referred to as the panhandle on the site. The site is located in the central portion of the City, north of SW 3121h Street and east of 6th Place SW. The site is accessed from 6th Place SW off of SW 312°i Street. The subject site has a land area of 80,598 square feet. The project was submitted as a potential cottage housing project in January of 2007, in order to be selected to advance the formal development of the Cottage Housing demonstration project. In this process, it was established that 8 traditional single-family homes could be situated on the parcels. The original cottage estimate was for 14 units, but upon purchasing additional land, the City approved the modification to allow for 16 units. As the development of the site will create additional runoff from new impervious surfaces such as streets, driveways, and rooftops, the plan proposes the use of pervious pavement systems, shallow infiltration basins and trenches, rain gardens and other techniques to be implemented in order to prevent further runoff impacts. In addition, the property, based on a Forestry evaluation, the site contains two forest cover types; a fully stocked stand of second growth timber in the northern portion of the site, with conditions ranging from very poor to good, and the area around the existing house consists of scattered individual or clusters of evergreen trees, and the understory is grass and weeks, with conditions ranging from very poor to very good. There are also 63 significant trees located on the subject site, of which the applicant has proposed removing all of them in addition to removal of most of the other vegetation on the site. Tree replacement has been proposed with the installation of 28 evergreen trees ten feet in height at the time of planting, and further vegetation replanting. Also on the site are deer and songbirds, as well as nuisance species such as skunks, raccoons, feral cats, and rodents. t13FP707808.D0C; 1/ 13041.150015/) Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 5 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation 4. Characteristics of the Area. The property is situated in the central portion of the City in an already developed single-family residential area. The site is generally surrounded by residential properties developed with single-family residences on lots ranging from 6,969 square feet to 20,150 square feet in size. The 18-acre church property to the east contains a sanctuary with daycare facility, a community building, a school building, and several small rental cottages throughout the large site. Lots sought of the subject site front onto Mirror Lake, and lots west of the site front onto 6th Place SW, which is a private easement roadway. Mirror Lake is a regulated lake as defined under Federal Way Code, and is located approximately 160 feet south of the subject site. SW 312`11 Street and a row of developed residential lots separate the proposed cottage development from the lake. However, one of the underlying lots of the project is the beneficiary of a ten -foot -wide easement to Mirror Lake. Additionally, the zoning of the surrounding area is the same as the subject property, RS 7.2, Single -Family - High Density. 5. Adverse Impacts. The surrounding community has expressed several concerns about the impacts of the project. Staff have thoroughly addressed all of those issues in their report and testimony. Infrastructure issues are addressed in more detail in Finding Fact No. 6. Other impacts are addressed below: A. Easement. Some community members expressed concern about the overuse of an easement that allows lake access to a portion of the subject property. It is believed that the drafters of the access easement never intended it to allow access to multiple users, as would occur if this project is approved. The scope of the easement is a private issue between the future owners of the subject property and those others who have rights to Mirror Lake. The issue is not germane to this permit application. B. Water Quality. The adequacy of the proposed stormwater detention facility is addressed under Finding of Fact No. 6 below in regard to infrastructure. Water quality is addressed here as a separate environmental impact. Several citizens, most notably Bob Roper, expressed concern over impacts on water quality. Mr. Roper, a chemical engineer with extensive experience in monitoring water quality in Mirror Lake, testified that the rain gardens proposed by the applicant are experimental and it is unclear whether they will adequately protect Mirror Lake from water quality problems. Ann Dower, from the Public Work's department, has ten years of experience in assessing the adequacy of stormwater systems. She noted that a 2005 study of Mirror Lake water quality found no trend towards degradation and that she and others in Public Works who have assessed the project see no threat to water quality from the proposed project. Ms. Dower stated that the storiwater system proposed by the applicant is actually the best suited of the types available for preventing phosphorous contamination of the lake. She also noted that the system has been subjected to extensive geotechnical analysis. Given the expertise and testimony of staff and the thorough analysis conducted for the design of the stromwater system, the Examiner finds that the system is adequately designed to prevent any material water quality degradation of Mirror Lake. Mr. Roper noted that the King County Stormwater Drainage Manual, applicable to this development, does not have compulsory requirements for inspections of system performance or correction of deficiencies. Mr. Roper points out that the Manual authorizes the review authority to impose additional conditions based upon site specific conditions. In her testimony Ms. Dower stated that she was open to conditions that required monitoring. The Examiner will condition the { D FP 707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/ Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 6 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation Project to include a monitoring plan and to allow the City to correct deficiencies if they are not timely corrected by the property owners. These obligations will be recorded upon the property. This condition is intended to address both water quality control and water flow. C. Tree Retention. All trees will be removed from the property, but the applicant will replant 28 evergreen ten or more feet taller. Staff have found this to be consistent with the City's tree regulations and project opponents have not identified any code provision that is violated by the clearing of the existing trees_ Further, there is nothing in the record to suggest anything unique about the trees that would: warrant protection beyond that required by Federal Way regulations. For these reasons, there is no justification to require any additional tree mitigation. D. Wildlife. Concerns were raised about native wildlife, such as deer, songbirds, skunks, raccoons, feral cats, and rodents. None of these species are designated as threatened or endangered under federal regulations and they are not protected under Federal Way regulations_ Comments were made about eagle sightings in the area but there is no evidence to suggest that there is any eagle habitat on the property that would be affected by the project. Concerns were also raised that displaced wildlife would become a nuisance to adjoining properties, but there was no evidence presented to support this issue. Impacts on wildlife are either not adverse or there is no legal basis to mitigate against the impact. 6. Adeguacy of Infrastructure and Public Services. As mitigated by staff, adequate infrastructure will serve development as follows: Tran ortation: As proposed and as required by the Federal Way City Code ("FWCC"), all internal and external roadways shall be improved to all applicable FWCC street standards, and rights -of -ways must be dedicated by Statutory Warranty Deed to the City of Federal Way. As shown on the plat cross-section, streets are designed in accordance with the City's February 9, 2007, right-of-way modification granted by the Public Works Department. The section for 6t1' Place SW is a section `W' and includes 20-foot pavement width, vertical curb and gutter, four -foot planter strips, five -foot -wide sidewalks, three-foot utility strip, streetlights, and street trees. This property will remain private but will be set aside in a "Tract X" for possible future dedication to the public, and parking will not be allowed in the tract_ The section for SW 312a` Street is a section "K" and includes a 78-foot-wide right-of-way, 44-foot pavement width, vertical curb and gutter, six-foot planter strips, eight -foot - wide sidewalks, five-foot bike lanes, streetlights, and street trees. Submitted plans demonstrate how the full street section can be constructed within the right-of-way. A sight distance analysis was provided and reviewed by the City. The approved internal roadway cross section follows those of private road serving 13 or more lots and consists of 24 feet of pavement, 5-foot wide sidewalk on both sides, and a minimum easement width of 34-feet. The City granted a modification to eliminate sidewalks on one side of the private roadway. Both the City's Traffic Engineer and South King Fire and Rescue reviewed the submitted plans and concluded that the proposed street layout of the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage subdivision is consistent with the adopted codes and comprehensive plan. t BFP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.15001511 Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 7 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation 4 • Vehicular Access and Circulation: Primary vehicular access to the site will be provided via 6th Place SW off of SW 3121h Street. The applicant will dedicate land to the 61h Place SW frontage, will construct the half street to meet city standards, and will establish a Tract X for future dedication. 61h Place SW will remain private until such a time as required by the City. No direct vehicular access will be allowed to SW 3121h Street. No dedication is required along SW 312th Street as that portion of street contains a section of unopened right-of-way. The internal driveway shall be improved to a private roadway standard_ Pursuant to FWCC street improvement standards, applicable SW 3121h Street improvements must be dedicated to the City of Federal Way for right-of-way and the public and private streets must be improved to applicable City standards. The northern extension of Weyerhaeuser Way and the northern extension of 32"' Avenue South, both from South 320"' Street. The 32"' Avenue South right-of-way is outside Federal Way corporate boundaries, but will be constructed in accordance with King County standards as a part of the preliminary plat improvements. To comply with FWCC Section 20-151, which requires block perimeters no longer than 1,320 feet for non -motorized trips and 2,640 feet for streets. South 317th Street within the plat is stubbed to extend to the north in conjunction with future development. Pursuant to FWCC street improvement standards, all street improvements must be dedicated to the City of Federal Way for right-of-way and must be improved to applicable City standards, except private access and private alley tracts. ■ Pedestrian_ System: As proposed and required, the plat complies with the FWCC subdivision code requirements for on- and off -site pedestrian circulation; providing cottage housing requirements for on and off -site pedestrian circulation; providin� pedestrian pathways the length and width of the project as well as along SW 312 Street and 61h Place SW frontage. The new sidewalks will connect to existing paved roadway shoulders on 61h Pace SW and SW 3120' Street. • Open_ Space: There will be both common and private open space within the project site. The proposed Cottage and Compact Single -Family Housing Development requires 8,000 square feet of open space for the 16 unites based on a 500 square feet per unit standard. Provided common open space is 10,431 square feet and rain garden open space is 4,087 square feet for a total of 14,518 square feet of common open space. The common open space includes established garden areas, a pea patch, and a 560 square -foot community building, landscaped pedestrian corridors, and includes rain gardens that incorporate pedestrian trails, seating and landscaping. Of this, 22% is in common sidewalks. Mr. Roper asserts in his testimony that the rain gardens have been incorrectly used to count towards the open space requirements for the project. As noted by the applicant, however, the project complies with open space requirements even if the rain gardens are not counted. The three open space "clusters" will be established in tracts to be owned in common by the owners of the Cottage Housing Development. There will also be front yard open space areas that are a minimum of 9-feet deep, located between a porch and the property line ranging in size from 403 square feet to 832 square feet. These private yards will be separated from common areas with low fencing and will be planted and maintained by individual homeowners. { BFP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/ } Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 8 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation ■ Drainage: Development of this site will create additional runoff from new impervious surfaces such as streets, driveways, and rooftops. Storm drainage facilities are being designed in accordance with Low Impact Development (LID) options from the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual ("KCSWDM") and as modified by the City. The applicant's storm drainage Preliminary Technical Information Report and Level I Drainage Analysis were reviewed and approved by the City's Public Works Department. According to the reports, runoff from the site currently goes into a ditch along SW 31i?`h Street, and crosses under SW 3121h Street to discharge into Mirror Lake. This system drains into Fishers Bog to the south, and ultimately to Lakota Creek and Puget Sound. Proposed LID techniques depicted on submitted plans are to reduce impervious surfaces, use pervious pavement for sections of the private road, increase stormwater infiltration to the maximum extent feasible through the use of shallow infiltration basins and trenches, allow soil amendment to provide a good growth medium and enhance treatment of stormwater to be infiltrated, and infiltrate stormwater runoff from roof areas through the use of individual infiltration trenches. Stormwater design and plat drainage elements must conform to the standards, policies, and practices of the City of Federal Way's Surface Water Management Division as outlined in the KCSWDM, the Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan, and the Stormwater System Operation and Maintenance Manual. The approved storm drainage facilities must be constructed per City code requirements, prior to final plat approval and recording of the subdivision. Final review and approval of the storm drainage facilities as shown on the engineering plan will occur in conjunction with full drainage review. • In his written materials, Mr. Roper takes issue with a decision issued by Ann Dower waiving the five foot setback requirement for the rain gardens. FWCC 21-23 only allows the applicant to appeal these decisions and the appeal must be heard by the Public Works Director_ The Examiner and Council have no authority to entertain an appeal of this decision. • Water: The applicant proposes to serve the subdivision with a public water supply and distribution system managed by the Lakehaven Utility District. The December 7, 2007, Certificate of Water Availability indicates Lakehaven's capacity to serve the proposed development through a Developer Extension Agreement (DEA). • Sewage: The applicant proposes to serve the proposed plat by a public sewer system managed by Lakehaven Utility District. A December 7, 2008, Certificate of Sewer Availability indicates the district's capacity to serve the proposed development through a Developer Extension Agreement (DEA) between the applicant and the district_ The applicant will be extending the sewer to the far edge of the subject site, and may provide opportunities for other properties to hook up to the sewer on a latecomer basis. • Schools: As part of the City's review of the proposal, the preliminary plat application was referred to the Federal Way School District for review. A March 31, 2008, school access analysis submitted by the applicant indicates that the site is located in the service areas of Lake Grove Elementary, Lakota Middle School, and Federal Way { B FP707808. DOC :111,04 1.1500151) Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 9 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation High School. School service areas are reviewed annually and may be adjusted to accommodate enrollment growth and new development. Middle and elementary school students will walk to school as these schools are within one mile of the subject site, while high school students will be bused to school. Lakota Middle School students will walk west along SW 3121h Street to the middle school, crossing SW 312th at 8th Avenue SW in a marked crosswalk. Lake Grove Elementary and Federal Way high School students will walk north along 6`h Puce SW to SW 3081h Street. The Lake Grove students will continue east to the school grounds within a path separated from the vehicular travel lane by a curb. High school students will catch the school bus at SW 3081h and 8th Avenue SW. Bus stops are subject to change, as student needs increase and roads are developed. School impact fees will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. Currently those fees amount to $3,883.00 plus a $194.00 City administrative fee per single-family housing unit. School impact fees are determined on the basis of the District's Capital Facilities Plan and are subject to annual adjustment and update. Fire Protection: South King Fire and Rescue requires that a fire hydrant be located within 350 feet of each lot. If this condition cannot be met, the houses require sprinklers. In the case of the long narrow lot, hydrant access is limited, so all of the houses, garages and other buildings will be required to contain sprinkler systems prior to final inspection. The Certificate of Water Availability from Lakehaven Utility District indicates that water will be available to the site in sufficient quantity to satisfy fire flow standards for the proposed development. The exact number and location of fire hydrants will be reviewed and approved by South King Fire and Rescue. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Procedural: 1. Authority of Hearing Examiner: FWCC 20-110 (4) and (5) provide the Examiner with the authority to conduct a hearing and snake a recommendation to the City Council on preliminary plat applications. State Environmental Policy Act "SEPA" Review: SEPA review would be subject to challenge if notice of the SEPA threshold decision (issuance of the DNS) did not follow code requirements. Community members raise an interesting notice argument in on this issue. Mirror Lake, which is within 300 feet of the proposal, is owned by all the members of the Mirror Lake Resident's Association. FWCC 18.49(a)(1) requires the City to provide notice of a threshold determination to all "...owners of real property as shown in the records of the county assessor located within 300 feet of the site..." As noted in Exhibit L-3, notice of the SEPA threshold determination was mailed to the president of the Mirror Lake Resident's Association. There is no case law in Washington State that directly addresses this type of situation. In general, the constitutional requirements for notice in permit hearings is to provide notice that is reasonably calculated to apprise affected parties ofa pending action to afford them an opportunity to present objection. See, e.g., Pease Hill Community Group v. County of Spokane, 62 Wn. App_ 800 (1991)_ The members of the Resident's Association managed their ownership rights through their Residents's {BFP707808.DOC;1/ 13041.150015/} Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 10 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation Association. Under the reasonableness standard of due process, notifying the President of that Association was an appropriate means of providing notice to the membership. "Reasonableness" is a concept that works for all participants in the land use process and it would be unreasonable to expect a municipal entity to asecertain the identify of all members of an organization with ownership rights to a parcel of property and then mail eachmember notice. The President of the Association was in a much better position to provide this notice than the City. Substantive: 2. Zonin Designation: Single -Family — High Density, RS7.2. 3. Review Criteria and Application. FWCC 20-126(c) governs the criteria for preliminary plat approval. Those criteria are quoted in italics below and applied to the application under corresponding Conclusions of Law. FWCC 20-126(c): Decisional Criteria_ A Hearing Examiner shall use the following criteria in reviewing the preliminary plat and may recommend approval of the plat to the City Council if (1) It is consistent with the comprehensive platy 4. The application is subject to the adopted Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP), which designates the property as Single -Family — High Density. The proposed land use of a Cottage and Compact Single -Family housing development is permitted within the RS 7.2 zone and is consistent with density allowances and policies applicable to this land use as established in the FWCP. FWCC 20-126(c)(2): It is consistent with all applicable provisions of the Chapter, including those adopted by reference from the comprehensive plan: 5. The preliminary plat application is required to comply with the provisions of the FWCC Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy"; Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; Chapter 22, "Zoning" including Article XI1 "Cottage and Compact Single -Family Housing"; and all other applicable codes and regulations. Future development of the residential subdivision will be required to comply with all applicable development codes and regulations. As proposed, and with conditions as recommended by staff, the preliminary plat will comply with all provisions of the chapter. FWCC 20-126(c)(3): It is consistent with public health, safety, and welfare. 6. As discussed in detail in the Findings of Fact, all adverse impacts associated with the proposal are fully mitigated and all infrastructure needs are met. The proposed Cottage Housing preliminary plat would permit development of the site consistent with the current Single -Family High Density land use classification of the FWCP and map. Proposed access and fire hydrant locations must meet all requirements of South King Fire and Rescue, and all future structures are required to be sprinklered. Under these conditions the project is designed and conditioned to ensure protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. FWCC 20-126(c)(4): It is consistent with the design criteria listed in FWCC 20-2: { BFP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/ } Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 1 1 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation 7. The proposed preliminary plat would promote the purposes identified in FWCC Section 20-2 -and the standards and regulations therein, as identified in the staff report, including effective use of land, promotion of safe and convenient travel on streets, provision for the housing needs of the community, protection of environmentally sensitive areas, and preservation of approximately 18% of the site as common open space. As proposed, and with conditions as recommended, the plat application complies will all provisions of the chapter. FWCC 20-2: This chapter is adopted in furtherance of the comprehensive plan of the City. It is hereby declared that the regulations contained in this chapter are necessary to: (1) Promote the health, safety and general welfare in accordance with the standards established by the state and the city; 8_ As noted in the Washington State Growth Management Act, the Washington State Legislature has found it to be in the public interest to prevent urban sprawl and to promote the efficient use of infrastructure. The development proposed by the applicant at urban densities meets these objectives_ Also, as previously discussed, the project, as mitigated, creates no material or significant adverse impacts and there is adequate infrastructure to meet the needs of the new development. For these reasons, the project promotes the health, safety, and general welfare in accordance with the standards established by the state and the city. FWCC 20-2(2): Promote effective use of land by preventing the overcrowding or scattered development which would injury health, safety or the general welfare due to lack of water supplies, sanitary sewer, drainage, transportation or other public services, or excessive expenditure of public funds for such services: 9_ As previously noted, the project constitutes development in an area that is already characterized and developed by residential development. In addition, the project will effectively use the land, combining high -density housing with high levels of open space and on site infrastructure. Also as previously discussed, the project is served (or as conditioned will be served) by adequate infrastructure. For these reasons, the above criterion is satisfied. FWCC 20-2(4): Provide for adequate light and air_ 10. The density of the project meets the density requirements for the RS7.2 zoning district. The applicant will have to comply with the dimensional requirements of the zoning code for any structures it builds in order to get through building permit review. The dimensional standards of the City's Zoning Code set the standard for adequacy of light and air and for these reasons the above criterion is satisfied. FWCC 20-2(5): Provide for rater, sewage, drainage, parks and recreational areas, sites for schools and school grounds and other public requirements: 11. As noted in the Findings of Fact, the project is served by adequate infrastructure, in order to properly serve new residents as well as to prevent degradation of current services to existing residents of the area. FWCC 20-2(6): Provide for proper ingress and egress: { B FP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/ ) Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 12 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation 12. According to staff, as conditioned, access to all lots will comply with City design standards. The widening of 61h Place SW will aid in available safe access to the subject property. FWCC 20-2(7): Provide for housing and commercial needs of the community_ 13. The project constitutes a development at urban densities, and therefore satisfies the above criteria. In addition, the project is a Cottage Housing Demonstration project that will serve as a model for future developments of the same type, which will help meet the long term economic and housing growth in the future. FWCC 20-2(8): Require uniform monumenting of land divisions and conveyance of accurate legal descriptions: 14. FWCC 20-111(b) requires that the survey of the proposed subdivision must be made by or under the supervision of a registered land surveyor who shall certify that it is a true and correct representation of the land surveyed. This and other requirements like it help ensure that the objective of unifonn monumenting of land divisions and accurate legal descriptions are satisfied. FWCC 20-2(9): Protect environmentally sensitive areas: 15. As noted previously, the project has gone through a review under the State Environmental Policy Act, which ensures that all environmentally sensitive areas are protected and mitigated. No appeal has been filed in regards to the SEPA determination. and although concerns regarding the sensitivity of Mirror Lake have been raised, the LID and other development techniques have been employed that will minimize adverse environmental impacts. Although residents are concerned about the adverse impacts to their- individual properties, as well as to the Lake itself, the project has been properly reviewed and mitigated in order to prevent such damages from occurring. In addition, Further review of the engineering site plan will take place prior to construction and final approval of the plat. FWCC 20-2(10): Provide for flexibility and site design to accommodate view enhancement, protection, protection of streams and wetlands, protection of steep slopes and other environmental significant or sensitive areas. 16. The project incorporates features designed to comply with the above criterion. The LID has been utilized to specifically address the protection of the environment and sensitive areas. There are also no streams, wetlands, or steep slopes on the project site. FWCC 20-125(c)(5): It is consistent with the development standards listed in FWCC 20-151 through 20-157, and 20-178 through 20-187. 17. Development of this site is required to comply with the provisions of FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; Chapter 18, "Environmental Protection"; Chapter 22, "Zoning"; and all other applicable local and state development codes and regulations. As proposed, and as recommended by City staff, the preliminary plat application complies with all applicable statutes, codes, and regulations. (BFP707808 DOC;1/13041.150015/) Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 13 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation 1 RECOMMENDATION The -Examiner recommends that the City Council approve the preliminary plat as set forth in the staff report Deb Barker, subject to conditions- 1 through 10 therein noted. In addition, the applicant shall incorporate a stormwater maintenance and monitoring plan into CC&R's or other covenants running with the land that provide the following: 1. A reasonable five year monitoring plan prepared by staff designed to monitor compliance with the performance standards contemplated in the King County Stormwater Design Manual. The monitoring plan shall authorize the City to impose remedial measures, such ilities, if performance standards are not maintained. as requiring additional stormwater fac 2. A right of access to the City for stormwater system inspections. 3. A right of the City to repair stormwater system facilities at the expense of property owners if the property owners do not conduct the repairs within a reasonable timeframe imposed by the City. Dated this l Oth day of October, 2008. hi 1 Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Federal Way { BFP707808. D0C:1 / 13041.150015/ } Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 14 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner RE: Bill McCaffrey, WJM Studios FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF 07-106874-00-SU LAW AND RECOMMENDATION INTRODUCTION The applicant requests approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide 1.85 acres into 16 single- family cottage -housing units. The Examiner recommends approval subject to conditions recommended by staff. ORAL TESTIMONY Deb Barker, Federal Way Staff. Ms. Barker presented an overview of the staff report on behalf of the City. Her testimony, other than her presentation of the staff report, was in response to the public concerns raised during the hearing. First, she addressed the concern of the residents that too many trees were being removed. She noted that the applicant's plan actually exceeded the City's requirements regarding replacement of removed trees. She noted that the project exceeded the open space requirements stated in the Code, which was also a concern for many residents. Finally, she reassured the public that although there were concerns raised regarding the grading proposed for the site, there were further permits that still had to be applied for and examined by City departments before construction could begin. Bill McCaffrey, applicant. Mr. McCaffrey presented the history and background of the project. Specifically, he described the competitive process to be granted the cottage housing demonstration project. He noted that it was his proposition to create the development as a Low Impact Development (LID). In response to community concerns, he stated that he has not been misleading about his intentions with the project, and that the public has always been presented with the 16-unit plan, and not with the 12-unit plan as many residents contend. Also he disagreed with the statements made regarding the experimental nature of rain gardens proposed for the site. He testified that they were not experimental. They are currently in use in other developments in the City, and are intended to capture water at the source of the runoff and prevent damage to the lake. Rain gardens, he noted, are very good at capturing and controlling the flow of contaminants. Finally, he stated that he followed the recommendations of a hired arborist in order to save important trees on the property. Carl Hansen, resident. Mr. Hansen voiced few concerns regarding the project itself, and about the ingress and egress issues on 61h Place. He wanted to make sure that the project and plat maps correctly stated the name of the road, as it appeared to be misnatned on the current mapping. { SFP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/ 1 Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation Simon Garcia, III, resident. Mr. Garcia also stated concerns regarding the main road, and the problem of runoff during heavy rains causing cars to hydroplane on the road. In addition he stated that stormwater runoff from the road often resulted in overflow onto his property down the road, and he hopes that such problems will be addressed in the planning and construction during the proposed widening of the road. Marilyn Gates, resident. Mrs. Gates first stated her concerns regarding the disruption of animals in the area, including coyotes, raccoons, and skunks, that due to the project would likely end up in her backyard. In addition, she was concerned about the ability of the lake to handle any further runoff, as it already submerges her property during the heavy rainfall of the winter months. Finally, she stated that she disagrees with the piecemeal development that the City is allowing around the lake, and that it is the cause of some of the major problems with the lake. David Toner, resident. Mr. Toner first raised his concern regarding the lack of notice provided to him as a property owner with a partial ownership interest in the lake. Although his property is not within 300 feet of the project property, the lake is, and as a partial owner of the lake he believed he, along with all other partial owners, ought to have been notified regarding the SEPA determination process. His problem was that due to lack of notice, the property owners around the lake, who will be most affected by any harm to the lake, were unable to have a voice in the determination process. He also contends that the project needs an Environmental Impact Statement, and that because he did not receive notice he was unable to voice this concern to the City. In addition, he testified that he believed this project posed a great economic risk to the City, and that the adverse affects that will likely result from mass grading, removal of trees, and harm to the lake, are reason enough for this proposal to be denied. Richard Scott, resident. Mr. Scott also addressed the issue of lack of notice to those residents around the lake who are not within 300 feet of the subject property, but have partial ownership of the lake. In addition he opposed the proposed mass grading, and the removal of nearly all of the large trees on the property, as they are not only crucial to the geological integrity of the lake, but also the aesthetic quality. Bob Roper, resident. Mr. Roper has been monitoring the lake for over 12 years, from 1993 through 2005, and is concerned by the proposal because of the possible infiltration and flow into the lake that will occur. He lives on the lake, chairs the Land Use Committee of the Mirror Lake Residents Association, served on the Board of Directors for the Washington State Lake Protection Association, and is a chemical engineer. He is specifically concerned that the King County stormwater manual techniques are insufficient to prevent harm to the lake, especially in regards to the inadequacies of the proposed rain gardens for controlling stormwater runoff into the lake. He submitted a letter into the record addressing these issues in great detail. He also stated concern regarding the cottage housing on the subject location because of its impact on the lake, { BFP707808.DOC;1/13041.150015/} Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner RE: Bill McCaffrey, WJM Studios FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF 07-106874-00-SU LAW AND RECOMMENDATION INTRODUCTION The applicant requests approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide 1.85 acres into 16 single- family cottage -housing units. The Examiner recommends approval subject to conditions recommended by staff. ORAL TESTIMONY Deb Barker, Federal Way Staff. Ms. Barker presented an overview of the staff report on behalf of the City. Her testimony, other than her presentation of the staff report, was in response to the public concerns raised during the hearing. First, she addressed the concern of the residents that too many trees were being removed. She noted that the applicant's plan actually exceeded the City's requirements regarding replacement of removed trees. She noted that the project exceeded the open space requirements stated in the Code, which was also a concern for many residents. Finally, she reassured the public that although there were concerns raised regarding the grading proposed for the site, there were further permits that still had to be applied for and examined by City departments before construction could begin. Bill McCaffrey, applicant. Mr. McCaffrey presented the history and background of the project. Specifically, he described the competitive process to be granted the cottage housing demonstration project. He noted that it was his proposition to create the development as a Low Impact Development (LID). In response to community concerns, he stated that he has not been misleading about his intentions with the project, and that the public has always been presented with the 16-unit plan, and not with the 12-unit plan as many residents contend. Also he disagreed with the statements made regarding the experimental nature of rain gardens proposed for the site. He testified that they were not experimental. They are currently in use in other developments in the City, and are intended to capture water at the source of the runoff and prevent damage to the lake. Rain gardens, he noted, are very good at capturing and controlling the flow of contaminants. Finally, he stated that he followed the recommendations of a hired arborist in order to save important trees on the property. Carl Hansen, resident. Mr. Hansen voiced few concerns regarding the project itself, and about the ingress and egress issues on 6ch Place. He wanted to snake sure that the project and plat maps correctly stated the name of the road, as it appeared to be misnamed on the current mapping. {BFP707808.DOC;1 /13041.150015/1 Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation and because it would allow double the density of the surrounding zoning districts. Finally, he proposed conditions to the approval of the plat if approved: reducing the housing to 12 units, reserving the south side of the property for water retention, providing for City maintenance of the ponds for the project, and a bond for remediation of future water problems. Eden Toner, resident. Mr. Toner also addressed the lack of notice received as a property owner in the area, like those that testified before him. He felt as though he was essentially excluded from the process. He also pointed out an easement that would allow lake access to 5 of the cottage homes. This would create problems for the property owners that own the lake and who are responsible for its maintenance, because the cottage home owners owe no duty to protect the lake. In addition, he disagreed with the proposal to remove all of the trees. Mr. Toner also testified that he felt as though the applicant had deceived the neighbors throughout this process, and that the applicant only went through the necessary motions in order to have this project approved. Finally, he proposed conditions for the possible approval of the project: addition of retention ponds, retention of more trees on the property, fewer number of proposed units, and phased grading. Patricia Raine, resident. Ms. Raine testified mainly only to the wildlife problem that is likely to be created from the clearing of the subject property. Specifically, her concern regarded the increase in rats that come onto her property and into her house. James Knannlein, resident. Mr. Knannlein testified that the quality of the lake has gone down as a result of oth projects in the vicinity, and that it will continue to be adversely impacted if this project is approved. In addition he pointed out that there are significant important wildlife in the area, specifically osprey and eagles, and the impact on these animals habitats needs to be addressed in an Environmental Impact Statement prior to any further action on the project. Duncan Blanchard, resident. Mr. Blanchard testified primarily to his concerns regarding water retention on the subject property and the overflow of the lake that is likely to occur upon clearing the property and increasing impervious surfaces. He stated that he has installed more retention devices on his property for a single home than what is proposed for 16 homes. Barbara Hartloff, resident. Ms. Hartloff was primarily concerned with the deterioration of the quality of the lake, how overflow damages the properties, and how even minimal runoff makes a big impact on the lake, and by extension, the property owners. In addition she pointed out that the property owners on the lake were the ones responsible for its upkeep, that there is no City involvement or funds involved, and that this project will impact each of those property owners' interests. She also stated her belief that an untested idea like the rain garden is simply not enough to prevent harm to the lake. William Murphy, resident. ,13FP707808.DOC; I /13041.150015/1 Preliminary Plat Recommendation p_ 3 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation Mr. Murphy has been involved in trying to clean the lake up for the past thirty years, and believes they have made progress, but that this project will be detrimental to any gain that has been made. Fish have been added to the lake, which have brought eagles and osprey to the area, but harm to the lake and clearing of the property will negatively impact that relationship. In regards to the City, he believes that they have upheld the Code, and are not protecting the residents, the property, or the environment. Additionally, he believes that the applicant has been deceptive in what he has presented to the community. Finally, he stated that even if the Hearing Examiner cannot hear a SEPA appeal, he is able to deny the proposal as it currently stands. Ann Dower, Federal Way Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer. Ms. Dower currently works in the City Public Works Department, and has been there for 10 years, she is not a P.E., but has many years of experience working at that level. Ms. Dower specifically addressed the issue of stormwater for the project. She testified that the applicant has provided sufficient geotechnical reports and infiltration tests for the water situation, and that King County and the State Department of Ecology have advocated for this type of infiltration system in developments. She, and the rest of City staff, believes that the proposed system of several rain gardens, pervious pavement, infiltration gallery below the pavement, current soil conditions, and retention trenches will be a successful management system for the project. In response to a question from the Examiner regarding the longevity of this type of system, she is confident that the systems will work for this site, and that they will take care of the 100-year storm and beyond, as well as cover level 3 flow control and phosphorous flow into the lake. Also, she pointed out that infiltration systems in general, the category that rain gardens fall into, are the best method for controlling and filtering phosphorous. hi addition, she stated that the development process is not finished, and that she and her department will continue to work with the applicant to further perfect the system. In response to Examiners question regarding monitoring of the system, she did state that monitoring issues have not been addressed at this stage, although she would be open to monitoring conditions, but that bonding will be required, and is also a proposed condition in the staff report. In addition, she said that because of the available open space planned for on the site, it would be possible to move the rain gardens or enlarge them if some type of failure does occur; however she does not see this as a likely occurrence. When asked by the Examiner about the water quality of the lake, she stated that there is a Public Works Department study from 2005 that indicates no trend towards degradation of the Mirror Lake water quality, and that no degradation is foreseen as a result of this project. In response to Mr. Garcia's concerns, Ms. Dower stated that the design standards require that water be captured and treated, that the design does not impact neighboring properties with erosion problems, and that if the impacts on Mr. Garcia's property can be addressed in this project, that will be done during future planning with the applicant. Finally, in response to Mr. Roper's letter, she stated that she generally disagrees with its content, and that many departments within the City have reviewed setbacks proposed for the project. Some of his concerns are also specifically addressed in Exhibit H-3, and that other aspects of the staff report also address many of his, and other resident's, concerns. EXHIBITS See list of exhibits at p. 19 of the September 19, 2008, staff report prepared by Deb Barker. In addition, the following exhibits were presented and entered into the record during public hearing: (BFP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/) Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 4 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation and because it would allow double the density of the surrounding zoning districts. Finally, he proposed conditions to the approval of the plat if approved: reducing the housing to 12 units, reserving the south side of the property for water retention, providing for City maintenance of the ponds for the project, and a bond for remediation of future water problems. Eden Toner, resident. Mr. Toner also addressed the lack of notice received as a property owner in the area, like those that testified before him. He felt as though he was essentially excluded from the process. He also pointed out an easement that would allow lake access to 5 of the cottage homes. This would create problems for the property owners that own the lake and who are responsible for its maintenance, because the cottage home owners owe no duty to protect the lake. In addition, he disagreed with the proposal to remove all of the trees. Mr. Toner also testified that he felt as though the applicant had deceived the neighbors throughout this process, and that the applicant only went through the necessary motions in order to have this project approved. Finally, he proposed conditions for the possible approval of the project: addition of retention ponds, retention of more trees on the property, fewer number of proposed units, and phased grading. Patricia Raine, resident. Ms. Raine testified mainly only to the wildlife problem that is likely to be created from the clearing of the subject property. Specifically, her concern regarded the increase in rats that come onto her property and into her house. James Knannlein, resident. Mr. Knannlein testified that the quality of the lake has gone down as a result of other projects in the vicinity, and that it will continue to be adversely impacted if this project is approved. In addition he pointed out that there are significant important wildlife in the area, specifically osprey and eagles, and the impact on these animals habitats needs to be addressed in an Environmental Impact Statement prior to any further action on the project. Duncan Blanchard, resident. Mr. Blanchard testified primarily to his concerns regarding water retention on the subject property and the overflow of the lake that is likely to occur upon clearing the property and increasing impervious surfaces. He stated that he has installed more retention devices on his property for a single home than what is proposed for 16 homes. Barbara Hartloff, resident. Ms. Hartloff was primarily concerned with the deterioration of the quality of the lake, how overflow damages the properties, and how even minimal runoff makes a big impact on the lake, and by extension, the property owners. In addition she pointed out that the property owners on the lake were the ones responsible for its upkeep, that there is no City involvement or funds involved, and that this project will impact each of those property owners' interests. She also stated her belief that an untested idea like the rain garden is simply not enough to prevent harm to the lake. William Murphy, resident. {BFP707 808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/} Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 3 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation Y: Letter from David Toner Z: Letter from Bob Roper Z-1: Letter from Eden Toner Z-2: Letter from Marla Ledin Z-3: Email from Marla Ledin FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Applirrant. The applicant is Bill McCaffrey of WJM Studios. 2. Hearing. The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the application at 2:00 p.m. at Federal Way City Hall on September 26, 2008. Substantive: 3. Site/Proposal Description. The applicant proposes to subdivide an approximate 1.85 acre parcel of land into 16-lots for establishment of single-family cottage housing units. The site, which consists of five parcels for a total of 1.85 acres, is a long and narrow parcel, 109 feet wide by 716 feet deep, with frontage onto SW 3121h Street and 6th Place SW. A small house on the southernmost portion will be removed with plat development; the rest of the site is vacant. A 7- foot wide portion of the property extends northward approximately 140 feet, which has been referred to as the panhandle on the site. The site is located in the central portion of the Citv, north of SW 312th Street and east of 6th Place SW. The site is accessed from 61h Place SW off of SW 312th Street. The subject site has a land area of 80,598 square feet. The project was submitted as a potential cottage housing project in January of 2007, in order to be selected to advance the formal development of the Cottage Housing demonstration project. In this process, it was established that 8 traditional single-family homes could be situated on the parcels. The original cottage estimate was for 14 units, but upon purchasing additional land, the City approved the modification to allow for 16 units. As the development of the site will create additional runoff from new impervious surfaces such as streets, driveways, and rooftops, the plan proposes the use of pervious pavement systems, shallow infiltration basins and trenches, rain gardens and other techniques to be implemented in order to prevent further runoff impacts. In addition, the property, based on a Forestry evaluation, the site contains two forest cover types; a fully stocked stand of second growth timber in the northern portion of the site, with conditions ranging from very poor to good, and the area around the existing house consists of scattered individual or clusters of evergreen trees, and the understory is grass and weeks, with conditions ranging from very poor to very good. There are also 63 significant trees located on the subject site, of which the applicant has proposed removing all of them in addition to removal .of most of the other vegetation on the site. Tree replacement has been proposed with the installation of 28 evergreen trees ten feet in height at the time of planting, and further vegetation replanting. Also on the site are deer and songbirds, as well as nuisance species such as skunks, raccoons, feral cats, and rodents. { B FP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/ } Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 5 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation 4. Characteristics of the Area. The property is situated in the central portion of the City in an already developed single-family residential area. The site is generally surrounded by residential properties developed with single-family residences on lots ranging from 6,969 square feet to 20,150 square feet in size. The 18-acre church property to the east contains a sanctuary with daycare facility, a community building, a school building, and several small rental cottages throughout the large site. Lots sought of the subject site front onto Mirror Lake, and lots west of the site front onto 6th Place SW, which is a private easement roadway. Mirror Lake is a regulated lake as defined under Federal Way Code, and is located approximately 160 feet south of the subject site. SW 312th Street and a row of developed residential lots separate the proposed cottage development from the lake. However, one of the underlying lots of the project is the beneficiary of a ten -foot -wide easement to Mirror Lake. Additionally, the zoning of the surrounding area is the same as the subject property, RS 7.2, Single -Family - High Density. 5. Adverse Im acts. The surrounding community has expressed several concerns about the impacts of the project. Staff have thoroughly addressed all of those issues in their report and testimony. Infrastructure issues are addressed in more detail in Finding Fact No. 6. Other impacts are addressed below: A. Easement. Some community members expressed concern about the overuse of an easement that allows lake access to a portion of the subject property. It is believed that the drafters of the access easement never intended it to allow access to multiple users, as would occur if this project is approved. The scope of the easement is a private issue between the future owners of the subject property and those others who have rights to Mirror Lake. The issue is not germane to this permit application. B. Water Quality. The adequacy of the proposed stormwater detention facility is addressed under Finding of Fact No. 6 below in regard to infrastructure. Water quality is addressed here as a separate environmental impact. Several citizens, most notably Bob Roper, expressed concern over impacts on water quality. Mr. Roper, a chemical engineer with extensive experience in monitoring water quality in Mirror Lake, testified that the rain gardens proposed by the applicant are experimental and it is unclear whether they will adequately protect Mirror Lake from water quality problems. Ann Dower, from the Public Work's department, has ten years of experience in assessing the adequacy of stormwater systems. She noted that a 2005 study of Mirror Lake water quality found no trend towards degradation and that she and others in Public Works who have assessed the project see no threat to water quality from the proposed project. Ms. Dower stated that the stormwater system proposed by the applicant is actually the best suited of the types available for preventing phosphorous contamination of the lake. She also noted that the system has been subjected to extensive geotechnical analysis. Given the expertise and testimony of staff and the thorough analysis conducted for the design of the stromwater system, the Examiner finds that the system is adequately designed to prevent any material water quality degradation of Mirror Lake. Mr. Roper noted that the King County Stormwater Drainage Manual, applicable to this development, does not have compulsory requirements for inspections of system performance or correction of deficiencies. Mr. Roper points out that the Manual authorizes the review authority to impose additional conditions based upon site specific conditions. In her testimony Ms. Dower stated that she was open to conditions that required monitoring. The Examiner will condition the {BFP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/} Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 6 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation Y: Letter from David Toner Z: Letter from Bob Roper Z-1: Letter from Eden Toner Z-2: Letter from Marla Ledin Z-3: Email from Marla Ledin FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Applicant. The applicant is Bill McCaffrey of WJM Studios. 2. Hearing. The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the application at 2:00 p.m. at Federal Way City Hall on September 26, 2008. Substantive: 3. Site/Proposal Description. The applicant proposes to subdivide an approximate 1.85 acre parcel of land into 16-lots for establishment of single-family cottage housing units. The site, which consists of five parcels for a total of 1.85 acres, is a long and narrow parcel, 109 feet wide by 716 feet deep, with frontage onto SW 312th Street and 6th Place SW. A small house on the southernmost portion will be removed with plat development; the rest of the site is vacant. A 7- foot wide portion of the property extends northward approximately 140 feet, which has been referred to as the panhandle on the site. The site is located in the central portion of the City, north of SW 312th Street and east of 6th Place SW. The site is accessed from 6`' Place SW off of SW 312th Street. The subject site has a land area of 80,598 square feet. The project was submitted as a potential cottage housing project in January of 2007, in order to be selected to advance the formal development of the Cottage Housing demonstration project. In this process, it was established that 8 traditional single-family homes could be situated on the parcels. The original cottage estimate was for 14 units, but upon purchasing additional land, the City approved the modification to allow for 16 units. As the development of the site will create additional runoff from new impervious surfaces such as streets, driveways, and rooftops, the plan proposes the use of pervious pavement systems, shallow infiltration basins and trenches, rain gardens and other techniques to be implemented in order to prevent further runoff impacts. In addition, the property, based on a Forestry evaluation, the site contains two forest cover types; a fully stocked stand of second growth timber in the northern portion of the site, with conditions ranging from very poor to good, and the area around the existing house consists of scattered individual or clusters of evergreen trees, and the understory is grass and weeks, with conditions ranging from very poor to very good. There are also 63 significant trees located on the subject site, of which the applicant has proposed removing all of them in addition to removal ,of most of the other vegetation on the site. Tree replacement has been proposed with the installation of 28 evergreen trees ten feet in height at the time of planting, and further vegetation replanting. Also on the site are deer and songbirds, as well as nuisance species such as skunks, raccoons, feral cats, and rodents. {BFP707808.D0Q 1/13041.150015/} Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 5 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation project to include a monitoring plan and to allow the City to correct deficiencies if they are not timely corrected by the property owners_ These obligations will be recorded upon the property. This condition is intended to address both water quality control and water flow. C. Tree Retention. All trees will be removed from the property, but the applicant will replant 28 evergreen ten or more feet taller. Staff have found this to be consistent with the City's tree regulations and project opponents have not identified any code provision that is violated by the clearing of the existing trees. Further, there is nothing in the record to suggest anything unique about the trees that would warrant protection beyond that required by Federal Way regulations. For these reasons, there is no justification to require any additional tree mitigation. D. Wildlife. Concerns were raised about native wildlife, such as deer, songbirds, skunks, raccoons, feral cats, and rodents. None of these species are designated as threatened or endangered under federal regulations and they are not protected under Federal Way regulations. Comments were made about eagle sightings in the area but there is no evidence to suggest that there is any eagle habitat on the property that would be affected by the project. Concerns were also raised that displaced wildlife would become a nuisance to adjoining properties, but there was no evidence presented to support this issue. Impacts on wildlife are either not adverse or there is no legal basis to mitigate against the impact. 6. Adequacy of Infrastructure and Public Services_ As mitigated by staff, adequate infrastructure will serve development as follows: • Transportation: As proposed and as required by the Federal Way City Code ("FWCC"), all internal and external roadways shall be improved to all applicable FWCC street standards, and rights -of -ways must be dedicated by Statutory Warranty Deed to the City of Federal Way. As shown on the plat cross-section, streets are designed in accordance with the City's February 9, 2007, right-of-way modification granted by the Public Works Department. The section for 6th Place SW is a section ` W' and includes 20-foot pavement width, vertical curb and gutter, four -foot planter strips, five -foot -wide sidewalks, three-foot utility strip, streetlights, and street trees. This property will remain private but will be set aside in a "Tract X" for possible future dedication to the public, and parking will not be allowed in the tract. The section for SW 312th Street is a section "K" and includes a 78-foot-wide right-of-way, 44-foot pavement width, vertical curb and gutter, six-foot planter strips, eight -foot - wide sidewalks, five-foot bike lanes, streetlights, and street trees. Submitted plans demonstrate how the full street section can be constructed within the right-of-way. A sight distance analysis was provided and reviewed by the City. The approved internal roadway cross section follows those of private road serving 13 or more lots and consists of 24 feet of pavement, 5-foot wide sidewalk on both sides, and a minimum easement width of 34-feet. The City granted a modification to eliminate sidewalks on one side of the private roadway. Both the City's Traffic Engineer and South King Fire and Rescue reviewed the submitted plans and concluded that the proposed street layout of the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage subdivision is consistent with the adopted codes and comprehensive plan. { B FP707808.DOC; 1/ 1 3041.15001 5/ Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 7 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation • Vehicular Access and Circulation: Primary vehicular access to the site will be provided via 6th Place SW off of SW 312th Street. The applicant will dedicate land to the 6th Place SW frontage, will construct the half street to meet city standards, and will establish a Tract X for future dedication. 6th Place SW will remain private until such a time as required by the City. No direct vehicular access will be allowed to SW 312th Street. No dedication is required along SW 312th Street as that portion of street contains a section of unopened right-of-way. The internal driveway shall be improved to a private roadway standard. Pursuant to FWCC street improvement standards, applicable SW 312th Street improvements must be dedicated to the City of Federal Way for right-of-way and the public and private streets must be improved to applicable City standards. The northern extension of Weyerhaeuser Way and the northern extension of 32"' Avenue South, both from South 320"' Street. The 32"' Avenue South right-of-way is outside Federal Way corporate boundaries, but will be constructed in accordance with King County standards as a part of the preliminary plat improvements. To comply with FWCC Section 20-151, which requires block perimeters no longer than 1,320 feet for non -motorized trips and 2,640 feet for streets, South 317th Street within the plat is stubbed to extend to the north in conjunction with future development. Pursuant to FWCC street improvement standards, all street improvements must be dedicated to the City of Federal Way for right-of-way and must be improved to applicable City standards, except private access and private alley tracts. • Pedestrian System: As proposed and required, the plat complies with the FWCC subdivision code requirements for on- and off -site pedestrian circulation; providing cottage housing requirements for on and off -site pedestrian circulation; providin pedestrian pathways the length and width of the project as well as along SW 312 Street and 6th Place SW frontage. The new sidewalks will connect to existing paved roadway shoulders on 6th Pace SW and SW 312th Street. • Open Space: There will be both common and private open space within the project site. The proposed Cottage and Compact Single -Family Housing Development requires 8,000 square feet of open space for the 16 unites based on a 500 square feet per unit standard. Provided common open space is 10,431 square feet and rain garden open space is 4,087 square feet for a total of 14,518 square feet of common open space. The common open space includes established garden areas, a pea patch, and a 560 square -foot community building, landscaped pedestrian corridors, and includes rain gardens that incorporate pedestrian trails, seating and landscaping. Of this, 22% is in common sidewalks. Mr. Roper asserts in his testimony that the rain gardens have been incorrectly used to count towards the open space requirements for the project. As noted by the applicant, however, the project complies with open space requirements even if the rain gardens are not counted. The three open space "clusters" will be established in tracts to be owned in common by the owners of the Cottage Housing Development. There will also be front yard open space areas that are a minimum of 9-feet deep, located between a porch and the property line ranging in size from 403 square feet to 832 square feet. These private yards will be separated from common areas with low fencing and will be planted and maintained by individual homeowners. {BFP707808.DOC; I /13041.150015/1 Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 8 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation project to include a monitoring plan and to allow the City to correct deficiencies if they are not timely corrected by the property owners. These obligations will be recorded upon the property. This condition is intended to address both water quality control and water flow. C. Tree Retention. All trees will be removed from the property, but the applicant will replant 28 evergreen ten or more feet taller. Staff have found this to be consistent with the City's tree regulations and project opponents have not identified any code provision that is violated by the clearing of the existing trees. Further, there is nothing in the record to suggest anything unique about the trees that would warrant protection beyond that required by Federal Way regulations. For these reasons, there is no justification to require any additional tree mitigation. D. Wildlife. Concerns were raised about native wildlife, such as deer, songbirds, skunks, raccoons, feral cats, and rodents. None of these species are designated as threatened or endangered under federal regulations and they are not protected under Federal Way regulations. Comments were made about eagle sightings in the area but there is no evidence to suggest that there is any eagle habitat on the property that would be affected by the project. Concerns were also raised that displaced wildlife would become a nuisance to adjoining properties, but there was no evidence presented to support this issue. Impacts on wildlife are either not adverse or there is no legal basis to mitigate against the impact. 6. Adequacy of Infrastructure and Public Services. As mitigated by staff, adequate infrastructure will serve development as follows: • Transportation: As proposed and as required by the Federal Way City Code ("FWCC"), all internal and external roadways shall be improved to all applicable FWCC street standards, and rights -of -ways must be dedicated by Statutory Warranty Deed to the City of Federal Way. As shown on the plat cross-section, streets are designed in accordance with the City's February 9, 2007, right-of-way modification granted by the Public Works Department. The section for 6`h Place SW is a section `W' and includes 20-foot pavement width, vertical curb and gutter, four -foot planter strips, five -foot -wide sidewalks, three-foot utility strip, streetlights, and street trees. This property will remain private but will be set aside in a "Tract X" for possible future dedication to the public, and parking will not be allowed in the tract. The section for 5W 312th Street is a section "K" and includes a 78-foot-wide right-of-way, 44-foot pavement width, vertical curb and gutter, six-foot planter strips, eight -foot - wide sidewalks, five-foot bike lanes, streetlights, and street trees. Submitted plans demonstrate how the full street section can be constructed within the right-of-way. A sight distance analysis was provided and reviewed by the City. The approved internal roadway cross section follows those of private road serving 13 or more lots and consists of 24 feet of pavement, 5-foot wide sidewalk on both sides, and a minimum easement width of 34-feet. The City granted a modification to eliminate sidewalks on one side of the private roadway. Both the City's Traffic Engineer and South King Fire and Rescue reviewed the submitted plans and concluded that the proposed street layout of the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage subdivision is consistent with the adopted codes and comprehensive plan. { BFP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/ } Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 7 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation + Drainage: Development of this site will create additional runoff from new impervious surfaces such as streets, driveways, and rooftops. Storm drainage facilities are being designed in accordance with Low Impact Development (LID) options from the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual ('`KCSWDM") and as modified by the City. The applicant's storm drainage Preliminary Technical Information Report and Level I Drainage Analysis were reviewed and approved by the City's Public Works Department. According to the reports, runoff from the site currently goes into a ditch along SW 3121h Street, and crosses under SW 3121h Street to discharge into Mirror Lake. This system drains into Fishers Bog to the south, and ultimately to Lakota Creek and Puget Sound. Proposed LID techniques depicted on submitted plans are to reduce impervious surfaces, use pervious pavement for sections of the private road, increase stormwater infiltration to the maximum extent feasible through the use of shallow infiltration basins and trenches, allow soil amendment to provide a good growth medium and enhance treatment of stormwater to be infiltrated, and infiltrate stormwater runoff from roof areas through the use of individual infiltration trenches. Stormwater design and plat drainage elements must conform to the standards, policies, and practices of the City of Federal Way's Surface Water Management Division as outlined in the KCSWDM, the Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan, and the Stormwater System Operation and Maintenance Manual. The approved storm drainage facilities must be constructed per City code requirements, prior to final plat approval and recording of the subdivision. Final review and approval of the storm drainage facilities as shown on the engineering plan will occur in conjunction with full drainage review. In his written materials, Mr. Roper takes issue with a decision issued by Ann Dower waiving the five foot setback requirement for the rain gardens. FWCC 21-23 only allows the applicant to appeal these decisions and the appeal must be heard by the Public Works Director. The Examiner and Council have no authority to entertain an appeal of this decision. ■ Water: The applicant proposes to serve the subdivision with a public water supply and distribution system managed by the Lakehaven Utility District. The December 7, 2007, Certificate of Water Availability indicates Lakehaven's capacity to serve the proposed development through a Developer Extension Agreement (DEA). ■ Sewage: The applicant proposes to serve the proposed plat by a public sewer system managed by Lakehaven Utility District. A December 7, 2008, Certificate of Sewer Availability indicates the district's capacity to serve the proposed development through a Developer Extension Agreement (DEA) between the applicant and the district. The applicant will be extending the sewer to the far edge of the subject site, and may provide opportunities for other properties to hook up to the sewer on a latecomer basis. • Schools: As part of the City's review of the proposal, the preliminary plat application was referred to the Federal Way School District for review. A March 31, 2008, school access analysis submitted by the applicant indicates that the site is located in the service areas of Lake Grove Elementary, Lakota Middle School, and Federal Way { BFP707808. DOC;1 /13041.150015/1 Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 9 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation High School. School service areas are reviewed annually and may be adjusted to accommodate enrollment growth and new development. Middle and elementary school students will walk to school as these schools are within one mile of the subject site, while high school students will be bused to school. Lakota Middle School students will walk west along SW 312th Street to the middle school, crossing SW 312th at 8th Avenue SW in a marked crosswalk. Lake Grove Elementary and Federal Way high School students will walk north along 6th Place SW to SW 308" Street. The Lake Grove students will continue east to the school grounds within a path separated from the vehicular travel large by a curb. High school students will catch the school bus at SW 308th and 8th Avenue SW. Bus stops are subject to change, as student needs increase and roads are developed. School impact fees will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. Currently those fees amount to $3,883.00 plus a $194.00 City administrative fee per single-family housing unit. School impact fees are determined on the basis of the District's Capital Facilities Plan and are subject to annual adjustment and update. • Fire Protection: South King Fire and Rescue requires that a fire hydrant be located within 350 feet of each lot. If this condition cannot be met, the houses require sprinklers. In the case of the long narrow lot, hydrant access is limited, so all of the houses, garages and other buildings will be required to contain sprinkler systems prior to final inspection. The Certificate of Water Availability from Lakehaven Utility District indicates that water will be available to the site in sufficient quantity to satisfy fire flow standards for the proposed development. The exact number and location of fire hydrants will be reviewed and approved by South King Fire and Rescue. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Procedural: 1. Authority of Hearing Examiner: FWCC 20-110 (4) and (5) provide the Examiner with the authority to conduct a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council on preliminary plat applications. State Environmental Policy Act "SEPA" Review: SEPA review would be subject to challenge if notice of the SEPA threshold decision (issuance of the DNS) did not follow code requirements. Community members raise an interesting notice argument in on this issue. Mirror Lake, which is within 300 feet of the proposal, is owned by all the members of the Mirror Lake Resident's Association. FWCC 18.49(a)(1) requires the City to provide notice of a threshold determination to all "...owners of real property as shown in the records of the county assessor located within 300 feet of the site..." As noted in Exhibit L-3, notice of the SEPA threshold determination was mailed to the president of the Mirror Lake Resident's Association. There is no case law in Washington State that directly addresses this type of situation. In general, the constitutional requirements for notice in permit hearings is to provide notice that is reasonably calculated to apprise affected parties ofa pending action to afford them an opportunity to present objection. See, e.g., Pease Hill Community Group v. County of Spokane, 62 Wn. App. 800 (1991). The members of the Resident's Association managed their ownership rights through their Residents's {BFP707808.D0C;1 / 13041.150015/ } Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 10 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation • Drainage: Development of this site will create additional runoff from new impervious surfaces such as streets, driveways, and rooftops. Storm drainage facilities are being designed in accordance with Low Impact Development (LID) options from the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual ("KCSWDM") and as modified by the City. The applicant's storm drainage Preliminary Technical Information Report and Level I Drainage Analysis were reviewed and approved by the City's Public Works Department. According to the reports, runoff from the site currently goes into a ditch along SW 312th Street, and crosses under SW 312th Street to discharge into Mirror Lake. This system drains into Fishers Bog to the south, and ultimately to Lakota Creek and Puget Sound. Proposed LID techniques depicted on submitted plans are to reduce impervious surfaces, use pervious pavement for sections of the private road, increase stormwater infiltration to the maximum extent feasible through the use of shallow infiltration basins and trenches, allow soil amendment to provide a good growth medium and enhance treatment of stormwater to be infiltrated, and infiltrate stormwater runoff from roof areas through the use of individual infiltration trenches. Stormwater design and plat drainage elements must conform to the standards, policies, and practices of the City of Federal Way's Surface Water Management Division as outlined in the KCSWDM, the Comprehensive Surface Water Management Plan, and the Stormwater System Operation and Maintenance Manual. The approved storm drainage facilities must be constructed per City code requirements, prior to final plat approval and recording of the subdivision. Final review and approval of the storm drainage facilities as shown on the engineering plan will occur in conjunction with full drainage review. In his written materials, Mr. Roper takes issue with a decision issued by Ann Dower waiving the five foot setback requirement for the rain gardens. FWCC 21-23 only allows the applicant to appeal these decisions and the appeal must be heard by the Public Works Director. The Examiner and Council have no authority to entertain an appeal of this decision. ■ Water: The applicant proposes to serve the subdivision with a public water supply and distribution system managed by the Lakehaven Utility District. The December 7, 2007, Certificate of Water Availability indicates Lakehaven's capacity to serve the proposed development through a Developer Extension Agreement (DEA). « Sewage: The applicant proposes to serve the proposed plat by a public sewer system managed by Lakehaven Utility District. A December 7, 2008, Certificate of Sewer Availability indicates the district's capacity to serve the proposed development through a Developer Extension Agreement (DEA) between the applicant and the district. The applicant will be extending the sewer to the far edge of the subject site, and may provide opportunities for other properties to hook up to the sewer on a latecomer basis. • Schools: As part of the City's review of the proposal, the preliminary plat application was referred to the Federal Way School District for review. A March 31, 2008, school access analysis submitted by the applicant indicates that the site is located in the service areas of Lake Grove Elementary, Lakota Middle School, and Federal Way { BFP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/ } Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 9 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation Association. Under the reasonableness standard of due process, notifying the President of that Association was an appropriate means of providing notice to the membership. "Reasonableness" is a concept that works for all participants in the land use process and it would be unreasonable to expect a municipal entity to asecertain the identify of all members of an organization with ownership rights to a parcel of property and then mail eachmember notice. The President of the Association was in a much better position to provide this notice than the City. Substantive: 2. Zoning Designation: Single -Family — High Density, RS7.2. 3. Review Criteria and Application. FWCC 20-126(c) governs the criteria for preliminary plat approval. Those criteria are quoted in italics below and applied to the application under corresponding Conclusions of Law. FWCC 20-126(c): Decisional Criteria. A Hearing Examiner shall use the following criteria in reviewing the preliminary plat and may recommend approval of the plat to the City Council if (1) It is consistent with the comprehensive plan; 4. The application is subject to the adopted Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP), which designates the property as Single -Family — High Density. The proposed land use of a Cottage and Compact Single -Family housing development is permitted within the RS 7.2 zone and is consistent with density allowances and policies applicable to this land use as established in the FWCP. FWCC 20-126(c)(2): It is consistent with all applicable provisions of the Chapter, including those adopted by reference from the comprehensive plan: 5. The preliminary plat application is required to comply with the provisions of the FWCC Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy"; Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; Chapter 22, "Zoning" including Article XIl "Cottage and Compact Single -Family Housing"; and all other applicable codes and regulations. Future development of the residential subdivision will be required to comply with all applicable development codes and regulations. As proposed, and with conditions as recommended by staff, the preliminary plat will comply with all provisions of the chapter. FWCC 20-126(c)(3): It is consistent with public health, safety, and welfare. 6. As discussed in detail in the Findings of Fact, all adverse impacts associated with the proposal are fully mitigated and all infrastructure needs are met. The proposed Cottage Housing preliminary plat would permit development of the site consistent with the current Single -Family High Density land use classification of the FWCP and map. Proposed access and fire hydrant locations must meet all requirements of South King Fire and Rescue, and all future structures are required to be sprinklered. Under these conditions the project is designed and conditioned to ensure protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.. FWCC 20-126(c)(4): It is consistent with the design criteria listed in FWCC 20-2: {BFP707808. DOC;1113041.150015/) Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 11 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation 7. The proposed preliminary plat would promote the purposes identified in FWCC Section 20-2 and the standards and regulations therein, as identified in the staff report, including effective use of land, promotion of safe and convenient travel on streets, provision for the housing needs of the community, protection of environmentally sensitive areas, and preservation of approximately 18% of the site as common open space. As proposed, and with conditions as recommended, the plat application complies will all provisions of the chapter. FWCC 20-2: This chapter is adopted in furtherance of the comprehensive plan of the City. It is hereby declared that the regulations contained in this chapter are necessary to: (1) Promote the health, safety and general welfare in accordance with the standards established by the state and the city; 8. As noted in the Washington State Growth Management Act, the Washington State Legislature has found it to be in the public interest to prevent urban sprawl and to promote the efficient use of infrastructure. The development proposed by the applicant at urban densities meets these objectives. Also, as previously discussed, the project, as mitigated, creates no material or significant adverse impacts and there is adequate infrastructure to meet the needs of the new development. For these reasons, the project promotes the health, safety, and general welfare in accordance with the standards established by the state and the city. FWCC 20-2(2): Promote effective use of land by preventing the overcrowding or scattered development which would injury health, safety or the general welfare due to lack of water supplies, sanitary sewer, drainage, transportation or other public services, or excessive expenditure of public funds for such services: 9. As previously noted, the project constitutes development in an area that is already characterized and developed by residential development. In addition, the project will effectively use the land, combining high -density housing with high levels of open space and on site infrastructure. Also as previously discussed, the project is served (or as conditioned will be served) by adequate infrastructure. For these reasons, the above criterion is satisfied. FWCC 20-2(4): Provide for adequate light and air. 10. The density of the project meets the density requirements for the RS7.2 zoning district. The applicant will have to comply with the dimensional requirements of the zoning code for any structures it builds in order to get through building permit review. The dimensional standards of the City's Zoning Code set the standard for adequacy of light and air and for these reasons the above criterion is satisfied. FWCC 20-2(5): Provide for water, sewage, drainage, parks and recreational areas, sites for schools and school grounds and other public requirements: 11. As noted in the Findings of Fact, the project is served by adequate infrastructure, in order to properly serve new residents as well as to prevent degradation of current services to existing residents of the area. FWCC 20-2(6): Provide for proper ingress and egress: {BFP707808.DOC;1 /13041.150015/) Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 12 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation Association. Under the reasonableness standard of due process, notifying the President of that Association was an appropriate means of providing notice to the membership. "Reasonableness" is a concept that works for all participants in the land use process and it would be unreasonable to expect a municipal entity to asecertain the identify of all members of an organization with ownership rights to a parcel of property and then mail eachmember notice. The President of the Association was in a much better position to provide this notice than the City. Substantive: 2. Zoning Designation: Single -Family — High Density, RS7.2. 3. Review Criteria and Application. FWCC 20-126(c) governs the criteria for preliminary plat approval. Those criteria are quoted in italics below and applied to the application under corresponding Conclusions of Law. FWCC 20-126(c): Decisional Criteria. A Hearing Examiner shall use the following criteria in reviewing the preliminary plat and may recommend approval of the plat to the City Council if (1) It is consistent with the comprehensive plan; 4. The application is subject to the adopted Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP), which designates the property as Single -Family — High Density. The proposed land use of a Cottage and Compact Single -Family housing development is permitted within the RS 7.2 zone and is consistent with density allowances and policies applicable to this land use as established in the FWCP. FWCC 20-126(c)(2): It is consistent with all applicable provisions of the Chapter, including those adopted by reference from the comprehensive plan: 5. The preliminary plat application is required to comply with the provisions of the FWCC Chapter 18, 'Environmental Policy"; Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; Chapter 22, "Zoning" including Article XII "Cottage and Compact Single -Family Housing"; and all other applicable codes and regulations. Future development of the residential subdivision will be required to comply with all applicable development codes and regulations. As proposed, and with conditions as recommended by staff, the preliminary plat will comply with all provisions of the chapter. FWCC 20-126(c)(3): It is consistent with public health, safety, and welfare. 6. As discussed in detail in the Findings of Fact, all adverse impacts associated with the proposal are fully mitigated and all infrastructure needs are met. The proposed Cottage Housing preliminary plat would permit development of the site consistent with the current Single -Family High Density land use classification of the FWCP and map. Proposed access and fire hydrant locations must meet all requirements of South King Fire and Rescue, and all future structures are required to be sprinklered. Under these conditions the project is designed and conditioned to ensure protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. FWCC 20-126(c)(4): It is consistent with the design criteria listed in FWCC 20-2: { BFP707808. DOC;1 / 13041.150015/) Preliminary Plat Recommendation P. 11 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation 12. According to staff, as conditioned, access to all lots will comply with City design standards. The widening of 61" Place SW will aid in available safe access to the subject property. FWCC 20-2(7): Provide for housing and commercial needs of the community: 13. The project constitutes a development at urban densities, and therefore satisfies the above criteria. In addition, the project is a Cottage Housing Demonstration project that will serve as a model for future developments of the same type, which will help meet the long term economic and housing growth in the future. FWCC 20-2(8): Require uniform monumenting of land divisions and conveyance of accurate legal descriptions: 14. FWCC 20-111(b) requires that the survey of the proposed subdivision must be made by or under the supervision of a registered land surveyor who shall certify that it is a true and correct representation of the land surveyed. This and other requirements like it help ensure that the objective of uniform monumenting of land divisions and accurate legal descriptions are satisfied. FWCC 20-2(9): Protect environmentally sensitive areas: 15. As noted previously, the project has gone through a review under the State Environmental Policy Act, which ensures that all environmentally sensitive areas are protected and mitigated. No appeal has been filed in regards to the SEPA determination, and although concerns regarding the sensitivity of Mirror Lake have been raised, the LID and other development techniques have been employed that will minimize adverse environmental impacts. Although residents are concerned about the adverse impacts to their individual properties, as well as to the Lake itself, the project has been properly reviewed and mitigated in order to prevent such damages from occurring. In addition, further review of the engineering site plan will take place prior to construction and final approval of the plat. FWCC 20-2(10): Provide for flexibility and site design to accommodate view enhancement, protection, protection of streams and wetlands, protection of steep slopes and other environmental significant or sensitive areas. 16. The project incorporates features designed to comply with the above criterion. The LID has been utilized to specifically address the protection of the environment and sensitive areas. There are also no streams, wetlands, or steep slopes on the project site. FWCC 20-125(c)(5): It is consistent with the development standards listed in FWCC 20-151 through 20-157, and 20-178 through 20-187. 17. Development of this site is required to comply with the provisions of FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; Chapter 18, "Environmental Protection"; Chapter 22, "Zoning"; and all other applicable local and state development codes and regulations. As proposed, and as recommended by City staff, the preliminary plat application complies with all applicable statutes, codes, and regulations. {BFP707808.DOC;1 /13041.150015/1 Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 13 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation RECOMMENDATION The Examiner recommends that the City Council approve the preliminary plat as set forth in the staff report Deb Barker, subject to conditions 1 through 10 therein noted. hi addition, the applicant shall incorporate a stormwater maintenance and monitoring plan into CC&R's or other covenants running with the land that provide the following: 1. A reasonable five year monitoring plan prepared by staff designed to monitor compliance with the performance standards contemplated in the King County Stormwater Design Manual. The monitoring plan shall authorize the City to impose remedial measures, such as requiring additional stormwater facilities, if performance standards are not maintained. 2. A right of access to the City for stormwater system inspections. 3. A right of the City to repair stormwater system facilities at the expense of property owners if the property owners do not conduct the repairs within a reasonable timeframe imposed by the City. Dated this 10th day of October, 2008. Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner City of Federal Way {BFP707808.DOC;1 /13041.150015/} Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 14 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation 12. According to staff, as conditioned, access to all lots will comply with City design standards. The widening of 6t1, Place SW will aid in available safe access to the subject property. FWCC 20-2(7): Provide for housing and commercial needs of the community: 13. The project constitutes a development at urban densities, and therefore satisfies the above criteria. In addition, the project is a Cottage Housing Demonstration project that will serve as a model for future developments of the same type, which will help meet the long term economic and housing growth in the future. FWCC 20-2(8): Require uniform monumenting of land divisions and conveyance of accurate legal descriptions: 14. FWCC 20-111(b) requires that the survey of the proposed subdivision must be made by or under the supervision of a registered land surveyor who shall certify that it is a true and correct representation of the land surveyed. This and other requirements like it help ensure that the objective of uniform monumenting of land divisions and accurate legal descriptions are satisfied. FWCC 20-2(9): Protect environmentally sensitive areas: 15. As noted previously, the project has gone through a review under the State Environmental Policy Act, which ensures that all environmentally sensitive areas are protected and mitigated. No appeal has been filed in regards to the SEPA determination, and although concerns regarding the sensitivity of Mirror Lake have been raised, the LID and other development techniques have been employed that will minimize adverse environmental impacts. Although residents are concerned about the adverse impacts to their individual properties, as well as to the Lake itself, the project has been properly reviewed and mitigated in order to prevent such damages from occurring. In addition, further review of the engineering site plan will take place prior to construction and final approval of the plat. FWCC 20-2(10): Provide for flexibility and site design to accommodate view enhancement, protection, protection of streams and wetlands, protection of steep slopes and other environmental significant or sensitive areas. 16. The project incorporates features designed to comply with the above criterion. The LID has been utilized to specifically address the protection of the environment and sensitive areas. There are also no streams, wetlands, or steep slopes on the project site. FWCC 20-125(c)(5): It is consistent with the development standards listed in FWCC 20-151 through 20-157, and 20-178 through 20-187. 17. Development of this site is required to comply with the provisions of FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; Chapter 18, "Environmental Protection"; Chapter 22, "Zoning"; and all other applicable local and state development codes and regulations. As proposed, and as recommended by City staff, the preliminary plat application complies with all applicable statutes, codes, and regulations. {BFP707808. DOC; i / 13041.150015/) Preliminary Plat Recommendation p. 13 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation CITY OF MEMORANDUM FederalWay Community Development Services Department NOTICE OF DECISION ON MIRROR LAKE HIGHLAND COTTAGES PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION November 5, 2008 Pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 20-128, this notice is to inform you that the Federal Way City Council, on November 4, 2008, approved by resolution the Mirror Lake Highland Cottages preliminary plat application, File No. 07-106874-00-SU. An Environmental Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance was issued for the above proposal on April 16, 2008. Pursuant to FWCC Section 20-128(c)(2) (enclosed), affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes, notwithstanding any program of revaluation. The City Council's decision is the City's final decision on the preliminary plat application. Per FWCC Section 20-129, prior to construction of improvements pursuant to preliminary plat approval, engineering drawings for public improvements shall be submitted for review and approval to the Department of Public Works and the Lakehaven Utility District. The applicant may not engage in any activity based on the decision, including construction or site work, until final approval of all engineering and utility plans (including storm drainage), the payment of all pertinent fees, the submittal of performance and maintenance securities as may be required, and a pre -construction meeting has been held. Pursuant to FWCC Section 20-129(c), approval of the preliminary plat by the City Council constitutes acceptance of subdivision layout and design, and includes all conditions, restrictions, and other requirements adopted by the Council as part of plat approval. City Council approval of a preliminary plat does not constitute approval for land clearing or grading, vegetation removal, or any other activities that otherwise require permits from the City. Pursuant to FWCC Section 20-130, the action of the City in granting or denying an application under this article may be reviewed pursuant to 36.70C in the King County Superior Court. The land use petition must be filed within 21 calendar days of issuance of the City's final decision on the preliminary plat application. Standing to bring the action is limited to the following parties: the applicant or owner of the property on which the subdivision is proposed; any property owner within 300 feet of the proposal; and any property owner who deems himself aggrieved thereby and who will suffer direct and substantial impacts from the proposed subdivision. Pursuant to FWCC Section 20-131, preliminary plat approval shall expire five years from the date of City Council approval unless substantial progress has been made toward completion of the entire plat, or the initial phase of the plat, if the preliminary approval included phasing. The five-year preliminary plat apprtvaI period started on November 4, 2008. In the event the applicant has not made substantial progress toward completion of the plat, the applicant may request an extension from the Hearing Examiner. The request for extension must be submitted to the Department of Community Development Services at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the preliminary plat. In considering whether to grant the extension, the Hearing Examiner shall consider whether conditions in the vicinity of the subdivision have changed to a sufficient degree since initial approval to warrant reconsideration of the preliminary plat. If the Hearing Examiner deems such reconsideration is warranted, a public hearing shall be scheduled and advertised in accordance with FWCC Section 20-119. If you have any questions regarding this notice of final decision, please contact Senior Planner Deb Barker, City of Federal Way's Department of Community Development Services, at 253-835-2642, or at deb.barker@cityoffederalway.com. enc: FWCC Section 20-128(c)(2) c: William McCaffrey Marla Ledin WJM Studio 401 SW 312`h Street 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116 Federal Way, WA 98023 Federal Way, WA 98023 Dana and Joe Belke Eden Toner 616 SW 312`h Street 305 SW 313`h Street Federal Way, WA 98023 Federal Way, WA 98023 Marie Trotignon Carl Hansen 426 SW 316`h Street 30847 Oh Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Federal Way, WA 98023 Richard Scott Simon Garcia 545 SW 312`h Street 621 SW 3121h Street Federal Way, WA 98023 Federal Way, WA 98023 Bob Roper Barbara Hartloff 525 SW 312`h Street 31434 7`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Federal Way, WA 98023 Pat Raine 31432 7`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 James Knannlein 31418 7`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Duncan Blanchard 31460 7`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Marylyn Gates 31604 7`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 William J. Murphy 31315 2"d Avenue SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Doc I D. 47645 CITY OF Federal Way DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) MIRROR LAKE HIGHLAND COTTAGE HOUSING PRELIMINARY PLAT File No. 07-106875-00-SE Proposed Action: Subdivision of five lots, 1.85 acres in size, into a sixteen -lot single-family cottage housing demonstration project. The project includes public and private street improvements, construction of drainage features using Low Impact Design (LID) concepts, utility improvements, a 580 square -foot community building, and parking for thirty vehicles in at -grade parking stalls, attached garages and detached garages. Approximately seventeen percent of the site will be retained in open space tracts in compliance with cottage housing design requirements. Project Name: Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat Location: SW 312th Street at 6th Place SW in the SW 1/4 of Section 07, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M., in King County, Washington (Vicinity Map), and encompasses King County parcel numbers #072104-9024, 9110, 9111, 9109, and 9114. Applicant: William McCaffrey The WJM Studio 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116 Federal Way, WA 98023 Agent: Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 North 30th Street, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services City Staff Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, final staff evaluation for this action, and other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations designated as a basis for exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act Rules pursuant to RCW 43.31C.I 10. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on April 30, 2008. Unless modified by the City, this determination will become final following the comment deadline. Any person aggrieved by the City's determination may file an appeal with the City within 14 days of the above comment deadline. You may appeal this determination to Greg Fewins, Director of Community Development Services, at the City of Federal Way (address below), no later than 5:00 p.m. on May 14, 2008, by a written letter stating the reason for the appeal of the determination. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Responsible Official: Greg Fewins Title: Director, Department of Community Development Services Address: 33325 8t' Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Date Issued: April 16, 2008 Signature: 07-106875 I.D. 45004 CITY OF 4A Federal 1!1!'ay Department of Community Development Services FINAL STAFF EVALUATION FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat Federal Way File No: 07-106875-00-SE (Related Files: 07-106874-00-SU and 07-106876-00-CN) NOTE: The purpose of this staff evaluation is to provide technical staff evaluation of the proposed action; supplement information contained in the environmental checklist and expanded studies; provide technical information unavailable to the applicant; correct inaccurate information; and recommend measures to the responsible official to mitigate identified impacts. Technical reports and attachments referenced herein may not be attached to all copies of this evaluation. Copies of reports, attachments, or other documents may be reviewed, and/or obtained by contacting Deb Barker, Senior Planner, Department of Community Development Services, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718. Phone: 253-835-2642. I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION Subdivision of five lots, 1.85 acres in size, into a sixteen -lot single-family cottage housing demonstration project. The project includes public and private street improvements, construction of drainage features using Low Impact Design (LID) concepts, utility improvements, a 580 square -foot community building, and parking for thirty vehicles in at -grade parking stalls, attached garages and detached garages. Approximately seventeen percent of the site will be retained in open space tracts in compliance with cottage housing design requirements. (Exhibit A, Reduced Scale Site Plan). 11. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Name: Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat Applicant: William McCaffrey The WJM Studio 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116 Federal Way, WA 98023 Location: SW 312t" Street at 6`h Place SW in the SW t/4 of Section 07, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M., in King County, Washington (Vicinity Map), and encompasses King County parcel numbers #072104-9024, 9110, 9111, 9109, and 9114. Parcel Size: 1.85 acres (80,586 square feet) Zoning: Residential Single -Family (RS 7.2) Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single -Family High -Density The following technical information was submitted as part of the application for the proposed development. • Project memo on site statistical information for sheet 1 of AHBL civil plans from AHBL dated December 26, 2007 • Tree evaluation and protection plan prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants, dated December 18, 2007 (Originals re -submitted on December 26, 2007) ■ Preliminary Technical Information report prepared by AHBL dated December 2007 • Level 1 Drainage analysis prepared by AHBL dated December 2007 • Conceptual site plan, conceptual grading and drainage plan, utility plan, notes, details and SW 312th Street ROW improvement plans prepared by AHBL dated December 21, 2007 • Record of survey prepared by Informed Land Survey, dated December 16, 2007, recording date unknown ■ Topographic survey prepared by Paul Hill Mabry dated December 21, 2007 • Cottage Housing plan sheets Al: Overall site plan and cottage housing requirements; A2: Proforma site plan; A3: Unit A plans, elevations and sections; A4: Unit B plans, elevations and sections; A5: Units AFF plans, elevations and sections; A6: Unit A-CSF and Unit B-CSF Compact Single Family unit plans; A7: Commons Building plan, sections and foundation plan; A8: Garage #1 plans, elevations, sections and foundation plan; A9: Garage #2 plans, elevations, sections and foundation plan; A10: Garage #3 plans, elevations, sections and foundation plan; and Al 1: Garages #4 & #5 plans, elevations, sections and foundation plan all prepared by The WJM Studio dated December 21, 2007 ■ Conceptual Landscape Plan prepared by Artistic Garden Concepts, dated January 2, 2007 III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Analysis of Environmental Checklist Following are staff responses to the elements of the environmental checklist (Exhibit 0 indicating whether or not City staff concurs with the applicant's response to the checklist item, or staff clarification or amendment of the response. A. BACKGROUND 1-5. Concur with the checklist. 6. A two -week comment period commences following issuance of an environmental determination, followed by a two -week appeal period. At the conclusion of the environmental review process, the City forwards the preliminary plat application to the Federal Way Hearing Examiner for review. Following a public hearing, the Examiner issues a recommendation on the preliminary plat application. The preliminary plat recommendation is forwarded to the Federal Way City Council for review. Following preliminary plat approval, civil engineering plans are reviewed by the City before construction commences. The City Council must approve the constructed final plat before recording. 7-9. Concur with the checklist. Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat 07-106875/Doc. J.D. 44W Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 2 10. Concur with the checklist. In addition, the applicant is responsible to identify and obtain all applicable outside agency permits as may be required for the project. 11-12. Concur with the checklist. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. Concur with the checklist. b. Concur with the checklist. The site measures 100 feet wide by 756 feet long. The site generally slopes from the northwest to the southeast with an elevation change of approximately 55 feet over the length of the site. Concur with the checklist. According to the 1971 King County Soils Survey Map, soil classification for the subject site is AgB - Alderwood Series Gravelly Sandy Loam, 0-6 percent slope. These soils are characterized as somewhat excessively drained, with slow to medium runoff rates. d. Concur with the checklist. The site is outside of identified landslide, seismic, or erosion hazard areas, as shown on the City's Critical Areas Map. Concur with the checklist. Preliminary grading plans depict clearing of the entire site for installation of infiltration systems, rain gardens, access driveways, and utilities. The source of the fill is not known at this time. Depicted grading exceeds the parameters of FWCC Section 20-179 Retention of Vegetation, which requires that all clearing not related to infrastructure development is to be conducted only after final plat approval and building permit issuance. Historically, the Federal Way City Council has granted mass clearing approval to subdivision proposals on a limited basis based on extenuating or unusual circumstances. Concur with the checklist. The applicant must submit a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan consistent with provisions of the FWCC to prevent and/or minimize erosion impacts during the construction phase of the project. Post construction erosion potential will be minimized by applicant's proposed stormwater drainage plan contained within the submitted Storm Drainage Calculations. Compliance with code provisions will prevent and/or minimize erosion impacts; thus, no additional mitigation measures are necessary. g. Concur with the checklist. Under FWCC Section 22-923(12), the maximum lot coverage in cottage housing developments is 60 percent of the gross site area. Paved components of common open spaces areas and walkways shall not be counted in calculation of lot coverage. h. Concur with the checklist. A TESC Plan must be approved and implemented in accordance with the City's engineering standards, in conjunction with filling and grading activities. Land surface modifications are regulated by FWCC Chapter 21 and the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), and the applicant has proposed to install replacement trees in conformance with FWCC. Staff has requested Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat 07-106875/Doc. 1D. 44844 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 3 r additional information in order to adequately review the grading request and provide a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed regrading actions in conjunction with preliminary plat review. 2. Air a. Short-term effects to air quality will occur during construction and paving operations. Construction activity contributes to carbon monoxide levels through the operation of construction machinery, delivery equipment and materials, and worker access to the site by automobile. These activities also include the emissions of hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen, potentially elevating the level of photochemical oxidants (such as ozone) in the ambient air. Long-term impacts, due to vehicle and maintenance equipment (such as lawn mowers and emissions from employees' and guests' vehicles) will vary in level according to the amount of traffic generated in the future by the proposal. b. Offsite sources of emissions will include local automobile traffic and wood smoke from neighboring homes. C. Compliance with local (FWCC Section 22-947), state, and federal air quality standards will provide sufficient mitigation of potential on -site construction activities and long-term site usage. The implementation of an approved TESC plan that incorporates watering of the site, wheel washing, and approved construction entrances, should adequately mitigate potential adverse construction impacts. 3. Water a. Surface 1) Concur with the checklist. The site is within a drainage basin that discharges into systems that discharge into Mirror Lake, Fishers Bog, and through local wetlands into Lakota Creek and into Puget Sound. 2-6) Concur with the checklist. b. Ground 1-2) The project site is located within the five-year Wellhead Protection Zone of the Redondo Milton Channel Aquifer for Lakehaven Utility District for well 23A, and the site is classified as a "Low Risk Parcel" for the District's Wellhead Protection Program. The applicant completed a Hazardous Material Inventory Statement for the Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Area and noted that the proposed development will not store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous materials not common to a residential subdivision. This will be reviewed in conjunction with construction permits. C. Water Runoff 1) Concur with the checklist. The level I downstream analysis prepared by AHBL, Inc. dated December 2007 states that the site is within a Level 3 Flow Control area and a Resource Stream Treatment area, and is therefore subject to flow control and water quality requirements of the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) as adopted and amended by the City. The applicant has proposed low impact development or LID -based drainage features to be designed according to the 2005 KCSWDM. During engineering approval, Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat 07-1 O6S75/Doc.I,D. 44844 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 4 the City will review the proposed subdivision development for conformance with either 2005 KCSWDM or the 1998 KCSWDM. No adverse stormwater impacts are anticipated with either scenario based on the required compliance with code requirements for the treatment and discharge of stormwater. 2) Concur with the checklist. d. Concur with the checklist. Prior to construction of any improvements and/or buildings on the site, those portions of the drainage facilities necessary to accommodate the control of surface and stormwater runoff discharging from the site must be constructed and in operation in accordance with all City requirements. Compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations will ensure that surface water impacts are appropriately mitigated. The final TIR submitted with engineering permits shall demonstrate that there are no impacts to Mirror Lake. No further mitigation is required. 4. Plants a. Concur with the checklist. b. Concur with the checklist. The applicant has proposed clearing and grading of the subject site in conjunction with installation of trenches and rain gardens associated with the LID drainage features. The Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants dated December 26, 2007, was submitted to document the number of trees that meet FWCC based definition of significant tree. Concur with the checklist. d. The subject site contains sixty-one trees which meet the definition of significant tree pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1568; fifty-seven of the trees (93%) are proposed to be removed during plat development with four significant trees retained at the southern end of the site. The applicant proposes replacement trees located on the commonly owned areas of the cottage housing development. The scope of clearing exceeds that permitted under the City's subdivision code, which limits site clearing to plat infrastructure and which requires tree replacement in conjunction with individual building permits. An approved landscape plan is required for this project. The landscape plan, prepared by AHBL, shows four significant trees proposed to be retained at the south end of the site, as well as tree replacement, vegetative buffering and common open space landscaping proposed for this subdivision. Street trees will be installed in the right-of-way behind the curbs on SW 312t' Street and 6t' Place SW. The proposed mass grading shall be reviewed as part of preliminary plat and engineering review, and replacement of significant trees consistent with FWCC Section 22-1568 is required. 5. Animals a. Concur with the checklist. A neighbor reports observing skunks, raccoons, feral cats, rats, and mice at or near the subject site. These animals may be considered nuisances and are not protected under state or local laws. Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat 07-106875/Do� I.o. 44844 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 5 b. Concur with the checklist. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) priority habitat report and species map has no record of threatened, endangered, or sensitive species of wildlife within a mile of the subject site. c-d. Concur with the checklist. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a-c. Concur with the checklist. 7. Environmental Health a. 1-2) Concur with the checklist; normal emergency services are anticipated. The proposed plat will be served by an internal access road suitable for emergency vehicle access and each structure will be fully sprinklered as required by South King Fire and Rescue. Fire and police department personnel have reviewed this plat for adequacy of emergency access and layout, and found no significant environmental health hazards. In addition, the project site is located within the five-year Wellhead Protection Zone of the Redondo Milton Channel Aquifer for Lakehaven Utility District Well 23A, and the site is classified as a "Low Risk Parcel" for the District's Wellhead Protection Program. This will be reviewed in preliminary plat review. No further mitigation measures are necessary. b. Noise 1-3) Noise levels will increase on a long-term basis, due to the creation of sixteen dwelling units on the largely undeveloped site. Control measures include required conformance with local noise ordinances regulating hours of construction. An increase in noise levels due to traffic generated by the new residences is expected on a long-term basis. The majority of noise will be generated by vehicle traffic and will occur during the major commuter times during the week consistent with surrounding developed residential areas. Compliance with the code and implementation of the measures outlined in the checklist will sufficiently mitigate noise levels. Additionally, proposed landscaping along storm facilities, internal landscaping, and the open space will help buffer noise levels. No further mitigation measures are necessary. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a-c. Concur with the checklist. Housing is also contained in conjunction with the church site east of the subject site. d. Concur with the checklist. The shed shall be removed prior to final plat approval. e-g. Concur with the checklist. The subject site is located within a 10-year wellhead protection area (WHPA). In addition, the project site is located within the five-year Wellhead Protection Zone of the Redondo Milton Channel Aquifer for Lakehaven Utility District Well 23A, and the site is classified as a "Low Risk Parcel" for the District's Wellhead Protection Program. The applicant completed a Hazardous Material Inventory Statement for the Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Area and noted that the proposed development will not store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous materials not common to a residential plat. This Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat 07-106875/Doi I.D. aasaa Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 6 will be reviewed in conjunction with construction permits. Mirror Lake is located approximately 170 feet south of the subject site, and is separated from the site by SW 312ffi Street and a developed single-family lot. i-k. Concur with the checklist. Concur with the checklist. In addition to the subdivision code, the development must comply with cottage housing code provisions under FWCC Section 22-923 et al. 9. Housing a-c. Concur with the checklist. Under FWCC, the Cottage Housing project can include compact single-family units as well as cottage housing units. The maximum size of a compact single-family unit is 1,300 square feet, while the maximum size of a cottage unit is 1,100 square feet. Affordable housing provisions are a key element of cottage housing projects. Affordable housing shall have the same appearance, utilize the same materials as the market rate units, and be dispersed throughout the cottage housing development. 10. Aesthetics a-c. Concur with the checklist. Views onto the site will change from a forested site to that of a cottage housing based residential development. The proposal calls for 9,449 square feet of common open space and 4,674 square feet of rain garden area for a total of 12,123 square feet of open space, which will add to the character and attractiveness of the proposed development. 11. Light and Glare a-c. Concur with the checklist. The applicant will install one low light pole on the south side of the parking entry at 6th Place SW to illuminate the entry. The existing SW 312t' poles will be re-lamped to achieve brighter lighting. No lighting will be included in the 6t' .Place SW right-of-way. All other lighting will be building or ground mounted. d. The project must comply with FWCC Sections 22-950 and 22-954, which regulate off -site lighting and glare. Compliance with applicable lighting regulations in FWCC should sufficiently mitigate project impacts. 12. Recreation a Concur with the checklist. According to the 2006 City's Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Comprehensive Plan, neighborhood parks serve residents within a mile radius. The site is located in Park Planning Area A. Under the FWCC, applications for subdivision shall provide fifteen percent of the gross land area in open space, or make a fee -in -lieu -of payment for the open space, except however, cottage housing developments are required to provide open space on site so the fee is not an option. b. Concur with the checklist. Cottage housing developments are required to provide common open space based on 500 square feet per dwelling unit, with a minimum of 3,000 improved for active and passive recreation use. The sixteen units requires 8,000 square feet of open space, and the applicant proposes to provide 14,123 square feet open space to include Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat 07-106875/Doc i n. 44844 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 7 seating, trails, pea patches, community building, gazebo with lawn and picnic tables. The checklist notes that there are currently no plans for improvements to an easement to Mirror Lake, which is a private lake. The Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing proposal received conceptual approval on April 17, 2007, subject to several conditions, including a provision that rain gardens that be counted as open space only if they contain open space features such as trails, seating and landscaping. The proposed rain garden areas include these features. The minimum amount of required common open space is provided without calculating the rain garden areas. No further mitigation is necessary. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a-c. Concur with the checklist. 14. Transportation a-e. Concur with the checklist. Pursuant to the FWCC, the applicant will be responsible for the design and construction of half street improvements plus tapers along the east side of 6'h Place SW. That existing private street section does not meet city code standards. The Public Works Director, in a February 9, 2007, modification response, upheld the required Type "W" cross section for 6"' Place SW. The required improvements shall include 20 feet of pavement, 4-foot planter strip, 5-foot sidewalk and 3-foot utility strip. This property will remain private but must be set -aside in a Tract X for possible future dedication to the City. Half street improvements along the north side of SW 312`h Street fronting the subject site shall comply with Type "K" standards, with 44 feet of paving, 8-foot sidewalk, 6- foot planter strip and 5-foot bike lane, 11-foot-wide driving lane and 12-foot center lane within a 78-foot right-of-way. Currently, the SW 312`h Street right-of-way is wider than the required cross section; area not required by the City for future right-of-way may be vacated by the City Council following a formal street vacation process. The internal driveway was approved to a 24-foot-wide minimum with a five-foot sidewalk on one site. The right-of-way modification letter dated February 9, 2007, erroneously states that sidewalks are required on both sides of the internal roadway. Traffic generated from the proposed development will also impact other roadways and intersections near the site scheduled for improvements. See item g below for specific impacts. f. Concur with the checklist. The City's Traffic engineers determined that trip generation results in 19 new PM peak hour trips. These trips generated by the project contribute new trips onto the existing transportation network. g. Concur with the checklist. The applicant submitted a Concurrency application which has been reviewed by Public Works Traffic staff. The Concurrency analysis will provide mitigation measures to be incorporated into conditions of Process III Project Approval, will address any failures of the City's Level of Service (LOS) standard, and will provide for the collection of pro-rata share mitigation towards the City's Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) projects impacted by the proposed development. Minor Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat 07-106875A)m i.n 44844 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 8 The following are components of the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan supporting the Process III conditions for the development. TG2 Provide a safe, efficient, convenient, and financially sustainable transportation system with sufficient capacity to move people, goods, and services at an acceptable level of service. The City shall develop and adopt policies for the construction, reconstruction, maintenance, and preservation of new and existing facilities. TP6 Give priority to transportation alternatives that improve mobility in term of people and goods moved for the least cost. TP16 The City's LOS standard shall be E. This is defined herein as a volume/capacity ratio less than 1.00 in accordance with Highway Capacity Manual (1994) operational analysis procedures. At signalized intersections, the analysis shall be conducted using a 120-second cycle length and level of service E is defined as less than 60 seconds of stopped delay per vehicle. Where transit or HOV facilities are provided, the LOS shall be measured by average delay and volume/capacity ratio per person rather than per vehicle. This standard shall be used to identify concurrency needs and mitigation of development impacts. For long- range transportation planning and concurrency analysis, a volume/ capacity ratio of 0.90 or greater will be used to identify locations for the more detailed operational analysis. TP17 Expand arterial capacity by constructing channelization improvements at intersections when they are an alternative to creating new lanes along a roadway corridor. TP24 Consider safety first in the design of intersection improvements. TP43 Minor capacity projects, placing spot (localized) traffic improvements, will be carried out to extend the capacity of system components. 15. Public Services a-b. Concur with the checklist. The applicant prepared a school access narrative as directed by the Federal Way School District. The site is located in the service areas for Lake Grove Elementary, Lakota Middle School, and Federal Way High School. Middle and elementary school students will walk to school as these schools are within one mile of the subject site, while high school students will be bused to school. Lakota Middle School students will walk west along SW 312`h Street to the middle school, crossing SW 312th at 8th Avenue SW in a marked crosswalk. Lake Grove Elementary and Federal Way High School students will walk north along 6th Place SW to SW 308th Street. The Lake Grove students will continue east to the school grounds within a path separated from the vehicular travel lane by a curb. High school students will catch the school bus at SW 308th and 8th Avenue SW. Bus stops are subject to change as student needs increase and roads are developed. Minor Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat 07-106875/Dm- i D. 44844 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 9 The collection of school impact fees will mitigate impacts to school service delivery. The current school mitigation fee is $3,883.00 (plus a $194.00 City administrative fee) for a single-family residence and is collected at building permit issuance for a residence. Note that the Federal Way City Council adjusts the impact fee annually and the applicable fee would be determined at the time a complete individual single- family building permit is submitted to the City. 16. Utilities a-b. Concur with the checklist. As of the date of environmental determination, the applicant had not yet made application to Lakehaven Utility District for a predevelopment, Pre -Design, or Developer Extension Agreement. Pipes ranging from eight inches to twelve inches in diameter will be installed during site development. IV. CONCLUSION The lead agency for this proposal has determined that the proposed action does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.032(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. The information is available to the public upon request. The City reserves the right to review any future revisions or alterations to the site or the proposal in order to determine the environmental significance or nonsignificance of the project at that point in time. V. EXHIBITS Exhibit A — Reduced Scale Site Plan Exhibit B — Vicinity Map Exhibit C — Environmental Checklist, signed March 6, 2008 Prepared by: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Date: April 10, 2008 07-106875/noc. i n 44844 Page 10 s NEINabi osu E)NIsnOH 3M ONV NV -Id ails llVH3AO {l;iiil e _I lVLL1Wsns 3WOH SOV1100 GOOVLiVZL :31vo 3nssi E dM ',kVM WU3a3: NM:A9OWW] ;87 flE og ' IS 43Z M MS V09 WfM :A9 —1 I w EXHIBIT-2� PAGE I OF_� N � � W �U) cu �O cuo� OLo a-.0 U) Q cp 00 c O co co C CD 0 E � 00 �C:) Z0 po� O ++ C Q .s N DO c�c �(D .E Eco ��= � a) N 0 00- U Y U) a� m 0 m 0 0 U 0 � m m W m v 0 N Y p U a, J -i a a DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33530 First Way South PO Box 9718 i RESUBMITTED Federal Way WA 98063-9718 CITY OF ` f '- 253-661-4000; Fax 253-661-4129 Federal Way MAR 0 7 2008 yy4y_ei1yoLtuicralu:Jy corn CITY OF FEDERAL WAY BUILDING DEPT. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW Chapter 43.21 C, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON -PROJECT PROPOSALS Complete this checklist for non -project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for Non -Project Actions (part D). For non -project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. EXtIIEl1T PAGE _L-OF_ n..uo.:. WA M JL4­111 1 Q IM11 13- 1 _fP 1 A. BACKGROUND ! _ Name of proposed project, if applicable: Mirror Lake Highland 2. Name of applicant: William McCaffrey Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: William McCaffrey The WJM Studio 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116 Federal Way, WA 98023 (253) 231-7125 4. Date checklist prepared: December 21, 2007 Amended March 3, 2008 Agency requesting checklist: City of Federal Way 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): No phasing is proposed. The project proposes to be under construction beginning in the late Spring 2008. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants, dated December 18,2007; Sight Distance Analysis verified by Paul Mabry, PLS, of Informed Land Survey, dated December 20, 2007; Geotechnical Engineering Study, prepared by Pacific Geo Engineering, dated December 20, 2007; Preliminary Technical Information Report, prepared by AHBL, Inc., dated December 20, 2007. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City ofFederal Way: Preliminary Plat approval, SEPA Determination, site development permits, building permits, Right -of Way Use Permit. $ ter General Permit (NPDES) cove WA Dept. of Ecology: Construction tormwa a �F11 0 1� Dept of Natural Resources: Forest Practices Permit. p A G ` ®F It. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The project is a cottage housing demonstration project consisting of 14 single family dwelling units and 2 affordable dwelling units on a 1.85-acre site. The project was selected through a City selection process which included a neighborhood meeting. The project will incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) strategies including rain gardens and several common open space areas. The project will construct an onsite private road for access to the project from 6th Place SW. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project site is located at 604 SW 312th Street. The site is identified as King County Tag Parcel No. 072104-9024, and is located in the NE'/ of Section 7, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian. A legal description is provided with the Title Report and Land Survey. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rc ling, hi l steep slopes, mountainous, other. The northern portion of the site slopes from west o east, and the central and southern portion of the site slopes from north to south down towards SW 312th Street. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The site has an overall gradient of approximately 7%, with the steepest slope approximately 10%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, mulch)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The Soil Survey of King County identifies soils as the site as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. Please see the Geotechnical Engineering Report for more details. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. At the time of preliminary plat application, the cut and fill quantities are estimated to he 194 CY of cut and 5,562 CY of fill. These quantities will be refined and potentially reduced through the project design phase. The fill quantities are required for stormwater runoff to be conveyed to the infiltration areas and provide 3'-5' sub -base of soil for the infiltration of stormwater. Infiltration of stormwater is the preferred method of flow control as defined by the King County Surface Water Design Manual, as adopted by the City of Federal Way E XH I B IT C PAGE OFF_ •1:1..ttot'.. uncn tit Innz 13— n -f a 6•�u�..a...,r� no.,:�o,n G....:......,,o.,r.,t !'Mvrl.l: cr f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? if so, generally describe. Erosion could potentially occur during clearing and grading. Potential erosion impacts would be controlled as noted in B.Lh below. After construction, erosion would not occur as the site will be stabilized with vegetation and developed with a storm drainage system. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 47%. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. During construction a temporary erosion control plan conforming to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual will be designed and implemented to reduce and control erosion. After the project is complete, landscaping and a stormwater system consisting of catchbasins, conveyance, and infiltration facilities will control erosion. 2. AIR a What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Construction activities at the site will stir up dust particles, and construction vehicles and equipment will also be a potential source of exhaust emissions. After project completion, the primary sources of emissions will be automobile exhaust. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. Conform to vehicle emissions standards and practice dust abatement measures during clearing, grading and construction. 3. WATER a. Surface 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Mirror Lake, an approximately 17-acre lake, is located approximately 150 feet to the south of the site. The area drains into Lakota Creek, which ultimately discharges into Dumas Bay (part of Puget Sound). 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Frontage improvements and site development work will occur within 200 feet of Mirror Lake. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No fill will be added to or material dredged from Mirror Lake. EXHIBU G PAGE GF�_ M.16+i.. MArn 11.f-1. 19 lnn'x D.— Q nr 14 I-M—.i—t� 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a I00-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material will be discharged into the ground. C. Water Runoff (including stormwater) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The source of runoff will be stormwater. Temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) measures will be implemented in accordance with the standards of the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin, the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual and the City of Federal Way requirements to control stormwater runoff during clearing, grading, and construction activities. After construction, stormwater collected via catchbasins and will be conveyed via pipes and will be infiltrated through the use of shallow infiltration facilities and trenches. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The water quality facility and Low Impact Development features will ensure that no waste materials could enter ground or surface waters. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. Temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) measures to reduce and control impacts to water during construction will be implemented. The stormwater system described above in B.3.c(1) and in the Preliminary Technical Information Report will control impacts after the project is complete. EX IZ`31�; �1 T._ PAGE-.�!-QF_LL, Q-16r:., ancn TA-1, 14 1nnz 13— r -F 14 Y-\[I�.,.7..�.ro Do.,:oa.11G'...,:........o.,♦mil !'I,o..Ll: �r 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site. X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs X grass _ pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other _ water plant: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other _other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Most vegetation will be removed to construct the project. The northern portion of the site currently includes second growth timber, mainly Douglas -fir. The understory is predominantly Indian plum, bracken fern, Himalayan blackberry and holly. No trees of any particular significance were noted in this area. The southern end of the property is scattered with individual or small clusters of trees. The conditions range from very poor to very good. The understory is predominantly grasses and weeds. A 100% inventory of trees defined as significant per FWCC was completed by Washington Forestry Consultants. A total of 61 significant trees were found. Fffty-one of these trees were healthy and ten were deemed hazardous and recommended for removal. There are four significant trees located near the project entrance that are planned to be retained. See the Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants for more information. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. Landscaping will include street trees along the property frontage on SW 312`h Street, landscaping in the common open space areas, and vegetated rain gardens planted with native and other appropriate plantings for a stormwater infiltration feature. See the Landscape Plan for more information. 5. ANMIALS a. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. birds: haw n, eagle, s agbirds ther: mammals deer, r, elk, beaver, other: �� C j fish: bass, sa man, trout, herring, shellfish, other: PAS_1E_ OFA, Mncn nR. t, IQ Innz V..—'7 ..f 1 A L-A" ...L...ro b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The site is located within the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. The proposed landscape plan includes the use of native plant species to enhance wildlife habitat. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas will be used for lighting, heating, and cooking. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. The project will conform to the State Energy Code. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. l) Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services would be required. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area that may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? The only noise would be generated from the traffic on SW 312t Street. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction traffic noise and construction noise will be generated during construction. Noise would occur during permitted construction hours. After construction, noise would primarily be generated by traffic entering and leaving the site. This noise would occur during peak commute times. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. Comply with vehicle noise standards and noise abatement practices during construction. Landscaping will minimize off -site noise impacts after project completion. t E 1-1121 7 PA _ E encn n,r., 6 IQ )nnz 13- 9 -r I A....;. -.>A r-1 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is presently used as a single-family residence. Surrounding properties are single-family residences to the west and south, vacant land to the north, and a church to the east. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. There is an existing single-family residence and two associated accessory structures on the site. d. Will, any structures be demolished? If so, what? All structures presently existing will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The zoning classification of the site is RS 7.2. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The comprehensive plan designation of the site is Single Family -High Density. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 40 people would live in the completed project. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The project would displace two people. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. The project would construct new single-family residences which would offset any displacement impacts. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. Conformance to applicable provisions of the FWCC and the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The completed project would provide 14 middle -income and two affordable income homes. The affordable income homes will have Deed restrictions for 15 years ensuring they remain affordable to future owners. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminawci? Indicate whether hi middles l w- Hncn k,r-k IQ 7nn1 1 income housing. One existing middle -income home would be eliminated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. None. 10. AESTHETICS a What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The tallest structure will be 18 feet tall (roofs no higher than 24 feet) in accordance with the City of Federal Way zoning standards. The exterior materials will be primarily wood with some brick or stone accents. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. This cottage housing project proposed extensive on -site landscaping that will result in a superior aesthetic. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Glare from streetlights and exterior house lights would be present. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Lake Grove Park is approximately a V2 mile walk to the west. Lake Grove Elementary School is approximately a t/Z mile walk to the east. Lakota Park is located approximately % miles to the west. French Lake Park is located approximately one mile to the southeast. One of the subject parcels (includes 5 of the new homes) is the beneficiary of a 10-foot access easement to Miirror Lake. b. Would the proposed displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. C. R,.nor:.. unc Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recmition opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. The project will provide approximately 14,000 SF of pocket park -like amenities, including paths, benches, rain gardens and viewing decks. At this time there are no plans for improvements t the Mirror Lake access easement for the 5 benefited homes. EXH I _ PAGE F n A.T•, 1, IQ IMI nonce to nr 14 I •1u ,. in. +� i7 n..:r tip ..:. � i 3 ! l 0 41:ct 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL. PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, nation, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. None. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street systen-L Show on site plans, if any. The site will be accessed from 6th Place SW, which connects to SW 312th Street. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. There is a transit stop at the intersection of 6th Place SW and SW 312th Street. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Three current parking spaces would be eliminated. The project will have 16 enclosed garage spaces and 14 surface parking spaces for a total of 30,. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (IndiuitL whether public or private). Yes. Half -street frontage improvements to SW 312'h Street will be provided consisting of curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscape planter strip and dedication of Right of Way in conformance with the City of Federal Way's Type K Street Section. 6'h Ave SW has been approved to comply with the Type "W" road section. See the plan sheets provided with the application for more detail e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be ~generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The completed project would generate approximately 160 trips per day, assuming a typical trip standard of 10 trips per day per single family unit, which is the standard used in the ITE Manual. Peak volumes would occur during the morning and evening commute hours. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. The City has a Concurrency Permit process to determine if any traffic analysis and/or traffic mitigation fees will apply to the project. The applicant would be expected to contribute pro-rata shares toward TIP projects impacted by one or more trips. EXHIBIT. C, AGE � 0O n..uo«:.. =4- 41A';ZA lka-,.,.h IQ 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The project would result in a slight increased need for public services similar to any new housing development. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. UTILITIES a Cir �sewe able at the site lectricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanieptic system, other. The project will connect to the following utilities: 12" Water line in SW 312th Street 6" Water line in 6th Place SW 8" Sewer line south of SW 312th Street 12" Storm sewer line in SW 312th Street b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity that might be needed. Electricity: Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy Water: Lakehaven Utility District Sanitary Sewer: Lakehaven Utility District Solid Waste: Waste Management, Inc. Telephone: Qwest Cable: Comcast C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. SIGNATURE: -,/W DATE SUBMITTED: m2e EXHIBIT-L. PAGE-J-OF_J� Bulletin #050 — March 18, 2003 Page I 1 of 16 k:\tlandouts — Revised\Environmental Checklist 41k CIT Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES RESUBMITTED MAR 0 7 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL. WAY BUILDING DEPT. 33530 First Way South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-661-4000; Fax 253-661-4129 V.tl1�'4�. C1lVp��CL1s:r8��3aY_C�ill ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW Chapter 43.21 C, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON -PROJECT PROPOSALS Complete this checklist for non -project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for Non -Project Actions (part D). For non -project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. D-11.ti„ HAV) 1\4—k 1 4 Innz 13— 1 of IA 1.duo... —+, An..;co�F.,.rir..r.mnn♦mil !'1.o,.L1: A. BACKGROUND Name of proposed project, if applicable: Mirror Lake Highland 2. Name of applicant: William McCaffrey 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: William McCaffrey The WJM Studio 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116 Federal Way, WA 98023 (253) 231-7125 4. Date checklist prepared: December 21, 2007 Amended March 3, 2008 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Federal Way 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): No phasing is proposed. The project proposes to be under construction beginning in the late Spring 2008. 7. Do you have any plans for fixture additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants, dated December 18, 2007; Sight Distance Analysis verified by Paul Mabry, PLS, of Informed Land Survey, dated December 20, 2007; Geotechnical Engineering Study, prepared by Pacific Geo Engineering, dated December 20, 2007; Preliminary Technical Information Report, prepared by AHBL, Inc., dated December 20, 2007. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Federal Way: Preliminary Plat approval, SEPA Determination, site development permits, building permits, Right -of -Way Use Permit. WA Dept. of Ecology: Construction Stormwater General Permit (NPDES) coverage. Dept of Natural Resources: Forest Practices Permit. R„llo+;,, a+nSn T.lorrh 14 �nn1 vnnA 7 ..f 1� L•\IIo,,.a..,,+o 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The project is a cottage housing demonstration project consisting of 14 single family dwelling units and 2 affordable dwelling units on a 1.85-acre site. The project was selected through a City selection process which included a neighborhood meeting. The project will incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) strategies including rain gardens and several common open space areas. The project will construct an onsite r�rvate road for access to the project from 6th Place SW. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project site is located at 604 SW 312th Street. The site is identified as King County Tax Parcel No. 072104-9024, and is located in the NE % of Section 7, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian. A legal description is provided with the Title Report and Land Survey. B. ENviRONMENTAL ELEm ENTs 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, li�Oeas>t., , steep slopes, mountainous, other. The northern portion of the site slopes from west and the central and southern portion of the site slopes from north to south down towards SW 312th Street. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The site has an overall gradient of approximately 7%, with the steepest slope approximately 10%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, mulch)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The Soil Survey of King County identifies soils as the site as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. Please see the Geotechnical Engineering Report for more details. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. At the time of preliminary plat application, the cut and fill quantities are estimated to be 194 CY of cut and 5,562 CY of fill. These quantities will be refined and potentially reduced through the project design phase. The fill quantities are required for stormwater runoff to be conveyed to the infiltration areas and provide Y-5' sub -base of soil for the infiltration of stormwater. Infiltration of stormwater is the preferred method of flow control as defined by the King County Surface Water Design Manual, as adopted by the City of Federal Way R„llof:,. -nan T I - 1, 1 4 I)AM D— A ..f 14 VATJ—A—+, f Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion could potentially occur during clearing and grading. Potential erosion impacts would be controlled as noted in B.Lh below. After construction, erosion would not occur as the site will be stabilized with vegetation and developed with a storm drainage system g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buiildings)? Approximately 47%c h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. During construction a temporary erosion control plan conforming to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual will be designed and implemented to reduce and control erosion. After the project is complete, landscaping and a stormwater system consisting of catchbasins, conveyance, and infiltration facilities will control erosion. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Construction activities at the site will stir up dust particles, and construction vehicles and equipment will also be a potential source of exhaust emissions. After project completion, the primary sources of emissions will be automobile exhaust. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. Conform to vehicle emissions standards and practice dust abatement measures during clearing, grading and construction. 3. WATER a. Surface 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? if yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Mirror Lake, an approximately 17-acre lake, is located approximately 150 feet to the south of the site. The area drains into Lakota Creels, which ultimately discharges into Dumas Bay (part of Puget Sound). 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Frontage improvements and site development work will occur within 200 feet of Mirror Lake. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No fill will be added to or material dredged from Mirror Lake. -4ncn r.4.,.• h IQ Innq 13 o c f 14 P)—lrl;ot 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste material will be discharged into the ground. c. Water Runoff (including stormwater) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The source of runoff will be stormwater. Temporary erosion and sediment control (TESL) measures will be implemented in accordance with the standards of the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin, the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual and the City of Federal Way requirements to control stormwater runoff during clearing, grading, and construction activities. After construction, stormwater collected via catchbasins and will be conveyed via pipes and will be infiltrated through the use of shallow infiltration facilities and trenches. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The water quality facility and Low Impact Development features will ensure that no waste materials could enter ground or surface waters. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. Temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) measures to reduce and control impacts to water during construction will be implemented. The stormwater system described above in B.3.c(1) and in the Preliminary Technical Information Report will control impacts after the project is complete. R„llar;,, a+ncn T�To��h 1 R �nn� 13— A ..f 1 U•\Uo.,.i.,,,♦o Ao.�;oA.1\F,,. �;.n,,,+,A.+rol !'hP�UI; 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site. X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs X grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other water plant: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other _other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Most vegetation will be removed to construct the project. The northern portion of the site currently includes second growth timber, mainly Douglas -fir. The understory is predominantly Indian plum, bracken fern, Himalayan blackberry and holly. No trees of any particular significance were noted in this area. The southern end of the property is scattered with individual or small clusters of trees. The conditions range from very poor to very good. The understory is predominantly grasses and weeds. A 100% inventory of trees defined as significant per FWCC was completed by Washington Forestry Consultants. A total of 61 significant trees were found. Fifty-one of these trees were healthy and ten were deemed hazardous and recommended for removal. There are four significant trees located near the project entrance that are planned to be retained. See the Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants for more information. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. Landscaping will include street trees along the property frontage on SW 312`h Street, landscaping in the common open space areas, and vegetated rain gardens planted with native and other appropriate plantings for a stormwater infiltration feature. See the Landscape Plan for more information. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. birds: haw n, eagle, s ngbirds ther: tnammaIs deer, , elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, s on, trout, herring, shellfish, other: u„nPr;. *nan TA-1, IQ I)nn11 T3 . 7 f 1 r IATJ­.i. t, Aa..;cu i\F ,..;�.. ,+o�♦ol f l o�Ll;ot b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The site is located within the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. The proposed landscape plan includes the use of native plant species to enhance wildlife habitat. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed' project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas will be used for lighting, heating, and cooking. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. The project will conform to the State Energy Code. 7. 1~NVIRONNIENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emmvmq services that might be required. No special emergency services would be required. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area that may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? The only noise would be generated from the traffic on SW 312`h Street. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction traffic noise and construction noise will be generated during construction. Noise would occur during permitted construction hours. After construction, noise would primarily be generated by traffic entering and leaving the site. This noise would occur during peak commute times. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. Comply with vehicle noise standards and noise abatement practices during construction. Landscaping will minimize off -site noise impacts after project completion. n-11A+;,, -Mncn TIA— 1, 19 1nn2 13— Q .,f 1 A U•\Aon.1n„tc Aa..;coA\F,.,.;,•.,,,...o+.tol !'ha�Uhof 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is presently used as a single-family residence. Surrounding properties are single-family residences to the west and south, vacant land to the north, and a church to the east. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. There is an existing single-family residence and two associated accessory structures on the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? All structures presently existing will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The zoning classification of the site is RS 7.2. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The comprehensive plan designation of the site is Single Family -High Density. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 40 people would live in the completed project. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The project would displace two people. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. The project would construct new single-family residences which would offset any displacement impacts. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. Conformance to applicable provisions of the FWCC and the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The completed project would provide 14 middle -income and two affordable income homes. The affordable income homes will have Deed restrictions for 15 years ensuring they remain affordable to future owners. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- D-11.+;.. -+nan AA—h 19 IAM Po..A O .,f 1 AU•1i7",.i.,,,r� DA..:oo.i\F,,..;�..,,,+.o.,rol !`ho�Ll;of income housing. One existing middle -income home would be eliminated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. None. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The tallest structure will be 18 feet tall (roofs no higher than 24 feet) in accordance with the City of Federal Way zoning standards. The exterior materials will be primarily wood with some brick or stone accents. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. This cottage housing project proposed extensive on -site landscaping that will result in a superior aesthetic. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Glare from streetlights and exterior house lights would be present. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Lake Grove Park is approximately a'/ mile walk to the west. Lake Grove Elementary School is approximately a lh mile walk to the east. Lakota Park is located approximately % miles to the west. French Lake Park is located approximately one mile to the southeast. One of the subject parcels (includes 5 of the new homes) is the beneficiary of a 10-foot access easement to Mirror Lake. b. Would the proposed displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. The project will provide approximately 14,000 SF of pocket park -like amenities, including paths, benches, rain gardens and viewing decks. At this time there are no plans for improvements to the Mirror Lake access easement for the 5 benefited homes. n„no,;, +4ncn lkff .l, IQ 1AM Pons 1 n ..f i A v�u� a .,+� nP..;�o ���. ..:r . ,,,0„♦�1 (ho Ll;� 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, nation, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. None. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site will be accessed from 6th Place SW, which connects to SW 312th Street. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. There is a transit stop at the intersection of 6th Place SW and SW 312th Street. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Three current parking spaces would be eliminated. The project will have 16 enclosed garage spaces and 14 surface parking spaces for a total of 30y d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or u provements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes. Half -street frontage improvements to SW 312'h Street will be provided consisting of curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscape planter strip and dedication of Right of Way in conformance with the City of Federal Way's Type K Street Section. 6'h Ave SW has been approved to comply with the Type "W" road section. See the plan sheets provided with the application for more detail. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. £ How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The completed project would generate approximately 160 trips per day, assuming a typical trip standard of 10 trips per day per single family unit, which is the standard used in the ITE Manual. Peak volumes would occur during the morning and evening commute hours. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. The City has a Concurrency Permit process to determine if any traffic analysis and/or traffic mitigation fees will apply to the project. The applicant would be expected to contribute pro-rata shares toward TIP projects impacted by one or more trips. -"ncn Aff h 1 Q I)nnz 13- 1 1 ..f t 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The project would result in a slight increased need for public services similar to any new housing development. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. UTILITIES a. Or available at the site. lectricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewe septic system, other. The project will connect to the following utilities: 12" Water line in SW 312th Street 6" Water line in 6th Place SW 8" Sewer line south of SW 312th Street 12" Storm sewer line in SW 312th Street b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity that might be needed. Electricity: Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy Water: Lakehaven Utility District Sanitary Sewer: Lakehaven Utility District Solid Waste: Waste Management, Inc. Telephone: Qwest Cable: Comcast C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. SIGNATURE: //W DATE SUBMITTED: 29w:-I49J zgoe Bulletin #050 — March 18, 2003 Page 11 of 16 k:\Handouts — Revised\Environmental Checklist FILE CIT �. Federal Way May 9, 2008 Mr. Robert Roper Ms. Marla Ledin 525 SW 312a' Street Federal Way, WA 98023 RE: File #07-106875-00-SE; RESPONSE TO SEPA COMMENTS Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. Roper and Ms. Ledin: CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com Thank you for your comments on the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) decision for the above - referenced subdivision proposal. Several comment letters were provided to the City in response to the Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) issued on April 30, 2008. Your comments related to infiltration and drainage, trees, and lake access. This letter briefly responds to your comments, including comments from the Public Works Development Services Division and also forwards comments from the applicant. IN FILTRATION/ST ORMWATER Your letter states that you are uncertain whether the comments - particularly those having to do with stormwater — are best addressed during the SEPA process or during preliminary plat review, but you do believe that the infiltration scheme proposed and the use of fill materials deserves scrutiny and validation because of potential effects on nearby Mirror Lake. Your correspondence contains a number of very technical queries which are valid questions. However, it is important to note that at this time, the design is only required to be of a preliminary nature. The final design would be reviewed for compliance with mandated standards of the King County Surface Design Manual, and City amendments to the manual. Please see also comments from the Public Works Development Services Division below. TREES Your letter notes concerns that the environmental review process is getting ahead of the city's review of tree removal. Also, neighbors have expressed concerns that removal of the trees would alter their landscape view enjoyed by lake residents with an aesthetic environmental impact. The land identified for the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing preliminary plat project is privately owned and no part of it has been established for the use or benefit of Mirror Lake residents. Tree removal and retention issues are reviewed under the preliminary plat process and during engineering review. The Hearing Examiner and the City Council would evaluate any grading requests, and FWCC Section 22- 1568 permits removal of significant trees with corresponding tree replacement. The Federal Way City Council can approve the subdivision if the applicant demonstrates that all City development standards are met. In that the tree replacement issue is addressed under the FWCC, the City does not require the final decision to be made at the time of environmental determination. LAKE ACCESS Your letter notes that Mirror Lake residents are concerned about lake access provided to this subdivision, with concerns of crossing SW 312t' Street, the lack of toilet facilities, potential for trespassing, and gated access. As noted in a previous letter from Deb Barker, concerns about use of the access easement to RoperlLedin May 9, 2008 Page 2 Mirror Lake are of a civil nature, and not under City purview. The applicant has informed the city "there are no plans for improvements to the Mirror Lake access easement for benefited homes." The City will not require any improvements associated with use of this lake. Cross walks across SW 312'h Street are available east and west of the subject site. PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION The following comments have been prepared by Public Work Development Services Division in response to the letters dated April 30, 2008, from Robert Roper and Marla Ledin, in addition to a letter from Richard Scott: Infiltration and Design Infiltration Rate: The design details that are discussed in this letter are more appropriately and thoroughly addressed during engineering review. This level of detail is not required for SEPA and preliminary plat review. As a result, the applicant's proposal to grade or fill is not finally approved simply because it is stated as part of the SEPA checklist or appears conceptually on a preliminary plat drawing. The design will be reviewed against the requirements of the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual, and Department of Ecology requirements as appropriate. Both of these agencies provide standards for design, construction, and maintenance of rain gardens, pervious pavement, infiltration trenches, and other Low Impact Development methods. Soils on this site have been tested, and have been shown to provide good infiltration rates. Additional amended soils (fill) will be brought in to meet design requirements for the rain gardens. These amended soils are specifically designed to provide maximum infiltration in addition to the infiltration provided by the native soil, and will not inhibit the infiltrative qualities of the native soil. There are no drainage requirements that prohibit fill beneath structures or lawn areas. However, fill material will have to meet building code requirements beneath structures, and must provide optimum growing conditions beneath vegetated areas to increase plant uptake of storm water runoff. Following the experience of other jurisdictions and the requirements and procedures provided by King County and DOE, soils will be required to meet stringent design standards and will be carefully monitored during construction to assure that the infiltrative capacity of the native soils is retained. The concern about design infiltration rate will be addressed during engineering review. Presettling: The only pre -settling required prior to a rain garden is a grass filter strip. Three rain gardens on this site are designed to accept sheet flow from the surrounding lawn areas and roofs. These are considered "non - pollution generating" surfaces, therefore there is no need for pre -settling. However, the lawn area would provide the same function as a grass filter strip. The fourth rain garden will need to include a grass filter strip if it is designed to accept runoff from the adjacent paved surface. Protection from Upstream Erosion: Erosion control measures will be required and monitored during construction. Erosion control technology has been in place for many years and has been designed to deal with grading and filling situations. State and local requirements will be enforced. Infiltration Trenches: The design of the infiltration trenches is conceptual at this point. The designer is aware that there are outstanding issues with the trenches. The KCSWDM includes design requirements for infiltration trenches, and this project will be required to meet them. 07-106875 Doc. LD. 45357 Roper/Ledin May 9, 2008 Page 3 Lake Residents' Comments: Impervious surfaces are proposed to make up 45.6 percent of the site. This is actually a somewhat smaller amount of impervious area than an average subdivision. Since the time of Lakota Crest's design, LID technology has become more prevalent as a means to meet both flow control and water requirements in the Pacific Northwest and is now not only accepted, but strongly encouraged by the Washington State Department of Ecology. Rain gardens have been in use in the Midwest for many years. European countries have employed pervious pavement for many years as well. Several successful LID projects have been installed in neighboring communities over the last few years. City staff would be happy to provide a list and locations of these projects if the neighborhood is interested in seeing them firsthand. RESPONSE FROM APPLICANT A copy.of your letter was forwarded to the applicant. He has elected to provide a written response to your comments; a copy of his May 8, 2008, letter is enclosed. CONCLUSION The City appreciates the comments provided. After careful consideration of the comments, however, the City is retaining the DNS as issued and will not be modifying the DNS. Any appeal of the DNS must be received by May 14, 2008, and include a $114.50 filing fee. In regards to the next steps, the City's Hearing Examiner will be holding a public hearing on the proposed subdivision and will forward a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration. Notification of the upcoming public hearing will be provided through mailing to all parties of record and to each property owner within 300 feet of the site, posting of the site and public places, and publication of a legal notice in the newspaper. A date for the public hearing has not been set. If you have any further questions or would like to review the project files, please contact Deb Barker, Senior Planner, at 253-835-2642. Sincerely, Greg Fewins Director of Community Development Services Responsible Environmental Official enc: Letter dated May 8, 2008 from William McCaffrey c: Deb Barker, Senior Planner Soma Chattopadhyay, Traffic Analyst Ann Dower, Public Works Engineering Plans Review Paul Bucich, Surface Water Manager Monica Buck, City Staff Attorney Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116, Federal Way, WA 98023 07-106875 Doc I D. 45357 FILE. CITY OF � Federal May 9, 2008 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Way Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Mr. Richard Scott PO Box 4536 Federal Way, WA 98063-4536 RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; RESPONSE TO SEPA COMMENTS MIRROR LAKE HIGHLAND COTTAGE PRELIMINARY PLAT Dear Mr. Scott: Thank you for your comments on the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) decision for the above - referenced subdivision proposal. Several comment letters were provided to the City in response to the Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) issued on April 30, 2008. Your comments related to (1) public notice; (2) tree replacement; (3) LID; (4) retaining wall height; and (5) lake access. This letter briefly responds to your comments, including comments from the Public Works Development Services Division and also forwards comments from the applicant. (1) You noted that not all of the residents around the lake were notified. You believe that the applicant has a responsibility to notify all affected property owners which includes all lake residents who share a joint ownership around the lake. As provided in Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 18-49, when the responsible official issues a determination of nonsignificance, the city shall give public notice for project related actions, which includes mailing to all owners of real property as shown in the records of the County assessor located within 300 feet of the site and any interested party or agency who has filed its name directly with the responsible official. Real property does not mean areas of easement, only ownership. It is the applicant's responsibility to accurately represent the subject site and to provide stamped addressed envelopes for property owners within 300 feet of their property. In the case of this project, the applicant elected to contract with the City's Graphic Information System (GIS) department who prepared the mailing labels based on the applicant's direction. It is the City's position that the notification procedures of FWCC Section 18-49(a)(1) were accurately followed and notification requirements met. (2) You question why the environmental process is continuing when tree replacement information has not yet been submitted. Tree removal and retention issues are reviewed under the preliminary plat process and during engineering review. The Hearing Examiner and the City Council would evaluate any grading requests, and FWCC Section 22-1568 permits removal of significant trees with corresponding tree replacement. In that the tree replacement issue is addressed under the FWCC, the City does not require the final decision to be made at the time of environmental determination. (3) You have expressed concerns regarding fill and the use of low impact development "in such an environmentally sensitive lakeside area" and questioned requirements surrounding residential development. Low impact development is generally considered to be more `sensititve' when used May 9, 2008 Page 2 adjacent to critical areas. Naturally, structural standards have evolved since the initial fill created San Francisco's Marina District. Fill and grading actions proposed in conjunction with residential structures requires review under the International Building Code (IBC) adopted by the City. Specifically, under IBC J104.3, a soils report prepared by registered design professionals' must be submitted and reviewed in conjunction with residential development. Compaction reports that meet section J107.5 2 must be submitted to the Building Official during residential construction activity. These reports remain on file with the City, and potential purchasers can review these records. Building permits are required for structures, including rockeries and retaining walls in excess of four feet in height and decks over thirty inches in height including rails. The City can approve professionally engineered design that meet adopted standards, and the design professional maintains the liability for their product. In addition, as noted in the staff evaluation for environmental determination, the subject site is located within the five-year Wellhead Protection Zone of the Redondo Milton Channel Aquifer for Lakehaven Utility District Well 23A, and the site is classified as a "Low Risk Parcel" for the District's Wellhead Protection Program. However, Mirror Lake is located approximately 170 feet south of the subject site, and is separated from the site by SW 312th Street and a developed single-family lot. Such separation does not establish a lot as an environmentally sensitive lakeside area. In response to your question regarding the City's liability, the issue of liability is generally so fact specific that it is virtually impossible to predict. (4) You have inquired about dimensions and materials of a retaining wall, and its relation to retained trees. This is a question that the City has posed to the applicant, but does not yet have a response to. However, it is not an issue that must be resolved within the environmental process. The city will require resolution of the matter before the public hearing can be conducted. (5) You asked if there are fencing requirements associated with the lake easement, and noted safety aspects of crossing the busy street. The applicant has informed the city "there are no plans for improvements to the Mirror Lake access easement for benefited homes." Public swimming pool barriers are regulated by WAC 246-26-031(4). This regulation does not extend to areas defined as shorelands, which would include lakes as well as Puget Sound. As noted in a previous letter from Deb Barker, concerns about use of the access easement to Mirror Lake are of a civil nature, and not under City purview. The City will not require any improvements associated with use of this lake. There are cross walks on SW 312th Street located east and west of the subject site. PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION The following comments have been prepared by Public Work Development Services Division in response to the letters dated April 30, 2008, from Robert Roper and Marla Ledin, in addition to Richard Scott: Infiltration and Design Infiltration Rate: The design details that are discussed in this letter are more appropriately and thoroughly addressed during engineering review. This level of detail is not required for SEPA and preliminary plat review. As a result, the applicant's proposal to grade or fill is not finally approved simply because it is stated as part of the t The soils report shall identify the nature and distribution of existing soils; conclusions and recommendations for grading procedures; soil design criteria for any structures or embankments required to accomplish the proposed grading; and, where necessary, slope stability studies, and recommendations and conclusions regarding site geology. 2 All fill material shall be compacted to 90 percent of maximum density as determined by ASTM D 1557 Modified Proctor, in lifts not exceeding 12 inches in depth. 07-I06875 Doc I.D 45358 Mr. Scott May 9, 2008 Page 3 SEPA checklist or appears conceptually on a preliminary plat drawing. The design will be reviewed against the requirements of the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual, and Department of Ecology requirements as appropriate. Both of these agencies provide standards for design, construction, and maintenance of rain gardens, pervious pavement, infiltration trenches, and other Low Impact Development methods. Soils on this site have been tested, and have been shown to provide good infiltration rates. Additional amended soils (fill) will be brought in to meet design requirements for the rain gardens. These amended soils are specifically designed to provide maximum infiltration in addition to the infiltration provided by the native soil, and will not inhibit the infiltrative qualities of the native soil. There are no drainage requirements that prohibit fill beneath structures or lawn areas. However, fill material will have to meet building code requirements beneath structures, and must provide optimum growing conditions beneath vegetated areas to increase plant uptake of storm water runoff. Following the experience of other jurisdictions and the requirements and procedures provided by King County and DOE, soils will be required to meet stringent design standards and will be carefully monitored during construction to assure that the infiltrative capacity of the native soils is retained. The concern about design infiltration rate will be addressed during engineering review. Presettling: The only pre -settling required prior to a rain garden is a grass filter strip. Three rain gardens on this site are designed to accept sheet flow from the surrounding lawn areas and roofs. These are considered "non - pollution generating" surfaces, therefore there is no need for pre -settling. However, the lawn area would provide the same function as a grass filter strip. The fourth rain garden will need to include a grass filter strip if it is designed to accept runoff from the adjacent paved surface. Protection from Upstream Erosion: Erosion control measures will be required and monitored during construction. Erosion control technology has been in place for many years and has been designed to deal with grading and filling situations. State and local requirements will be enforced. Infiltration Trenches: The design of the infiltration trenches is conceptual at this point. The designer is aware that there are outstanding issues with the trenches. The KCSWDM includes design requirements for infiltration trenches, and this project will be required to meet them. Lake Residents Comments: Impervious surfaces are proposed to make up 45.6 percent of the site. This is actually a somewhat smaller amount of impervious area than an average subdivision. Since the time of Lakota Crest's design, LID technology has become more prevalent as a means to meet both flow control and water requirements in the Pacific Northwest and is now not only accepted, but strongly encouraged by the Washington State Department of Ecology. Rain gardens have been in use in the Midwest for many years. European countries have employed pervious pavement for many years as well. Several successful LID projects have been installed in neighboring communities over the last -few years. City staff would be happy to provide a list and locations of these projects if the neighborhood is interested in seeing them firsthand. 07-106875 Doc LA 45358 Mr. Scott May 9, 2008 Page 4 RESPONSE FROM APPLICANT A copy of your letter was forward to the applicant. He has elected to provide a written response to your comments; a copy of his May 8, 2008, letter is enclosed. CONCLUSION The City appreciates the comments provided. After careful consideration of the comments, however, the City is retaining the DNS as issued and will not be modifying the DNS. Any appeal of the DNS must be received by May 14, 2008, and include a $114.50 filing fee. In regards to the next steps, the City's Hearing Examiner will be holding a public hearing on the proposed subdivision and will forward a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration. Notification of the upcoming public hearing will be provided through mailing to all parties of record and to each property owner within 300 feet of the site, posting of the site and public places, and publication of a legal notice in the newspaper. A date for the public hearing has not been set. If you have any further questions or would like to review the project files, please contact Deb Barker, Senior Planner, at 253-835-2642. Sincerely, i r Greg Fewins Director of Community Development Services Responsible Environmental Official enc: Letter dated May 8, 2008 from William McCaffrey c: Deb Barker, Senior Planner Soma Chattopadhyay, Traffic Analyst Ann Dower, Public Works Engineering Plans Review Paul Bucich, Surface Water Manager Monica Buck, City Staff Attorney Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116, Federal Way, WA 98023 07-106875 Doc. I.D. 45358 Cne W,3m 0-5-unie Design I Construction Management I Development N N d) to d) N Ln N r m N Z 0 a May 8, 2008 Deb Barker Senior Planner City of Federal Way RE: MLRA (Roper/Ledin), Kittredge, and Scott SEPA Comments Dear Deb: Per the Mirror Lake Residents Association's (MLRA) 4/30/08 letter (signed by President Marla Ledin and Land Use Chair Robert Roper) please note the following: General -- I am pleased that the MLRA acknowledges that we have addressed their neighborhoods primary concern by designing a drainage/grading solution that addresses potential pollution problems, including phosphorous. We are also pleased that the neighborhood representatives had the chance to meet and discuss our development on April 27th, 2008 We will attempt to answer the neighbor's specific questions, many of which appear to be well researched and professional. Infiltration questions - I) We are not using fill to create infiltrative soils. The grading/drainage plan, and the anticipated fill, is designed to utilize the existing natural 5 feet of infiltrative soil (indicated by the site's geotechnical report) to provide the infiltration performance required. There may end up being small areas of the rain gardens that will contain controlled fill to level them out. There will also be some component of amended soil/fill used in and around the rain garden areas to augment the performance of the native soil and provide a better growth medium for plants. All of these issues are the subject of final engineering review and are not required at the SEPA stage. 2) Design approaches for construction of rain gardens as infiltration areas are provided for in sections of the 1998 and the 2005 KCSWDM (as well as the Department of Ecology standards). 3) As stated above, keeping the bottom of the rain gardens within�#A"WTTED predevelopment infiltrative soils is the basis for the grading pl MAY, 0 9 2000 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY wwudW8Q0MLU1110.00m Design Infiltration Rate questions- 1) The MLRS's analysis of alternative calculation methods is in the manual. Our current approach is one of the allowed methods and includes significant safety factors to insure final performance. The final engineering phase is the required time for detailed analysis of these calculations and they will all be reviewed by the City at that time. Presettling questions- 1) Final engineering will satisfy all presettling requirement and space is allowed for them in this preliminary design. Protection from Upstream Erosion questions- 1) An erosion control plan will be included with final engineering per requirements. As stated above, the source of sediment and the infiltration medium are not one and the same. Infiltration Trenches -Design Criteria questions- 1) MLRA's analysis of our current drawings is incorrect. Both the preliminary and the final engineering solution will comply with this requirement. Tree questions- 1) Any issues raised by the City concerning clearing and grading are being addressed, as is the common process, in our response to their initial technical comments. As soon as we receive answers from the City on the few outstanding questions we submitted, we will turn in our final Preliminary Plat submittal per City requirements. Per the Lori Kittredge with King County Metro e-mail dated 4/21/2008, please note the following: 1) We will address the ADA landing request. Per the Richard Scott letter dated 4/30/2008, please note the following: 1) So far we have made 3 mailings to the neighbors per City of Federal Way requirements. The required address list for these mailings was supplied by the City (for a fee). The City further requested that we notify the President of the Mirror Lake Residents Association and Mirror Lake resident Robert Roper who has exhibited a keen interest in development activity concerning the Lake over the years (if they were not within the 300' zone). We did that. As a result of our last notification, Mirror Lake residents met and discussed our development on Sunday 4/27/2008 providing us with comments included in one of the above letters. Given the above, we feel we met all notification requirements outlined by the City and that the expected results occurred. Monica Buck, from the City Attorney's office, phoned me concerning this question and after hearing what we had done was in agreement that we had met the notification requirements. 2) As stated above under "Tree's", we believe we are proceeding according to City timing and preliminary plat submittal requirements. 3) As stated above in response to the MLRA letter, the vast majority of the required site fill does not contribute to the infiltrative performance of the LID design approach. Its function is to level the yards and building pads due to the natural fall of the site along its eastern property line as well as provide the elevation change required to utilize the natural infiltrative characteristics of the existing soil for the rain gardens and underground infiltration trenches. It is required to allow the infiltration design to perform optimally, but is not used as the infiltrative material. There is nothing "ground breaking" or "experimental" about the fill. 4) As to any "breached" retaining walls. Only a few of the landscape walls shown on the site plan retain enough earth to even require engineering and none of them hold back infiltrated water to any significant degree. The ones used near the rain gardens are up -grade from the direction of the water flow! The walls were originally included to create more level grade around and between units, rain gardens, and property lines. We may reconsider even keeping a lot of them during final design as the individual lots are analyzed in more detail and the need for fill is expected to decline due to more precise fill calculations. Final engineering will determine the height and influence the material of the walls. They could end up stone, decorative concrete block, poured concrete with a finish or pattern, or treated wood. In any case it will be in the developer's best interest to insure they are aesthetically pleasing due to their integral location near the open space features of the site. We do not anticipate final design resulting in any walls interfering with the retained trees. 5) As stated, the developer does not intend to improve the lake access easement. The location of the easement across a busy arterial, in the usable side yard of a MLRA members unfenced lot, with unimproved shoreline access does not seem to make it very desirable for the five MLH units that have access rights. Any improvement on the part of our development would undoubtedly invite use which is not our intent. The easement agreement allows the homeowner to fence the easement as long as the neighbors with rights are still guaranteed access. If the MLRA homeowner is afraid of their liability we would not object to a fence, but there is another home with access rights that is not a part of our development and they would have to agree to any action concerning the access easement. I hope this letter answers the neighbors concerns. It is our intent to be good neighbors and to increase the property value of the entire neighborhood by completing an ecologically responsible development. Best Regards, J � William McCaff the WJM studio 30 April 2008 525 SW 312" St Federal Way WA 98023 City of Federal Way Community Development Services Department Attn: Deb Barker, Senior Planner 33325 8t' Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 Subject: Proposed Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Home Development Dear Ms Barker, I have read the April 16, 2008 Determination of Nonsignificance regarding proposed Mirror Lake Highlands cottage housing development and I offer the following comments. Also included is a compilation of concerns expressed by lakeside residents at a recent meeting_ I am uncertain whether these comments —particularly those having to do with stormwater re best addressed during the SEPA process or during preliminary plat review, but we believe the infiltration scheme proposed and the use of fill material deserve scrutiny and validation because of potential effects on nearby Mirror Lake. Infiltration The checklist states (B.1.e) that 5562 yards of fill will be brought in. The purpose of the fill is described as follows: 'The fill quantities are required for stormwater runoff to be conveyed to the infiltration areas and provide 3'-5' sub -base of soil for the infiltration of stonmwater_ Infiltration of stonmwater is the preferred method of flow control as defined by the King county Surface Water Design Manual, as adopted by the City of Federal Way.' The KCSWDM (5.1.1) does State, in the section on Low Impact Design(UD) that "on some sites... it is possible to infiltrate all storm water, which eliminates impacts from surface water leaving the site. On these sites, further mitigation of stormwater impacts is usually not required." This sounds like a good solution to potential pollution problems, including phosphorous, one of our primary concerns. RECEIVED APR 3 -1) 2008 UP( OF FEDERAL WRY ODS But Section 5.1.1 goes on to state "While use of LID is strongly encouraged, there is a lack of experience with designing and constructing projects that rely extensively on LID techniques. This edition [2005] of the SWDM along with the clearing and grading code requires limited use of these techniques in urban - zoned area and more extensive use in the rural area where they are more easily applied." This raises some important questions. First, Do infiltration analyses address the use of fill to create an infiltration area? Second, are there standards for design and construction of rain gardens as infiltration areas or should rain gardens be treated as infiltration ponds per KCSWDW The T/R Appendix cites soil permeabilby tests in the natural, predevekpment state to establish infiltration rates for analysis. However, grading will create some disturbance of the natural state and wit add a layer, compacted to some degree, of new sod (Environmental checklist B.1.e.) KCSWDM Section 5.4 INFILTRATION FACILITIES contains several cautions and requirements that seem to apply to the Mirror Lake Highlands use of infiltration. DESIGN INFILTRATION RATE (Caution) - "Monitoring of actual facikty performance has shown that the U"cale infilt ation rate is far kmw than the rate deknrr ned by small-scale testing_ Actual measured facikty rates of 10% of the small-scale test rates have been seen. It is clear that great conservatism in the selection of design rates is needed..." The Simplified MethW of determining infiltration rates includes factors, such as for testing and plugging that attempt to cared for some sources of error. These factors were employed in the TIR Appendix B analysis. However, the KCSWDM states that the Simplified method must be used a" with full-scale testing of the completed facility. Comment- The requirement for full scale testing implies remaining uncertainties. Due to the particular configuration of the proposed system, a failure at Viis point would be very costly, but would str7 reed to be coed. PRESETTLING (Requirement) - "Presettlirg must be provided before stormwater enters the infiltration facility. This requirement may be met by either of the following: - A water quality facility from the Basic WQ menu... - A presenting pond or vault... 2 If water in the WQ facility or presettling facility will be in direct contact with the soil, the facility must be lined..." Comment: The proposed design does not appear to incorporate the required presettling facility. There is concern about long-term performance of a system that is lacking this protection. PROTECTION FROM UPSTREAM EROSION (Requirement) - "Erosion must be controlled during construction of areas upstream of the infiltration facilities since sediment laden runoff can permanently impair the functioning of the system." Cornrnent The source of sedknent (grading and filling) and the infiltration medium itself appear to be one and the same. INFILTRATION TRENCHES -DESIGN CRITERIA (Requirement) - 5.4.5.1.c "The infiltration surface elevation (bottom of the trench) must be in native soil (excavated at least one foot in depth)." Comment. The design of the roof infiltration tenches as described in the TIR Appendix B identifies finished grade in the sketch, but not native soil. The infiltration trench sketch shows the optional use of backfill or native soil below the infiltration surface. Rain garden infiltration areas appear to be at or somewhat above existing grade. The designs should be examined careful y for compliance with this requirement. Trees The Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan says, in the section on Potential Tree Retention, that only four trees are outside the "buildable area' and are therefore recommended for retention_ The stated purpose of the tree ordinance is 'to preserve, probed and enhance a valuable natural resource", In a March 28 2008 letter to Richard Scott, a lake resident living in sight of the project, the city states that the applicant has proposed clearing a majority of the site in conjunction with the prefiminary plat application --contrary to city requirements and that the city has requested additional information from the applicant on the subject Since that additional information has not been received by the city, it appears that the envinonrnenfial review process is getting ahead of itself. Lake Residents' Cornrnents 3 On Sunday, April 27, 2008, a meeting of interested lake residents included a discussion of Mirror Lake Highlands. Paraphrasing some of the comments from that meeting: There was considerable concern that the infiltration approach will not work. - Impervious surfaces are a large percentage of the project. Density is higher than anything experienced to date for single-family dwellings in Federal Way. - Even with considerable capacity, Lakota Crest detention facility has come very close to overflowing during a heavy storm in November 2005. How can this site not use detention? Trees were also the source of several comments- - Nearly complete loss of trees in that portion of the landscape view enjoyed by some lake residents was felt to be an esthetic environmental impact. -Trees are beneficial -soil stabilization -CO2 absorption Lake Access by MLH residents was a major concern. - People crossing a busy road to get to the lake are in danger, particularly young children. • There are no toilet facilities. • Access by MLH residents will encourage trespassing by others. -The Bethel church lot has fencing and good signage and even so, trespassing occurs • Access must be gated and locked when not in use. If the city should decide these questions do not rise to the level of SEPA, please include a copy of these comments in the project file. Yours truly, Robert S. Roper MLRA Land Use Marla Ledin MLRA President 4 FEDERAL WAY __ERROR A SOUND PUBLMING NEWSPAPER Affidavit of Publication Rudi Alcott, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is the Publisher of The Federal Way Mirror, a semi -weekly newspaper. That said newspaper is published in the English language continually as a semi -weekly newspaper in Federal Way, King County, Washington, and is now and during all of said time has been printed in an office maintained at the aforementioned place of publication of said newspaper. That the annexed is a true copy of a legal advertisement placed by City of Federal Way - Community Development Dept. L-1441 as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplemental form) of said newspaper once each week for a period of one consecutive week(s), commencing on the IOth day of Se t� 2008 ,and ending on the loth day of Suer, 2008, both dates inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its readers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $162.95 which amount has been paid in full, or billed at the legal rate according to RCW 65.16.090 Subscribed to and sworn before me this 15th day of September, 2008. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, Residing at Federal Way NOTARY PUBLIC ` Q STATE OF WASHINGTON TERYL A. HELLER My Appointment Expires Sept. 04, 2( 1414 S. 324th STREET, SUITE B210, ffDERAL WAY, WA 98003 ■ 253-925-5565 ■ f A X: 253-925-5750 CITY -OF FEDERAL WAY NOTICE OF LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Federal Way File #07-106874-00-SU Notice'is hereby given that the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hear- ing at 2:00 p.m. on September 26, 2008, in Fed- eral Way City Councii Chambers (33325 8th Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063,-9718) for the following project. Name: Mirror Lake Highland (Cottage) Prelimi- nary Plat Project Description: Subdivision of five lots, 1.85 acres in size, into a sixteen -lot single-family cottage housing demonstration project, includ- ing infrastructure and site improvements. Applicant: The WJM Studio, Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Dr. Ste #116, Federal Way, WA Project Location: SW 312th Street at 6th Place SW in the SW 1/4 of Section 07, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M., in King County, Washington and encompasses King County parcel numbers #072104-9024, 9110, 9111, 9109, and 9114. Date Application Received: December 21, 2007 Date Determined Complete: January 15, 2008 Date of, Notice of Application: January 26, 2008 Date of SEPA Determination: April 16, 2008 Existing Environmental Documents: Storm - water Drainage Technical Information Report, Concurrency Application Development Regulations to be Used for Project Mitigatron, Known at This Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Polio' (SEPA); FWCC Chapter 19, "Planning and Development"; FWCC Chapter 20, "Sub, - divisions"; FWCC Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management; and FWCC Chapter 22, "Zoning." Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: The project will be reviewed for consistency with all applicable codes and regu- lations including the FWCC; King County Sur- face Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way; and King County Road Standards as amended by the City. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner either by delivering written comments to the Department of Community Development Sen (ices before thehearing, �g,- or by appeadrig at the hearing and presenting public testimony in person, or through a representative. The Hear- ing Examiner will issue a recommendation on the preliminary plat application within 10 work- ing days after the close of the hearing. Any person has the right to request a copy of the Hearing Examiner's decision, once made. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. The application is to be re- viewed under all applicable codes, regulations; and policies of the City of Federal Way. The official file is available for review during working hours in the Department of Commu- nity Development Services (33325 8th Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063- 9718). The staff report to the Hearing Examiner will be available for review one week before the hearing. Questions regarding this proposal should be directed to Deb Barker, Senior Plan- ner, at 253-835-2642. FWM 1441 Date of Publication: September 10, 2008 CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.citvoffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION i, hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washingto4tha.: ❑ 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 ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other was g mailed ❑ faxed 7.4 2008. Project Name ❑ 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 ❑ e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on * 111111 � ` f ,p� Signature -%•- ` Date K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 2/14/2008 5:03:00 PM FEMA REGION 10 NTH DIV 130 228T" ST SW BOTHELL WA 98021-9796 EPA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SEC 1200 6T" AVE MD-126 SEATTLE WA 98101 RAMON PAZOOKI SNO-KING PLANNING MGR WSDOT SOUTH KING COUNTY PO BOX 330310 SEATTLE WA 98133-9710 OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PO BOX 48343 OLYMPIA WA 98504-8343 5=STOFEL WDFW REGION 4 OFFICE 16018 MILL CREEK BLVD MILL CREEK WA 98012 US FISH & WILDLIFE SERVCE 510 DESMOND DR SE #102 LACEY WA 98503 PORT OF TACOMA ENVIRONMENTAL DEPT PO BOX 1837 TACOMA WA 98401-1837 SHIRLEY MARROQUIN KC WASTEWATER TREATMENT MS KSC-NR-0505 201 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 LISA DINSMORE LAND US SVC KCDDES 900 OAKESDALE AVE SW RENTON WA 98057-5212 KC BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD 810 THIRD AVE STE 608 SEATTLE WA 98104-1693 US ARMY CORPS/ENGINEERS AT -TN REGULATORY BRANCH PO BOX 3755 SEATTLE WA 98124 DEPT OF ECOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SEC PO BOX 47703 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7703 FDNR AYLOR PA CENTER 47015 ,A WA 98504-70 WA STATE DEPT WILDLIFE 600 CAPITOL WAY N OLYMPIA WA 98501-1091 TRAVIS NELSON WDFW PO BOX 73249 PUYALLUP WA E DOH - DIV OF DRINKING WATER ENV DOCUMENTS REVIEWER PO BOX 47822 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7822 PORT OF SEATTLE PO BOX 1209 SEATTLE WA 98111 GARY KRIEDT KING COUNTY TRANSIT DIV ENV PLANNING MS KSC-TR-0431 201 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE WA 98104-3856 SOUTH KING COUNTY REGIONAL WATER ASSOCIATION 27224 144T" AVE SE KENT WA 98042 ROD HANSEN SOLID WASTE DIV KING CO DEPT OF NATURAL RES 201 S JACKSON ST STE 701 SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 JOE HENRY NATURAL RESOURCES CVN SVC 935 POWELL AVE SW RENTON WA 98055 WSDOT ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS REGULATORY COMPLIANCE PO BOX 47331 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7331 WA NATURAL HERITAGE DNR PO BOX 47014 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7014 RANDY PEARSON WASH STATE PARKS PO BOX 42668 OLYMPIA WA 98504-2668 LARRY FISHER WDFW 1775 12T" AVE NW STE 201 ISSAQUAH WA 98027 F A REVIEW ND CLEAN AIR AGENCYVE STE 105 WA 98101-3317 PSRC GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPT 1011 WESTERN AVE #500 SEATTLE WA 98104-1040 PERRY WEINBERG SOUND TRANSIT 401 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE WA 98104-2826 KING COUNTY PARKS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT PO BOX 3517 REDMOND WA 98073-3517 LEE DORIGAN PUBLIC HEALTH SEATTLE/KING 401 FIFTH AVE STE 1100 SEATTLE WA 98104 NV*V Wa kb" u*yc ko rom pww • stm KING CO ROADS DIVISION COUNTY ROADS ENGINEER 155 MONROE AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 SOUTH KING FIRE & RESCUE 31617 1 ST AVE S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 COMCAST CABLE STORE 1414 S 324T" ST STE 211 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 LINDA HAYES PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS 3009 E PORTLAND AVE TACOMA WA 98404 PIERCE COUNTY HEALTH DEPT 3629 S "D" ST TACOMA WA 98408 PLANNING & CD DEPT CITY OF AUBURN 25 W MAIN ST AUBURN WA 98001 KENT CITY HALL PLANNING DEPT 220 4T" AVE S KENT WA 98032 NE TAC NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL C/O JAMES COLBURN TACOMA ECONOMIC DEV 747 MARKET ST RM 900 TACOMA WA 98402-3793 CRAIG GIBSON TACOMA PUBLIC UTILITIES PO BOX 11007 TACOMA WA 98411 GERI WALKER FW PS 31405 18T" AVE S FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PO BOX 3440 FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE FISHERIES DIVISION ATTN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWER 39015 172ND AVE SE AUBURN WA 98002 PIERCE CO PLNG & LAND SVCS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT 2401 S 35T" ST TACOMA WA 98409-7460 PIERCE COUNTY BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD 2401 S 35T" ST TACOMA WA 98409 CITY CLERK PACIFIC CITY HALL 100 THIRD AVE SE PACIFIC WA 98047 CITY OF TACOMA BLUS LAND USE ADMINISTRATOR 747 MARKET ST STE 345 TACOMA WA 98402-3769 MARION WEED CHAIR NORTHEAST TACOMA NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL 4735 NE 42ND ST TACOMA WA 98422 CITY OF LAKEWOOD 10510 GRAVELLY LK DR SW STE 206 LAKEWOOD WA 98499-5013 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DIST PO BOX 4249 FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 FEDERAL WAY DISPOSAL PO BOX 1877 AUBURN WA 98071 LAURA MURPHY TRIBAL ARCHAEOLOGIST MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE 39015 172ND AVE SE AUBURN WA 98092 PIERCE CO PLNG & LAND SVCS DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER 2401 S 35T" ST TACOMA WA 98409-7460 AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT 915 FOURTH NE AUBURN WA 98002 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ALGONA CITY HALL 402 WARDE ST ALGONA WA 98001-8505 JOE ELTRICH TACOMA WATER DIVISION PO BOX 11007 TACOMA WA 98411 HAYES ALEXANDER PLNG CHAIR NORTHEAST TACOMA NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL 5308 RIDGE DR NE TACOMA WA 98422 CITY OF MILTON 1000 LAUREL ST MILTON WA 98354 CITY OF SEATAC CITY OF DES MOINES CITY OF NORMANDY PARK 4800 S 188T" ST 21630 11T" AVE S 801 SW 174T" ST SEATAC WA 98188 DES MOINES WA 98198 NORMANDY PARK WA 98166 CITY OF BURIEN CITY OF FIFE TERRY LUKENS CITY HALL TH 5411 23RD ST E BELLEVUE COUNCIL OFFICE 415 SW 150 ST FIFE WA 98424 PO BOX 90012 BURIEN WA 98166-1957 BELLEVUE WA 98009-9012 WATER DISTRICT #54 HIGHLINE WATER DISTRICT MIDWAY SEWER DISTRICT 922 S 219T" ST PO BOX 3867 PO BOX 3487 DES MOINES WA 98198-6392 KENT WA 98032-0367 KENT WA 98032 WATER DISTRICT #111 COVINGTON WATER DISTRICT PAT PROUSE 27224 144T" AVE SE 18631 SE 300T" PL QWE1600 T7T H AVE KENT WA 98042-9058 KENT WA 98042-9208 S EAT 120E SEATTLE WA 9818121 LORI KITTREDGE MARY AUSBURN JILL GASTON REALTY SPEC METRO TRANSIT PSE BPA KSC-TR-0413 TH 6905 S 228 ST SKC-SVC 914 AVE "D" 201 S JACKSON ST SEATTLE WA 98104-3856 KENT WA 98032 SNOHOMISH WA 98290 WASH ENVIRON COUNCIL CHRIS CARREL LINDA SHAFFER 615 2ND AVE STE 380 FRIENDS OF THE HYLEBOS PIERCE TRANSIT SEATTLE WA 98104-2245 PO BOX 24971 PO BOX 99070 FEDERAL WAY WA 98093 LAKEWOOD WA 98499-0070 SAM PACE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS FW COMMUNITY COUNCIL SEA/KING CO ASSOC/REALTORS OF SOUTH KING COUNTY PO BOX 4274 29839 154 TI AVE SE PO BOX 66037 FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 KENT WA 98042-4557 BURIEN WA 9816E MICHAEL FELDMAN ATTN NEWSROOM AVIATION PLANNING SEATAC WASH STATE OCD 901 COLUMBIA ST SW TACOMA NEWS TRIBUNE PO BOX 68727 OLYMPIA WA 98504-8300 1950 S STATE ST SEATTLE WA 98168-0727 TACOMA WA 98405 SEATTLE PI LISA PEMBERTON-BUTLER FEDERAL WAY NEWS 101 ELLIOTT AVE W SEATTLETIMESNORTH 14006 1ST AVE S STE B SEATTLE WA 98121 1200 112 AVE NE STE C145 BURIEN WA 98168 BELLEVUE WA 98004-3748 FEDERAL WAY MIRROR SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL JOHN KIM TH KOREA POST 1414 S 324 ST STE B-210 PO BOX 130 28815 PACIFIC HWY S STE 4B FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 KENT WA 98035-0130 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 KING COUNTY ASSESSORS HOLLY WILLIAMSON CITY OF EDGEWOOD 500 4T" AVE RM 700 OLYMPIC PIPELINE CO 2221 MERIDIAN AVE E SEATTLE WA 98104 2319 LIND AVE SW EDGEWOOD WA 98371-1010 RENTON WA 98055 CRESTVIEW SHORECLUB ASSN MHACC MIRROR LK RESIDENTS ASSN 4817 SW 310T" ST C/O WILL�IAM HICKS T" ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 29219 7 PL S 525 SW 312FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 NORTH LAKE COMNTY CLUB WEST GREEN CONDO ASSN REDONDO COMMUNITY CLUB 33228 38T" AVE S 432 S 321IT PL PO BOX 5118 AUBURN WA 98001 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 REDONDO WA 98054 STEEL LK RESIDENTS ASSN BARCLAY PLACE HOA BELMOR PARK HOA 2329 S 304T" ST 1034 SW 334T" ST 2101 S 324T" ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 BELLACARINO WOODS HOA BELLRIDGE TOWNHOMES HOA CAMPUS GLEN HOA 35204 6T" AVE SW 1438 S 308T" LN 32806 6T" PL S FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 TWIN LAKES HOA MAR CHERI COMNTY CLUB BROOKLAKE COMNTY CENTER 3420 SW 320T" ST # 28 PO BOX 25281 726 S 356T" ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 KEN SHATOCK COMCAST - SE PUGET SOUND ARE GROUSE POINTE HOA 2613 KINGSGROVE HOA CONSTRUCTION/ENG MANAGER 2613 S 379 PL 1911 SW CAMPUS DR # 621 FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 4020 AUBURN WAY N FEDERAL WAY WA 98023 AUBURN WA 98002 MASTER BUILDERS ASSOC CHERYL PARAS 335 116T" AVE SE PSE CMTTYHSERVICES DEPT BELLEVUE WA 98004-6407 TAC S OMA ST ACA WA 98409 Revised April 2, 2008 K:\Environmental Checklists\Agency Mailing List.doc 10/23/2007 City of Federal Way City of 3_ Parcel 33325 8th Ave S. P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way Wa. 98063 Federal Way Notification area (206) - 835 - 7000 www.cityoffederalway.com 178870- 178880-0260 1 178880.0320 - 178890- 1786 4 0 .178890-0520 0320 178880-0410 176880-0390 '788807 178860- 178890-0300 [rj 178890- 3: - -- 178880- 178880- 178880; 0360 .178880- 0350 178880- %r 0900 0310 178890- - 0470 _ _178896 - 0510 178870- 0420' 0400 0380�178880- 0340 It 178880 178890- 0490+ Q pp 0325 0370, CID 0910 0320 � 178890- 178890- _ - - - � oa8o _ osoo ST SW 308TH ST SW 308TH ST 555820- 555770- 555770- 771620- 771620-i - - - - -` - - 0090 0260 0010 072104-! 0010 0120 ! 9234 555820- 555770- _ t 555770- 0100 0250 0020 771620- j771620-1 072104- _- 0020 0110 9235 555820- 555770- 555770- 01?0 0240 0030 071104- 771620- U) 771620- 9106 Q 555820- 555770- 555770- 0030 } 0100 072104- 0120 0230 Q 0040 Q 9116 072iO4 _ = 771620- = 0721D4- 9180 116 0000 555820- 0130 502200 ti 005555770- 0040 W 70090 �072104- 0050 9189 555820- 555770- 555770- 771620- 771620- 0140 0210 0060 0050 %80 072104- 9114 555820- j 555770- 555770- 0150 0200 0070 771620- 771620- -- - - - 0060 0070 555820- 555770- 555770- 0160 0190 0080 -- — - 072104- - 9109 072104- 072104- ' 072104- 9003 SW 310TH ST 555770- 9183 9163 - 0090 072104- 555820- 555770- 3: ' --- - - 072104- 9112 0210 0180 N 555770- 072104- 9110 > 0100 9151 555820- 555770- Q - 0220 0170 = 555770- 0110 072104 072104- 072104- 555820- 555770- `- - 9140 9149 9111 0230 0160 555770- 0120 555820- Q721{�4- 072104• 0240 555770- 555770• 9238 9144 072104- 072104- 9024 0150 555770- 0130 - 9028. 555820- �` 0140 . 5fi 072104- 02,. C?� 9239 555820- S 072104- 0255 9 9027 072104- 9199 0250 w3 9074 072104- 555920. 555920- 555920- 4 _ 555920• 0055 .0052 555926- 072104- i _ 0061 555920 0051 9108 0045 072104- 0060 555920- 555920- 555750- 9125 555920 _ 0040 $5592tl-0030 0180 _--- 555920- 0070 555920= 0035 555920- - - - 0075 0065 0Mg20_ 555920- 555750- 0020 0010 0190 072104- 555920- 9216 0085 555920- j - / 0005 555750 555920: 0200 555920- 0015 - - -- 0086 - , ` ppF I l 5557550+- 5 rror TRCT 555920-, �'� I l/ E i. 1 �I 0095 555920-010U. $55750-0220 IMF(. /);P 7 Legend CRY OF- , Z0�! King County Tax Parcels Scale, fogyp. ya ��'Y Notified Properties N o 75 150 Feet a nosy ��� � ` � t� �r� t ( This map is r Subject Property The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. N O O ,It O_ N r- O O d' O_ N ti O O O O_ N r- O O _O N r` O rn V O_ N rl- M _O C O (0 O Z W re, M M M M M rn M M M M M rn M M M M M M M M M M M M M cl) M rl1 M M N N N N N (V . . . CV N N N CV N CV (V N N (V N fV CV V fV (V CV V' \D " O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 � 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 \p ON ON 01 G1 ON O1 O\ ^ G\ CT O\ 01 O\ G', G1 O\ C\ ON O\ 'O\ M G1 G1 G1 ✓\ O\ 0% O\00 N 00 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3¢ 3 3 3 3 3 3 ON IGN Z ¢ Q ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ 3 ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ wwA.¢¢�aaa.aaa -a iaaa i aaaaa.aQa¢oaaa a.�a�i�a.� w W w w W w�4 w w w W w w w w A A A A A A o w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w¢ w g w w w w w w w w w w Q w w w w w w w w w w w w cw u, t, w w w w E-, w w w T N w xV)U)voCOI CID 3333��33�3"�3�w�v�iv�i (3ntnv�i � z w q w a a a' L. z axwxaaax �.aaaa.axx,� >> >v,>>>>>>,,,ox > N E E- E� Pr o. F" P. P. a P. P, P. H Pr P� Q Q > Q ¢ ¢ Q Q ¢ Q v M $ N c Q H F x x x x x x x A o o Z x x W x x x x x x x v 3 U) (� x M r- E� E M o w z cn 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 _ 0 0 3 _3 0 M t- O (V _� N M O O O O M M C4 M O N O 7 O kn p O N O M 00 \O V1 O\ G\ 00 O \D O O O O 00 O\ 'n --� O O 00 OO O CX1 --� 00 00 00 C 0 O \O --' O CS N O O --� .--� •-' ^ -' O N O O --� �--+ O CoO1 O N O CD O �-+ �--' o O N Q ht N CV ZM \O M rn M \D M M M M M M \O \D M M M M ^ M M M M P. M M M P. a, �D •S� o G O O U � Cu 3 C ^ 0 L Z :C 0 Z v 13 w L � N Z 0 J � o ^ N Z C�/L N x N LCIO Q - r 13 N L 4� cc 0 CL Cu z �a Q z w Q o z w 0 d z o a x ¢ w¢ U `4 Oa ¢ d rz p Q ¢¢ Q p Z w wGo 'a U a Q¢ A z w w O F" m � .w U z ¢ Q ¢ ¢ wr�x+3z3z�'wzw� zw �.�OpF z� z O y 0 z �; oa Q z P. p .z 0 a a: O z U x w O w p O x 0 ti O¢ E- m w P! O O U w `n U x w a L] 04 C 0: m x 4 z P: O w U¢ z Q a aQ q� O Cw7 F a' Z a ¢ p w ¢ W U U Z z g d¢ U Q x W u g w w nx, W w d A �. c7 x Q Z z ZE- QQQ E ID U P" U a' w x x z a O G� � 0. a `d z O .a w 3 z x C7 z 0> p p z M t� 00 \O 00 'n \D Or) Q\ C\ Vl 00 .O\ O O O CO O O O O O CDO CD O N --� O O M M M "n --� cV M "I- 'n � (- 00 O\ CD.� N_ M -t 'n 0 0 0 .O �--� �--' --' ^' �"' �"" N N cq : N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �--� O C. O\ p\ O\ O\ Q1 Q\ O1 O\ ON ON ON ON O1 O\ O\ O\ O\ 'CT O\ •O\ O O CD O O O O O O O O O O O O J �t �t � �� V �t V q:t O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t` l- [- I- [, [- r- ['� l- [- [- I-- I- N N d — ll- l- l- C-- (- t- r- l� f- l- I- C-- allO\ N N N N cV N . N N N N N N N CA N N (V AV N V) Vl Vn Vn to v'1 v\ vn kn V1 to kn v') Vl kn l- t-- i- t� r- [� t- i- l- t-- i- t` t- (- t- t-- i-- r- V1 V7 -) vi N V"1 Vl kn � 'n -) v\ 1/'1 v\ '/1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Oi O O 'n 'n v\ v1 'n 'n v\ wl v\ " 'n vl 'n W) VI T N co I-LO co t` Co m O r: N CO 't LO (D 'r--00 M CD <- N CO � In (D t-- CO M CDT N CO T U-) #ki T T T T T T T T T N N N N.. N. N. CO M CO M V-s M N 4) N N Q 0 V/ j C C •� C O U -a ro C N z u) Ri 0 z'a 73 L C 0 (^� N CL N ^ N cu - N N N � a C J M M M M M r) M M M M M c l C4 Cl M M Cl CV CV N N " CV " " N " O N ON " " O " O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 fT a1 U C\ D1 G\ O� \�o C\ G\ 7 C\ Q` O\ U G1 CT G, 01, z d¢ d¢ d¢ d¢ d¢ d d d¢ d¢¢¢ d 3 GO M Cn Acn V, C V] W [.i] C�l] C�lJ U) 9) h¢ ¢ Q E" n N x x x x x x x N x x A x M L M M DO oo W 0000 - �o Z� cn C/] O O CD 'IT- N N� CDLn CQ M CV O [- O\ Oo 00 00 V 00 O 00 o 0o 0o O 00 O O O O O 1J 7 J 7 W W z z w w� ¢ z + oa ¢ �w„aoQo Q�QsQ� Z A x x+ ti d>o w o w> x� W z w Z x 3 v ¢m w r x wC40 z ¢ a' �" � x a Q z w w i o� o„ x o W Q o 0 L H C] a z .c? w 3 N vl O v'� O vl v-1 O O O O O O O O O O O O .O O O O O O O O CD CD CD O CD CD O O D O O O CD O O O CD O O O O O O O O O O O J O O O O O O C. O O Cl O O O O O O C. O O N N CV cV N N N CIA .. N N N. N. N r4 N C� C\ C\ ON C\ G1 O\ �c �o _ 'Vl vl kn �n v"t In V'1 'W� to kn to to kn vl C- I- (` � Lo Kkl CM co cn M - 'IT 'IT � V 'T V 'IT tmf) � mLn 9-- 9-- CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.citvoffederalwciv.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION i, lqd1l t UJ ' C b(\\ hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the Sta e of Washington, that a: Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the (DS) and Scoping Notice Hearing Examiner $OkNotice of Environmental Determination ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public f Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) Hearing ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Anticipated DNS/MDNS ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ 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 4"osted to or at each of the attached addresses on , 2008. Project Name (C)4if,(-M File Number(s) 12!�, OCR rS F- Signature Date ,V)0 K:\Intern\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc/Last printed 4/18/2008 8:05:00 AM Posting Sites: Federal Way City Hall - 33325 8th Avenue Federal Way Regional Library - 34200 1 st Way South Federal Way 320th Branch Library - 848 South 320th Street Subject Site - K:\Intern\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc/Last printed 4/18/2008 8:05:00 AM 41k CITY Federale. Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cii&federalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I, a m � x 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 ❑ FWCC 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 0 e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on 2008. Project Name File Number(s) Signature Date yr/Y ')o a K:\CD Adminlstration Flles\Declaration of Distribuflon.doc/Last printed 1 /3/200B 4:53:00 PM CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Preliminary Plat File No. 07-106875-00-SE The City of Federal Way has determined that the following project does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the City. Proposed Action: Subdivision of five lots, 1.85 acres in size, into a sixteen -lot single-family cottage housing demonstration project. The project includes public and private street improvements, construction of drainage features using Low Impact Design (LID) concepts, utility improvements, a 580 square -foot community building, and parking for thirty vehicles in at -grade parking stalls, attached garages and detached garages. Approximately seventeen percent of the site will be retained in open space tracts in compliance with cottage housing design requirements. Location: SW 312t' Street at 6"' Place SW in the SW 1/4 of Section 07, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M., in King County, Washington, encompassing King County parcel numbers #072104-9024, 9110, 9111, 9109, and 9114. Applicant: William McCaffrey The WJM Studio 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116 Federal Way, WA 98023 Agent: Lisa Klein AHBL 2215 North 30t' Street, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403 Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services City Staff Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 Further information regarding this action is available to the public upon request at the Federal Way Department of Community Development Services (Federal Way City Hall, 33325 8`h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718). This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2). Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on April 30, 2008. Unless modified by the City, this determination will become final following the comment deadline. Any person aggrieved by the City's final determination may file an appeal with the City within 14 days of the above comment deadline. Published in the Federal Way Mirror on April 16, 2008. Doc. I.D. 45005 (4/141 008) Tamara Fix - Re: Legal Notice - Mirror Lake ­ Cottage Page 1 From: Teryl Heller <theller@fedwaymirror.com> To: "Tamara Fix"<Tamara.Fix@cityoffederalway.com> Date: 4/14/2008 10:45 AM Subject: Re: Legal Notice - Mirror Lake Cottage Attachments: 11629271091.doc Tamara: Received. Will be in the 4/16/08 issue. Hope your week is great. Teryl Heller Federal Way Mirror 1414 South 324th Street, Suite B210 Federal Way, WA 98003 (phone) 253-925-5565 (fax) 253-925-5750 On Apr 14, 2008, at 9:40 AM, Tamara Fix wrote: CITY OF �. Federal Way April 16, 2008 Mr. William J. McCaffrey The WJM Studio 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 1 (6 Federal Way, WA 98023 RE: FILE 07-106875-00-SE CI , . HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way. WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityrfederalway.con) DNS FOR MIRROR LAKE HIGHLAND COTTAGE HOUSING PRELIMINARY PLAT Dear Mr. McCaffrey_ This office and other City staff have reviewed the environmental checklist you submitted. We have determined that the proposal will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. As a result, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required to comply with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). A 14-day comment period is required by the SEPA rules (WAC 197-11-340). A notice inviting comments will be published in the Federal Way Mirror on April 16, 2008_ At the end of the comment period, the department will determine if the DNS should be withdrawn, modified, or issued as proposed. All final determinations may be appealed within 14 days following the comment deadline. No licenses, permits, or approvals will be issued until completion of the appeal period. Our decision not to require an EIS does not mean that the license, permit, or approval you are seeking from the City has been granted. Approval or denial of the proposal will be made by the appropriate administrative or legislative body vested with that authority. The environmental record is considered by the decision maker(s) and conditions will be imposed to reduce identified environmental impacts, as long as the conditions are based on adopted and designated City policy. After a final decision has been made on your proposal (i.e., after a permit has been issued or City Council action taken, as applicable), you may, but are not required to, publish a Notice of Action as set forth in RCW 43.21C.075. The Notice of Action sets forth a time period after which no legal challenges regarding the proposal's compliance with SEPA can be made. A copy of the Notice of Action form and copies of RCW 43.21C.080 and WAC 197-11-680 providing instructions for giving this notice are available from the Department of Community Development Services. Permit 907-tOW5-00-SE Doc_ LD. 45017 Mr. William J. McCaffrey Page 2 April 16, 2008 The City is not responsible for publishing the Notice of Action. However, the City is responsible for giving a notice (to parties of record) stating the date for commencing a judicial appeal (including the SEPA portion of that appeal) if your proposal is one for which the City's action on it has a specified time period within which any court appeals must be made - If you need further assistance, feel free to call Deb Barker, Senior Planner, at 253-835-2642- Sincerely, Greg Fewins, Director Department of Community Development Services enc: DNS Staff Report C: Lisa Klein, AI-IBL, 2210 North 30`h Street, Suite 300, Tacoma, WA 98403 Deb Barker, Senior Planner Ann Dower, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer Sanjeev Tandle, Contract Traffic Engineer Soma Chattopadhyay, Traffic Analyst Permit P07-106875-00-SE Doc. I.D. 45017 Notes for Mirror Lake Cottage Development Hearing Examiner Ref Deb Barker ltr to William McCaffery dtd 12-20-06 and FW ORD #06-533 dtd 9-19-06 Article XII of the FWCC (rev 12-06) My name is David J. Toner and I live at 305 SW 313t` Street in Federal Way. I have an ownership interest in Tract A, a parcel on Mirror Lake. I was not notified of this project and therefore, had no opportunity to submit comments or attend hearings. My property interests will be affected by this project. I believe the City Code requires notification of all owners within 300 feet of the project. The lake is within 300 feet and it is privately owned. Persons with an ownership interest in the lake should have been provided notice since any degradation of the lake condition will affect all lake owners in exactly the same manner. I believe there are close to 75 owners who should have been notified, were not, and were excluded from presenting their views. This likely had a controlling influence on the City's Determination of Non -Significance, which may have been in error, and dangerously resulted in no Environmental Impact Statement. My purpose today is to impart a degree of doubt in your mind as to the suitability of this site for a Cottage Housing Development, to question the margin for error in the site proposal itself, and to consider the risk to the City of Federal Way if it proceeds with this plan. I submit that SUITABILITY is a key decisional criteria given inadequate attention in this process to date. Mirror Lake is a "regulated lake" and the surrounding wetlands are Category I "regulated wetlands". The proposed project property in located within 200 feet of these regulated wetlands and therefor comes under the jurisdiction of City Code Article 22 (22-1223 (6). The purpose of this article is to protect the environment, human life and property from harm and degradation. This property is within the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area and Wellhead Protection Area, yet the City is proposing to proceed without an Environmental Impact Statement. You should be asking yourself, "How could a Critical Area site be chosen for an experiment, a "demonstration project" using a Code and planning never before attempted in Federal Way? Without an Environmental Impact Statement, why should the City risk authorizing invasive site preparation techniques such as mass grading and clear-cut and removal of all trees and vegetation? The City has alternate proposals before it that coo not present such irreversible risks. The City recognizes that risk exists with projects in the Critical Areas , by incorporating a provision within Article 22 of the Code wherein the City may require a release and indemnity from damage or liability FROM ANY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY relative to the condition of the regulated lake or regulated wetlands. The City would be accepting unreasonable risk by proceeding without an Environmental Impact assessment when alternative sites were also being proposed which met the city's need for infill action without comparable risks. The project proposal also represents significant economic risks which the City need not accept. RECEIVED S E P 2 6 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS The developer has asked for numerous variances to planning safeguards, has disregarded advise of professional consultants on tree retention, phased grading, setbacks, and many other attempts to save money. He has utilized every inch of land to meet minimum Code requirements. He has left no margin for error or the unexpected. The probability of further declines in real estate values and the availability of credit is threatening to a project with no margin for error. The risk to the City is that early site preparation, mass grading and tree removal could leave 1.85 acres unprotected in this Critical Area, with subsequent irreversible degradation to the regulated lake and regulated wetlands. I request that the Examiner reconsider the suitability of this site for this project, reconsider the risks to the City of Federal Way for proceeding without an Environmental Impact Statement and finally decide to adjudicate this proposal as NOT RECOUNWNDED. If this is not acceptable, then I most strongly argue for requiring an Environmental Impact Statement or reinstituting the SEPA notice procedures. I also strongly argue for the City to impose prohibitions on the developer for tree removal and grading until such time as construction is ready to begin. David Y. and Mm % Toner .305.S'W31mst, }arferuf741uy, WA980234630 Hearing Examiner Testimony Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Homes 26 September 2008 My name is Bob Roper. I live on Mirror Lake and chair the Land Use Committee of the Mirror Lake Residents' Association. I have been a long-term lake monitor, taking daily rainfall and lake level measurements and weekly water quality measurements of Mirror Lake for over 12 years, from 1993 through 2005. 1 served on the Board of Directors for the Washington State Lake Protection Association (WALPA) during 2005-2006. 1 am a Chemical Engineer. My years of lake monitoring have given me unique insight into the characteristics of the lake and its behavior during storm events and throughout the seasons. As part of the lake level studies, I enlisted the help of a lake resident living near the outlet in order to correlate the first seasonal flow out of the lake (toward Fisher's Bog) with the reading on my lake level gauge. With that correlation, I am able to determine from lake level measurements how many days per year there is outflow, hence flushing of the lake. The average number of days of outflow was 85 per year, but some years showed extremely low flushing, only 3 days during the entire 1993-94 rain year. Fortunately, at this time, the water quality in Mirror Lake is good, due in part to lake residents' programs to protect water quality. In order to preserve this condition, considering the limited flushing of pollutants and the costs and risks of remedial action,I believe extraordinary caution is called for in evaluating potential impacts from development. RECEIVED S E P 2 6 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS Phosphorus Wapato Lake is a good illustration of what can happen when a lake first gets caught in the phosphorus trap. Lake residents are forced into a series of expensive and risky corrective measures in order to protect the recreational value of the lake. A standard algae treatment that badly backfired at Wapato Lake, causing a fish kill, cost $98,000 and that lake is less than twice the size of Mirror Lake. Another example is Steilacoom Lake where they have spent a small fortune on treatments and a likely bigger fortune on litigation. hear repeatedly from the experts that the time to control phosphorus is before it enters the lake. Even Sweetwater Technology Corp., which is in the alum treatment business acknowledges this. To quote from their web page: "A sediment alum treatment can last up to ten years, depending on how much alum is applied and lake conditions such as sedimentation rate and external phosphorus loading. Best results are obtained when steps are first taken to control the external sources of phosphorus. Some of these steps are simple, like encouraging the use of phosphorus free fertilizers and detergents or discouraging large flocks of waterfowl. More costly measures may be necessary..." The Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage Home development (CHID) proposes rain gardens rather than detentiontfiltration for stormwater quality control. There will be increased phosphorus in runoff from fertilizers, pet waste, etc. from the development vs. the natural condition. A rain garden would be expected to impede phosphorus load to the lake by filtering insoluble compounds and by biological take-up of soluble compounds. However, trapped phosphorus does not go away, and over a long period of time, might be expected to accumulate to the point where some sort of removal will be necessary. Regular maintenance will KA be required in order to assure that sediments have not clogged the soil. The Rain Garden Handbook for Western Washington Homeowners, published by WSU Extension states that rain gardens need maintenance and provides a list of actions recommended to keep a rain garden functioning as intended. Similarly, the porous driveways proposed will require regular maintenance or inspection to identify clogging and to assure it has not been overcoated. We are concerned about who takes responsibility for this required maintenance. The city should assume ownership of the rain gardens as it would for a detentiontfiltration facility. KCSWDM requires a covenant of the homeowners to assure that routine maintenance/inspections are conducted. However, the wording of the covenant is non -compulsory and/or lacking in detail for mandatory inspections and correction of deficiencies*. Until such time as maintenance of such facilities is well understood, sensitive downstream resources such as Mirror Lake are at risk. * Section 2.5.3 Maintenance Instructions for a Rain Garden states that "these instructions are intended to be a minimum; DDES may require additional instructions based on site —specific conditions. Also, as the county gains more experience with the maintenance and operation of these BMPs, future updates to the instructions will be posted on King County's Surface Water Design Manual website. Runoff Quantity There is concern that the proposed rain gardens will not provide the storage capacity required to preclude flooding around Mirror Lake during periods of sustained or heavy rains. 3 For comparison, the Lakota Crest development, about 200 yards to the east and presumably with the same soil structure, employs two flow control -and water quality facilities. The total volume of the wetponds is 31,634 cu ft to accommodate 5.395 acres of impermeable surfaces. During a heavy rainstorm in November 2006, the west pond was very near topping the overflow structure. This was my personal observation on the night of the storm. At the CHD, the proposed rain gardens, along with the trench system and pervious concrete, will need to accommodate 0.856 acres of impermeable surfaces. Without the contribution of the trenches and pervious concrete, this would require 5019 cu ft of storage capacity for equivalence. According to the applicant's letter of 6-20-08, The rain gardens will be required to handle runoff from "remaining paved surfaces, some roofs and general sheet flow". This imprecise description makes it difficult to estimate the area actually required to be accommodated by the rain gardens. However, with some assumptions ( 1/2 of the roofs and 1/2 of the paving), we can estimate that 0.727 acres will be feeding the rain gardens. By similarity to Lakota Crest, this would require 4263 cu ft of capacity. Calculated using KDSWDM requirement of 3 inches of runoff depth from the impervious surface served and similar assumptions, about 5000 cu ft would be required, more than would appear to be available in the rain gardens. Please note that I am not a civil engineer and these calculations were done only to provide a rough approximation for the purpose of assessing the rain garden design. Inconsistent Soil Representations The applicant claims 5 feet of infiltrative soil before reaching an impermeable layer (actually, the Geotechnical report states that silty sandy gravelly soils... extended up to approximately 5 feet...). In its Conclusions, the report says the sandy Ioams in the upper five feet of the test pits could be considered 4 suitable for installing the proposed infiltration trenches. It does not talk about shallow infiltration facilities. However, the CHD Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan states that "A weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth of 20-40 inches. A perched seasonal high water table is at a depth of 18-36 inches from November to March." This seems inconsistent with the 5 foot claim. Similarly, the TIR for Lakota Crest, very close to the CHD stated that: `These soils are made up of moderately well drained soils that have a weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated substratum at a depth of 24 to 40 inches. These soils are on uplands." Open Space Many Mirror Lake residents feel that adequate common open space on -site to be important for several reasons. First, it provides CHD residents that have minimum private open space (only 400 sq ft) with opportunities for relaxation, privacy and recreation in their everyday environment. Second, it upgrades the look and feel of the neighborhood. Finally, without adequate common open space, residents will look elsewhere for escape from their compact environment, in this case, likely to Mirror Lake. Since Mirror Lake is private, an increased burden of enforcement of trespassing laws might be expected for lake residents and law enforcement. The director approved, by letter 4/17/07, inclusion of rain gardens as open space, overriding the draft ordinance at the time contained a prohibition on dual status. The draft ordinance has since been codified with that prohibition intact. We believe the director's decision was in error. Also, it appears that relief from the 5- foot setback rule for rain gardens was granted by a member of staff (Letter, Ann Dower to Bill McCaffrey dtd March 27, 2008 re: Public Works Dept. Response to Rain Garden Setback Request) without the,approval of the director as required 5 by FWCC 21-19. Since this correspondence was not included in the staff report, a copy is attached to these comments. Without the contribution of the rain gardens, what's left hardly qualifies as common open space, which by ordinance is required to be "improved for passive or active recreational use". While the rain gardens are not required in order to fulfill the area requirement (other open space is 10,431 sq ft vs 8,000 required), it does appear to be necessary in order to fulfill the recreation requirement. Without the rain gardens, what is left is a system of narrow pathways that are interrupted by sidewalks and which appear to be of no value for recreation. It seems that rain gardens are needed in the equation solely in order to fulfill the recreation requirement. This is a poor reason for overriding the ordinance. Another question is: are the rain gardens, even with seating, quality open space? As stated in written comments submitted earlier, we believe they are not. Using a surface water facility for this purpose is expressly prohibited per code (/FWCC Article XII, Section 22-923(5f). Modifying,that requirement can only be done if the modification will not result in a project that is less compatible with neighboring land uses. We believe that prohibition should be maintained. Rain Gardens as Experimental Water uaii /Flow Control Facilities We believe that by any reasonable definition, the proposed rain gardens in this context are experimental. Consider the following layers of uncertainty: -This is the first use of rain gardens on this scale in Federal Way -The underlying zoning, which doubles the densest single family density, is a first in Federal Way •KCSWDM 5.1.1 states that "There is a lack of experience with designing and constructing projects that rely extensively on LID techniques." The manual "requires limited use of these techniques in urban zoned area..." ro -KCSWDM 5.4 cautions "Monitoring of actual facility performance has shown that the full-scale infiltration rate is far lower than the rate determined by small scale testing". -KCSWDM C.2.5.3 states that maintenance requirements are subject to change "as the county gains more experience with the maintenance and operation of these BMPs..." The FWCC 21-21 section seems to have been written exactly for this sort of situation. It allows the use of experimental facilities, but also allows requiring the posting of a bond sufficient to construct a conventional facility on land set aside for that purpose should the experimental facility not meet expectations. Action Requested There are so many uncertainties associated trying to make cottage housing fit in this location, we feel it would be best if the Examiner recommended against proceeding further. If this is not the case, the following conditions should be imposed: -Revert to the original 12 unit design, preserving space at the south end of the property for a detention facility per FWCC 21-21, and enhanced open space -Provide for.city maintenance of ponds -Require a bond to cover the cost of remediation should the rain gardens fail to provide the required flow and waterquality control. This remediation shall consist of permanent on -site modifications, not solely treatment.of Mirror Lake waters. 17 March 27, 2008 Mr. William McCaffrey 30929 37`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 RE. Permit No. 07-I06874--00-SU Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat, 604 SW 3I2" Street Public Works Dept. Response to Rain Garden Setback Request Dear Mr. McCaffrey: The Public Works Department has reviewed your request to reduce the required 5'. setback between rain gardens and property lines. The City hereby grants your request, based on the following: 1. The rain gardens will meet the setback requirements from exterior lot lines, thus protecting neighboring property and existing structures from any encroachment. 2. The rain gardens will be set back 5' from any proposed building, as required by the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 3. The rain gardens will be privately owned and maintained through a Homeowners Association. The developer shall make provisions for access and maintenance on the face of the plat and/or in the protective covenants. Homeowners will be jointly responsible for maintenance. 4. The rain gardens are modest in size and provide a redundant system that will minimize impacts to any single adjacent property should an overflow situation arise. 5. The rain gardens will be clearly shown on the plat so that future lot owners will be aware of their locations as they relate to property lines. Therefore, the rain gardens may be placed against interior property lines as shown in the preliminary plat drawings. If- you have any questions, please contact me at (253) 835-2732 or via email at ann.dower ci offederalwa .com. Sincerely, Ann Dower Engineering Plan Reviewer AD:cc cc: William Appleton, P.E., Development Services Manager Paul Bucich, P.E., Surface Water Manager Deb Barker, Senior Planner Project File / AD Day File E. Toner 1 City of Federal Way ("City") File #07-106874-00-SU Comments for Hearing Friday, September 26, 2008 My name is Eden Toner. My street address is 306SW 313a` St., Federal Way, WA 98023. As residents of Mirror Lake Estates, my husband, David Toner, and I own a fractional interest in a waterfront lot through which we enjoy lake access. This interest was granted in the original plat of the subdivision in the 1960's. We are gravely concerned about the lack of notice and the process that has been employed by this developer to suit his ends. Our neighborhood and the residents around the lake have worked diligently over the last couple of years to restore'water quality and prevent unauthorized access to the lake. We do not want these efforts undermined for the benefit of a single developer, We speak for many of our neighbors who cannot make it to this hearing. Insufficient Notice We never received notice of this project from the developer, despite the fact that we own an interest on the lake, and the lake is within the required area for notice to have been sent. Whatever impacts the lake impacts us. We and all of our neighbors were effectively excluded from the process that is supposed to allow us to participate to protect our interests. The only reason we indeed know about it now is through one neighbors on the lake. The City cannot overlook this flagrant neglect of process, which was brought to the City's attention many months ago (4/30/08 letter from Richard Scott to Deb Barker). Had we been properly notified, we could have provided comments long before this. Further, we would have taken all steps necessary to ensure that a proper environmental impact assessment was done. The developer should be required to go back to the beginning, properly notify the affected parties, and proceed from there. Anything short of that is a dereliction of the city's duty to the rest of its residents. Scoo of Proiect(Water QualiVaree Removal After reviewing documents obtained from the City, it is apparent that this proposal has changed dramatically from its initial inception. The number of proposed units has grown, from 12 to 16, the number of trees to be preserved has-been reduced to ZERO, and the initial plan for phased grading has evolved into a contention that phased grading will cost more, though it is possible to do it. If it is possible, it should be done. The codes do not exist for convenience; they exist to protect a vital public interest. With mass grading, the removal of all vegetation from the site will present an immediate threat of erosion downhill into the lake. And, if all vegetation is removed and the project stalls, the impact on the water quality and wildlife will be disastrous. Further, our location in a "wellhead protection district" (per Lakehaven Utility District) makes environmental protection of critical importance. RECEIVED �� � _/ S E P 2 6 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS E. Toner 2 The developer has, without hesitation, chipped away at the tree preservation requirements until there is nothing left. The recommendations of his own "Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan" dated December 10, 2007, provide for retaining 3 significant and 1 additional tree, and replacing removed trees with Douglas firs and Western red cedars. That plan goes on to describe how construction should proceed around the trees. Until his letter of June 20, 2008 to Deb Barker, the developer in all of his correspondence acknowledged the retained tree requirement. Then, in his June 20 letter, he claims he can't retain any trees. He completely disregarded the Evaluation as well as city codes in concluding that he needs to remove all trees and replace them with "smaller varieties in order to keep a uniform scale to the overall planting scheme" (letter to Deb Barker dated 6/20/08). It appears that the developer never had any intention of actually following the recommendations of the Evaluation —he just went through the required motions —and he lulled staff and neighboring residents into a false sense of confidence that he would act in compliance. To allow him to, at this late date, go forward with his plan makes a mockery of our city ordinances and sets a dangerous trend that others will undoubtedly try to follow. It is unconscionable for the City to condone this. The residents of Federal Way supported saving trees, and this is what the City should be doing. This project, regardless of size or timing, should be required to keep —and safely protect —the significant trees, and the mass grading proposal should be rejected. If this proposed project is accepted to any degree, it should be significantly scaled back in order to protect the trees and ensure water quality. By reducing the number of units, phased grading can be done, retention ponds can be installed and construction can proceed around significant trees. Further, larger trees can be replanted, since the homes will not be so tightly spaced. If it is not cost effective for the developer to proceed while still conforming to our codes and regulations, then this is not an appropriate location for his project. The lake is a sensitive environmental area, and the only development that should take place is development that can ensure its protection. Plat Reference to Mirror Lake Mirror Lake is a privately maintained lake, with each ownership interest reflected on its respective deed. The proposed project would not have an ownership interest, but a portion of the land in the proposal had been granted an easement for lake access in 2001. It was granted by a single homeowner on the lake to another single homeowner across the street, though it contained language providing that it "may be shared by all future owners of the properties, including new lots by short subdivision." While the parties may have contemplated short subdivision, high density cottage housing was not even authorized at that time. The staff report indicates that 5 new homes would be benefited —far more than a simple short subdivision would provide, and at least half of the lots encompassed by the proposed project were not original holders of the easement Therefore, it is critical that E. Toner 3 the plat for this project limit the number of lots that have the benefit of this easement to the number of short subdivision lots that could have been made from the original lot under the regulations in place at the time the easement was created. . Summag of Requests • Require notice to all lake interest holders, retroactive • Require an Environmental Impact Statement If the project proceeds: • return it to maximum 12 unit scale • require phased grading ■ require retained trees and adequate protections for them • require replanted trees to conform to the December 10, 2007 Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan • require retention ponds and provide for maintenance • require bond • require that the plat reflect lake access to only the lot corresponding to the original easement as it could have been subdivided at the time. Respectfully submitted, Eden R. Toner Carol McNeill From: Marla.G.Ledin@gsk.com Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 9:58 AM To: Carol McNeilly Cc: bob.roper@comcast.net Subject: Mirror Lake Highlands Comments for 9-26 hearing Attachments: Marla Ledin, Hearing comments 9-24-08.doc Hi Carol, I am on crutches currently so am submitting my comments via email per Deb's advice below. Thank you for any help in getting this to. the right people. Marla Ledin office phone 253.839.0626 marla.g.ledin()gsk.corn "Deb Barker" <Deb.Barker ci oifederalwa .comp 25-Sep-2008 11:44 To "'Marla.G.Ledin@gsk.com"' <Marla.G_Ledin sk.com> cc "Carol McNeilly' <Carol.McNeill ci otfederalwa .comma Subject RE: Mirror Lake Highlands Comments Hi Marla - Thank you for your message and I understand about the crutches and work obligation. Please e-mail your comments to City Clerk Carol McNeilly and she will get your comments distributed to the Hearing Examiner tomorrow. Carol's e-mail is attached to this reply and her phone number. is 253-835-2540 if. needed. You can copy me on your comments or not - your choice. Let me know if you have any questions. Also, I hope that the healing is going well. Regards Deb Barker, Senior Planner City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South, PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 253-835-2642(p) 253-835-2609 (f) deb.barker a o£federahva .cone From: Marla.G.Ledin d)gsk.com Finailto:Marla.G.Ledin@.cisk.coml Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 7:56 AM To: Deb Barker Subject: Mirror Lake Highlands Comments Hi Deb, I am on crutches and in a cast. Is it possible to email my comments to you today for the hearing tomorrow on the Mirror. Lake Highlands project? It looks like we need them in prior to the hearing and I cannot make the hearing due to. work. Marla Ledin office phone. 253.839.0626 marla. .ledin sk.com 6EP 2 6 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS Marla Ledin 401 SW 312thStreet Federal Way, Washington 98023 September 24, 2008 City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 Dear Hearing Examiner: I am currently the President of the Mirror Lake Residents Association. We are a -volunteer group which was organized among other things to maintain and defend the quality and health of our lake. Currently, we represent and get contributions from 40 lots around Mirror Lake. Due to the non-existence of public lake use we cannot access public funding like Steel Lake. Any major lake quality problem would overwhelm our system entirely. I wanted to take this opportunity to offer a vantage point from someone who has had one of Federal Ways natural resources in her backyard. I moved onto Mirror Lake in 1993 assuming I was about to enter into a life of leisurely lakeside living. Little did I know I had just signed up for a part- time job in becoming a surface water expert. My particular lot was the most overgrown with lilies and iris causing stagnation during the summer months, preventing circulation and encouraging more. rapid plant growth. I therefore was very motivated to organize the other lakefront owners and begin a plan to clean up the vegetation and determine next steps for continued lake health. Since 1993, and again without access to any public funding, we have educated our community in the options available for lake treatments. We have contracted with biologists. Working through time-consuming permit processes we have now had several successful lake treatments working towards our goal of weed management and a cleaner lake and secondarily maintaining our depth. We have had several compliments in recent months of the positive restoration that has resulted and you can see people enjoying swimming and other lake activities now that the lake has become more inviting. Several mailings and meetings have been sent and held to maintain our association and update the lake community on our progress. We have also held fundraisers to advance our cause since our funding is so limited. The lake has been monitored to keep a permanent record of the depth and clarity readings. This information will help us determine any impact to our lake water via outside influences. After tackling our challenges we have also been fielding nearby development projects through the years which threaten our lakes delicate balance via our Land Use Committee headed by Bob Roper. I am assuming there are various agendas at play here 1) the City of Federal Way wanting to enhance its tax base, 2) the developer wanting to put as many selling lots as possible in their plan and 3) the Mirror Lake residents monitoring these outside influences and hoping to prevent adverse impacts. These have not always been aligned. We rely heavily on the City to protect the interests of the tax base already living on Mirror Lake and to keep us whole. Federal Way is known for its trees and lakes, attractive qualities that set us apart from other communities. Recent reports of Pierce County lakes being impacted and damaged have come to our attention and we know that this is a very real possibility for us if we aren't diligent. While we welcome good neighbors and understand expansion is natural in a developing community such as ours we will continue to keep abreast of development in our area, to monitor promises made and to hold those accountable for any shortcomings. 'We are asking that the City of Federal Way be a good partner in our efforts so that we can leave this resource in better shape than we found it. Thank you in advance for any consideration. Sincerely, (Electronic Signature) Marla Ledin, President Mirror Lake Residents Association February 16, 2008 Deb Barker, Federal Way Senior Planner Director of Community Development Services P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063 COWLIN1�'DFVEEOPMD gDEPARTt?EW Re: The Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat - 604 SW 312`h Street, Federal Way, WA Dear Ms. Barker, Thank you for the opportunity to provide written comments on the Notice of Land Use Application as a follow-up to my previous March 23, 2007 Ietter. I will try to limit the detail in MY response here leaving that to the Mirror Lake Residents Association (NMRA), but I still want to again strongly express my concerns with the proposed project. As a result of reading through the extensive documentation that You of the file, I am even more apprehensive now about doubling the density provided as part current zoning) in such an environmentally sensitive area. Apparently, the proposed project has also grown now from 12 units to 16 units. At the same time, the amount of land which the church is selling to the developer has also increased leading to an even community. My concern is not just with the number of units rased on theater property, on the surrounding with the overall size of the development footprint in such close proximity to a lake with iutown flooding problems. In addition, here is a brief list of other specific concerns: 1) On the site plan, the retaining wall near 312'h Street to be constructed directly east of unit 2 appears to be where 3 or 4 significant trees where to remain, according to an environmental report. Can the trees and the retaining wall co -exist? 2) Significant IMfll: What will be the impact on the lake and surrounding area? 3) About 50 significant tall trees in all are proposed to be cut down (leaving only 3 or 4 of the original grove) in a setting which forms a backdrop to the lake. This will have a decidedly negative impact visually for those of us that love the lake, since Mirror Lake uniquely reflects the trees and sky and mirrors them back on the water. Even if some of the trees are replaced, it will certainly leave a scar. 4) Fire/LifeSafety: The site plan shows five units in the back of the property that appear not to have access to fire/ernergency vehicles. I understand that the fire department would require that all of the units have sprinklers inside, but if the exteriors ignite and cannot be extinguished right away —would that not pose a serious risk to other structures nearby? 5) Lake Access: The property has an easement to the lake. Unfortunately, 312`h Street is a busy thoroughfare_ Regular pedestrian crossing of this street to access the lake is a serious risk to life and limb. There are also no restroom facilities on the lakeside. 6) Retention: I'm no expert, but how can the measures proposed possibly address runoff? - Thank you again for your time/consideration. Please call (253) 946-9363, if you have questions. Sinc y, Richard Scott � �1B 1T-0--:y PAGE-1-OF-1 RECEIVED BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT rF FEB 2 0 2008 19 February 2008 401 SW 3121' St Federal Way WA 98023 City of Federal Way Community Development Services Department Attn: Deb Barker, Senior Planner 33325 8 h Avenue South Federal Way WA 989003 Subject: Proposed Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Home Development Dear Ms Barker, Thank you for notification and the opportunity to comment on the Mirror Lake Highlands cottage preliminary plat package. We have tried to incorporate in our comments many of the concerns of Mirror Lake- residents, although you wNI-be receiving comments frorrr individuals as well. In our letter submitted 27 June 2007, we emphasized a couple of points: • The design describes raingardens as common open space. Raingardens, �) DP', therefore, can not be also credited as surface water management facilities. -The design does not address the control of phosphorous. These are still concerns, but our comments now concentrate on the documents in the preliminary plat package. We feel that handling and treatment of surface water is one of the most important elements of this project from the perspective of Mirror Lake Residents. The newspapers regularly run stories on distressed lakes in the area; often that distress is a consequence of increases in nutrients reaching the lake. Attached are examples of three reports just since our first comments on this project. There is good reason for caution regarding runoff effects. Area lakes have been caught in the spiral of environmental damage; experimental and/or expensive treatment; unintended consequences.; lawsuits; loss of esthetic and recreational value. lGXHIB1 6 V3 ! PAGE.. -OF Steilacoom Lake is a good example. We do not want this for Mirror Lake and we look to the city to provide the appropriate regulatory protection. The following comments are organized according to the corresponding element of the data package. If you have any questions, please call either Bob Roper or Marla Ledin at the numbers listed below. Yours truly, Robert S. Roper Land Use Committee Mirror Lake Residents' Association 253-941-6954 EXHI,Ta !� PAGE �Z OF April 30, 2008 Deb Barker, Federal Way Senior Planner Director of Community Development Services P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063 Re: The Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat - 604 SW 312m Street, Federal Way, WA Dear Ms. Barker, Thank you again for the opportunity to provide a brief written comment on the Determination of Non -significance (DNS) as a follow-up to my previous letters. 1) All lake residents share a j oint ownership of the lake (which is about 150 feet from the site), however it has come to my attention that only a handful of residents were notified of the proposed project. I understand that it was the applicant's responsibility to identify all affected property owners (in fact a good portion have been excluded from the process). As a result, the public comment has been severely limited. I propose that all affected property owners be contacted, before the process continues any further. The applicant checked that no views would be affected, however the immediate view from the lake for all residents would be compromised. 2) I understand from our conversation yesterday, that you have not received the information requested from the applicant in regard to tree replacement. So, why then is there such haste in continuing the process? 3) Of utmost concern is the LID fill being proposed used to meet the drainage problems inherent at this site in such an environmentally -sensitive lakeside area. I understand that the use of this LID fill is "groundbrealdng" for the City, since it has never been done here before. Although, I understand that it has likely been done elsewhere in the County. But has it ever been attempted with structures built on top of it??? I can't help recalling Marina District in San Francisco after the Loma Prieta earthquake. Would potential buyers have to be notified of such "experimental" soil conditions before purchase? What liability does the City of Federal Way have? What happens if there is an earthquake and the retaining wall is breached, the homes are severely damaged/collapse, and the soil cannot continue to retain all the water? 4) Also, how tall is the retaining wall proposed? What are the dimensions? What is it to be made out of ---aesthetics? How could the remaining few trees co -exist with the retaining wall? 5) Lastly, I understand that the applicant proposes no improvements to the lake easement. But, doesn't the City require fencing/gate if it were a condo/apartment complex and had a pool or a lake ------- to protect children? This is besides the safety aspects of crossing the busy street. Thank you again for your time/consideration. Please call (253) 946-9363, if you have questions. Sincerely, Richard Scott EXHIBIT. K..:3 PAGE_1-t-OF �► 30 April 2008 525 SW 312t' St Federal Way WA 98023 City of Federal Way Community Development Services Department Attn: Deb Barker, Senior Planner 33325 a Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 Subject: Proposed Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Home Development Dear Ms Barker, I have read the April 16, 2008 Determination of Nonsignificance regarding proposed Mirror Lake Highlands cottage housing development and I offer the following comments. Also included is a compilation of concerns expressed by lakeside residents at a recent meeting. I am uncertain whether these comments—particutrly those having to do with stormwateF ire best addressed during the SEPA process or during preliminary plat review, but we believe the infiltration scheme proposed and the use of fill material deserve scrutiny and validation because of potential effects on nearby Mirror Lake. The checklist states (B.1.e) that 5562 yards of fill will be brought in. The purpose of the fill is described as follows: `The fill quantities are required for stormwater runoff to be conveyed to the infiltration areas and provide 3'-5' sub -base of soil for the infiltration of storrrwrater. Infiltration of starrmumter is the preferred method of flow control as defined by the lGn9 county Surface Wainer Design Nlarmal, as adopted by the City of Federal Way. - The KCSWDM (5.1.1) does gtate, in the section on Low Impact Design(LID) that "on some sites... it is possible to infittra -. all storm water, which eliminates impacts from surface water leaving the site. On these sites, hnfher mfigabon of storrnwater impacts is usually not required." This sounds like a good solution to potential pollution problems, 'hv*Ming phosphorous, one of our primary concerns. EXHIBIT RECEIVED PAGE OF. APR 3,0 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS On Sunday, April 27, 2008, a meeting of interested lake residents included a discussion of Mirror Lake Highlands. Paraphrasing some of the comments from that meeting: There was considerable concern that the infiltration approach will not work. • Impervious surfaces are a large percentage of the project. Density is higher than anything experienced to date for single-family dwellings in Federal Way. • Even with considerable capacity, Lakota Crest detention facility has come very close to overflowing during a heavy storm in November 2005. How can this site not use detention? Trees were also the source of several comments. • Nearly complete loss of trees in that portion of the landscape view enjoyed by some lake residents was felt to be an esthetic environmental impact. -Trees are beneficial -soil stabilization -0O2 absorption Lake Access by MLH residents was a major concern. • People crossing a busy road to get to the lake are in danger, particularly young children. • There are no toilet facilities. • Access by MLH residents will encourage trespassing by others. -The Bethel church lot has fencing and good signage and even so, trespassing occurs • Access must be gated and locked when not in use. If the city should decide these questions do not rise to the level of SEPA, please include a copy of these comments in the project file. Yours tru Robert S. Roper MLRA Land Use Marla Ledin MLRA President 4 EXHIBIT K-2- PAGE__y_0F_Y S Welcome to the W irror Lake rsident's ,AssociationICommunity,gnnua[9�teeting - 2008 Our W eeting wid start at .5: 4.5pm sftarp Please: 1. Sign in so we can record attendance and receipt of packet 2. Obtain your packet • 3. Please review survey sheets, etc to see if they pertain to you 4. If you have a neighbor who is not here can you take their packet and sign your name on their line please and deliver it for us 5. Feel free to write a check tonight for 2008 dues if that is convenient Notes on email: ao- If you check your work email more often than your personal email please provide that address for us as well &- Please let us know if you are willing to receive mailings via email. rap The Annual Report will always be in hard copy &-Email is being used for information sharing or short lead-times. It is a great source for sharing information around the lake. Most of these are not mailed so only those with email get these. &- Please remember to check your email. With our large group email is far less expensive/time-consuming than mail delivery. &-Does anybody know of any WIFI available in our area? We will try to address community issues first so that those off -lake attendees can leave earlier if they choose prior to any Lake/Association business. Note: There are no `Rules of Order' being followed at tonight's meeting. Please raise your hand to be recognized. We will schedule a follow-up meeting later if issues dictate the need. q�, � De, i � � `. ` OAK-L l Nate. D Ott T1 i� V �� L l�lY. i � �►. t 1 a J. LAND USE (CURRENT AND FUTURE) As of Fall, 2007, there is Preliminary Plat Approval for these nearby projects: I. Maggies Meadows subdivision, 9 Lots 11. Noyes subdivision, 6 Lots 111. Mirror Estates subdivision, 27 Lots Here is a map of current development projects near our lake community. It does not include the Cottage Housing Development which is still in process. I _17 L tic Ali i7,.,4h !Schd-al w.w j 32XL 76 Maggie's 4­1 g C f av Meadow 1 kI 'S U b d =11' 02i o n �J r Do)% bdiv Sub:dWi5ion 3t ST. LS 312--& 7 -.w.44 Ide a [7 la'i6 }s ti e$4f Koi c Z salt! 0 Z:! Mirror Estates: (South of SW 314th West of 8th Ave SW). in March '07, the City Council approved the preliminary plat application. I am not aware of any threats to our lake quality with this development but, traffic and 'critter displacement' may be of concern. I am not aware of a start date on this development. Proposed Cottage Housing Developments A-:1.-pproved Mirror Lake Hi ands Cottau Housing Devel2pme :(604SW312thSt) The City of Federal Way reviewed proposals for the building of Cottage Housing Developments during 2007 for a pilot program. A project of this nature was chosen for the location at 604 SW 312'h St. Bob Roper tracks these land use projects on our behalf and drafted a letter last spring to the City highlighting reasons why a project of this type could 11 affect our lake's phosphorus levels negatively based on the current code in Federal Way. Follow -Up: Bob wrote another feedback letter to the city in response to the preliminary plat package recently again highlighting his concerns. In his research of the project he has noted that "The program has been expanded and will now include 16 homes. Five trees will be retained on 312th. (Where have we heard that before!) Everything else goes. They are proposing 5500 yards of fill dirt. Nothing seen so far referring to lake access. Where is that information? The lake access easement is for a 10 foot width". Lake access could provide a whole new set of concerns as you can imagine. Here is a picture of another Cottage Housing Development in western Washington. Attractive but, since we are under the guidelines of the King County Resource .,� Stream requirements instead of Sensitive lake designations we do not have the codes in place that will protect our lake from phosphorus pollution. Bob has several examples of nearby lakes having these problems and is opposed to 5 the project moving forward without more protection for us. He has forwarded the backup to the City. loll ■ •�MR_ WIN Please visit the City of Federal Way website for more information on Cottage Housing. Bob Roper has the set of plans and can answer any questions you may have. Please get involved if you have concerns. We thank Bob for the hours and hours of `homework' he has had over the years in monitoring all of this activity. K. NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN/BENCH DESIGN 12 Our hope was to have Jim Knannlein construct a neighborhood sign at our new garden site much like the one you see at the left. With the vandalism to our existing Community Bulletin Board in that location that project was put on hold. Jim is now giving us another option — a garden bench! The Garden Committee will work with Jim on this opportunity this year and report back. From: Judy Garcia [mailto:judyagarcia@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2008 10:39 PM To: Marla.G.Ledin@gsk.com; 'Gayle Larson'; boxkbox@aol.com; gary.barth@multicare.org; dwblanchardl@comcast.net; rockyrayel@aol.com; lookforme.wa@netzero.com; dave- val@comcast.net; pdimick@u.washington.edu; simongarcia@comcast.net; mjgatesre@yahoo.com; gentryfire@aol.com; garyg@fieldsroofservice.com; jgrant1014@aol.com; budhardman@comcast.net; bjhartlo@yahoo.com; chanceandmerry@msn.com; nessiedg@comcast.net; kdntjones@earthlink.com; glolynn@msn.com; mmasion@aol.com; bblmurph@aol.com; lhwrightphoto@aol.com; bob.roper@comcast.net; valorissa@comcast.net; fdsl@comcast.net; 35mariet@netscape.com; perrysampley@yahoo.com; gablanchardl@comcast.net; dnbbaker@yahoo.com; deerefriends@comcast.net; jim@kmedrysuits.com; elien@creighton.edu; joannerice55@yahoo.com; jldmjones@comcast.net; jillbarth@comcast.net; keithjones@agrishopinc.com; NANHRNMS@aol.com; steph.spence@googlemail.com; sandyao@comcast.net; mojovette2000@yahoo.com; kymeee2004@yahoo.com; MWOODIN2@comcast.net; linda.helm@lewisbuilds.com; rwilson713@aol.com; VeronikaMarino@comcast.net; edtoner@earthlink.net; TOCARNW@aol.com; bethelcenter@comcast.net; sirrjames@comcast.net; sarinal027@hotmail.com; thurley@fhcrc.org; holdenhomes@comcast.net; rick.scott@gsa.gov Subject: RE: Cottage Housing Don't know how big their mailing list was, but we received a "Determination of Nonsignificance" last week on the Cottage Housing project, with an issue date of April 16, 2008. Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on April 30, 2008. Any appeal needs to be filed with the City within 14 days of the comment deadline. The appeal goes to Greg Fewins, Director of Community Development Services, at the City of Federal Way, no later than 5:00 p.m. on May 14, 2008, by a written letter stating the reason for the appeal of the determination. Judy Garcia From: Marla.G.Ledin@gsk.com [mailto:Marla.G.Ledin@gsk.com] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 8:59 PM To: Gayle Larson; boxkbox@aol.com; gary.bart.h@multicare.org; dwblanchardl@comcast.net; rockyrayel@aol.com; lookforme.wa@netzero.com; dave-val@comcast.net; pdimick@u.washington.edu; simongarcia@comcast.net; judyagarcia@comcast.net; mjgatesre@yahoo.com; gentryfire@aol.com; garyg@fieldsroofservice.com; jgrant1014@aol.com; budhardman@comcast.net; bjhartlo@yahoo.com; chanceandmerry@msn.com; nessiedg@comcast.net; kdntjones@earthlink.com; glolynn@msn.com; mmasion@aol.com; bblmurph@aol.com; lhwrightphoto@aol.com; bob.roper@comcast.net; valorissa@comcast.net; fdsl@comcast.net; 35mariet@netscape.com; perrysampley@yahoo.com; gablanchardl@comcast.net; dnbbaker@yahoo.com; deerefriends@comcast.net; jim@kmedrysuits.com; elien@creighton.edu; joannerice55@yahoo.com; jldmjones@comcast.net; jillbarth@comcast.net; keithjones@agrishopinc.com; NANHRNMS@aol.com; steph.spence@googlemail.com; sandyao@comcast.net; mojovettc2000@yahoo.com; kymeee2004@yahoo.com; MWOODIN2@comcast.net; linda.helm@lewisbuilds.com; rwilson713@aol.com; VeronikaMarino@comcast.net; edtoner@earthlink.net; TOCARNW@aol.com; bethelcenter@comcast.net; sirrjames@comcast.net; sarinal027@hotmail.com; thurley@fhcrc.org; holdenhomes@comcast.net; rick.scott@gsa.gov Subject: Follow-up from Annual Meeting 12 Lots were represented at this years Annual Meeting, about average. We chose only to focus on those issues of concern to the attendees and had a lively discussion. Here is the follow-up on some of those items. Note: We have had a lengthy annual report the last couple of years to insure all lake residents had all information available. This report will be cut down next year and only expanded for new residents. Please save the last annual report if you need to reference anything. You will not receive the full deck again. If we wrap up various projects we may not need an annual meeting every year and we will determine this need on a year to year basis. YARD SALE - There is alot of interest around a yard sale this year. We were not planning on one but, we may revisit this idea now. If we have one it will be in the summer timeframe. Please hold on to your 'stuff' if you can. If we do not have one this year we will definitely have one next year. We also entertained other fund-raising ideas like Plant or Vegetable sale on 312th St. GARDEN PROJECT- We will plan on refreshing the gravel and bark this year. We have ordered clover seed and will scatter in the lawn area instead of grass seed since it is more drought tolerant. Bulbs that are now growing in the lawn area will be relocated to the garden areas to make mowing alittle easier. The mowing schedule is posted on the community board. This requires mowing with a push mower now vs. a riding mower. If you can help please sign up and plan accordingly. WE NEED MOWING VOLUNTEERS. You can usually use the yard waste can at the house there to dispose of the mowed grass. GARDEN BENCH- A site in the garden has been chosen for our new 'Friendship Bench' made of red granite which will help us remember our lost friends like neighbor Marty Woodin. We are still considering the bench leg attachment design in order to prevent theft of the bench itself. SOCIAL COMMITTEE- If you can host the summer party let us know. We may have our Christmas party on the Eastside this year. POTHOLES- A lake resident was successful in getting the City to fill potholes on 312th St when they told the City a bicyclist had fallen because of one. I guess liability is a motivator there. Other requests were turned down. SPEEDING ON 7TH. - I noticed a police car pulling over a speeder on 7th the other night. We have a real problem on that road. We have a 9 yr wait on speedbumps but, we can check into rubber speedbumps, per a resident in the meantime if there is enough interest. If someone in that neighborhood would like to investigate that option and and get back to us with costs etc we would appreciate it. BREAK-INS AND THEFT ON 7TH AND 8TH- PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU ARE REPORTING ANY THEFT, BREAK- INS OR UNUSUAL BEHAVIOUR especially on 7th and 8th. There are few reported cases but, we know there have been several incidents. If you don't report it at least email/phone me the details so that I can log it. If the police are not aware of our problem there will be no attention given. You can report them to Jason Ellis who is aware of our situation at jason.ellis@cityoffederalway.com or 835-6897. If you have any details on past thefts or incidents that were not reported please let me know about those too. STREET LIGHT ADDED BY RESIDENT ON 8TH - After a breakin on 8th a lake resident there looked into adding a street light in front of his home. He went through Lakehaven (strange but, true). He was required to get 4 out of 6 signatures of nearby homes. All 6 homes nearby will have a monthly charge of $2.47 added to their Lakehaven bill. I would like to see another streetlight added at the corner of 7th and 8th in front of our garden area. It is very dark there. Buchans are included in the other light project, so this project would require approval from 4 of Dana, Gates, Ableson, Woodin, Helm, Smith although all 6 would be billed. Are these parties interested? Could someone in that group own this project for us? Let me know. CITY CENTER ACCESS - There was an open house in April on the I-5 Exit project which includes 312th as an option. I believe 2 people attended from the lake. It was heavily attended by Steel Lake Residents and folks from the 324th Mobile Home Park which is another option. Few details are available yet as they need to determine which option to 2 move on based on feedback from the open house. You can access updates on the City website. I was told that there will be improvements to the intersection at Dash Pt Rd and 312th and perhaps a 'round -about' added at 14th (between the lake and Dash Pt Road) to slow traffic. There are no changes planned for 312th in front of our lake at this time. They will determine the preferred option in 2009. COTTAGE HOUSING- The number is significant trees being left on 312th at the site is now down to about 3-4, pretty disappointing. The 10 foot easement may only be granted to a few of the homes. No retention ponds in current plan. 4 additional houses were added. Looks like parking for about 28 or so vehicles in the plan. Bob Roper and Rick Bell are continuing to track and give feedback. They would like to find a few more who would be willing to provide feedback. Can you help?? 'BEST OF' SURVEY RESULTS - So far I only have one response so we will not circulate any revised list this year. LILY/IRIS TREATMENT - The treatment results from last year look very promising. I see alot of dead iris in areas of treatment and very few lily pads emerging. Please clean out this dead plant material (after you pick up a manual). Also, if you are up paid up on dues in 2008 and are requesting treatment this year please leave all iris and lily pads. Do not cut as this will limit success of your treatment. A contract will be signed with the biologist in the next several weeks. If you have not paid for treatment please insure it is in by 5-31 to insure you are on the map. All paid up lots will qualify for treatment. AQUATIC PLANTS AND FISH MANUAL/PERMIT- I furnished the phone number to order these books which provide information for folks wanting to clean their lakefronts around docks etc. These are considered permits when on site. I was able to get 36 copies of these and will hand out at our tent event on Sunday to those who do clean their waterfronts. DUES HISTORY- We provided dues history for each lot that covered several years. We are aware that you may not have resided on your lot all of that time but, wanted to give you the history as lily pad treatment is generally not offered to unpaid lots and you can gauge by your history when your lot may have been treated. No payment = no treatment. MIRROR LAKE HISTORIAN PROJECT- Bob Roper is looking for pictures of turn of the century logging roads in our area and also any pictures or information on fires here as well. DUES DRIVE - We currently have 23 lots paid up in 2008 against a total of 37 lots in 2007. Please pay sooner than later so we can determine fund availability for our various projects. BOAT FLAGS - We have ordered inexpensive flags which will be available to place on your boats to identify you as having legal access to our lake. This will prevent anybody from questioning you or your guests. This is optional. I believe paddleboats will not require any flag as we can assume nobody is transporting one onto the lake. These will be available for pick up at the Tent Event on Sunday, April 27th in the community garden. Some will be delivered in the next couple of weeks. If you do not receive one you are welcome to pick one up at the end of the 401 sw 312th st driveway near the garbage cans. If you need and extra that should be fine too. FINES FOR CUTTING TREES - A resident on the east side received very substantial fines and fees for cutting down 2 diseased trees on his property. If you have questions on trees on your lot you can get more information by calling: R. Lee Bailey - Dead or diseased tree questions - 835-2620 Isaac Conlen - General Tree Questions - 835-2643 BOARD POSITION- J. Grant expressed an interest in becoming a Board Member if we have the need for another one and we have made a note of this and hope to take her up on this offer. Also, Duncan Blanchard is back home after 50+ days in the hospital. He is doing well. We send our good wishes to him. Marla Ledin President, Mirror Lk Residents Association office phone 253.839.0626 marla.g.ledin@gsk.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.6/1711 - Release Date: 10/6/2008 5:37 PM 3 FILE CITY OF Federal Way May 9, 2008 Mr. Richard Scott PO Box 4536 Federal Way, WA 98063-4536 RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; RESPONSE TO SEPA COMMENTS MIRROR LAKE HIGHLAND COTTAGE PRELIMINARY PLAT Dear Mr. Scott_ CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Thank you for your comments on the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) decision for the above - referenced subdivision proposal. Several comment letters were provided to the City in response to the Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) issued on April 30, 2008. Your comments related to (1) public notice; (2) tree replacement; (3) LID; (4) retaining wall height; and (5) lake access. This letter briefly responds to your comments, including comments from the Public Works Development Services Division and also forwards comments from the applicant. (1) You noted that not all of the residents around the lake were notified. You believe that the applicant has a responsibility to notify all affected property owners which includes all lake residents who share a joint ownership around the lake. As provided in Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 18-49, when the responsible official issues a determination of nonsignificance, the city shall give public notice for project related actions, which includes mailing to all owners of real property as shown in the records of the County assessor located within 300 feet of the site and any interested parry or agency who has filed its name directly with the responsible official. Real property does not mean areas of easement, only ownership. It is the applicant's responsibility to accurately represent the subject site and to provide stamped addressed envelopes for property owners within 300 feet of their property. In the case of this project, the applicant elected to contract with the City's Graphic Information System (GIS) department who prepared the mailing labels based on the applicant's direction. It is the City's position that the notification procedures of FWCC Section 18-49(a)(1) were accurately followed and notification requirements met. (2) You question why the environmental process is continuing when tree replacement information has not yet been submitted. Tree removal and retention issues are reviewed under the preliminary plat process and during engineering review. The Hearing Examiner and the City Council would evaluate any grading requests, and FWCC Section 22-1568 permits removal of significant trees with corresponding tree replacement. In that the tree replacement issue is addressed under the FWCC, the City does not require the final decision to be made at the time of environmental determination. (3) You have expressed concerns regarding fill and the use of low impact development "in such an environmentally sensitive lakeside area" and questioned requirements surrounding residential development. Low impact development is generally considered to be more `sensititve' when used EXHIBIT-LL"t- PAGE.. 1 _OF��' Mr. Scott May 9, 2008 Page 4 RESPONSE FROM APPLICANT A copy of your letter was forward to the applicant. He has elected to provide a written response to your comments; a copy of his May 8, 2008, letter is enclosed. CONCLUSION The City appreciates the comments provided. After careful consideration of the comments, however, the City is retaining the DNS as issued and will not be modifying the DNS. Any appeal of the DNS must be received by May 14, 2008, and include a $114.50 filing fee. In regards to the next steps, the City's Hearing Examiner will be holding a public hearing on the proposed subdivision and will forward a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration. Notification of the upcoming public hearing will be provided through mailing to all parties of record and to each property owner within 300 feet of the site, posting of the site and public places, and publication of a legal notice in the newspaper. A date for the public hearing has not been set. If you have any further questions or would like to review the project files, please contact Deb Barker, Senior Planner, at 253-835-2642. Sincerely, Greg Fewins Director of Community Development Services Responsible Environmental Official enc_ Letter dated May 8, 2008 from William McCaffrey C. Deb Barker, Senior Planner Soma Chattopadhyay, Traffic Analyst Ann Dower, Public Works Engineering Plans Review Paul Bucich, Surface Water Manager Monica Buck, City Staff Attorney Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116, Federal Way, WA 98023 07-106875 EXH l B IT '4'8 _ PAGE! OFF Minor Lake Residents' Association Walking List, 1011OW08 Voting Lots # Off lake First Name Last Name Address city St. Zip X Total 1 1 Don & Roxanne Carlson 392 SW 316th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 2 1 Julie Grant 388 SW 316th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 3 1 Albert Kniestedt 31402 2nd Ave SW Federal Way WA 98023 4 1 SERGEY+Golina BOZHKO 31343 2nd Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 CO 5 1 JAMES W+VERONIKA Marino 31323 2nd Ave SW Federal Way WA 96023 Q 6 1 Bill & Linda Murphy 31315 2nd Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 w 7 1 VLASENKO IYUBOV 313 SW 313th Street Federal Way WA 98023 9 1 .Jon & Stephanie Colby 31231 4th Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 10 1 'Marie Schrette 'empty lot Federal Way, WA 96023 OTHER eCCESs 1 Dave and Edie Toner 305 SW 313th Federal Way, WA 98023 11 1 Maria Ledin .401 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 12 1 Liz Lien 411 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 13 1 Keith & Deanna Jones 421 SW 312th Street Federal Way WA 98023 14 1 Lilly & Scott Simpson 517 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 96023 15 1 Bob and Jackie Roper 525 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 96023 = Is 1 Gary & Linda Gilmer d537 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 F�— 17 1 Linda Bell 541 SW 312th Street Federal Way WA 98023 18 1 Rick Scott 545 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 ❑ Z 19 1 Bethel Christian Center Pastor DennisTom Austin 414 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 20 1 Rov and Thelma Guilao 1505 SW 312th St Federal Way, WA 98023 21 1 Simon &Judy Garcia 1521 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 22 1 Helen & Kimi Hanson 627 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 23 1 Gloria Lynn Peny 719 SW 312th Street Federal Way WA 98023 24 1 Steve & Pat Gentry 721 SW 312th Street Federal Way, WA 98023 25 1 Duncan & Stephanie Spence 31204 Sth Ave SW Federal Way WA 98023 U) 26 1 Kim Inman 31206 8th Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 27 1 Pat & John Hardman 31208 8th Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 28 1 Marilyn & Paul Masion 31212 Bth Ave SW Federal Way. WA 98023 = 29 1 Betty Bicknell 31216 8th Ave SW Federal Way. WA 98023 30 1 Dave Danforth 31238 8th Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 31 1 Paul Davila 31246 8th Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 32 1 Resident Resident 31250 8th Ave SW Federal Way. WA 98023 33 1 1 ,Adam & Becky Buchan 31260 8th Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 34 1 Marjorie Dana 31400 7th Place SW Federal Wa , WA 98023 35 1 Marylyn Gates 31404 7th Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 36 1 Nang Ableson 31410 7th Place SW Federal Way, WA 198023 H 37 1 Floyd & Vera Smith 31414 7th Place SW Federal Way, WA 198023 U) 38 1 James & Hanne Knannlein 31420 7th Place SW Federal Wa , WA 98023 39 1 Kris (& Val Aker) Box 31422 7th Place SW Federal Wa , WA 98023 40 1 Tess Hurie , HenryZies 31424 7th Place SW Federal Way , WA 98023 = 41 1 Holden & Gracie Trent 131426 7th Place SW 'Federal Way, WA 98023 42 1 Robert Hunt 31430 7th Place SW 'Federal Way. WA 98023 n 43 1 Pat Raine 314327th Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 U) 44 1 Barbara Hartloff 31434 7th Place SW Federal Way. 'WA 98023 45 1 Freeman Laxson 31440 7th Place SW Federal Way, 'WA 98023 46 1 Chance & Merry Hebert 31448 7th Place SW Federal Way. 'WA 98023 47 1 Duncan & Gretchen Blanchard 31456 7th Place SW Federal Way, 'WA 98023 48 1 bee and Bruce Baker 602 SW 316th Street Federal Way, 'WA 98023 49 1 Mick Rice 534 SW 316th Street Federal Way, 'WA 98023 50 1 Denise Grant(hughes) 528 SW 316th Street Federal Way, 'WA 98023 51 1 Nadine Cox 522 SW 316th Street Federal Way, 'WA 98023 52 1 Paul & Terry Dimick 516 SW 316th Street Federal Way 'WA 98023 = 53 1 Terry & Leslie (and Gabriel Sam ley 510 SW 316th Street Federal Way. 'WA 98023 54 1 William Hartvig 504 SW 316th Street Federal Way, 'WA 98023 55 1 Jack & Darla Jones 438 SW 316th Street Federal Way, 'WA 98023 O 56 1 Darren & Judi Jones 432 SW 316th Street Federal Way 'WA 98023 U) 57 1 Marie Trotinon 426 SW 316th Street Federal Way, 'WA 98023 58 59 1 .Audrey Garcia 418 SW 316th Street Federal Wa 'WA 98023 1 Audrey Garcia 420 SW 316th Street Federal Way 'WA 98023 60 1 KathyKisch & Turk (David) Apps 414 SW 316th Street Federal Way. 'WA 98023 61 1 Jill and Gary Barth 1406 SW 316th Street Federal Way 'WA 98023 OTHER 1 Bob & Camille Wilson 1402 SW 316th Street Federal Way. 'WA 98023 Totals 62 ` CITY OF � Federal January 18, 2008 Mr. William McCaffrey 30929 37"' Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 CITY HALL �� 33325 Sth Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cit yoffederalway. com RE: Files #07-106874-00-SU and 07-106875-SE; Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Notice of Complete Application, Preliminary Technical Comments Dear Mr. McCaffrey: The Department of Community Development Services received your application on December 21, 2007, for the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat, a subdivision establishing 16 single-family units of cottage housing with site improvements. Pursuant to City regulations, upon receipt of an application the City has 28 days to determine whether all required information and documentation required for a complete application has been submitted. COMPLETE APPLICATION Please consider this letter as a Letter of Completeness. Pursuant to the Federal Way City Code (FWCC), the application is deemed complete as of January 15, 2008, based on the subdivision submittal requirements. Pursuant to FWCC Section 22-3.1, Exemptions from the requirements of the regulatory reform act of 1995 (RCW 36.70B), preliminary plats create special circumstances which necessitate the exemption of preliminary plat applications from review procedures of RCW 36.70B, including, but not limited to, the 120 day review time line. The City has elected to provide a letter of completeness and public notice of application and decision not withstanding this exemption. You will be informed of the status of the application if you are notified in writing that additional information is needed. Having met the submittal requirements, your application is now ready for processing. Therefore, pursuant to the FWCC, a Notice of Application will be published in the Federal Way Mirror on January 26, 2008, and other public notice will be given based on City procedures. The Department of Community Development Services has responsibility to notify other agencies that may have jurisdiction over your development project or an interest in it. The applicant has various requirements associated with public notices for the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat. Public notice of the complete application shall occur in accordance with FWCC Section 20-118, as noted below: The public will be notified of the complete application through the mailed notices, and on- and off - site notices. The applicant is responsible for installation of one on site notice board along SW 312`fi Street. This must be installed on or before February 1, 2008. (This is within 14 calendar days of the issuance of the letter of complete application.) The City will prepare the four -foot by four -foot notice boards, which will be available for pickup by 4:00 PM, Wednesday, January 23, 2008. A $40.00 fee per board is due at the time the notice board is picked up; bring the enclosed invoice with you. Please refer to the enclosed public notice board handout for installation instructions. Mr. McCaffrey January 18, 2008 Page 2 At the time of the SEPA determination and of the date for the public hearing, the City will update notices on the installed large Public Notice Board. The applicant is responsible for removal of the Public Notice Board, which shall occur within seven calendar days after the final decision of the City on the matter. PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL COMMENTS Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District, 253-946-5407 The applicant has completed and submitted to Lakehaven an application for Certificate(s) of Availability (issued 12/20/07). However, no other application has been submitted to Lakehaven that is necessary to more specifically be able to determine the applicant's requirements for connection to Lakehaven's water and/or sewer systems to serve the subject property have been submitted to Lakehaven. As previously noted, applicant will need to submit an application for either Developer Extension Pre -Design or Developer Extension Agreement for Lakehaven to formally commence the water and/or sewer plan review process. Please be advised that additional technical comments from the Planning, Engineering and Traffic Divisions on the preliminary plat application will be available in approximately 30 days. If you should have any questions regarding this letter or your development project, please feel free to call me at 253-835-2642. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner enc: Notice Board Invoice Notice Board Handout c_ Matt Herrera, Associate Planner Andrew Campbell, Planning Intern Ann Dower, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sarady Long, Traffic Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District 07-106874 Doc LD 43715 41k CITY '0'::tSP OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityoffederalw_a_y.cosn DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I, hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: 91 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 ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other was Rmailed ❑ faxed , d 5� 200& Project Name 1� l% (- ❑ 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 ❑ e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on File Number(s) 07 -) b& R) y- so O 7 -16 G 2 2 s -� Signature 7Date ) -.�.57 d KACD Administratlon Flles\Declaration of Disftutlon.doc/Last printed 1 /3/2008 4:54:00 PM 4ik CITY OF 40" Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION Name: Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Description: Proposal to subdivide five lots totaling 1.88 acres into sixteen single-family lots, with construction of cottage housing units as defined under Federal Way City Code (FWCC). The project includes three parking garages, a commons building and open space, public and private street improvements, and related drainage and utility improvements. Applicant: WJM Studios, William McCaffrey, 30929 37a' Place SW, Federal Way, WA Location: 604 SW 312'b Street, Federal Way, WA 98023 Date Application Received: December 21, 2007 Date Determined Complete: January 15, 2008 Date of Notice of Application: January 26, 2008 Permits Required by this Application: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (File #07-106875-SE), Preliminary Plat (File #07-106874-SU), Concurrency (File #07-106876-CN) Existing Environmental Documents: Preliminary Technical Information Report, Level I Drainage Analysis, Tree Evaluation, and Geotechnical Engineering Report. Relevant Environmental Documents are Available at the Address Below: X YES NO Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Mitigation, Known at this Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy" (SEPA); FWCC Chapter 19, "Planning and Development"; FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; FWCC Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management"; and FWCC Chapter 2.2, "Zoning" Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: The project will be reviewed for consistency with all applicable codes and regulations including the FWCC; King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way, and King County Road Standards as amended by the City. Any person may submit written comments on the Notice of Land Use Application to the Director of Community Development Services by February 11, 2008. The official project file is available for public review at the Department of Community Development Services (address below). Any person has the right to submit written comments to the Hearing Examiner and appear at the public hearing of the Hearing Examiner to give comments orally. Notification of the public hearing date will occur approximately 15 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may challenge the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner. Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 City of Federal Way 33325 8a Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Published in the Federal Way Mirror on January 26, 2008. Doc. I.D. 43766 c co L. 0 Lam.. U N � d U ■Y N CR a m C u C N � O O w? o ■Y cu E m a L 0D c to w N w E J a a coo 2LL ULL N d 7-14 'L.:oll- I WE 'City ®f Parcel o rro 123120e7 ❑)T Federal Way 33325 x 716Ave S. P,A- Box 9718 Federal Way Notification area { 6)-835- �9&063 www.Gtyoffed0raWaV.4:*fn 178870- 178880.02$0 1 - 178880 478880-0320 V1 1 8$� 178890-k 1 889{1-0460 1.78890.0520 0320 178880-0410 178880-0390 0360 178880- 178880- 178a90-0300 CO 178890- 178890- 178870- 178880; 178880- 178880- 0350178880- 0900 0310 � IT 0470 T78890= 0510 f., 0325 0420 0400 0380 178880 0340 F� 178880- 178890- 0490 0370 cc 0910 0320 178890- 178890- 0480 0500 ST SW 308TFi ST - - SW 308TH ST 555820- 555770- 555770- 771620- 771620-1072104- 0090 0260 0010 0010 0120 9234 555820- 555770- 555770- 0100 0250 0020 771620- 771620- 072104- - 0020 0110 9235 555820- 555770- 555770- 0110 0240 0030 � 072104- CO)�y 771620- CO) 771620- 9106 555820- 0120 555770- 555770- 0230 Q 0030 0100 072104- 4 2 5 0040 5 9115. 771620- = 072104- 771620- 9116 072104- 9180 0 01 00 02 00 � 555770- 0040 ( 0090 072104- 0050 9189 555820- 555770- 555770- 771620-: 771620- 0140 0210 0060 0050 0080 072104- 9114 555820- 555770- 555770- 0150 0200 0070 771620-, 771620- 0060 0070 555820- 555770- 555770- 0160 0190 0080 072104- SW 310TH 9109 072104- 072104- 072104- 9003 ST 555770- 9183 9163 0090 072104- 555820- 555770- 072104- 9112 0210 0180 U) 555770- 072104- 9110 > 0100 9151 555820- 555770- Q 0220 0170 555770- F. 0110 072104- 672104- 072104- 555820- 555770- 9140 9149 9111 0230 0160 555770- 0120 555820- 072104- 072104- 0240 555770- 555770- 9238 9144 072104- 072104- 9024 0150 555770- 0130 ___ 9028 555820- 0140 072104- 0255 CPA 9239 555820- 072104- 0255 9027 072104- 9199 555820-. CQ 0250 so 1��VI 072104- 072104- Svq 9074 555920- 555920- , 555920- 555920- 0055 0052 555920- 072104- 0045 0061 555'920- 0051 9108 072104- 0060 555920- 555920- 555750- 9125 555920- 0030 0040 555920- 0180 555920- 0070 555920- 0035 555920- 0075 0065 " 00R920 555920- 555750- 0026 0010 0190 072104- 555920- 9216 0086 555920- 0005 555750- 555920,- 0200 555920- Mirror 0015 0086 555990- 555920- 555750- rti } r i 0095 - _ .. 555920-0100 555750-0220 L-egunu King County Tax Parcels Notified Properties Subject Property WY OF It, OW Scale: AdF N 0 75 150 Feet if This map fs Ioru Spa lal1on one The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. W W W W W W N N fV N J IV N- N — -- 1— — — --` — O A I M C71 � W fV — O CO M v 0) t,- -A W N -� CO CC) v � C77 � W N - O CO 00 ,] O) M � W N to to to to cn to to �A to (A to cn to to to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OO cn cn to to to to cn to to to cn to c.n cn J J J J J J �1 J J J J J J J J J , 1 J rl J .-A v, to to to to to to to to is to to w to In N N N N N N N N N N N J J J J J J J J J J J O O O O 0 0 Cl O O C O O O O O O O O O O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o o� A4�6 A � A � 41 � -P -P A -A l�- � A� -P r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O \o \. �.D �.o �.o to tU t0 a tD L_% `D \0 `D" � O O CD CD CD O O O CD CD O O tJ N N N .- .- .-. '--' '--' �-' O. O O" O A W N '-- O O 00 J C% '.-n A W N .-. W W W w t i Oo 00 In -A '--� �-' O O J N N O —I -- V, O O O O O O 0 0 O O O O O to 00 to A \O t0 W W o 41 O C\ Ln 00. GN-;l 00 ,] W xwr- wnD �dmzm�mo z�Oo o n t) O 70, OC-0Daeopbno�rn n O p o z D zD<OZtri7 o a > p C7 n amxy O D cn rm D ran � D -d �, _ � m x Or �„ r n z p� C z p r .D z a z O O z o o r' Z Z r m ro C7 C z m m v z z y x m C7 D > y z n m C7 fc� n++cn ;n r" p z p Z m O x Z ►C n y r n r<1i D+ n m m C y a a n r b7 d r r m rn r 0 m r z u D D r n-< m z < z o a a a r r°� aaa ox� nDm� �' r o z moo° M�o z�� rnD z z -a a � ar a a z° r r rn r" m z C\ b 'T7 W W w -1C w w W w '-- w w W W C\ O� W W W W W W C1 w w W 01 W o\ Ili N Ill.) N O o --- .- CD O CDIJ O 'V O O .-� '-- O C N CD.-� �-. '--' '--' '--' O Cl N O CDCY CD�] O 00 00 00 0o C co 00 O O .-- v, \,o Cl- O O O O O 00 w N is to O N cn O w" W w Cl O O O W N N O J W v' O O O a Oo O N Cl a> O N J Vr c`n `w` '--� N C� O ff�!! V' �n! to c�n ! y' z O O J J J O J J J t./� J O J J C\ C\ G G N Ct D1 C� C� G W G O CD 3 00 00 ❑ .�'. r�+ �. .�i .� N .�+ N x N C/) J D a D a D a D x <<< <<< < rn<< x x x r x r xq Z rn C/) W m cn cn rn m m rn n m rn m rn rn d m D m rn m m to m rn m m m m m rn m rn m rn m rn t� rn t7t)t�t7dr7t) tzor7tI t7dt7t7t7tor Ct7dr7r7r7r7t7C7t�<aa rn rn r rn m to m rn rn rn m rn p rn rn rn m m m m ; ma m m m m m m m rn [zi m m rn a r- r r r r r r r r r p r a r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r t7 rn rn -< 'cca1 -: C� -< ADC `< �C < �C '� -< � llC a< '��< �C -C -< ��C -<��C ' < -< -`< ���< < l< �<! '-< D``C `< D to �n < G G C < c C < G < < < G C G G G G N 00 00 a s D a a D a a D a D N> a a D D a D a D D a D a D D a D D a00 o N I'D \-- to V V' w V t0 n V1 Vr V V1 Vr \.o rV V' tp to .� tD (V �D rV to C\ �--• 00 00 00 00 00 00 W 00 00 00 J 00 00 00 o0 00 00 00 00 OG 00 00 w w 00 w w 00 00 w w O O O O C O C O C O N O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O IJ 0, C, IV N IJ C;l N N 11i IliN IJ N tJ NJIJ IJ N . N N IJ N h1 N N N N N W w W W W W w W W W w W W W w W W W W W W W 1-i W W W w W w w D z r Z m D ❑ m CO r Z m L/ r 1-0 Off• � N (0 CD A a C37 A Gl W m N CJi Ul O -r� CO -91 M� 4�1 P :Ji A W N O W CO W W-4 W CA) O I* �-- �--• .- .--• U U U U U U U U U U U U: U. N O O N O N O O O N O EO O O IN O O V O N O O O oo O N O O O J O N O O O Ch O N O CD O v, O C\ C—N N O O O . P. O N O O O w O N O C O N O N O O O --• O N O CD O oo U N O O J U N O O O —AC\ O N C CD O U N O O O CT O N O CDO O Cs U N O' C. "A N r Z O o o� � m a odcny Z 0 Y C x oz m nb O z D�<< 0 > C7 O m aa + a a G� [= bd tz x z n z C7 0 z r7yOnrZ r7��dx Z C) z--3 z� =� a n D>> D°a 0 Z � � a � a 4 Z x b m zzr, t7 z �o rn CA ° a Z' O Z � �= z. 3 n rn m tr W O W O C% CN b rn w O O —• �] tom] n w O Cb Na ON ON b cn c w O oo w A C� ^� v] �< b Q O w O W U N b Cn N U O O C/DJ W Ouj cn b w O Cb -P Ol -d cn N U � N ry a b� d w C Do N J o, u w w O 00 G� �O CT -o ro r-• Go oo oo — a m In w �--• N �--� N m s m m `C W IQ C oo riy a ril W N C. ON o0 a m w w �-' N O •P 0o s m cn J N GG G •Nj J '--' \. m N cn CT- N J �! C ) C C r n J w 7y � CIO C by m dr7rt) r 7 m r Sri m r n m r by m r 171 m r 'r1 m r 171 m t7ar7dar7r7tlptzj r Cn m m 'r] m r Irl m r Cn m m Iri m r III m r -rl m r •ri m r xi m r -1 m r -rl m` d r ) G r a a a a -< a -< a a -C a a a a a a a a a a a a r a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a m 0 N W Do 0 C W m o N W oc c N u. w o V( N cc c N w oo C O W oo c IJ w oo o N W oo CD N W oo o N W m 0 N w oo 0 N W oo 0 N w oo 0 N W oo 0 N W Co 0 N W 4% 1 _ CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION Name: Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Description: Proposal to subdivide five lots totaling 1.88 acres into sixteen single-family lots, with construction of cottage housing units as defined under Federal Way City Code (FWCC). The project includes three parking garages, a commons building and open space, public and private street improvements, and related drainage and utility improvements. Applicant: WJM Studios, William McCaffrey, 30929 37a' Place SW, Federal Way, WA Location: 604 SW 312t' Street, Federal Way, WA 98023 Date Application Received: December 21, 2007 Date Determined Complete: January 15, 2008 Date of Notice of Application: January 26, 2008 Permits Required by this Application: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (File #07-106875-SE), Preliminary Plat (File #07-106874-SU), Concurrency (File #07-106876-CN) Existing Environmental Documents: Preliminary Technical Information Report, Level I Drainage Analysis, Tree Evaluation, and Geotechnical Engineering Report. Relevant Environmental Documents are Available at the Address Below: X _YES NO Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Mitigation, Known at this Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy" (SEPA); FWCC Chapter 19, "Planning and Development"; FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; FWCC Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management"; and FWCC 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 FWCC; King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way, and King County Road Standards as amended by the City. Any person may submit written comments on the Notice of Land Use Application to the Director of Community Development Services by February 11, 2008. The official project file is available for public review at the Department of Community Development Services (address below). Any person has the right to submit written comments to the Hearing Examiner and appear at the public hearing of the Hearing Examiner to give comments orally. Notification of the public hearing date will occur approximately 15 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may challenge the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner. Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 City of Federal Way 33325 8`' Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Published in the Federal Way Mirror on January 26, 2008. Doc I.D. 43766 v a� ti a` �., (n c Q co cucq C O � c O o y � e ` : i YI cn E coo Q =LL C u �C �c in o N U� N O .wj L L G - 7-1 : fir.. •- .-*rV 1� _r - - _ - 'S any yl$_ - ' -- it - -_ _ �'j�+:_-_ --• -�, ��- - •��� �• �' p'r -, i'� .17 ILI �:� •'� •�\ ..� � ' ti� -, Il � ._.- . ��• :��- �----�,��I ! �� .` - � _ � �.._. yam- ....-_ —• _ E1 � Y i U N N a� ca O 00 co ate+ r C 0 O N N u LL c O N `— M5 Id_439 co and 41L - f T 3 v n N �_ O N N ^CY) W J � O y a m W a C N k A we E CITY OF FEDERAL WAY NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION Name: Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Prelimi- nary Plat Description: Proposal to subdivide five lots totaling 1.88 acres into -sixteen single-fam- ily lots, with construction of cottage housing units as defined under Federal Way City Code ,(FWCC). The project includes three paikmg garages, a commons building and open space. public and private street improvements, and related drainage and utility improvements. Applicant: WJM Studios, William McCaffrey, 30929 37th Place SW, Federal Way, WA Location: 604 SW 312th Street, Federal Way, WA 98023 Date Application Received: December 21, 2007 Date Determined Complete: Jan- uary 15, 2008 Date of Notice of Application: January 26, 2008 Permits Required by this Application: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (File #07-106875-SE), Preliminary Plat (File #07- 106874-SU), Concurrency (File #07-106876- CN) Existing Environmental Documents: Pre- liminary Technical Information Report, Level I Drainage Analysis, Tree Evaluation, and Geo- technical Engineering Report. Relevant Environmental Documents are Available at the Address Below: X YES NO Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Mitigation, Known at this Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy" (SEPA); FWCC Chap- ter 19, "Planning and Development'; FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; FWCC Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management'; and FWCC 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 FWCC; King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way, and King County Road Standards as amended by the City. Any person may submit written comments on the Notice of Land Use Application to the Di- rector of Community Development Services by February 11, 2008. The official project file is available for public review at the Depart- ment of Community Development Services (address below). Any person has the right to submit written comments to the Hearing Ex- aminer and appear at the public hearing of the Hearing Examiner to give comments orally. Notification of the public hearing date will oc- cur approximately 15 days prior to the sched- uled hearing date. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Ex- aminer may challenge the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner. Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253- 835-2642 City of Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 FWM 1345 Date of Publication: January 26, 2008. FEDERAL -WAY A-_,W�.IRROR A SOUND PUBLISHING NEWSPAPER Affidavit of Publication Stuart Chernis, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is the Publisher of The Federal Way Mirror, a semi -weekly newspaper. That said newspaper is published in the English language continually as a semi -weekly newspaper in Federal Way, King County, Washington, and is now and during all of said time has been printed in an office maintained at the aforementioned place of publication of said newspaper. That the annexed is a true copy of a legal advertisement placed by City of Federal Way L-1345 as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplemental form) of said newspaper once each week for a period of one consecutive week(s), commencing on the 26th day of January. 2008 , and ending on the 26th day of January, 2008, both dates inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its readers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of 151.41 which amount has been paid in full, or billed at the legal rate according to RCW 65.16.090 Subscribed to and sworn before me this 12th day of February, 2008. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, Residing at Federal Way iIII irrlI,,I j� � }�`.��,1L p�. HEM •f,'. •''• OF WAS�� 1414 S. 3241h STREET, SUITE 13210, FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 ■ 253-925-5565 ■ f AY: 253-925-5750 CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityoffederqiwciy.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 10 t 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 & Anticipated DNS/MDNS ❑ FWCC 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 Qd,o❑sted to or at each of the attached addresses on 2008_ File Number(s) zoo:- `O%I Od Signature Date 2 K:\Intern\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc/Last printed 1 /25/2008 11:06:00 AM Posting Sites: Federal Way City Hall - 33325 8th Avenue Federal Way Regional Library - 34200 1 st Way South Federal Way 320th Branch Library - 848 South 3201h Street K:\Intern\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc/Last printed 1/25/2008 11:06:00 AM 4r CITY Federalo. Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www. it offederalwa .coin DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: �D 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 ❑ FWCC 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 Iffe-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on g 2008. Project Name File Number(s) 7 - -7- S 0 6 7 - l6627 S- St` Signature Date ) -) g -ag K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Dlstributlon.doc/Last printed 1 /3/2008 4:53:00 PM 4� � CITY OF 0 Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE APPLICATION Name: Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Description: Proposal to subdivide five lots totaling 1.88 acres into sixteen single-family lots, with construction of cottage housing units as defined under Federal Way City Code (FWCC). The project includes three parking garages, a commons building and open space, public and private street improvements, and related drainage and utility improvements. Applicant: WJM Studios, William McCaffrey, 30929 37t' Place SW, Federal Way, WA Location: 604 SW 312`h Street, Federal Way, WA 98023 Date Application Received: December 21, 2007 Date Determined Complete: January 15, 2008 Date of Notice of Application: January 26, 2008 Permits Required by this Application: State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (File #07-106875-SE), Preliminary Plat (File #07-106874-SU), Concurrency (File #07-106876-CN) Existing Environmental Documents: Preliminary Technical Information Report, Level I Drainage Analysis, Tree Evaluation, and Geotechnical Engineering Report. Relevant Environmental Documents are Available at the Address Below: X YES —NO Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Mitigation, Known at this Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy" (SEPA); FWCC Chapter 19, "Planning and Development'; FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; FWCC Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management"; and FWCC 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 FWCC; King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way, and King County Road Standards as amended by the City. Any person may submit written comments on the Notice of Land Use Application to the Director of Community Development Services by February 11, 2008. The official project file is available for public review at the Department of Community Development Services (address below). Any person has the right to submit written comments to the Hearing Examiner and appear at the public hearing of the Hearing Examiner to give comments orally. Notification of the public hearing date will occur approximately 15 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may challenge the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner. Contact: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 City of Federal Way 33325 8`h Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Published in the Federal Way Mirror on January 26, 2008. Doc ID 43766 Tamara Fix - Re: Legal Notice_- Mirror Lake RE1115ED W_ - _ _ - _ .. _ Page From: Teryl Heller <theller@fedwaymirror.com> To: "Tamara Fix"<Tamara. Fix@cityoffederalway.com > Date: 1/18/2008 4:08 PM Subject: Re: Legal Notice - Mirror Lake REVISED Attachments: Part.001; 4019115078.doc Thanks, Tamara. Will do. Teryl Heller Federal Way Mirror 1414 South 324th Street, Suite B210 Federal Way, WA 98003 (phone) 253-925-5565 (fax) 253-925-5750 On Jan 18, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Tamara Fix wrote: > Please publish the following revised legal notice (Mirror Lake Cottage > NOA, 07-106874) in Saturday's (Jan. 26, 2008) issue. > Please furnish an affidavit of publication. > Tamara Fix > Administrative Assistant > City of Federal Way > PO Box 9718 > Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 > 253-835-2602 P me!1 OM scumo Design I Construction Management I Development n 12/21/2007 Deb Barker Senior Planner City of Federal Way Subject: Mirror Lake Highland Formal Submittal Dear Deb, As you know we have met continuously with City staff over the last year to make sure we were proceeding satisfactorily concerning the new CHD zoning. Due to this, I am only aware of one issue that has not been submitted, reviewed and tentatively approved by City staff. We seek an additional 12 sq ft on Housing Unit A (1112 Total) and 15 sq ft on Housing Unit B (1115 Total). This would affect 6 units and result in an additional 81 sq ft of gross living space. The project is still 235 sq ft under the gross allowable sq footage. The CHD Ordinance allows for Design Standard modifications if they are "consistent with the purpose of the article" and `will not result in a project that is less compatible with neighboring land uses". We believe our request meets these standards. This request became necessary when our focus group results showed a clear preference for the second bathroom to be located on the second floor. The solution to achieve this within I I00sf was to shift square footage from the downstairs bedroom to the second floor. As shown on Sht. A-3 this square footage request is simply returning the downstairs bedroom wall 18" back into the covered front porch area. Covered porches do not count into the maximum sq footage calculation per Ordinance. This is completely under existing roof and does not change storm run-off calculations or any external architectural look. The importance of the change is that it allows an alternative location for a large bed in the main bedroom area. We believe this greatly enhances the livability of the design. We await your answer on this request. The garage door issue mentioned in your 10/10/2007 letter was actually raised in our 2/25/2007 Re -Submittal (after the public meeting) and was discussed and approved at that time. We counted on that approval very heavily and it would significantly affect the land plan if it were reversed. Please let me know if you need more information on this. Once again Deb, thank you for all the time and energy you have expended on this project. We firmly believe it has resulted in a better project for everyone. Best Regards, DEC 2 6 2007 OITY OF FEDERAL WAY BUILDING DEPT. wwwmnewamsGummcom CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: December 27, 2007 TO: Will Appleton, Development Services Manager Scott Sproul, Assistant Building Official Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District Chris Ingham, South King Fire & Rescue Geri Walker, Federal Way School District FROM: FOR DRC MTG. ON. - FILE NUMBER(s): RELATED FILE NOS: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS ZONING DISTRICT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: LAND USE PERMITS: PROJECT CONTACT: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, 253-835-2642 January 10, 2008 - Completeness Review 07-106874-00-SU, 07-106875-SE, 06-105883-PC, 07-100022-AD MIRROR LAKE HIGHLAND COTTAGE PRELIMINARY PLAT 604 SW 312`h Street RS 7.2 Cottage Housing demonstration proposal for 16 SF units on 1.88 acres, utilizing low impact development strategie, and vehicular access from 6th Ave SW. Preliminary Plat, SEPA, Concurrency William McCaffrey 30929 37`h Avenue SW Federal Way, WA 98023 425-231-7125 (Primary) MATERIALS SUBMITTED: Preliminary Plat conceptual drawing, TIR, SEPA checklist, etc. For full list, see the enclosed submittal list. 4k OF Federal Way APPLICATION NO(S) Project Name RECEIVED DEC 2 12007 MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8`h Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 www.ciryoffederaiwgy.com CITY OF FED a[J11.DIN AL SAY b0_ IL. Property Address/Location (004 6" 14 :3 1 ZTt( Parcel Number(s) ,2A 1 Q Z""1 61 1(0� '.0, [ l 1 � � (]�� 4 � 114 Project Description L ©`J(k(,r" �ayW PLEASE PRINT 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 H (Site Plan Review) Process III (Project Approval) Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) Process VI SEPA w/Project SEPA Only Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use Short Subdivision Subdivision Variance: Commercial/Residential Required Information ~% • Zoning Designation Comprehensive Plan Designation Value of Existing Improvements Value of Proposed Improvements International Building Code (IBC): _Occupancy Type Construction Type Applicant/ Name: ,' l� � . Address: 3 plot Zcl ?[, City/State: 9kQ VLlAL4 WA - Zip: Phone: O 2 Fax: Email: Signature: [� L(— Agent (if different an App ican Name: Address: City/State: ZL-) Az-rl t Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Signature: Owner Name: Address: City/State: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Signature: _4( Bulletin #003 —August 18, 2004 Page 1 of I k:\Handouts\Master Land Use Application I t l>Ity Department of Development and Environmental Services Building Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 206-296-6600 TTY 206-296-7217 Web date: 04/26/2007 SEWER AVAILA9L�TY; KING COUNTY CERTIFICATE OF SEWER AVAILABILITY ERU-LL For alternate formats, call 206-29,6-6600. This certificate provides the Public Health - Seattle & King County Department and the Department of Development and Environmental Services with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. Do not write in this box S $ g F9 Number Name ❑ Building Permit Preliminary Plat or PUD ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Rezone or other: CITY Op FEDERAL WAY ✓ ` T Applicant's name: (q c ° en � ''� Proposed use: L — ) Location (attach map and legal descriptlon if necessary): F1PN(s a�tia E ��o� brio �ri� err Q Seweragency • •� 1. (] a. Sewer service can be provided by side sewer connection only to an existing size sewer feet from the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed use. OR b. Sewer service will require an improvement to the sewer system of: X(1) O+ feet of sewer trunk or lateral to reach the site; ands X(2) The construction of a coil ction system on the site; andH .% (3) Other (describe): E> [ GaZ) TQ T+Z Z ' ?E�)- LAKEE J 2. a. The sewer system improvement is in conformance with a County approved sewer comprehensive plan. OR ❑ b. The sewer system improvement will require a sewer comprehensive plan amendment. 3. a. The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the district or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city. OR ❑ b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board (BRB) approval will be necessary to provide service. 4. Service is subject to the following: a. Connection charge: fl E "3 b. Easement(s): T—es- c. Other: ���F=t—zL�Z S1�rl EN a�U i�3� . ✓ I* The District, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to delay or deny sewer service based upon capacity limitations in District and Other Purveyor facilities. * I I certify that the above sewer agency information is true. This certification shall be valid for one year from date of signature. LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT Agency name Title � sewer availability form.doc b-cert-sewer.pdf Sign ory r Signature 02-07-2002 is o7 If 10/yll� - Page 1 of 1 King County Department of Development and Environmental Services Building Services Division 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, Washington 98057-5212 206-296-6600 TTY 206-296-7217 Web date: 04126/2007 WATER.-, VAI LABI LITY: H'a7 KING COUNTY CERTIFICATE D1= ,l 1 WATER AVAILABILITY i3 ERU� For alternate formats, call 206-296-6600. This certificate provides the Public Health - Seattle & King County Department and the Department of Development and Environmental Services with information necessary to evaluate development proposals ; b Do not write in this box Number ❑ Building Permit ❑ Short Subdivision Applicant's name: Proposed use: %Preliminary Plat or PUD ❑ Rezone or other: C Location (attach map and legal description if necessary): Name Cj 1 1 0r 1. ❑ a. Watei can be provided by service connection only to an existing feet from the site. 2. X El 3. ! RECEIVED ' BUILDING DEPT. (size) water main that is Water service will re uire an improvement to the water system of: { 1) t41 l feet of water main to reach the site; andtAF (2) The construction of a is 6ution system on the site; and/or (3) Other (describe):N �Q �{ ��C- F�C� �] �oL-( o{, ✓ a. The water system is in conformance with a County. approved water comprehensive plan. OR b The water system improvement is not in conformance with a County approved water comprehensive plan and will require a water comprehensive plan amendment. (This may cause a delay in issuance of a permit or approval.) a. The proposed project is within the corporate limits of the district, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of service outside the district or city, or is within the County approved service area of a private water purveyor. OR ❑ b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board (BRB) approval will be necessary to provide service. 4. a. Water is or will be available at the rate of ow and duration indicated below at no less than 20 psi measured at the nearest fire hydrant J2, " feet from the building/property (or as marked on the attached map): Rate of flow, at Peak Demand: ❑ less than 500 gpm (approx. gpm) ❑ 500 to 999 gpm J<1000 gpm or more ✓ ❑ flow test of gpm ❑ calculation of gpm. Duration: ❑ less than 1 hour ❑ I hour to 2 hours 02 hours or more ✓tither. (Note: Commercial Witting permits which include multifamily structures require flow test or caiculallon.) OR ❑ b. Water system is not capable of providing fire flow. 5. 9 a. OR Water system has certificates of water rights or water right claims sufficient to provide service. ❑ b. Water system does not currently have necessary water rights or water right claims.. Comments/conditions: P-GV-1dA,t E9Q, T RE&A9 I q Efl I certify that the above water purveyor information is true. This certification shall be valid f r one year from date of signature. LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT t� Agency name ignatory me Title Signature Date (�W/07 � Highest d - -� -4- Min. Pressure Zone; owest Elevation of Property ! 3 ; Est. Max. in Pressure psi L The District, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to delay or deny water service based upon capacity limitations in District and Other Purveyor facilities. Water availability form Rev. 05-19-2003 Page 1 of 1 At DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8' Avenue South CITY OF � �� � ® PO Box 9718 Federal 'tea � � � Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-8352607; Fax 253-835-2609 FEB 0 4 2008 www.cityoffederalway.com CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS SIGN INSTALLATION CERTIFICATE Project Name: WK Lk. -& C, Project File No: o'1 C)6 9 A Project Address: Installed By: Nu, ���4� �i���`� _ Date of Installation: � Location of Installation: M Gz. :fix :: R&F� 'g':x�Y .qps :>�a�:!�18 a: ::fie:?0.'l C'.!�r •�C •fir >�p +�.:::�a +fir: !�v •49r >RCa :'AA s: ,:fir +fir :9�r .fir :+ems. >�s :>�1r �pq f. •ems! x�r .'�5.. +!A x: •fie I hereby testify that the sign installed fully complies with the installation standards of the Department of Community Development Service's "Instructions for Obtaining & Posting Public Notification Signs" and that the sign will be maintained until a final decision is issued on the land use action. I understand that failure to return this certificate within five days of posting may result in delays, notice of corrections, and re -mailings at the applicant's expense. ,OiLc, tkocktFwj Installer's Name UOInstaller's ognlure ' Z t C) Date A 2-,5- 2�� t -- l z� Phone Bulletin #036 —August 18, 2004 Page 1 of 1 k:\Handouts\Sign Installation Certificate AkCITY OF Federal Way February 21, 2008 William McCaffrey 30929 370' Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; TECHNICAL COMMENTS PROVIDED Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. McCaffrey: CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 9806379718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com City staff have had the opportunity to review the proposed subdivision based on analysis of technical requirements. The formal application submitted on December 21, 2007, was determined to be a complete application on January 15, 2008. TECHNICAL COMMENTS SEPA Checklist — The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist must be revised to address the following comments: A.10 — The checklist notes that Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA) approval will be required. To date, a BLA has not been submitted. Further, the subdivision can reallocate location of property lines of the subject properties associated with the proposed development and a BLA may not be required. Revise the checklist to address this. B. Le — The checklist states that the cut and fill will be used to facilitate site development. Expand on this response. B.3.a.1— Mirror Lake drains into Lakota Creek and into Puget Sound. Revise the checklist to reflect this. B.4. — Revise the checklist response to address FWCC definitions of significant trees. Indicate the proposed level of significant tree elimination, retention, and replacement. B.9.a — Two of the sixteen cottage units are proposed to meet the affordable housing provisions of FWCC. Revise this checklist response to disclose these units and the affordable housing provisions to run with these lots. B:12.a — Explain why the private Bethel Christian Center property is referenced as a recreation opportunity in the immediate vicinity. A lso, the subject property controls a ten -foot -wide easement to Mirror Lake. Explain the intent of this easement on the proposed development. M,..Mccawey 4 February 21, 2008 Page 2 B.14.c — The SEPA checklist states that thirty-four parking spaces are proposed; Sheet Al states that there are thirty parking spaces, and the preliminary plat lists twenty-five parking spaces and five garages. Parking information must be consistently reflected on all documents. B.16 — Revise this response to identify any utility pipes over eight inches in diameter. Public Works Development Services, Ann Dower, 253-835-2732 Please find technical comments dated February 2, 2008. Traffic Division, Sanjeev Tandle, Contract Traffic Engineer Traffic comments will be available at a later date. Lakehaven Utility District, Brian Asbury, 253-946-5407 Applicant has completed and submitted to Lakehaven an application for Certificate(s) of Availability (issued 12/20/07). However, no other application has been submitted to Lakehaven that is necessary to more specifically be able to determine the applicant's requirements for connection to Lakehaven's water and/or sewer systems to serve the subject property have been submitted to Lakehaven. As previously noted, applicant will need to submit an application for either Developer Extension Pre -Design or Developer Extension Agreement for Lakehaven to formally commence the water and/or sewer plan review process. Planning Department, Deb Barker, 253-835-2642 The formal subdivision application depicts a fully engineered project utilizing low impact development (LID) design, and which now depicts nine of the sixteen units containing one or more retaining walls that separate the units from open space and/or rain garden areas, extensive trenching, a large amount of fill, and the removal of all existing vegetation. Although the site contains a modest slope from north to south, these construction actions significantly modify the existing landscape, and result in a project that is in stark contrast to the visual renderings submitted with the demonstration project application. Those included cross sections depicting cottages cascading down the gentle slope uncluttered by trenches or walls, trees taller than the cottage rooftops, and areas labeled as "existing native vegetation and trees." You'll recall that the demonstration project was conditionally approved as follows: 1) Rain gardens shall be considered as usable open space only if containing formal landscaping and seating. 2) The formal application shall provide verification of open space quantity and configuration. 3) Any changes to City road standards may require the proposal to be changed. 4) The project shall meet all requirements of the 1998 KCSWDMfor Level 3 Flow Control and Resource Stream Protection Menu Water Quality. If approved by the Public Works Director, the applicant may design the project using methods outlined in the 2005 KCSWDM standards for Low Impact Development (LID), but must show that Level 3 flow control and Resource Stream Protection Menu Water Quality standards will be met. The applicant may be required to provide additional bonding or maintenance provisions for methods not currently approved by the 1998 KCSWDM. In addition, site and development constraints may impact the proposed lot layout. 07-106874 Doc ].D.44050 Mr. McCaffrey February 21, 2008 Page 3 The project that has been submitted is quite different from the original proposal in that there is now substantial regrading, terracing, and the use of retaining structures throughout the site. Although not necessarily disallowed by city code, significant reshaping of building pads from the natural terrain to get all of the homes onto the subject property begins to question that properties ability to handle this number of homes. Extensive cutting and filling appears contrary to the intent of low impact development. The question is raised whether a project involving reshaping of the physical terrain would have been selected as a demonstration project. In order to better explain why this amount and style of regrading of the property is necessary, the following information will be needed. In addition, you will want to supplement this information with a written narrative explaining the need for this significant regrading of the property. 1) Preliminary Plat - The proposed development is being reviewed as a formal subdivision as provided in Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-923(14)(a) and (f). As such, the preliminary plat drawing must comply with drawing requirements of FWCC Section 20-111(c), and include the following: o To identify the location of significant natural features on and adjacent to the site, denote Mirror Lake to the south and indicate views available this natural feature. o The comprehensive plan and zoning classification of the subject and adjoining properties must be listed on the preliminary plat drawing. o Location, width, and name of streets or easements, including 6`� Place SW, must be listed on the preliminary plat drawing as well as the layout of proposed internal streets, with street names labeled. o Depict the existing and conceptually proposed water, sewer, and drainage utilities, as well as any street light locations. o List the parcels of land intended to be dedicated for public use or reserved for use of owners of the subdivision, including right-of-way dedication area and open space areas. o Show the building setback lines for the subject site as 15 feet front, 5 foot side and rear. o Label and show all tracts, and provide a summary of the use and square footage of each tract. o Show all lot lines for the proposed cottage units. For example, the line between lots 1 and 2 is not complete. o List acreage dedicated for public right-of-way as well as private tracts, alleys, and ingress/egress and utility easements created for purpose of providing access to lots. o List the location and acreage of tracts and areas dedicated for retention/detention/drainage facilities, open space and parks, or other on -site public facilities broken out by category. o List the net plat area, which is gross plat area minus critical areas, right-of-way, private open space, and public purpose lands. o Note that all buildings will be sprinkled, and label the emergency turnaround area. o List the City file number on the preliminary plat and on subsequent resubmittals. 2. Clearing, grading, retaining walls — As noted above, the formal subdivision application depicts a series of retaining walls separating cottage units and open space and cottages and rain garden areas. The civil plans depict over 5,000 cubic yards of fill added to the site and elimination of all but four of the fifty-one listed significant trees. These resulting construction actions significantly modify the existing landscape, and constitute mass grading, which is not permitted under the subdivision code. Pursuant to FWCC Section 20-179 Retention of Vegetation, all clearing not related to infrastructure 07-106874 Doc I D. 44050 Mr. McCaffrey February 21, 2008 Page 4 development is to be conducted only after final plat approval and building permit issuance.' The proposed clearing action significantly departs from the originally approved conceptual plan, may adversely impact building height (see section 5 below), and at this point is not supported by staff. Historically, the Federal Way City Council has granted mass clearing approval to subdivision proposals on a limited basis based on extenuating or unusual circumstances. To that end, additional information is requested in order to adequately review the grading request and provide a recommendation to the City Council. Please provide details about the following: a) A formal mass grading request with specific factors identified including written explanations to demonstrate how the proposed grading limits are the minimum necessary to accommodate infrastructure improvements. b) Under FWCC Section 22-923, dwelling units shall not be placed in areas with slopes that exceed 15% if extensive use of retaining walls is necessary to create building pads or open space areas. While there are few 15% slopes on the subject site, the proposed use of retaining walls appears excessive and creates a situation not supported by this particular Cottage Housing code section. Please provide a written response to state how this project meets this code requirement beyond the lack of 15 percent slopes. c) Provide cross sections of the proposed cottage houses showing yards, patios, retaining walls, and indicate the height and materials proposed for retaining walls. d) Clearing and grading plans depict grading and trenching along the south property line, while the landscape plan shows retention of significant trees in this location. These two plans must reflect consistent information. 3. Common Open Space — A cottage housing project is required to provide 500 square feet of common open space per dwelling unit, or 8,000 square feet for the 16 units. As noted above, "the formal application shall provide verification of open space quantity and configuration." Information submitted with the application does not clearly provide this information as the 1:30 scale map is too small to ascertain open space. Additional information is required as discussed below: a) Provide a 1:20 scale map that shows proposed buildings and common open space with each open space area sized and labeled. List the activities that are provided within the common open space areas and detail features such as special pavement, seating, tables, arbors, etc. Denote those rain garden areas that contain trails, observation decks, and seating. List the percentage of common open space that functions solely as a pedestrian corridor and those areas that provide active or passive recreation opportunities, excluding corridors. b) Under FWCC Section 22-923(5)(e), required common open space shall be divided into no more than two separate areas per clusters of dwelling units. Denote the open space area for the north, center, and south cluster of cottage dwelling units. c) FWCC Section 22-923(7) and (8) details the relationship between cottage units and open space. Unless the rain garden areas are counted as common open space, the requirements of FWCC Section 22-923(7)(b) and FWCC Section 923(8)(a) are not met for several of the units. However, conditions of approval dictated that the rain gardens could only be used as open 1 FWCC Section 20-179 states in part (a) All natural vegetation shall be retained on the site to be subdivided except that which will be removed for improvement or grading as shown on the approved engineering plans. (b) Existing mature vegetation shall be retained to the maximum extent possible. Preservation of significant trees shall apply solely to the development of each single- family lot at the time a building permit is applied for. (c) Lots created on slopes of 15 percent or greater shall minimize grading and shall not result in extensive use of retaining walls. Slopes are to be measured in their natural state. 07-106874 Doc I D. 44050 Mr. McCaffrey February 21, 2008 Page 5 space if they included related pedestrian amenities. Please provide a written response to address this issue. d) Under FWCC Section 22-923(6), each dwelling unit shall have minimum 400 square feet of private front yard space. This is depicted on the plans. If the private front yard spaces will be developed in conjunction with building construction, they must be included in the landscape plans. 4. Landscaping — A landscape plan prepared by Len Zickler with AHBL was submitted with the formal application. The scale of this drawing is suitable for the detail presented. The landscape drawing must be revised to address the following comments; please refer to the enclosed red lined landscape plan: Sigaificant Trees — The landscape plan states that there are fifty-one significant trees on the subject site and all but three of these trees are proposed to be removed. However, a review of the Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan prepared by Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc., dated December 18, 2007, finds that of the 107 trees analyzed, sixty-three of the trees meet the definition of a significant tree under FWCC. The number of significant trees must be clarified. Replacement Trees — Replacement trees are proposed with the cottage application at a ratio of one tree planted for every four significant trees eliminated. The Lawson Cypress replacement trees are in two groups at the east and west ends of the project to create a screen between the cottage housing and adjacent residential uses. While the screen is a good concept, the FWCC requires that replacement trees be located on individual building lots associated with the removed significant trees. In this case, a formal request to relocate the replacement trees must be submitted. Plant Selection — As noted above, the replacement evergreen trees are relegated to two areas on the site. The only other proposed evergreen tree is used as a screening tree for the parking lot. No evergreen trees are proposed within common open space areas, or private planting areas. Staff recommends that the project incorporate a greater diversity of native evergreen trees to mitigate removal of the existing significant trees. In addition, the Sunset Western Garden book notes that the Ilex Crenata "Sky Pencil" tree grows to six feet. The Cottage Housing plant schedule calls for thirty- two of these trees, six feet tall at the time of planting. The quantity and mature size of the tree at planting may not be realistic and should be reconsidered. Street trees shall be listed as 2 %2-inch caliper per ANSII standards, while other trees shall be listed at 1.5-inch caliper measured 4.5 feet above the rootball, and shrubs shall be listed as 24 inches in height at the time of planting. Ground cover is required in all planting areas to achieve full coverage within three years. Please revise the plant schedule to reflect these requirements. Rain Garden Seating — The observation decks proposed in the rain gardens should include areas for seating, such as low railing. Provide details of the decks, including materials, height, and connection methodology. 5. Cottage Design — The following comments relate to the cottage site design requirements of FWCC Section 22-923: Front entry — Design standards for cottage location dictate that the entry and covered porch shall be oriented to common open space. Several of the unit porches and entries face rain gardens that are not 07-106874 Doc. ID 44050 Mr. McCaffrey February 21, 2008 Page 6 proposed to be open space. If the rain gardens are not established as open space, the porch and entry for units 5, 6, 9, 10, 13, and 14 must be reoriented to face common open space and not the rain garden. Attached garage locationsldesignir — The location of the garage on Unit 1 faces onto the 6t1i Place right-of-way in conflict with cottage housing code provisions. Please provide a written explanation as to why this garage cannot be relocated or revised. It should be noted that carports can be located adjacent to the right-of-way without conflict. Detached garages are permitted pursuant to FWCC Section 923(8)(f) and (g). Provide visual information about the attached garages, including floor plans and elevations. Parkin — Denote the location of the five guest parking stalls required under FWCC Section 22-923 (9)(a). Hecht — Cottage housing codes state that the unit height shall not exceed 18 feet in height as defined in FWCC; and that no roof ridge shall exceed 24 feet from the average building elevation (ABE). Building elevations submitted with the preliminary plat show the housing units on a flat plane meeting these code requirements. However, the depicted elevations do not depict the ABE, or "the average of the highest and lowest existing or proposed elevations; whichever is lowest. " Elevations must be revised to show the proposed site regrading activities, proposed retaining walls, and the location of the existing lowest and highest elevations or proposed elevations, whichever is lower. Pedestrian Path — The pedestrian path shall continue across the drive aisle. The corridor shall consist of special pavement across the drive aisle; paint striping as a method of marking is not permitted. Depict this connection on the site plan and denote the pavement material. Required Yards — Under Section 11 of FWCC Section 22-923, cottages units shall be separated by ten feet not including projections per FWCC Section 22-1133(4). The site plan depicts several units with various projections. Please provide a written response to denote how these projects meet the extension and dimensional requirements of this code. Details of the unit adjacency can be provided. There also are decks and retaining walls that intrude into the five-foot setback on the north and east side of the subject site. Under FWCC Section 22-1133, improvements that are less than four inches tall may be located anywhere in a required yard, and retaining walls can be located in a required yard if it is not being used as direct structural support and it is reasonably necessary to provide support. Provide a written response as to how the decks and retaining walls meet the requirements of FWCC Section 22-1133(2) and (6). 6. Other a) The December 12, 2007, Topographic Survey prepared by Paul Mabry lists the "addition of a well and 100-foot buffer." Where is this located? b) The Commitment for Title Insurance prepared by Commonwealth Land Title Company of Puget Sound, LLC does not include copies of all easements, deeds, memorandums of agreement, and related documents. Provide two copies of all related documents. c) As previously noted, four copies of a School Access Analysis prepared to address Federal Way School District standards must be submitted. 07-106874 Doc. 1 D 44050 Mr. McCaffrey February 21, 2008 Page 7 With this request for additional information, the City's subdivision review will cease until information that furthers the application is submitted. Please provide six copies of any new or revised plan and four copies of any report along with the enclosed resubmittal information form. Please contact staff as noted in this letter, or me at 253-835-2642 should you have any questions about this letter. Sincerely, ��"�Pc, Deb Barker Senior Planner enc: Red lined landscape plan Public Works Engineering Comments Resubmittal Information Form c: Ann Dower, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sanjeev Tandle, Contract Traffic Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District 07-106874 Doc I D. 44050 F I li 4CITY OF �. Federal February 21; 2008 Mr. William McCaffrey 30929 37"' Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Way Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; FORWARD ADDITIONAL COMMENT LETTERS Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. McCaffrey: Today, the City received two new comment letters in response to the notice of application for the above - referenced preliminary plat application. Copies of the two letters are enclosed. As previously noted, the City will provide responses to the various issues raised in these letters. However, should you wish to provide a response to the comments, the City will forward your response to the author of that comment letter. I can be reached at 253-835-2642 should you have any questions about this letter or the status of the project. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner enc: Letter from Richard Scott Letter from Robert Roper, Mirror Lake Residents Association Doc. I.D. 44276 CITY OF Federal February 14, 2008 Mr. William McCaffrey 30929 37`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South y Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; FORWARD COMMENT LETTERS Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. McCaffrey: The City of Federal Way issued a notice of complete application for the preliminary plat and environmental applications on January 26, 2008. As part of the subdivision and environmental processes, the notice of application was posted at the subject site and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. To date, the City has received two comment letters on the above -referenced applications; copies of those letters are enclosed. The City will provide responses to the various issues raised in the letters. However, should you wish to provide a response to issues identified in the letters, the City will forward your response to the author of the comment letter. I can be reached at 253-835-2642 should you have any questions about this letter or the status of the project. Sincerely, At)) /39JQ-<,- Deb Barker Senior Planner enc: Letter from Dana and Joe Behlke Letter from Marie Trotignon c: Ann Dower, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer Sanjeev Tandle, Traffic Engineer Doc I D. 44214 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BY FEB 2 0 2008 19 February 2008 401 SW 312" St Federal Way WA 98023 City of Federal Way Community Development Services Department Attn: Deb Barker, Senior Planner 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 989003 Subject: Proposed Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Home Development Dear Ms Barker, Thank you for notification and the opportunity to comment on the Mirror Lake Highlands cottage preliminary plat package. We have tried to incorporate in our comments many of the concerns of Mirror Lake residents, although you will be receiving comments from individuals as well. In our letter submitted 27 June 2007, we emphasized a couple of points: • The design describes raingardens as common open space. Raingardens, therefore, can not be also credited as surface water management facilities. -The design does not address the control of phosphorous_ These are still concerns, but our comments now concentrate on the documents in the preliminary plat package. We feel that handling and treatment of surface water is one of the most important elements of this project from the perspective of Mirror Lake Residents. The newspapers regularly run stories on distressed lakes in the area; often that distress is a consequence of increases in nutrients reaching the lake. Attached are examples of three reports just since our first comments on this project. There is good reason for caution regarding runoff effects. Area lakes have been caught in the spiral of environmental damage; experimental and/or expensive treatment; unintended consequences; lawsuits; loss of esthetic and recreational value. Steilacoom Lake is a good example. We do not want this for Mirror Lake and we look to the city to provide the appropriate regulatory protection. The following comments are organized according to the corresponding element of the data package. If you have any questions, please call either Bob Roper or Marla Ledin at the numbers listed below. Yours truly, Robert S. Roper Land Use Committee Mirror Lake Residents' Association 253-941-6954 U � ? `-� Z-Ca ccr .a f a. r T � �'� D'�.�C � r: �•�.0 y� 1r- om CD `• _ O U tl �' s �& 'O IIf IJ ❑. -� to rz ^' U U A fli G] Q cc T III �d 40. a M CL (EjC. I c 11{ rIx ca C) I a"i AAA cc p , v O, I .� � � � H C U C: p. Z, JZ v p o m W�3�°' ^ � c S w v Ou 0 Q CL z o m o4. C ap- `Z C0� t2 0 GJ a O ti Ij i ! u E +I rA CL C r . Z a wVLU i+ C07 it GY1 C 0 Q +r i yZ a v v CL ` i > o QY a a � V) a 1, 3- I m m m Pvitu Al O ' �' ❑ 00 i CZ �O (D m U S' R, .--� � o + 8. +�+ E: cz U c6 i w o -o Q7 -Eb -0 El y C) 0 0 �O eon � O aOq �-4 E � o oaba m cC O U -co3�3Uo r E Cd U to 3 C' � ,� S". w � O �i cd CZ HCd cn a � Cd 0 a. rA W w W ° Z N B �N , 1z V ,Oi Lakewood aims to curb algae State grants will hetp pay for chemical treatments in two lakes as Lakewood tries to solve an algae problem that's been deemed a public health risk. BY ROB TUCKER rob-tucker@thenewstribune.com i- ke5teilacoom, one of L,akewoodrs t laest lakes, will get an experimental treatment next spring in an attempt to reduce blooms of toxic bluergreen al- gae, officials said. Treating the take will cost about $169,000. About sso.o&) will come I from a state i)epartment of Ecology grant to the city. Homeowners in the rake Stetlacooin Itrlpravemeat Ciub Ivrll pay the remainder, Officials said. III epop utar 330-Acre lake is the. sec. and in thecitvsell eduled for ueatment with calciu[n hydroxide. Government Officials and interested property oxn- ers hope it will cut dowr[ blooms that can make humans. Bets and livestock sick. "It's art effort to get a handle on toxic algae," Sandv Howard, state Ecol- ogvspokeswonian, said this week. "At a couple of lakes in pierce County, dogs have died"• - - The second take scheduled For treat- ' meat is waughop, a 35-acre center- piece of Tort Steilacunm Park, people fish there, and a pedestrian trait arou[rd the lake is used by many people, in- cluding dog walkers. Tito WAlig,n,..t-nIm-�—, , .,. 1L N ' allocated the iake as �t with the i The club -1 that man - I trla rnenI kr, keep rva- � 'iW officials wrk, but a com- aid it did until the ntrned off for a - Departmenfs :he algae appear inter runoff car - am pet waste. fail- ras,and from lawn -iR.,ers. mt to both lakes =g pellets of tal- c dim a barge in :ate anutrient and vhich should then tom. t r. Doug Df-Iing a-3�T�edne_ .a, he loth lakes in April He said he's also a consultant for the bake Steiiacoom improve- ment Ctuh, Darling proposed treating Waugh OP Lake last year, but he and city officials decider] to delay until next sprtng- Howard and county Health Department spokeswoman Joby Winans said Wednesday that while the treatment is expect_ mental, it's justifiable because of the algae's danger to the public. Greg Vigoren, city surface wa- ter division manager, said Lake Steilacaonl was added to the Spring treatment schedule after the city received the D0E, grant, "We want to work collabura- tively to try to improve the health of the lake;" he said. " lt's experi- mental, it may not work, but we think it's worth the effnr<to help the inrp.rovement club" Rob Tucker. 253-597.8374 $10.000-$20,000 COST EXPECTED Lake Bonney might et dosed Bonney Lake applies for a state permit to treat Lake Bonney for noxious weeds. Residents approve BY MIKE ARCHBOLD mike.archbold@thenewstribune.com As lalces go, Lake Bonney is in mid- Iife. And though no crisis looms, residents worry about the noxious and invasive weeds that thrive on nutrients carried into the lalce by storm water runoff. Residents of the 17-acre urban lake want the City of Bonney Lake to pay to chemically treat the weeds before they reach a point of no return. "I'll bet we've lost 40 percent of the Please see LAKE, page B2 s f Tav 'rna l), _ DETAIL f U'i isILE A2'. — .J Simmons r: Park sorth y: Cake Blvd. Ei'-So . .ice Boat —� launch- -B(?NNt Y . LAKE • 50 RCE,ESRI. GOT FRED MATAMOROS/The News Tribune r f ILLING ' COULD ING DEATl PENAL°' .... • • ....... B3 s A prosecutor might file death -penalty charges today againss B4 the man arrested in the 2007 slaying of two Tacoma men. B stands the lake folks' frustrations. Rackley said installing a catch basin system to divert storm waterfrorn the lake would help. So would installing mechan- ical filters on the outlets. Both are expensive, perhaps casting as much as $200,000, he said. These options are being studied, but paying is another matter. The city hasn't looped into it yet. Eutrophication, or aging of a lake, is a natural process. Lakes born in glacial times want to fill themselves in with plant life, though the process can talce centu- ries. As development increases around them, the aging process speeds up. Slowing it down is the goal at Lake Bonney. Sharilyn Anderson, who's lived on the lake for 18 years and is president of the conservation association, said the good news is that residents feel the city is listen- ing. But there are many voices to hear along the lakefront. Spreading out a map. Anderson showed where some residents want chemicals used in front of their homes while others don't. Anderson counts her- self among the latter group. "I tend to be more conservative," she said, "I don't want to fight nature." Mike Archbold: 253-597-8692 Preliminary Technical Information Report Section 2.1—Core Requirement #1 Discharge at Natural Location The TIR states that the project will provide overflow facilities to convey stormwater runoff to the existing city system in the event of system failure or an event greater than the design requirements. No details of the proposed facility could be found and no room appears to have been left in the design for such a facility. In fact, the porch of Unit #1 is less that 34 feet from the 312" St proposed easement Iine.The downstream drainage analysis states that "the existing drainage system 3121" Street is considered a suitable conveyance system to serve as an overflow from the proposed system..." If a new overflow facility is proposed, it should be described, at least conceptually and its size and location provided. Otherwise, the TIR is interpreted as providing no provision for overflow, Section 2.3—Core Requirement #3 Flow Control The TIR describes infiltration trenches with as little as one foot depth between the bottom of the trench and impermeable glacial till. Appendix B to the TIR describes infiltration trenches that are 2 feet wide by 1.5 feet deep and filled with gravel having 30% voids. This arrangement is expected to provide inadequate storage capacity (considering that 46% of the site is impermeable surface) compared to the typical wetpond or wetvault. Based on the drawing description of the proposed raingardens, little if any additional storage capacity can be expected from this source. Section 2.8—Core Requirement #8 Water Quality The TIR claims that the project is located within a Basic Water Quality Area. This is incorrect. It is located in a Resource Stream Water Quality Area as shown on the attached Water Quality Applications Map. Resource Stream requirements call for 50% removal of zinc as an indicator for a wider range of pollutants. The Resource Stream menu specifies options for the use of a large sand filter or a combination of two facilities in series, one of which is either a sand filter or a leaf compost filter. There is no indication in the TIR of proposed facilities to meet the Resource Stream requirements. oW W cC� G D U N N a Q c w (D ._ � m m o ca CL � O t5 co 0-0 v a Em c o Q cca Ccc G 7 0 d T "' m 3 M o co Z m �p m c m m U) V, a m m N /� = f6 � N O m 3 0 `V O m N m N U > V- C N � M O V co m >. � h >. w m v W LL CY ccE f6 7 U N J N mW Q W 0 V s m ` (6 C o N a� - to o i�� D m a � Li 0 ^ C (n U m U J U ID ¢ o�nai �-m m�LSM m O 0) "o ii a +/1 \V /� V/ j U O m N m` ! V y U U a J ilj m�(n 0-,com m� , mC7Uo:MLLN HF aT Nis w is S 0� ANVIEnn F 1 J - ,R `'r Preliminary TIR Addendum —Appendix B This document was used to the extent possible in trying to understand the design. However, it consists of a collection of engineering calculations without the benefit of narrative. As such, it is hard to understand and the terminology does not play well with other documents in the package. For example, consistent terms should be used and definitions provided for such terms as infiltration area, raingarden, infiltration trench, test pit and shallow infiltration facilities. Level 1 Downstream Drainage Analysis In section 3.0, the analysis concludes that "no downstream problems are anticipated". To support that conclusion, it claims that there were no flooding complaints registered during storm events of 1996, 1999 and 2006. The analysis fails to recognize that both 1996 and 1999 were flood years on Mirror Lake. It is unknown where the consultant obtained their data on complaints but 1996 was a year of extensive flooding on Mirror Lake with negotiations and neighborhood meetings involving lake residents and city officials. The effort resulted in the city installing a pump at Fisher's Bog in order to save lake residents from further flooding. Once again, in 1999, the city had to resort to pumping in order to protect the lake. The attached table provides a record of pumping dates and interaction between lake residents and the city during that time. Also attached are copies of written complaints presented to city officials during a January 1997 meeting. The city has since taken measures aimed at preventing flooding from getting any worse. It is important to understand one of the contributing factors to lake flooding. 1996- 1997 and 1998-1999 were both years of sustained rains that saturated the soil, as shown in the attached charts of rainfall and lake level for those years. Peak lake levels in both years exceeded 301 feet after a period of rains that were unrelenting until the soil was saturated. Photos taken on December 28 1998 show the extent of problems experienced on the lake. There is concern among lake residents that the infiltration approach proposed for the cottage homes will not work under such saturation conditions. The 9 inches per hour infiltration rate quoted by the consultant appears to represent a snapshot that does not account for saturated conditions which occur often. With only 1 to 5 feet of pervious soil above the impervious layer, there is concern that saturated conditions could quickly be reached and further rainfall will flow straight to the lake unimpeded, without detention or slowing. In Section 6.0, the analysis proposes using the existing conveyance system to serve as overflow from the proposed infiltration system. Per section 1.3, this consists of a ditch on the north side of 312th St which feeds into a catch basin to the east, then through a pipe under 312th St to another non -maintained catch basin, then directly to Mirror Lake. In other words, no additional facilities appear to be proposed to handle overflow. Since an overflow is a condition exceeding the capacity of the proposed infiltration system, it is difficult to understand how the Level 3 requirement of `maintaining the duration of high flows at predevelopment levels' for specified flows can be met. There is also concern for the quality of runoff water since pollutants and nutrients —most importantly phosphorous from fertilizers, pet waste, etc. —will be directed toward the lake during overflow without the opportunity for treatment, settling or filtration. 5 City Contact Pumping during the 1995-1996 rain year began on December 18 and ended on March 4. Operation of the pump was intermittent during that time. Pumping during the 1996-1997 rain year began on January 1 and ended on March 12. Operation of the pump was intermittent during that time. DATE ACTION COMMENT 95-96 Rain Year Pumping 12-18-95 to 3-4-96, intermittent 96-97 Rain Year Pumping 1-1-97 to 3-12-97, intermittent 12-14-98 Phone Contact To Jeff Pratt to tell him we have backflow. Said he'd have them get started on installing the pump 12-28-98 Phone Contact To Jeff Pratt to tell him the lake is up 6 inches in a day, to 300.64. Said pump was there and ready to go. Jeff wanted _pictures. 12-28-98 Extend Gage Placed additional level gage —original about to go under. 95cm on old gage = 135mm on new. 12-30-98 thru Pumping For 8 hours only on the 6t" and 7t". 1-7-99 1-21-99 thru 3-5- Missed a couple of days in Feb. 99 Mirror Lake Flooding Problem Report Name Address Phone 65) Date Problem was first noticed Problem Description c�:;2 zwe-t- 4" 61 G vv-b J .S/ �j era•l' 5 i I Name Address Phone Bate roblem s first noticed Problem Description i r Name Address 640,. S, 33 /.Z -S Phone 7 2— Date Problem was first noticed Problem Description Dcw,ve- 9,54,CKMC�-V\- �h �, e- �e�t ��3Z3 Z,w, �, eve < S , LIX— � m O O O O U W O V N ^ ^ 4pul 'llppelulq p O O O O O O O O O O In N O C1 [O r� m 0 m K N N N wmacl bli-lowl o4e-L U 16-claS-9Z 1_6-ca5-OZ 1.6-'la5 -t• 1 /6�oSS 16-d-IS-Z 16-liny 1Z M-Gnb• IZ 1.6 8n;c-cl 1.G-finy-6 1.6-4nb-£ 16-Inf.SZ 16-Inl--ZZ 16-lnf'9l 16'Inf OI 161nf•V Z6-unf-SZ /_6-unf•ZZ /,6•unf'91 16-unl'-O l /.6-vnf-b I,&•tPvl•6Z 16 xap!-1 I 16 fr•N I I / 6-friV-5 16•JdK-£Z 16-+dV-L l 16•i6N I l o l6.IdN.r. /6'+PIV O£ L6-JFVH'Z 9 L6-�uIV•SI o 1.6-aPI•l-Z l 1.6-•�P iV-9 16-gai SZ l.6 gni•ZZ /6-gad-9l 1.6-gni•Ol 16-gIli t, 1-6 1r-1'-6Z 16-Ml' £Z 1-G-iw.r, / I 16•'II1f- l i 96-310-0£ 96-�� CI • tZ 96-'aCl-S t 96-�C1 Zl 961D70 0 96-^nN-0£ 96•AoN-4Z 96,IGN-S L 96-^ON-Z l 961Acu 19 96-»O I£ 96-»0-52 96•»0-61 96.7�0.1. O G1 N N J Cu Cacz L a� ry rn N ob CU J L 0 L. L. 43ui `llE!IwBb 0 0 0 0 0 0 p ern O Ln O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M cV O rn 0 0 0 0 0 rn rn rn m M M m co N N N N wnauQ M3-Ian8-1 0113-1 66/0£/6 66/Z L /6 66/-V/6 66/ZZ/8 66/6/8 66/ZZ/Z 66/V L/Z 66/ L/Z 66/9 L/9 66/S/9 66/£Z/S 66/0 US 66/LZ/V 66/-V L/V 66/ L/-V 66/6 L/£ 66/9/£ 66/LZ/Z 66/8/Z 66/9Z/L 66/£ L/ L 86/ L £/Z L 86/9 L/Z L 86/S/Z L 86/ZZ/LL 86/6/LL 86UZ/O L 86/V L/O L 86/ L/O L _7 I:. � '+� .• pr r: ! "VT � -fir .�' i•.,�. fr _-} l► , Vic. � �� t � � rt ' ^�: �'�ii •6 ��,:'„' , � j , �. f ilrlrl ti �'r.k4 ii1�1�. I y��If {' _ -.j .p` �•' 'rq+. i r 1 •: � �I„i,�,,�lq'�-Fill, y,�rr+• ; +� ``�`..,.,--. � _..x'��"ti • �'' � � 1 _A. { y,l !i� � ' � '{� [ f .fir• • i r p74 low d ' "i7 i int r . � � +r � �• '��3� ' YH y IF 'ne u- f ,4..�, -�•- `-.'i���:-<'=.•_'r= :.ram.- -x�.� y::,,�`' :rbt ' A tip'. - � :. uxl r;�•� 49 40, x ��i �•'r,� + . L j '. ^T^-1 _ . �f _~_ art. t. Li ti — ,• iiT�d•• � 'ti �•`�+ ~„ _ +� �y � tea:. ���' _�.ti. { ..a'�, i—.�.F.r L� ter•• ''.+'.'"'.?',• Site Plans Common open space areas for the most part do not appear to be "improved for passive or active recreational use" as required by the draft code. Rather than including "such amenities as seating. landscaping trails, gazebos, barbecue facilities, covered shelters or water features", the areas identified on the drawings are unimproved (except for a picnic table) and of such a shape that recreational use would be precluded. W Environmental Checklist Section B.1.e describes the quantity of fill material to be used as approximately 5562 cubic yards. The purpose and location of this large quantity of fill is not described. Please require the applicant to describe in greater detail how fill will be distributed and how sediment will be prevented from entering Mirror Lake during construction. The environmental checklist is silent on the future residents' use of Mirror Lake. However, the Record of Survey and property description for Parcel A show an easement, the purpose of which is specifically LAKE ACCESS. Such use would have profound environmental effects on the lake and some of its residents. At the neighborhood meeting, the applicant said that he did not intend to extend lake access currently held by the single occupant of the site to the approximately 40 people who will occupy the site post -development. The applicant should be required to do one of two things: If not intending to extend lake access, the applicant should relinquish such rights formally by giving the easement back to adjacent property owner(s). This could be done at the same time the boundary line adjustment is made. -or- If attempting to extend lake access to cottage home residents, address environmental impacts in the Water Quality and Noise sections of the environmental checklist. The Agency (City of Federal Way) has the right to ask for such additional information per the Environmental Checklist instructions. Details should include lake pollution resulting from the lack of toilet facilities; assuring the safety of persons using the easement, both while accessing the lake across 312th and while using the lake; and gating or otherwise securing the access point to prevent use by unauthorized persons. It must also be assured that liability for property losses or personal injury resulting from such unauthorized use will fall on the prospective residents of Mirror Lake Highlands. k* -=-j EASEIdENTS AND EXCEPTIONS FASEMEN f AND THE TERMS AND CONDI [IONS THEREOF: t_ DISTRICT, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION GRANTf:f:: LAKEHAVEPJ SEUr1_R DIS.� r OF SECTION J, PURPOSE: SF 14FR MAINS AREA AFFECTED: A POR fl0N OF PARCEL A OF A POR11ON OF SAID PREMISES RECORDED: JUNF 14, 1978 RECORDING NO.: mnG140899 LINE OF SAID (NOT SHOWN ON SURVEY, AI)JACENT TO LAKE) fORTHEAST 2. CASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: LAKE ACCESS AREA AFFECTED. A PORTION OF PARCEL A OF A PORTION OF SAID PREMISES RECORDING NO. 20010619000739 (SEE SOUTH PORTION OF S14EET 2) OuTF1ti,WST 3. SELLER'S NOTICE OF ON-5I-TE SEWAGE SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REOUIREIMENTS IMPOSED BY IN ER OF SAID RECORDED, UNDER RECORDING NO. 20050211001839. (COVERS: PARCEL A) (NOT SHOWN ON SURVEY, AFFECTS PARCEL A) Q, MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: I RECORDED: APRIL 12, 2007 RECORDING NO,: 20070412000601 ORDLD REGARDING, BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENTS (NOT SHOWN ON SURVEY, AFFECTS PARCELS A,B,C, AND D) 5. QUITCLAIM DEEDS CLEARING TITLE RE ACCESS RIGHTS AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: APRIL 12, 2007 i. RECORDING NO.: 20070412000602, 20D70412000603 AND 20d70412000604, REGARDING: DENIES RIGHTS OF ACCESS AND EASEMENTS AS STATED HEREIN TOWNSHIP (NOT SHOWN ON SURVEY, AFFECTS PARCEL A) ` �F BEARS -ROM.TFIE LAND. c t A1�1/ Ar A nrnnnnr�r llrAiin nr lKif.crrcc.Atin F_GRESS_L0 A PUC _ -,__ Jy _ RECEIVED FEB 11 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL Wp'�?February 11, 2008 City of Federal Way CDS Community Development Re: Highland Scottish Homes Development/SW 312th and 6th Ave SW As a forty-seven year resident/property owner on Mirror Lake, I have some real concerns regarding the proposed development of Cottage Homes on SW 312th, across from Mirror Lake. It is my understanding the developer proposes to provide lake access for those homes. Mirror Lake, a small, fragile lake, has always been privately owned. As owner of my lot plus 1151" interest in the whole of Mirror Lake, I share responsibility for expense of maintaining its purity and beauty. Aside from lake frontage taxes, I contribute to the cost of controlling lily pad growth, invasion of noxious plants and control of lake level. Along with other property owners, I contribute to the expense of stocking the lake with trout, on a catch -and -release basis. In my first years of residence, we physically cleared out any debris obstructing the outlet, the testing for water purity was performed by Dr. Bruell, a courtesy now assumed by Robert Roper. With the growth of the area, it has become an increasingly urgent responsibility to keep the lake from becoming polluted and a community cesspool. The Bethel Chapel, lessee of the beach abutting 312th, has responded to our request to erect a gated fence to the property for privacy and to also provide a life guard when their young people use the lake. In my opinion, accessing the lake to sixteen non -lakefront homes is a violation of the property rights of those residents on Mirror Lake r f Marie Trotignon� 426 S.W. 316th Street Federal Way, WA 253-927-7404 ,t RF-CEIVED BY OOMMUNITY DEVELOPMBT DEPARTMENT FEB 0 4 2008 1 /30/08 Deb Barker, Sr Planner City of Federal Way P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 RE: Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Notice Of Land Use Application Dear Deb, My husband and I have a question/concern to raise with regard to displacement of raccoons, skunks, ferrell cats, rats, and mice that currently live in the wooded area to become developed. We just wonder if there is anything that can be done with these animals before they move out of the woods when the heavy equipment comes in to start work. We think the cats are doing their best to survive on the mice/rat/bird population & we would put food out for them if we didn't think it would encourage the rats to come over. We wouldn't have our feelings hurt if the skunks went bye bye ... we just are hoping the entire animal population doesn't move in with us (especially the skunks & rats). We would like to know what typically happens to the small animal population when wooded land is developed in neighborhoods, and hope to attend the Public Hearing for information. Thanks very much. Dana & Joe Behlke 616 S.W. 312' St. Federal Way, WA 98023 EIVEL) By r,C)M LINITYDEVEL PME TTDEPARTMEP47 February 16, 2008 Deb Barker, Federal Way Senior Planner Director of Community Development Services P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063 FEB 2 0 2008 Re: The Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat - 604 SW 312`h Street, Federal Way, WA Dear Ms. Barker, Thank you for the opportunity to provide written comments on the Notice of Land Use Application as a follow-up to my previous March 23, 2007 letter. I will try to limit the detail in my response here leaving that to the Mirror Lake Residents Association (MLRA), but I still want to again strongly express my concerns with the proposed project. As a result of reading through the extensive documentation that you graciously provided as part of the file, I am even more apprehensive now about doubling the density (as allowed under current zoning) in such an environmentally sensitive area. Apparently, the proposed project has also grown now from 12 units to 16 units. At the same time, the amount of land which the church is selling to the developer has also increased leading to an even greater impact on the surrounding community. My concern is not just with the number of units proposed on the property, but also with the overall size of the development footprint in such close proximity to a lake with known flooding problems. In addition, here is a brief list of other specific concerns: 1) On the site plan, the retaining wall near 312`' Street to be constructed directly east of unit 2 appears to be where 3 or 4 significant trees where to remain, according to an environmental report. Can the trees and the retaining wall co -exist? 2) Significant Infill: What will be the impact on the lake and surrounding area? 3) About 50 significant tall trees in all are proposed to be cut down (leaving only 3 or 4 of the original grove) in a setting which forms a backdrop to the lake. This will have a decidedly negative impact visually for those of us that love the lake, since Mirror Lake uniquely reflects the trees and sky and mirrors them back on the water. Even if some of the trees are replaced, it will certainly leave a scar. 4) Fire/LifeSafety: The site plan shows five units in the back of the property that appear not to have access to fire/emergency vehicles. I understand that the fire department would require that all of the units have sprinklers inside, but if the exteriors ignite and cannot be extinguished right away ---would that not pose a serious risk to other structures nearby? 5) Lake Access: The property has an easement to the lake. Unfortunately, 3121h Street is a busy thoroughfare. Regular pedestrian crossing of this street to access the lake is a serious risk to life and limb. There are also no restroom facilities on the lakeside. 6) Retention: I'm no expert, but how can the measures proposed possibly address runoff? Thank you again for your time/consideration. Please call (253) 946-9363, if you have questions. Since y, Richard Scott FILE ` CITY OF � Federal Way March 6, 2008 Mr. William McCaffrey 30929 371h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com RE: File #07-106874-SU; Cottage Housing Size, Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. McCaffrey: This letter is provided in response to your request to increase the size of the cottage units proposed in the Mirror Lake Highland Cottages. In your December 21, 2007, letter you request that housing units A and B, which make up ten of the sixteen proposed units, be permitted to exceed the maximum allowed unit area of 1,100 square feet by between twelve and fifteen square feet. Your request is not approved as discussed below. Your letter states that the increase is necessary to provide the downstairs master bedroom with enough room to accommodate an alternative location for a large bed. Focus groups provided you with information that such a configuration would be preferable_ The overall increase would add a total of 81 square feet to the gross living space established with the cottage units, and as it is underneath a porch roof, would not increase storm run-off calculations. Under Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-924, the Community Development Director may grant modifications to open space, site design, design standards, setbacks, and parking provisions of the Cottage housing article if all applicable criteria are met. Unfortunately, the maximum square foot size, or unit area of the Cottage dwelling unit, is not one of the code provisions that can be modified under FWCC Section 22-924. Further, you may recall that the city initially recommended that cottage housing unit area be considerably less than the 1,100 square feet adopted by City Council, in order to be consistent with other jurisdictions that allow cottage housing. An increase to the cottage housing square footage brings the units in line with that of a compact single-family house, subsequently eroding the intent of a cottage housing development. It does appear that with minor internal modifications such as relocating the coat closet to underneath the stairs, eliminating the second sink in the bathroom, or adjusting another area of the floor plan, you can achieve bed location flexibility without increasing the size of the dwelling unit. Please contact Senior Planner Deb Barker at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this letter. Sincerely, 1144, Greg Fewins, Director Community Development Services Doc 1 D 44478 A� a' P. - Architecture I Planning I Construction Management 3/21/08 Deb Barker Senior Planner City of Federal Way Subject: Mirror Lake Highland, File #07-105874-00-SU Technical Comments from 2/21/08 Dear Deb, Thanks for your comments and our previous meeting concerning the re -submittal. We have three pertinent issues that are un-resolved and we feel need a formal answer before we resubmit our project. 1. Per your comments under Sec. 5- Attached garage location/design. As you know this was one of the first allowed modifications we asked for during the "competition" portion of approval for our Cottage Housing project. (See our re - submittal letter dated 2/25/08). Because this issue was discussed then, and was not included as a "condition" in our approval letter, we thought the mod was approved and our final land plan depends heavily on having a single garage door facing our secondary street access just a few feet short of our parking lot. Ln Per your request I have attached a lot plan and elevations for Lot #1 of the project showing exactly how we intend to develop that site/unit. Please review and let me know if this will be allowed before we re -submit because denial would cause ry significant re -design of the entire site. 2. All of our internal sidewalks are designed at 44" in width. There was some Q discussion as to whether these sidewalks had to be 60" in width. (We have K submitted this request separately to Ann Dower). We strongly support 44" due to 3 the very nature of the Cottage Housing genre. It is essential to keep the J atmosphere residential in flavor and a 60" internal sidewalk clearly promotes a more commercial look. A tour of the most successful Puget Sound Cottage o Housing developments would support this request. 3. We contacted Sanjeev Tandle, designated Traffic Engineer, about any traffic ° comments and he told us he had none. He said the concurrency report was in to w process. We assume this means that all parking lot access arrangements, setbacks, garage locations, curb cuts, etc. meet the City's requirements because > the site plan depends heavily on this design. Please confirm. Please let me know when I might expect an answer to these questions. RESUBMITTED 31'c' est Regards, Bill McCafi'rey At MAR 2 12008 CITY®LDING DEPT.WAY www.Gl@WamsGLII]io.com RECEIVED BY +' MUNIT' DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MAR 0 4 2008 4 March 2008 Deb, caught up with Marla Ledin, president of the MLRA and, as promised, got her signature for our comment letter. Here is a copy for your file. I would also like to submit a reference to a Tacoma News Tribune article from September 1998 as further support of our claim of past flooding problems on Mirror Lake. Regards, Bob Roper Steilacoom Lake is a good example. We do not want this for Mirror Lake and we look to the city to provide the appropriate regulatory protection. The following comments are organized according to the corresponding element of the data package. If you have any questions, please call either Bob Roper or Marla Ledin at the numbers listed below. Yours truly, Robert S. Roper Land Use Committee Mirror Lake Residents' Association 253-941-6954 Marla Ledin President Mirror Lake Residents' Association 253-839-9090 'ZRE�PIN w11RROR LAKE DEFEATING RESIDENTS / HO^-PWNERS WATCH WATER MOVE FARTHER AND FARTHEI THE YARDS EACH WINTER 2/21/08 7:37 PM Some decisions 4I 2 Y NEW TACOMA should be made Before t W Cemeteries Hotz�e you need to make them. o then ews tribuni�Customer toolbox > Subscribe 0 Adverlising A4(wt n ICJ Contact us HOME 1 NEWS ° SPORTS , BUSINESS ° OPINION > PHOTOS . A&E - SOUNDLIFE - ADVENTURE HEALTH ^ CLASSIFIEDS Tacoma, WA • About us • Contact us • The Web site of the South Sound Ads by Google ADYERTI511 Winter Fashion Bionics How to Lose Stomach Fat ? What's hot this winter? Find about Find Bionics Online. I Found the 10 Rules to Lose Belly Interactive what's trendy and fashionable! Shop & Save at Target.com Today. Fat, and I Lost 9 Ibs every 11 Days HomeSil Sofeminine.co.uk/Winter-Fashion www.Target.com www FatLoss4ldiots.com 17--lill 1-1 SEARCH Tacoma, WA - February 21, 2008 Basic Search Advanced Search I Saved Search I About the Archive I Search Tips I Pricing I FAQ My Account Help I Terms of Service I Login I Home Document Start. a New Search I Previous Results ram, Buy Complete Document: A Abstract u$ Full Text 0$ Page Print CREEPING MIRROR LAKE DEFEATING RESIDENTS / HOMEOWNERS WATCH WATER MOVE FARTHER AND FARTHER INTO THE YARDS EACH WINTER [South King County Edition] The News Tribune - Tacoma, Wash. Author: Barbara Clements; The News Tribune Date: Sep 30, 1998 Start Page: BA Section: Local/State Text Word Count: 690 Abstract (Document Summary) That seems to be the choice facing Federal Way's engineering staff - and lake residents - as both parties ponder what to do about the ever growing Mirror Lake. "Either you translocate the water or you translocate the houses," said Jeff Pratt, manager of the city's surface water division. Pratt said it would cost between $2 million to $3 million to move the water in the 16-acre lake west through Lakota wetlands and Lakota park into Lakota Creek and finally into Dumas Bay. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission. Buy Complete Document: I: Abstract R$ Full Text 0$ Page Print Most Viewed Articles (Updated Daily) j,►yn rV,-ood Shorelin a( o$olhelll dge Kir+nd0lOedmond Seattle NSe•cedr° ols 1s a oRenton c ederal Way Place rch Area Max Price ❑ Min. Price ❑ Bedrooms ❑ http://pgasb.pgarchiver.com/TRIBnet/access/34697287.htmI?did...CH+WATER+MOVE+FARTHER+AND+FARTHER+INTO+THE+YARDS+EACH+WINTER Page 1 of 2 CITY OF t Federal Way March 28, 2008 Ms. Marie Trotignon 426 SW 316" Street Federal Way, WA 98023 CITY HALL FILE 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; Response to Comments, Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Ms. Trotignon: Thank you for your February 11, 2008, comment letter regarding the City's notice of application for the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing preliminary plat. Your letter was forwarded to City staff and the applicant for review and response. The following information is provided in response to the comments and concerns about impacts to Mirror Lake. 1. Drainage — Please refer to the enclosed Public Works memorandum from Ann Dower dated March 5, 2008. 2. Mirror Lake Access — Concerns about use of the access easement to Mirror Lake are of a civil nature, and not under City purview. The applicant does state in section B.12.c of the revised environmental checklist "there are no plans for improvements to the Mirror Lake access easement for benefited homes." A copy of the revised checklist is enclosed. In addition to this early notice and request for public comments, there will be two additional opportunities to submit comments on this application. Notice and opportunity for public comments will also occur following the City's issuance of an environmental decision and two weeks prior to conducting a public hearing on this proposal. The City's Hearing Examiner, who forwards a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration, will conduct a public hearing. You will receive mailed notification of the environmental decision and public hearing. If you would like to discuss this proposal or review the preliminary plans, we would be glad to meet with you. If you have any further comments, please contact me at deb.barker@cityoffederalway.com or 253-835-2642. Sincerely, k��datj� Deb Barker Senior Planner Enclosures as noted c: Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116, Federal Way, WA 98023 Ann Dower, Public Works Engineering Plans Review Doc I.D. 44836 FILE CITY OF CITY HALL 44kFederal Vila 33325 8th Avenue South Y Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com March 28, 2008 Mr. Bob Roper 525 SW 312`h Street Federal Way, WA 98023 RE: FILE #07-106874-00-SU; RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. Roper: Thank you for your February 19, 2008, comment letter regarding the City's notice of application for the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing preliminary plat. The following information is provided in response to the comments and concerns expressed in your letter. I have asked City Public Works Department staff to review your comments and provide a written response to address your concerns. A copy of the response memorandum from Ann Dower, dated March 5, 2008, is enclosed. Your letter also contained comments on responses in the environmental checklist. Please note that your comment letter was forwarded to the applicant on February 21, 2008. A revised environmental checklist was submitted on March 7, 2008, in response to City comments; a copy of that document is enclosed. In addition to this early notice and request for public comments, there will be two additional opportunities to submit comments on this application. Notice and opportunity for public comments will also occur following the City's issuance of an environmental decision and two weeks prior to conducting a public hearing on this proposal. The City's Hearing Examiner, who forwards a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration, will conduct a public hearing. You will receive matted notification of the environmental decision and public hearing. If you would like to discuss this proposal or review the preliminary plans we would be glad to meet with you. If you have any further comments, please contact me at deb.barker@cityoffederalway_com or 253- 835-2642. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner - Enclosures as noted c: Marla Ledin, 401 SW 3121h Street, Federal Way, WA 98023 Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116, Federal Way, WA 98023 Ann Dower, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer Doc. LD 44833 CITY OF t Federal Way March 28, 2008 Dana and Joe Belke 616 SW 312t' Street Federal Way, WA 98023 1 CITY HALL FiLE 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; Response to Comments, Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. and Mrs. Belke: Thank you for your January 30, 2008, comment letter regarding the City's notice of application for the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing preliminary plat. Your letter was forwarded to City staff and the applicant for review and response. The following information is provided in response to the comments and concerns about the wildlife population during construction. The March 6, 2008, environmental checklist provided by the applicant states that there are songbirds and deer on or near the subject site; that no threatened or endangered species are known to be on or near the site; that the site is located within the pacific flyway for migratory birds; and the proposed landscape plan includes the use of native plant species to enhance the wildlife habitat. Small animal populations displaced with development may migrate to other undeveloped property in the area. Unless there are known threatened or endangered species that are impacted by a development proposal, specific protection and/or mitigation measures are not required with the development proposal. In addition to this early notice and request for public comments, there will be two additional opportunities to submit comments on this application. Notice and opportunity for public comments will also occur following the City's issuance of an environmental decision and two weeks prior to conducting a public hearing on this proposal. The City's Hearing Examiner, who forwards a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration, will conduct a public hearing. You will receive mailed notification of the environmental decision and public hearing. If you would like to discuss this proposal or review the preliminary plans we would be glad to meet with you. If you have any further comments, please contact me at deb.barker@cityoffederalway.com or 253-835-2642. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner Enclosures as noted c: Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116, Federal Way, WA 98023 Doc. [ D. 44837 1--) FILE CITY OF L Federal Way March 28, 2008 Mr. Richard Scott 545 SW 3121h Street Federal Way, WA 98023 RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. Scott: CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Thank you for your February 16, 2008, comment letter regarding the City's notice of application for the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing preliminary plat. Your letter was forwarded to City staff and the applicant for review and response. The following information is provided in response to the comments and concerns expressed in your letter, which include trees, drainage and Mirror Lake, fire/life safety and access to Mirror Lake. 1. Significant Trees — Significant trees are defined and regulated under Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-1568(b). The applicant is permitted to remove vegetation on the subject property to the extent allowed by code. The trees on the project site are not under obligation to "form a backdrop to Mirror Lake." Pursuant to FWCC Section 20-179(b), significant tree replacement is not required for those trees removed for plat infrastructure such as roads and utilities; however, tree replacement is required for individual residential lots pursuant to FWCC Section 22-1568(c). The applicant has proposed to clear the majority of the site in conjunction with this plat application, with tree replacement occurring throughout the subject site. The City has requested additional information to review this request, and to date, this information has not been submitted_ Conflicts between proposed infrastructure and retained trees would be reviewed in conjunction with engineering plans following preliminary plat review; and impacts to trees proposed for retention must be resolved prior to engineering approval. 2. Drainage — Please refer to the enclosed Public Works memorandum from Ann Dower dated March 5, 2008. 3. Fire/Life Safety — Please refer to the enclosed South King Fire and Rescue letter from Chris Ingham dated February 27, 2008. 4. Mirror Lake Access — Concerns about use of the access easement to Mirror Lake are of a civil nature, and not under City purview. The applicant does state in section 13.12.c of the revised environmental checklist "there are no plans for improvements to the Mirror Lake access easement for benefited homes." A copy of the revised checklist is enclosed. In addition to this early notice and request for public comments, there will be two additional opportunities to submit comments on this application. Notice and opportunity for public comments will also occur following the City's issuance of an environmental decision and two weeks prior to conducting a public hearing on this proposal. The City's Hearing Examiner, who forwards a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration, will conduct a public hearing. You will receive mailed notification of the environmental decision and public hearing. Mr. Scott March 28, 2008 Page 2 If you would like to discuss this proposal or review the preliminary plans we would be glad to meet with you. If you have any further comments, please contact me at deb.barker@cityoffederalway.com or 253- 835-2642. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner Enclosures as noted c: Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116, Federal Way, WA 98023 Ann Dower, Public Works Engineering Plans Review Chris Ingham, South King Fire and Rescue 07-106974 Doc 1 D 44834 3/28/2008 Deb Barker Senior Planner City of Federal Way RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; School Access Analysis School Access Analysis for Mirror Lake Highland CHD The following school attendance and bus stop information was supplied by Geri Walker of the Federal Way School District. Lake Grove Elementa - Walking Distance To get to Lake Grove Elementary students must walk approx 1076 R North on 6'H PL SW from the entry of Mirror Lake Highland (MLH) to SW 3081h St. From there they would proceed East along the south shoulder of 308th for approx. 942' to the school. They cross no streets. 6th PL SW is a lightly used local street with no sidewalks and about 300' of the approx 1076' is a gravel surface. 6th PL SW is not a through street. It dead ends at a guardrail barrier coming south from SW 308th ST and going north from SW 312th ST. (see photo 461 for view Northwest from MLH entry, photo 462 for North view to barrier, photo 471 for South view to barrier, and photo 465 for South view from SW 308th St. intersection) SW 308th St. is a minor collector with no sidewalks. It is equipped with "C" curbs along the south shoulder from the 6th PL intersection to the school. It has two 15mph speed bumps within the 942' and it terminates at a 20mph school zone at the school. (see photo 464 for East view from 6th PI intersection and photo 466 for end of South shoulder at school) Lakota Middle School- Walking Distance To get to Lakota Middle School students would walk approx 100' south on the new 6th PL SW sidewalk to SW 312th St. Then approx 600' west along the north shoulder of 312th to the school crosswalk at 8th Ave SW. After crossing 312th at the crosswalk they would continue West approx. 1945' along 312th to 14th Ave SW, turn south, and continue approx 600' to the school. RESUBMITTED MAR 3 J 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY BUILDING DEPT. e 6th PL SW is a lightly used local street, which when developed, will have a sidewalk on the east side connecting to a new sidewalk going east on the north side of 312th. (see photo 460 for view north from 312th) 312th is a minor arterial with a pedestrian shoulder on the north side between 6th Ave and 8th Ave. (see photo 447 & 450 for westerly view along this section) 8th Ave. SW is a minor collector with no sidewalks and a school crosswalk at 312th. (see photo 456 for crosswalk and photo 451 for view of South side of intersection) The south shoulder of 312th from 8th Ave all the way west to Lakota is already equipped with "C" curbs for school pedestrian traffic. The end of 312th at 14th Ave SW terminates in a 20mph school zone and a lighted crosswalk. (see photo 473 for West view of South shoulder from crosswalk) Federal Way High School - Bus transportation provided Mirror Lake Highlands has a public bus stop immediately in front of it on SW 312th St. this extended shoulder could easily be utilized for a new High School bus stop. To get to the closest existing High School bus pick-up students would have to walk approx 100' south on the new 6t PL SW sidewalk to SW 312th St. Then approx 600' west along the north shoulder of 312th to the school crosswalk at 8th Ave SW. After crossing 312th at the crosswalk they would proceed approx 600' south on 8th Ave SW to the comer of it and SW 313th Ct. where the bus currently stops. 6th PL SW is a lightly used local street, which when developed, will have a sidewalk on the east side connecting to a new sidewalk ;going east on the north side of 312th. (see photo 460 for view north from 312") 312th is a minor arterial with a pedestrian shoulder on the north side between 6th Ave and 81h Ave. (see photo 447 & 450 for westerly view along this section) 8th Ave. SW is a minor collector with no sidewalks and a school crosswalk at 312th. (see photo 456 for crosswalk and photo 451 for view of South side of intersection) SW 313th Ct. is a local street with sidewalks. (see photo 455 for South view of 313 Ct. intersection and sidewalks) MAR 3,1 2oo8 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY BUILDING DEPT. 1 RESUBMITTED MAR 3,1 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY BUILDING DEPT. I {I� •, r i� 9 0 - ,6 , Oak k Ail IF - !13 N I• a J 7 •• ; ;i � d�"•Fil�ysSl " � � + 1 lit ' i•l' :� r.• .. :I i� a. ��]-• •Yi rl� ,•tit �..• - � •� ' •- � r� ��r 4• i., .A 4•; .' ti . 't• I^ k �I 64)" si4c sr4+ fw $us @ sw Ala SeH.iov h U� wsAJL wa+ ob to�" 4j. te MAR 3,, j 2008 G CITY FEDERAL WAY ' g[JIL DING DEPT. P, IV 1, wit Eli " �, il kr�, 1 *60 =- -I "MOW.. 4- i ALI [w Project Name L11 lla V Applicant t C gy Project Location JW � t Tracking No, III. TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Please provide the approximate quantity of the types of hazardous materials or deleterious substances that will be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of in connection with the proposed activity. If no hazardous materials will be involved, please proceed to Section IV. MATERIAL LIQUID allons SOLIDpounds) (1) Acid or basic solutions or solids (2) Antifreeze or coolants (3) Bleaches, peroxides, detergents, surfactants, disinfectants, bactericides, algaecides (4) Brake, transmission, hydraulic fluids (5) Brine solutions (6) Corrosion or rust prevention solutions (7) Cutting fluids (8) Deicing materials (9) Dry cleaning or cleaning solvents (10) Electroplating or metal finishing solutions (11) Engraving or etching solutions (12) Explosives (13) Fertilizers Lal%?f'YtLaZ �.di7 4 (14) Food or animal processing wastes (15) Formaldehyde (16) Fuels, additives, oils, greases (17) Glues, adhesives, or resins (18) Inks, printing, or photocopying chemicals (19) Laboratory chemicals, reagents or standards (20) Medical, hospital, pharmaceutical, dental, or veterinary fluids or wastes (21) Metals (hazardous e.g. arsenic, copper, chromium, lead, mercury, silver, etc.) (22) Paints, pigments, dyes, stains, varnish, sealers. (23) Pesticides, herbicides or poisons (24) Plastic resins, plasticizers, or catalysts (25) Photo development chemicals (26) Radioactive sources (27) Refrigerants, cooling water (contact) (28) Sludges, still bottoms (29) Solvents, thinners, paint removers or strippers (30) Tanning (leather) chemicals (3 1 ) Transformer, capacitor oils/fluids, PCB's (32) Waste oil (33) Wood preservatives (34) List oTi IER hazardous materials or deleterious substances on a separate sheet. 1 Bulletin #056 — November 24, 2004 Page 2 of 3 k:\I-landouts\Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement Project Name Applicant 11IA1i QM 1 0Tracking Project Location 0 6y ]_ 31� S Tl _ Tracking No. IV. FURTHER INFORMATION Provide the approximate quantity of fill and source of fill to be imported to the site. Check box #1 if you do not plan to store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous material or deleterious substance listed in Section Ill. Check box(s) #2 through #5 (ancLfill in appropriate blanks) of the belpw table if they apply to your facility or acf ity. #1 [ The proposed development will not slVre, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dL+ose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous materials or deleterious substances listed above. 42 [ ] Above ground storage tanks, having a capacity of gallons will be installed. #3 [ ] Construction vehicles will be refueled on site. Storage within wholesale and retail facilities of hazardous materials, or other deleterious #4 [ ] substances, will be for sale in original containers with a capacity of _ gallons liquid or _pounds solid. The presence of chemical substances on this parcel is/will be for "temporary" non -routine 45 [ ] maintenance or repair of the facility (such as paints and paint thinners) and are in individual containers with a capacity of_ gallons liquid or ____pounds solid. Check any of the following items that currently exist or are proposed in connection with the development of the site. 91 [ Stormwater infiltration system (e.g., french drain, dry well, stormwater swale, etc.) #2 [ ] Hydraulic lifts or elevator, chemical systems, or other machinery that uses hazardous materials #3 [ ] Cathodic protection wells #4 [ ] Water wells, monitoring wells, resource protection wells, piezometers #5 [ ] Leak detection devices, training for employees for use of hazardous materials, self-contained machinery, etc. SIGNATURE %1 y- -08 Signature if Date 'Sa kle4' Print Name If you have any questions about filling out this application form, please call the Department of Community Development Services at 253-835-2607. Please be advised that an application for a development permit lacking the required information will not be accepted. Bulletin #056 — November 24, 2004 Page 3 of 3 k:\Handouts\Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement C4TY OF FEDERAL WAY NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINA- T10N OF NONSIGN1FiCANCE Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Housing Pre- liminary Plat File No. 07-1068754*-SE The City of Federal Way has determined that the following project does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environrneiilal checkllsL and other informatir,n an file with the CU'y: Proposed Action: Subdivision of five lots, 1.85 acres in size, into a sixteen -lot single-fam- ily cottage housing demonstration project. The project includes public and private street im- provements, construction of drainage features using Low Impact Design (LID) concepts, util- ity improvements, a 580 square -foot commu- nity building, and parking for thirty vehicles in at -grade parking stalls, attached garages and detached garages. Approximately seventeen percent of the site will be retained in open space tracts in compliance with cartage hcu> ing design requirements. Location-. SW 312th Street at 6th Place SW in the SW '/a of Section 07, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M., In fling County, Wash- ington, encompassing King County parcel numbers 0072104-9024, 9110, 9111, 9109, and 9114. Applic3cil:W011am MGGaffrr;y The WJI'A Studio 1g11 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116 Federal VJay, WA 93023 Agent: Lisa Kloin AHSL 2215 North 30th Streel, SUITC. 3QC) Tacoma, WA 98403 Lead Agency: City of Federal Way ❑eparlmf'gy of Community Development Services City Staff Cr)11lact-. l,)cb Barker,116nior, Plannidir, 253.835-2642 Further information regarding this action is available to the public upon request at the Fed- eral Way Department of Community Develop- ment Services (Federal Way City Hall, 33325 81h Avenue South. PO. Box 9716, Federal Way, WA 96063-9718). This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340t2), Comments must be sub- mitted by 5:00 p.m. on April 30, 2008. Unless modified by the City, this determination will become final following the comment dead- line. Any person aggrieved by the City's final determination may file an appeal with the City within 14 days of the above comment dead- line. FWM 1379 Dale of Publication: April 16, 2008. M-In-wn-OR Your Community Newspaper - Affidavit of Publication Rudi Alcott, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that he is the Publisher of The Federal Way Mirror, a semi -weekly newspaper. That said newspaper is published in the English language continually as a semi -weekly newspaper in Federal Way, King County, Washington, and is now and during all of said time has been printed in an office maintained at the aforementioned place of publication of said newspaper. That the annexed is a true copy of a legal advertisement placed by City of Federal Way L-1379 as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplemental form) of said newspaper once each week for a period of one consecutive week(s), commencing on the 16th day of April. 2008 , and ending on the 16th day of April, 2008, both dates inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its readers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of 1$ 12.4g which amount has been paid in full, or billed at the legal rate according to RCW 65.16.090 Subscribed to and sworn before me this 17th day of April. 2008. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, Residing at Federal Way xox� ►►11111111����,,` A' ---------� Ot dF WAS�'�r4'`~ lot 11tijklO 1414 SO.324TH STREET, SUITE B210, FEDERAL WAY,WA 98003 ■ 253-925-5565 0 FAX: 253-925-5750 CITY OF L Federal Way CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 wwwcityoffederalway. com April 30, 2008 FILE Mr. William McCaffrey 30929 37`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 RE: FILE #07-106874-00-SU & 07-106875-SE; SEPA COMMENTS FORWARDED MIRRIOR LAKE HIGHLAND COTTAGE PRELIMINARY PLAT Dear Mr. McCaffrey: As you are aware, a two week comment period began when the City issued an environmental determination of non -significance for the preliminary plat application on April 16, 2008. As of this date, the City has received two comments as follows: (1) E-mail from Lori Kittredge with King County Metro dated April 21, 2008, (2) Letter dated April 30, 2008 from Richard Scott received via e-mail. Copies of those comments are enclosed. Be advised that the city will respond to these comments in approximately one week. If you have any information that you would like to forward with our letter, please forward it to my attention on or before May 8, 2008. You will be copied on any response issued by the City. I can be reached at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this matter. Sincerely, 10'tk 40a% Deb Barker Senior Planner Enclosures as noted cc: Ann Dower Soma Chattopadhyay Doc. I.D. 45293 FIL E CITY OF Federal May 1, 2008 Mr. William McCaffrey 30929 37`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 CITY HALL Way 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway com RE: FILE #07-106874-00-SU & 07-106875-SE; SEPA COMMENTS FORWARDED MIRRIOR LAKE HIGHLAND COTTAGE PRELIMINARY PLAT Dear Mr. McCaffrey: As you are aware, a two week comment period began when the City issued an environmental determination of non -significance for the preliminary plat Application on April l6, 2008. The City received the following comment letter on April 30, 2008 and forwards it to your attention: (1) Letter dated April 30, 2008 from Robert Roper and Marla Ledin. Be advised that the city will respond to these comments in approximately one week. If you have any information that you would like to forward with our letter, please forward it to my attention on or before May 8, 2008. You will be copied on any response issued by the City. I can be reached at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this matter. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner Enclosure as noted cc: Ann Dower Soma Chattopadhyay Doc. I.D. 45310 N N N m m Ln N Ln N In N Ln Z 0 a P Design I Construction Management I Development 6/20/08 Deb Barker Senior Planner City of Federal way Subject: 2/21/08 Technical Comments Response Dear Deb, I have responded below in order of your 2/21/08 comments, you will need your original comments letter to correlate my responses: SEPA Checklist: All comments were addressed and revised Checklist resubmitted on 3/14/2008. The SEPA report has now received a DNS, been publically posted, citizen comments responded to, and no appeals received. Public Works Development Services: To date we have had several phone calls and two meetings with Ann Dower and other City Public Works personnel concerning their Preliminary Submittal comments. Per those communications and the Preliminary Plat comments from Deb Barker it was agreed that items 1-8 of her 2/4/08 letter would be addressed on the new preliminary plat drawing 1-A that we are adding to the preliminary engineering drawings. The balance of her comments were issues we needed to address at the time of final engineering submittal. Traffic Division Sanieev Tandle: We have received no written response from Traffic. I called Sanjeev and he told me he had no comments. We assume this means that all parking lot access arrangements, setbacks, garage locations, curb cuts, etc. meet the City's requirements because the site plan depends heavily on this design. If this is not the case, please respond immediately. Sanjeev forwarded the completed Concurrency Report to us on 4/8/08. RESUBMITTED JUN 2 5 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL_ WAY BUILDING D6P7 wwtumnewams u io_com Lakehaven Utility District: All preliminary submittals have been made and we have signed a Developer Extension Agreement with Lakehaven. Planning De ai-twent: Several statements in Deb Barkers response were the result of misunderstanding the previous drawings as well as this submittal. Two meetings and several phone calls have cleared up this misunderstanding. I will however provide written response to all of the issues raised in the Deb's Technical Comments. General Preamble Section - First and foremost, the notion that this preliminary plat submittal results in "a project that is in sharp contrast to the visual renderings submitted with the demonstration project application" is simply not correct. The slope and the housings relationship to the slope, indicated in both submittals are nearly ideal. The extent of the labeled "existing native vegetation and trees", the extent of existing vegetation removal, and the amount of new landscaping required in both submittals is nearly identical. The "extensive trenching" noted in the comments referred to the completely underground infiltration trenches for each housing unit (a Low Impact Development feature) that were misunderstood as open surface trenches. Any changes in site landscaping/open space is the direct result of the City requiring additional pavement width and garage setbacks (an emphasis on the automobile over the pedestrian), as well as the developer granting 6 neighbors easements for all of their encroachments along the western property line. The result of all of this was a reduction in the width of open space down the middle of the entire project by 14'. To mitigate this loss we acquired additional property on our north border. The result is a nearly identical amount of open space which still exceeds the CHD Ordinance requirement by over 80% (14,518sf vs. 8000sf). The design decision to utilize low landscape walls between many of the houses to enhance the use of the small side yards was clearly depicted on the site section submitted to the City for review on 9/21/07 and was not noted as an issue in the City's 10/10/07 response letter that gave us direction for our preliminary submittal. These landscape walls are definitely not required in order to "get all of the homes onto the subject property" and will be addressed below under- Clearing, Grading, & Retaining Walls. The comments concerning the amount of fill required on the site are correct. The preliminary engineering solution, which utilizes extensive Low Impact Development (LID) approaches, will require more fill than originally expected to fully utilize the natural infiltration capacity of the site in order to meet the stringent requirements for Level 3 Flow Control. This will be addressed below under- Clearing, Grading, Retaining Walls. In regards the reiteration of the 4 conditions outlined in our CHD approval/selection letter, we believe our preliminary plat submittal meets or exceeds all of these conditions. If these conditions are included here to indicate we have failed any of these requirements, please elaborate on the specific issues. ■ Planning Section 1— Preliminary Plat A Final Plat drawing is primarily uniform due to County filing requirements. Preliminary Plat drawings are not really a filed document and thus vary greatly between jurisdictions. The confusion on our part as tq what The City of Federal Way wanted on its Preliminary Plat was cleared up in a meeting between the project surveyor, me, and Deb Barker. The 13 bullet point's outlines by Deb Barker to be on the Preliminary Plat are being addressed per our meeting. Our intent is to answer all of Deb's requests on our re -submittal. Planning Section 2 — Clearing, grading retaining walls Clearing- As stated above, we take issue with the statement that "The proposed clearing action significantly departs from the originally approved conceptual plan". Our original landscape plan indicated all but maybe three or four perimeter trees as being removed. The "existing vegetation" note was clearly pointed at trees around the perimeter that were beyond our actual property line and will in fact be kept. The issue of trees was raised at the neighborhood meeting. My response was a desire to keep as many trees as possible, but the possibility of removing all the tress was raised as a possibility. Upon final tree survey and site plan layout about 5 significant trees (in addition to the 4 currently indicated as retained) were not eliminated by buildings or pavement improvements. Unfortunately, due to the narrowness of the site (please see our lost 14' discussion above), utility requirements dictate significant trenching right through the root structure of these remaining trees. The tree consultant ultimately decided that those trees would not survive construction and should be removed also. Approval for mass grading will not affect the number trees saved. Even if our LID engineering approach has to be abandoned and we build at grade, all trees would still be recommended for removal. a) Mass Grading Request- (If this Mass Grading Request needs to be submitted under separate cover please let me know) We are requesting permission to mass grade our 1.88 acre site at 604 SW 312th Street, submitted as Mirror Lake Highland Preliminary Plat, for the following extenuating and unusual circumstances. The site is developing as a demonstration project for the new Federal Way Cottage Housing Development Ordinance (CHD Ordinance). Cottage housing is characterized by higher density small lots not required to have public ROW frontage, arranged around commonly owned open areas, and designed in a manner that promotes neighborhood interaction and security. Due to the projects location in a sensitive Level 3 Flow Control area and a strong neighborhood and developer concern over water quality issues as related to Mirror Lake, the developer is committed to utilizing as many Low Impact Development (LID) approaches as feasible. This use of environmentally preferred and neighborhood friendly LID approaches places a unique layer of constraints on how the site can develop. The combination of CHD requirements/goals, LID engineering design, and a long narrow development site result in this request for mass grading. Typical subdivisions have all lots accessing a public ROW that typically contains the infrastructure serving the lots. In a CHD, most of the lots are separated from the access ROW by common open space. This results in the common space becoming a main conduit of the sites infrastructure. This means the whole common space (which intertwines the lots) is developed up front along with vehicular and fire access as well as utility extensions. This would leave the building lots separated from heavy equipment access by already developed open space with infrastructure in place. This would make completion of the lot clearing and grading nearly impossible without severe negative impact on the already completed open areas. With a mass grading approach, we plan on excavating the housing unit crawl spaces along with final common space work so no heavy "tracked" equipment will be needed to complete the foundations. One advantage of the narrow site is that concrete for foundations can be delivered by pump trucks from the access ROW without having to pass the heavy equipment over the open space. Another issue concerning clearing is that lots in a Cottage Housing development occupy a significant less percentage of the entire subdivision. In this case our lots average 2250 sq. ft. and account for less that half of the total project area. Clearing trees one lot at a time on 2250 sq. ft. lots (average width about 41') without negatively affecting the surrounding lots and open space, as stated above, is highly improbable. The trees themselves are longer than the lots they occupy. Per our soils report, this site is favored with over twice the depth of water retaining, infiltrative soil than most land in south King County. This infiltrative soil provides the very best water quality solution as well as flow control solution for a sensitive area like Mirror Lake. We are proposing the use of LID techniques including buried infiltration trenches for most roof run off and public ROW for 6`h ST SW, pervious concrete for major portions of the paved surfaces, and rain gardens for remaining paved surfaces, some roofs, and general sheet flow. The essence of LID rain garden design is to locate the flow control element as close to the source of run-off as possible. The site has over 50'of fall (about 8%) from north to south and as much as 10' (about 10%) of fall on its narrow axis from west to east. This calls for the rain gardens to be located down -gradient along the east property line of the project between the cottage housing units. This leaves the roof run-off infiltration trenches running along the contours in an east/west direction across the site (see drainage plan C-3), primarily on the west third. In order to take advantage of this infiltrative soil, and implement the neighborhood favorable LID infiltration/rain garden approach, we need to raise the grade level along the eastern side of the property between rain gardens. The design calls for nothing more than "leveling out" the western half of the site and uniformly raising the eastern half from north to south, except for the rain garden areas. This allows us to place the bottom of the 18" deep rain gardens slightly below grade along the eastern third of the site as well as allowing the proper elevation change and clearances for the roof infiltration trenches to work properly on the western third of the site. The east side would uniformly be raised a yet to be finalized amount. The 5000 CU YD fill dirt estimate, and our preliminary grading plan, was arrived at as a worst case scenario so we would not have to modify the SEPA Report if indeed that amount of dirt were ultimately required once final engineering was completed. We need to progress to final engineering of the rain gardens in order to finalize the earthwork number. At least a 50% reduction in dirt is our current goal. The natural 3'-5' drop between houses (North to South) indicated on our original CHD Submittal drawings, and our Preliminary Plat submittal, would remain relatively the same. Mass grading is required to accomplish all of these desirable outcomes. The last issue affecting our clearing and grading approach is the narrow character of our site and our commitment to LID products like pervious concrete. The long range benefits of pervious concrete are obvious but use of it causes some impacts on initial construction. All of our street infrastructure will be required to be in place prior to building permits being issued. It is not desirable to direct inherently heavy and dirty construction vehicles like those required for tree clearing and earthwork over pervious concrete. Our narrow site cuts off all access to the north end of the site after the first models are built on the south end except over the newly placed pervious concrete. While protecting the pervious is not an impossible task (we hope to only have to accommodate rubber tired cement pump trucks), it is very desirable to avoid this degree of exposure if possible. b) Retaining Walls This site has no 15% slopes and does not require "extensive use of retaining walls to create building pads or open space areas". The predominant north to south slope never exceeds about 8%. A small portion of the north end of the site reaches about 10% in a west to east slope. Per our existing design which includes mass grading (please see above), the west to east area slope will be reduced some and the north to south slope will remain predominantly the same. Our request for mass grading has nothing to do with creating retaining walls to make areas suitable for housing pads. It has to do with optimizing the desirable, community friendly LID engineering concepts as shown on our engineering drawings. From our earliest submittal the natural 8% grade created a 3' to 5' floor to floor difference in elevation between housing units. Early on a different texture was used on the site section drawings to indicate a certain amount of fill or re -grading around the houses in order to fit flat first floors into the sloping hillside. As the design advanced and input from our informal focus group unfolded, a desire to make the narrow side yards more user friendly for dog runs, walkways, etc., resulted in the possible addition of low garden walls to create a more level area. These walls are not required to make any yard habitable or legal. They are simply an aesthetic landscaping element being considered by the architect and landscape designer. We indicated this direction on our 9/5/08 submittal which included a site section showing various height walls. These walls were drawn with no drop in elevation away from any of the foundations so they were a worse case scenario. Only a couple were high enough to require engineering. You responded to this submittal favorable on 10/10-08 with no mention of an objection to us utilizing the garden walls. That drawing was just the beginning of us looking at low walls. The truth is I decided that the walls were higher than I would like them and I started working with the engineers to see what we could do to lower them in many cases and eliminate them in others. That is basically where we stand right now. Based on the clarifications we received from the City of Federal Way Public Works Department to our proposed rain garden design, final engineering should let us take a lot of height out of the walls and require much less fill. Because there are no slopes over 15% and because these walls do not affect the amount of lots or density that the site will hold, I don't know exactly what I need to support here. If the City dictated no walls for some reason, we could make that happen. However, I think it is unusual territory for the City to dictate this kind of aesthetic decision. c) Cottage Housing Yards - A general site section was provided with our 9/8/07 submittal that shows the worst possible wall height. In addition we have submitted detailed lot drawings for your review as per Cottage Design Section 5(f) of this response. I have submitted no additional drawings at this time because I think all of the above information has covered the original concern. d) Apparent Tree/Trench Conflict -this will be resolved on the final engineered submittal. 0 Planning Section 3 - Common Open Space The City gave us permission to supply the overall site plan and CHD Areas verification drawing at a scale of 1:30 in order to keep from having to break the site in two parts. It was agreed that it would be easier to review that way. All of the required information is shown on this 1:30 drawing. Since the City has apparently changed their mind, we redrew these drawings at the larger scale and broke them into two separate drawings, Sht. A-1 and Sht. A-1.1. Hopefully you will find this more convenient, it cost many hours of drawing time. a) Please see Sht. A-1 and A-1.1 for this information. b) Please see Sht. A-1.1 for this information. c) Please note that the original submittal and this re -submittal call the rain gardens out as common open space in accordance with the CHD approval letter dated 4/17/07. d) The 400 Sq Ft minimum private front yard areas are shown on Sht. A-1.1. Just as it is labeled, this space is private property and will be landscaped by, and at the expense of, the eventual homeowner under the requirements and the time frame outlined in the Home Owners Association C,C,&R's. a Planning Section 4 — Landscaping a) Significant Trees — The submitted trees study (dated 12/18/07) studied all 107 trees on the site. Federal Way standards only consider 63 of these trees to be significant. 12 of these significant trees were declared unhealthy or dead and were recommended to be removed by the arborist. This left 51 significant trees. This is all clearly delineated on page 4 of the report. b) Replacement Trees — Consider this a formal request to relocate replacement trees from the building lot associated with the removed significant trees. If this request needs to be submitted under separate cover, please let me know asap. 5 The existence of common open space throughout a CHD and the very small size (avg. 2250 sf) of the lots, makes locating the replacement significant trees in the open space areas the logical approach. The open space has more area for significant trees and will fall under the common maintenance of the home owners association (HOA). Location in the open space also insures that enjoyment of the trees is available to all resident/owners in the development. The HOA is expected to limit the size of trees allowed in the private yards to smaller varieties in order to keep a uniform scale to the overall planting scheme. This further points to the open areas as the best place for the prescribed number of significant replacement trees. c) Plant Selection — The resubmitted, revised Landscape Plan addresses all of these concerns. d) Rain Garden Seating — The current design intentions for the decks and seating in the rain gardens and common spaces are listed in the notes on Sht. A-1. A low seating/eating 30"-36" rail design is included at the rain garden viewing decks which will be built of pressure treated wood and composite decking material. Final detailing will be included with our final submittal. • Planning Section 5 — Cottage Design a) Front Entry - Please note that the original submittal and this re -submittal call the rain gardens out as common open space in accordance with the CHD approval letter dated 4/17/07. b) Attached garage locations/design — We submitted the requested drawings on 3/21/2008 and received City approval for the garage on Unit # 1 - 5/12/2008. c) Parking — Please see Sht. A-1 for guest and compact stall locations. d) Height — All height issues are addressed on the submitted unit drawings. e) Pedestrian Path — This approach is reflected on the resubmitted site drawings. f) Required Yards — Your requested drawings were submitted on 3/27/08 and your review letter was returned on 5/8.08. We are proceeding under the findings of your letter. Per your request for a written response, please note the following: All of the units and lots are designed to meet the requirements for the required yards of 5' minimum. All projecting bays are less than 25% of the length of the fagade that they are placed on. This means they can project up to 18" into any required yards. Decks less than 18" in height from the ground are allowed to project 18" into required yards. All projecting decks will meet this requirement. Retaining walls are allowed in required yards if they do not provided direct structural support. None of our proposed retaining wall provide structural support and many will probably be eliminated per final design. The building set back line for each lot is shown on Sht. A-1.1. In most cases it allows about a foot of play in width to place the housing unit. This allows all units to meet the above requirements. A careful study of sheet A-1 shows the actual proposed location of each unit on each lot with dimensions. ® Planning Section 6 — Other a) The well is located on the Bethel Christian Church property to the east of our site. It is well outside the 100 ft required buffer and was checked by the surveyor. b) The additional Title information has been submitted. c) The School Access Analysis has been submitted and was approved by the Federal Way School District. Best Regards � iJ Bill McCaffrey Al the WJM studio Project Memo TO: Ann Dower / Deb Barker FROM: Holly Williams / Len Zickler DATE: June 24, 2008 PROJECT: Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat OUR FILE NO.: 207555.30 SUBJECT: February 4, 2008 Comment Memo .A L 13ft In response to Comment No. 18 on the memo dated February 4, 2008, written by Ann Dower regarding the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Landscape Plans, I would like to respond to the five plants in question in the Typical Raingarden Plant Schedule on Sheet 1-1.2. The first plant in question is the Rosa pisocarpa, common names Swamp Rose or Clustered Wild Rose. This plant is shown on the Typical Raingarden Plan to be planted in planting Zones 1 or 2 (see attached exhibit). According to the Low Impact Development Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound (LID Technical Guidance Manual), compiled by the Puget Sound Action Team and Washington State University Pierce County Extension, Rosa pisocarpa is best planted in Zones 1 or 2, as it can tolerate moist soils and seasonal flooding, but is also tolerant of dry conditions. The next plant in question is the Lavandula angustifolia, common name Lavender. This plant is also listed in the LID Technical Guidance Manual as an appropriate plant for Zone 3 planting areas in a raingarden. The Typical Raingarden Plan on Sheet 1-1.2 shows Lavandula angustifolia to be planted only in Zone 3, the high sides of the proposed raingarden. The Lavender is adaptable to various soils and sun and/or partial shade. We are not proposing that the Lavender be planted in the lower more saturated Zones 1 or 2. Echinacea purpurea, common name Purple Coneflower, is also listed in the LID Technical Guidance Manual as an appropriate plant within Zone 3. We are proposing that the Echinacea purpurea be planted on the high side of the raingarden slopes. Lilium columbianum, common name Columbian Lilly, is also an appropriate plant to be planted within Zone 3 of the proposed raingardens. It is a native lily that is adaptable to wet soils, as well as summer drought. We would also suggest Hemerocallis fulva, common name is Daylily, which is listed in the LID Technical Guidance Manual as an appropriate plant for Zone 3. It is also ��W,tq lv� of soil types and is a hardy plant. OUE JUN 2 5 Z008 TACOMA 2215 North 30th Street Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98403-335 253.383.2422 TEL 253.383.2572 FAX CITY OF FEDERAL WAY BUILDING DEPT. www.ahbl.com Page 2 The last plant listed in the comment letter is Fragaria chiloensis, common name Coastal Strawberry. This plant is being proposed as a groundcover at the top of the raingarden area, so it will not need to tolerate any extra amount of water. It is a hardy groundcover that will not require long term irrigation or a lot of maintenance. A similar plant, Fragaria vesca, common name Wood Strawberry, is recommended in the LID Bioretention Plant List. The plants listed above are being proposed in the appropriate planting zones based on how wet they will be for varying time periods. I have attached an image, which graphically shows the three zones that I am referring to, that is used in the Bioretention Plant List of the LID Technical Guidance Manual. I agree that not all of the plants listed in the Raingarden Plant Schedule on Sheet L1.2 would be appropriate in Zone 1 where they would need to tolerate frequent standing or flowing water. In addition, not all of those plants would be appropriate in Zone 3 where they would need to tolerate dry soils, as well as some wet periods. We feel that the plants being proposed are appropriate plants for the raingardens if planted in the appropriate zones, as shown on the Typical Raingarden Plan. Please feel free to call Len Zickler or me at (253) 383-2422 if you have any questions. Holly Williams Landscape Designer HW/lsk Q:\2007\207555\WORDPROC\MEMOS\20080624_Memo_(Com mResp)_207555.30.doa Page 3 Bioretention Planting Zones — Section View PACIFIC BLEEDING THIMBLEBERRY •ikaNi •�%RDSi �$ ktY1Rh Note: Vertical scale is aaggeraced to show mines �.- r PACIFIC C RRy:+s Rain Garden WILD COASTAL STRAWBERRY C Ll15T[RiD ..+� — BLACK I Y�L[+AOSE R SVM,yERRY'�' zone 3 ku Wv tier is, +t• ` - � zone- 2 +�L��. - SvrLL-' zone 1 7GE � nn&-5ni• rx:psEcl LEAE BULAOss+ - Soo mlz nWl Vn HNEKAFC - ALlV! Bioretention Planting Zones — Plan View Rain Garden SNOWBERRY WILD COSTAL i ;NOOTKA ROSE STRAWBERRY aBLACK TWI BERRY SUCROSE': ` "`" gone 3 fir• m � iE._< Well .i zone t ..• ;. se�Rur�r HAT' UB i ! \ —` AACIFIC 1% � �� ` r PENSTEMO NSTEM. O1IMBLE ' J + NINEBARY� f�one '1 r BERRY - j-- _ rnDle s'r'i 1IFn J • ,LOUGH` SEDGE ► -• .+x` }' ! r i, WILD v - PACIFIC CRASAPPLE COASTAL STRAWBERRY - y r -• 4 SNOWBERRY CLUSTERED �r i WILD ROSE IJAGGERLEAF SMALL -FRUITED RUSH FOUNTAIN GRASS BULRUSH CIT 4§� Federal Way May 12, 2008 Mr. William McCaffrey 30929 37`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Re: File #07-106874-00-SU; MODIFICATION TO GARAGE LOCATION FOR UNIT 1 Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat; 604 SW 312th Street, Federal Way Dear Mr. McCaffrey: This letter approves the proposed location of the garage on unit # 1 of the Cottage Housing Development as provided in the Federal Way City Code (FWCC). In a March 27, 2008 letter, the City received a formal modification written request to allow the garage attached to cottage unit # 1 to face the 6th Place SW roadway. Additional information about the request was received on May 6, 2008. The location of attached garages and the right-of-way is discussed in several areas in the cottage housing code sections, including FWCC Sections 22-923(8)(fl' and 22-923(9)(e) 2 Under FWCC Section 22-924, "Modifications," the applicant may request modifications to the site design provisions of this article if all criteria of FWCC Section 22-924(1) through (3) are met as discussed below. Decisional Criteria (1) The site is constrained due to unusual shape, topography, easements, or critical areas. (2) The modification is consistent with the purposes of the article as stated in FWCC Section 22-921. (3) The modification will not result in a project that is less compatible with neighboring land uses. FINDINGS Site Constraints — The subject site is approximately 100 feef by 748 feet, bordered by SW 312t" Street at the south end of the property and 6'h Place SW along the southwest portion of the property. SW 312'h Street is a public right-of-way, while 6'h Place SW is a private street subject to vehicular easements. The applicant is required to improve their half of the first 120 feet of a Place SW to an adopted street standard. This property will remain private but must be set -aside in a Tract X for possible future dedication to the City.3 1 FWCC Section 22-923(8)(1) — Dwelling units shall not include attached garages unless the garage abuts an alley or shared parking lot. 2 FWCC Section 22-923(9)(e) — Garage doors shall not be oriented toward a public right-of-way with the exception of an alley. 3 Public Works staff has stated that it is doubtful that 61h Place SW will be made public as it does not connect to another street other than SW 3121h Street. File #07-106874-00-SU Doc I D 45321 Mr. William McCaffrey Page 2 May 12, 2008 Vehicular access into the cottage housing development will be from the 6t' Place SW. Due to the narrowness of the cottage housing parcel and required structural setbacks, only two units are able to front onto SW 312a' Street, with the other 14 units located along the balance of the property. Unit # I is proposed at the corner of SW 312a' Street and 6`h Place SW. It is also adjacent to an open space area to the north. The primary entry and covered porch of unit #I fronts onto the SW 312th Street right-of-way in conformance with cottage code requirements, and a one -car garage is proposed at the rear of the unit # 1. So as to not interrupt the required open space area with vehicular traffic, access to this garage is proposed from 6 h Place SW, which results in the garage door visible from the private road. The overall cottage housing parcel is considered to be constrained because of the shape of the lot; the existing location of public and private roadways; the limited vehicular access point locations into the site; and the corner lot configuration of proposed Lin it #1 . As a result, there are Iimited configurations for the attached garage to unit # 1 and the proposed garage door is oriented to an area that functions as a right-of-way.' Purpose of Article — The modification to locate the garage facing the 6 h Place SW roadway is consistent with the purposes of the cottage and compact single-family housing article. To that end, cottage housing prototypes are maintained and there are no impacts to the affordability of the housing units. The location of the vehicular access to the garage attached to unit # 1 will not interrupt the functional open space of the cottage project. As conditioned to eliminate vehicle parking in the driveway, neighborhood interaction and safety through design is maintained. The location of the unit #1 garage maintains compatibility with neighboring uses and maintains the infili opportunities associated with the cottage housing project. Compatibility — The modification will result in a project that is compatible with neighboring land uses. The proposed location of the unit # 1 driveway is in the same location as the driveway for the existing house and the proposed driveway would be more than 25 feet from the driveway into the cottage housing development. In order to serve the single car garage, the driveway would be less than 20 feet wide, consistent with existing driveways for nearby residential development. Based on these findings, the proposed location of the driveway to the garage attached to the unit # 1 is approved. Please contact Senior Planner Deb Barker at 253-835-2642, or deb.barker@cityoffederalway.com, if you have any questions about this modification or the cottage housing preliminary plat application. Sincerely, Greg Fewins, Director Community Development Services c: Deb Barker, Senior Planner Ann Dower, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sanjeev Tandle, Traffic Analyst 4 It should be noted that carports can be located adjacent to the right-of-way without conflict. File #07-106874-00-SU Doc I D. 45321 FILE 1�k Federal Way May 8, 2008 William McCaffrey 30929 37`h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 RE: File #07-106874-00-SU; RESPONSE TO SETBACK INTRUSIONS Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. McCaffrey: CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com This letter provides comments on the information submitted on March 27, 2008, for the above -referenced application. Specifically, on February 21, 2008, staff requested additional information about the building protrusions extending into the required five-foot side yard setback for several'of the cottage housing units proposed with this plat. Your drawing response provided additional information about the building protrusions extending into the required five-foot side yard setback for the cottage housing units proposed with this plat. The overview sheet, Sheet Y-1, depicts the floor plans of three different units proposed to be located throughout the site. The units are listed as A-AFF, A-CHU#2 and A-CHU #1. My responses relate to each unit type as follows: A-AFF: These units contain two intrusions into the side yard setbacks. The building protrusion for the fireplace is a typical element that customarily extends beyond the exterior wall, does not create any habitable floor area, and is also listed as a permitted intrusion into the required yard pursuant to Federal way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-1133. This intrusion is approved. The building protrusion associated with the shower is not a typical element that customarily extends beyond the exterior wall, creates habitable floor area, and cannot extend into the side yard setback. This intrusion is not approved. A-CHU#2: These units contain an intrusion into the side yard setbacks for what appears to be a ledge in the shower as well as a deck intrusion into the side yard setback. The building protrusion for the shower ledge can be considered a typical element that customarily extends beyond the exterior wall as it does not create any habitable floor area. This intrusion is approved as long as the formal shower area (able to be occupied by a standing person) does not extend into the setback area. A deck, no more than eighteen inches in height including rails, can intrude into a required yard up to five feet. This intrusion can be approved with the building permit provided it meets these standards. A-CHU#1: These units contain three intrusions into the side yard setbacks. The building protrusion for the window seat off the living dining area is a typical built-in area/element that customarily extends beyond the exterior wall and does not create any habitable floor area. This intrusion is approved so long as it does not extend the floor joist. The building protrusion off the first floor bedroom is not considered a typical element that customarily extends beyond the exterior wall because it creates habitable floor area. This intrusion is not approved. A deck, no more than eighteen inches in height including rails, can intrude Mr. McCaffrey May 8, 2008 Page 2 into a required yard up to five feet. This intrusion can be approved with the building permit provided it meets these standards. I trust that this letter provides you with sought after direction for the housing design. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, " &IJU-11---� Deb Barker Senior Planner enc: Red lined sheet Y-1 c: Scott Sproul, Assistant Building Official Fernando Fernandez, Plans Examiner/Inspector Interpretation Notebook Planners 07-106874 Doc I D. 45294 A-AFF LOT/FLOOR PLAN scale: 1/4"=1'-0" Notes: 1) This drawing indicates the minimum lot size that these Cottage Housing Units can occupy. Most of the actual Mirror Lake Highland lots have 2' additional width in the building envelope (6minimum side yards). To see the actual relationship of all buildings to building envelopes for CHU and CSF unit refer to S I-2. This drawing shows the worst possible case. 2) Please see Sht's. Y-3, Y-4, and Y-5 for detailed elevations of each CHU design. 3) All extensions/bays into the 5' required yards are less that 25% of the overall facade of the building, and extend less than 18" into the required yard, so they all meet FWCC Code. 4) Decks less than 18" from grade are allowed to extend 5' into required yards. If any rear decks end up over 18" above grade, they will be shortened in width in order to fit the building envelope. 5) Some lots may utilize low landscape/retaining walls on the down gradient side yard and to some rear property lines. None of these walls are used as a direct structural support for a major improvement and would be utilized to level out the side yards to create a more usable yard. Code allows this kind of a wall in required yards. 6) Required yard area indicated by grey area. 32' Y 'lilt A-CHU #2 LOT/FLOOR PLAN scale: 114W=1'-0" A-CHU #1 LOT/FLOOR PLAN scalr,0*b1 `ODE BUILDING G ia' �3 W 0 O 0°a ¢ALL i Q C01ML0iT2008 U S L Mhrl P cne W3M scunin Design I Construction Management I Development May 5, 2008 Deb Barker Senior Planner City of Federal Way RECEIVED MAY 0 6 2008 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS Subject: Modification clarification on FWCC Section 22-923(9)(e) Dear Deb: Per our conversation today concerning clarification of the modification request originally N submitted on February 25, 2007 and assumed by the W1M Studio to have been accepted since our initial approval letter dated April 17", 2007, please note the following: m In order to supply varied housing types that are responsive to changing household Ln demographics, we have designed 2 of the 16 cottage housing units with single car attached garages. One of these units has an attached single garage with the door facing C4 the private road that is the projects secondary public view. Because this is a single garage door set back significantly from the facade on which it is located; because no garage N doors face the primary public view; and because the look is totally in keeping with the LA character of the neighborhood, we believe this modification should be supported. Specific drawings of this lot were submitted on March 21, 2008 for your further review. a ry Per modification standard #1- The Mirror Lake Highland site is long and narrow in the o north south direction with vehicular access only available on the southwest corner. The cz Q major design challenge has been to integrate the limited vehicular access and parking K along the western side of the narrow site while maintaining a pedestrian orientation and Q attractive cluster of cottage housing units to the east. Placing this unit with an attached garage on the south end of the site adjacent to 66, PL SW helps overcome this site constraint. The site fronts on two ROW's, the public SW 312th ST and the private road p 6th PL SW. Because it is the most prominent public view, the 312th ROW has been determined to be primary by the City for CHD Ordinance purposes. Due to the geometry %Z of the site and the specific orientation requirements of the CHD Ordinance, the best design solution is to orient one of the attached garage units with its front facade towards the primary SW 3121h ST ROW and the side facade with garage door facing the j secondary 6th PL SW ROW. Per modification standard #2- This modification supports all 5 purposes outlined in FWCC section 22-921; in particular number 3 - encourage creation of functional usable open space in residential communities. Moving the garage anywhere else on the site will be at the cost of functional open space (and fewer varied housing types). www.cnew3msc c1io-com Per modification standard #3- A single family residence with attached garage is the most prevalent type of housing in the neighborhood. This modification is perfectly compatible with the neighboring land uses. Thank you for your consideration. Best Regards, VIX-Irt lV� �Pr William McCaffrey AIA the WJM studio 40kCITY 10"::tSP OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.citMffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I, hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) , ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter /E[ 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 ke-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on 2008. Project Name N t1rrb r L File Number(s) 0 % - /6 0? y-.S (J Signature Date K:\CD Administration Files\Declaralion of Distribution.doc/Last printed 1 /3/2008 4:53:00 PM CITE' DF Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Federal Way File #07-106874-00-SU Notice is hereby given that the City of Federal Way Hearin; Examiner will hold a public hearing at 2:00 p.m. on September 26, 2008, in Federal Way City Council Chambers (33325 8th Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718) for the following project. Name: Mirror Lake Highland (Cottage) Preliminary Plat Project Description: Subdivision of five lots, 1.85 acres in size, into a sixteen -lot single-family cottage housing demonstration project, including infrastructure and site improvements. Applicant: The WJM Studio, Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Dr. Ste #116, Federal Way, WA Project Location: SW 312`h Street at 6'h Place SW in the SW '/4 of Section 07, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M., in King County, Washington and encompasses King County parcel numbers #072104-9024, 9110, 9111, 9109, and 9114. Date Application Received: December 21, 2007 Date Determined Complete: January 15, 2008 Date of Notice of Application: January 26, 2008 Date of SEPA Determination: April 16, 2008 Existing Environmental Documents: Stormwater Drainage Technical Information Report, Concurrency Application Development Regulations to be Used for Project Mitigation, Known at This Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy" (SEPA); FWCC Chapter t9, "Planning and Development"; FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; FWCC Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management"; and FWCC 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 FWCC; King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way; and King County Road Standards as amended by the City. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner either by delivering written comments to the Department of Community Development Services before the hearing, or by appearing at the hearing and presenting public testimony in person, or through a representative. The Hearing Examiner will issue a recommendation on the preliminary plat application within 10 working days after the close of the hearing. Any person has the right to request a copy of the Hearing Examiner's decision, once made_ Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision The application is to be reviewed under all applicable codes, regulations, and policies of the City of Federal Way. The official file is available for review during working hours in the Department of Community Development Services (33325 8"h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718)_ The staff report to the Hearing Examiner will be available for review one week before the hearing. Questions regarding this proposal should be directed to Deb Barker, Senior Plaruier, at 253-835-2642. Published in the Federal Way Mirror on September 10, 2008. Doc. 1. D. 46967 Tamara Fix From: Teryl Heller [theller@fedwaymirror.com] Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 3:35 PM To: Tamara Fix Subject: Re: Legal Notice - Mirror Lake Cottage Attachments: 24399785038.doc; ATT00001.htm Thanks, Tamara. Will publish 9/10/08 as requested. Have a great weekend. Teryl Heller Federal Way Mirror 1414 South 324th Street, Suite B210 Federal Way, WA 98003 (phone) 253-925-5565 (fax) 253-925-5750 On Sep 5, 2008, at 2:35 PM, Tamara Fix wrote: Please publish the following legal notice (Mirror Lake Hearing, 07-106874) in Wednesday's (Sept. 10, 2008) issue. Please confirm and issue an affidavit of publication. Thanks! ?anuira. Fix Adinin .Asst. City of Federa[Uay ta.mara. 6Lx0cityoffederahwa .com CITY OF 41A Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE PUIBLIC HEARING Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Federal Way File #07-106874-00-SU Notice is hereby given that the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing at 2:00 pm, on September 26, 2008, in Federal Way City Council Chambers (33325 8 h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718) for the following project. Name: Mirror Lake Highland (Cottage) Preliminary Plat Project Description: Subdivision of five lots, 1.85 acres in size, into a sixteen -lot single-family cottage housing demonstration project, including infrastructure and site improvements. Applicant: The WJM Studio, Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Dr. Ste #116, Federal Way, WA Project Location: SW 312`b Street at 6'b Place SW in the SW I/4 of Section 07, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M., in King County, Washington and encompasses King County parcel numbers #072104-9024, 9110, 9111, 9109, and 9114. Date Application Received: December 21, 2007 Date Determined Complete: January 15, 2008 Date of Notice of Application: January 26, 2008 Date of SEPA Determination: April 16, 2008 Existing Environmental Documents: Stormwater Drainage Technical Information Report, Concurrency Application Development Regulations to be Used for Project Mitigation, Known at This Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy" (SEPA); FWCC Chapter 19, "Planning and Development"; FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; FWCC Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management"; and FWCC 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 FWCC; King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way; and King County Road Standards as amended by the City. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner either by delivering written comments to the Department of Community Development Services before the hearing, or by appearing at the hearing and presenting public testimony in person, or through a representative. The Hearing Examiner will issue a recommendation on the preliminary plat application within 10 working days after the close of the hearing. Any person has the right to request a copy of the Hearing Examiner's decision, once made. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. The application is to be reviewed under all applicable codes, regulations, and policies of the City of Federal Way. The official file is available for review during working hours in the Department of Community Development Services (33325 8`h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718). The staff report to the Hearing Examiner will be available for review one week before the hearing. Questions regarding this proposal should be directed to Deb Barker, Senior Planner, at 253-835-2642. Published in the Federal Way Mirror on September 10, 2008. Doc. I.D. 46867 ..oson�WC�R � VIVO 3EJVHaAoo 311S PUB SV3HV QOB8 E)NisnOH SDVI= v1V111vmens 3W0H 3DV110O �^ Lev► � =31V4 3nssi VM'JLVM IW303d f wren u®oa�o , 1S 4324E MS 409 °M �� s Q ONV IHOIH MWI MOMMIW aT ' I 3 cr w N 52 d r � A a W O m O Q�sg cn aam s D iDmm m EE2o 0 E m--E E 0 5 N E 012ocy O E h o M0139 33S 3NIIHOiVVi 3 g HC 3AOS`d 33S 3NIIHOiVIN 0 eg x _ Z a w N w co m O CM O vca Ch OR S 0 Z �_� CO a Ft O cco m C O C to o fncm EN E r- E -ru.� OE E V-*: 'A w CV o N o N N� Q f0 U CO O. O rn E -2 c 0 rnE c E U�0 0 CN fA- q a a �F3S O r� LL CT 25 E r?9#.g�o�iem�8- 888'91 L LL 19I0 yg ii'il `o �rn xx �Exaacaasaxs_3_Qaass ��@03~ a �'s� a . 0 W W 0 U w U) cu Z VJ Q W Q 0 a W V Z U) Z) 00 i �w'^/ V F- 0 U CITY OF A. Federal September 9, 2008 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Way Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com Mr. Bill McCaffrey 1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite #116 Federal Way, WA 98023 RE: FILE #07-106874-00-SU; HEARING DATE RE -SCHEDULED Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Dear Mr. McCaffrey: As discussed last week, the public hearing date for the proposed subdivision has been rescheduled. This letter is to advise you of the various time lines associated with the rescheduled public hearing for the Mirror Lake Highland Cottage preliminary plat application. A public hearing conducted by the Federal Way Hearing Examiner has been rescheduled as follows: Friday, September 26, 2008 - 2:00 PM Council Chambers Federal Way City Hall, Second Floor 33325 8"' Avenue South Federal Way, WA 2. The staff report for this public hearing will be available for distribution on September 19, 2008. I will send you a copy of the report at the above address. 3. Pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 20-126(b), the Hearing Examiner must issue a recommendation on the preliminary plat within 10 working days after the close of the public hearing, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to. I would anticipate his decision on approximately October 6, 2008. 4. The recommendation from the Hearing Examiner will be forwarded to the Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC) of the Federal Way City Council. The LUTC meeting agenda is set approximately two weeks before their meeting dates, which are the first and third Monday of each month. LUTC meetings begin at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Any comments on a proposal generally must be made at the beginning of the LUTC meeting during the general comment period. Staff will present the Hearing Examiner's recommendation for LUTC discussion as an agenda item. This project could tentatively be scheduled for the October 20, 2008 LUTC meeting. I will notify you once an LUTC meeting is scheduled. 5. The LUTC will issue a recommendation on the preliminary plat application, which will be forwarded to the full City Council as a consent agenda item for consideration at their next regularly Mr. McCaffrey September 9, 2008 Page 2 scheduled meeting. City Council meetings are the first and third Tuesday of the month, and agenda items are set approximately ten days in advance of meeting dates. Meetings begin at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. This project could tentatively be scheduled for the November 4, 2008, City Council meeting. I will notify you once the Council meeting is scheduled. Please call me at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions. Again, I regret the delay in the hearing date. Sincerely, Deb Barker Senior Planner c: Ann Dower, Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer Soma Chattopadhyay, Traffic Analyst Will Appleton, Public Works Development Services Manager Aaron Walls, Assistant City Attomey Stephanie Courtney, Deputy City Clerk Krystal Roe, Deputy City Clerk Carol McNeilly, City Clerk Chris Ingham, South King Fire and Rescue Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District Sanjeev Tandle, Parametrix 07-106874 Doc ID 46923 41k OF 101�� Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 vvww.cit afFederaiwcr .com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION State t hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Nofice 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 ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other was X mailed ❑ faxed 2008. Project Name File Number(s) Signature ❑ 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 ❑ e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on ay - Date --9 -D' KACD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 1/3/2008 q;53;00 PM CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Federal Way File #07-106874-00-SU Notice is hereby given that the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing at 2:00 p.m, on September 26, 2008, in Federal Way City Council Chambers (33325 8`h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718) for the following project. Name: Mirror Lake Highland (Cottage) Preliminary Plat Project Description: Subdivision of five lots, 1.85 acres in size, into a sixteen -lot single-family cottage housing demonstration project, including infrastructure and site improvements. Applicant: The WJM Studio, Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Dr. Ste #116, Federal Way, WA Project Location: SW 312th Street at 6`' Place SW in the SW '/4 of Section 07, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M., in King County, Washington and encompasses King County parcel numbers #072104-9024, 9110, 9111, 9109, and 9114. Date Application Received: December 21, 2007 Date Determined Complete: January 15, 2008 Date of Notice of Application: January 26, 2008 Date of SEPA Determination: April 16, 2008 Existing Environmental Documents: Stormwater Drainage Technical Information Report, Concurrency Application Development Regulations to be Used for Project Mitigation, Known at This Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy" (SEPA); FWCC Chapter 19, "Planning and Development"; FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; FWCC Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management"; and FWCC 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 FWCC; King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way; and King County Road Standards as amended by the City. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner either by delivering written comments to the Department of Community Development Services before the hearing, or by appearing at the hearing and presenting public testimony in person, or through a representative. The Hearing Examiner will issue a recommendation on the preliminary plat application within 10 working days after the close of the hearing. Any person has the right to request a copy of the Hearing Examiner's decision, once made. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. The application is to be reviewed under all applicable codes, regulations, and policies of the City of Federal Way. The official file is available for review during working hours in the Department of Community Development Services (33325 80' Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718). The staff report to the Hearing Examiner will be available for review one week before the hearing. Questions regarding this proposal should be directed to Deb Barker, Senior Planner, at 253-835-2642. Published in the Federal Way Mirror on September 10, 2008. Doc. I.D. 46867 VIVa 3GVU3AOD3M PLM SV3W 003U mtSMR BW.L= , iv-Luw s3VYo3E)VLM LOOM= :3.Lm3nssi MCA�� ��'¥m ■ate � ' );- JS �� Ms V0e/ - �O�Ho H � aoaa w 1 � 3a08¥ 33S ]NnHol n MOB 8 33S 3NIIH01¥W M [ �-�,}G 7'\,\!�!&■• � _ !!.! 10/23/2007 City of 3- Y Parcel City of Federal Way 33325 8th Ave S. P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way Wa. 98063 Federal Way Notification area (206) - 835 - 7000 www.cityoffederalway.com 178870- 178880 02(50 17 178880-0320 178860- 0 1-78889=0890 178890- y� Q 0320 178880-0410 178880-0390 0360 178880- 178880- 178890-0300 W = 178880= 178880- 178880- 0350178880- Q p90b 0310 ` 0 103250 0420 0400 0380 178880 0340 178880- 178890- _ 4370 co 0910 0320 An ST SW 308TH ST 555820- 0090 555770- 0260 555770- 771620- 771620- 072104 0010 0010 0120 555820- 555770- 0100 0250 555820- 555770- 0110 0240 y N Q 555820- 555770- 0120 0230 Q 555820- 555770- 00 0130 0220 f- 555820- 0140 555820- 555770- 0210 555770- 0150 0200 555770- 555820- 0160 0190 SW 310TH ST 555820- 555770- 0210 0180 N 555820- 555770- Q 0220 0170 = 555820- 555770- ~ ONO 0160 555820- 0240 555820- 0256 Pk 555820- S 0255 y G 555820- U) 0250 _ 555770- 0020 1771620- 771627024 0020 0110 555770-0030 771620- f!1 77162 555770- 0030 > 0100 0040 Q - . 771620- 2 072104- i" 171620- 9116 555770- 0040 QO 0090 072104- 0050 9189 555770- 771620- 771520• - 0060 0050 0080 072104- 9114 555770- 0070 771620- 771620- 0060 0070 555770- 0080 072104- 072104- 072104- 9109 555770- 9183 9163 0090 555770- 072104- 072104- 0100 9151 9110 555770- 0110 072104- 072104- 072104- 9140 9149 9111 555770- 0120 I i� 072104- 072104- 9144 072104- 555770- 555770- 9238 072104- 9024 0150 555770- 0130 g1128;,.- 0140 072104- 9239 072104- 9003 072104- 9027 072104- 9199 3'� 2T1 S'C 072104- %'� 9074 178890.04aO. 178890-0520 178890- ! 178890- N 0470 178890- 0510 ; Q 178890- 0490 178890- S 0480 + 0500 16- SW 308TH ST 072104- 9180 072104- 9112 I - 555920- 555926- 555920- y -__- - - 555920 0055 0052 555920- 07iiN- 0045 OD61 55592D- D051 9108 072104- 0060. 555920- :- 55592D- r f 555750-:; jJ 9125 550•. 007 0 555920- 60030 0040 559207 0035 555920- 180 1 �0 — 555920- 0075 0065 Ow920- 555920- 555750- 072104- 555920- 0020 Oulu 1 0190 9216 0085 555926 - �' - 0005 555750- 0200 I 555920- 40T5 T- - 0086 i 555990- -Mirror -.: 555750- TRCT5920- I�lY!! d! f-.A- 0095 $55920-0100 555.750-0220 .72 King County Tax Parcels Notified Properties Subject Property Scale: N 0 75 150 Feet I CITY OF Thts map is lA� Ifaldd kn uld1ti�a i]ripili29Tfapj85elitatiGn cnty. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to ris accuracy, V N O O d' O N O IT _O N 1- O O O O N ti O O O 6') O N ti 00 V- O N I- C) U M N M N M N M N M N M N" M Cl) N M N M N M O M fV N O\ M N M N M O Nl N O 00 O 00 Cl w O w Cl 00 O w00 O O 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 O 00 Cl 00 O 00 O Oo rn rn rnC*l O, rn O\ a, O, o� rn rn -¢dI- ¢¢¢¢Q¢¢d 3 3 3 3 3 00 3 00 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 � J aaQadaa¢a¢aWaaW¢a¢aa.aa�¢ada¢a¢a W W W W W W W E+ W W E-q W W W W W W W W � q F CA U) W ¢ V)cl, a W W x W Q W .C/) a U) a DO a ro DO U) a U V) NQ M Q W aa-i oOM, va.. U aa.. � ^�Nr"'a."xC7xE�'xx�xoxNxxzx ¢ �' u C 00 0 SO 0 W 00 \o N 'o �o cli al � M N m N .--i N N �--� N .--� 0 N •--+ N .--i d' 00 00 - 00 O 00 O N � Oo O� O Cl tr) 00 O O 00 O 00 O O O 00 .O M K1 M M M M N M N M P. M M M M tTd ILIWL fill u I I_ L as UE NN O W z W aO Q w Q Q fa C:8 o w¢ � ww d Q> z 3 U L z W cn z Q Z ¢ A, c� E- x A z E" x L rj)O ��; U d9 f� C7 O w �. a x Q. 0 E- vOi W W a -a ¢ Z W P. c7 CAx� U x C7 A z z _ N V7 Ln rn O 110 rn I'O O [- kn [- W) 00 O O N O M O �r O V) O �.o O [- O 00 O O\ O O �--� O N_ D O O CD O Cl O O O CD O CD O C. O CDO O O CD O O O O CD O O O CD CD CD O _O O O O J O N O N O N O N O N O N CD N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O N O1 C% O\ ON O\ ON C% 1�0 \O 110 to 110 \o \O �10 \�o I'O \D kn Vl Ln V) V) V) V) V) V) Vl V1 V) V) V) V7 V) kn V) N kn V) •-- [� [- •--i r- r- .--� r- r- .--I i- [-- .--� l-- r- .--i l- r- - [- l- .--� i- l- .--� r--[- [- .--i r- .--� r- [� .--i r- [- kkl m m m M It � t I �� Nt It -� LO LO LO U')LO CZ m �► � Y � � J -;j' Ln S. M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M f+l M M M [+l M M M M M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N �O N N N �O N O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O 00 DD DD 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 DD 00 00 00 DD W 00 00 00 r- 00 DD CO W DD 00 GO DD DD 00 �O O\ C1 01 ON U O\ ON O� C1 ON 01 01 ON 01 O\ ON O\ O\ O\ 01 M 01 U 01 O\ C1 O\ O� ON C1 C1 00 NknQ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ¢ Q Q Q Q Q Q N Q Q Q Q ¢ Q Q ¢ Q ¢ Q 00 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3co3¢ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 w w A a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a¢ a o a a a a a a a a a a waa������������������������������� h F w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w o w w w w w w w w w w w w Q Q> A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A U A A A A A A A A A A A o w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w Q w A w w w w w w w w w w Q w w w w w w w w rS. ru. w w w c4 r N w A x rE„ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 cn� 3 w z w w a av M mmmmv'`�' CcC/) w� www www i asM tPLr arr� a a awM.a s H Ex- raMy Ma d rQ� > < `� ¢�r -<�r Q � ¢ �Qr Q O � ¢ '""' &0 I W W W �y 3 00 cn x M `' H H ``' F• E� H H E Z `"' �`' E� F- E E > E M E- E E E� E� E� �C >C a% cn 7 Q M N N M O "' O O O M M "' , M O; O N 0� kn kn 0 0 0 M oo � v� oN a\ oo O_ \0 O_ o_ 0 0 o (ON o o� 0 0 0 00 o 0 00 O o o 0 0 0 N O �O .--� O O N O O ^ '-' •� Q N N N �O M \O M M M 1O M M M M M M 10 \O M M M M �--� M r+ M M M Pr M M M P- P, �D •� o O O U m C 2 c_ N H 0 E Z cc o Z v v W L Z ti J 0 ^N Z CL N Lm Q r � N 4. m o� z a ¢ w C + w x ¢ a ¢ ti ti 0 Q w¢ U Q ¢O�;; p w a Q Q Q p z ¢ +� w W a U¢ Q A Z w w W O �z'" Q O M z>z `� U �Q w W U Q> �' v' U' j Q adox+303z ax ¢ zxx QawaU a o z z�O�-� > z���-�A�o� �WOzoa°wz�a�o�w�x O Q ti Q O a U x Q�� Q� Z x Z A¢ cj Q x w W p w ua a as w Q A c7 x Q z z Z F ¢ W o h U r� U P. w x Z a o ? C7 ]¢ Z O -� w A 3 Z C7 Z C7 > o O Z w w¢ U Q U U w U o U Z o o¢ C6 O � O A w U 0 o O U Q f— Paa>c��c����aaDOu 9.c�P.w¢wm3wP4 V.)u aa�3�x M Ll 00 'tT"D 00 v') 10 O-r CN -^ M M C1 ON "t V, 00 O\ O O O O O O O O O O O O O V-� --� O N N L- O O d• ,O oo oo a1 M M M M N M V v'i \.O r- 00 O> O �--� N M I O O O O N N N N O O O O O O CDO O •-+ 0 0 O 01 ON ON ON C1 Q, 01 O� Ol O\ D1 O\ O1 D\ O\ O1 O1 O\ ON O O O Cl O O O O O O O O O Cl O J � It It 't -I-'t �t ,t V �t lzh �t 'zt d• O O O O O O O O Cl O O O O O O O O O Cl O O_ O O O O O O O O O O_ O O O O L- L- Lr- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N V) kn V) V) kn V� Ln V) V) V) �n vi Vn V)`n (- L- L- L� l- L- r- (� l� l� l� l� L� L-- L� L-- L-- L- L- Ln to Vl Ln V) kn v-� Ln v-) In Vl Vl Vl Ln 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 kn to kn Ln V)v� kn 'n v) to V,)V' kn kn v) ill r N M It Lo (O 1l- M M O rr NM � LO (O r-N M O N M Ln (D I1- M 0') O r N CO d' LO r r r r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N CV M M CO M M M N 4- O r N 0) m IL 41k CITY Federalo. Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.ciivoffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 1,�eckj�411 hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Was ngton, th t 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 & Anticipated DNS/MDNS ❑ FWCC 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 Xposted to or at each of the attached addresses on 2008. Project Name 14( i n F File Numbers S v \ Signature , Date K:\Intern\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc/Last printed 9/10/2008 10:59:00 AM Posting Sites: Federal Way City Hall - 33325 8th Avenue Federal Way Regional Library - 34200 1 st Way South Federal Way 3201h Branch Library - 848 South 320th Street Subject Site - SW 312th ST at 6th Place SW K:\Intem\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc/Last printed 9/10/2008 10:59:00 AM CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF LAND USE PUBLIC HEARING Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat Federal Way File #07-106874-00-SU Notice is hereby given that the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hold a public hearing at 2:00 p.m. on September 26, 2008, in Federal Way City Council Chambers (33325 8'h Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718) for the following project. Name: Mirror Lake Highland (Cottage) Preliminary Plat Project Description: Subdivision of five lots, 1.85 acres in size, into a sixteen -lot single-family cottage housing demonstration project, including infrastructure and site improvements. Applicant: The WJM Studio, Bill McCaffrey, 1911 SW Campus Dr. Ste #116, Federal Way, WA Project Location: SW 312'h Street at 6t' Place SW in the SW 114 of Section 07, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M., in King County, Washington and encompasses King County parcel numbers #072104-9024, 9110, 9111, 9109, and 9114. Date Application Received: December 21, 2007 Date Determined Complete: January 15, 2008 Date of Notice of Application: January 26, 2008 Date of SEPA Determination: April 16, 2008 Existing Environmental Documents: Stormwater Drainage Technical Information Report, Concurrency Application Development Regulations to be Used for Project Mitigation, Known at This Time: Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 18, "Environmental Policy" (SEPA); FWCC Chapter 19, "Planning and Development"; FWCC Chapter 20, "Subdivisions"; FWCC Chapter 21, "Surface and Stormwater Management"; and FWCC 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 FWCC; King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way; and King County Road Standards as amended by the City. Any person may participate in the public hearing by submitting written comments to the Hearing Examiner either by delivering written comments to the Department of Community Development Services before the hearing, or by appearing at the hearing and presenting public testimony in person, or through a representative. The Hearing Examiner will issue a recommendation on the preliminary plat application within 10 working days after the close of the hearing. Any person has the right to request a copy of the Hearing Examiner's decision, once made. Only persons who submit written or oral comments to the Hearing Examiner may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision. The application is to be reviewed under all applicable codes, regulations, and policies of the City of Federal Way. The official file is available for review during working hours in the Department of Community Development Services (33325 8a' Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718). The staff report to the Hearing Examiner will be available for review one week before the hearing. Questions regarding this proposal should be directed to Deb Barker, Senior Planner, at 253-835-2642. Published in the Federal Way Mirror on September 10, 2008. Doc. LD. 46867 0 O Y I m O C cn ^z 1.1 J m O D m D D z Q r VJ m 0 O/ m m DJ 1 D 1e6 es��io-'a6a�aaa=rec t i�pl"..���'s�tI6iogess3$Iig"as�$Qf:. l age av—YR s g lax I y MATCHLINE SEE ABOVE oa3 { o g m m N S N r CD A 2 Z 0 � r i Y s- z v v F v a a a 31� F MATCHLINE SEE BELOW _��^ °a �`�...=�,„a +�• MIRROR LAKE HIGHLAND •`"°`"" — ➢MGM W11 604 SW 312th ST FEDERAL WAY. WA ISSUE DATE 11(2007 COTTAGE HOME SUBMITTAL COTTAGE HOUSING REO'D AREAS and SITE COVERAGE DATA CIl@ ui�� SCUUiD` CITY OF t Federal Way March 27, 2008 Mr. William McCaffrey 30929 371h Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Mailing Address: PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com RE. Permit No. 07-106874-00-SU Mirror Lake Highland Cottage Preliminary Plat - 604 SW 312'ft Street Public Works Dept. Response to Rain Garden Setback Request Dear Mr. McCaffrey: The Public Works Department has reviewed your request to reduce the required 5' setback between rain gardens and property lines. The City hereby grants your request, based on the following: The rain gardens will meet the setback requirements from exterior lot lines, thus protecting neighboring property and existing structures from any encroachment. 2. The rain gardens will be set back 5' from any proposed building, as required by the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 3. The rain gardens will be privately owned and maintained through a Homeowners Association. The developer shall make provisions for access and maintenance on the face of the plat and/or in the protective covenants. Homeowners will be jointly responsible for maintenance. 4. The rain gardens are modest in size and provide a redundant system that will minimize impacts to any single adjacent property should an overflow situation arise. 5. The rain gardens will be clearly shown on the plat so that future lot owners will be aware of their locations as they relate to property lines. Therefore, the rain gardens may be placed against interior property lines as shown in the preliminary plat drawings. If you have any questions, please contact me at (253) 835-2732 or via email at ann.dower uC✓7ci offederalwa .cone_ Sincerely, Ann Dower Engineering Plan Reviewer AD:cc cc: William Appleton, P.E., Development Services Manager Paul Bucich, P-E., Surface Water Manager %ei3 Barker, Senior Planner Project File / AD Day File L:\CSDC\DOCS\SAVE\l0334968063. DOC 14450 N.E. 29" PI., #200 C O r �'Y1 O Yl i, a _ - " [ � Bellevue, WA -8007 591 1 l.R 111 11 Phone: 425-646-8591 LAND TITLE COMPANY OF PUGET SOUND, LLC 888-267-2303 Fax: 425-646-8593 November 20, 2007 William J. McCaffrey 30929 37th Place SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Attn.: William J. McCaffrey Reference No.(s): Order No.: RM - 40003349-T35 Property Address: , Federal Way, Washington Buyer/Borrowers: William J McCaffrey and Dawn L. McCaffrey In connection with the above referenced Order, we are enclosing documentation as requested. If we may be of further assistance, please feel free to contact any member of the team listed below Title Team Randy McCrory, Senior Title Officer, (425) 646-8591 rmccrory@landam.com Chris Scurti, Title Officer (425) 688-9374 chrisscurti@landam.com Bryan Dow, Title Assistant (425) 646-8589 blow@landam.com Brad Hallstrom, Title Assistant (425) 646-8590 bhhallstrom@landam.com 1-888-267-2303 Fax: (425) 646-8593 We thank you for this opportunity to serve you. Randy McCrory Title Officer Enclosure(s) Cc: William J. McCaffrey Attn: William J. McCaffrey RECOVED DEC 2 1 20Q7 Cam' or- r E!0CRA4 WAY BIKING DEPt, Issued by LandAmerica Commonwealth Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Comp2nX COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, a Nebraska corporation, herein called the Company, for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the exceptions and conditions and stipulations shown herein, the Exclusions from Coverage, the Schedule B exceptions, and the conditions and stipulations of the policy or policies requested. (See the following pages for printed Exclusions from Coverage and Schedule B exceptions contained in various policy forms.) This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement and is subject to the Conditions and Stipulations. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate 180 days after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. NOTE: THE POLICY COMMITTED FOR MAY BE EXAMINED BY INQUIRY AT THE OFFICE WHICH ISSUED THE COMMITMENT, AND A SPECIMEN COPY OF THE POLICY FORM (OR FORMS) REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT WILL BE FURNISHED PROMPTLY UPON REQUEST. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company ez r Attest: L� By* SEAL`- President COMMITMENT CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance I}ereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and Stipulations and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. 5. The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at< h-Up Swww. a Ila. or-g/>. Commitment Cover - WA (Revised 8-07) '__'tHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM CO4 AGE AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY (06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land; or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11, 13, or 14); or (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing -business laws of the state where the Land is situated. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth -in -lending law. 6. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 13(b) of this policy. 7. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 11(b). Conunitment Cover - WA (Revised 8-07) SCH ")ULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM COVEIZA,_ . (continued) AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY (06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land; or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 9 and 10); or (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Title. 4. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 9 of this policy. 5. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. Commitment Cover - WA (Revised 8-07) SCE4--)ULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERA�(continued) AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE FOR A ONE -TO -FOUR FAMILY RESIDENCE (10-22-03) In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, You are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from: 1. Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of any law or government regulation. This includes ordinances, laws and regulations concerning: (a) building (b) zoning (c) Land use (d) improvements on the Land (e) Land division (f) environmental protection This Exclusion does not apply to violations or the enforcement of these matters if notice of the violation or enforcement appears in the Public Records at the Policy Date. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 14, 15 16, 17 or 24. 2. The failure of Your existing structures, or any part of them, to be constructed in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not apply to violations of building codes if notice of the violation appears in the Public Records at the Policy Date. 3. The right to take the Land by condemning it, unless: (a) a notice of exercising the right appears in the Public Records at the Policy Date; or (b) the taking happened before the Policy Date and is binding on You if You bought the Land without Knowing of the taking. 4. Risks: (a) that are created, allowed, or agreed to by You, whether or not they appear in the Public records; (b) that are Known to You at the Policy Date, but not to Us, unless they appeared in the Public Records at the Policy Date; (c) that result in no loss to You; or (d) that first occur after the Policy Date — this does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 7, 8.d, 22, 23; 24 or 25. 5. Failure to pay value for Your Title. 6. Lack of a right: (a) to any Land outside the area specifically described and referred to in paragraph 3 of Schedule A; and (b) in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch the Land. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk it or 18. Commitment Cover - WA (Revised 8-07) The matters listed below each policy form are expressly excepted from the coverage of that policy and that policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) which arise by reason thereof. SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS APPEARING IN ALTA OWNER'S POLICY — STANDARD COVERAGE AND STANDARD COVERAGE LOAN POLICY 1. Taxes or assessments which are not now payable or which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records; proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession, or claiming to be in possession, thereof. 3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land, and that is not shown by the Public Records. S. Any lien, or right to a lien, for labor, material, services or equipment, or for contributions to employee benefit plans, or liens under Workmans' Compensation Acts, not disclosed by the public records. 6. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including, but not limited to, easements or equitable servitudes; or, (d) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), (c) or (d) are shown by the public records. 7. Right of use, control or regulation by the United States of America in the exercise of powers over navigation; any prohibition or limitation on the use, occupancy or improvement of the land resulting from the rights of the public or riparian owners to use any waters which may cover the land or to use any portion of the land which is now or may formerly have been covered by water. 8. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity, or garbage collection or disposal, or other utilities unless disclosed as an existing lien by the public records. SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS APPEARING IN ALTA OWNER'S POLICY — EXTENDED COVERAGE 1. Taxes or assessments which are not now payable or which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records; proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Underground easements, servitudes or installations which are not disclosed by the public records. 3. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) Indian treaty or'aboriginal rights, including, but not limited to, easements or equitable servitudes; or, (d) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), (c) or (d) are shown by the public records. 4. Right of use, control or regulation by the United States of America in the exercise of powers over navigation; any prohibition or limitation on the use, occupancy or improvement of the land resulting from the rights of the public or riparian owners to use any waters which may cover the land or to use any portion of the land which is now or may formerly have been covered by water. S. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity, or garbage collection or disposal, or other utilities unless disclosed as an existing lien by the public records. SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS APPEARING IN EXTENDED COVERAGE ALTA LOAN POLICY (06-17-06) and ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (10-22-03) No general exceptions appear in these policy forms. Commitment Cover - WA (Revised 8-07) Order No.: RM - 40003349 comnrlonw(:11(-11..:h. LAND TITLE COMPANY OF PUGET SOUND, LLC REVISED COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 14450 N.E. 29" PI., #200 Bellevue, WA 98007 Phone: 425-646-8591 888-267-2303 Fax: 425-646-8593 1. Effective Date: November 14, 2007 at 8:00 a.m. Commitment No.: RM - 40003349 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: ALTA 2006 Loan Policy Construction Loan Proposed Insured: to be determined Amount: TO COME Premium: $ 0.00 Tax: $ 0.00 Total: $ 0.00 3. Title to the fee simple estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: William 3. McCaffrey and Dawn L. McCaffrey, husband and wife 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company By 722A� Authorized Sf n Lure Preliminary Commitment Page 1 EXHIBIT "A" EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL A: (9024) Order No. RM - 40003349 THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF A PRIVATE ROAD, SAID POINT BEING 198 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION AND 100 FEET WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID PRIVATE ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 712 FEET; THENCE EAST 100 FEET TO INTERSECT THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION AT A POINT 910 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE COUNTY ROAD; THENCE WEST 100 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF A PRIVATE ROAD; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID PRIVATE ROAD TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE WEST 10 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 220 FEET OF THE EAST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO A POINT 198 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE EAST 10 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THE NORTH 82 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD (SOUTHWEST 312TH STREET); AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO SOPHIE A. MCNEIL BY QUIT CLAIM DEED DATED JUNE 16, 2001, RECORDED JUNE 19, 2001, UNDER RECORDING NO. 20010619000738; TOGETHER WITH A PERPETUAL EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OVER THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND: A STRIP OF LAND 20 FEET IN WIDTH LYING 10 FEET ALONG EITHER SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, FROM WHICH POINT ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF BEARS NORTH 89°11'19" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 439.51 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01°04'58" WEST, 987.31 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 63°55'02" EAST, 110.34 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01°04'58" WEST, 145.16 FEET TO THE NORTH MARGIN OF THE COUNTY ROAD KNOWN AS SOUTH 312TH STREET; TOGETHER WITH AN ACCESS EASEMENT AS SET FORTH IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED JUNE 19, 2001 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20010619000739; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Order No. RM - 40003349 EXHIBIT "A" - Continued PARCEL B: (9109) THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION AT A POINT 525.00 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE 175.00 FEET; THENCE WEST 100 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF A PRIVATE ROAD; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE 175 FEET TO A POINT WEST OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE EAST 100 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: (9110) THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 700 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 70 FEET; THENCE WEST 100 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70 FEET; THENCE EAST 100 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL D:(9111) THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 770 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 140 FEET; THENCE WEST 100 FEET; THENCE NORTH 140 FEET; THENCE EAST 100 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, COUNTY OF KING EXHIBIT "A" - Continued PARCEL E: (9114) Order No. RM - 40003349 THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W. M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 420 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SUDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 105 FEET; THENCE WEST 100 FEET; THENCE NORTH 105 FEET; THENCE EAST 100 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON Order No. RM - 40003349 SCHEDULE B REQUIREMENTS: Instruments necessary to create the estate or interest to be properly executed, delivered and duly filed for record. EXCEPTIONS: Schedule B of the Policy or Policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. Standard exceptions set forth on the Commitment Cover. B. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1 2 GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES AND SERVICE CHARGES, AS FOLLOWS, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST, PENALTY AND STATUTORY FORECLOSURE COSTS, IF ANY, AFTER DELINQUENCY: (1ST HALF DELINQUENT ON MAY 1; 2ND HALF DELINQUENT ON NOVEMBER 1) TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 0721049024 YEAR BILLED PAID BALANCE 2007 $2,932.01 $2,932.01 $0.00 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE, NOT INCLUDING INTEREST AND PENALTY: $0.00. LEVY CODE: 1205 ASSESSED VALUE LAND: $84,000 ASSESSED VALUE IMPROVEMENTS: $166,000 (COVERS: PARCEL A) GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES AND SERVICE CHARGES, AS FOLLOWS, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST, PENALTY AND STATUTORY FORECLOSURE COSTS, IF ANY, AFTER DELINQUENCY: (1ST HALF DELINQUENT ON MAY 1; 2ND HALF DELINQUENT ON NOVEMBER 1) TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 0721049109 YEAR BILLED PAID BALANCE 2007 $ 183.60 $91.80 $91.80 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE, NOT INCLUDING INTEREST AND PENALTY: $91.80. LEVY CODE: 1205 ASSESSED VALUE LAND: $16,000 ASSESSED VALUE IMPROVEMENTS: $0.00 (COVERS: PARCEL B) Page 5 Order No. RM - 40003349 SCHEDULE B - continued 3 Q 5 GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES AND SERVICE CHARGES, AS FOLLOWS, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST, PENALTY AND STATUTORY FORECLOSURE COSTS, IF ANY, AFTER DELINQUENCY: (1ST HALF DELINQUENT ON MAY 1; 2ND HALF DELINQUENT ON NOVEMBER 1) TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 0721049110 YEAR BILLED PAID BALANCE 2007 $ 77.58 $77.58 $0.00 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE, NOT INCLUDING INTEREST AND PENALTY: $0.00, LEVY CODE: 1205 ASSESSED VALUE LAND: $10,000 ASSESSED VALUE IMPROVEMENTS: $0.00 (COVERS: PARCEL C) GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES AND SERVICE CHARGES, AS FOLLOWS, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST, PENALTY AND STATUTORY FORECLOSURE COSTS, IF ANY, AFTER DELINQUENCY: (1ST HALF DELINQUENT ON MAY 1; 2ND HALF DELINQUENT ON NOVEMBER 1) TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 0721049111 YEAR BILLED PAID BALANCE 2007 $ 123.23 $123.23 $0.00 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE, NOT INCLUDING INTEREST AND PENALTY: $0.00. LEVY CODE: 1205 ASSESSED VALUE LAND: $16,000 ASSESSED VALUE IMPROVEMENTS: $0.00 (COVERS: PARCEL D) GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES AND SERVICE CHARGES, AS FOLLOWS, TOGETHER WITH INTEREST, PENALTY AND STATUTORY FORECLOSURE COSTS, IF ANY, AFTER DELINQUENCY: (1ST HALF DELINQUENT ON MAY 1; 2ND HALF DELINQUENT ON NOVEMBER 1) TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 0721049114 YEAR BILLED PAID BALANCE 2007 $ 1.50 $1.50 $0.00 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE, NOT INCLUDING INTEREST AND PENALTY: $0.00. LEVY CODE: 1205 ASSESSED VALUE LAND: $0.00 ASSESSED VALUE IMPROVEMENTS: $0.00 (COVERS: PARCEL E) 6. THE LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED IS CARRIED ON THE TAX ROLLS AS EXEMPT, HOWEVER, IT WILL BECOME TAXABLE FROM THE DATE OF EXECUTION OF A CONVEYANCE TO A TAXABLE ENTITY AND SUBJECT TO THE LIEN OF REAL PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE BALANCE OF THE YEAR. TAX ACCOUNT NO. 072104-9114. 7. POTENTIAL SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR GENERAL TAXES IN THE CURRENT YEAR AND PRIOR YEARS ON OMITTED IMPROVEMENTS. THE SUBJECT PREMISES APPEAR ON THE YEAR 2007 TAX ROLLS ASSESSED ONLY ON THE VALUE OF THE LAND. TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 0721049109 0721049110 0721049111 0721049114 Page 6 Order No. RM - 40003349 SCHEDULE B - continued NOTICE OF TAP OR CONNECTION CHARGES WHICH HAVE BEEN OR WILL BE DUE IN CONNECTION WITH DEVELOPMENT OR RE -DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND AS DISCLOSED BY RECORDED INSTRUMENT. INQUIRIES REGARDING THE SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF THE CHARGES SHOULD BE MADE TO THE CITY/COUNTY/AGENCY. CITY/COUNTY/AGENCY: WATER DISTRICT NO. 124 RECORDED: JUNE 1, 1981 RECORDING NO.: 8106010916 9. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: LAKEHAVEN SEWER DISTRICT, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PURPOSE: SEWER MAINS AREA AFFECTED: A PORTION OF PARCEL A OF A PORTION OF SAID PREMISES RECORDED: JUNE 14, 1978 RECORDING NO.: 7806140899 10. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: PURPOSE: LAKE ACCESS AREA AFFECTED: A PORTION ❑F PARCEL A OF A PORTION OF SAID PREMISES RECORDING NO. 20010619000739 11, SELLER'S NOTICE OF ON -SITE SEWAGE SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY INSTRUMENT RECORDED, UNDER RECORDING NO. 20050211001839. (COVERS: PARCEL A) 12. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: APRIL 12, 2007 RECORDING NO.: 20070412000601 REGARDING: BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENTS 13. QUITCLAIM DEEDS CLEARING TITLE RE ACCESS RIGHTS AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: APRIL 12, 2007 RECORDING NO.: 20070412000602, 20070412000603 AND 20070412000604, REGARDING: DENIES RIGHTS OF ACCESS AND EASEMENTS AS STATED HEREIN 14. LACK OF A RECORDED MEANS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS TO A PUBLIC ROAD FROM THE LAND. (COVERS: PARCELS B, C, D AND E) 15. EASEMENT AGREEMENTS AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: RECORDED: NOVEMBER 8, 2007 RECORDING NOS.: 20071108001180, 20071108001181, 20071108001182, 20071108001183, 20071108001184, 20071108001185, AND 20071108001186 REGARDING: USE OF THE WESTERLY PORTION OF PARCEL A Page 7 Order No. RM - 40003349 SCHEDULE B - continued 16. DEED OF TRUST AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTOR: WILLIAM J. MCCAFFREY AND DAWN L. MCCAFFREY, HUSBAND AND WIFE TRUSTEE: TALON GROUP BENEFICIARY: WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK ORIGINAL AMOUNT: $262,500.00 DATED: SEPTEMBER 7, 2007 RECORDED: SEPTEMBER 13, 2007 RECORDING NO.: 20070913002632 (COVERS: PARCEL A) 17. MATTERS RELATING TO THE QUESTIONS OF SURVEY, RIGHTS OF PARTIES IN POSSESSION, AND UNRECORDED LIEN RIGHTS FOR LABOR AND MATERIAL, IF ANY, THE DISPOSITION OF WHICH WILL BE FURNISHED BY SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT. NOTE 1: THIS IS A LOAN -ONLY TRANSACTION. THE SPECIFIC DISCOUNTED RATE CLASSIFICATIONS APPLIED TO THE OWNER'S POLICY, AND ANY LENDER'S POLICY ALSO REQUESTED FOR THIS TRANSACTION, ARE DISCLOSED IN SCHEDULE A OF THE PRELIMINARY COMMITMENT. OTHER DISCOUNTED RATE CLASSIFICATIONS MAY APPLY, INCLUDING THE: REFINANCE RATE PRIOR TITLE EVIDENCE RATE SHORT TERM RATE BUILDER'S AND SUBDIVIDER'S RATE JUNIOR MORTGAGE RATE LENDER'S STANDARD COVERAGE RATE ATTACHED IS A BRIEF DESCRIPTION FOR THESE RATES. PLEASE INFORM YOUR TITLE OFFICER IF YOU THINK YOUR TRANSACTION QUALIFIES FOR ONE OF THE LISTED DISCOUNT PREMIUM RATES. YOU MAY REACH YOUR TITLE OFFICER, RANDY MCCRORY, AT (425) 646-8591 OR RMCCRORY@LANDAM.COM. NOTE 2: IF YOU WOULD LIKE THE COMPANY TO ACT AS TRUSTEE IN THE PROPOSED DEED OF TRUST, PLEASE NOTE THAT -COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE OF PUGET SOUND" MAY ACT AS TRUSTEE OF A DEED OF TRUST UNDER RCW 61.24.010(1). NOTE 3: THE COMPANY REQUIRES THE PROPOSED INSURED TO VERIFY THAT THE LAND COVERED BY THIS COMMITMENT IS THE LAND INTENDED TO BE CONVEYED IN THIS TRANSACTION, THE DESCRIPTION OF THE LAND MAY BE INCORRECT, IF THE APPLICATION FOR TITLE INSURANCE CONTAINED INCOMPLETE OR INACCURATE INFORMATION. NOTIFY THE COMPANY WELL BEFORE CLOSING IF CHANGES ARE NECESSARY. CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS MUST INDICATE THAT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY ALL PARTIES. NOTE 4: THE FOLLOWING MAY BE USED AS AN ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON THE DOCUMENTS TO BE RECORDED, PER AMENDED RCW 65.04. SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR A COMPLETE LEGAL DESCRIPTION WITHIN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT. PTN NE STR 07 21N 04E Page 8 Order No. RM - 40003349 SCHEDULE B - continued NOTE 5: WHEN SENDING DOCUMENTS FOR RECORDING, VIA U.S. MAIL OR SPECIAL COURIER SERVICE, PLEASE SEND TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS, UNLESS SPECIFIC ARRANGEMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE WITH YOUR TITLE UNIT: COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE COMPANY OF PUGET SOUND 1501 - 4TH AVENUE, SUITE 308 SEATTLE, WA 98101 ATTN: RECORDING DEPT. COMMONWEALTH PRE -ADDRESSED ENVELOPES MAY STILL BE USED WHEN SENDING DOCUMENTS VIA TDS (TITLE DELIVERY SERVICE) TO THE ADDRESS ON THE FACE OF THE COMMITMENT COVER PAGE OR TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. NOTE 6: IN THE EVENT THAT THE COMMITMENT JACKET IS NOT ATTACHED HERETO, ALL OF THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SAID JACKET ARE INCORPORATED HEREIN. THE COMMITMENT JACKET IS AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT ANY COMPANY OFFICE. NOTE 7: THE POLICY(S) OF INSURANCE MAY CONTAIN A CLAUSE PERMITTING ARBITRATION OF CLAIMS AT THE REQUEST OF EITHER THE INSURED OR THE COMPANY. UPON REQUEST, THE COMPANY WILL PROVIDE A COPY OF THIS CLAUSE AND THE ACCOMPANYING ARBITRATION RULES PRIOR TO THE CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION. (END OF EXCEPTIONS) Investigation should be made to determine if there are any sewer treatment capacity charges or if there are any service, installation, maintenance, or construction charges for sewer, water or electricity. In the event this transaction fails to close, a cancellation fee will be charged for services rendered in accordance with our rate schedule. Unless otherwise requested or specified herein, the forms of policy to be issued in connection with this Commitment will be the ALTA 2003 Homeowner's Policy, the ALTA 2006 Loan Policy, or, in the case of standard lender's coverage, the ALTA 2006 Standard Loan Policy. The Policy committed for or requested may be examined by inquiry at the office that issued the Commitment. A specimen copy of the Policy form(s) referred to in this Commitment will be furnished promptly upon request. JES1 Enclosures: Sketch Vesting Deed Paragraphs all recorded documents Page 9 Order No:: RM - 40003349 LAND TITLE COMPANY OF PUGET SOUND, LLC 14450 N.E. 291h PI., #200 Bellevue, WA 98007 Phone: 425-646-8591 888-267-2303 Fax: 425-646-8593 Discounted Rate Disclosure Addendum - Refinance -Only This is a refinance -only transaction. The specific discounted rate classifications applied to this transaction are disclosed in Schedule A of the preliminary commitment. Other discounted rate classifications may apply, including the: Refinance rate - For first priority mortgages that refinance prior indebtedness incurred by the present borrower. Prior title evidence rate - If a copy of a prior title policy or commitment issued by any title company is submitted with an order for a new lender's policy upon land without a 1-to-4 family residential structure. Short term rate - If a title policy has been issued within the last five (5) years. Builder's and subdivider's rate - For a lender's policy insuring a development loan on land which has been or is to be divided and for a lender's policy insuring a construction loan. ]unior mortgage rate - When a mortgage policy insuring the lien of a mortgage has previously been issued at the general schedule rate. Lender's standard coverage rate - When a commercial lender requests a standard coverage lender's policy with broad exceptions instead of specific descriptive exceptions. PLEASE INFORM YOUR TITLE OFFICER IF YOU THINK YOUR TRANSACTION QUALIFIES FOR ONE OF THE LISTED DISCOUNT PREMIUM RATES. You may reach your title officer, Randy McCrory, at (425) 646-8591 or RMccrory@Landam.com.. Please acknowledge your receipt of this rate disclosure by signing below. Name: Name: Date: Please return to company at: 14450 N.E. 29th Place Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98007 Attn: Randy McCrory Date: Discounted Rate Disclosure Addendum THIS SKETCH IS PROVIDED, WITHOUT CHARGE, FOR YOUR INFORMATION. IT IS NOT INTENDED TO SHOW ALL MATTERS RELATED TO THE PROPERTY INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, AREA, DIMENSIONS, EASEMENTS, ENCROACHMENTS OR LOCATIONS OF BOUNDARIES. IT IS NOT APART OF, NOR DOES IT MODIFY, THE COMMITMENT OR POLICY TO WHICH IT IS ATTACHED. THE COMPANY ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR ANY MATTER RELATED TO THIS SKETCH,UNLESS SUCH COVERAGE IS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED BY THE COVERED RISKS OF THE POLICY. REFERENCE SHOULD BE MADE TO AN ACCURATE SURVEY FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. SECTION: 07 TOWNSHIP: 21N RANGE: 04E S olw ; om1*1 ooeo P7 006o I ooeo • 411 060 0300 1 0070 u rat �s tt�r• 4' r� 1• ;r J b a«� � I; +n E 4's` VOL .qA� I �'• cm om ♦ ON J� ow r�er •� OOEO a+��r, s el-a-A7 j "6LW.37OTH 87 A +tit+` �.+bs ,��v� ,ry,1 - 7f3 _ r il;i 6�ri ■ %S a 77 At oQa :w 121 AC 11 A{ t1y� O 7 .ro R 02D - �o {`♦ c, ♦11�b •• .11 AC °ib WD7 ' I t om 1 !t AG • 4 Z OpO e If-u_It r , I • I ' a ' '+0230 • I > Naa 35 Ac — a! As ow" 9" 0GO rb� O24O � � � " � LOT !• �` f+D• s „e At c 14 fmm c f114 ' \ B W 'rr r• 0140 am poll OQO r 9 a iCCSP 577O41 J ►!� r 00021GM LOT 3 N 73t3D !1 "y r�tlls S ;+ t 4�♦1� 1c O?3p o 17111 - . v1073t/ `+ Pill sf LOT z � t7[7s sr � 94 _ _ o t.R Ac 2 Ina ` I 9m7 eluat t.u31 3t 16 NT—"— ` Q 61 .312TH. sr n�o �a w t- t 7 ��gpIL7s76t .,. •,/�� 7>ai/7--------- 1 7 ASV 1, 31 i�� � ---•• RV y 7- -- LQTT:-'WTI fgw.s'12TM FOR13 c�� tl AC yxetL _ T•n�l d YA 1' _ __ f�R �{ c � �� 4 907 Atf. 1 _y`-_---- 1144 VAC. 9/2715 1 AN sl A is rl lies 10 ,, °,�� 33ef of — - •g c' ,. ]�.. ..,� .. - L M WOE CITY OF Federal Way Way Public Works Department 33325 8th Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 TRANSPORTATION C ONCUR REN CY ANALYSIS Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage 07-106876-00-CN Prepared by Sanjeev Tandle City of Federal Way Public Works Traffic Division Introduction This report documents the transportation capacity impacts associated with the proposed Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage in Federal Way, Washington. The study focuses on evening peak hour traffic operations at all intersections that are monitored for transportation concurrency and impacted by at least one (1) new evening peak hour trip. All other transportation impacts are addressed by other applicable development review processes. The analysis was conducted for 2009, the anticipated year of opening of the development proposal for conditions with and without the project. Purpose and Objectives This study has been performed on behalf of the project applicant by the City of Federal Way, Public Works Department, Traffic Services Division, and is consistent with the City of Federal Way Transportation Concurrency Management Code as described in Federal Way City Code Chapter 19, Article IV. The purpose of this code is to implement the transportation concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Act, RCW 36A.70.070(6)(e), consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and WAC 365-195-510 and 365-195-835. These requirements apply to all new developments and expansions of existing developments and specify that the City may not permit development if adequate capacity in the transportation system cannot be provided concurrent with the development. Adequate capacity is deemed to be provided if the City's adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard is met. The City's adopted LOS standard is contained in Comprehensive Plan TP16 and is summarized in the table below: Table 1 - Level of Service Thresholds Impact Parameter Threshold Minimum Level of Service Signalized Intersection E Unsignalized Intersection None Maximum Volume/Capacity Ratio (Xc) 1.00 Project Location and Description The proposed development is located at 604 SW 312t' St, Federal Way, WA 98003. A vicinity map is shown in Figure 1 below. The project would include construction of fifteen single family detached housing units. Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage (07-106876-00-CN) Transportation Concurrency Analysis City of Federal Way Page 2 03/07/08 3 Background Conditions Traffic forecasts for year 2009 conditions without the project are presented in this section, representing the anticipated year of opening for the project. In addition, all projects shown on the City's currently adopted Transportation Improvement Plan are assumed to be constructed consistent with the Growth Management Act's definition of "concurrent with development". The 2009 evening peak hour future volume for each study intersection was derived by applying a 2% annual growth rate to the latest available volumes and adding trips reserved for approved development projects. The background volumes are illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2 — 2009 Evening Peak Hour Background Traffic Volumes Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage (07-106876-00-CN) Transportation Concurrency Analysis City of Federal Way Page 4 03/07/08 Figure 2 Horizon Without Project Figure 2 Horizon Without Project ! a' m Q 0 S brC p s6 Nr ao a It _ a S st .-Iss,�lt }�1 ,,4 15➢-4 SSd , 131 r s5a - 1304 S[ �* 0 a 4 0. 1 S 306,St� f CO e 4u m S 310 SI It a ~ 1� r4e 1 1b11 �4�a1 mom i` t. > a r dJl S r,so g8 1s 1�, f r104 1312 It a r rrrr i 65 75iy TT' 34y v y 3 r ice±"7.'S' — E4�~ as 1 tay 5 �� 354 y 165� - so rrrr 1ti S 314 It r- o = 115s 10! 7 CO 4z-3 �' as-, 2lea', H 1 ao 8 Q N m _ 114 �1L1� r 1316It err Mee r17 47 '-0 s 10 t 140 S 317 COCO a o� �-M45 N N 0 CO Q .Yl r F-53 1s m o m t 1050 11�1LLA rp 1320 _ t103 1 �1 q v J �1 t 1 157115112 F 218 m-I- ��ze6 �y It �10 L 'a t147 12G1 r7 S 320 St d6r� airy1�Y ,m q �TEp�pp 1 'i•:i: ~ a4 7 SS j H + 11� � � 1ne-+ I� 1056� isea-' 1 2 1 ob lal� v.a 1 i 34-j R069y •A ^ CA-*r Ll 1a� n a. Q 0 �2 S 322,5la LP.1 ¢ c� 5D ,F18 9T e S 263 .L d l� r1y5 3 S 324 St d x Tara, 1 1$ S t92(7 s r r 13_ 4 1 U U A a m h S 328,St 0' Tr S3 22 Z4 1 C I ,.S 330 � rrrr 1332 t $ c31�iT Figure 2 Horizon Without Project Figure 2 Horizon Without Project N x's P,, ('a., "1! L! m �y 330 Sl141 F';1 Si 330 St a s S39$51 S 356 St a x 0 p a_ S 328$I c? � rr _y! 53 4 330 9 Z2 3ai S 332 I qy +ivF` L1 S 333 St m a T m ypp TOB� '3_ 1SK F'IB6 0 171 �7a +an S 340 0 N w ? 92 S 336 St 561 2a�` h ;as S 341 PI a i �. 1 w 5 S 344 St = 1 10 to ,04�� CO N _a a -+i•L F 234 Ito � -1697 �1751 p.f791 al p $31 $t '1.(, Cs36 iS4, �900 �di 1p It 9 Dns� e�N 20� lam _• TTr. N �' �i ^i 7 �-1.r "' ltpq-ija y 0 �vr i a y y - VL242 0 S 352 St 266 90a e TBt i ti R sR Y e°� r554 �5 5324 M � 309� 4 f Site Generated Traffic Evening peak hour trips generated by the proposed project were forecasted. The evening peak hour trips were then distributed and assigned to the adjacent roadways and intersection within the study area using the City's latest transportation model. No reduction in vehicle trips was made to account for a potential shift away from the automobile. ITE trip rates are based on observed vehicle trip patterns at each land use and thereby account for a basic amount of non -auto travel. Trip Generation The project would include construction of fifteen single family detached housing units. Trips generated by the project were forecasted using trip generation rates found in the 7th Edition of Trip Generation (ITE, 2003). ITE Land Use Code 210 was used to calculate the trip generation. Procedures outlined in ITE's Trip Generation Handbook were used to determine when to use rates or regression equations and calculating weighted averages between different independent variables. These calculations are shown in Appendix A. The project is expected to generate a total of 5 evening peak hour trips. Table 2 below summarizes the trips generation for the proposed development. Table 2. Evening Peak Hour Trip Generation Land Use F � Size Entering Trips Exiting Trips Total Trips Single Family Detached Housing Net New Trips 15 Units 12 7 19 Nntac *Rrnrrres Trin Generation (ITE. 7`E' Edition. 2003). land use code 210 Trip Generation Handbook (ITE, 2"d Edition, 2001) Trip Distribution and Assignment The evening peak hour trips generated by the proposed project were distributed and assigned to the roadway system as shown in Figure 3. The distribution is based on the City's travel demand model, taking into account surrounding land uses and existing traffic patterns. Figure 3 - Evening Peak Hour Project Trip Assignment Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage (07-106876-00-CN) Transportation Concurrency Analysis City of Federal Way Page 9 03/07/08 o p a O a, a p` p D 0 0^ ep I olc tla �ee ❑ 0 v I 1 ❑ ' 1 e'n �a 00 � — o D D o p ❑ �❑ a ° p —o �!a D p u D D ° p 0 ❑ - °— ^o a pa p o' ale P D 0 ! 1 s t G O p 0 I of 0 �e as "r p a 1 S , + s P a2 7 of ❑ O 3 f 1 ?o t t t t I U .- alp ` a � p e❑aiv 9d o D A o4 G 0 �.� i ❑ D. o 0 ❑ ❑ A Q Oo 'f 1 fi ��0 6 0 f 1 f 1 p f 1 ! t 1 Iai at 1 10 01 I I 1 I 1 1 1 e{ � O 1p pP c p 1 � 1' 1 r 0 A qo 0 p I G _ o A❑ ,a�.o ... p o q o � as ° I P9 � v 4 0 0 i ago e ai= o pp 7 A llj r. b ! V s o ° a oin a W eo vv p° p\ 1 be p0 oe Ao o � o t 0 0 o a - 0 o a e{ e u ° i o nice e o I ° D e 0 - 0 ° oe I cello D D D a e ° o o a S 5 ° T � 5 1 , 1 10 ° a ° a V P ❑ a 0 ao P o $P 13 c p ° ola o e o D i a �iP �� , a ❑ ❑ 6 ❑ ° ° °�'1 t 1 �J�p e a G s 1 � } 6 v i P o e v vn J el Ic � Pn � p pq n oil GOfP 4 ❑ q•o i ❑ q 0 P �o a w N Q ev o u oo � a • ° o �o P' �• as ° O P� o0 9 ❑ �� Pe 79 ° =Ic iiJ o N � n o- ❑ ° a o a o a o�y Horizon Year Traffic Forecast The evening peak hour traffic generated by the proposed project was added to the background forecasts in Figure 2. The Horizon Year volumes are illustrated in Figure 4 below. Figure 4 — 2009 Horizon Year Evening Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage (07-106876-00-CN) Transportation Concurrency Analysis City of Federal Way Page 16 03/07/08 Figure 4 Horizon With Project Figure 4 St N St S 3U,;,' j�'� �Ty yy�L[' L52S310Si m CO d ass TtT'S57'� Iss r t103 r1w S 312 St '� a 10N m 13a� _A Icy � .a i7I1 b mm z W gn S 314 St 85, $Ki� 180� L. �T• - 11{ �b1L� 1-207 S 316 St n1� � r{� � = a B 6 �S311 99 11� n 199 S CO N Ln N :t3O4 1 b-b3 m o m F1050 M 618 F J1�1LL� rwa 1473 FS T r393 p.8! a^ F2p�a t S 320 S[ �o as 1T�� xa s°i+ -1 { I! ro 85-1 6" 1-t 20Gt-r �°` ! 11 °y a < d S322,S1.4 T ii« m a-255 rSi3 01 p0� p hlu S 324 St IL m a h S U81SI sr .Fr rS 330 2Z F^l4 1 2x 7pr rx 38 m a Horizon With Project S 304 St 0 ' JJ o 1If rrrr e 91.1pr N ai202 `° - t?B7 F11 a4 r S 320 St 159� o� 1181ti gi _ tiry m m S Sp� Figure 4 Horizon With Project C ,18 at .da S .ay oyy t 32 �-595 9s SW 3 2 °S� 1B 14 a — ' 3 3N o 3 a SW St 'J• �1628 �7�5 14Q SW32051 t 02E+ g13 o s. f � 3 m a IV 8, F—J � 54 SW 325 PI EOD a t 27 L---` � �N 11 ¢r ron SW 336 St tzy2 m 12W 1e 1 19 SW Campus Dr 310 rah; ?r4 r � ANSW340St i 0 312 St S 312 St 11 o�l � 35 � li om li 330 St a1 S 330 St S 320 St I Figure 4 Horizon With Project r325 Pf ^f z 1 'o ,tl � a 11 A 328 r+1 ro om v S328& as ,TT E e� 330 St t S 330 St 0 ill ^ y S % q 4 330 22 7 125 � TT, L tie � � ' S ,o-lF S3325f e8, j-% +T.-t't' >`sgb+S 333 St ar rra `4 0 '1 �A rn � w s10iy MR. FB56 26 223 .Q Nn � � 10@a "� 93 152% �n yo r� tsfi S 336 St .� Ye_ S7T?' •' �7f,. - ,i(rasr ��+ 5 Owy d� N N T 0 f� m 8 Lt ~ 1 J SU# St 171y 'STr �� Wry 1pa� a�'ti 1 S 356 St 1 smd.'S a� S 341 PI is S 344 St K jh to 24Hn T y- C2 a rase � b� o-1697 Y1751 N S352St va,-. 225 04 Traffic Analysis The quality of traffic flow at the key study intersections is presented in this section of the report. Table 3 shows a summary of the LOS analysis for the study intersections. Where a performance measure does not apply to the entire intersection, the table shows the measure for the worst movement of the intersection. Calculations are shown in Appendix B for Background and Horizon Year conditions. Table 3 - LOS Summary Worksheet Intersection 2009 Background Conditions LOS Standard Met? 2009 With - Project Conditions LOS Standard Met? ID North -South Street East-West Street LOS V/C LOS V/C 451 1 Pacific Hwy S 16 Av S 0.80 Y 0.80 Y 750 Pacific H S S 283 PI 0.41 Y 0.41 Y 1050 Pacific Hwy S S 288 St D 0.62 Y D 0.63 Y 1051 18 Av S S 288 St A 0.24 Y A 0.24 Y 1052 20 Av S S 288 St 0.35 Y 0.35 Y 1053 21 Av S S 288 St 0.25 Y 0.25 Y 1647 9 PI S S Dash Point Rd 0.51 Y 0.51 Y 1648 11 PI S S Dash Point Rd A 0.65 Y A 0.65 Y 1650 Redondo Wy S S Dash Point Rd B 0.56 Y B 0.56 Y 1651 Pacific Hwy S S Dash Point Rd C 0.76 Y C 0.76 Y 1751 Pacific Hwy S 18 Av S 0.55 Y 0.55 Y 1842 4 Av S S Dash Point Rd 0.38 Y 0.38 Y 1846 SW Dash Point Rd S 301 St 0.26 Y 0.26 Y 2040 1 Av S S 304 St 0.25 Y 0.25 Y 2051 Pacific Hwy S S 304 St B 0.61 Y B 0.61 Y 2140 1 Av S S 304 PI 0.20 Y 0.20 Y 2240 1 Av S S 308 St 0.34 Y 0.34 Y 2250 Pacific ILw y S S 308 St B 0.56 Y B 0.56 Y 2530 SW Dash Point Rd SW 312 St C 0.63 Y C 0.63 Y 2531 14 Av SW SW 312 St 0.47 Y 0.48 Y 2533 10 PI SW SW 312 St 0.33 Y 0.33 Y 2535 8 Av SW SW 312 St 0.24 Y 0.24 Y 2540 1 Ave S S 312 St D 0.82 Y D 0.82 Y 2542 4 Av S S 312 St 0.62 Y 0.63 Y 2545 8 Av S S 312 St A 0.58 Y A 0.58 Y 2546 8 Av S S 312 St A 0.59 Y A 0.60 Y 2549 14 Av S S 312 St B 0.36 Y B 0.37 Y 2550 Pacific Hwy S S 312 St D 0.73 Y D 0.73 Y Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage (07-106876-00-CN) Transportation Concurrency Analysis City of Federal Way Page 21 03/07/08 2551 18 Av S S 312 St 0.34 Y 0.34 Y 2552 20 Av S S 312 St B 0.39 Y B 0.39 Y 2553 22 Av S S 312 St 0.35 Y 0.35 Y 2554 23 Av S S 312 St C 0.55 Y C 0.55 Y 2628 21 Av SW SW Dash Point Rd B 0.70 Y B 0.70 Y 2654 23 Av S S 314 St B 0.22 Y B 0.22 Y 2750 Pacific Hwy S S 316 St C 0.63 Y C 0.63 Y 2754 23 Av S S 316 St A 0.38 Y A 0.38 Y 2855 23 Av S S 317 St B 0.38 Y B 0.38 Y 3028 21 Av SW SW 320 St D 0.87 Y D 0.87 Y 3031 14 W SW SW 320 St 0.66 Y 0.66 Y 3040 1 Av S S 320 St D 0.85 Y D 0.85 Y 3043 5 Av S S 320 St 0.44 Y 0.44 Y 3046 8 Av S S 320 St C 0.69 Y C 0.69 Y 3048 11 PIS S 320 St D 0.79 Y D 0.79 Y 3050 Pacific Myy S S 320 St C 0.81 Y C 0.81 Y 3052 20 Av S S 320 St C 0.67 Y C 0.67 Y 3055 23 Av S S 320 St D 0.86 Y D 0.86 Y 3056 Gateway Blvd S S 320 St C 0.87 Y C 0.87 Y 3057 I-5 SB Ramp S 320 St C 0.74 Y C 0.74 Y 3058 I-5 NB Ramp S 320 St B 0.68 Y B 0.68 Y 3060 32 Av S S 320 St B 0.58 Y B 0.58 Y 3061 Weyerhaeuser Wy S S 320 St B 0.72 Y B 0.72 Y 3128 21 Av SW SW 323 St 0.22 Y 0.22 Y 3428 21 Av SW SW 325 PI A 0.36 Y A 0.37 Y 3440 1 Ave S SW 325 PI A 0.44 Y A 0.44 Y 3540 1 Av S S 328 St A 0.46 Y A 0.46 Y 3628 21 Av SW SW 330 St 0.45 Y 0.45 Y 3640 1 Av S SW 330 St C 0.87 Y C 0.87 Y 3828 21 Av SW SW 334 St A 0.39 Y A 0.39 Y 3842 1 W S S 333 St A 0.48 Y A 0.48 Y 3942 1 Wv S S 334 St 0.61 Y 0.61 Y 4028 21 Av SW SW Campus Dr D 0.81 Y D 0.81 Y 4043 1 W S S 336 St D 0.86 Y D 0.86 Y 4046 9 Av S S 336 St C 0.78 Y C 0.78 Y 4242 1 Wy S SW 340 St 0.50 Y 0.50 Y 4341 1 Wy S S 342 St 0.32 Y 0.32 Y 4441 1 PI S 1 W S 0.58 Y 0.58 Y 48401 1 Av S S 348 St C 0.80 Y C 0.80 Y Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage (07-106876-00-CN) Transportation Concurrency Analysis City of Federal Way Page 22 03/07/08 5240 1 Av S S 356 St B 0.72 Y B 0.72 Y 5246 Pacific Hwy S S 356 St D 0.89 Y D 0.89 Y 5345 Pacific Hwy S S 359 St 0.39 Y 0.39 Y Pro-rata Share Traffic Mitigation The City requires all new development projects impacting projects listed in the City's currently adopted Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) to either construct the impacted projects or provide pro-rata share contributions towards these projects. The pro-rata contribution for each TIP project is calculated as the number of new peak hour trips generated by the development divided by the estimated total peak hour traffic volume at the time that phase of the development is completed. If a TIP project has been deemed to be fully funded by the Public Works Director, the pro-rata share will be calculated based on the design engineer's current cost estimate subtracting funding from federal and state grants. If frontage improvements are also provided on a TIP project, the cost of the frontage improvements provided by the development would be subtracted from the cost of the TIP project before calculating pro-rata share of mitigation for off -site improvements. If the development's impacts on a TIP project vary within the TIP project, depending on the operational or safety issue the TIP project is intended to resolve, pro-rata shares may be calculated separately for each segment that is impacted differently by dividing the cost of the TIP project on a per -lineal -foot basis. Based on the estimated trip generation and distribution of the project traffic, the project would impact 16 TIP projects by one or more trips during the weekday evening peak hour. In order to mitigate the impacts of the new trips generated by the project and meeting the LOS standards, the applicant shall: 1. Prior to the issuance of recording of the plat, construct the TIP projects identified in Table 4; or 2. Prior to the issuance of recording of the plat, voluntarily pay the project's pro-rata share contribution in the amount of $64,458.00. The pro-rata share calculations are shown in Appendix C. Table 4 — Impacted TIP Project List Map 2007-2012 TIP PROJECTS ID Location Description Design Study, Environmental analysis to improve la City Center Access Phase 2 access to City Center lb City Center Access Phase 3 Add 2nd SB left -turn lane, 3rd SB right -turn lane Widen S 320th St bridge over I-5, realign loop ramp lc City Center Access Phase 4 and NB off -ramp 2 SR 99 HOV Lanes Phase 3: S 284th St Add HOV lanes, 2nd SB left -turn lane @ 288th, install raised median, signal @ SR 509 @ - SR 509 Redondo Wy S with interconnect to 1 Ith PI S Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage (07-106876-00-CN) Transportation Concurrency Analysis City of Federal Way Page 23 03/07/08 4 S 320th St @ 1st Ave S Add 2nd NB, WB left -turn lanes, WB right -turn lanes, widen 1st Ave S to 5 lanes to S 316th St. 5 SR 99 @ S 356th St Add WB thru lane, EB, NB left-tum lanes 6 S 320th St: 8th Ave S - SR 99 Add HOV lanes, install raised median, underground utilities, illumination 7 S 348th St @ 1st Ave S Add WB, SB right -turn lanes, 2nd EB, WB left -turn lanes 9 1st Ave S @ S 328th St Install raised median, improve access at 328th 10 S 320th St @ 20th Ave S Add 2nd left-tum lanes EB, WB 11 21st Ave SW @ SW 336th St Add 2nd left -turn lanes all approaches, WB right -turn lane 12 SR 99 HOV Lanes Phase 4: SR 509 - S Add HOV lanes, install raised median 312th St 13 SR 99 @ S 312th St Add 2nd NB left -turn lane 14 SW 312th St @ SR 509 Add EB, WB left-tum lanes 18 SW 320th St @ 21st Ave SW Interconnect to 26th Ave SW with the addition of a 2nd WB left -turn lane 19 S 320th St: 1 st Ave S - 8th Ave S Add HOV lanes, install raised median No level of service (LOS) deficiencies were noted at any of the City of Federal Way study intersections. Therefore, no supplemental offsite mitigation is necessary. However, King County's Military Road S/S 320th Street would experience 1 p.m. peak hour trip and the intersection would operate at LOS F under both baseline and project conditions. King County uses a 30 p.m. peak hour trip threshold to assess location -specific mitigation; therefore no mitigation is required. Summary and Conclusions • The project would include construction of fifteen single family detached housing units. • The proposed development is forecast to generate 19 new evening peak hour trips. ■ All City intersections impacted by one or more evening peak hour trips from the proposed development would meet City of Federal Way LOS standards with programmed improvements, thus the transportation system provides adequate capacity concurrent with the development. • The proposed development will either construct all TIP projects impacted by one or more trips or voluntarily contribute $64,458.00 in pro-rata share contributions. Mirror Lake Highlands Cottage (07-106876-00-CN) Transportation Concurrency Analysis City of Federal Way Page 24 03/07/08 POINT B ROADWAY I -- _ -- {DISTANCE z-EDGE OF TRAVEL LANE r- -- - `CENTER OF -� - APPROACH LANE I 1 ' CENTER OF b APPROACH LANE EDGE OF TRAVEL LANE I LEFT TANGENT LINE r-CLNTER OUTSIDE EDGE OF MAJOR STREET TRAFFIC LANES- MINOR STREET APPROACH LANE OR DRIVEWAY POINT B EDGE OF TRAVEL LANE RIGHT TANGENT LINE NOTES 1. PARKING STRIPS OR LANES DESIGNATED FOR PARKING ONLY ARE OUTSIDE THIS REFERENCE LINE AND ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE MAJOR STREET TRAFFIC LANES. 2. SEE STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE SEC. 2.12 3. SEE INTERSECTIONS, SEC 2.10(D) 4. SEE ENTERING SIGHT DISTANCE, SEC. 2.13 5. ALL STREET ENDS SHALL BE SIGNED PER THE MUTCD Department of Transportation MEASURING SIGHT DISTANCE FIG. 2-012 Road Services Division 2007 Design and 2-36 King County Construction Standards 1 n GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY For MIRROR LAKE HIGHLANDS DEVELOPMENT FEDERAL WAY, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Prepared For WJM STUDIO 1911; SW CAMPUS DRIVE; SUITE #116 FEDRAL WAY, WA 98023 Prepared By Pacific Geo Engineering, LLC P.O. BOX 1419 ISSAQUAH, WASHINGTON 98027 PGE PROJECT NUMBER 0708182 December 20, 2007 a 7- 1 D 6 8 7 4 wuBmiTTED JAN` 0 9 2000 CITY OF FEDERAL B AY BUILDING DEPT. PGEPacific Geo Engineering LLC Geotechnical Engineering, Consulting & Inspection December 20, 2007 WJM STUDIO 1911, SW Campus Drive; Suite # 116 Federal Way, WA 98023 Attn.: Mr. Bill McCaffrey, AIA Re: Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands 604, SW 312th Street Federal Way, King County, Washington Parcel No. 072104-9024, -9109, -9110, -9111 PGE Project No. 0708182 Dear Mr. McCaffrey: Pacific Geo Engineering, LLC (PGE) has completed a Geotechnical Engineering study for the referenced project. This report includes the results of our subsurface exploration and engineering evaluation, and provides recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of the design and development of the project. We trust the information presented in this report is sufficient for your current needs. We appreciate the opportunity to provide the geotechnical services at this phase of the project and look forward to continued participation during the design and construction phase of this project. Should you have any questions or concerns, which have not been addressed, or if we may be of additional assistance, please do not hesitate to call us at 425-643-2616 or 425-218-9316. Respectfully submitted, Pacific Geo Engineering, LLC SM.0-w a-n- Santanu Mowar, MSCE, P.E. D AGeotechn ical\2007-proj\0708182rpt J P.O . Box 1419. Issaquah. WA. 98027. (Tel) 425-643-2616 . (Fax) 425-643-0436 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT...................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 SCOPE OF GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES.................................................................................................. 1 3.1 Field Investigation...........................................................................................::.......—.................. 2 3.2 Laboratory Testing.............................................................................................................................. 2 3.3 Engineering Evaluation....................................................................................................................... 3 4.0 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS.........................................................................................1 3 4.1 Site Location......................................................................................................................................... 3 s_l 4.2 Site Descriptions................................................................................................................................... 3 I4.3 Regional Geology................................................................................................................................ 4 4.4 Soil Conservation Survey Soil Descriptions........................................................................................ 4 4.5 Visual Soil Descriptions........................................................................................................................ 4 4.6 Groundwater Conditions....................................................................................................................... 5 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................... 5 5.1 General................................................................................................................................................ 5 5.2 Site Preparation.................................................................................................................................. 6 5.2.1 Clearing and Grubbing........................................................................................................ 6 ^j 5.2.2 Subgrade Preparation.............................................................. 6 jj5.2.3 Reuse of On -Site Soils......................................................................................................... 7 5.2.4 Dry Weather Construction................................................................................................... 7 5.2.5 Wet Weather Construction.................................................................................................. 8 5.2.6 Structural Fill ...................................................................... ................................................. 9 5.2.7 Fill Placement & Compaction Requirements...................................................................... 9 l5.2.8 Temporary Excavations...................................................................................................... 10 J 5.2.9 Permanent Cut & Fill Slopes.............................................................................................. 12 5.2.10 Construction Dewatering.................................................................................................. 12 5.2.11 Construction Monitoring..................................................................................................... 12 - 5.3 Foundation Recommendations............................................................................................................ 13 5.4 Floor Slabs........................................................................................................................................... 14 5.5 Site Drainage.....--............................................................---•-..................-.............................:........... 5.6 Utility Support and Backfill................................................................................................................ 14 15 5.7 Pavement Thickness..... 16 . 5.8 Geologic Hazards . ........................................................................:...................................••---•--. 17 5.8.1 Erosion Hazard.................................................................................................................... 17 5.8.2 Seismic Hazard.................................................................................................................... 18 U 5.8.3 Landslide Hazard................................................................................................................. 18 5.9 Infiltration Potential Evaluation......................................................................................................... 19 6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS................................................................................................................................ 21 7.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES............................................................................................................................... 22 1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity Map Figure 2 Site & Exploration Plan Figure 3 Soil Conservation Map LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Soil Test Pit Logs Appendix B Laboratory Test Results li Pacific Geo Enaineerina. LL t Geotechnica! EnqLneerina. Consultation & lns ection Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 1 of 22 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical evaluation for the proposed Mirror Lake Highlands Development, to be located at 604 SW 312th Street, in Federal Way, l King County, Washington. This study was accomplished in general accordance with our proposal No. 708228, dated August 10, 2007, and was granted to proceed by written authorization of Mr. Bill McCaffrey, on August 13, 2007. 2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The development plan calls for constructing single-family residences and associated driveways. According to the project information available from WJM Studio, we understand that the rooftop and stormwater runoff management system would be consisted of shallow underground infiltration trenches. According to the current grading plan we understand that only minor cuts and fills will be required in this site to achieve the final grades for the proposed development. Based on our experience with similar projects, we anticipate that the houses will be one and half story wood -framed structures with loading carried primarily by a system of bearing walls. We expect bearing wall loads will be in the range of 2 to 3 kips per lineal foot, isolated column loads in the range of 30 to 40 kips, and slab -on -grade floor loads of 150 pounds per square foot (psf). We further expect that the first floor levels of the buildings will be constructed at grades or framed over a crawl space area. The proposed development will include asphalt -paved driveways. We anticipate vehicle traffic will primarily consist of passenger cars and occasional waste management trucks. J The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon our understanding of the above assumed design features of the development. If actual features vary or changes are made, PGE should be allowed to review the actual features so that the conclusions and recommendations lcontained herein may be re-evaluated and modified accordingly to reflect those changes. 3.0 SCOPE OF GEOTECII ICAL SERVICES The purpose of this geotechnical study is to provide a report evaluating the geotechnical feasibility of the proposed development. This study identifies and addresses the geotechnical issues and aspects that may impact the proposed site development. The scope of this study included field explorations, laboratory testing, geologic literature review, and engineering evaluation of the field and laboratory data. This study also included interpretation of this information to generate pertinent geotechnical a recommendations and conclusions that may be used for the design and construction of the development. _.3 Pacific Geo Enaineerina LLG ` Geotechnical Enaineering. Consuitat/on & Inspection Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 2 of 22 The scope of our work did not include any wetland study, or any environmental analyses or evaluation to find the presence of any hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater, or air in or around this site. 3.1 Field Investigation We explored surface and subsurface conditions at the project site on August 15, 2007. Four (4) test pits were excavated to depths of about 9 to 10 feet below the existing grades, and were backfilled with loosely compacted excavated soils. The test pits were completed using a trackhoe provided by - PGE's subcontractor. The test pits were excavated in the proposed infiltration trench areas. The specific numbers and the locations of the test pits at the proposed trench areas were selected by WJM Studio and were located on -site by PGE personnel. The test pit locations were estimated in relation to the existing and proposed site features, and not using any surveying instruments or methods. Therefore, the locations J of the test pits in the field should be considered approximate only, and accurate to the degree implied by _. the measuring methods. The approximate test pit locations are shown on the Site & Exploration Plan, Figure 2. A professional geotechnical engineer from our firm observed the excavations, continually logged the subsurface conditions in each test pit, collected representative bulk samples from different soil layers, and observed pertinent site features. Samples were designated according to the test pit number and depth, stored in watertight plastic containers, and later transported to our laboratory for further visual examination and testing. The samples that were not used for laboratory testing will be retained for 30 days from the date of submission of this report. Further storage or transfer of samples can be made at the client's expense upon written request. Results of the field investigation are presented on the test pit logs, which are presented on Pages A-1 through A-4 of Appendix A. The final logs are modified based on the interpretation of our field logs, laboratory test results, and visual examination of the samples in the laboratory. 3.2 Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were conducted on several selected representative soil samples to evaluate the general physical properties and engineering characteristics of the soils encountered. The samples were visually classified in the field and laboratory, and later on supplemented by grain size analyses performed in accordance with ASTM procedures. Sieve analyses were performed on two (2) selected samples in accordance with ASTM D-422 and D-2487 procedures. The results of the sieve analyses are presented on the grain -size distribution graphs B-1 and B-2 enclosed in Appendix B. Pacific Gen Engineering. LLC ❑ erhnlra) @n -----n Conse+rtaNarr & !ns er[lan Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 3 of 22 3.3 Engineering Evaluation The results from the field and laboratory tests were evaluated and engineering analyses were performed to provide pertinent information and recommendations on the following geotechnical aspects of the proposed site development: ^� • Soil and groundwater conditions of the site. - • Foundation types and allowable bearing capacity for supporting the proposed residences. I + Settlement due to the recommended bearing capacity value and the observed soil conditions. • Frictional and passive values for the resistance of lateral forces. • Subgrade preparation for slab -on -grade. • Earthwork, including site preparation, excavation, and placement of compacted fill. • Use of the on -site soils as structural fill. I + Wet weather construction. • Seismic design considerations, including the site coefficient per Table 16-J of the UBC. �] • Site drainage including permanent subsurface drainage systems and temporary groundwater control measures, if necessary. + Erosion control. f f . Asphalt pavement sections. 1 Geologic hazards as per the City of Federal Way Critical Area Ordinances: landslide, erosion, and seismic. + Infiltration potential of the native soils. —� 4.0 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS J4.1 Site Location The proposed development is to be located at 604 SW 312th Street, in Federal Way, King County, Washington. The north, east, and west of the site are bounded by residences, and the south by 312th Street. The general location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. 4.2 Site Descriptions The project site is located within a region dominated by residences. The majority of the site is covered with small to large trees, bushes, and shrubs. A single-family residence and associated garage and shack are located in the southern portion of the site. The site has an access from the 312th Street via a paved private road. J J Pacific Geo Enaineerinq. uc Geotechnlcal Enalneering. consultation a Inspection Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 4 of 22 In general, the site grades are consisted of almost level ground with minor downward slopes from its northern to southern boundary. Based on the current topography plan, the site has an overall gradient of approximately 7 percent. During our field study, we attempted to notice the firmness and stability of the slopes as well as the evidences of geologic phenomena like previous landslides, erosion, and presence of any groundwater 1 seepage or streams across the slopes. No such geologic phenomena were visible on the slopes at the time of our observations of the slopes. Based on our visual observations of the soils in the test pits the slopes are appeared to be stable and firm at their present conditions. 4.3 Regional Geology The site is in the Puget Sound Lowland, a north -south trending structural and topographic depression lying between Olympic Mountains on the west and Cascade Mountains on the east. The lowland depression experienced successive glaciation and nonglaciation activities over the time of Pleistocene period. During the most recent Fraser glaciation, which advanced from and retreated to British Columbia between 13,000 and 20,000 years ago, the lowland depression was buried under about 3,000 feet of continental glacial ice. During the successive glacial and nonglacial intervals, the lowland depression, which is underlain by Tertiary volcanic and sedimentary bedrock, was filled up above the bedrocks to the present-day land surface with Quaternary sediments, which consisted of Pleistocene glacial and nonglacial sediments. The glacial deposits include concrete -like lodgement till, lacustrine silt, fine sand and clay, advance and recessional outwash composed of sand or sand and gravel, and some glaciomarine materials. The nonglacial deposits include largely fluvial sand and gravel, overback silt and clay deposits, and peat attesting to the sluggish stream environments that were apparently widespread during nonglacial times. 4.4 Soil Conservation Survey Soil Descriptions According to the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Survey for King County, Washington, the subject site of its upper 60 inches consist of soil unit `Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam (AgB)'. The approximate site location with respect to the horizontal boundaries of this soil unit is shown on the Soil Conservation Map, Fig. 3. 4.5 Visual Soil Descriptions The average thickness of the topsoils was found to be about 6 inches, which was composed of dark gray silty sand with small size gravels, roots, and organic materials. The topsoils were underlain by light brown silty sandy gravelly soils (Sandy loams; USCS: SM), which were extended upto approximately 5 feet below the current grades. This deposit was almost dry Pacific Geo EngineerinQ, LL Geotechnical Engineering,Enginearing, Consul a ion &Ins ect/on Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 5 of 22 ^� and loose at shallow depths, and medium dense at greater depths. This deposit was then underlain by very dense silty sandy gravels, locally known as till or hardpan, which extended upto the bottom of the l test pits. The till was almost dry and very dense. Difficulties were encountered during the digging through the till due to its hardness. Till was partly cemented. The preceding discussion on the subsurface conditions of the site is intended as a general review to highlight the major subsurface stratification features and material characteristics. For more complete and specific information at individual test pit locations, please review the Test Pit Logs (Pages A-1 through A-4) included in Appendix A. These logs include soil descriptions, stratification, and location of the samples and laboratory test data. It should be noted that the stratification lines shown on the i individual logs, represent the approximate boundaries between various soil strata; actual transitions may be more gradual or more severe. 1 4.6 Groundwater Conditions Neither groundwater nor any perched water seepage or signs of mottling indicating evidence of high perched water table were noticed within the exploratory depths of the test pits. It is to be noted that groundwater elevations are not static; seasonal fluctuations in the groundwater elevations and the presence of perched water in the permeable sandy loams may be expected in the amount of rainfall, surface runoff, and other factors not apparent at the time of our exploration. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations and the presence of perched water should be considered when designing and developing the proposed development at this site, particularly while determining the lbottom elevations of the stromwater management facilities, and for the utility trench excavations. _J 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General Based on this study, there are no geotechnical considerations that would preclude development as proposed, therefore, the site appears to be suitable for the proposed development. According to our field investigation, the site is underlain by loose to medium dense sandy loams followed by till. The sandy loams would be considered suitable for installing shallow infiltration system due to their good permeability characteristics. However, the very dense till would not be considered suitable for installing infiltration system due to their low permeability characteristics. The slopes within the site are gentle therefore not considered potential for landslide hazard. The native soils are considered suitable for Jbuilding houses and roads. The houses in this site may be supported on conventional shallow footing Pacific Geo Engineering, L c Geo echnita! En rn erin Cans 1 aNan a Iris ection Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 6 of 22 I foundations, constructed on the firm and stable native soils or newly placed structural fills placed over the above native soils. With the existing conditions in this site, floor slabs can bear on grades after the —� topsoils and any loose deleterious material have been stripped. The remainder of this section (5.0) presents specific engineering recommendations on the pertinent geotechnical issues that are anticipated for the design and construction of the proposed development. ' 5.2 Site Preparation 5.2.1 Clearing and Grubbing Initial site preparation for construction of new buildings and paved areas should include demolition of the existing structures, removal of fences, stripping of vegetation and topsoil, and paved driveways from the site. Based on the topsoil thickness encountered at our test pit locations, we anticipate topsoil stripping depths of about 6 inches, however, thicker layers of topsoil may be present in unexplored portions of the site. Stripped vegetation debris should be removed from the site. Stripped organic topsoils will not be suitable for use as structural fill but may be used for future landscaping purposes. The stripped gravels from the existing driveway may be stockpiled on site for later use as road construction materials. ` 5.2.2 Subgrade Preparation After the site stripping, cut and fill operations can be initiated to establish desired pavement and building grades. Any exposed subgrades that are intended to provide direct support for new construction and/or require new fills should be adequately proofrolled and/or must be probed with a T-probe by the PGE's geotechnical engineer to identify the presence of any isolated soft and yielding areas, and to verify that stable subgrades are achieved to support the buildings and the pavements, and the new fills. Proofrolling should be done with a loaded dump truck or a front-end loader or a steel drum vibratory roller under the supervision of a geotechnical engineer of PGE. If any subgrade area ruts and pumps J excessively and cannot be stabilized in place by compaction, the affected soils should be over -excavated completely to firm and unyielding, and suitable bearing materials, and replaced with new structural fills to desired final subgrade levels. If the depth of overexcavation to remove unstable soils becomes excessive, a geotextile fabric, such as Mirafi 50OX or equivalent in conjunction with structural fills may be considered. Such decision should be made on -site by a geotechnical engineer of PGE during the actual �l construction of the project. Existing fills may be expected in the vicinity of the existing residence. If any existing fills are encountered then such fills from these areas and the loosely backfilled soils in the areas of exploratory test pits should be overexcavated completely to the firm native soils and backfilled with adequately J Pacific Geo Engineering, LLc Geoferhni[a! En ineerin C sultatrnn � Inspection Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 7 of 22 compacted new structural fills to the final grades. If any existing underground utilities are encountered or are to be abandoned those lines should be plugged or removed so that they do not provide a conduit for water and cause soil saturation, and erosion and stability problems. Tree stumps and root balls should be removed completely and backfilled with new structural fills to the desired subgrade level. 5.2.3 Reuse of On -Site Soils The ability to use on -site soils obtained from the site excavations as structural fills depends on the gradation, moisture content of the soils, and the prevailing weather conditions exist during the grading activities. As the fines content (that portion passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve) of a soil increases, it becomes increasingly sensitive to small changes in moisture content, and adequate compaction becomes more difficult or impossible to achieve. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines by weight cannot be consistently compacted to the recommend degree when the moisture content is more than about 2 percent above or below the optimum. The near surface sandy loams within the upper 5 feet depth contain a significant percentage of fines, and are therefore considered severely moisture sensitive soils. These soils may be used as structural fill only during the dry season and if the optimum moisture content of these soils can be maintained during the compaction. Because of the higher fines content, these soils will pose problems during their compaction if they are used as structural fill during the wet season. During wet weather periods, typically between October and May, increases in the moisture content of these soils can cause significant reduction J in the soils strength and support capabilities. In addition, when these soils become wet they may be slow to dry and thus significantly retard the progress of grading and compaction activities. It will, therefore, be advantageous to perform the earthwork construction activities, during the dry season, typically from July through September, so that earthwork costs can be significantly reduced over wet weather construction. In the event that whether the fill materials are to be imported to the site, or if on -site soils are to be reused as a fill, we recommend that the potential fill materials be verified and approved by the project geotechnical engineer prior to their use. 1 5.2.4 Dry Weather Construction j Combinations of factors like sloped surfaces and the presence of high fines content in the near J surface sandy loams may contribute erosion related problems in this site. This may particularly happen, when uncontrolled surface runoff is allowed to flow over unprotected excavation areas and over the slope areas of the site during the wet winter months. We therefore recommend that the proposed construction be completed during the dry season of the year. This will help eliminating erosion related problems, and any slope stability problems triggered by erosion. 3 Pacific Geo Engineerina, tcc Geolechnica! Engineering, Consultatrorz & lnspectinn Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 8 of 22 } 5.2.5 Wet Weather Construction If the construction takes place during the wet weather, the near surface sandy loams will be found very wet and disturbed, and these soils could not be adequately compacted. Therefore, it may be _ ? necessary to adopt some remedial measures to enhance the subgrade conditions in this site if the 1 construction takes place in the winter. The contractor should include a contingency in the earthwork budget for this possibility. The appropriate remedial measure be best determined by the geotechnical - engineer during the actual construction of the project. The following remedial measures may be considered in this regard: (i) the earth contractor must use reasonable care during site preparation and excavation so that the subgrade soils are remain firm, unyielding, and stable (ii) removal of the affected soil to expose suitable bearing subgrades and replacement with imported free -draining materials as structural fills that can be compacted. (iii) aeration of the surficial materials during favorable dry weather by methods such as scarifying or windrowing repeatedly and expose to sunlight to dry near optimum moisture content prior to placement and compaction (iv) chemical modification of the subgrades with admixtures like hydrated lime or Portland cement, depending on the soil type. (v) mechanical stabilization with a coarse crushed aggregate (such as sand and gravel, crushed rock, or quarry spalls) compacted into the subgrade, possibly in conjunction with a geotextile fabric, such as Mirafi 500X. In the event earthwork takes place during the wet season, we recommend that special precautionary measurements should be adopted to minimize the impact of water and consti2iction activities on the moisture sensitive soils. It is recommended that earthwork be progressed part by part in small sections to minimize the soil's exposure to wet weather. Traversing of construction equipment can cause considerable disturbance to the exposed subgrades, therefore, should be restricted within the specific drive areas. This will also prevent excessive widespread disturbance of the subgrades. Construction of a new working surface from an advancing working surface could be used to avoid trafficking the exposed subgrade soils. Any excavations or removal of unsuitable soils should be immediately followed by the placement of backfill or concrete in footings. At the end of each day, no loose on -site soils and exposed subgrades be left uncompacted or properly tamped, which will help seal the subgrade and thereby to minimize the potential for moisture infiltration into the underlying layers of j fills or subgrades. Pacific Geo Engineering, LLC Ceotechnical Enoineerinq, Consultation & Inspection Geotechnical Engineering Study 1 Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 9 of 22 5.2.6 Structural Fill Structural fill is defined as non -organic soil, free of deleterious materials, and well -graded and free -draining granular material, with a maximum of 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve by weight, and not exceeding 6 inches for any individual particle. A typical gradation for structural fill is presented in the following table. Table 1: Structural Fill U.S. Standard Sieve Size Percent Passing by Dry Weight 3 inch 100 3/4 inch 50 —100 No. 4 25 — 65 No. 10 10 — 50 No. 40 0 — 20 No. 200 5 Maximum* * Based on the 3/4 inch fraction. Other materials may be suitable for use as structural fill provided they are approved by the project _ geotechnical engineer. Such materials typically used include clean, well -graded sand and gravel (pit -run); clean sand; various mixtures of gravel; crushed rock; controlled -density -fill (CDF); and lean -mix concrete. Recycled concrete derived from crushed parent material is also useful for structural fill provided this material is thoroughly crushed to a size deemed appropriate by the geotechnical engineer (usually less than 2 inches). The top 12 inches of compacted structural fills should have a maximum 3-inch particle diameter and all underlying fills a maximum 4 to 6 inch diameter unless specifically approved by the geotechnical engineer. J5.2.7 Fill Placement and Compaction Requirements Structural fills under structural elements should be placed in uniform loose lifts not exceeding 12 inches in thickness for heavy compactors and 4 inches for hand held compaction equipment. Each lift should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soil's laboratory maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Designation D-1557 (Modified Proctor) method, or to the applicable minimum City or County standard, whichever is more conservative. The fills should be moisture conditioned such that its final moisture content at the time of compaction should be at or near (typically within about 2 percent) of its optimum moisture content, as determined by the ASTM method. If the fill 1 J I Pacific Geo En ineerin LLc Geatechnlral En !Hearin C nsultatiun 8 !ns [lion Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development 1I Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 10 of 22 materials are on the wet side of optimum, they can be dried by periodic windrowing and aeration or by intermixing lime or cement powder to absorb excess moisture. If field density tests indicate that the last lift of compacted fills has not been achieved the required percent of compaction or the surface is pumping and weaving under loading, then the fills should be 1 scarified, moisture -conditioned to near optimum moisture content, re -compacted, and re -tested prior to placing additional lifts. The footing subgrade densification should be achieved using back -hoe mounted hydraulic compaction equipment (e.g., Hoepac) or hand operated/walk-behind compaction equipment. We do not recommend jumping jack or vibratory plate equipment due to insufficient energy. 5.2.8 Temporary Excavations The owner and the contractor should be aware that in no case should the excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations, particularly, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations in the "Construction Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR, part 1926, Subpart P, dated October 31, 1989" of the Federal Register, Volume 54, the United States Department of Labor. As mentioned above, we also recommend that the owner and the contractor should follow the local and state regulations such as WSDOT section 2-09.3(3) B, Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA), Chapter 49.17RCW, and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 296-115, Part N. These documents are to better insure the safety of construction worker entering trenches or excavation. It is mandated by these regulations that excavations, whether they are for utility trenches or footings, be constructed in accordance with the guidelines provided in the above documents. We understand that these regulations are being strictly enforced and, if they are not closely followed, both the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial penalties. Stability of temporary excavations is a function of many factors including the presence of groundwater and seepage, the type and density of the various soil strata, the depth of excavation, surcharge loadings adjacent to the excavation, and the length of time and weather conditions while the ` excavation remains open. It is exceedingly difficult under these unknown and variable circumstances to pre -establish a safe and maintenance -free temporary excavation slope angle at this time of the study. We therefore, strongly recommend that all temporary, as well as permanent, cuts and excavations in excess of 4 feet be examined by a geotechnical engineer of PGE during the actual construction to verify that the ! recommended slope inclinations are appropriate for the actual soil and groundwater seepage conditions exposed in the cuts. If the conditions observed during the actual construction are different than anticipated during this study then, the proper inclination of the excavation and cut slopes or requirements of temporary shoring should be determined depending on the condition of the excavations and the slopes. �I J 1 pacific Geo Engineerina, «G GeptMMical Enginevring. cansultatlan a& Ins ec[1on Geotechnical Engineering Study —1 Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 11 of 22 As a general rule, all temporary soil cuts greater than 4 feet in height associated with site regarding or excavations should be adequately sloped back or properly shored to prevent sloughing and collapse. As for the estimation purposes, in our opinion, the upper sandy loams above the till would be classified as `Group B' soils as per the current OSHA regulations. Accordingly, for temporary excavations within this deposit, the side slopes of excavation should be laid back at a minimum slope inclination of 1:1 (Horizontal: Vertical) for dry conditions and 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) for moist conditions. The till encountered within the exploration depths would be classified as `Group A' soils as per the current OSHA regulations. Accordingly, for temporary excavations more than 4 feet and less or equal to the maximum exploration depths (10 feet), the side slopes of excavation should be laid back at a minimum slope inclination of 3/4:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) for dry conditions and 1:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) for moist conditions. The above recommended inclination assumes that the ground surface behind the excavation 1 slopes is level, that surface loads from equipment and materials are kept at sufficient distance away from the top of the slope, and that only minor seepage exist within the excavation depths. If these assumptions are not valid, we should be contacted to provide revised slope inclinations. If the excavation cannot stand by itself, or the excavation slope cannot be flattened because of the space limitations between the excavation line and the boundary of the property, or caving or moderate to heavy seepage encountered within the excavation depths then temporary shoring may be considered. The shoring will assist in preventing slopes from failure and provide protection to field personnel during excavation. Because of the diversity available of shoring systems and construction techniques, the design of temporary shoring is most appropriately left up to the contractor engaged to complete the installation. We can assist in designing the shoring system by providing with detailed shoring design parameters including earth - retaining parameters, if required. Where sloped embankments are used, the top of the slopes should be barricaded to prevent vehicles and storage loads within 10 feet of the top of the slopes. Greater setbacks may be necessary when considering heavy vehicles, such as concrete trucks and cranes. Temporary covering, such as heavy i plastic sheeting, should be used to protect slopes during periods of rainfall. Surface water runoff from Jabove cut slopes should be prevented from flowing over the slope faces by using curbs, berms, drainage ditches, swales, or other appropriate methods. The above information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants, and under no circumstances should not be construed to imply that PGE assumes responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. Therefore, the contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations, and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractor's "responsible person", as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures. Pacific Geo Engineering, LLC r.—P-hnlcal Fn fneerin Con ultatiar+ &Ins [[lan Geotechnical Engineering Study 1 Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 12 of 22 1 We expect that the excavation can be completed using conventional equipment such as bulldozers or backhoes. 5.2.9 Permanent Cut and Fill Slopes 1 For permanent cut slopes the side slopes should be laid back at a minimum slope inclination o 2:1 for tills and 3:1 for sandy loams. Where the above slope inclinations are not feasible, protective facings and/or retaining structures should be considered. Temporary erosion protection described later on in section 5.8.1 of this report should be used until permanent protection is established. Cut slopes should be re -vegetated as soon as practical to reduce the surface erosion and sloughing. We recommend that any permanent fill slope be constructed no steeper than 211:1V. To achieve - i uniform compaction, we recommend that fill slopes be overbuilt slightly and subsequently cut back to expose well compacted fill. 5.2.10 Construction Dewatering 1 The contractor should be prepared to dewater the excavation if it takes place during the wet j winter months in this site. If minor seepage occurs at the bottom of the excavations, a system of collection ditches directing water inflow to sumps and then removal of water by conventional filtered sump pumps will be adequate to maintain a relatively dry working area for construction purposes. The dewatering must remain in operation to maintain a dry working condition throughout the construction period in the excavation areas. J I 5.2.11 Construction Monitoring Problems associated with earthwork and construction can be avoided or corrected during the progress of the construction if proper inspection and testing services are provided. It is recommended that site preparation activities including but not limited to stripping, cut and filling, final subgrade preparation for foundation, floor slab, pavement, retaining walls, and infiltration systems be monitored by a geotechnical engineer from PGE. In -place density tests should be performed to verify compaction and moisture content of the fill and base material. Each lift of fill or base material should be tested and approved by the soils engineer prior to placement of subsequent lifts. As a guideline, it is recommended that field density tests be performed at a frequency of not less than 1 test per 2,000 square feet of surface area per lift in the building and pavement areas. Pacific Geo Engineering, 1' LC Gentechnlral Enghwenn Consal anon & Irs etlan Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 13 of 22 5.3 Foundations Recommendations Spread Footin Based on the subsurface conditions encountered in this site, it is our opinion that the proposed residences can be supported on conventional shallow strip and spread footings. The footings should be supported on the native soils or on new structural fills placed above the properly proofrolled native subgrades. For the design of shallow footing foundation supported on the above described native soils or properly compacted structural fills we recommend using a maximum net allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a 1/3 increase in this allowable capacity can be used. We recommend that continuous footings have a minimum width of 12, 15, and 18 inches for 1-, 2-, and 3-strory residential structures as presented in the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). We recommend a minimum width of 24 inches for the individual column footings. All exterior footings should be embedded a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest final adjacent external grade to provide adequate confinement of the bearing materials and frost protection. Interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below the floor slab. Based on our settlement potential evaluation in this site, we anticipate that properly designed and constructed foundations supported on the recommended materials should experience total and differential settlements of less than 1 inch and 1/2 inch, respectively. Most of these settlements are expected to occur immediately following the building loads are applied. The predicted settlement values may be expected larger if soft, loose, organic soil is encountered, or if the foundation subgrade is disturbed and becomes soft during construction. The settlement evaluation was done without the aid of any laboratory consolidation test data, and on the basis of our experience with similar types of structures and subsoil conditions. Lateral foundation loads can be resisted by friction between the foundation base and the supporting soil, and by passive earth pressure acting on the face of the embedded portion of the foundation. We recommend using a coefficient of friction of 0.4 to calculate friction between the concrete and native soils or structural fills. For passive earth pressure, the available resistance may be determined using an equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pcf, which includes a factor of safety of 1.5. This value assumes the foundations are cast "neat" against the undisturbed native soils or structural fills placed and compacted as recommend in section 5.2 of this report. We recommend to disregard the upper 12 inches of soil while computing the passive resistance value because this depth can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. To achieve the adequate passive resistance from the embedded soils we recommend that the perimeter footings must be embedded at least 2 feet below the final adjacent grades consisted of either the undisturbed native soils or structural fills placed and compacted as recommend in section 5.2 of this report. Variations in the quality and strength of the potential bearing soils can occur with depth and distance between the test pits. Therefore, careful evaluation of the bearing materials is recommended at Pacific Geo Engineering, ttc eatechnical Fnaamm inQ. consuitarion & Inspection Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 14 of 22 the time of construction to verify their suitability to support the above recommended bearing pressure. We recommend that a geotechnical engineer from PGE must be retained on -site to examine the bearing materials prior to placing forms or rebar. 5.4 Floor Slabs Soil supported slab -on -grade floors can be used for the proposed residences if the subgrades are Pp �' f prepared as discussed in section 5.2 of this report. All soil -supported slab -on -grade floors should bear on 14 firm, unyielding native soils or on suitable properly compacted structural fills. After subgrade preparation is completed, the slab should be provided with a capillary break to retard the upward wicking of ground moisture beneath the floor slab. The capillary break would consist of a minimum of 6-inch thick clean, free -draining sand or pea gravel. The structural fill requirements specified in Table 1 could be used as capillary break materials except that there should be no more than 2 percent of fines passing the no. 200 sieve. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, we recommend the use of a vapor barrier such as a layer of durable plastic sheeting (such as Crossstuff, Moistop, or Visqueen) between the capillary break and the floor slab to prevent the upward migration of ground moisture vapors through the slab. During the casting of the slab, care should be taken to avoid puncturing the vapor barrier. At owner's or architecture's discretion, the membrane may be covered with 2 inches of clean, moist sand to j guard against damage during construction and aid in curing of the concrete. The addition of 2 inches of f sand over the vapor barrier is a non-structural recommendation. Based on the subgrade preparation as described in section 5.2 of this report, a modulus of subgrade reaction value of about 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) can be used to estimate slab deflections. 5.5 Site Drainage Surface Drainage 1 The final site grades must be such that surface runoff will flow by gravity away from the structures, and should be directed to suitable collection points. We recommend providing a minimum drainage gradient of about 3% for a minimum distance of about 10 feet from the building perimeter. A -� combination of using positive site surface drainage and capping of the building surroundings by concrete, asphalt, or low permeability soils will help minimize or preclude surface water infiltration around the perimeter of the buildings and beneath the floor slabs. Paved areas should be graded to direct runoff to catch basins and or other collection facilities. Collected water should be directed to the on -site drainage facilities by means of properly sized smooth walled PVC pipe. Interceptor ditches or trenches or low earthen berms should be installed along the upgrade perimeters of the site to prevent surface water runoff from precipitation or other sources entering the site. Surface water collection facilities should be designed by a professional civil engineer. 1 Pacific Geo Enaineer►nn , LLG Georethnicat Englneerrno, Consultation & Inspedlan Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 15 of 22 Footing Excavation Drain Water must not be allowed to pond in the foundation excavations or on prepared subgrades either during or after construction. If due to the seasonal fluctuations, groundwater seepage is encountered within footing depths, we recommend that the bottom of excavation should be sloped toward one corner to facilitate removal of any collected rainwater, groundwater, or surface runoff, and then direct the water to ditches, and to collect it in prepared sump pits from which the water can be pumped and discharged into an approved storm drainage system. Footing rain Footing drains should be used where (1) crawl spaces or basements will be below a structure, (2) stem wall footings will be at greater depths, (3) a slab will be below the outside grade, and (4) the outside 1 grade will not slope downward from a building. For buildings to be built on slopes, the footing drain should be installed at the inner base of the footings located toward the downhill side of the building, and at the outer base of the wall footings located toward the uphill side of the building. The drains must be laid with a gradient sufficient to promote positive flow to a controlled point of approved discharge. The foundation drains should be tightlined separately from the roof drains to this discharge point. Footing drains should consist of 4-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe with perforations at the bottom portion of the pipe. The pipe should be placed in a free -draining sand and gravel backfill. Either the pipe or the pipe and the free -draining backfill should be wrapped in a non -woven geotextile filter fabric to limit the ingress of fines. Cleanouts should be provided. _1 Downspout or Roof Drain These should be installed once the building roof in place. They should discharge in tightlines to a positive, permanent drain system. Under no circumstances connect these tightlines to the perimeter footing drains. J5.6 Utility Support and Backfill Based on the soils encountered within the area where our explorations were performed, the majority of the soils appear to be adequate for supporting utility lines; however, softer soils may be encountered at isolated locations, where, it should be removed to a depth that will provide adequate - support for the utility. In our experience, utility trench backfilling has been found a major source of the majority of post -construction fill settlement problems along utility alignments and pavements. Therefore, it is important that each section of utility line be adequately supported on proper bedding material and properly backfilled. -1 Pacific Geo En ineerin LL Geatechnrcal Engineering. CgnSUINYnn & Jnsoectinn Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 16 of 22 It is recommend that utility trenching, installation, and backfilling conform to all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations such as WISHA and OSHA for open excavations. Utility bedding should be placed in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations and local ordinances. Bedding material for rigid and flexible pipe should conform to Sections 9-03.15 and 9-03.16, respectively, of the 1994 WSDOT/APWA (American Public Works Association) Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction. For site utilities located within the City of Federal Way right-of-ways, bedding and backfill should be completed in accordance with the City of Federal Way specifications. As a minimum, 5/8 inch pea gravel or clean sand may be used for bedding and backfill materials. On -site soils are considered suitable for these purposes. The bedding material should be hand tamped to ensure support is provided beneath and around the pipe haunches to help prevent pipe distortion under load. The fill cover within 12 inches above the crown should be carefully placed and hand tamped or compacted with any hand operated compaction equipment before any heavy compaction equipment is brought into use for compacting fills above 12 inches. The remainder of the trench backfill should be placed in lifts having a loose thickness of less than 12 inches and compacted to 90 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM Test Designation D-1557 (Modified Proctor) except for the uppermost foot of backfill which should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM Test Designation D-1557 (Modified Proctor). 1 The utility trenches should not be left open for extended periods to prevent water entry and softening of the subgrade. Should soft soils be encountered at the bottom of the trench, it should be t overexcavated and replaced with select fills. As an alternative to undercutting, a Geotextile fabric or 1 crushed rock may be used to stabilize the trench subgrade. Where water is encountered in the trench excavations, it should be removed prior to fill placement as mentioned earlier in section 5.2 of this report. Alternatively, quarry spalls or pea gravel could be used below the water level if allowed in the project specifications. 5.7 Pavement Thickness 9 A properly prepared subgrade is very important for the life and performance of the driveway �1 pavements. Therefore, we recommend that all driveway areas be prepared as described in section 5.2 of this report. Subgrades should either be comprised of adequately proofrolled competent undisturbed native Jsoils, or be comprised of a minimum of one foot of granular structural fill that is compacted adequately. The structural fill should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by Modified Proctor (ASTM Test Designation D-1557). It is possible that some localized areas of yielding and weak subgrade may still exist after this process. If such conditions occur, crushed rock or other qualified materials as addressed in section 5.2 may be used to stabilize these localized areas. li .J Pacific Geo EngineerinQ, LLC Geotechnical Engineering. Consultation & Inspection Geotechnical Engineering Study �l Mirror Lake Highlands Development 1 Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 17 of 22 We assumed that the traffic will mostly consist of passenger cars and occasional waste management trucks, which is typical for a residential community. Two types of pavement sections may be considered for such traffic, the minimum thicknesses of which are as follows: • 2 inches of Asphalt Concrete (AC) over 2 inches of Crushed Surface Top Course (CSTC) over a 6 inches of Granular Subbase, or • 2 inches of Asphalt Concrete (AC) over 3 inches of Asphalt Treated Base (ATB) material. I The 1998 Standard Specifications for Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and American Public Works Association (APWA) should be applicable to our recommendations that aggregate for AC should meet the Class-B grading requirements as specified in 9-03.8(6). For the Crushed Surfacing Top Course (CSTC), we recommend using imported, clean, crushed rock per WSDOT Standard Specifications 9-03.9(3). For the sub base course, we recommend using imported, clean, well - graded sand and gravel, such as Ballast or Gravel Borrow per WSDOT Standard Specifications 9-03.9(1) and 9-03.14, respectively. For the asphalt treated base course (ATB) the aggregate should be consistent with WSDOT Standard Specifications 9-03.6 (2). Long-term performance of the pavement will depend on its surface drainage. A poorly -drained pavement section will deteriorate faster due to the infiltration of surface water into the subgrade soils, thereby reducing their supporting capability. Therefore, we recommend using a minimum surfacing drainage gradient of about 1% to minimize this problem and to enhance the pavement performance. Also, regular maintenance of the pavement must be considered. i 5.8 Geologic Hazards 1 5.8.1 Erosion Hazard A Uncontrolled surface water with runoff over unprotected site surfaces during construction activities is considered the single most important factor that impacts the erosion potential of a site. The erosion process may be accelerated for soils with high fines, especially when construction activities take place in the wet winter months and/or along the slope areas. Taking into consideration of the fines content (27 to 28%) in the near surface sandy loams, the project site will have severe impact due to erosion. Based on the King County SCS map, the soil has `moderate erosion hazard'. The hazard due to the erosion can be mitigated if the mass grading activities and the earthwork can be completed within the dry summer period. Also, measurements such as the control of surface water must be maintained during construction, and a temporary erosion and sedimentary control (TESC) plan, as a part of the Best Management Practices (BMP) must be developed and implemented as well. The TESC plan should include the use of geotextile ,.J Pacific Geo Engineering, Ltc Gentechnira! En ineerin Cans I atiorr &Ins e[t�on Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 18 of 22 barriers (silt fences) along the down -slope, straw bales to de -energize downward flow, controlled surface grading, limited work areas, equipment washing, storm drain inlet protection, and sediment traps. A permanent erosion control plan is to be implemented following the completion of the construction. _ We recommend that any increase of ground or surface water flow due to the proposed development along the slopes be prohibited. The increased flow may trigger erosion initiating local surficial slope failures. Therefore, surface water runoff should be routed away from the slope faces including routing stormwater drainage from rooftops and away from the proposed building setback areas. Catch basins and storm drainage system should be used where necessary to direct storm or other surface water across slope areas. The water collected in the rooftops and set back areas must be discharged in approved locations, which is critical for reducing the erosion hazard to minimum and for maintaining the stability of the slopes. Roof downspouts should be tightlined to stormwater disposal systems. 5.8.2 Seismic Hazard 1 The Puget Lowland is classified as a Seismic Zone 3 by the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). Based on our evaluations of the subsurface conditions and review of Table 16-J of UBC, we interpret the underlying bearing soils to correspond to Sc, which refers to very dense soils. Structural design of the F buildings should follow UBC standards for Seismic zone 3, a site co -efficient SZ = 1.2, and taking into consideration of the stress caused by seismically induced earth shaking due to a 0.3g horizontal acceleration. As part of the seismic evaluation of the site, the liquefaction potential of the site was also evaluated. Liquefaction is a phenomenon, which takes place due to the reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to increased pore water pressure during a major earthquake event. Liquefaction primarily affects geologically recent deposits of fine-grained sands that are below the groundwater table. Based on the soil and groundwater conditions, it is our opinion that the on -site soils are not prone to liquefaction, therefore, potential for widespread liquefaction and its associated hazards over the site during a seismic event is none. Therefore, subsurface conditions do not warrant additional mitigation techniques relating Jto seismic hazards. j5.8.3 Landslide Hazard As mentioned earlier, in general, the site is relatively level ground with gentle slopes (7 percent ` gradients) running form the southern to northern boundary of the site. Based on our visual observations of the soils in the test pits the slopes appeared to be stable and firm at their present conditions therefore not considered critical for landslide hazard. The presence of dense and stable, and non -liquefiable native Jsoils are positive qualities for considering the slopes within the site feasible for constructing houses. I I J Pacific Geo Engineering, LLc Geatechnical En ineerin Con ultation & inspection Geotechnical Engineering Study Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 19 of 22 5.9 Infiltration Potential Evaluation The infiltration potentials of the native soils in the proposed infiltration trench locations were evaluated by following the procedure that includes excavation of the test pits in the proposed trench areas, direct measurement of the infiltration rate by performing field percolation tests in the native soils, and verification of at least 12 inches of separation between the trench bottom and the seasonal high water table. Field percolation tests were performed at approximately 2 feet (24 inches) depths below the existing grades in the test pits to determine the infiltration rates of the sandy loams above the till. The falling head permeability tests were performed following the guidelines outlined in 1998 King County SWDM approved `EPA falling head percolation test procedure'. After excavation to the proposed test depths, a 6-inch diameter plastic pipe was pushed through the soil to about 6 inches below the bottom of the test depth. Voids around the pipe were sealed using bentonite to prevent the upward flow of the water along the sides of the pipe. The bottom of the hole was backfilled with 2 inches of % to 3/4-inch washed crushed rock. Several falling head percolation tests were performed. The tests were consisted of filling up the pipe with 6 inches of water column above the crushed rock and measuring the time lapsed between the drop of the initial water level (6 inches) to zero. After each test, the water level was readjusted to the 6-inch level. The last water level drop during the last test was used to calculate the percolation rate of the native soils. Infiltration rate was calculated by measuring the total drop of water and dividing that by the time lapse between the initial and final drop of water. Infiltration rates were calculated by measuring the total drop of water and dividing that by the time lapse between the initial and final drop of water. Based on the results of the last tests the infiltration rates for the tested soils were determined. To determine the soil types as per the USCS classification, one representative grab sample was colleted below the test depths in Test Pit 1 and 3. These samples were then tested in the laboratory for performing the sieve analyses, and to determine the USCS soil classes. The USCS classes for these soils were found as `SM'. The grain size distribution graphs for the tested soils are shown on Figure B-1 and B-2. The test pit numbers, infiltration test depths, sample depths, USCS soil classes, and the actual percolation rates of the tested soils are given in the following table. I Pacific Geo Engineering, LL Geotechnical Enaineerina. Consultation & Jnspedion Geotechnical Engineering Study �I Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 20 of 22 Table 2: Infiltration Rate per Field Percolation Tests Test Pit Nos. Infiltration Test depth (ft.) Visual Soil Descriptions USCS Soil Type Infiltration Test Results* (in/hour) TP-1 2.0 Light Brown Silty Sand w/ Gravel SM 9 TP-2 2.0 Light Brown Silty Sand w/ Gravel SM 6 TP-3 2.0 Light Brown Silty Sand w/ Gravel SM 8 TP-4 2.0 Light Brown Silty Sand w/ Gravel SM 8 * These infiltration rates should be used for designing the infiltration trenches using an appropriate factor of safety in accordance with the King County SWDM. iConclusions J I I i Based on the geological factors such as the type of native soils (USCS: SM), the grain -size distribution pattern of the native soils determined from the sieve analyses tests, the permeability values obtained from the field percolation tests, absence of water table or mottling signs within the sandy loam deposit, and the presence of till at 5 feet depth below the current grades, in our engineering opinion, the sandy loams encountered within the upper 5 feet of the exploratory test pits could be considered suitable for installing the proposed infiltration trenches. Given the relatively small and narrow size of the site and the consistent nature of the native soils encountered in the exploratory test pits, it is likely that the native soils in the remaining areas of the site away from the exploratory test pits may be consisted of similar type of native soils having similar type of percolation rates found in the exploratory test pits. However, such possibilities are not guranteed, therefore must be verified during the actual construction of the infiltration trenches away from the exploratory test pit locations by monitoring the subsurface conditions and by performing some random verification percolation tests at such trench locations. It may be necessary to modify the design of the trenches if soil conditions differ from those encountered in the exploratory test pits. A geotechnical engineer from PGE must be retained by the owner or the contractor during the construction of the proposed trenches in this site to verify that the soil conditions and the percolation rates are as anticipated. J Pacific Geo Engineeriiu L ara c Geotechnical Enoineerina. CORSIIlOMM & 1n5-;P On Geotechnical Engineering Study 1 Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 21 of 22 The proposed infiltration trenches should be designed based on the actual infiltration rates determined from the field percolation tests. These rates are provided in the Table 3. If these infiltration l rates are to be used for designing the infiltration trenches then we recommend that the trench bottoms should be well within the above soil deposits. An appropriate factor of safety is to be applied on the 1 above recommended percolation values in accordance with the King County SWDM to determine the design infiltration rates of such native soils. The presence of impermeable layer (till) must be considered 1 during the design of the bottom elevation of the proposed infiltration trenches in this site. As with any storm system depending on subsurface infiltration, the system's performance will degrade over time due to clogging of pore spaces. The native soils can become easily clogged if 1 suspended soils are deposited in the bottom of the system over the time. The suspended soils are primarily carried into the system from surface runoff. The longevity of the infiltration system can be increased by frequent cleaning of the pavement surfaces, roofs, and catch basins, and periodic cleaning of the suspended soils from the system. To help reduce clogging of the infiltration system during the construction, we recommend that the system should be protected with siltation control facilities such as temporary settling basins, silt fences, and hay bales. Also, infiltration system should not be connected to the development until after construction is complete and the site is paved and landscaped. We recommend that no equipment be permitted in the infiltration system after they are excavated to grade to prevent compaction and a decrease in the infiltration rate of the native soils. 6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the information available from our subsurface explorations, the project details and the topographical information available from WJM Studio. If there are any revisions to the plans for this project or if variations in the subsurface conditions noted during this study are encountered later on during construction, PGE should be notified immediately of these revisions and variations so that necessary amendment of our geotechnical recommendations can be made. If such changes or variations are not notified to PGE, no responsibility should be implied on PGE for the impact of those changes or variations on the project. PGE warrants that this report including its findings, recommendations, specifications, or professional advice has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnical engineer practices in the local area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Pacific Geo Engineering, ILLc Geotechnical Encineerina. Consultation R Inspection Geotechnical Engineering Study �j Mirror Lake Highlands Development Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page 22 of 22 This report is the property of Pacific Geo Engineering, and has been prepared for the exclusive use of WJM Studio and their authorized representatives for the specific application to the proposed development at the subject site in Federal Way, King County, Washington. 7.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES -1 As the geotechnical engineer of record for the proposed development, PGE should be retained to perform a review of the project plans and specifications to verify that the geotechnical recommendations of this report have been properly interpreted and incorporated into the project design and specifications. PGE should also be retained to provide geotechnical consultation, material testing, and construction monitoring services during the construction of the project. These services are important for the project to confirm that the earthwork and the general site development are in compliance with the general intent of I design concepts, specifications, and the geotechnical recommendations presented in this report. Also, participation of PGE during the construction will help PGE engineers to make on -site engineering 1 decisions in the event that any variations in subsurface conditions are encountered or any revisions in +I design and plan are made. PGE will be able to perform the above services under a separate contract and cost. 11 11 1 J J as Hie • s+r u1s N r4i S la yr .n L S ld N' oyz S AV _ �• � �sv {ii�a wPLS w Y r "F �' "• 1 �` v) .. ✓i �� S „• 1 S E S i7 aox• 5 A� FI1► S 7d Qtlf �• tt i s la` aXZ m .. S t g „ S lSln U ~� C� �] Gi C� �` •� � � o v a W U t •' .Z � � � d Kill: • ms a 7 AV iFiB hY N1C id a + a J� M l 4 i ai, a O Cd • - A •� - .A Is :. Y HlZI `' cl Q A � � rt AV vial t pia FUTi- � " "f ` O W p tT � ,;, riY guar • � +, �N .•t g AVjK M 5 AY . t4E Hl9z .x Klit ifS Ay r • a 'e' C7 y avasr A N W!£Z A Irk-. ��V I a ry AY yZ a "• uu ZA ;ToLOOM AY HlSZ `~ pd ti n As IV AS • R • tiOCr C ` t � � � y{ � y W � M ark � ..t sw •• �. if .AY OD& F H10E :n ��.,y ❑ _ 16 r 1 r � arZtc� Y tAV 3 is . O O N 00 N � p 00 O a A A U O M 372-5 " 368 5 t 37y 366 364 .J 3G9 s x • 3Fo ,.r I 354 — •- J r m 3�� 359- •:,� 35o TP-3 ,Jr � x n • N 4.1 ol � r--c.--F — •�- 35 u '39 L J�O 3+13 �n - 336 sib 30 a 32.6r I�rlO I fa J ilj � 1• � � � ��;� Jam• ' v C7 � O U a� �] O 'AMU z � 3 O � "C a> Gzf r O O N O O N O �. O •N I ;To o � QI M Uj •.r a o b w 0 0 N N O � N ^C 00 o C a A A U 1 ' 1 I Appendix A Soil Test Pit Lags j I I it J� 1 Pacific Geo EngineeringLLC Geotechnlcal Engineering, Consulting & Inspection KEY TO EXPLORATION LOGS Sample Descri tlons: Classification of soils in this report is based on visual field and laboratory observations, which include density/consistency, moisture condition, grain size, and plasticity estimates, and should not be construed to imply field or laboratory testing unless presented herein. Visual -manual classification methods in accordance with ASTM 13-2488 were used as an identification guide. Where laboratory data available, soil classifications are in general accordance with ASTM D2487. Soil density/ronsisteney in borings is related primarily to the Standard Penetration Resistance values. Soil density/consistency in test pits is estimated based an visual observations of excavations. Undrained shear strength = Y: unconfined compression strength. RELATIVE DENSITY OR CONSITENCY VS. SPT N-VALUE COARSE GRAINED SOILS: SAND OR GRAVEL FINE GRAINED SOILS: SILT OR CLAY Density N (Blows/ft.) Approx. Relative Density (%) Consistency N (Blows/ft.) Approx. Undrained Shear Stren th (sf Very Loose 0-4 0- 15 Very Soft 0-2 <250 Loose 4-10 15 — 35 Soft 2-4 250 —500 Medium Dense 10 — 30 35 — 65 Medium Stiff 4-8 500 — 1000 Dense 30 — 50 65 — 85 Stiff 8 — 15 1000 — 2000 Very Dense >50 85 — 100 Very Stiff Hard 15 — 30 > 50 2000 — 4000 > 4000 MOISTURE CONTENT DEFINITIONS Dry Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch — Moist Damp but no visible water Wet Visible free water, from below water table DESCRIPTIONS FOR SOIL STRATA AND STRUCTURE General Thickness or Spacing Structure General Attitude Parting < 1/16 in Pocket Erratic, discontinuous deposit of limited extent Near Horizontal 0 - 10 deg Seam 1/16 - 1/2 in Lens Lenticular deposit Low Angle 10 - 45 deg Layer Y2 - 12 in Varved Alternating seams of silt and clay High Angle 45 - 80 deg Stratum > 12 in Laminated Alternating seams Near Vertical 80 - 90 deg Scattered < 1 per ft Interbedded Alternating Layers Numerous > 1 per ft Fractured Breaks easily along definite fractured planes Slickensided Polished, glossy, fractured planes Blocky, Diced Breaks easily into small angular lumps Sheared Disturbed texture, mix of strengths Homogeneous Same color and appearance throughout Pacific Geo Engineering.LLC ' Geotechniral Engineering, Consultation & !ns ectlon ` Mirror Lake Highlands Development Federal Way, King County, Washington Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page A-1 I 1 i 1 1 J SOIL TEST PIT LOGS TEST PIT -1 Date of Excavation: 08/15/07 Depth, Ft. USCS Soil Description Sample No./ Moisture - #200 % Depth, Ft. Content % 0 — 0.5 Topsoil: 6" thick Drk. Gray Silty Sand w/ small size Gravels w/ Roots & Organics 0.5 — 2.0 SM Lt. Brn. Silty Sandy Gravel S1/2 5.2 28.2 Dry, Loose (Graph B-1) 2.0 — 5.0 Med. Dense 5.0 — 10.0 SM Lt. Gray Silty Sandy Gravel S2/6 3.0 (Partly Cemented) Dry, V. Dense (V. Hard Digging) Note: Test pit was terminated at approximately 10 feet below the existing ground surfaces. No groundwater or seepage was encountered within the exploration depth. No signs of mottling were noticed within the exploration depth. No caving was encountered within the exploration depth. Field percolation tests were performed @ 2 feet depth below the existing grades; Percolation Rate — 9 inches/hour. J Pacific Geo En ineerin U- i Geo e[hnira! En rneerrn an ul(afran Ins e[tian Mirror Lake Highlands Development Federal Way, King County, Washington Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page A-2 TEST PIT - 2 Depth, Ft. USCS Soil Description 0 — 0.5 Topsoil: 6" thick Drk. Gray Silty Sand w/ small size Gravels w/ Roots & Organics 0.5 — 2.0 SM Lt. Brn. Silty Sandy Gravel Dry, Loose 2.0 — 5.0 Med. Dense 5.0 — 9.0 SM Lt. Gray Silty Sandy Gravel (Partly Cemented) Dry, V. Dense (V. Hard Digging) Date of Excavation: 08/15/07 Sample No./ Moisture - #200 % Depth, Ft. Content % S1/2 1 4.4 S2/8 1 2.5 Note: Test pit was terminated at approximately 9 feet below the existing ground surfaces. No groundwater or seepage was encountered within the exploration depth. No mottling was noticed within the exploration depth. No caving was encountered within the exploration depth. Field percolation tests were performed @ 2 feet depth below the existing grades; Percolation Rate — 6 inches/hour. Pacific Geo En ineerin LLC Geoterhr+lraf en-gineefing, Consultation & lns ec[1on Mirror Lake Highlands Development Federal Way, King County, Washington ] Project No. 0708182 +I December 20, 2007 Page A-3 TEST PIT - 3 Date of Excavation: 08/15/07 Depth, Ft. USCS Soil Description Sample No./ Moisture - #200 % Depth, Ft. Content % 0 — 0.5 Topsoil: 6" thick Drk. Gray Silty Sand w/ small size Gravels w/ Roots & Organics 0.5 — 2.0 SM Lt. Brn. Silty Sandy Gravel S 1/2 5.9 27.5 Dry, Loose (Graph B-2) 2.0 — 5.0 Med. Dense 5.0 — 9.0 SM Lt. Gray Silty Sandy Gravel S2/6 3.2 (Partly Cemented) Dry, V. Dense (V. Hard Digging) Note: Test pit was terminated at approximately 10 feet below the existing ground surfaces. No groundwater or seepage was encountered within the exploration depth. No mottling was noticed within the exploration depth. No caving was encountered within the exploration depth. Field percolation tests were performed @ 2 feet depth below the existing grades; Percolation Rate — 8 inches/hour. Pacific Geo Fn ineerin LLC Ge technical En ineerin Consultation &Ins etiion Mirror Lake Highlands Development Federal Way, King County, Washington Project No. 0708182 December 20, 2007 Page A-4 l TEST PIT - 4 Date of Excavation: 08/15/07 Depth, Ft. USCS Soil Description Sample No./ Moisture - #200 % Depth, Ft. Content % 0 — 0.5 Topsoil: 6" thick Drk. Gray Silty Sand w/ small size Gravels w/ Roots & Organics 0.5 — 2.0 SM Lt. Bm. Silty Sandy Gravel S1/2 3.4 Dry, Loose 2.0 — 5.0 Med. Dense 5.0 — 9.0 SM Lt. Gray Silty Sandy Gravel S2n 2.1 (Partly Cemented) l Dry, V. Dense (V. Hard Digging) .J Note: Test pit was terminated at approximately 9 feet below the existing ground surfaces. 1 No groundwater or seepage was encountered within the exploration depth. No mottling was noticed within the exploration depth. No caving was encountered within the exploration depth. Field percolation tests were performed @ 2 feet depth below the existing grades; Percolation Rate — 8 inches/hour. J J J J J J J J l I I :l Appendix B Laboratory Test Results J I j j PGEPacific Geo EngineeringLLC Geotechnical Engineering, Consulting & Inspection UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Soil Classification Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Test SA — Group Group Names Symbol Coarse -Grained Soils Gravels -� Clean Gravels Y Cu z 4 andyI s Cc 5 3E GW Well -graded gravel` More than 50% retained on More than 50% of coarse Less than 5% finesc No. 200•sleve fraction retained on _ Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E_GP Poorly graded gravelF No. 4 sieve F G, H G I Ith FI Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silly gravel Fine -Grained Soils 50% or more passes the No. 200 sieve Highly organic soils Sands 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Silts and Clays Liquid limit less than 50 Silts and Clays Liquid limit 50 or more "Based on the material passing the 3-In. (75-mm) sieve. sll field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. °Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual Symbols: GW-GM well -graded gravel with slit GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay GP -GM poorly graded gravel with silt GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay °Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well -graded sand with sill SW -SC well -graded sand with clay SP-SM poorly graded sand with sill SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay rave s w nes More than 12% finesc Clean Sands Less than 5% fines Sands with Fines More than 12% finest) Inorganic organic Inorganic Fines classify as CL or CH GC Cu t 6 and 1 5 Cc s 3E SW Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E — SP Fines classify as ML or MH SM Fines classify as CL or CH SC PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" Ilne' PI < 4 or plots below "A" Ilnei m CL ML Liquid limit —,oven dried -- < 0.75 Liquid limit — not dried OL PI plots on or above "A" line CH PI plots below "A" line MH organic f� Liquid limit — oven dried Liquid limit — not dried Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor � ECu a D dD,o Cc a -- (D at)) D x D 60 Flf soil contains Z 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name. III fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC - GM, or SC-SM. Hill fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name. 'If soil contains Z 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name. III Alterberg limits plot In shaded area, soil Is a CL- ML, silty clay. et) 50 ox. W M G _z 30 U 20 a to 7 4 0 < 0.75 OH PT Clayey gravelF, G, H Well -graded sand' Poorly graded sand' Silly sand°• "•' Clayey sands. H. I Lean clay L. M SlitK• L M Organic clay K, L, M. H Organic sllti"L. M, o Fat clay L M Elastic sillK L, M Organic clayK. L. M• P Organic SlItK• L. M. G Peat Klf soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel", whichever is predominant. LII soil contains z 30% plus. No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. "flf soil contains a 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. "PI a 4 and plots on or above "A" line. oPi < 4 or plots below "A" line. PPI plots on or above "A" line. 0 PI plots below A Ilne. For elu Al1..non of nn.gralned aolle and nne-Yralmd heatfon of corn.• r , /I ed pr,ntwits / - -•_r. - Equallon of "A" • Ilne\� / {r. /I Horizontal at PI - 4 to LL - 25 5. then PI . 0.73 ILL .20) .•J/ 4y\a Equallon of •V" • line Verlleal el LL - IS to PI - 7, O`Z` then P1 . 0 D [LL - a) ¢0 'MRo"0HI � I I I 0 10 15 20 30 40 so 00 70 e0 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT (LL) Size of Opening In Inches Number (US StaeW per Inch Grain Size in Millimetres p 8 O 8 p pp p O O+ O 0 0 Oa O p p O O Ae O N 10 N 0 I I IILLI k Ip itI_II pv C7 N O f7 p 8 8 2 N O co IO " all1t7 V Ci N $ $ O O O O O p Grain Size in Millimetres Cobble Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Flne Silt and/or Clay Gravel Sand Particle Size Distribution Report ,00 90 8C LLJ 6C Z LL ~ z 5( 11J U LJ 4( Q 2 ic NINE 11111111 % COBBLES GRAIN SIZE - mm GRAVEL % SAND CRS. FINE CRS. MEDIUM FINE 8.4 14.6 9.0 1 13.2 26.6 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT FINER SPEC.` PERCENT PASS? (X=NO) 1.5 in. 100.0 0.75 in. 91.6 0.5 in. 85.9 0.375 in. 83.7 #4 77.0 #10 68.0 #20 59.7 #40 54.8 #60 48.7 # 100 40.6 #200 28.2 % FINES SILT CLAY 28.2 Soil Descri tiara Silty Sand with Gravel Atterbera Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D85= 11.5 D80= 0.884 D50= 0.275 D30= 0.0828 ❑15= D10= Cu= Cc= Classification USCS= SM AASHTO= (no specification provided) Sample No.: Sl Source of Sample: Native Soil Location: Test Pit I Client: WJM Studio _Pacific Geo Engineerh7 fl LLC Project: Mirror Lake Highlands Geotrchnlcal Engineering, Consultation & InXPROion Proiect No: 0708182 Remarks Date: 08/16/2007 Elev./Depth: 2 feet Plate B-1 Particle Size Distribution Report 100 90 80 70 CY LLJ 60 Z LL Z 5C W U LtJ 4C tl { 3( { 2C GKAIN 51Lt - mm GRAVEL % SAND % FINES COBBLES CRS,�FlCRS. MEDIUM FINE SILTCLAY 0.0 10.38.6 14.5 29.2 27.5 SIEVE SIZE PERCENT FINER SPEC.* PERCENT PASS? (X=NO) 1.5 in. 100.0 0.75 in. 89.7 0.5 in. 87.0 0.375 in. 85.4 #4 79.8 #10 71.2 #20 67.9 #40 56.7 #60 50.6 #100 41.0 #200 27.5 Soil Description a Silty Sand with Gravel Atterbern Limits PL= LL= P1= Coefficients D85= 8.93 DB0= 0.522 D50= 0.240 D30= 0.0856 D15= D10= Cu= Cc= Classification USCS= SM AASHTO= (no specification piovuleo) Sample No.: Sl Source of Sample: Native Soil Location: Test Pit 3 Client: WJM Studio Pacific Gea >En ineerinS.,LLC Project: Mirror Lake Highlands Geo[e[hnlcOl Engrinaerfnpi Ccn;5'"ration & rr+spa[tlnn Project No: 0708182 Remarks Date: 08/16/2007 Elev./Depth: 2 feet Plate B-2 a - WASHINGTON FORESTRY CONSULTANTS, INC. FORESTRY AND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SPECIALISTS W F C I 360/943-1723 1919 Yelm Hwy SE, Suite C FAX 360/943-4128 Olympia, WA 98501 -Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan - MIRROR LAKE HIGHLAND 604 SW 312`h Street Federal Way, WA Prepared for: William McCaffrey, Owner Prepared by: Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Date: December 18, 2007 Introduction I have evaluated all trees on the proposed residential development located at 604 SW 312`h Street in Federal Way, WA. The purpose of the evaluation was to determine the condition of the trees and make recommendations for retention, protection, replacement, and/or cultural care as required by Section 22-1568 of the Federal Way municipal code. Methodology WFCI has evaluated all trees 6 inches diameter (DBH measured 4.5 ft. above the ground level) and larger in the proposed project, and assessed their potential to be incorporated into the new project. All trees were numbered at the base with painted numbers. The tree evaluation phase used methodology developed by Matheny and Clark in their text A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas (2nd edition), International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign, IL (1994), and their text Trees and Development — A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees during Land Development, International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign, IL (1998). A description of the tree evaluation methodology is provided in Appendix H. RESUBMITTED uEt. L 62007 t,;ITY OF FEDERAL WAY BUILDING DEPT, URBAN/RURAL FORESTRY Y TREE APPRAISAL . HAZARD TREE ANALYSIS RIGHT-OF-WAYS o VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ■ ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES o CONTRACT FORESTERS Member of International Society of Arboriculture and Society of American Foresters Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan Observations Site Description The site includes two parcels that slope gently with a southerly aspect. The property is bordered by residential developments to the east and west, SW 312`s Street to the south, and an undeveloped parcel to the north. The site had been cleared many years ago to construct the house. The northern portion of the parcels have naturally returned to a fully stocked forest. There are three buildings that currently occupy the site. Soils -- According to the King County Soil Survey, the soil type includes variants of the Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, a moderately deep, moderately well drained soil found on glacial till plains. it is formed in ablation till overlying basal till. A weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth of 20 to 40 inches. Permeability is moderately rapid above the hardpan and very slow in the pan. The available water capacity for plants is low. The effective rooting depth for trees is 20-40 inches. A perched seasonal high water table is at a depth of 18-36 inches from November to March. The potential for windthrow of trees is moderate under normal conditions. New trees require irrigation for establishment. Existing Tree Conditions The forest covers were stratified into 2 forest cover types based upon the species, stocking, and size of trees. Trees were also classified by their condition class, which is a good indicator of the longevity of the tree (Appendix IV). A 100% inventory and assessment of the trees identified the species, stocking, condition, and size of trees. Type I This type occurs in the northern portion of the site. It is a fully stocked stand of second growth timber. The main species is Douglas -fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Minor species include Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), red alder (Alnus rubra) and bigleaf maple (Ater macrophyllum). The diameter range is 6 to 40" diameter at breast height (DBH). Stand Condition. -- The stocking level is fairly uniform across the site in a full stand of trees. The conditions of the trees range from very poor to good. Trees in the more densely stocked stands have smaller crowns due to shading and competition. A live crown ratio (LCR) of 30% is considered the minimum for a tree to be considered a long- term tree. There are 86 trees in the type, with 55 trees per acre classified as sound, healthy, long- term trees in the dominant and co -dominant crown class. The remainder of the trees are intermediate or suppressed, and are not long-term trees due to the slender nature of the stems and poor live -crown ratios. No significant insect or disease problems were noted in this stand. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 2 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan []nderstory Vegetation._-- The understory is predominantly made up of Indian plum (Qemleria cerasiformis), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), Himalayan blackberry (Rubes discolor), and holly (Ilex spp.). Significant. Specimen. or. Historical Trees.--- No trees occurred that would be considered significant, specimen, or historical trees. No trees of any other particular significance were noted. Type II This type occurs around the existing house in the southern end of the parcel. The trees on the site occur as scattered individuals or small clusters of trees. The main species is Douglas -fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). Minor species include Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), Scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris) and Leyland cypress (Cupressocyparis leylandii). The diameter range is 8 to 38" DBH. Stand Condition. -- The stocking level is uneven across the site. Some of the larger trees along SW Mr Street have been previously topped and have poor weakly attached stems. The conditions of trees in the type range from very poor to very good. There are 21 trees in the type, with 16 trees per acre classified as sound, healthy, long- term trees in the dominant and co -dominant crown class. The remainder of the trees are intermediate or suppressed, and are not long-term trees due to the slender nature of the stems and poor live -crown ratios. No significant insect or disease problems were noted in this stand. Understo Vegetation, -- The understory is predominantly grasses and weeds. Significant S ecimen or Historical Trees..-- No trees occurred that would be considered significant, specimen, or historical trees. No trees of any other particular significance were noted. Discussion Significant Trees A 100% inventory of the significant trees was completed. A significant tree is described as trees over 12 inches diameter a breast height (DBH). The red alder and bigleaf maple on the site are not counted as significant tree. A total of 61 significant trees were found. Fifty-one of these trees were healthy and have the potential to be retained on the site based on their health. Ten of the trees are hazardous and should be removed from the site. Their locations are shown on Figure 2. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 3 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan Off -Site Impacts Tree removal on this parcel will not impact trees on any surrounding parcels. Potential for Tree Retention There are 4 trees that fall outside the buildable area of the site that have the potential to be retained. The trees recommended for retention are one Douglas -fir and 3 western red cedars ranging in diameter from 10 to 28" DBH. Three of the 4 trees are considered significant. The other 1 tree is smaller than 12" and not considered significant. Minimum Density Calculations The city of Federal Way's Tree Protection Ordinance requires that 25 percent of healthy significant trees be retained on the site. The following is a summary of the estimated tree density planned for retention: Number of Healthy Significant Trees on Site: 51 Trees Minimum Density Required: (25% of trees) 13 Trees Planned Significant Tree Retention: 3 Trees Shortfall of Retention: 10 Trees The planned tree retention falls short of the required retention by 10 trees. This means that 10 trees will have to be replanted to meet the minimum requirement. Tree Replacement Plan It is recommended that the replacement trees be native Douglas -fir or western red cedar. These 10 trees should be 10 ft. tall balled and burlap stock and be planted in gaps in the landscape area. They should be planted no closer than 12 ft. on center, and no closer than 15 feet to established save trees. All trees should meet the ANSI Z60.1 standard for nursery stock and be planted to industry standards. The projected cost of the required tree replacement plus 3 years of maintenance is $2,650. Tree Protection Measures Trees to be saved should be protected during site grading and construction with chain link fencing (Appendix IV) located at the edge of the critical root zone (see Figure 2). This zone is described as a distance of 5 feet outside of the dripline of the save tree unless otherwise specified by WFCI . The fences should be installed after logging, clearing, and pruning, but prior to the start of grading. This will allow removal of hazardous or poor quality trees from the perimeter landscape area. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 4 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan There should be no root disturbing activity within the critical root zone of save trees. This includes irrigation line installation, rototilling, equipment operation, trenching, cuts or fills. If roots are encountered outside of the established root protection zone, they should be cut cleanly with a saw and covered immediately with moist soil. If grading or fill soils must impact tree, then the tree should be re-evaluated by WFCI to determine if the tree can be saved. Mitigation to save the tree can then be prescribed, or tree removal may be necessary. Pruning Tree pruning may be required where trails, sidewalks, access roads, or other improvements pass near trees. Crown raising should be done to a height of 8' over trails and sidewalks, and 15' over driveways or streets to allow vehicles to pass without damaging branches. All new buildings should have at least 10 feet of clearance to tree branches. Pruning should be completed prior to construction to avoid tree damage by construction contractors cutting or breaking branches for clearance. All pruning on save trees should be completed according to the ANSI A300 (2001) standards for proper pruning, and be completed by, or supervised by an International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist®. Recommendations Timeline for Activity 1. Retain 3 healthy significant trees on the site. Retain 1 other smaller non significant tree. Remove all other trees on the site. All removals should be individually marked after staking of the clearing limits. These trees are noted in Appendix I. 2. The approved tree protection plan map should be included in the construction drawings for bid and construction of the project. 3. Contact WFCI to attend pre job conference and discuss tree protection issues with logging and clearing contractors. WFCI can verify all trees to be saved and/or removed are adequately marked for retention. 4. Complete logging and clearing. Complete necessary removals from the tree protection areas. No equipment should enter the tree protection areas during logging and clearing. 5. Do not excavate stumps within 10' of trees to be saved. These should be individually evaluated by WFCI to determine the method of removal. 6. Complete all necessary pruning to provide at least 8' of ground clearance near sidewalks and trails, and 15' above all driveways or access roads. 7. Install tree protection fences along the perimeter landscape and around all interior trees to be saved. The fences should be located 5 feet outside of the dripline of the save tree. Maintain fences throughout construction. 8. Complete grading and construction of the project. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 5 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan 9. Plant replacement trees between October 1 and April 1. Provide irrigation to the trees for 3 growing seasons to insure establishment. Summary Four healthy trees are proposed to be saved on the site. Three of these trees are considered significant. The city of Federal Way requires the retention of 25% of the significant trees on the site. This would require the retention of 13 of the 51 trees on the site. The planned retention falls short of the requirement by 10 trees. This will require replanting of 10 replacement trees for the shortfall under the 25% trees required to be saved. The projected cost to replant the 10 trees is $2,650. If you have any questions please feel free to give me a call. Respectfully submitted, Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. ]oshua Sh e" s Certified Arborist No. PN-5939A attachment: figures 1 & 2 and appendices Note: Even healthy trees can fail under normal or storm conditions. The only way to eliminate all risk is to remove all trees within reach of all targets. Annual monitoring by an ISA Certified Arborist or Certified Forester will reduce the potential of tree failures. It is impossible to predict with certainty that a tree will stand or fail, or the timing of the failure. It is considered an 'Act of God' when a tree fails, unless it is directly felled or pushed over by man's actions. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 6 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan Figure 1 Aerial Photo of 'Mirror Lake highland' Site (King County Geodata) NORTH No Scale Site Boundary .......... Type Boundary Type I- Douglas-fir,pm,rc,ra,bm; 6-40" DBH; 86 trees Type II- Douglas-fir,pm,rc,wh,sp,lc; 8-38" DBH; 21 trees Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 7 1 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan Figure 2 Mirror Lake Highland Tree Protection Plan 4 NORTH NO SCALE 1 1 2�� 7-9 3 + 12 44 ` 19-20 1 5-6 "' 10-11 18 17 i 16 F,f 15 13-14 II r 21 22 23 24-26 _ 29-31 27-28 32 ,_ 34-38 39-40 ..... 33 s 41 -01 w�52 45-46 43-44,58-65 R 47-48 1.y 56 it 49-51 '' 53-55, 67-68 74 i 73 68,72 75-77 F 69-71 84 nl q 78-80 e 85 81 82 83 v COAL T� 87 90 L k. 91 89 94 An a 93 f 107 } 95 100 106 96-99 _- I � ;' .tlS 105 101 ... - 102-104 " _ •:' . AM Tree to be Saved Tree to be Removed Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. n Mirror Lake Highland —Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan APPENDIX I Mirror Lake Highland Existing Tree List and Potential for Retention (Based on Tree Condition Only) Project Tree DBH Save/ Save/ # Species (in.) Condition Remove* Notes Remove 1 Bi leaf Maple 18 Poor Remove Remove 2 Douglas -fir 26 Fair Save Remove 3 Bi leaf Maple 18 Poor Remove Remove 4 Bi leaf Maple 19 Fair Save Remove 5 Douglas -fir 20 Fair Save Remove 6 Douglas -fir 22 1 Good Save Remove 7 Douglas -fir 21 Fair Save to out Remove 8 Douglas -fir 23 Fair Save Remove 9 Douglas -fir 19 Fair Save Remove 10 Pacific Madrone 22 Fair Save Remove 11 Pacific Madrone 23 Fair Save Remove 12 Douglas -fir 24 Fair Save Remove 13 Bi leaf Maple 6-10 Very Poor Remove 3 stems Remove 14 Bigideaf Maple 26 Poor Remove Remove 15 Douglas -fir 36 Good Save Remove 16 Douglas -fir 30 Good Save Remove 17 Douglas -fir 32 Fair Save top out Remove 18 Red Alder 12 Fair Save Remove 19 Red Alder 15,16 Fair Save Remove 20 Red Alder 11 Fair Save Remove 21 Douglas -fir 40 Poor Remove double stem Remove 22 Douglas -fir 30 Poor Remove double stem Remove 23 Douglas -fir 28 Good Save Remove 24 Douglas -fir 26 Good Save Remove 25 Douglas -fir 28 Good Save Remove 26 Douglas -fir 32 Fair Save Remove 27 Douglas -fir 30 Fair Save tree house Remove 28 Douglas -fir 32 Fair Save tree house Remove 29 Douglas -fir 30 Fair Save Remove 30 Douglas -fir 31 Fair Save Remove 31 Pacific Madrone 18 Poor Remove Remove 32 Pacific Madrone 22 Verf Poor Remove Remove 33 Douglas -fir 22 Good Save Remove 34 Bi leaf Maple 16-18 Very Poor Remove 3 stems Remove 35 Bi leaf Maple 17 Very Poor Remove Remove 36 Bi leaf Maple 25 Very Poor Remove Remove 37 Bi leaf Ma le 24 Ver Poor Remove Remove 38 Bi leaf Maple 18 VeryPoor Remove Remove Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan Tree # S ecies DBH (in.) Condition Save/ Remove* Notes Project Save/ Remove 39 Bi leaf Maple 26 Poor Remove Remove 40 Bi leaf Maple 25,26 Fair Save Remove 41 Bi leaf Maple 28 Fair Save Remove 42 Douglas -fir 22 Fair Save some root damage Remove 43 Pacific Madrone 12 Fair Save Remove 44 Red Alder 12 Fair Save Remove 45 Douglas -fir 21 Poor Remove annosus root rot Remove 46 Red Alder 15,16 Ver Poor Remove Remove 47 Pacific Madrone 26 Poor Remove in decline Remove 48 Red Alder 19 Poor Remove top dead Remove 49 Bi leaf Maple 15 Good Save Remove 50 Douglas -fir 13 Poor Remove Remove 51 Red Alder 22 Poor Remove toR dead Remove 52 Douglas -fir 11 Fair Save Remove 53 Red Alder 14 Poor Remove top dead Remove 54 Red Alder 16 Poor Remove top dead Remove 55 Western Red Cedar 12 Good Save Remove 56 Douglas -fir 15 Good Save Remove 57 Red Alder 15 Very Poor Remove Remove 58 Douglas -fir 11 Fair Save Remove 59 Bi leaf Maple 11 Fair Save Remove 60 Douglas -fir 17 Good Save Remove 61 Douglas -fir 22 Good Save Remove 62 Douglas -fir 30 Good Save Remove 63 Bi leaf Maple 20 Fair Save Remove 64 Dou las-fir 21 Good Save Remove 65 Bi leaf Maple 16 Fair Save Remove 66 Pacific Madrone 10 Very Poor Remove Remove 67 Red Alder 13 Poor Remove top out Remove 68 Douglas -fir 18 Poor Remove root damage Remove 69 Douglas -fir 26 Good Save Remove 70 Bi leaf Maple 19,20 Fair Save Remove 71 Western Red Cedar 11 Good Save Remove 72 Douglas -fir 13 Poor Remove top out, root dama a Remove 73 Douglas -fir 10 Fair Save Remove 74 Douglas -fir 18 Good Save Remove 75 Douglas -fir 16 Fair Save Remove 76 Red Alder 16 Fair Save Remove 77 Red Alder 22 Fair Save Remove 78 Red Alder 18 Poor Remove Remove 79 Red Alder 19,20 Poor Remove Remove 80 Douglas -fir 13 Poor Remove Remove 81 Douglas -fir 34 Good Save Remove 82 Douglas -fir 10 Fair Save Remove Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 10 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan Tree # Species DBH (in.) Condition Save/ Remove* Notes Project Save/ Remove 83 Douglas -fir 24 Good Save Remove 84 Western Red Cedar 11 Good Save Remove 85 Douglas -fir 28 Good Save Remove 86 Red Alder 14 Poor Remove Remove 87 Scotch Pine 17 Poor Remove Remove 88 Douglas -fir 34 Very Good Save Remove 89 Douglas -fir 38 Very Good Save too close to building to save Remove 90 Douglas -fir 28 Good Save Remove 91 Western Hemlock 30 Fair Save Remove 92 Douglas -fir 34 Good Save Remove 93 Douglas -fir 19 Fair Save Remove 94 Douglas -fir 36 Good Save Remove 95 Douglas -fir 24 Good Save Remove 96 Douglas -fir 13 Fair Save top out Remove 97 Pacific Madrone 10 Poor Remove Remove 98 Pacific Madrone 10 VerX Poor Remove Remove 99 Pacific Madrone 16 Fair Save Remove 100 Douglas -fir 30 Fair Save bad Lo2 Remove 101 Douglas -fir 28 Fair Save bad top Save 102 Western Red Cedar 18 Fair Save Save 103 Western Red Cedar 15 Fair Save Save 104 Western Red Cedar 10 Fair Save Save 105 Douglas -fir 32 Fair Save bad top Remove 106 Douglas -fir 30 1 Fair Save bad top Remove 107 Leyland Cypress 8.10 1 Fair Save I Remove 'Potential for Retention — based on tree condition only. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 11 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan APPENDIX II Description of Tree Evaluation Methodology The evaluation of the tree condition on this site included the assessment of: 1. Live -crown ratio, 2. Lateral and terminal branch growth rates, 3. Presence of dieback in minor and major scaffold branches and twigs, 4. Foliage color, 5. Stem soundness and other structural defects, 6. Visual root collar examination, 7. Presence of insect or disease problems. 8. Windfirmness if tree removal will expose this tree to failure. In cases where signs of internal defect or disease were suspected, a core sample was taken to look for stain, decay, and diameter growth rates. Also, root collars were exposed to look for the presence of root disease. In all cases, the overall appearance of the tree was considered relative to its ability to add value to either an individual lot or the entire subdivision. Also, the scale of the tree and its proximity to both proposed and existing houses was considered. Lastly, the potential for incorporation into the project design is evaluated, as well as potential site plan modifications that may allow otherwise removed tree(s) to be both saved and protected in the development. Trees that are preserved in a development must be carefully selected to make sure that they can survive construction impacts, adapt to a new environment, and perform well in the landscape. Healthy, vigorous trees are better able to tolerate impacts such as root injury, changes in soils moisture regimes, and soil compaction than are low vigor trees. Structural characteristics are also important in assessing suitability. Trees with significant decay and other structural defects that cannot be treated are likely to fail. Such trees should not be preserved in areas where damage to people or property could occur. Trees that have developed in a forest stand are adapted to the close, dense conditions found in such stands. When surrounding trees are removed during clearing and grading, the remaining trees are exposed to extremes in wind, temperature, solar radiation, which causes sunscald, and other influences. Young, vigorous trees with well -developed crowns are best able to adapt to these changing site conditions. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 12 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan APPENDIX III Glossary of Forestry and Arboricultural Terminology DBH: Diameter at Breast Height (measured 4.5 ft. above the ground line on the high side of the tree). Live Crown Ratio: Ratio of live foliage on the stem of the tree. Example: A 100' tall tree with 40 feet of live crown would have a 40% live crown ratio. Conifers with less than 30% live crown ratio are generally not considered to be long-term trees in forestry. Crown: Portion of a trees stem covered by live foliage. Crown Position: Position of the crown with respect to other trees in the stand. Dominant Crown Position: Receives light from above and from the sides. Codominant Crown Position: Receives light from above and some from the sides. Intermediate Crown Position: Receives little light from above and none from the sides. Trees tend to be slender with poor live crown ratios. Suppressed Crown Position: Receives no light from above and none from the sides. Trees tend to be slender with poor live crown ratios. Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 13 Mirror Lake Highland — Tree Evaluation and Protection Plan APPENDIX IV Tree Protection Fence Detail ANCHOR POSTS SHOULD BE MINIMUM 6' TALL THE TREE PROTECTION FENCE SHCULO BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION AND GRADING, AND HOT TO BE REMOVED UNTIL FINAL LANDSCAPD4G IS IN PROGRESS. AT NO TIME SHALL EDUIPMFNT ENTER INTO THE ROOT PROTECTION ZONE (RPI). ALL BRUSH CLEANUP WITHIN THE RPZ SHOULD BE COMPLETED BY HANG TO PREVENT DISTURBANCE OF NATIVE GROUND COVERS NO CUTS OR FRLS, UTRjTY TRENCHING. MODIFICATIONS TO DRAINAGE. OR CONCRETE RISE WATER SHOULD IMPACT THE RPZ NO WARES. CABLES, OR OTHER DMCES SHOULD BE ATTACHED TO PROTECTED TREE.$ DURING CONSTRUCTION. IF IMPACTS MUST OCCUR WITHIN THE API, CONTACT nFCi PRIOR TO THE OPERATIONS TO OEIERMINE THE PROPER PROCEDURE TO PROTECT THE TREE'S HEALTH, Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 14 RESUBMITTED DEC 12 2018 Exhibit C MY OF FEDERAL WAY Rain Garden and Porous Aspha tMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Maintenance Requirements Porous Asphalt Maintenance Re uirements Introduction The main goal of maintaining porous asphalt pavement, which is commonly used in parking lots, is to prevent the surface of the pavement and the underlying infiltration bed from being clogged with fine sediments. With proper routine maintenance, the porous asphalt can have a usable life similar to standard asphalt. The parking lot pavement surface should be vacuum swept with a regenerative air sweeper at least twice a year. With a high -volume air blast, the air is forced out at an angel, creating a 'peeling' effect, which then causes the debris to be loosened from the asphalt and sucked into the unit. Simple broom sweepers are not recommended for porous asphalt maintenance. If the pavement surface of the parking lot has become significantly clogged to the point where the routine regenerative air sweeping does not restore permeability, it may be necessary to wash the porous pavement with clean, low pressure water, followed by immediate vacuuming with a pure vacuum sweeper. If the pressure of the washing nozzle is too great, contaminants may be driven further into the porous surface. The landscaping adjacent to your porous asphalt pavement should be well maintained to prevent soil washout onto the parking lot. If there is soil washout, it should be cleaned off the pavement immediately to prevent clogging of the pores. During the winter, it is very important that sand and abrasives not be used for winter maintenance because they will clog the pores; rather, use deicing materials. Standard road salt is acceptable as a deicer. If snow plowing is ever necessary, it should be done carefully by setting the blade about an inch higher than usual. If there is damage to the porous parking lot, non -porous patching mixes can be used to repair the damage - as long as the cumulative area repaired does not exceed 10 percent of the paved area. Larger areas should be patched with approved porous asphalt. No tar based or asphalt sealer of any kind can ever be applied to the porous asphalt areas. Maintenance Whereas the'porous asphalt surface of the driveway and parking areas of Mirror Lake Highland are an integral part of the storm management system the following required practices and maintenance will be performed by and paid for by the owners of the project or their subcontractors. Per the CC&R's for Mirror Lake Highland, The City of Federal Way has the right to enter for periodic inspection to confirm the adequate functioning of the porous surface and underlying rock gallery. If proper maintenance is not being performed by the Home Owner Association (HOA), the City can perform the required maintenance at the expense of the HOA if necessary. Requirements: Care must be taken to insure no granular or organic materials such as bark, soil, or sand are deposited directly on the porous asphalt without protection underneath. Even with the use of protection, the area should be blown off with a commercial air blower after completion of the task. 2. Any soil or granular wash out from adjacent landscaping will be cleaned off immediately. 3. Any oil -based liquid spills should be cleaned up immediately. 4. The driveway and parking area porous surface will be blown off with a commercial air blower once a month during regular common area landscape maintenance. 5. At least twice a year (three times are scheduled below) the pavement area will be swept with a regenerative air sweeper. 6. Any repair of the asphalt surface will be completed within 30 days of the damage occurring 7. Monthly maintenance will be confirmed by the appropriate HOA representative by entering the vendor and the date the service was performed (See next page for schedule of maintenance) Parking Lot Schedule: Year- Blower Cleaning Regen AIFSW(N iUplII Any Washouts Repairs January Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Immediately w/in30days February Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Immediately 7/in30days March Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Confirmed Date Immediately w/in30days April Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Immediately w/in30days May Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Immediately w/in30days June Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Immediately w/in30days J my Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Confirmed Date Immediately w/in30days August Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Immediately w/in30days September Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Immediately 77,730days October Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Immediately 71in30days November Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Confirmed/Date Immediately w/in30days December Vendor Vendor Vendor Confirmed/Date Immediately w/in30days Homeowner's Manual To Their New and Existing Landscape Dos and Don'ts 9/26/2017 Farmer Frog Contents Pruning..........................................................................................................................................................................3 Deadheading..................................................................................................................................................................3 Fertilizing......................................................................................................................................................................3 Pestmanagement...........................................................................................................................................................4 Irrigation........................................................................................................................................................................4 Soil, mulching, weed control.........................................................................................................................................4 Homeowner's maintenance manual for existing and newly installed Rain Gardens.....................................................5 Homeowner's maintenance manual for existing and newly installed Cisterns..............................................................6 Homeowner's guideline for "putting mixed garden and rain garden to bed" in the Fall ......................... :..................... 8 Winterizingirrigation .................................. ..............................................................................I.............................9 Winterizingwater feature........................................................................................................................................10 Aboutsustainable landscaping....................................................................................................................................I I Aboutedible landscaping............................................................................................................................................14 Homeowner's maintenance manual for existing and restored STEEP SLOPES.........................................................15 Monitoring and maintenance recommended for steep slopes..................................................................................16 • Year 1.......................................................................................................................................................16 Year2.......................................................................................................................................................16 • Year 3.......................................................................................................................................................17 Year4.......................................................................................................................................................17 • Year 5.......................................................................................................................................................17 2 1 P a a e Pruning Pruning is surgery. It creates wounds on any plant and can often lead to infections and death. It is a gardening technique that is overused and misused by people, even by tree workers and landscapers. Pruning should be practiced only with clear goals and plans as a plant health, food or plant product production promoting solution with the exception of hedging. Pruning should always follow the specifications provided by the International Society of Arboriculture. For example, instead of topping the trees to open or preserve a view, selectively prune out branches to window the view through the tree canopy. Do not prune the new shrubs and trees unless damaged branches are present. The plants need to be established before any non -emergency pruning is recommended. It is important to limit pruning to minimal maintenance in order to preserve the health of the trees and shrubs even on food plants. If the landscape was designed and installed by Farmer Frog, all of the plants specified in the design will stay within the desired size range even if they are never pruned. It is IMPORTANT to not use pruning techniques to alter the trees naturally beautiful shape since such practices will not only deform the trees, but will devalue the landscape and may lead to the trees' death. The exception to this rule is for fruit trees. In not production focused plantings, prune shrubs and trees by cutting out broken or dead branches. If a branch is too long, cut entire branches and branchletts back to another slightly larger branch. Do not cut branches halfway or in the middle because these cuts promote unhealthy growth or branch dieback. Deadheading Remove dead flowers or seed heads only if they are truly unsightly or messy (e.g.: rotting). These plant parts are important food and nest sources to birds and other local wildlife. These vegetative parts often provide winter interests and are actually part of the seasonal design therefore it is best to wait with their removal until the next spring. Fertilizing Fertilize by applying high quality organic compost (such as Cedar Grove or Cascade Composting products or equivalent) at the base of each plant at the time of planting and every year. If slow release fertilizer is desired, use an organic material available at suppliers. Make sure the fertilizer is covered with a thin coat 3111aue of mulch because wildlife often mistakes them for food, can eat them and it can be toxic to them. Compost is the best fertilizer and soil builder tool we have however. Pest management All of the plants are pest -free at the time of installation if installed by Farmer Frog. If pest damage is observed during the following months or years, it is important to use IPM (Integrated Pest Management) techniques as the only solution to any pest problems. Some damage (chewing, webbing, etc.) can be caused by beneficial insects (especially in a wildlife habitat) thus positive pest identification before any prevention or pest control is attempted is essential. Farmer Frog is a permaculture based organization; however any pesticide/herbicide application (even organic) is kept to zero on sites maintained by us according to our policy. Pest management can be and should be done with sometimes changing out severely infected and/or dying plants rather than trying chemical control (even organic) that will certainly effect other things as well, things, that should be left alone. Fungicides for example will kill molds, AND destroy beneficial "Mycorrhiza" in the soil. Irrigation Irrigate the new installation once a day for the first few weeks unless it is raining and the mulch is moist. Once plants are starting to get established, the watering is reduced to just a few times a week and to once a week for the first few growing seasons or in case of severe drought condition. It is important to remember that in severe drought irrigation maybe illegal. Farmer Frog designs and plants water -wise landscapes that are drought tolerant and need less watering. Soil, mulching, weed control The soil is always amended by Farmer Frog based on the recent BMP (Best Management Practices) specifications before plants are installed. Woody mulch has to cover all of the beds at least 2" deep. This mulch layer will have to be reapplied annually or as necessary (maybe less frequent) in order to keep a nice 2" deep cover. Temporary weed fabric, such as thick cardboard and/or burlap layers placed under the mulch will help reducing the weeding maintenance if appropriate (not to be used in some restoration or LID projects). 41Pa—,e Weeding should be done by hand. Chemical weed control (even organic material) should be avoided as it is often detrimental to the health of the environment and people. Many plants that are considered weeds are beneficial for wildlife, edible and native plants. Understanding what really a weed is - is the first important step. Natural and sustainable landscapes fend off weeds by having low plants covering the area growing in lush, thick covers and by having woody mulch layers in the soil. Homeowner's maintenance manual for existing and newly installed Rain Gardens Mulch annually. Mulching is the most important part of rain garden maintenance. Mulch keeps the soil moist, cool in summer, warm in winter. Un-mulched surfaces may erode or develop into a crusted surface, a condition in which the soil surface forms a hard, impervious layer. Mulching also protects plants and reduces weed growth. It helps to reduce compaction if the garden is walked in. Each spring, rain gardens should be re - mulched to maintain a 2-3 inches of woody mulch layer. Minimize sediment flow into the garden. Sediment in a rain garden can clog up inflow and overflow and decrease infiltration. By cleaning out and monitoring the cobble stone armor at each inflow and overflow areas, sediment can be kept to minimum. Cobbles inside the ponding area may have some plant debris on them which helps keeping the soil below fertile as it breaks down. 51Page Weed and water the garden during plant establishment. There will be varying degrees of weeding and watering. It is important to weed regularly, like once a quarter, during plant establishment, as newly planted species may have a tough time competing with weeds. It is important to know what the real weeds are and what things will become part of the natural system. Once plants become established, less weeding will be required. The plants in the rain garden will need to be watered regularly during establishment to ensure healthy growth the same way as in any other planted area. Use a plank to enter the rain garden on to minimize the soil compaction. Keep the garden happy and clean. Rain gardens should be free of garbage. Replanting may be necessary over time. Try limiting walking inside the ponding area to a minimum since that can cause compaction and reduce infiltration capacity. Use sustainable gardening practices only and allow wildlife to make it their home. Keep the gutters clean! Clean all gutters before and after the rainy season to keep all inflow systems running smoothly. Install a Leaf -guard screen if it makes the maintenance easier. Homeowner's maintenance manual for existing and newly installed ulisternS Keep the gutters clean! Clean all gutters before and after the rainy season to keep all inflow systems running smoothly. Install a Leaf -guard screen if it makes the maintenance easier. Keep the sludge strainer clean! Clean the sludge strainer before, during and after rainy season by twisting it off, emptying it, maybe washing it and putting it back on. Aect your pump! Make sure your cistern is full when you water (you can check ough the top opening). If it is not, fill it up with your hose first. Make sure to mect the irrigation line to the pump's outlet. - Turn off the ball valve to the rain garden. - Turn on the ball valve to the pump. - Plug in the pump to the extension cord. - Keep an eye on the water level in the cistern (every ten minutes). - When done, or when the cistern is almost empty, unplug the pump. - Turn off the ball valve to the pump. - Turn on the ball valve to the rain garden. ie cisterns clean! Clean all cisterns before and after the rainy season. First, close the ball valves (to the rain garden and to the pump keeping out the sludge) shown with the yellow arrows. Second, open the clean out valves, (one between the cisterns under the window and one after the cisterns before the pump) shown with the red arrows. Put a garden hose into each tank from the top clean up opening (needs to unscrew it) shown with green arrow. Wash them out one after the other until no more sludge is coming out from them. Close the tanks back, the clean out valves back and open the ball valve to the rain garden leaving the system in stand-by for rainy weather. wit Homeowner's guideline for "putting mixed garden and rain garden to bed" in the Fall October -November Fall is the time to prepare your landscape for next year's beauty. It is time to review your landscape to determine what plants did well and which ones struggled. It is also the time to plan for next year. Clean up Remove and discard any diseased plants and foliage. May cut back some of the dormant perennials, but leave enough for the birds and wildlife. Pull out any noxious weeds: ivy; blackberry, morning glory, etc. Prune out dead or diseased branches from trees and shrubs. Remove dangerous branches that overhang walkways, or are touching the house. If there is a question about the tree dying, consider hiring a tree risk assessor to evaluate whether it should be removed entirely or if it can be saved. Plant for spring Plant spring flowering bulbs (tulip, daffodil, hyacinth, crocus, smaller iris, fawn lily, dogtooth violet, trillium and lilies) in October, before the ground gets too hard/cold to work with. No bulb food is needed if the soil is rich and full of life. Spring bulbs should be fed by using compost in the summer as soon as they are done blooming and their leaves died back. Mulch the beds If the natural debris from the plants is disease free, it is advisable to leave on the ground and allow it decomposing where it fell. Plants are designed by nature to feed themselves by dropping branches and foliage on the ground. Landscapes should imitate nature since it is the most efficient and environmentally stable way to garden. Spread organic mulch over the ornamental landscape beds and rain gardens, such as woody mulch if a tidier look is desired. This should be done without cleaning up first, just cover the debris with the mulch in order 81Pa e to keep as much organic material on the ground as possible. Shredded leaves work great and look natural, but so do wood chips or chunky bark. Do not rake the soil! Protect tender and/or containerized plants Bring any tender potted plant closer to the house for protection from wind, rain & freezing temperatures. Insulate them with a layer of compost and a blanket of cardboard and/or woody mulch. Avoid straw as this may encourage slugs and snails and spread unwanted seeds. Farmer Frog uses frost -proof containers unless Client requests otherwise. Aerate the existing lawn It is recommended that existing lawns are aerated twice a year (fall and spring). Do not use synthetic fertilizer in the fall and use compost with care also. It is important to avoid nutrients leaching into the stormwater. It is the best practice to top -dress the lawn with compost using no fertilizers at all, since it will slowly release nutrients. Fertilizers can be mistaken by birds and wildlife for food and if it is digested, it can be lethal. Most fertilizers do not get used up completely and will wash into the runoff when it rains. Lime can be applied in February or March when the snow is melted, but the temperature is still around freezing during the night. 40 pounds of lime should cover 1000 sqft of lawn. Reseeding must be done with care and preferably early fall or in the spring. Covering the seeds with a thin layer of compost helps to hide the seeds from birds and insulates the seeds from cold/heat/wind as well as provides nutrients to them. The seed will need "food" to get going (roots and leaves). If reseeding is done in the late fall, it may not be mature enough when it starts to freeze. Sod can be planted anytime during the year, but sod often results in weaker lawns than seeded grass. To repair smaller bare areas or to increase the density of an existing lawn, overseed using a suitable grass mixture for your conditions and top dress with '/2 inch of compost. Winterizing irrigation 4 Close the gate valve Close both ball valves just before and after the backflow preventer l� Attach the compressor to the quick coupler; use a %2" key from any of the local irrigation supplier store and have a compressor that is at least 6SCFM 91Pa`*e OF Remove the end cap from each zone Blow the system out with no more then 40 PSI pressure doing one zone after the other; Set the timer on manual start-up on Zone One and blow the system until only mist comes out (should not take long), than move the timer to manual start-up on Zone Two and blow it out. Continue until all zones are done. l6 Spring Start-up: Open all the valves; flush the system by running it with no caps. When the lines are clean (maybe 10 minutes), close the caps and run the system again. Make sure it waters. Program the timer to 1-2 times a week or as necessary. After the first month check the filter and clean it if necessary. Repeat the filter -check every 6 month. Winterizing water feature 19 Close the gate valve or any other valve that controls the automated refill system, if there is a refill system. Stop feeding the fish as the weather gets cooler. 4 Allow the water feature to run non-stop all winter as once it is stopped freezing can damage the pipelines and pumps. %F If running it non-stop is not feasible, drain the water feature completely dry and let it sit until spring. OF Spring Start-up: Open all the valves for the automated refill system if there is one; flush the water feature by running it full and overflowing the entire system. Clean any debris and gunk out. Make sure it runs as intended. Check the filter and clean it if necessary. Repeat the filter -check every 6 month. OF If the system has fish in it, the fish should not be fed until the outside day and night temperature gets above 50 degrees and the fish is active because the fish can die in cold weather due to the unabsorbed food fermenting in their digestive tracks. 101f'a—e About sustainable landscaping Benefits of Sustainable Landscaping Sustainable landscapes are less expensive to maintain and need less water, fertilizer, and even labor. (If properly placed, for example, trees can allow sunlight to warm the house in the winter and provide shade in the summer, therefore saving overall heating and cooling costs.) These landscapes enhance and overtime build the soil and microclimates. They provide a habitat for wildlife as well as for people and can add value to a property. Four Main Building Blocks/Components of Sustainable Landscaping The four main components of sustainable landscaping are • healthy, organic soil; • water -wise irrigation and water feature systems; • "right plant in the right place"; • wildlife habitat. Healthy, organic Soil Soil is the most important element of a landscape and it is often the most neglected or abused. During the building and development of urban areas, much (at least 8 inches) of the natural topsoil is removed, leaving the hardpan from beneath. Developers for the longest time used to spread about 2 inches of topsoil over the lawn and garden areas when they finish a home. Lawns need a minimum of good 6 inches of good soil to develop strong root systems. Trees and shrubs need even more to ensure their structural stability. Organic soil means the soil has high content of good organic material. It is rich in nutrients and tiny, even microscopic critters that enhance the soil, such as earthworms, bacteria and other decomposers. Adding and sometimes incorporating 12-14 inches of compost to new beds and 6-8 inches to a new lawn will greatly improve the growth of the new plants. Top -dress an existing lawn with a %2 inch of compost each year to improve the health of the grass. 11IPa<ae Instead of concrete blocks, use compost soxx which can be stacked to provide a wall and can be directly planted with native plant material. These systems provide healthy soils and plants in one simple solution. Water -wise Systems Water has become increasingly in short supply due to climatic changes around the world. By planting drought tolerant and native plants, the year-round watering needs of a landscape can be reduced dramatically. Lawns, which are not native plants in the Pacific Northwest usually, need more water and less acidic pH than native plants so decreasing the size of the lawn and installing additional beds will also reduce water and fertilizer needs. By installing an automated irrigation system that is run by a "smart controller" and with a rain sensor, lawns and planting beds can be watered efficiently during non -peak water hours. Allowing lawns to go dormant in the summer minimizes crane fly infestations and other pests, even moles (remember: moles are aerators....), which prefer moist soil conditions versus dry. To mitigate erosion and pollution caused by stormwater runoff into the streams and other natural water bodies, rain gardens as well as other Low Impact Development (LID) solutions can be used. These techniques are bioengineered, based on the expected volume of water and the site soil conditions to slowly infiltrate, percolate and reuse the excess rainwater. The plants in a rain garden are selected specifically for their ability to tolerate and reuse the sometimes severe amount of water and pollution. Rainwater harvesting, using gutter systems, rain barrels and DekDrain or deck covering systems under overhead decks can also help reducing the stormwater run off while providing supplemental irrigation water for a garden. Turf blocks and pervious pavers are solutions that improve drainage and are a great alternative to asphalt driveways and cement walkways. Gravel, bark or woody mulch paths allow water, rain to penetrate the soil right where it falls thus minimize runoff. 121Pase "Right plant for the right place" Using the right plant for every site condition improves the chance of survival of the plant and can decrease its watering needs. Planting drought tolerant plants like sedums, lavender, rosemary, and other tough herbs and perennials along areas near concrete or paving provide better success with less fuss as these surfaces increase the heat of the adjacent soil. Planting appropriate natives and drought loving plants under large conifers can turn a trouble spot into a garden since the soil under these trees will be naturally drier. It is important to always keep in mind the sun/shade and other requirements when placing plants. Habitat for Wildlife Plants that attract birds and bees provide food and often shelter for wildlife. Dead snags that are left in place provide a home to millions of insects. Remember, insects are mostly beneficial. Leaf mulch and grass clippings return nitrogen to the soil when they are broken down by the microbes in the soil. Running water (not stagnant) provides a soothing sound for people and birds and other animals a source of water during the dry summer months. How to preserve the trees and vegetation Prior to construction, during the design phase is the time to ensure there is a preservation plan in place for both vegetation and soil. During construction, it is important to avoid the trees and set up flagged protection zones complete with signage around the vegetation to be preserved. If soil must be disturbed and excavated, preserving the soil either on site or off site is the best practice. Arrangement has to be in place to bring it back after the construction is complete. 131Pa�—,e Once the landscape is installed, a management plan is useful to preserve the habitat areas. The plan should assess the health of the habitat and provide further recommendations. It should discuss topics such as proper pruning of trees and shrubs and how these techniques improve the health of the plants if done right. How to Create a Sustainable Landscape When creating a sustainable landscape, it is important to keep in mind that long term goal is for the site to maintain itself, without never-ending additional help from people. If properly designed and installed, the maintenance requirements should drastically reduce within three to five years. Starting with a good design that takes into consideration the four main components of a sustainable landscape, a beautiful, functional, healthy and easy to care -for garden can be built. About edible landscaping If you have an edible landscape, caring for it will depend on your site conditions, crops, the techniques utilized in your garden, season extenders, irrigation systems and energy generators you have. It is good practice to plan your production at least one year out. It is also important to keep a journal tracking what, when and how was done on the site so rotation plans can be followed. Make sure you discuss your needs with the Farmer Frog team and arrange for a customized production and management recommendation regardless of the size of your garden or farm. Having a step-by-step guide fitting your specific needs will help you succeed with growing your own food, reducing your carbon and water footprint. 141Pa_e Homeowner's maintenance manual for existing and restored STEEP SLOPES Mulch annually. Mulching is the most important part of the slope maintenance. Mulch keeps the soil moist, cool in summer, warn in winter. Un-mulched surfaces may erode or develop into a crusted surface, a condition in which the soil surface forms a hard, impervious layer. Mulching also protects plants and reduces weed growth. It helps to reduce compaction if the slope is walked in. Each year, slopes should be re -mulched to maintain a 2-3 inches of woody mulch or compost layer whichever is specified. Minimize erosion and plant die -off. Sediment in drain pipes or other drainage structures can clog up and cause failures. Make sure these pipes are built to code and maintained as specified. Check to make sure compost soxx and logs are in place once heavy rains start. These may have some plant debris on them which helps keeping the soil below fertile as it breaks down. Do not use these structures as stairs when walking on the slope. Weed and water the garden during plant establishment. There will be varying degrees of weeding and watering. It is important to weed regularly, like once each quarter, or annually as a minimum, during plant establishment, as newly planted species may have a tough time competing with weeds. It is important to know what the real weeds are and what things will become part of the natural system. Blackberries, Japanese knotweeds, and English ivy are the greatest concerns. Once plants become established, less weeding will be required. The plants in the restoration will need to be watered regularly during establishment to ensure healthy growth the same way as in any other planted area. The roots and/or root crowns of these weeds must be removed by hand. Only hand weeding is acceptable on the slope restoration (Pesticide and powered equipment use will lead to destruction in the restored area therefore it is not recommended.) Irrigation systems must be maintained per specifications, these include winterization and spring start-up completed by professionals. Irrigation should be checked at the time of weeding visits. All controllers should be located and checked at this time as well. 151Paae Keep the slope survival rate in check. The slope should be free of garbage. Replanting may be necessary over time ensuring that the prescribed survival rate (usually no less than 80%) is achieved. Try limiting walking inside the restoration area to a minimum since that can cause compaction and reduce infiltration capacity. Use sustainable gardening practices only and allow wildlife to make it their home. Use only organic fertilizers, such as compost and no pesticides or herbicides. Keep flags on each plant. Spring is a good time to tally what lived and what needs replacement. Monitoring and maintenance recommended for steep slopes l0 Year 1 — During the season after the rains and just before the rains a team of professionals should walk the entire site and check each plant installed in the prior year. The visit should include tallying the condition of each plant, checking for any flags missing and replacing such flags as well as making sure the remaining flags are visible and correct. Condition of plants should be noted in a chart for reference during the following years. Tracking all signs of wildlife activity during the visit can help with successful management in case wildlife is damaging new plants. Replacement of plants that died or are dying should be done only if the survival rate is less than 80% of any given species or if high rate of plants died off in a given area thus opening the future canopy. Replacement should preferable be planting a similar species and size plants that died. The replacement plants will need to be watered in at the time of planting. The maintenance tasks should include removal of invasive weeds, application of compost and mulch around the plants. Managing sprouting tree stumps is also an important maintenance task. Thinning sprouts leaving only strong, well connected ones to become multi -trunk trees can help the new stump -sprout vegetation live longer. Once finished, the crew should collect any non -natural debris generated. Ot Year 2 - During the season after the rains and just before the rains a team of professionals should walk the entire site and check each plant installed during previous years. The visit should include tallying the condition of each plant, checking for any flags missing and replacing such flags as well as making sure the remaining flags are visible and correct. Condition of plants should be noted in a chart similar used before for reference during the following years. Tracking all signs of wildlife activity during the visit can help with successful management in case wildlife is damaging new plants. Replacement of plants that died or are dying should be done only if the survival rate is less than 80% of any given species or if high rate of plants died off in a given area thus opening the future canopy. Replacement should preferable be planting a similar species and size plants that was originally planted. The replacement plants will need to be watered in at the time of planting. The maintenance tasks should include removal of invasive weeds, application of compost and mulch around the plants. To manage tree sprouts, thinning the sprouts leaving only strong, well connected ones to become multi -trunk trees can help the new stump -sprout vegetation live longer. Remove any week new shoots letting the ones from the previous year get stronger. Once finished, the crew should collect any non -natural debris generated. 161Page Year 3 - During the season after the rains and just before the rains a team of professionals should walk the entire site and check each plant installed during previous years. The visit should include tallying the condition of each plant, checking for any flags missing and replacing such flags as well as making sure the remaining flags are visible and correct. Condition of plants should be noted in a chart similar used before for reference during the following years. Tracking all signs of wildlife activity during the visit can help with successful management in case wildlife is damaging new plants. Replacement of plants that died or are dying should be done only if high rate of plants died off in a given area thus opening the future canopy. Replacement should preferable be planting a similar species and size plants that was originally planted. The replacement plants will need to be watered in at the time of planting. The maintenance tasks should include removal of invasive weeds, application of compost and mulch around the plants. To manage tree sprouts, thinning the sprouts leaving only strong, well connected ones to become multi -trunk trees can help the new stump -sprout vegetation live longer. Remove any week new shoots letting the ones from the previous years get stronger. Once finished, the crew should collect any non -natural debris generated. It Year 4 - During the season after the rains and just before the rains a team of professionals should walk the entire site and check each plant installed during previous years. The visit should include tallying the condition of each plant, checking for any flags missing and replacing such flags as well as making sure the remaining flags are visible and correct. Condition of plants should be noted in a chart similar used before for reference during the following years. Tracking all signs of wildlife activity during the visit can help with successful management in case wildlife is damaging new plants. No plants should be replaced if died. The maintenance tasks should include removal of invasive weeds, application of compost and mulch around the plants. To manage tree sprouts, thinning the sprouts leaving only strong, well connected ones to become multi -trunk trees can help the new stump -sprout vegetation live longer. Remove any week new shoots letting the ones from the previous years get stronger. Once finished, the crew should collect any non -natural debris generated. It Year 5 - During the season after the rains and just before the rains a team of professionals should walk the entire site and check each plant installed during previous years. The visit should include tallying the condition of each plant, checking for all flags or other markers and collecting these from the site. Condition of plants should be noted in a chart similar used before for reference. Tracking all signs of wildlife activity during the visit can help with measurement of success. No plants should be replaced if died. The maintenance tasks should include removal of invasive weeds, application of compost and mulch around the plants. To manage tree sprouts, thinning the sprouts leaving only strong, well connected ones to become multi -trunk trees can help the new stump -sprout vegetation live longer. Remove any week new shoots letting the ones from the previous years get stronger. Once finished, the crew should collect any non -natural debris generated, close out the site and let the maintenance path, if any, grow in with vegetation. 171Page Rain Garden Schedule: Year- Weed & Clean January vendor Confirmed / Date February Vendor Confirmed / Date March Vendor Confirmed / Date April Vendor Confirmed / Date May Vendor Confirmed / Date June Vendor Confirmed / Date July Vendor Confirmed / Date August Vendor Confirmed / Date September Vendor Confirmed / Date October Vendor Confirmed / Date November Vendor Confirmed / Date December Vendor Confirmed / Date kh Vendor Type Amount Confirmed / Date reflilize. Vendor Type Amount Confirmed / Date Replant vendor as needed Vendor as nee e Vendor as needed Vendor as needed Vendor as needed Vendor as needed Vendor as needed Vendor as needed Vendor as needed Vendor as needed 3 Lot Report- MIRROR LAKE HIGHLAND PLAT Mon Dec 17 07:48:35 2018 ORIGINAL LOT, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7055 122172.669 1266107.510 0.000 N 88047152" W 100.000 7058 122174.767 1266007.532 100.000 N 01006108" E 140.002 7078 122314.743 1266010.225 240.002 N 88°48136" W 9.423 7079 122314.939 1266000.805 249.425 S 01005125" W 880.644 7080 121434.455 1265984.047 1130.069 Radius: 316.000 Length: 27.671 Chord: 27.662 Delta: 5001102" Chord BRG: N 71007,181, E Rad-In: S 21°23113" E Rad-Out: S 16022'll" E Radius Pt: 7003 121140.215,1266099.282 Tangent: 13.844 Dir: Right Tangent -In: N 68036147/, E Tangent -Out: N 73037149" E Non Tangential -In Tangential -Out 7002 121443.405 1266010.221 1157.740 Radius: 316.000 Length: 42.727 Chord: 42.695 Delta: 7°44150" Chord BRG: N 77030113" E Rad-In: S 16°22'll" E Rad-Out: S 08°37122" E Radius Pt: 7003 121140.215,1266099.282 Tangent: 21.396 Dir: Right Tangent -In: N 73037149/, E Tangent -Out: N 81°22138" E Tangential -In Tangential -Out 7004 121452.643 1266051.905 1200.467 Radius: 316.000 Length: 41.997 Chord: 41.966 Delta: 7036153" Chord BRG: N 85011105" E Rad-In: S 08037122" E Rad-Out: S 01°00129" E Radius Pt: 7003 121140.215,1266099.282 Tangent: 21.030 Dir: Right Tangent -In: N 81022138" E Tangent -Out: N 88'59131" E Tangential -In Non Tangential -Out 7008 121456.166 1266093.723 1242.464 N 01006108" E 716.636 7055 122172.669 1266107.510 1959.100 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 1959.100 Area: 80597.59SQ.FT., 1.85ACRES RESUBMITTED DEC 17 2018 CITY OF FEDER&L WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEW LOT 1, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7000 121511.727 1266053.029 0.000 N 88°54135" W 41.500 7001 121512.517 1266011.537 41.500 S O100512511 W 69.124 7002 121443.405 1266010.221 110.624 Radius: 316.000 Length: 42.727 Chord: 42.695 Delta: 7044150/1 Chord BRG: N 77030,1311 E Rad-In: S 16°22'11" E Rad-Out: S 08°37122" E Radius Pt: 7003 121140.215,1266099.282 Tangent: 21.396 Dir: Right Tangent -In: N 73037/49/1 E Tangent -Out: N 81°22138" E Non Tangential -In Non Tangential -Out 7004 121452.643 1266051.905 153.351 N 01*0512511 E 59.094 7000 121511.727 1266053.029 212.446 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 212.446 Area: 2639.98SQ.FT., 0.06ACRES LOT 2, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7005 121516.100 1266094.876 0.000 N 88054135" W 41.756 7006 121516.895 1266053.128 41.756 S O1005125" W 5.169 7000 121511.727 1266053.029 46.925 S O1005125" W 59.094 7004 121452.643 1266051.905 106.020 N 81022138" E 0.000 7007 121452.643 1266051.905 106.020 Radius: 316.000 Length: 41.997 Chord: 41.966 Delta: 7°36'53" Chord BRG: N 85011'05" E Rad-In: S 08037122" E Rad-Out: S O1000129" E Radius Pt: 7003 121140.215,1266099.282 Tangent: 21.030 Dir: Right Tangent -In: N 81022138" E Tangent -Out: N 88059131" E Tangential -In Non Tangential -Out 7008 121456.166 1266093.723 148.017 N 01006108" E 59.945 7005 121516.100 1266094.876 207.962 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 207.962 Area: 2573.33SQ.FT., 0.06ACRES LOT 3, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing 7009 121578.334 N 88054135/1 W 53.503 7010 121579.352 S O1005,251, W 33.847 7011 121545.512 S 45011/52/1 E 14.692 7012 121535.158 S 88054/35/1 E 42.874 7013 121534.342 N O100610811 E 44.000 7009 121578.334 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 188.917 Area: 2300.04SQ.FT., 0.05ACRES Easting Station 1266096.074 0.000 1266042.580 53.503 1266041.936 87.350 1266052.361 102.043 1266095.227 144.917 1266096.074 188.917 LOT 4, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7014 121614.328 1266096.766 0.000 N 88054/35/1 W 40.490 7015 121615.098 1266056.283 40.490 N 88054/35/1 W 5.621 7016 121615.205 1266050.664 46.111 S 46005/25/1 W 10.465 7017 121607.947 1266043.124 56.576 S 01005/25/1 W 28.600 7010 121579.352 1266042.580 85.176 S 88054/35/1 E 53.503 7009 121578.334 1266096.074 138.680 N O100610811 E 36.000 7014 121614.328 1266096.766 174.680 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 174.680 Area: 1898.88SQ.FT., 0.04ACRES LOT 5, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7018 121671.319 1266097.863 0.000 N 88054135/1 W 35.422 7019 121671.993 1266062.447 35.422 S 46005/25/1 W 6.881 7020 121667.221 1266057.490 42.303 S 46005/25/1 W 0.304 7021 121667.011 1266057.272 42.606 S O100512511 W 51.922 7015 121615.098 1266056.283 94.528 S 88054135/1 E 40.490 7014 121614.328 1266096.766 135.018 N O1*0610811 E 57.002 7018 121671.319 1266097.863 192.020 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 192.020 Area: 2295.46SQ.FT., 0.05ACRES LOT 6, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7022 121759.305 1266099.556 0.000 N 88'54135" W 40.306 7023 121760.072 1266059.258 40.306 N 88054/35/1 W 0.000 7024 121760.072 1266059.257 40.306 S O1°05125" W 50.462 7025 121709.619 1266058.297 90.768 S 43054/35/1 E 5.710 7026 121705.505 1266062.258 96.478 S 88054/35/1 E 36.257 7027 121704.815 1266098.508 132.735 N O100610811 E 54.500 7022 121759.305 1266099.556 187.235 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 187.235 Area: 2188.21SQ.FT., 0.05ACRES LOT 7, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7028 121797.298 1266100.287 0.000 N 88054/35/1 W 52.996 7029 121798.307 1266047.300 52.996 S 01005125/1 W 25.318 7030 121772.994 1266046.819 78.314 S 43054/351/ E 17.936 7031 121760.072 1266059.257 96.249 S 43054'35" E 0.000 7023 121760.072 1266059.258 96.249 S 88054/35/1 E 40.306 7022 121759.305 1266099.556 136.555 N O100610811 E 38.000 7028 121797.298 1266100.287 174.555 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 174.555 Area: 1933.28SQ.FT., 0.04ACRES LOT 8, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7032 121833.291 1266100.980 0.000 N 88054/35/1 W 40.490 7033 121834.062 1266060.497 40.490 N 88*5413511 W 6.314 7034 121834.182 1266054.184 46.804 S 46*0512511 W 8.768 7035 121828.101 1266047.868 55.572 S 01005/25/1 W 29.800 7029 121798.307 1266047.300 85.372 S 88054/35/1 E 52.996 7028 121797.298 1266100.287 138.368 N O100610811 E 36.000 7032 121833.291 1266100.980 174.368 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 174.368 Area: 1888.78SQ.FT., 0.04ACRES LOT 9, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing 7036 121906.447 N 88054135/1 W 40.505 7037 121907.218 S O1°05'25" W 48.593 7038 121858.634 S 43054/35/1 E 7.644 7039 121853.127 S 88054135/1 E 35.089 7040 121852.459 N O100610811 E 53.998 7036 121906.447 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 185.827 Area: 2172.25SQ.FT., 0.05ACRES Easting Station 1266102.387 0.000 1266061.890 40.505 1266060.965 89.098 1266066.266 96.741 1266101.348 131.830 1266102.387 185.827 LOT 10, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing 7041 122027.425 N 88054/35/1 W 35.125 7042 122028.093 S 46005/25/1 W 7.644 7043 122022.792 S O100512511 W 51.596 7044 121971.206 S 88054/35/1 E 40.518 7045 121970.435 N 01006,0811 E 57.001 7041 122027.425 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 191.884 Area: 2295.30SQ.FT., 0.05ACRES Easting Station 1266104.715 0.000 1266069.596 35.125 1266064.089 42.769 1266063.108 94.365 1266103.619 134.883 1266104.715 191.884 LOT 11, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7046 122097.414 1266106.062 0.000 N 88054/35/1 W 54.136 7047 122098.444 1266051.935 54.136 S 01005125/1 W 34.379 7048 122064.072 1266051.281 88.515 S 47016134/1 E 12.977 7049 122055.267 1266060.814 101.492 S 88054135/1 E 3.893 7050 122055.193 1266064.706 105.384 S 88054/35/1 E 40.536 7051 122054.422 1266105.235 145.920 N O1°06108" E 43.000 7046 122097.414 1266106.062 188.920 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 188.920 Area: 2285.86SQ.FT., 0.05ACRES LOT 12, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing 7052 122134.407 N 88054/35/1 W 46.726 7053 122135.296 S 46005125/1 W 10.491 7054 122128.021 S O1005,2511 W 29.582 7047 122098.444 S 88054/35/1 E 54.136 7046 122097.414 N O100610811 E 37.000 7052 122134.407 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 177.935 Area: 1975.67SQ.FT., 0.05ACRES Easting Station 1266106.774 0.000 1266060.057 46.726 1266052.498 57.217 1266051.935 86.798 1266106.062 140.935 1266106.774 177.935 LOT 13, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing 7055 122172.669 N 88047/52/1 W 51.750 7056 122173.755 S O100512511 W 33.345 7057 122140.416 S 43°51141" E 7.100 7053 122135.296 S 88054135/1 E 46.726 7052 122134.407 N O100610811 E 38.269 7055 122172.669 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 177.190 Area: 1970.28SQ.FT., 0.05ACRES Easting Station 1266107.510 0.000 1266055.771 51.750 1266055.137 85.095 1266060.057 92.196 1266106.774 138.921 1266107.510 177.190 LOT 14, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7056 122173.755 1266055.771 0.000 N 88°47152" W 48.250 7058 122174.767 1266007.532 48.250 N O100610811 E 140.002 7078 122314.743 1266010.225 188.252 N 88048/36/1 W 9.423 7079 122314.939 1266000.805 197.675 S O100512511 W 140.000 7059 122174.964 1265998.141 337.675 S 01°05125" W 44.976 7060 122129.996 1265997.285 382.651 S 88°54135" E 46.124 7061 122129.119 1266043.401 428.775 N 46005/25/1 E 16.290 7057 122140.416 1266055.137 445.065 N O100512511 E 33.345 7056 122173.755 1266055.771 478.410 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 478.410 Area: 3840.07SQ.FT., 0.09ACRES LOT 15, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing 7062 122089.875 N 43054/35/1 W 9.630 7063 122096.813 N 88654135/1 W 36.190 7064 122097.502 S O100512511 W 57.000 7065 122040.512 S 88054/35/1 E 43.000 7066 122039.694 N 01005125/1 E 50.190 7062 122089.875 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 196.011 Area: 2427.82SQ.FT., 0.06ACRES Easting Station 1266039.529 0.000 1266032.850 9.630 1265996.666 45.821 1265995.582 102.821 1266038.574 145.821 1266039.529 196.011 LOT 16, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7067 122035.448 1266051.496 0.000 N 43054135/1 W 5.657 7068 122039.523 1266047.572 5.657 N 88054135/1 W 9.000 7066 122039.694 1266038.574 14.657 N 88054135/1 W 43.000 7065 122040.512 1265995.582 57.657 S 01'05125" W 37.000 7069 122003.519 1265994.878 94.657 S 88054135/1 E 52.000 7070 122002.530 1266046.868 146.657 N 46005125/1 E 5.657 7071 122006.453 1266050.944 152.314 N O100512511 E 29.000 7067 122035.448 1266051.496 181.314 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 181.314 Area: 2056.00SQ.FT., 0.05ACRES TRACT A, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7037 121907.218 1266061.890 0.000 S 88054135" E 40.505 7036 121906.447 1266102.387 40.505 N 01*06108" E 64.000 7045 121970.435 1266103.619 104.505 N 88054135" W 40.518 7044 121971.206 1266063.108 145.023 N O1°05125" E 51.596 7043 122022.792 1266064.089 196.619 N O1°05125" E 32.407 7050 122055.193 1266064.706 229.026 N 88054135/1 W 3.893 7049 122055.267 1266060.814 232.918 N 47016134/1 W 12.977 7048 122064.072 1266051.281 245.895 N O1°05125" E 34.379 7047 122098.444 1266051.935 280.274 N O1°05125" E 29.582 7054 122128.021 1266052.498 309.855 N 46*0512511 E 10.491 7053 122135.296 1266060.057 320.347 N 43*511411, W 7.100 7057 122140.416 1266055.137 327.447 S 46005125" W 16.290 7061 122129.119 1266043.401 343.737 N 8805413511 W 46.124 7060 122129.996 1265997.285 389.861 S O1005125" W 32.500 7064 122097.502 1265996.666 422.361 S 88054135/1 E 36.190 7063 122096.813 1266032.850 458.552 S 43054/35/1 E 9.630 7062 122089.875 1266039.529 468.182 S O100512511 W 50.190 7066 122039.694 1266038.574 518.372 S 88054,35" E 9.000 7068 122039.523 1266047.572 527.372 S 43°54135" E 5.657 7067 122035.448 1266051.496 533.029 S 01005125/1 W 29.000 7071 122006.453 1266050.944 562.029 S 46005125/1 W 5.657 7070 122002.530 1266046.868 567.686 N 88054135/1 W 52.000 7069 122003.519 1265994.878 619.686 S 01°05125" W 430.548 7072 121573.050 1265986.685 1050.234 S 88°54135" E 0.999 7073 121573.031 1265987.684 1051.233 Radius: 25.000 Length: 39.270 Chord: 35.355 Delta: 90*0010011 Chord BRG: S 43054135" E Rad-In: S O100512511 W Rad-Out: N 88054135/1 W Radius Pt: 7074 121548.035,1265987.208 Tangent: 25.000 Dir: Right Tangent -In: S 88°54135" E Tangent -Out: S O100512511 W Tangential -In Tangential -Out 7075 121547.559 1266012.204 1090.503 S 01*05'25" W 11.635 7076 121535.927 1266011.982 1102.137 S 88°54'35" E 9.268 7077 121535.750 1266021.248 1111.405 S 88054'35" E 31.118 7012 121535.158 1266052.361 1142.523 N 45°11'52" W 14.692 7011 121545.512 1266041.936 1157.216 N 01°05125" E 33.847 7010 121579.352 1266042.580 1191.063 N 01°05125" E 28.600 7017 121607.947 1266043.124 1219.663 N 46°05125" E 10.465 7016 121615.205 1266050.664 1230.128 S 88°54'35" E 5.621 7015 121615.098 1266056.283 1235.749 N 01005'25" E 51.922 7021 121667.011 1266057.272 1287.671 N 46005'25" E 0.304 7020 121667.221 1266057.490 1287.974 N 01005,25" E 42.406 7025 121709.619 1266058.297 1330.380 N 01005125" E 50.462 7024 121760.072 1266059.257 1380.842 N 01005,25" E 0.000 7031 121760.072 1266059.257 1380.842 N 43054135" W 17.936 7030 121772.994 1266046.819 1398.777 N 01005125" E 25.318 7029 121798.307 1266047.300 1424.095 N 01005125" E 29.800 7035 121828.101 1266047.868 1453.895 N 46005125" E 8.768 7034 121834.182 1266054.184 1462.663 S 88054135" E 6.314 7033 121834.062 1266060.497 1468.977 N 01005125" E 24.576 7038 121858.634 1266060.965 1493.554 N 01005125" E 48.593 7037 121907.218 1266061.890 1542.146 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 1542.146 Area: 35511.50SQ.FT., 0.82ACRES TRACT B, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7013 121534.342 1266095.227 0.000 N 88054/35/1 W 42.874 7012 121535.158 1266052.361 42.874 N 88054/35/1 W 31.118 7077 121535.750 1266021.248 73.992 N 88054135/1 W 9.268 7076 121535.927 1266011.982 83.260 S 01005125/1 W 23.415 7001 121512.517 1266011.537 106.675 S 88054135/1 E 41.500 7000 121511.727 1266053.029 148.175 N 01°05125" E 5.169 7006 121516.895 1266053.128 153.344 S 88054/35/1 E 41.756 7005 121516.100 1266094.876 195.100 N 01006108/1 E 18.245 7013 121534.342 1266095.227 213.345 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 213.345 Area: 1733.60SQ.FT., 0.04ACRES TRACT C, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7027 121704.815 1266098.508 0.000 N 88*5413511 W 36.257 7026 121705.505 1266062.258 36.257 N 43054/35/1 W 5.710 7025 121709.619 1266058.297 41.967 S 01005/25/1 W 42.406 7020 121667.221 1266057.490 84.373 N 46005/25/1 E 6.881 7019 121671.993 1266062.447 91.253 S 88054,3511 E 35.422 7018 121671.319 1266097.863 126.675 N 01'06108" E 33.502 7027 121704.815 1266098.508 160.178 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 160.178 Area: 1369.83SQ.FT., 0.03ACRES TRACT D, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing 7040 121852.459 N 88054135" W 35.089 7039 121853.127 N 43054135/1 W 7.644 7038 121858.634 S 01005,25" W 24.576 7033 121834.062 S 88*5413511 E 40.490 7032 121833.291 N 01006108/1 E 19.172 7040 121852.459 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 126.970 Area: 790.89SQ.FT., 0.02ACRES Easting Station 1266101.348 0.000 1266066.266 35.089 1266060.965 42.732 1266060.497 67.309 1266100.980 107.798 1266101.348 126.970 TRACT E, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing 7051 122054.422 N 88054/35/1 W 40.536 7050 122055.193 S 01005/25/1 W 32.407 7043 122022.792 N 46005125/1 E 7.644 7042 122028.093 S 88054/35/1 E 35.125 7041 122027.425 N 01006/08/1 E 27.002 7051 122054.422 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 142.714 Area: 1109.08SQ.FT., 0.03ACRES Easting Station 1266105.235 0.000 1266064.706 40.536 1266064.089 72.943 1266069.596 80.587 1266104.715 115.712 1266105.235 142.714 TRACT X, PNT# Bearing Distance Northing Easting Station 7076 121535.927 1266011.982 0.000 N O1005125" E 11.635 7075 121547.559 1266012.204 11.635 Radius: 25.000 Length: 39.270 Chord: 35.355 Delta: 90°00100" Chord BRG: N 43054135" W Rad-In: N 88°54135" W Rad-Out: S O1*05125" W Radius Pt: 7074 121548.035,1265987.208 Tangent: 25.000 Dir: Left Tangent -In: N O1005125" E Tangent -Out: N 88054135" W Tangential -In Tangential -Out 7073 121573.031 1265987.684 50.905 N 88°54135" W 0.999 7072 121573.050 1265986.685 51.904 S O1°05125" W 138.620 7080 121434.455 1265984.047 190.524 Radius: 316.000 Length: 27.671 Chord: 27.662 Delta: 5001102" Chord BRG: N 71007118" E Rad-In: S 21023113" E Rad-Out: S 16022,11" E Radius Pt: 7003 121140.215,1266099.282 Tangent: 13.844 Dir: Right Tangent -In: N 68°36147" E Tangent -Out: N 73037149" E Non Tangential -In Non Tangential -Out 7002 121443.405 1266010.221 218.195 N O1°05125" E 69.124 7001 121512.517 1266011.537 287.319 N O1°05125" E 23.415 7076 121535.927 1266011.982 310.733 Closure Error Distance> 0.00000 Total Distance> 310.733 Area: 3341.49SQ.FT., 0.08ACRES Block 1 Total Area: 161195.19SQ.FT., 3.70ACRES 12-17-18 VICINITY MAP W-2. RS7 Mlrra Lally HighFdn�,{g0.gd(y�7Sa Flf LInl1 R etpm 2aa We Aleacd (see Ua: FIM AW LhR Uk p(.) Type Area Area A," Avon Ij AG•R 741 357 IM :118Cr V &L 74T !V 10" ;•tl(jm y A's 741 377 IWO is T100r 5) ACSF- 611 441 12112 -a1200r 4J R-L 741 3S7 1C85 (c1100i 7j AAF.L SS& 30, 9S7 "t100) .Ij .. .. a R 74; 357 f05! i} ACSF :3 "I ie i 1,-Q . icr3607 10 ACBF-L 5e1 411 12 1�1.1grRP 11) BCSF-R E55 Aar 175E t•typpf,,, 111...� A•L 741 "' 357 109E '. 1$' 1 IFj AFF-i 64 303 857' 1e11601 14U a'SF4 M W 129E rct= 1R SL 74T 357 M0 f0M... e11 ..- NU AG L.. . i41... 357 • 111B6 ;t11001 CaMn = Qld4. 5W S50 -i 30p0i 0XV90 $3 upyw_ 32E 326 lmt enax 'alas,.., 5^_5n+ um 19538 Ild/&17) a.rapes e1 d2 rt's #a es . .. sav euo' Boa ss7 es7 MOTES: 1),"G'.P.. L'.1 Type d.cen.l.. �n"c, pe•.ya. 7)) -CSFaft a lF.:n'?M;ndn8M c—t anrje Fame' W..1 3)_'AFF'n3[eb.h.2 CmArea 91 Bmth (P. Ah u1 rrrekh Ca W (1) 5W Carmaa Bulking (3) EnhwwW pavemerd ae® (3) Petk Bawd are s (M Dewrerlve Tralls GuaeNrg (RG-1) RAW den#I can- rw (1) LeW view deddbrk pe (1) Park Bad 1 am (1) Bappktp abra pWh b bench (RG2) RdWrdw#2 WnUdre 11) PwkT" (1) Lapp Ewixorned aee for mare salve reaweeun. Comnonw Am#1 NOM (blwn mekmw caftl­ (1) 3zeef Cammne Ryan war Gal (1) Enhanced pavemad ava (1) Pack Bendy Area (877 Decoraeve Treek Scleenlnp (RG#G) Reblprdm #3 wntW (1)Pak Bedi Area (1) SteppkV eb" paM b bate Commna Area#2 (-ft tg—M) Co a r (1) Enhanced Ba dpave P (z) Pak Bardt areas (51Y) Decorative Trallla Sawft (1) IarBa Eeo4zwrmd am for more ealve racmdon. (RO#4) Rdnpadan#4 cwttalra: (1) Vlew deck (1) PkwdcTeble (1) Gwel pah to Ow dedc 0 LU in W z J 2 LC) r CQ L ( I NG 3J2TH 60' EASEMENT CENTERLINE SW 312TH I E EDGE OF j MIRROR 1 LAKE Site offers Soutr�gmly viewslof lake ti from rhany y .�. 1 ouse.w I 1 1 1 I�12TH 78' EASEMENT LINE ENCH LAKE RD, EASEMENT LINE =e E �o ago E 3 m3 aq mm V u C m� Loom 2 .c m ' 3w MMw ram/ o 10 to LL. 1 FTE M >~ (� 008 © COPYRIGHT 2007 m. vm ma. 11 t]7<.j11r1..1 r.— _lEP Off a 0 oimioqm �■ . . r. .. . vvaly. ,ice - � -.. w ryt 32,_0„ u Al., = ,. k�: .Rdi!1■i:V>■IJJ!ML*JJWA so .A 0 fn EL � Is u e 3 scale: 1/4"=1'-0" SECTION A -A 1 24'4' , Asphalt Shingles Shingle SIDE ELEVATION scale: 1/4-=1--o' FRONT ELEVATION scale:1/4-=1--w SIDE ELEVATION scale: 1/4-=1--0- REAR ELEVATION scaie:1/4"=V-0" SECTION B-B scale: 1/4-=1--o- SECTION A A scale: 1/4-=1'-o- �-- 24'_0„ AFF UPPER PLANscaie: 1/4"=1'-0'. 106 24'-0 rITY OF FED[ AFF MAIN PLAN scale: 1/4"=1'-0i-1U1LD1NG