Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
19-103181
CITY OF Federal way Centered on Opportunity August 30, 2019 Ms. Silvia Hendrickson ESA I Environmental Science Associates 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 Hendrickson@esassoc.com Re: File #19-103181-00-UP; TECHNICAL COMMENT LETTER Lakehaven Pump Station #33b, 200 South 359th Street, Federal Way Dear Ms. Hendrickson: CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor City staff has completed the initial review of your Process III Master Land Use (MLU) application submittal package. Site improvements include a new sewer pump station, gravity line, and force main improvements. The new pump station will replace an existing pump station on an easement dedicated to the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District. TECHNICAL COMMENTS Unless otherwise noted, the following comments provided by staff reviewing your project must be addressed prior to issuing the administrative site plan decision. Please direct questions regarding any of the technical comments to the appropriate staff representative. Community Development — Planning Division Becky Chapin, 253-835-2641, becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com 1. Pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.200.140(4), and as stated in the preapplication summary letter for this project, the pump station must be screened from the right-of-way. There is a proposed fence; however, landscape screening along the right-of-way is not shown on the plans. Per FWRC 19.125.060(2), type III landscaping 10 feet in width shall be provided along all property lines of nonresidential uses in the RS zoning districts. Type III landscaping shall be a mixture of evergreen and deciduous trees interspersed with large shrubs and groundcover. Tree, shrub, and groundcover spacing shall be appropriate for the species type, and the intent of this section. Please depict the required landscaping on the mitigation and/or landscape plan, or provide documentation on how the existing vegetation provides an adequate screen. Public Works — Development Services Division Cole Elliott, 253-835-2730, cole.eUiott@cityoffederalway.com The following technical comments must be addressed prior to issuance of a building permit: Ms. Silvia Hendrickson Page 2 of 3 August 30, 2019 Technical Information Repoit 1. King County Surface Wlater Design Manual (ZCSWIDM) Section 2 —There are now nine core requirements, not eight as submitted. 2. KCSWIDM Section 9.3 `Declaration of Covenant"— This is applicable and will be required to be completed and recorded prior to approval of the pump station design. 3. KCSWDMAppendix A Technical Information Report, Section VI `Special Reports and Studies"— The critical areas report must be included with the submitted land use application. Plan Sheets GO I -GO5 4. Plan Sheet G02 is missing from submitted set. No other comments on these sheets. Plan Sheets SA01-SA03 5. No comments. Plan Sheet DO I 6. All abandoned sanitary sewer mains within the right-of-way must be removed in accordance with the franchise agreement. 7. Correct Key Note 1 to reflect the above comment. 8. Correct Key Note 3 to reflect the above comment. Plan Sheet CO I 9. No comments. Plan Sheet CO2 10. Key Note 6 calls out Plan Sheet P002, which was not included in the submitted plan set. Plan Sheet CO3 11. No comments. Plan Sheet C04 12. Key Note 3 calls out a `Valley Gutter." Please define and provide Detail C104. Plan Sheet C05 13. No comments. 19-103181-00-UP Doc. LD. 79547 . 1 1 Ms. Silvia Hendrickson Page 3 of 3 August 30, 2019 Plan Sheet C06 14. Detail 7 the CSBC depth shall be no less than six -inches, not five -inches as currently shown. Plan Sheets LD I — L02 15. No comments. South King Fire & Rescue Sean Nichols, 253-946-7242, sean.nichols@southkingfire.org The following technical comments must be addressed prior to issuance of a building permit. Emergency Access Electric gate being installed with a Knox key switch required for fire department access. Tanks The old underground diesel tank will require a separate permit for removal. The new 1500 gallon above ground diesel tank will require an annual operational permit. APPLICATION STATUS The review period for the Use Process III application has stopped and the application is on hold until requested items are resubmitted. When resubmitting requested information, please provide a written response to each of the referenced items, and six copies of the corrected full-size plans with the enclosed resubmittal form. Pursuant to FWRC 19.15.050, if an applicant fails to provide additional information to the city within 180 days of being notified that such information is requested, the application shall be deemed null and void and the city shall have no duty to process, review, or issue any decisions with respect to such an application. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your development project, please contact me at 253-835- 2641, or becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, Becky Chapig Senior Planner enc: Resubmittal Information Handout Cole Elliott, Development Services Manager Sean Nichols, South King Fire & Rescue Ken Miller, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, kmitleralake nvcn.org 19-103181-00-UP Doc. LD. 79547 CITY OF �. Federal Way Centered an Opportunity November 21, 2019 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor Mr, Ken Miller Lakehaven Water and Sewer District PO Box 4249 FILE Federal Way, WA 98063-4249 kmiller@lakebaven.org Re: File #19-103181-00-UP; PROCESS III, PROJECT APPROVAL Lakehaven Pump Station #33B, 200 South 359th Street, Federal Way Dear Mr. Miller: The Community Development Department has completed administrative land use review of the proposed Lakehaven Pump Station 33B located at 200 South 359�h Street. The proposal is to construct a lager capacity pump station, including gravity sewer line and force main improvements. An electrical building will be constructed to house a standby generator, above -ground fixes tank, and associated electrical equipment. The Process III Master Land Use (Ivff-U) application submitted July 2, 2019, and subsequent resubmittals on October 22, 2019, and November 12, 2019, is hereby conditionally approved based on the enclosed findings of fact (Exhibit A), incorporated into this decision in hill, and meets applicable decisional criteria per Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.65.100(2). The remainder of this letter outlines the land use review process required for the project; summarizes the State Emironmental Policy Act (SEPA) process; lists conditions of the land use decision; and provides other procedural information. This land use decision does not authorize initiation of construction activities. REVIEW PROCESS The site is within the Single Family Residential (RS35.0) zoning district. A public park is a permitted use in this zone subject to the provisions of FWRC 19.200.160. The proposed use is reviewed under Use Process III, ProjectApproval. The Director of Community Development makes a written decision on the application based on the criteria listed under FWRC 19.65.100. SEPA PROCESS The responsible official at Lakehaven Water and Sewer District issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the pump station proposal on April 22, 2019. The appeal period for the determination ended on May 8, 2019. The final evaluation by Lakehaven for the environmental checklist is hereby incorporated by reference as though set forth in full. Mr. Ken Miller Page 2 of 3 November 21, 2019 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The following conditions are reasonably necessary to eliminate or minimize undesirable effects of granting application approval. • After initial mitigation area planting is completed, a memo from the project biologist confirming compliance with the mitigation plan must be submitted to the city. • Five years of monitoring of the migration area is required. Monitoring will begin with Year 1, the first full growing season after construction is completed and the plants have been installed, and continue for Years 2, 3, 4, and 5. Monitoring reports, as detailed in the Critical Areas Report prepared by ESA, will be prepared by a qualified biologist or landscape designer for review and approval by the city. BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL This Process III land use decision does not authorize clearing/grading activities. A separate building permit application is required. Additional comments/requirements may be provided during the building permit review process. An electrical permit is also required. If you have any questions regarding the building or electrical permit process please contact the Permit Center at 253-835-2607, or permitcenter@cityoffederalway.com. REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF VALUATION Per FWRC 19.65.100(4)(i), affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes not withstanding any program of revaluation. APPROVAL DURATION Per FWRC 19.15.100(2), unless modified or appealed, the Process III decision is valid for five years from the date of issuance of the decision. Time extensions to the decision may be requested prior to the lapse of approval following the provisions listed in FWRC 19.15.110. The improvements must be substantially completed within the five-year time period, or the land use decision becomes void. APPEALS Per FWRC 19,05.360, the effective date of issuance is three calendar days following the date of this letter, or November 26, 2019. Pursuant to FWRC 19.65.120(1), this land use decision may be appealed by the applicant, any person who submitted written comments or information, or any person who has specifically requested a copy of the decision. In compliance with FWRC 19.65.120(2), any appeal must be in the form of a letter delivered to the Community Development Department, with the established fee and within 14 days after the effective date of issuance of this decision, or December 10, 2019. The appeal letter must contain a statement identifying the decision being appealed, along with a copy of the decision; a statement of the alleged errors in the director's decision, including identification of specific factual findings and conclusions of the director disputed by the person filing the appeal; and the appellant's name, address, telephone number, and fax number, and any other information to facilitate communications with the appellant. The Federal Way Hearing Examiner will hear any appeals of the Process III decision. 19-103181-00-UP Doc. I.D. 79816 101 Mr. Ken Miller Page 3 of 3 November 21, 2019 CLOSING This land use decision does not waive compliance with future City of Federal Way codes, policies, and standards relating to this development. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Senior Planner Becky Chapin at 253-835-2641, or becky.chapin@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, B5Davis Community Development Director enc: Exhibit `A' Findings for Project Approval Approved Site Plan c: Becky Chapin, Senior Planner Cole Elliott, Development Services Manager Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue Silvia Hendrickson, ESA, shendrickson@esassoc.com Brian Sliger, Carollo Engineers, bsliger@carollo.com 19-103181-00-UP Doc. I.D. 7981G A CITY OF Federal Way Exhibit A Findings for Project Approval Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.65 "Process III Project Approval" Lakehaven Pump Station #33B, File #19-103181-00-UP The Director of Community Development hereby makes the following findings pursuant to content requirements of the Process III written decision as set forth in Federal Way Devised Code (FWRC) 19.65.100(4). These findings are based on review of existing city documents and items submitted by the applicant and received July 2, 2019, and resubmitted October 22, 2019, and November 12, 2019. 1. Proposal— Lakehaven Water and Sewer District (Lakehaven) proposes to construct a larger capacity pump station, including gravity sewer line and force main improvements. The new pump station and associated equipment will replace an existing pump station on an easement dedicated to Lakehaven and within the public right-of-way. The new Pump Station 33B will pump through an existing 10-inch diameter force main, which feeds the gravity sewer system, upstream of the existing Pump Station 22. An electrical building will be constructed and includes a 450-kW standby generator with above ground 1,500-gallon diesel fuel storage tank, above ground packaged odor system, transformer, and associated electrical equipment. Underground facilities include a wet well, valve vault, separate flow meter vault, 48-inch gravity sewer line, and 10-inch force main. The existing Pump Station 33A will be removed once Pump Station 33B is constructed and operational. This includes removal of the siting above ground pump station, and decommissioning the remaining underground structures by filling with gravel and capping. An existing on -site 12-inch sewer line will be plugged and abandoned. All gravity and force mains located within the right-of-way will be removed. Approximately 1,000 square yards of existing pavement south of the new facility will be removed and the site restored. 2. Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designation — The zoning for the subject property is Single Family Residential (RS35.0) and the comprehensive plan designation is Parks and Open Space. Public Utility is an allowed use in this zone pursuant to FWRC 19.200.140. 3. Site Plan Review Process— The proposed pump station requires review under Process III, Project Approval. The Director of Community Development makes a written decision on the application based on d1e criteria listed under FWRC 19.65.100. 4. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) —The proposed improvements exceed categorical exemptions adopted by the city's environmental policy codified in FWRC 14.15.030(c), and therefore require an environmental threshold determination prior to any land use or building permit approval. Lakehaven acted as lead agency and issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on April 22, 2019. Exhibit A File #19-103181-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79815 Findings for Process III Project Approval Page 1 of 4 The final evaluation by Lakehaven for the environmental checklist, submitted to the City of Federal Way on July 2, 2019, is hereby incorporated by reference as though set forth in full. 5. Public Notice and Comments —Pursuant to Process III regulations, a Notice of Land Use Application (NOA) was published in the Federal Way Mirror, posted on the subject property, and displayed on the designated city notice boards on August 2, 2019. No comment letters were received by the city. 6. Dimensional Limitations — Under FWRC 19.200.140, setback requirements for public utilities located in RS zone are 20 feet front, side, and rear. Maximum lot coverage is 75 percent. Maximum height is 30 feet. Parking is determined on a case -by -case basis. The proposed pump station meets all dimensional requirements. 7. Critical Areas — The subject property contains a stream and wetland, which are regulated under FWRC Chapter 19.145, "Environmentally Critical Areas." The applicant submitted a Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Plan, prepared by Environmental Science Associates (ESA), March 2019. The site contains the North Fork West Hylebos Creek; a Type F stream with a 100-foot buffer. No impacts are proposed to the stream. Per the report, there are three different wetlands that impact the site. Wetland D is located southwest of the intersection of SR 99 and South 359tt, Street. The wetland slopes down to the sough and is part of a large wetland complex that extends as far south as South 373,d Street. Wedand D is a Category I wetland with 9 Habitat points, which has a standard buffer width of 225 feet. Wetland E is located along the western bank of North Fork Hylebos Creek, south of South 3591' Street. The wetland slopes down to the southeast to the stream and extends offsite and on the east side of the stream. Wetland E is a Category III wetland with 6 Habitat points, which has a standard buffer width of 165 feet. Wetland F is located adjacent to the east side of the driveway, between Wetlands D and E. Due to its small size, Wetland F is exempt from buffer requirements per FWRC 19.145.420(3). The project will avoid all direct impacts to all wetlands. Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.120(1), essential public facilities, public utilities, and other public improvements are partially exempt from provisions of this chapter if no practical alternative with less impact on the critical areas exist. The specific location and extent of the intrusion into the critical area must constitute the minimum necessary encroachment to meet the requirements of the public facility or utility and not pose an unreasonable threat to the health, safety, or welfare on or off the subject property. The intrusion shall attempt to protect and mitigate impacts to the critical area function and values. The director may require supporting documentation to demonstrate compliance with partial exemptions. The project was designed to avoid all impacts to the wetlands and stream. Impacts to the buffer area are unavoidable because all areas outside the wetlands on the project site are within regulated buffers. The proposed project will result in permanent buffer impacts of 9,511 square feet. The functions of the impacted buffer area are currently low because it consists of primarily disturbed habitat dominated by invasive plan species and a few red alder trees. Temporary buffer impacts will occur in an approximately 6,384 square feet construction staging area and 3,006 square foot area along a temporary construction access road. This area is largely covered by grasses, invasive species, and red alder trees. Following construction, the soil will be de -compacted in all temporary impacted areas and native trees and shrubs will be planted. The proposed buffer mitigation strategy for this project is to restore and enhance a total of 11,447 square feet of regulated wetland and stream buffer to compensate for 9,511 square feet of buffer impacts. The buffer restoration will be accomplished by removing the paved driveway, existing pump station, and hardscape associated with the exiting pump station (33A). The soil will be amended and native tree and Exhibit A File #19-103181-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79815 Findings for Process III Project Approval Page 2 of 4 shrub species will be installed. An additional 3,421 square foot area is designed for buffer enhancement. This includes enhancing the underplanting with native conifers to improve wildlife habitat and structural diversity in the plan community. Following planting of the mitigation area, five-year monitoring will be required, as detailed in the migration report. The director hereby allows the pump station improvements within the buffers and mitigation as proposed. 8. Rquimd Landssapitr.g — Under FWRC 19.125.060(2), perimeter landscaping is required as follows: Type III "Visual Buffer" landscaping 10 feet along all property lines. The native vegetation is mature and dense on this site; the Type III landscape requirement for the perimeter buffer is only required along the South 359th Street frontage. Landscape Plan Modification The applicant has requested a modification, as allowed by FWRC 19.125.100, to the required landscaping along the South 359t" Street frontage. The request is to provide a landscaping buffer, five feet in width along the frontage, five-foot wide landscaping along the west side, four -foot landscaping along the east side, and eliminate the trees. The modification is being requested for the following reasons: • Trees are not recommended in this area, as there are several conflicts with nearby structures and underground pipes. Instead, shrubs selected for screening are proposed. • A reduced landscape buffer width along the frontage is needed for minimum intrusions of the pump station improvements into the critical area buffers while meeting the required yard setbacks with the structure. • A perimeter fence with privacy slats is proposed to be installed behind the landscaping and will create additional screening meeting the intent of the code. The Director hereby grants the modification request. Code language allows a modification if it represents "a superior result than that which could be achieved by strictly following the requirements of this title." The proposed modification represents a superior result in that it will: 1) create a solid screen with the fencing; and 2) result in more native looking vegetation in coordination with the mitigation planting. 9. Clearing & Grading — Clearing and grading activities are generally consistent with applicable standards set forth in FWRC Chapter 19.120. A geotechnical report by Robinson Noble Qanuary 17, 2019) was prepared for the site. All clearing and grading will follow the geotechnical report conclusions and recommendations. The pump station site area is being raised by approximately four feet. A Mechanical Stabilized Earth (MSE) retaining wall is proposed around the perimeter of the new pump station site to accommodate grade changes. 10. Tree Retentionl Replacement — Pursuant to FWRC 19.120.030(13), removal of trees in easements and rights - of -way for the purposes of constructing public utilities is exempt from the minimum tree density requirements. Protection of trees shall be a major factor in the location, design, construction, and maintenance of the utilities. Tree removal will occur as in conjunction with the project; however, as stated in the mitigation plan, replacement trees are proposed. 11. Stormavater— The project must meet the requirements of the 2016 King County Surface lYlater Design Manual and City of Federal Way addendum to the manual. Water quality shall meet the requirements of Enhanced Basic treatment. Flow control shall meet the requirements of Conservation Flow Control. Exhibit A Findings for Process III Project Approval File #19-103181-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79815 Page 3 of 4 12. South King Fire & Rescue — South King Fire and Rescue has indicated an electric gate installed with a "Knox" key switch is required for fire department access. The old underground diesel tank will require a separate fire permit for removal. The new 1,500 gallon above ground diesel tank will require an annual operational permit. 13. Conclusion — As conditioned, the proposed site plan application and application attachments have been determined to be consistent with the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP), with all applicable provisions of the FWRC, and with the public health, safety, and welfare. The proposed development is consistent with Process III, Project Approval, decisional criteria required under FWRC Chapter 19.65. These findings shall not waive compliance with future City of Federal Way codes, policies, and standards relating to this development. Prepared by. Senior Planner Becky Chapin Exhibit A Findings for Process III Project Approval Date: November 20, 2019 File #19-103181-00-UP / Doc. I.D. 79815 Page 4 of 4 b(I STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING ) FILE AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Ken Spurrell, being first duly sworn on oath that he is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Federal Way Mirror a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Federal Way Mirror has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Federal Way Mirror (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, (Ad #867796) a: City Notices Published 1 time(s) beginning on 08/02/2019 and ending on 08/02/2019. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $116.65. Ken Spurrell Legal Advertising Representative, Federal y Mirror Subscribed and sworn to me this 2nd daX ai�vg4h , 2019. Residing in Tacoma, Washington City of Federal Way, Community Dev Dept FWM867796 Federal Way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name: Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station #33B Project Description: Installation of a new sewer pump station, gravity line, and force main Im- provements. The new pump station is a replace- ment of an existing pump station on an easement dedicated to Lakehaven Water & Sewer District. Project Contact: Silvia Hendrickson, Environmental Science Associates (ESA), 5309 Shlishole Avenue NW, Suite 200, Seattte, WA, 206-576-3780 Project Location: 200 South 359th Street. Federal Way, Parcels 292104.9157 and 292104.9152 Application Received: July 2, 2019 Determined Complete: duly 25, 2019 Notice of Application: August 2, 2019 Environmental Review: The environmental review required under State Environmental Policy Act (SE - PA) has been conducted by Lakehaven Water & S%ver District as lead agency. A MDNS was Issued on Aprit 22, 2019. Permits Under Review: Use Process Ill (File #19- 103181-UP) Environmental Documents & Required Studies: Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Pian, prepared by ESA. March 2019, Revised Gee - technical Engineering Report, prepared by Robin- son Noble. Inc., January 17. 2019. and Technical Information Report, prepared by Carollo, Novem- ber 2018. Development Regulations Used for Project Miti- gation: Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Tille 16 "Surface Water Management," and Title 19,'Zoning and Development Code.' Public Comment & Appeals: Any person may sub- mit written comments on the land use application to the Director of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on August 19, 2019. Only persons who sub- mit written comments to the director (address be- low) or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the decision. Availability of File: The ofiicW project fife, exist- ing environmental documents, and requued stud- ies are available for public review at the Depart- ment of Community Development's Permit Center, 33325 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Staff Contact: Senior Planner Becky Chapin, 253- 835- 941, becky.chapfnOcityoffederalwaycom Published in the Federal Way Mirror August 2, 2019 #867796 Engineers... Working Wonders With Water® November 12, 2019 Becky Chapin City of Federal Way 33325 8th Ave S Federal Way, WA 98003 RESUBMITTED NOV 12 2019 CrTy OF COMMUNITY D��F Subject: File #19-103181-00-UP, Additional Resubmittal Drawings Dear Ms. Chapin: 1218 Third Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, Washington 98101 P. 206.684 6532 F. 206 903.0419 In the permit review letter dated August 30, 2019, with subject: File #19-103181-00-UP, TECHNICAL COMMENT LETTER, Lakehaven Pump Station #33B, 200 South 3S9th Street, Federal Way, the City provided technical comments following their initial review of our land use permit application. As directed by the City via email on September 241h, 2019, and as outlined in our comment response letter dated October 22"d, 2019, these items have been addressed but only select revised drawings were submitted to save on paper, as all revised drawings will be submitted with the forthcoming building permit submittal. The building permit submittal is prepared for printing and will be submitted as soon as we receive land use approval. After review of the resubmittal the City requested additional revised sheets on November 5th, 2019, that previously were not required or requested. These inlcude sheets D01, C01(unrevised and provided with original submittal), CO2, C04, TP01(unrevised and provided with original submittal), and TC01(unrevised and provided with original submittal). Copies of these sheets are enclosed for your review. For your reference, the original review comments regarding these drawings along with their associated response were as follows: Public Works -- Development Services Division Plan Sheet D01 1. All abandoned sanitary sewer mains within the right-of-way must be removed in accordance with the franchise agreement. Response: Acknowledged. All abandoned sanitary sewer mains within the right-of-way are now identified to be removed. 2. Correct Key Note 1 to reflect the above comment. Response: Revised. 3. Correct Key Note 3 to reflect the above comment. Response: Revised. Plan Sheet CO2 4. Key Note 6 calls out Plan Sheet P002, which was not included in p an set. Project No 10581A.10 I WATER Lakehaven_Land Use Perm it_Resubmittal Letterv2 Docs.docx OUR FOCUS OUR BUSINESS OUR PASSION Becky Chapin City of Federal Way November 12, 2019 Page 2 Response: Key Note 6 on DWG CO2 calls out typical detail P002, which is provided on DWG TPOI of the submitted plan set. P002/Typ is for pipe installation and pavement replacement (trench detail). Plan Sheet C04 S. Key Note 3 calls out a "Valley Gutter. "Please define and provide Detail C104. Response: Key Note 3 on DWG C04 calls out typical detail C104, which is provided on DWG TC01 of the submitted plan set. C104/Typ is for a valley gutter, to be installed along the front of the site where landscaping is not present (per DWG C04). Per our email correspondence on November 8th, 2019, we have only included two (2) copies of the requested plans sheets. A full set of the revised documents will be submitted with the building permit application. Please contact me at 206-684-6532 with any questions. Sincerely, CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC. Brian Sliger, P.E. Engineer BAS:sm Enclosures: City of Federal Way Permit Resubmittal Form —1 Copy Requested Revised Lakehaven Water and Sewer District PS33B Permit Review Plan Set Sheets — D01, C01, CO2, C04, TP01, TP02 Only (October 2019) — 2 Copies CC: Ken Miller & Molly Du — Lakehaven Water and Sewer District carollo.com P,zm4-ed f�u Cke _�"/n ('i. °•� V DEPARTMENT OF COMMIINITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 010k, CITY OF NOV 1 ,t � �� 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 Federal Way cmr of FqEptA=wAy www.ci€:voffcderalway.com cwmux� DEVELO µEW RESUBMITTAL INFORMATION This completed form MUST accompany all resubmittals. Additional or re vised plans or documents for an active project will not be accepted unless accompanied by this completed form. Changes to drawings must be clouded. Applicants will be required to affix the city's date stamp on each page of resubmitted plans and to collate loose plans into existing plan sets. You are encouraged to contact the Permit Center prior to submitting if you are not sure about the number of copies required. Project Number: 1 9_ 1 0 3 1 8 1- 0 0- U P Project Name: Lakehaven Sewer Pum Station #33B Project address: South 359th Street and Pacific Highway South Project Contact: Ken Miller Phone: 253-941-5401 Emaii kmiller lakehaven.or RESUBMITTED ITEMS: # of Copies 1 2 (ea.) DETAILED Description of Item Lakehaven Water and Sewer District PS33B Permit Review - Technical Comment Letter Responses (October 2019) ;vised Lake haven Water and Sewer District PS33B Permit Review Pian Set Sheets — DO CO2, C04, TP01, 1"Q Only (October 201 Tea ai Resubmittal Requested by: Becky Chapin Letter Dated: 1 1 1 5 12019 (Staff Member) RESUB A � Dept/Div Name Building ,'-Planning PW Fire Other OFFICE USE Oft Y Distribution Date.- 1/-/3 J I # I Description Bulletin #129 — September 24, 2018 Page 1 of 1 k:\Iandouts\Resubmittal Information A�k CITY OF Federal Way DATE: November 5, 2019 TO: Becky Chapin, Planner MEMORANDUM Public Works Department FROM: Cole Elliott, PE Development Services Manager SUBJECT: LAKEHAVEN PUMP STATION #33B - (19-103181-00-UP) 200 S 359TH ST Development Services has reviewed the second Land Use submittal received October 30, 2019 and make the following comments: 1. Plan Sheet D01 — was not included in the submittal received by Development Services therefore we cannot back check that our previous comments have been addressed. Accordingly, "All abandoned sanitary sewer mains within right-of-way must be removed in accordance with the franchise agreement." Must still be corrected. 2. Plan Sheets C01 and TP01 — were not included in the resubmittal to Development Services therefore the following comment still has not been corrected, "Key Note 6 calls out Plan Sheet P002, which was not included in the submitted plan set." 3. Plan Sheets C04 and TC01 — again were not submitted in the packet received by Development Services therefore the following comment has not been corrected, "Key Note 3 calls out a "Valley Gutter." Please define and provide Detail C104. Your response, calls for investigation of Plan Sheet C04, which was not included as mentioned previously. Development Services will not sign -off for Land Use approval until these items have been addressed. C C"M rfim U.0% Engineers... Working Wonders With Water® October 22, 2019 Becky Chapin City of Federal Way 33325 8th Ave S Federal Way, WA 98003 RBuUBM117_-® -UC7Z22019 CdMW� M ��E� w�pNQ{i' 1218 Third Avenue, Suite 1600, Seattle, Washington 98101 P 206 684 6532 F 206 903.0419 Subject: File #19-103181-00-UP, Technical Comment Letter Responses Dear Ms. Chapin: In the permit review letter dated August 30, 2019, with subject: File #19-103181-00-UP, TECHNICAL COMMENT LETTER, Lakehaven Pump Station #338, 200 South 3591h Street, Federal Way, the City provided technical comments following their initial review of our land use permit application. These comments have been addressed and are listed below, along with their corresponding responses: Communitv Develo ment — Planning Division 1. Pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC)19.200.140(4), and as stated in the preapplication summary letter for this project, the pump station must be screened from the right-of-way. There is a proposed fence; however, landscape screening along the right-of-way is not shown on the plans. Per FWRC 19.125.060(2), Type 111 landscaping 10 feet in width shall be provided along all property lines of nonresidential uses in the RS zoning districts. Type 111 landscaping shall be a mixture of evergreen and deciduous trees interspersed with large shrubs and groundcover. Tree, shrub, and groundcover spacing shall be appropriate for the species type, and the intent of this section. Please depict the required landscaping on the mitigation and/or landscape plan, or provide documentation on how the existing vegetation provides an adequate screen. Response: Per follow-on discussions with Becky Chapin, the site layout has been revised to provide the maximum landscaping screen possible. This includes a 5-foot wide strip of landscape screening along the site frontage, a 5-foot wide strip of landscape screening along the west side of the site, and a 4-foot wide strip of landscape screening down the east side of the site. The perimeter site fence will be installed behind this landscaping and will have black privacy slats installed for additional screening. The shrubs selected for screening are narrow, native, and drought tolerant to maximize their chance of survival and success in screening as intended. Trees are not recommended in this area, which is only five feet wide and has several conflicts with nearby structures and underground pipes. Planting even narrower trees could still cause roots to impact the adjacent road, pavement, and structures, whereas shrubs are smaller and less likely to have such an impact. See the attached revised site plan (DWG CO3 & C04) and mitigation planting plans (DWG L01 & L02). Project No 10581A.10 I WAT E R Lakehaven_LandUse Permit_ResubmittalLetter.docx OUR FOCUS OUR BUSINESS OUR PASSION Becky Chapin City of Federal Way October 22, 2019 Page 2 Public Works — Development Services Division Technical Information Report 1. King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) Section 2 -There are now nine core requirements, not eight as submitted. Response: Acknowledged. The proposed site falls under the Small Lot BMP Requirements of the SWDM (see Section 1.2.9.2.1). Runoff from the site will be fully dispersed and therefore meets the requirements for small lots under core requirement #9 (option one in Section 1.2.9.2.1). Core requirement #9 has now been addressed in the updated TIR. 2. KCSWDM Section 9.3 "Declaration of Covenant"- This is applicable and will be required to be completed and recorded prior to approval of the pump station design. Response: Per discussions with the City, the Declaration of Covenant will be required during the building permit application review. Public Works will prepare the covenant based on information provided by the applicant later in the building permit review process. The final recorded document will be provided in the Project's final TIR. 3. KCSWDM Appendix Technical Information Report, Section VI "Special Reports and Studies"- The critical areas report must be included with the submitted land use application. Response: The critical areas report was provided with the initial application as part of the overall package. It will also be included with the updated TIR for the building permit submittal. Plan Sheets G01-GOS 4. Plan Sheet G02 is missing from submitted set. No other comments on these sheets. Response: DWG G02 will be included with the building permit submittal. Plan Sheets SA01-SA03 S. No comments. Response: Acknowledged. Plan Sheet D01 6. All abandoned sanitary sewer mains within the right-of-way must be removed in accordance with the franchise agreement. Response: Acknowledged. All abandoned sanitary sewer mains within the right-of-way are now identified to be removed. carollo.com Becky Chapin City of Federal Way October 22, 2019 Page 3 7. Correct Key Note 1 to reflect the above comment. Response: Revised. 8. Correct Key Note 3 to reflect the above comment. Response: Revised. Plan Sheet C01 9. No comments. Response: Acknowledged. Plan Sheet CO2 10. Key Note 6 calls out Plan Sheet P002, which was not included in the submitted plan set. Response: Key Note 6 on DWG CO2 calls out typical detail P002, which is provided on DWG TP01 of the submitted plan set. P002/Typ is for pipe installation and pavement replacement (trench detail). Plan Sheet CO3 11. No comments. Response: Acknowledged. Plan Sheet C04 12, Key Note 3 calls out a "Valley Gutter." Please define and provide Detail C104. Response: Key Note 3 on DWG C04 calls out typical detail C104, which is provided on DWG TC01 of the submitted plan set. C104/Typ is for a valley gutter, to be installed along the front of the site where landscaping is not present (per DWG C04). Plan Sheet COS 13. No comments. Response: Acknowledged. Plan Sheet C06 14. Detail the CSBC depth shall be no less than six -inches, not five -inches as currently shown. Response: Detail 7 has been revised to require 6 inches of CSBC. carollo.com Becky Chapin City of Federal Way October 22, 2019 Page 4 Plan Sheets L01— LO2 1S. No comments. Response: Acknowledged, South King Fire & Rescue Emergency Access: Electric gate being installed with a Knox key switch required for fire department access. Response: Acknowledged. A Knox key switch wil be provided for both access gates. The drawings have been revised to clarify this. This requirement is also included in the Project specifications. Tanks: The old underground diesel tank will require a separate permit for removal. The new 1,500 gallon above ground diesel tank will require an annual operational permit. Response: Acknowledged. The drawings have been revised to clarify that a separate demolition permit will be required for the existing diesel tank. An annual operational permit for the new tank will be acquired prior to startup of this facility. The Project documents have been revised to address the above comments. Per our email correspondence on September 24th, 2019, we have only included the revised plans showing the changes to the site fencing and addition of landscape screening. All other revised documents will be submitted with the building permit application. Please contact me at 206-684-6532 with any questions. Sincerely, CAROLLO ENGINEERS, INC. Brian Sliger, P.E. Engineer BAS:sm Enclosures: City of Federal Way Permit Resubmittal Form —1 Copy Revised Lakehaven Water and Sewer District PS33B Permit Review Plan Set— CO3, C04, L01, L02 Only (October 2019) — 6 Copies cc: Ken Miller & Molly Du — Lakehaven Water and Sewer District carollo.com Becky Chapin From: Ken Miller <kmiller@lakehaven.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 4, 2019 9:04 AM To: Becky Chapin Cc: Tyler Whitehouse; Silvia Hendrickson; Molly Du Subject: FW: Lakhaven Sewer Pump Station #33, S 359th Street CFW Becky Please see email below from Isaac back in 2014. The site landscaping was discussed with Isaac and his thoughts were to not require landscaping along the back and all the way up each side of the site based on future use. Since this is an Open Space property, the sensitivity of the property and the existing native landscaping surrounding the property and also there will be no future development. Therefore, we are requesting to waive landscaping on the south side of the easement and a portion along the west and east? If you would like to meet to discuss further let me know. Thanks Ken From: Isaac Conlen Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:14 AM To: Ken Miller; John Hutton; William Appleton Cc: John Bowman; Ken Canfield; Ann Dower Subject: RE: Lakhaven Sewer Pump Station #33, S 359th Street CFW Hi Ken, Based on our meeting last week I have a good grasp of what you are proposing. I will limit my comments to discussion of the zoning/critical area requirements and process. A utility improvement of this nature requires a Process III land use approval (if you will be encroaching into a wetland (as opposed to a wetland buffer) that may jump land use approval to Process IV). You've identified the setback requirements. Those apply to improvements over 4-inches in height. One area of discussion is what extent of perimeter landscaping would be appropriate. My initial reaction is that landscaping should be installed along the front (north) property line and the portion of the west property line where vertical improvements are proposed. You raised a question as to whether landscaping is appropriate along the south and east sides of the facility. Given that there's a lot of natural vegetation already on -site we could consider waiving this requirement. I would be interested in an opinion of that from the Parks Department/SWM. The question would be — based on future intended use of the property, would it be important to screen this utility installation for aesthetic reasons? In terms of critical area issues, it sounds like an overall improvement. Relocation of the existing pump station would potentially benefit water quality in the Hylebos. As noted above, these type of improvements may be made in a wetland buffer, subject to certain criteria. If the improvements will encroach into the wetland itself, that will likely trigger a Process IV approval — Hearing Examiner type process. Obviously we'll need a wetland report from a qualified specialist.. That's a brief response. Ken check in with Margaret if you have follow-up questions. Best, Isaac From: Ken Miller [mailto:kmiller@,lkkhaven. ] Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 3:16 PM To: Isaac Conlen; John Hutton; William Appleton Cc: John Bowman; Ken Canfield; Ann Dower Subject: Lakhaven Sewer Pump Station #33, S 359th Street CFW Isaac: Thanks for meeting with Ken Canfield and I last Thursday to discuss planning issues related to the possibility of locating Lakehaven's proposed sewer pump station 33(b) on property owned (PN's 292104-9152 & 9157) by the City of Federal Way. Lakehaven was granted an easement in the 1985 and completed constructed of the existing pump station 33 in 1987 located on PN 292104-9157 prior to the City's purchase of the Park's Open Space property. The existing pump station is located approximately 570± feet East of Pac Hwy and 430± feet South of South 359th Street. Lakehaven's'access to the existing pump station site is by a 15' wide easement off South 359th Street. Because of the expanding need for sewer service tributary to this pump station, Lakehaven is in the process of designing a supplemental and/or replacement station. Since the existing station is still very functional, the District will continue to use the existing system to supplement the new proposed pump station, unless the existing station can moved further North on the same parcel. The existing station is partially located within the 100' stream buffer of the North Branch of Hylebos Creek and entirely within a wetland buffer. There is an existing above ground diesel tank for the standby generator. Even though the station still has many years of useful life, Lakehaven would consider demolishing the station and restoring the area back to its native condition if the pump station were relocated on parcels 292104-9152 and 9157, closer to South 359th Street. The combined area of the existing access road and pump station site is approximately 9,511 square feet. If Lakehaven were allowed to construct the replacement station on the City parcels closer to South 359th Street, the District would attempt to design it within the same square footage footprint of 9,511. The zoning for the area is SR-35. Building setbacks for this zoning are 20' from all property lines which includes a 10' wide landscape strip. The City zoning code makes no mention of setbacks and landscape buffers requirement from easement boundaries. The District is currently in a fact finding mode to determine if there is a possibility that the new pump station 33(b) can be constructed on City parcels 292104-9152 and 9157. If possible, Lakehaven would like to know all of the requirements, and processes to make this become a reality. Attached for your information to assist you reviewing our request are the following items: Two plan sheets showing the proposed locations for the pump station. • Enlargement of the proposed site on parcels 292104-9152 & 9157 owned by the City. Copy of the 1985 easement granting Lakehaven the use of the existing pump station site. • King County assessor Quarter Section Map NE 29-21-04 noting the location of the parcels referenced above owned by the City of Federal Way. I have included John Hutton, Parks Director in the email so he can see the what Lakehaven is considering on the property, if you need additional information or have any questions, please contact Ken Miller (253-946-5405) or Ken Canfield (253-946-5400) Thanks Ken Phone: Office; 253-946-5405 Email: kmiller@lakehave:n.org The contents of this email may be determined to be a public record and subject to disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56 regardless of any expectations or claims of confidentiality or privilege asserted. CITY OF Federal Way COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003-6325 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 planning@cityoffederalway.com www.diyoffederolway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION l , hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, of a: Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed�j ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or posted to or at each of the attached addresses on Aug wf J- 2019. Project Name �4 k6 VM File Number(s) Signature 5-fgtit 0 3� Date C:\Users\wgolding\Desktop\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc Posting Sites: Federal Way City Hall - 33325 8t" Avenue Federal Way Regional Library - 34200 1 st Way South Federal Way 320t" Branch Library - 848 South 320th Street C:\Users\wgolding\Desktop\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc --7 41k CITY '0';:tt=P OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityc)ffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I, E. Tina Piety hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: El Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document Was ❑ emailed ❑x mailed ❑ faxed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on Auaust 1. 2019 Project Name Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station #3313 File Number(s) �r Signature Date August 1. 2019 CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name: Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station #33B Project Description: Installation of a new sewer pump station, gravity line, and force main improvements. The new pump station is a replacement of an existing pump station on an easement dedicated to Lakehaven Water & Sewer District. Project Contact: Silvia Hendrickson, Environmental Science Associates (ESA), 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200, Seattle, WA, 98107, 206-576-3780 Project Location: 200 South 359`h Street, Federal Way, Parcels 292104-9157 and 292104-9152 Application Received: July 2, 2019 Determined Complete: July 25, 2019 Notice of Application: August 2, 2019 Environmental Review: The environmental review required under State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) has been conducted by Lakehaven Water & Sewer District as lead agency. A MDNS was issued on April 22, 2019. Permits Under Review: Use Process III (File #19-103181-UP) Environmental Documents & Required Studies: Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Plan, prepared by ESA, March 2019, Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report, prepared by Robinson Noble, Inc., January 17, 2019, and Technical Information Report, prepared by Carollo, November 2018. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 16 "Surface Water Management," and Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code." Public Comment & Appeals: Any person may submit written comments on the land use application to the Director of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on August 19, 2019. Only persons who submit written comments to the director (address below) or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the decision. Availability of File: The official project file, existing environmental documents, and required studies are available for public review at the Department of Community Development's Permit Center, 33325 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Staff Contact: Senior Planner Becky Chapin, 253-835-2641, becks.ChapinC@,ci!yoffederalway.conn Published in the Federal Way Mirror August 2, 2019 LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 39A FEET OF SUBJECT PROPERTY BOUNDARY Process III Application: Lakehaven Sew )ump Station #33B Federal Way, Washington APN 2921049457 PIN Mailing Address Owner Address City State ZIPS 33325 8TH AVE S 2921049006 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 City of Federal Way 3580 PACIFIC HWY S Federal Way WA 98003 35929 PACIFIC HWY S 2921049020 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 David & Elizaveta Denchik 35935 PACIFIC HWY S Federal Way WA 98003 33325 8TH AVE S 2921049021 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 City of Federal Way 36317 PACIFIC HWY S Federal Way WA 98003 36530 PACIFIC HWY S 2921049024 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 McCaw Living TR & Culliton J 36530 PACIFIC HWY S Federal Way WA 98003 33330 8TH AVE S 2921049025 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Federal Way School District 35999 16TH AVE S Federal Way WA 98003 2921�z66 Federal Way PFejeet i i r NA [. a-y WA 98903 36501 11TH PL S 2921049027 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Susan Cadaram 36501 11TH PL S Federal Way WA 98003 33325 8TH AVE S 2921049059 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 City of Federal Way 1131 S 359TH ST Federal Way WA 98003 33325 8TH AVE S 2921049080 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 City of Federal Way N/A Federal Way WA 98003 33325 8TH AV S 2921049087 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98033 City of Federal Way N/A Federal Way WA 98003 2990 SE WALNUT RD 2921049088 OLALLA, WA 98359 Tim Whetstone PACIFIC HWY S Federal Way WA 98003 8306 GRANDSTAFF DR 2921049104 SACRAMENTO, CA 95823 Sunset Development & Invest 35975 PACIFIC HWY S Federal Way WA 98003 PO BOX 47338 2921049110 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 WSDOT R/E Services 933 S 364TH ST Federal Way WA 98003 805 S 364TH ST 2921049111 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Steve & Shauna Kane 805 S 364TH ST Federal Way WA 98003 36423 12TH PL S 2921049120 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Edwards & Rebecca Snyder 36423 12TH PL S Federal Way WA 98003 36407 12TH PL S 2921049121 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Boyd & Elizabeth Werley 36407 12TH PL S Federal Way WA 98003 807 S 364TH ST 2921049130 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Dean & Teressa Brown 807 S 364TH ST Federal Way WA 98003 33330 8TH AVE S 2921049131 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Federal Way School District N/A Federal Way WA 98003 RICE ANTOINETTE POTESTIO 36424 12TH PL S 2921049135 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Jack Kessler 36424 12TH PL S Federal Way WA 98003 1301 S 359TH ST 2921049136 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 William & Mindy Davis 1301 S 359TH ST Federal Way WA 98003 36404 12TH PL SOUTH 2921049140 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Thomas Schwartz 36404 12TH PL S Federal Way WA 98003 33325 8TH AVE S 2921049152 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 City of Federal Way N/A Federal Way WA 98003 3800 SW OTHELLO ST 2921049153 SEATTLE WA 98118 Federal Way Project LLC N/A Federal Way WA 98003 33325 8TH AVE S 2921049157 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 City of Federal Way N/A Federal Way WA 98003 NOTE = City of Federal Way -owned properties. Lake HavenPumpStation_Sta keholderTa hle_20190701 Page 1 of 1 aTJ;ogp.JaD ❑opulpsul u2TS\sjnopueI-jN:x l3o I aced 8I0Z `L 4o.,uW— 9£0# upoling auotid aisQ ' - V wniuuOiS s,ieiinlsui awum s'aaiiu;sui •asuadxa s juvaildde aql lu s2uiliuul-aa pun'suoilaaa,.IoaO aailou ,s,iuIap ui linsaa ,foul 2u.1sod So s Crp ani,I uigl!m alvai3ilaaa sigl uanlaa of aanituj;ugl puelsaapun I •uoTleuiuzaolap plo-gso.TLll I-eluoLuuo.TiALTa to/pug uotlo� asn pLTLI aLll uo panssi sT uoisToap I�ug lilun poupquptu oq IITM u2Ts o,ql legl pui3,apoD luoLudolanaQ pLTL OuiuOZ, 61 all!.I. (�IIAk,4) apoD Pasi''tay dfv jD.rapa� uT pauTllnO Sp.TT?pLTBIS U011eII-RiSLTT aLll TIM SatldLuoo SIN palltrisuI UOTS atjl Imll Apsol Xgo.ioq I m- '9 f'I`�I"luf'I E=1LF'lyj'I�j'l,yk+lyf+jf,.i�FA I'•fLF=1 I •i 1 •f fdWFd F�) F G7`�F I f']..f§InE:7�f+1gN?I FfI�F'1�.E 1...E°7...9 e,P�3e,F' uzoo•Al�Ml73tap*jjjoX1To r3 utdt;Lla•A)looq — uldwID tiloag tauuuld toivas x UauuvId s,laafoad aql of utis palsod agl So sawn}aid piuAuoj asuald ��`5 V :uoilulluisuljo of-eQ ,uogelluisul jo uoilBoo-I :Iig pollelsuI :ssa.Tppy loofoad :oN 011,4 loafoTd :au etz Toorotd 31` OIA11830 NOI1`dll`d1SNI N JIS NOIIVDlldd`d 40 30IION titan• Lrnll3aapa��a c�•nv��,1n trEn�• un�lF�aapa��o c❑ � ucuul3j 609Z-9£8-£9Z Xnd'L09Z-S£8-£SZ 9Z£9-£0086 VML `/,nM In•Japa3 111nos onuany ,,i8 SZ£££ .LNaL1(.Luv(13Q LNabudo'IaA3Q A.LINfllvlAIoD =10 AlD �`a Ili PUBLIC NOTICE suq'�iec• rp in.uo uss nr.'r�rnN �• t•"..�. •fit .} 41k o. Fed'0';:ttt=:P eral Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8rh Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.citvoffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 1, E. Tina Piety hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: 0 Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document Was. 0 emailed ❑ mailed ❑ faxed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on Julv 31, 2019 Project Name Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station #33B File Number(s) 19-103181 Signature ' --� ---- Date July 31, 2019 'N 41k CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name: Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station #33B Project Description: Installation of a new sewer pump station, gravity line, and force main improvements. The new pump station is a replacement of an existing pump station on an easement dedicated to Lakehaven Water & Sewer District. Project Contact: Silvia Hendrickson, Environmental Science Associates (ESA), 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200, Seattle, WA, 206-576-3780 Project Location: 200 South 359`' Street, Federal Way, Parcels 292104-9157 and 292104-9152 Application Received: July 2, 2019 Determined Complete: July 25, 2019 Notice of Application: August 2, 2019 Environmental Review: The environmental review required under State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) has been conducted by Lakehaven Water & Sewer District as lead agency. A MDNS was issued on April 22, 2019. Permits Under Review: Use Process III (File #19-103181-UP) Environmental Documents & Required Studies: Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Plan, prepared by ESA, March 2019, Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report, prepared by Robinson Noble, Inc., January 17, 2019, and Technical Information Report, prepared by Carollo, November 2018. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 16 "Surface Water Management," and Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code." Public Comment & Appeals: Any person may submit written comments on the land use application to the Director of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on August 19, 2019. Only persons who submit written comments to the director (address below) or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the decision. Availability of File: The official project file, existing environmental documents, and required studies are available for public review at the Department of Community Development's Permit Center, 33325 8 h Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Staff Contact: Senior Planner Becky Chapin, 253-835-2641, becky.chapin(i—bcityoffederalway.com Published in the Federal Way Mirror August 2, 2019 Doc ID 79363 1 Tina Piety From: Ken Spurrell <legals@tacomadailyindex.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 9:42 AM To: Tina Piety Cc: Becky Chapin Subject: Re: Legal Notice Received, thank you. Ken Spurrell Publisher Direct: 253-232-5219 Internal: 15001 Fax: 253-627-2253 15 Oregon Ave, Suite 101, Tacoma, WA 98409 0 Sound Publishing Man Prins. RMC Online Rats Media Kit Sound lnf'a On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 9:14 AM Tina Piety <Tina.Piety@ cit offederalwa .corny wrote: Hello, Please publish the attached legal notice (Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station NOA, 19-103181) in the Federal Way Mirror's Friday (8/2/2019) issue. Please furnish an affidavit of publication. This is for the Community Development account 83722477. Thank you, Tina E. Tina Piety, CAP, OM Administrative Assistant II Federal Way Community Development Department 1 Aijj�k CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name: Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station #3313 Project Description: installation of a new sewer pump station, gravity line, and force main improvements. The new pump station is a replacement of an existing pump station on an easement dedicated to Lakehaven Water & Sewer District. Project Contact: Silvia Hendrickson, Environmental Science Associates (ESA), 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200, Seattle, WA, 206-576-3780 Project Location: 200 South 350 Street, Federal Way, Parcels 292104-9157 and 292104-9152 Application Received: July 2, 2019 Determined Complete: July 25, 2019 Notice of Application: August 2, 2019 =r � r Subject Property ppi�g 03 .4 Z 5 Environmental Review: The environmental review required under State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) has been conducted by Lakehaven Water & Sewer District as lead agency. A MDNS was issued on April 22, 2019. Permits Under Review: Use Process III (File #19-103181-UP) Environmental Documents & Required Studies: Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Plan, prepared by ESA, March 2019, Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report, prepared by Robinson Noble, Inc., January 17, 2019, and Technical Information Report, prepared by Carollo, November 2018. Development Regulations Used for Project Mitigation: Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 16 "Surface Water Management," and Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code." Public Comment & Appeals: Any person may submit written comments on the land use application to the Director of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on August 19, 2019. Only persons who submit written comments to the director (address below) or specifically request a copy of the decision, may appeal the decision. Availability of File: The official project file, existing environmental documents, and required studies are available for public review at the Department of Community Development's Permit Center, 33325 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Staff Contact: Senior Planner Becky Chapin, 253-835-2641, beck .cha in ci offederalwa .com Published in the Federal Way Mirror August 2, 2019 CITY OF Federal Way Centered on Opportunity July 26, 2019 Ms. Silvia Hendrickson ESA I Environmental Science Associates 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 It n ickson ss .cfl CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway. com FILE Re: File #19-103181-00-UP; COMPLETENESS LETTER Lakehaven Pump Station #33b, 200 South 359th Street, Federal Way Dear Ms. Hendrickson: Jim Ferrell, Mayor The Community Development Department is in receipt of your July 2, 2019, Process III Master Land Use (ML.U) application. The proposal includes a new sewer pump station, gravity lines, and force main improvements. The new pump station will replace the existing pump station. Pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.15.045, within 28 days of receiving an application, the city shall determine whether all information and documentation required For a complete application has been submitted. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Please consider this correspondence a formal Letter of Complete Application. Pursuant to FWRC 19.15.045, the application is deemed complete as of July 25, 2019. This determination of completeness is based on a review of your submittal relative to applicable requirements referenced within FWRC 19.15.040. The submittal requirements are not intended to determine if an application conforms to city codes; they are used only to determine if all required materials have been submitted. A 120-day time line for reviewing the Process III application has started as of this date. The city's development regulations allow the department 120 days from the date that an application is deemed complete to take action on the application. However, the 120-day time line will be stopped any time the city requests corrections and/or additional information. You will be informed of the status of the.120-day time line when you are notified in writing that corrections and/or additional information are needed. NOTICE OF APPLICATION Formal processing and review of your applications will now begin. A Notice. of Application (NOA) will be posted on the city's official notice boards, published in die Federal Way Mnvr, and mailed to the persons within 300 Feet of each boundary of the subject property within 14 days of this letter, pursuant to FWRC 19.65.070(2). The city will prepare one Public Notice Board that the applicant will be responsible for posting on site by August 2, 2019. Further posting instructions and the notice board will be available for pick-up at Will Call at the Permit Center Receptionist Desk on the 2°J floor of City Hall on July 29, 2019. Ms. Silvia Hendrickson Page 2 of 2 July 26, 2019 CLOSING The Development Review Committee (DRC) staff is preparing initial technical review comments that will be forwarded to you in a separate correspondence at a later date. Technical review comments may result in a request for additional information and revisions in order to comply with applicable code requirements. If you have any questions regarding this letter or your development project, please contact me at 253-835-2641, or beck .cha in ci offed wa .c m. Sincerely, Becky Chap � Senior Planner enc: Notice of Application (NOA) c., Cole Elliott, Development Services Manager Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District Sean Nichols, South King Fire & Rescue Ken Miller, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, kmiller akehaver-rorg 19- 103181 -00- UP Doc I.D. 79362 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 3, 2019 TO: Cole Elliott, Development Services Manager Greg Kirk, Plans Examiner Rick Perez, City Traffic Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue FROM: Becky Chapin, Senior Planner FOR DRC MTG. ON. July 25, 2019 -Internal Completeness Review FILE NUMBER(s): 19-103181-00-UP RELATED FILE NOS.: 15-104085-00-PC PROJECT NAME: LAKEHAVEN PUMP STATION #33B PROJECT ADDRESS: 200 S 359TH ST ZONING DISTRICT: RS 35.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: New sewer pump station, gravity line, and force main improvements. The new pump station will replace an existing pump station on an easement dedicated to the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District. LAND USE PERMITS PROJECT CONTACT. MATERIALS SUBMITTED: UPIII and Partial Exemption for Critical Area Silvia Hendrickson ESA I Environmental Science Associates 5309 Shilshole Ave NE, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 sendrickson@esassoc.com • Master Land Use Application ■ Title Report • Water and Sewer Availability • Site Photos • SEPA Checklist & DNS (Lakehaven was Lead Agency) • Critical Areas Report and Concept Mitigation Plan ■ TIR • Plans/Drawing Set ES■ } 5309 Shilshole Avenue, NW 1 www.esassoc.com A Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98107 206.789.9658 phone 206.789.9684 fax RECDENED SUS. transmittal CITY OF FV[)R kL VY& commut4tTy DEVE3 OPVF_1%1T date July 2, 2019 attached ❑ via regular mail ❑ via messenger ❑ via overnight mail to City of Federal Way Community Development Department project Process III Process Approval: Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station #3313 South 359" Street and Pacific Highway South (Parcel 292104-9157) items A, Master Land Use Application B, Lakehaven Utility District Purchase Order #50136 for $6,262 C-1, Summary Letter and Pre -Application Conference Checklist C-2, Process III Checklist Referencing Sheet Numbers for Required Figures D, Title Report E, Water and Sewer Availability Letters F, Site Photographs G, SEPA Checklist H, Plan Set I, TIR with Storm Drainage Analysis and Geotech Report J,`Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Plan K, Process III, Public Notice: envelopes, list, and map. comments Dear City of Federal Way Staff, Environmental Science Associates (ESA) is pleased to submit the attached Process III (project approval) Application and attachments (Attachments A through K) on behalf of the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District for review of the proposed Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station #3313 and related gravity line and force main improvements, proposed to be located at Parcel 292104-9157, proximate to South 359' Street and Pacific Highway South. A Pre -Application Conference was held on September 3, 2015; a summary of required documents are listed in the Pre -Application Conference Summary and included for your reference (Attachment C-1). Attachment C-2 lists which sheet number corresponds to each sheet requirement listed in the latest version of the Process III checklist. The required geotechnical report has been included within Attachment I, the Technical Information Report. A narrative of how the proposed project mitigates for intrusions in critical areas, as required under FWRC 19.145.120(1), is included in the Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Plan (Sections 5 through 6 in Attachment J). Please feel free to contact me if you have questions or need any additional information. Best Regards, lli� Sfvi�afl4end-lc i Senior Planner 206-576-3780 sent by Silvia Hendrickson, ESA cc Ken Miller, Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Brian Sliger, Carollo Engineers Karmen Martin, ESA LAKEHAVEN WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Sewer Pump Station 33B PROJECT RECEIVED Lakehaven Water and Sewer District JUL 0 2 2019 P.O. Box 4249 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY Federal Way, WA 98063-4249 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE OF ISSUANCE: April 22, 2019 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Lakehaven Water and Sewer District proposes to construct a larger capacity pump station which is needed to meet the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District's existing and future needs for the basin. Phase I (this project) will construct a new Pump Station 33B to replace the existing Pump Station 33 on the same site and pump through the existing 10-inch diameter force main which feeds the gravity sewer system, upstream of the District's existing Pump Station 22. Major equipment will be installed for Phase I flow conditions and includes a 450 kW standby generator with aboveground 1,500-gallon diesel fuel storage tank, electrical building, aboveground packaged odor control system, three 200 horsepower pumps, 48" diameter sewer pipe on S 3591h Street, associated electrical equipment and site grading/filling. Phase II (future project) will be constructed when the sewerage inflow to Pump Station 33B nears the capacity of the existing 10-inch force main and the District's existing Pump Station 22. Phase II will include the construction of new parallel 14-inch and 18-inch diameter force mains, approximately 9,300- feet-long from Pump Station 33B to the District's Panther Lake Trunk Line. The route for the new parallel force mains is as follows: West in S. 359th Street to the west side of Pacific Highway; then south to north side of parcel 292104-9098; then west across parcels 292104-9020, 9163, 9098, and 113780-0210 to the 3rd Avenue cul-de-sac; than S. 161st Place to 1st Avenue S.; then north in 1st Avenue S. to S. 356th Street; then west in SW 356th Street to 4th Avenue SW; then north in 4th Avenue SW to the 4th Avenue SW cul-de-sac. Phase II construction will also include addition of miscellaneous electric actuated valves and programming modifications. Phase III (future project) will be constructed when the sewerage inflow to Pump Station 33B nears the capacity of Phase II loading conditions. Equipment installed for Phase III loading conditions includes replacement with a 650 kW standby generator with aboveground 2,500 gallon diesel storage tank and addition of a fourth 200 horsepower pump and associated electrical equipment. PROPONENT: Lakehaven Water and Sewer District LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The project limits are located at approximately 450' east of Pacific Highway South on the north side of S 359ffi Street. THRESHOLD DETERMINATION: 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 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 lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. WRITTEN COMMENTS AND APPEALS: This Determination of Non -significance (DNS) is issued under the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Resolution 84-984 and WAC 197-11-340(2). The lead agency (Lakehaven Water and Sewer District) will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date of this DNS or date of legal notice, whichever is later. Comments must be submitted to the District by 4:30 pm on May 8, 2019. Unless modified by the District, this determination will become final following the comment deadline. Any person aggrieved of the District's final determination may file an appeal, along with the appropriate filing fee, within 15 days of date of the determination or of the date whenever any required notice is made, whichever is later; provided that if there are any state statutory requirements for appeals specified therein, such requirements shall control. Responsible official: John Bowman Position/Title: General Manager Phone: (253) 941-1516 Address: P.O. Box 4249 Federal Way, WA 98063 Publication Date: April 23, 2019 Comment Deadline: May 8, 2019 Appeal Deadline: May 8, 2019 Staff Contact: Ken Miller, P.E. Engineering Manager Phone: (253) 946-5405 Email: kmiller@lakehaven.org .� Date _ Signature LakehavenTRICTWATER EWER u 31623 Is' Ave S Federal Way, WA 98003 K. Miller 253-946-5405 kmfller(a lakehayen.org SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose ofcheckYst, Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are si0ficant. 'f'his information is also helpfu:i to determine if available avoidance, minimization, or compensatory mitigation measures will address die probable significant impacts, or if an environmental impact statement will be Prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checkist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or pdvate consultant for some questions. Y611 gray rrse Trot applicable " or "doer not appy"only rAmlyarr arri explain 1) it doe rrot apply and nel rvherr the arrsrreris rnikrrarvrr. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies and/or reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process, as well as later in the decision -making process. The checklist questions apply to allp.11Is ofyorrrptoposal, even ifyou 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 thus checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Additional infoLmation may be necessary to evaluate die existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal, and an analysis of adverse impacts. Tine checklist is considered the f mt, but not necessarily the only source of infonrnation needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonprojectproposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans, and programs), complete the applicable parts of S IP I;X'Af jNL T,11_ S1 JRF f' 1ru W Ni']�i'1ZC} '=C"1 :1 . t,Ico)N"5 ar Please completely answer all sections A and B, plus the questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for nonprojects) questions in Part B (Environmental Elements) that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. Page 1 of 21 A. BACKGROUND 1. Namc of proposed project, if applicable: Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Pump Station 33B 2. Name of applicant Lakehaven Water and Sewer District 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Ken Miller P.O. Box 4249 (253) 946-5405 Federal Way, WA 98063 4. Date checklist prepared: March 13, 2019 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Federal Way 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Project construction for the current project is scheduled to begin in late Summer 2019 or 2020 and continue through Winter 2021, for an estimated duration of 12 to 16 months. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Yes, Phase II and III. As a result of increased growth, a larger capacity pump station is needed to meet the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District's existing and future needs. Phase I (thus project) will construct new Pump Station 33B to pump through the existing 10-inch diameter force main which feeds the gravity sewer system, upstream of the District's existing Pump Station 22. Major equipment will be installed for Phase II loading conditions and includes a 450 k%V standby generator with aboveground 1,500-gallon diesel fuel storage tank, aboveground packaged odor contr❑l system, three 200 horsepower pumps, and associated electrical equipment. Phase II (future project) will be constructed when the sewerage inflow to Pump Station 33B nears the capacity of the existing [ 0-inch force main and the District's existing Pump Station 22. Phase II will include the construction of new parallel 14-inch and 18-inch diameter force mains, appxnximately 9,300-feet-Iong from Pump Station 33B to the Disttct's Panther Lake Trunk Line. The route for the new parallel force mains is as follows: %Vest in S. 359ti Street to the west side of Pacific Highway; then south to north side of parcel 292104-9098; then west across parcels 292104-9020, 9163, 9098, and 113780-0210 to the 3rd Avenue cul-de-sac; than S. 161st Place to 1st Avenue S.; then north in 1st Avenue S. to S. 356th Street; then west in SW 356th Street to 4th Avenue SW; then north in 4th Avenue SW to the 4th Avenue SW cul-de-sac. Phase II construction will also include addition of miscellaneous electric actuated valves and programming modifications. Phase i1I (future project) will be constructed when the sewerage inflow to Pump Station 33B nears the capacity of Phase II loading conditions. Equipment installed for Plhase III loading conditions includes replacement with a 650 Page 2 of 21 M 1cW standby generator with aboveground 2,500-gallon diesel fuel storage tank and addition of a fourth 200 horsepower pump and associated electrical equipment. 8. List any environmental information you lmow about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Environmental information prepared for the project include the following: • Enviromnental Science Associates. Lakehaven Water and Server District Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Plan. March 2019. ■ Robinson Noble. Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared for the pump station site located on parcel 2921049157. September 2018 e Terracon. Geotechnical Engineering Report. April2013. • Carollo Engineers. Site Plan Permit Review Technical Information Report. November 2018. 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. None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if lmown. Ci � of-ederal Wa Process III Application Right -of -Way Permit Building Pen -nit Plan Review Critical Areas Review Storm Drainage Review 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this chec[dist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional spccific infonmation on project description.) L dwhaven Water and Sewer District proposes to construct a newsewerputnnp station and appurtenances (Pump Station 3313) along with a new gravity sewer line and force main. The proposed fac[Hes will be located in public road rights - of -way and easements dedicated to the District. As a result of increased growth, a larger capacity pump station is needed to meet the District's existing and Future needs. The new Pump Station 3313will replace the existing pump station 33(A). Because of the location of the existing pump station 33(A), it is not possible to upgrade or replace it at the existing site. The District has obtained an easement from. the City of Federal Way for the nmy pump station site location north of the existing pump station 33(A) on parcel 292104157. The project will construct the new Pump Station 33B to pump though an existing 10-inch diameter force main wlucli feeds the gravity sewet system, upstream of the existing Pump Station 22. Major equipment will be installed for Future (phase ID loading conditions and includes a 450 kW standby generator with aboveground 1,500-gallon diesel fuel storage tank, aboveground packaged odor control system, three 200 horsepower pumps, and associated electrical equipment. Pump Station 33B The pump station will include a rectangular wet well and valve vault with approximate dimensions of 28 feet by 23 feet by 23 feet deep and separate flow meter vault with approximate dimensions of 17 feet by 14 feet by 11 feet deep. O ther Page 3 of 21 facilities will include an electrical building to house electrical equipment and a standby generator, an aboveground diesel fuel storage tank, packaged odor control system, transformer, and tem-final enclosures, influent manholes, and related facilities. All of these structures will be surrounded by a reLiiningwall set atop quarry spall footings. Gravity Sewer Line and Force Main The project includes approximately 380 feet of 48-inch gravity sewer line and approximately 110 feet of 10-inch force main. The new sewer line and force main would be constructed within the permanent pump station easement and within the right of way. The force main and the gravity line %will be 6 to 8 feet deep on average. The deepest portion of the gravity line (15 feet) would be located at the pump station site. Existing Pump Station Demolition and Site Restoration The existing pump station 33(A) will be removed once Pump Station 33B is constructed and operational. This will include removal of the existing above ground pump station appurtenances and decommissioning the remaining underground structures by filling-,vith gravel and capping. An existing 12-inch sewer line will be plugged and abandoned. Approximately 1,000 square yards of existing pavement (driveway and existing pump station site) south of the new pump station, will be removed and the site restored. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information fora 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 east of Pacific Highway South (NE '/a of Section 29, Township 21N, Range 4E; Figure 1) in Federal Way, WA. Pump Station 33B will be constructed on King County Parcel #2921049157 on an existing easement granted to the Lakehaven Water and Server District by the City of Federal Way. The pump station will be located in the northwest comer of the parcel adjacent to South 359thStreet and approximately 300 feet north of the existing pump station 33(A). The majority of the gravity sewer system and force main will be installed in South 359thStreet starting approximately 550-feet east of the intersection of Pacific Highway South and South 3591hStreet. The remainder of the gravity lines and force main will be constructed within the pump station easement area to connect to the proposed pump station. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (underline/circle one): _Flat rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The area slope varies between 7% to 11% in a south and southeast direction, the steepest beingin the south easterly direction. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope is on the east side of the proposed pump site is approximately 11%. Retaining walls are proposed to be built on the east and south sides of the pump station site so that the finished grade for the site will have a slope no greater than 2% in a southerly direction. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. Page 4 of 21 According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, tile piinhary soil type within the project area is Bellingham silt loam (13h) with minor components of Scattle, AldeMvood and Everett series. Slope varies between 0-2%. The District retained the services of a geotechnicaI consultant (ltobinson Noble) to drill soil borings on the proposed Pump Station 33B site to support design efforts, The geotechnical consultant's report is available at the District's office for review and will be submitted to the City during the permitting process. Based on soil borings drilled at the project site, die soils consist of layers ofvery soft silt, dense silty sand, hard silts, very dense silty sand and very dense sand and gravel. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immmediate vicinity? If so, describe. According to City of Federal Way mapping, there are no known geologically hazardous areas on the project site. There is also no surface indication or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity of the proposed sewer facilities. e. Describe the ptupose, type, total area, and appioxirmate quantities and total affected area of any filling, e_Xcavadon, athd grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. 'I1he proposed sewer facilities will require cut and fill in order to construct the new sewer facilities and to abandon the existing pump station and driveway. The total area of construction disturbance will be 28,600 square feet (so and includes approximately 9,500 sf at the new pump station site, approximately 5,000 sf for saver line facilities widen tine ROW, approximately 7,700 sf for abandonment of the existing pump station/driveway, and approximately 6,400 sf of temporary construction staging area. Appta ornately 3,100 cu. yds. of soil will be excavated along tlhe sewer pipe line route and Pump Station 33B site. Approximately 2,960 cu, yds. of special fill materials will be required to fill and level the pump station site and Ell the pipeline trenches. Excavated material that is considered unsuitable for trench and pump station backK will be hauled offisite and disposed of at permitted sites to be identified by the contractor. Special fill material will be imported for backfilling from local gravel pits• f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. As %vith all construction projects, clearing and construction -related activities could result in tempos 1, erosion of exposed/excavated soils.7.ihis construction effectwould be mitigated with theimplernentation o£best nhanagement practices included in a ternpoLm, y erosion and sediment control plan. After areas disturbed by construction are stabilized, there will be very little potential for erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? About 37% of the pump station easement site will be covered wide impervious surface, including approxitmately 2,789 sf of structures and 763 sf of Detaining wall. The remainder of the 9,500 sf site will consist of porous asphalt and vegetated areas. With the exception of the selected rump Station 33B site, a majority of the saver gravity line and force main will be constructed -within e.+istingimproved (paved) road rights -of -way. NeNv impervious surfaces would be associated with the proposed Pump Station 33B site only. E.usting unproved (paved) roads, driveways, and landscaped easement areas disturbed by the installation of the sewer system will be restored to pre -construction conditions and in accordance with the requirements of the local jurisdiction. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Temporary erosion control measures, pursuant to applicable King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDIvl), City of Federal Way, and Lakehaven Water and Sewer District standards, will be employed. A temporary erosion and sedimentation control (ESC) plan has been prepared for the project and will be submitted to the required permitting agencies for review and approval. All approved mitigation measures, including Best Page 5 of 21 Management Practices, will be implemented before and during construction as appropriate. 2. Air It. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. In the short term, construction of the sewer system will cause a minor, temporary increase in emissions to the air from construction vehicles and equipment and possibly dust. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no known off -site sources of air emissions or odors that may affect the project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The project contractor would be required to comply with all relevant federal, state, and local air quality laws, and to prepare a plan to minimia.�e dust and odors. During project construction, standard methods for controlling dust, such as frequent watering of the construction area and pavement sweeping.tvill reduce impacts to the air. In addition, the following measures may be implemented to avoid or minimize immpacts to air quality from construction of the proposed project: • All construction vehicles and equipment would be properly sized and maintained in optimal operational condition. ■ Particulate smatter deposited on paved, public roads and sidewalks, would be removed to reduce mud and dust. • Dirt, gravel, and debris piles would be covered as needed to reduce dust and wind blow debris. • A TESC plan would be required to prevent sediment transport from tie project site. 3. Water a. Surface Water 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The project is located within the Hylebos Creek watershed (WRIA 10). The North Fork Hylebos Creek is conveyed through a culvert under South 359th Street and flows approximately 110 feet to d-ie east of the proposed pump station site (Figure 1). This stream joins with the main stem West Hylebos Creek approximately 0.75-mile south of the project site. Hylebos Creek flows into Comnneneerment Say, Puget Sound, approximately 4 miles from the project site. The project site generally slopes from the northwest to southeast toward die North Fork West Hylebos Creek. Three wedands (Wetlands D, E and F) have been identified in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Wedand E, a Category III -,vedand, is located itmnediately adjacent to the project site and along the western stream bank of the North Fork Hylebos Creek. Wedand D, a Category I wetland, is located west of the proposed purnp station site and is part of a large wetland complex (>30 acres). Wetland D is separated from die pump station site by die access road. Wetland F — a small, approximately 450 square foot depressional wetland - is located south of the proposed pump station site, adjacent to the east side of the access road between Wetlands D and E. No other surface water is present on or in the immediate vicinity of tie site. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (vitlhin 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Page 6 of21 Yes. The new pump station and portions of the gravity sewer line and force main located in South 35911, Street will be located within 200-Feet of North Fork Hylebos Creek and wetlands as described below. North Fork Hylebos Creek The project will require installation of a new gravity sewer over the North Bork Hylebos Creek where the stream is conveyed through a culvert (South 359'h Street). The proposed construction method at the North Fork Hylebos Creek in South 359th Street will involve open trench construction where the proposed force main crosses above the existing culvert. The existing culvert will not be disturbed. A concrete blanket or controlled density fill will be used to protect the existing culvert pipe and a 6-indi rniitiniLwn cover maintained between the culvert pipe and the gravity main. Wetlands (and Wetland and Stream Buffers) VYAnile the proposed Pump Station 33B avoids permanent impacts to wetlands, the pump station (and portions of the force main and gravity sewer system route) will be constructed within wcdand and stream buffer areas and construction access will temporarily disturb a portion of Wetland D. The project will result in permanent buffer impacts of 9,511 square feet, temporary buffer impacts of 6,400 square feet, and temporary wetland impacts of 3,006 square feet. A mitigation plan has been prepared that proposes restoration and enhancement of wetland and wetland and streain buffer to compensate for the temporary and permanent impacts. A portion of the proposed wetland mitigation is the existing Pump Station 33 site and the asphalt access road. Best management erosion control practices will be implemented during construction of the sewer facilities to prevent runoff and materials from entering the wedand and wetland and strewn buffers. A critical areas report has been prepared to meet City of Federal Way critical areas reporting and mitigation requirements for wedand and stream buffer impacts. 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. None. Temporary plates will be placed over the construction access to avoid placement of fill within Wetland D. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. During construction, the project may require surface water runoff diversion during storm events. Surface water runoff from the construction areas will be filtered through appropriate filtering mechanisms (i.e., silt fence, straw waddles) to remove sediments before diversion overland. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note the location on the site plan. No, the project does not lie within a 100-year floodplain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. The project itself will not discharge any waste material to any surface waters, however, wastewater currently generated widnin the project area will be ptunped to the District's Lakota Wastewater Treatment Plan%which discharges the treated wastewater to Puget Sound (in accordance with NPDES permit requirements). b. Ground Water Page 7 of 21 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses, and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The District retained the services of a geotechnical consultant (Robinson Noble) to install monitoring wells and evaluate groundwater conditions -within the proposed pump station site to support design efforts. The geotechnical consultant's report is available at the District's office for review and will be submitted to the City during the permitting process. Project construction will require dewatering of the Pump Station 33B site excavation area and portions of the force main and gravity sewer lines that are installed below groundwater level. The project's geotechnical engineer roughly estimates a peak dewatering rate of approximately 25 gallons per minute to dewater at tine Pump Station 33B site, and along the route of the gravity sewer and force mains. Dewatering draw down tests were not performed and dewatering rates are estimates only. Disposal will be by overland flow discharge to Hylebos Creek. Temporary dewatering discharge areas will be established in the southeast corner of the pump station site. A temporary energy dissipater will be installed to protect the adjacent wetland and stream buffer/riparian area from scour, erosion sedimentation and other damage. The groundwater will be disposed of in accordance with City of Federal Way regulations. All withdrawn groundwater will be detained in holding tanks (Baker tanks) to allow sediment to settle prior to being discharged. During geotechnical investigations, artesian groundwater aquifer was encountered approximately 37 feet below the ground surface at the project site. Tlne aquifer has an extremely high permeability and storage capacity. As recommended by the geotechnical consultant, die project will use a sink -in place caisson type construction. T11is method was selected to maintain a factor of safety to reduce the risk of affecting underlying artesian pressures. The project will not require long-term ground water discharge or removal. 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 systern(s) are expected to serve. None This project may eliminate the need for existing and future septic tanks within the project area. No waste material will be discharged into the ground as a result of this project. 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. Existing runoff originates from precipitation and surface water runoff. The proposed pump station site is approximately 9,500 sf and contained within a single drainage basin. The site is predominately wooded/vegetated and includes an existing asphalt access road to the District's existing pump station 33(A) along its west boundary. Existing sheet flow runoff from the access road and South 3591h Street is dispersed to the adjacent vegetated areas. Runoff not infiltrated or dispersed onsite sheet flows in a south-east direction to Hylebos Creek. During construction, any surface water runoff from the construction areas will be filtered through appropriate filtering mechanisms (i.e., silt fence, straw waddles) to remove sediments before diversion overland. Once the construction is completed and the sewer line route is stabilized, the surface runoff will be restored to the pre -project conditions. Existing surface water runoff flow and/or direction from existing impervious areas will not be altered by this project. Page 8 of 21 Surface water rluloff originating from the new itmpen�ious area at the pump station site will be collected and disposed of in accordance mitt; applicable drainage standards, codes, and regakcrnents included in the 2016 King County Washington Surface eater Design Manual gZCSWDIvL and City of Federal Way requirements. Tlie Proposed site drainage system consists oFporous asphalt, catch basins to collect porous asphalt overflow, storm di -in piping, and a dispersion trench. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Wastewater could enter ground or surface water in. the unlikely evcn t of a breRk in the sewer or sewer bypass system, but this condition already emsts and the proposed replacetnentpump station will. be more reliable than the existing. 3) Does the proposal alter or othetwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: An approved temporary erosion control plan will be implemented to prevent untreated, sediment -laden storm water from entering wetlands and Hylebos Creek. Any surface water runoff from the construction areas Will be filtered through appropriate filtering mechanisms (i.e., silt fence, straw waddles) to remove sediments before diversion overland. Appropriate measures will be implemented during construction, pursuant to applicable KCSV D1VI, City of Federal Way, and Lakehaven Water and Sewer District standards, to reduce and control runoff water impacts. Land disrupted by construction of the pipeline ■wiil be restored to pre -constriction condition. Temporary de■vatering discharge areas will be established in the southeast Corner of the pump station site. A temporary energy dissipater will be installed to protect the adjacent wetland and stream buffer/riparian area from scour, erosion sedimentation and other damage. The groundwater will be disposed of in accordance with City of Federal. Way regulations. All withdrawn groutidwatcr will be detained in holding tanks (Baker tanks) to allow sediment to settle prior to being discharged. The project will use a sink -in place caisson type construction. This method was selected to maintain a factor of safety to reduce the risk of affecting underlying artesian pressures. 4. Plants a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: Deciduous trees: red alder. bi -leaf ma le Indian lusn black cguonwond PaciF will w . l will w v' e na le l Evergreen trees: D u 1 s fu western hemlock ■ves n red cedar 1:,' n fish holly Shrubs: Douglas spkaea thimbleberry, satmonb •r�r h ackberry Herbs: s.vord Fern. [�tegon ran . s[ingiin i� settle, giant hol-e a'I Fireweed lady ern Grasses: 6e�t ttin ss. bluegrass. Fee Cana amass, ryeeras_s_, velvetgrass Wet Soil Plants: reed can& ' grass black cottonwood red alder Paciliic ■villow F 2itig, willow almo berg s f rush Dou l G s ira a slo h ed k k cab . Page 9 of 21 Water Plants: none within the pipe installation corridor deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fit, cedar, pine, other -----Shrubs morass pasture crop or grain orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrvsh, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, tinfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? A total of approximately 0.5 acre of vegetation at the pump station site and along the gravity and force main routes will be disturbed by construction. Because of the use of existing cleared road right-of-way, tree and shrub removal along the sewer system route is expected to be minimal. Most of the vegetation disturbance will be temporary. Permanent removal will be necessary at the Pump Station 33B site to accormnadate the new facility. Approximatcly 4 trees ('lT' alders) will have to be removed at the Pump Station 33B site, c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. The Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Natural Heritage Program GIS Database does not identify any threatened or endangercd plant species or crucial habitatin the ptojcct area or in the inhnhediate vicinity of the project area. Given the disturbed nature of tie project site (located wid-h n existing improved road rights of way and easements) it is unlikely that any threatened or endangered plant species exist on or near the project site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. All disturbed areas will be restored upon project completion to as near pre -construction conditions as possible. A mitigation plan will be developed in accordance with City of Federal Way requirements for impacts to wetland and stream buffer areas and will include the replacement of invasive blackberry with appropriate native vegetation. Grass and weedy areas disturbed by the pipe and storage structure installation will be re -seeded by hydroseeding with a grass mixture or with red fescue grass upon completion of the project. The proposed development is very similar in size to the existing developed area, there is proposed mitigation for both areas. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None to our knowledge 5. Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site, or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: Invertebrates: shellfish, insects, other Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, sculpins, w her fish Page 10 of 21 Amphibians: Frogs_ salamanders, other Reptiles: lizards, snakes, turtles, other Birds: hawks heron ea le songbirds, ducks bla It-ca 1 chic( o atr « Am rican ro 'n Ameri .. n crow and tcllar's 'a Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, rrAnuse. OL vole le It is assumed soiree small mammals exist along the proposed sewer line route area. birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, ells, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. According to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (LV7M' Priority Habitats and Species rind database, winter steetllend, a federally threatened species, are present ill West Hylebos Creek, located east of the emsting pump station. Downstream reaches of Hylebos Creek are known to support Chinook Salmon, also a federally threatened species. Other priority Fish species present include Cohn Salmon in the portion of 14ylebos Creek that flows From the center of the project area south and ill West Hylebos Creek. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Although the area is located within the Pacific Firvay, the project site is not known to be a critical Dart of the migration route. Hylebos Creels serves as a migration corridor for salmonids and its riparian area likely serves as a wildlife movement corridor. The closest known bald eagle nest is approximately 1.5 miles northwest of the project on the east side of I-5. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. The route for the sewer system will be designed to avoid work within streams, in order to avoid or minimize disturbances to surface waters, riparian habitat, and wildlife habitat. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None to our knowledge 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. The completed Pump Station 33B will require the use of electrical power for the operation of dhe pumps and appurtenances. In the event of pmver outages, a standby generator will be installed on the pump station site to provide an alternative temporary source of electrical power. b. `Mould your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No Page 11 of 21 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. High-energy efficient pump station motors and lighting are proposed for the site. 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. Yes. The standby generator will require the installation of an above ground fuel storage tank of approximately 3,000 gallons for diesel heel at Pump Station 33B. The diesel storage tank will be designed with double walled construction and in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. The proposed generator and fiiel tank willreplace the existing "older" style equipment. The newer equipment will be Further away from the creek and state of the art. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None to our knowledge. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity, None to our knowledge, 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. None. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None to our knowledge 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. The diesel storage tank will be designed with double walled construction and in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations, including UFC regulations for tank leakage, spill contaimnent, and secondary containment. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long- term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term construction related noise will be created by the project but will predominantly be limited to daytime hours as allowed under City of Federal Way Municipal Code. For a short span of the project Page 12of21 (estimated 4 weeks max), sound attenuated temporary bypass puillps may operate at night during reconstruction of the gravity sewer system in S359th Street and the switchover of flows to the new pump station. Upon project completion of construction, noise levels will return to pre -construction levels. With the exception of the standby generator at Pump Station 33B, which will include measures to reduce the noise during operation, the noise generated by the operation of the pump station will be very miniimal. The pump station will be designed to meet City of Federal Way noise standards. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction activities related to this proposal will meet all applicable codes and ordinances relating to noise. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a . What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The pump station and pipeline will be located within easements and property dedicated to Lakehaven Water and Sewer District, and existing improved street rights-of-Nvay. The project site is adjacent to open space property belonging to the City of Federal Way; to the north, south and east. The large tract residential property to the %vest is privately owned but encumbered by sensitive areas. b. Has the project site been used as working farmLuids or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? Not to our knowledge. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, till ng, and harvesting? If so, how. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. None. An approximately 450-foot paved driveway is located on the west side of this study area that facilitates access to the existing sewer pump station. The pump station is surrounded by a cyclone fence and consists of two buildings that were built on a paved turn -out d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The existing pump station structures will be removed to allow for site restoration and enhancement. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The zoning designation in the vicinity of Pump Station 33B site is SR 35 (single family residential -min 35,000 sq ft lots). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Page 13 of 21 The comprehensive plan designations within the project area is Open Space. 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 a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. Yes. The Pump Station 33B site is located within wetland and stream buffers associated with Hylebos Creek. See response to checklist question B(3)(2) for further information on Pump Station 33B site and potential to affect wetlands, streams, and buffers. The project area lies within a designated 100-year wellliead protection area. Wellhead protection areas are based on proximity to and travel time of groundwater to the public water source -wells. i. Approximately how many people -would reside or -work in the completed project? None j. Approximately how many people -would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. Not applicable 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. The proposed sewer pump station and appurtenance and related pipelines are being sized to accommodate the existing and future needs for sewer service,,vitivn the service area. All of the proposed sewer facilities are located within the City of Federal Way where urban services are expected. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long -tern commercial significance, if any. Not applicable 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No units will be eliminated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. Not applicable 10. Aesthetics Page 14 of 21 a. What is the tallest height of any proposed sttucture(s), not including antennas; Avhat is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? widr the exception of the pump station standby power generator, power panel, electricn] equipment, odor control system, the above ground diesel tonic, acid electrical transformer, die entire system (pump station, and pipelines) will be located below the existing gnmutnd surbce. The pump station will require a 33 foot by 35 foot building, with an approximate height of 20 Feet, to house the putnp station electrical equipment and standby generator. Retaining walls tip to fi feet ]ugh will, be constructed on the west, south, and east sides of the site. b. `N/hat views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obsttacted? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. The Pump Station 33B footprint site will be fenced. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What tithe of day would it mauzly occur? Project construction will take place largely during daylight hours. Temporary site lighting may be used at the beginning and end of hark days during construction when daylight hours are short. The completed project will require sufficient light for safety and security. Outside areas of the new building will be lit. 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. All exterior lights will be focused or shielded as necessary to cast light only in area that require it and to minimize light spilling onto adjacent areas. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? ,111cre are existing walking trails in the vicinity of South 359th Street located on the property owned by the City of Federal lay. The City of Federal owns the recreational property in the vicinity of South 359Lh Street. b. Would the proposed project 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 tine project or applicant, if any. Page 15 of 21 None proposed. 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. There are no aboveground buildings, structures, or sites in or near the subject property that are listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, Washington Heritage Register, or King County Landmarks Register (Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, 2019; King County Historic Preservation Program, 2018). The existing structures date to at least 1985. The access road was established c.1980 (HistoricAerials.com, 2019). b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? Tlnis may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. No archaeological sites, cemeteries, or traditional cultural places ate recorded in or near the project site. The Statewide Predictive Model for encountering precontact-era sites classifies this location as Moderate to High Risk (Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, 2010). This model does not take into account potential impacts from development or potential for historic -era archaeological deposits. Thirteen cultural resources assessments have been completed within, one mile of the subject property; three were done within 0.25-mile. None of the assessments identified archaeological resources or historic properties near the subject property. Approximately one mile southwest of the subject propertyare two cemeteries, one established in the 1970s and the other in at least the 19th century as a Native American cemetery that was later associated with the St. George Indian School. There are three recorded archaeological sites within one mile: a historic barn, cemetery, and historic automobile service station. The subject property is within the traditional territory of the Puyallup people. Ethnographic studies do not record any specific Puyallup use or occupation along the upper Hylebos Creek and its tributaries, however the waterway was likely an important resource for traditional subsistence practices such as fishing, hunting, and gathering. Historical maps and aerial photographs do not show evidence of any development at the subject property prior to its current function (HistoricAerials.corn, 2019; U.S. Geological Survey, 1898, 1900, 1949, 1961, 1968, 1973, 1981; U.S. Surveyor General, 1868). In 1897 the area was classified as merchantable forest, however there is no evidence of past logging (U.S. Geological Survey, 1897) and the area appears to have remained forested since at least 1936. The property was originally part of the Northern Pacific Railway land holdings, however no track was constructed in this area. The property was sold and subdivided by 1907. Former owners include H.F. Reynolds (1907), H.L. Reynolds (1912), and Hans Olson (1926 to at least 1936). Nearby South 356th Street was constructed c.1912 and South 359th Street was constructed c.1926 (Kroll Map Company, 1926; Metsker Map Company, 1936). c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. As cited in response to questions 13a and 13b above, the following types of documents were reviewed in order to identify any potential cultural resources in the project vicinity: Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's Statewide Predictive Model and Washington Information System for. Architectural and Archaeological Records Data, historical maps, aerial photographs, and published ethnographies and local histories. No consultation with tribes has been conducted to date. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Page 16 of 21 Should cultural resources be inadvertently identified ducting the project, the District ■vill comply with state laws requiring the protection of cultural resources and human remains (RCW 27.53, RON 27.4-4, RC%X168.50, and RC%V 68.60). The District will temporarily halt work in the iftunediate vicinity of the identified resources and notify Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and tribes to negotiate trsitigation and/or avoidance measures. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The Pump Station 33B, pipelines and related appurtenances will be constructed in existing road rights=of %vay, and property and easements dedicated to I..akehaven `slater and Server District. L-dsdug public streets dial construction vehicles will be used for access to thin site include South 359th Street; PacIlwy, South 356th Sheet, 1st Avenue South, 361st Street, and 3rd Ave South. b. Is die site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Pacific I-1ighway, South is served by Pierce Transit Route 500. No public transit serves S 35911, St. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed projector non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Not applicable d. will die proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle, or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. However, all existing streets disturbed dming project construction will be returned to pre -construction condition upon project completion. There is an existing driveway that would be used to access the Pump Station 33B site. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How many veh icuiar trips per day wouuld be generated by the completed project or proposals' If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non -passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Pump station and pipeline maintenance will occur on an "as needed" basis. Maintenance for the pump station will be performed at least once a week. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. "06 h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. In the short term, pipeline construction may cause periods of "normal traffic flow" disruption, however, in the long term, the sewer pump station and pipelines will not create transportation impacts. The contractor will be Page 17 of 21 responsible for providing the City of Federal Way, and the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District with detour and traffic control plans prior to construction. 15. Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: Fite protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The pu>np station and pipelines will require periodic maintenance by District personnel. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Provision of service will be consistent with all applicable land use plans. 16. Utilities a. Underline/circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other All of the above utility services referenced above are available adjacent to and within the project site. 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 which might be needed. A new electrical service will be required for Pump Station 33B. The provider for electrical service in the area is PSE. Public water service will also be required for the new pump station and two existing houses. Lakehaven Water and Sewer District is the water service provider. During pipeline construction, some existing utilities may have to be relocated to avoid conflicts. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Printed Name of Signee: �" \ Position and Agency/Organization: ; l FV 1 ill ' .•�G �` �-P����4v�Yv t.�a�Tr✓� � �� � Date Submitted: e\ Page 18 of 21 References Anderson Map Company. 1907. Anderson's Atlas of King County. Available at: htt www.historicma wor'Ics.com "vla U5 1250014 Pa a+14+++Townshi +21+North++Ran a+4i-East Kin +C ount +1907 Washin ton . Accessed: January 2, 2019. Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 2010. Statewide Predictive Model. Last updated 2010. Available at: htt www.dah .wa. ovl. Accessed: January 2, 2019. Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 2019. Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD). Restricted Database. Available at: http://www.dah .wa. ov Accessed: January 2, 2019. Hilbert, Vi, Jay Miller, and Zalmai Zahir. 2001. Puget Sound Geography: Original Manuscript from T. T. Waterman. Lushootseed Press, Federal Way, WA. HistoricAerials.com. 2019. 1936, 1964, 1968, 1969, 1980, 1990, 1998, 2002, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2013 Aerial Coverage. Available at: www.HistoricAerials.com. Accessed: January 2, 2019. King County Historic Preservation Program. 2018. Technical Paper No. 6 - King County and City Landmarks List. Last Revised December, 2018. Available at: https://www.kingcounty.gov/services/home-property/historic- preservation/resources-links.aspx. Accessed: January 2, 2019. Kroll Map Company. 1912. Kroll's Atlas of King County. Available at: htt www.historicma warks.com Ma /US 503547 Township+21+N+Ran a+4+E Kin +Count +1912 Washin ton . Accessed: January 2, 2019. Kroll Map Company. 1926. Kroll's Atlas of King County. Available at: http://www.histori -maworks.com Ma US 1610883 Plate+❑14+++T++21+N+++R++4+E+++Edgewood++Jovita+ +Pacific+Cit ++Auburn++Pu et+Sound Kin +Count +1926 Washington . Accessed: January 2, 2019, Metsker Map Company. 1936. Metsker's Atlas of King County. Available at: htt www.historlcma works.com Ma US 1260012/Townshi +21+N+++Ran e+4+E+++Auburn++Jovita++Paci fic+Cit ++Buenna Kin +Count +1936 Washin ton . Accessed: January 2, 2019. U.S. Geological Survey. 1897. Tacoma, WA. Land Classification Sheet. 30' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1898. Tacoma, WA. 30' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1900. Tacoma, WA. 30' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1949. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1961. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1968. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1973. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. Page 19 of 21 U.S. Geological Survey. 1981. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1995. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Surveyor General. 1868. Township 25 North, Range 5 East Survey Map. Electronic document, https://www. bl m.gov/or/landrecords/survey/yPlatViewl_2.php?path=PWA&name--t210nO4Oe_001.jpg, accessed January 2, 2019. Page 20 of 21 Lakehaven.206061-08 SOURCE: ESA,2013; NAIP.2013 Figure 1 Vicinity Map Federal Way, Washington Page 21 of 21 ""'EIVED Lakehaven ` WATER & SEWER DISTRICT AL 0 2 2019 CITY OF FEDEPAL WAY ' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Lakehaven Water & Sewer District — Development Engineering Section 31623 — 1st Ave S * PO Box 4249 * Federal Way, WA 98063-4249 Telephone: 253-945-1581 or 253-945-1580 * Email: DE@Lakehaven.org This certificate is intended to provide the applicant, land use agencies &/or public health departments with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to delay, or deny, water service based upon capacity &/or supply limitations in Lakehaven's or Other Purveyor's system facilities. Proposed Land Use: ❑ Building Permit-SFR ❑ Building Permit-MFR ® Building Permit -Other ❑ Subdivision ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Binding Site Plan ❑ Rezone ❑ Boundary Line Adjustment ❑ Other (specify/describe) Tax Parcel Number(s): 2921049157 Site Address: I IXX S 359th St Lakehaven GIs Grid: 1-13 Ex. Bldg. Area to Remain: N/A sf New Bldg. Area Proposed: 500+ - sf Applicant's Name: Lakehaven Water i Sewer District WATER SYSTEM I ag ATION 1. ® Water service can be provided by service connection to an existing 8" diameter water main that is approximately 25+ - feet from the site. 2. ❑ Water service for the site will require an Improvement to Lakehaven's water distribution system of: ❑ a. feet of " diameter water main to reach the site; and/or ❑ b. The construction of a water distribution system on the site; and/or Elc. A major portion of Lakehaven's comprehensive water system plan would need to be implemented and/or constructed; and/or ❑ d. Other (describe): 3. ® a. The existing water system is in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Water System Plan. ❑ b. The existing water system is not in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Water System Plan and an Amendment to this Plan will be required. This may cause a delay in Issuance of land use approvals or permits. 4. ® a. The subject property is within the corporate limits of Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of water service outside of Lakehaven's water service area. ❑ b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board approval will be necessary to provide service. S. Water service is subject to: ® a. Payment of connection charges (to be determined by Lakehaven, for any new/modified service connection); ® b. Proof or reservation of easement(s) as required by Lakehaven; ® c. Other: e existing a er s a should be v lu der UP & Lakehaven standards, tp determinp, If ftJ adequ e for the proposed use. Water Service Conner.tlon A li ation IMO. forany ne modifl ervic o i Comments/special conditions: Servi r greater han N pst indicated, ssure ducin Vaive indicate n ac logo] huilrSina official for requirements r additional Information. The nearest fire hydrant is approximately 30+ - feet from the Property (as marked on map on the back of this page). Fire Flow at no less than 20 psi available within the water distribution system is a minimum 1,000 GPM for two (2) hours or more. This flow figure depicts the theoretical performance of the water distribution system under high demand conditions. Fire flow rates greater than this may be accommodated through water distribution system improvements, contact Lakehaven for additional information. 450 Pressure Zone Est. Meter Elevation(s)-GIS: 178+/- Est. Pressure Range at Meter(s) (psi): Min. 116, Max. 118 I hereby certify that the above water system information is true. This certification shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of signature. Name: BRIAN ASBURY Title: DEVELOPMENT NGINE IN SU RVI5 Signature: Date: , J 2-921049157 wtr.docx (Form Update 10/24/18) Page 1 of 2 NOTE: Lakehaven Water and Smver Wat er Certificate ofAvailbility District neither warrants nor guarantees parce12927f}4975T the accuracy of any facility infonnation Q 1 provided, Facility locations and conditions are subject tofieldveriFication_ Feel 17}6yr2018 BIA 2921049157 wtr.docx (Form Update 10/24/18) Page 2 of 2 f' RECEIVED Lakehaven WATER & SEWER DISTRICT JUL 022019 CiTYDF FEDERM-IIAY oc MUNn DEVELOPMI+NI $EW Lakehaven Water & Sewer District — Development Engineering Section 31623 — 1st Ave S * PO Box 4249 * Federal Way, WA 98063-4249 Telephone: 253-945-1581 or 253-945-1580 * Email: DE@Lakehaven.org This certificate is intended to provide the applicant, land use agencies &/or public health departments with information necessary to evaluate development proposals. Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to delay, or deny, sewer service based upon capacity &/or supply limitations in Lakehaven's or Other Purveyor's system facilities. Proposed Land Use: ❑ Building Permit-SFR ❑ Building Permit-MFR ® Building Permit -Other ❑ Subdivision ❑ Short Subdivision ❑ Binding Site Plan ❑ Rezone ❑ Boundary Line Adjustment ❑ Other (specify/describe) Tax Parcel Number(s): 2921049157 Site Address: 11XX S 359th St Lakehaven GIs Grid: 1-13 Ex. Bldg. Area to Remain: N/A sf New Bldg. Area Proposed: 500+/- sf Applicant's Name: Lakehaven Water & Sewer District SEWER SYSTEM INFOgMATION 1. ® Sewer service can be provided by service connection to an existing 1Z diameter sewer main that is on the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed land use. 2. ❑ Sewer service for the site will require an improvement to Lakehaven's sanitary sewer system of: ❑ a. feet of " diameter sewer main or trunk to reach the site; and/or ❑ b. The construction of a sanitary sewer collection system on the site; and/or El c. A major portion of Lakehaven's comprehensive wastewater system plan would need to be implemented and/or constructed; and/or ❑ d. Other (describe): 3. ® a. The existing sewer system is in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Wastewater System Plan. ❑ b. The existing sewer system is not in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Wastewater System Plan and an Amendment to this Plan will be required. This may cause a delay in issuance of land use approvals or permits. 4. ® a. The proposed site land use is within the corporate limits of Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of sewer service outside of Lakehaven's sewer service area. ❑ b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board approval will be necessary to provide service. S. Sewer service is subject to: ❑ a. Payment of connection charges (to be determined by Lakehaven, for any new/modified service connection); © b. Proof or reservation of easement(s) as required by Lakehaven; ❑ c. Other: Sewer Seri onnec n Permit re uired for n new modified ice co nection. Comments/special conditions: I hereby certify that the above sewer system information is true. This certification shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of signature. Name: BRIAN ASBURY Title: DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING SUPERNttSQR Signature: Date: 2921049157 swr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 1 of 2 10TE: Lakehaven Water and Setiver Sevier C ertificate of Mal bility District neither warrants nor guararitees the accuracy of any facility information Parcel 2921049157 50 1041 provided. Facility locations and conditions are subjecttofieidveryication_ ree1 121612018 RFA 2921049157 swr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 2 of 2 Photograph facing s Non site on the lett). Photograph facing north, toward site entrance (proosed pump station site on right, up near entrance SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Process III: Lakehaven Sewer Pump Station #3313 South 3591h Street and Pacific Highway South s Fidelity National Title 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Commitment for Title Insurance Fidelity National Title }R-:.+��EI Title Officer: Bill Fisher / Carlos Maxwell / Paula 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Luxmore / Jason Black Lynnwood, WA 98037 s 7(y`�n Email: Unit2@fnf.com Phone:(425)771-3031 JUL Phone:(425)771-3031 CITY OF FEDERA;.,w{,y{ File No.: 611212631 r,,,CMMlljllTy DEVEt OPMErJ Introducing Live LOOK LiveLOOK title document delivery system is designed to provide 24/7 real-time access to all information related to a title insurance transaction. Access title reports, exception documents, an easy -to -use summary page, and more, at your fingertips and your convenience. To view vOUr new FidelitV National Title LiveLO K re rt. Click Here Effortless, Efficient, Compliant, and Accessible SUBDIVISION Guarantee/Certificate Number: Issued By: 0 -Fidelity National TRW 611212631 Insurance Company FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation, herein called the Company GUARANTEES Lakehaven Utility District herein called the Assured, against actual loss not exceeding the liability amount stated in Schedule A which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. 2. The Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amount of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall the Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth in Schedule A. Please note carefully the liability exclusions and limitations and the specific assurances afforded by this guarantee. If you wish additional liability, or assurances other than as contained herein, please contact the Company for further information as to the availability and cost. Fidelity National Title Company of Washington, Inc. 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Countersigned By: Authorized Officer or Agent Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Fidelity National Title Insurance Company By: •�TNTLE'1A1S ++�� Attest: �+ , rr President Secretary Printed: 06.18.19 @ 12:05 PM Page 1 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-19-611212631 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Liability $1,000.00 GUARANTEE/CERTIFICATE NO. 611212631 ISSUING_ OFFICE: Title Officer: Bill Fisher / Carlos Maxwell / Paula Luxmore / Jason Black Fidelity National Title Company of Washington, Inc. 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Phone: (425)771-3031 Main Phone: (425)771-3031 Email: Unit2@ nf.com Effective Date: June 13, 2019 at 08:00 AM The assurances referred to on the face page are: SCHEDULE A Premium Tax $350.00 $36.75 That, according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matter relative to the following described property: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Title to said real property is vested in: City of Federal Way, a municipal corporation subject to the matters shown below under Exceptions, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate END OF SCHEDULE A Printed: 06.18.19 @ 12:05 PM Page 2 WA-FT-FTMA-01 530.610051-SPS-1-1 9-611212631 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description For APN/Parcel ID s : 292104-9157-00 THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING SOUTHERLY OF M.E. NEAL ROAD (SOUTH 359TH STREET) AS CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 2616092 AND LYING EASTERLY OF THE WEST 20 FEET THEREOF, AND LYING WESTERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF LOT A OF KING COUNTY LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 1084071; TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH (SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1) AS CONVEYED BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBERS 1778239 AND 2545574. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 06.18.19 @ 12:06 PM Page 3 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-19-611212631 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY GUARANTEE/CERTIFICATE NO. 611212631 SCHEDULE B GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: H. Reservations and exceptions in United States Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: Purpose: Road Recording Date: February 11, 1959 Recording No.: 4996326 Affects: As described therein 2. Covenants, conditions, restrictions, recitals, reservations, easements, easement provisions, dedications, building setback lines, notes, statements, and other matters, if any, but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, or source of income, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law, as set forth on the Survey: Recording No: 7906089001 3. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: In favor of: Puget Sound Power & Light Company Purpose: Electric transmission and/or distribution lines Recording Date: June 19, 1979 Recording No.: 7906190994 Affects: As described therein 4. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: In favor of: Puget Sound Power & Light Company Purpose: Underground electric system Recording Date: July 7, 1986 Recording No.. 8607070288 Affects: As described therein 5. Notice of Addition Water or Sewer Facility Tap or Connection Charge and the terms and conditions thereof: Recordin No.: 8607010673. 8608041129, 8610080643 and 9301190272 6. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document: In favor of: King County Purpose: Drainage facility and fisheries enhancement structures Recording Date: February 14, 1991 Recording No.: 9102140121 Affects: As described therein Printed: 06.16.19 @ 12:06 PM Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 4 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.61 0051 -SPS-1 -19-611212631 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY GUARANTEE/CERTIFICATE NO. 611212631 SCHEDULE B (continued) 7. Covenants, conditions, restrictions, recitals, reservations, easements, easement provisions, dedications, building setback lines, notes, statements, and other matters, if any, but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, or source of income, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law, as set forth on the Survey: 10 11 12. 13 Recardin No: 9404129007 Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Lakehaven Utility District Purpose: Sewer facilities Recording Date: October 22, 2015 Recordin No.: 20151022000762 Affects: As described therein Unrecorded Lot Line Adjustment No. 1084071 and matters related thereto, if any. Right of the public, if any, to the use of the west 30 feet of the portion of the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 29, lying southerly of Pacific Highway for raod purposes (Hans Olsen County Road No. 1877). The property herein described is carried on the tax rolls as exempt. However, it will become taxable on the date of the execution of a conveyance to a taxable entity and subject to the lien of real property taxes for the balance of the year from that date: Tax Account No.: 292104-9157-00 Levy Code: 1205 Assessed Value -Land: Not disclosed Assessed Value -Improvements: Not disclosed Special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year (amounts do not include interest and penalties): Year: 2019 Tax Account No.: 292104-9157-00 Levy Code: 1205 Special Taxes. - Billed: $21.34 Paid: $21.34 Unpaid: $0.00 The search did not disclose any open mortgages or deeds of trust of record, therefore the Company reserves the right to require further evidence to confirm that the property is unencumbered, and further reserves the right to make additional requirements or add additional items or exceptions upon receipt of the requested evidence. END OF SCHEDULE B Subd"ion Guarantee/Certificate Printed: M 06.18.19 @ 12 06 P Page 5 WA-FT-FTMA-01 530.610051-SPS-1-1 9-611212631 ' 611 W2019 g eoAdvantag e by Sentry Dynamics - fli ng , WA N This map/plat is being furnished as an aid in locating the herein described land in relation to adjoining streets, natural boundaries and other land, and is not a survey ofthe land depicted. Except to the extent a policy oftitle insurance is expressly modified by endorsement, if any, the company does not insure dimensions, distances, location of easements, acreage or other matters shown thereon. clients.sentrydynamics.net/geo/wa/Idng?layout=&min= 1/1 w� CITY OF Federal Way RECEIVED REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JAN 2 9 2m 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 CDS www.ci�offederalwaym FILE NUMBE(S-104085�-00-PC) I (O ' ' (7��V� !D ate 15 Applicant NAME PRIMARY PHONE Ken Miller, Engineering Manager (253) 946-5405 BUSINESS/ORGANIZATION ALTERNATE PHONE Lakehaven Utility District MAILING ADDRESS _ E-MAIL P.O. Box 4249 kmiller®lakehaven.org CITY STATE ZIP EAB Federal Way WA 95063-4249 (25�946-95�52���� Property Address/Location No assigned addressed. South side of South 359`h Street located approximately 515 feet east of the intersection of Pac HighwayFlighway and South 359th Street. APN 292104-9157 Federal Way Description of Request Ex iare the subsurface soil and oundwater conditions in the area of the ro osed sani sewer um station by drilling one bgdag with a mud-rotgy drill rig to a depth of 60 feet. Explore the subsurface sail and noundwater conditions in the area of the pq= station standby power generator and electrical structures with two borings to a de th of 15 feet Install a piezometer in the 60 foot boring to measure the water table de 4 over time in the area of the ro osed pMp station. List/Describe Attachments Attachment: Robinson Noble ma showin ath of track mounted drill n entrance to site. Equipment will access the soil boring locations from the existing paved drive wa . Straw will be laced over the a 1 meat access road from the paved driveway to the boring locations after the drill rig is removed. All soil cuttings will be disposed of off For Staff Use ❑ Code Interpretation/Clarification ❑ Critical Areas Letter/Analysis/Peer Review ❑ Request for Extension (Land Use/Plat Approval) ❑ Revisions to Approved Permit ❑ Tree Removal ❑ Work Hours Variance ❑ Zoning Compliance Letter No Fee No Fee (Actual Cost if Applicable) Check Current Fee Schedule - Check Current Fee Schedule No Fee Check Current Fee Schedule - Check Current Fee Schedule Bulletin #079 — January 4, 2016 Page 1 of 1 k:\Handouts\Request for Administrative Decision CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: February 4, 2016 TO: E.J. Walsh, Development Services Manager Peter Lawrence, Plans Examiner FROM: Jim Harris FOR DRC MTG. ON: No DRC meeting. Please review and email comments to lim.harris@cityoffederalway.com by February 11, 2016 FILE NUMBER(s) : 16-100509-00-AD RELATED FILE NOS.: None PROJECT NAME: LAKEHAVEN PUMP STATION ##3313 PROJECT ADDRESS: South side of S. 359th Street - 515 feet est of Pac Hwy ZONING DISTRICT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Inquiry request to allow boring with a mud -rotary drill rig to a depth of 60 feet to.explore subsurface soil and groundwater conditions for proposed sanitary sewer pump station. LAND USE PERMITS: AD letter PROJECT CONTACT: LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT KEN MILLER PO BOX 4249 MATERIALS SUBMITTED: AD Cover sheet submittal Site Plan Site Photos February 8, 2016 Jim Ferrell, Mayor Mr. Ken Miller Via Email — kmiller@lakehaven.org Lakehaven Utility District PO Box 4249 Federal Way, WA 98063-4249 RE: File No. 16-100509-00-AD; SUB -SURFACE SOIL INVESTIGATION 1N WETLAND BUFFER Lakehaven Pump Station #33B Dear Mr. The city is in receipt of your January 29, 2016, request and accompanying information which requests approval to drill three borings near the south side of South 359"' Street, approximately 515 feet east of Pacific Highway South. The proposed borings appear to be located within a wetland buffer area. Pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.120(2), this site reconnaissance and borings is approved subject to the applicable provisions of code and as discussed below. Any disturbance of the critical area shall be the minimum necessary to conduct the site reconnaissance and test boring work. The area shall be restored to its previous condition immediately. The erosion control measures identified in your request must be implemented before, during, and after construction. This includes, at a minimum: no tree removal; minimal soil disturbance and brush clearing (not grading) to access the test sites; wattles and/or silt fence installed around the test sites prior to excavation; backfill of test locations per Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) specifications; and a minimum of three inches of straw spread over the disturbed areas. Any contractors, sub -contractors, and consultants working at the site need to have a city business registration before conducting work. Any DOE or other agency permits that may be required are the responsibility of the applicant. If you have any further questions or need additional assistance, contact Planner Jim Harris, at 253-835-2652, or jim.harris@cityoffederalway.com, or Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer Ann Dower at 253-835-2732, or ann.dower@cityoffederalway.com. Sincerely, ......77 r� Isaac Conlen Planning Manager enc: FWRC 19.145 c: Jim Harris. Planner Ann Dower, Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer EJ Walsh. PE, Development Services Manager 33325 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Doc, I D 7'_ 3 10 • (253) 835-7000 www.cityoffederalway.com C I7 y 0 n- 9:orlornl AAlnvr 100 200 400 600 Lakehaven Pump Station �-011 Lakehaven WATER &SEWER DISTRICT 31623 1 s' Ave S Federal Way, WA 98003 K. Miller 253-946-5405 kiniller _.lak_ehaven.orq SEPAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PuTose ofchea st.• Goverrunental agencies use thus checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. Thus information is also helpful. to determine if available avoidance, rnininuzation, or compensatory mitigation measu es ►will address the probable significant impacts, or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for app.Lrcatrts: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consultwith an agency specialist or private consultant for some. questions. Yolt nary use 1w applicable " or floes not apply"On# 1Pbe►ryolt all, explaill 1P1Y it does 1101 eoly and 1m11P1w !Ix annPeris mike o1Pn. You may, also attach or incotpotatc by reference additional studies and/or reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process, as well as later in the decision -making process. The checklist questions apply to 1111pc11Vs ofyorlr pmvpa al, even if you plan to do dient over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that ►vill 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. Instructions forLead Agencies: Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal, and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first, but not necesw-fly the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklistfornonprojectproposals: ror none .oject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans, and programs), complete the applicable puts of sections A and B, plus the 5t] 11.I AI .\'I :11.5I li:F: f' ] i 3 t i, ONPILO 11 -,t-t' •►C-TT0iti5 art DL please completely answer all questions that apply and note. that the. words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for nonprojects) questions in Part B (Environmental Elements) that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. Page 1 of 21 A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Pump Station 33B 2. Name of applicant: Lakehaven Water and Sewer District 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Ken Miller P.O. Box 4249 (253) 946-5405 Federal Way, WA 98063 4. Date checklist prepared: March 13, 2019 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Federal Way 6. Proposed tunuig or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Project construction for the current project is scheduled to begin in late Summer 2019 or 2020 and continue through Winter 2021, for an estimated duration of 12 to 16 months. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected `vidi this proposal? If yes, explain. Yes, Phase II and III. As a result of increased growth, a larger capacity pump station is needed to meet the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District's existing and future needs. Phase I (this project) will construct new Pump Station 33B to pump through the existing 10-inch diameter force main which feeds the gravity sewer system, upstream of the District's existing Pump Station 22. Major equipment will be installed for Phase II loading conditions and includes a 450 kW standby generator with aboveground 1,500-gallon diesel fuel storage tank, aboveground packaged odor control system, three 200 horsepower pumps, and associated electrical equipment. Phase II (future project) will be constructed when the sewerage inflow to Pump Station 33B nears the capacity of the existing 10-inch force main and the District's existing Pump Station 22. Phase II will include die construction of new parallel 14-inch and 18-inch diameter force mains, approximately 9,300-feet-long from Pump Station 33B to the District's Panther Lake Trunk Line. The route for the new parallel force mains is as follows: West in S. 359ti Street to die west side of Pacific I-iighway; then south to north side of parcel 292104-9098; then west across parcels 292104-9020, 9163, 9098, and 113780-0210 to the 3rd Avenue cul-de-sac; than S. 161st Place to 1st Avenue S.; then north in 1st Avenue S. to S. 356th Street; then west in SW 356th Street to 4th Avenue SW; then north in 4th Avenue SW to the 4th Avenue SW cul-de-sac. Phase II construction will also include addition of miscellaneous electric actuated valves and programming modifications. Phase III (future project) will be constructed when the sewerage inflow to Pump Station 33B nears the capacity of Phase II loading conditions. Equipment installed for Phase III loading conditions includes replacement with a 650 Page 2 of 21 kW standby generator with aboveground 2,500-gallon diesel fael storage tuck and addition of a fourth 200 horsepower pump and associated electrical equipment. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Environmental information prepared for the project include the following: • Environmental Science Associates. Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report and Conceptual Mitigation Plan. March 2019. • Robinson Noble. Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared for the pump station site located on parcel 2921049157. September 2018 ■ Terracon. Geotechiucal Engineering Report. April 2013. ■ Carollo Engineers. Site Plan Permit Review Technical Information Report. November 2018. 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. None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Ci!y of Federal 4filay Process III Application Right -of -Way Permit Building Permit Plan Review Critical Areas Review Storm Drainage Review 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modif , this form to include additional specific information on project description.) Lakehaven Water and Sewer District proposes to construct a new sewer prunp station and appurtenances (Pump Station 33B) along with a new gravity sewer line and force main. The proposed facilities will be located in public road rights - of -way and easernents dedicated to the District. As a result of increased growth, a larger capacity pump station is needed to meet the District's existing and fixture needs. The new Pump Station 33B willreplace the existing pump station 33(A). Because of tie location of the existing pump station 33(A), it is not possible to upgrade or replace it at the existing site. The District has obtained an easement from tie City of Federal Way for the new pump station site location north of the existing pump station 33(A) on parcel 292104157. The project will construct the new Pump Station 33B to pump through an existing 10-inch diameter force main which feeds the gravity sewer system, upstream of the existing Pump Station 22. Major equipment will be installed for future (Phase II) loading conditions and includes a 450 kNV standby generator with aboveground 1,500-gallon diesel fuel storage tank, aboveground packaged odor control system, three 200 horsepower pumps, and associated electrical equipment. Pump Station 33B The pump station will include a rectangular wet well and valve vault with approximate dimensions of 28 feet by 23 feet by 23 feet deep and separate flow lneter vault with approximate dimensions of 17 feet by 14 feet by 11 feet deep. Other Page 3 of 21 facilities will include an electrical building to house electrical equipment and a standby generator, an aboveground diesel fuel storage tank, packaged odor control system, transformer, and terminal enclosures, influent manholes, and related facilities. All of these structures will be surrounded by a retaining wall set atop quarry spall footings. Gravity Sewer Line and Force Main The project includes approximately 380 feet of 48-inch gravity sewer line and approximately 110 feet of 10-inch force inain. The new sewer line and force main would be constructed within the permanent pump station easement and within the right of way. The force main and the gravity line will be 6 to 8 feet deep on average. The deepest portion of the gravity line (15 feet) would be located at the pump station site. Existing Pump Station Demolition and Site Restoration The existing pump station 33(A) will be removed once Pump Station 33B is constructed and operational. This will include removal of the existing above ground pump station appurtenances and decommissioning the remaining underground structures by fillingtvith gravel and capping. An existing 12-inch sewer line willbe plugged and abandoned. Approximately 1,000 square yards of existing pavement (ddmmay and existing pump station site) south of the new pump station, will be removed and the site restored. 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 east of Pacific Highway South (NE'/4 of Section 29, Township 21N, Range 4E; Figure 1) in Federal Way, WA. Pump Station 33B will be constructed on King County Parcel #2921049157 on an existing easement granted to the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District by the City of Federal VVay. The pump station will be located in die northwest corner of the parcel adjacent to South 3591' Street and approximately 300 feet north of the existing pump station 33(A). The majority of the gravity sewer system and force main will be installed in South 3591hStreet starting approximately 550-feet east of the intersection of Pacific Highway South and South 359,h Street. The remainder of the gravity lines and force main will be constructed within the pump station easement area to connect to the proposed pump station. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (underline/circle one): Flat rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other The area slope varies between 7% to 11% in a south and southeast direction, the steepest being in the south easterly direction. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope is on the east side of the proposed pump site is approximately 11%. Retaining walls are proposed to be built on the east and south sides of the pump station site so that the finished grade for die site will have a slope no greater than 2% in a southerly direction. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long -tern commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. Page 4 o F 21 According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the primary soil type within the project area is Bellingham silt loam (Bh) with rniiior components of Seattle, Aldenvood and Everett series. Slope varies between 0-2%. The District retained the services of a geotechnical consultant (Robinson Noble) to drill soil borings on the proposed Pump Station 33B site to support design efforts. The geotechnical consultant's report is available at the District's office for review and will be submitted to the City during the permitting process. Based on soil borings drilled at the project site, the soils consist of layers of very soft silt, dense silty sand, hard silts, very dense silty sated and very dense sand and gravel. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. According to City of Federal Way mapping, there are tnv kno�vn geologically hazardous areas on the project site. There is also no surface indication or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity of the proposed sewer facilities. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The proposed sewer facilities will require cut and fill in order to construct the new sewer facilities and to abandon the existing pump station and driveway. The total area of construction disturbance will be 28,600 square feet (so and includes approximately 9,500 sf at the new pump station site, approximately 5,000 sf for sewer line facilities within the ROW, approximately 7,700 sF for abandonment of the existing pump station/driveway, and approximately 6,400 sf of temporary construction staging area. Appxoximateiy 3,100 cu. yds. of soil will be excavated along the sewer pipe line route and Pump Station 33B site. Approximately 2,960 cu. yds. of special fill materials will be required to fill and level the pump station site and fill the pipeline trenches. Excavated material that is considered unsuitable for trench and pump station backfill, will be hauled offsite and disposed of at permitted sites to be identified by the contractor. Special fill material will be imported for backfilling from local gravel pits. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. As with all construction projects, clearing and construction -related activities could result in temporary erosion of exposed excavated soils. This constriction effectwould be mitigated Nvith the implementation of best n3auagement practices included in a temporary erosion and sediment control plan. After areas disturbed by construction ate stabilized, dime will be very little potential for erosion. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? About 37% of the pump station easement site will be covered Nvith impervious surface, including approximately 2,789 sf of structures and 763 sf of retaining wall. The remainder of the 9,500 sf site will consist of porous asphalt and vegetated areas. Willi the exception of the selected Pump Station 3313 site, a majority of the sewer gravity line and force main will be constructed within existing improved (paved) road rights -of -way. New impervious surfaces would be, ssociated with the proposed Pump Station 33B site only. Existing unproved (paved) roads, driveways, and landscaped easement areas disturbed by die installation of the sewer system will be restored to pre -construction conditions and in accordance with the requirements of the local jurisdiction. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Temporary erosion control measures, pursuant to applicable I{ing County Surface 'Water Design Manual gz,CSWDNy , City of Federal. Way, and Lakehaven Water and Sewer District standards, xvill be employed. A temporary erosion and sedimentation control (ESC) plan has been prepared for the project and will be submitted to the required permitting agencies for review and approval. All approved mitigation measures, including Best Page 5 of 21 Management Practices, will be implemented before and during construction as appropriate. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. In the short term, construction of the sewer system will cause a minor, temporary increase in emissions to the air from construction vehicles and equipment and possibly dust. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no known off -site sources of air emissions or odors that may affect the project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The project contractor would be required to comply with all relevant federal, state, and local air quality laws, and to prepare a plan to minimize dust and odors. During project construction, standard methods for controlling dust, such as frequent watering of the construction area and pavement sweeping will reduce impacts to the air. In addition, the following measures may be implemented to avoid or minimize impacts to air quality from construction of the proposed project: • All construction vehicles and equipment would be properly sized and maintained in optimal operational condition. • Particulate matter deposited on paved, public roads and sidewalks, would be removed to reduce mud and dust. • Dirt, gravel, and debris piles would be covered as needed to reduce dust and wind blow debris. • A TESC plan would be required to prevent sediment transport from the project site. 3. Water a. Surface Water 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or -river it flows into. The project is located within the Hylebos Creek watershed (WRIA 10). The North Fork Hylebos Creek is conveyed through a culvert under South 359d� Street and flows approximately 110 feet to the east of the proposed pump station site (Figure 1). This stream joins with the main stem West Hylebos Creek approximately 0.75-mile south of the project site. Hylebos Creek flows into Commencement Bay, Puget Sound, approximately 4 miles from the project site. The project site generally slopes from the northwest to southeast toward the North Fork West IIylebos Creek. Three wetlands (Wetlands D, E and F) have been identified in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Wetland E, a Category III wetland, is located immediately adjacent to the project site and along the western stream bank of the North Fork Hylebos Creek. Wedand D, a Category I wetland, is located west of the proposed pump station site and is part of a large wetland complex (>30 acres). Wetland D is separated from the pump station site by the access road. Wetland F — a small, approximately 450 square foot depressional wetland - is located south of the proposed pump station site, adjacent to the east side of the access road between Wetlands D and E. No other surface water is present on or in die immediate vicinity of the site. 2) Will die project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (widiin 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Page 6 of 21 Yes. The new primp station and portions of the gravity sewer line and force main located in South 359,1, Street will be located within 200-feet of North Fork Hylebos Creek and wetlands as described below. North Fork Hylebos Creek The project will require installation of a new gravity sewer over the North Fork Hylebos Creek -where the stream is conveyed through a culvert (South 359th Street). The proposed construction method at the North Fork Hylebos Creek in South 359ffi Street will involve open trench construction where die proposed force main crosses above the existing culvert. The existing culvert will not be disturbed. A concrete blanket or controlled density fill will be used to protect the existing culvert pipe and a 6-inch minimum cover maintained between the culvert pipe and the gravity main. Wetlands (and Wetland and Stream Buffers) While the proposed Pump Station 33B avoids permanent impacts to wetlands, the pump station (and portions of the force main and gravity sewer system route) will be constricted within wetland and stream buffer areas and construction access will temporarily disturb a portion of Wedand D. The project will result it, permanent buffer impacts of 9,511 square feet, temporary buffer impacts of 6,400 square feet, and temporary wetland iinpacts of 3,006 square feet. A mitigation plan has been prepared that proposes restoration and enhancement of wetland and wetland and stream buffer to compensate for the temporary and permanent impacts. A portion of the proposed wetland mitigation is the existing Pump Station 33 site and the asphalt access road. Best management erosion control practices will be implemented during construction of the sewer facilities to prevent runoff and materials frorn entering the wetland and Wedand and stream buffers. A critical areas report has been prepared to meet City of Federal \Vay critical areas reporting and mitigation requirements for wetland and stream buffer impacts. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate die area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. Temporary plates will be placed over the construction access to avoid placement of fill within Wetland D. 4 ) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. During construction, the project may require surface water runoff diversion during storm events. Surface water runoff from the construction areas will be filtered through appropriate filteringmechanisms (i.e., silt fence, straw waddles) to remove sediments before diversion overland. 5) Does the proposal lie widen a 100-year floodplain? If so, note the location on the site plan. No, the project does not lie within a 100-year floodplain. 6) Does the proposal involve my discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. The project itself will, not dischharge any waste material to any surface waxers, however, wastewater currently generated within the project area will be pumped to the District's Lakota Wastewater Treatment Plant, which discharges the treated wastewater to Puget Sound (in accordance with NPDES permit requirements). b. Ground Water Page 7 of 21 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses, and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate giiandties if known. The District retained the services of a geotechnical consultant (Robinson Noble) to install monitoring wells and evaluate groundwater conditions within the proposed piunp station site to support design efforts. The geotechnical consultant's reporL is available at the District's office for review and will be submitted to die City during the permitting process. Project construction will requite dewatering of the Pump Station 33B site excavation area and portions of the force main and gravity sewer lines that are installed below groundwater level. The project's geotechnical engineer roughly estimates a peak dewatering rate of approximately 25 gallons per minute to dawater at the Pump Station 33B site, and along the route of the gravity sewer and force mains. Dewatering draw down tests were not performed and dewatering rates are estinates only. Disposal will be by overland flow discharge to Hylebos Creek. Temporary dewatering discharge areas will be established in the southeast corner of the pump station site. A temporary enerWy dissipater will be installed to protect die adjacent wetland and stream bufferbiparian area from scour, erosion sedimentation and other datnnge. The groundwater wili be disposed of in accordance with City of Federal Way regulations. All withdrawn groundwater will be detained in holding tanks (Baker tanks) to allow sediment to settle prior to being discharged. During geotechnical investigations, artesian groundwater aquifer was encountered approximately 37 feet below the ground surface at the project site. The aquifer has an extremely high permeability and storage capacity. As reconunended by die geotechnical consultant, the project will use a sink -in place caiwon type construction. This method was selected to rnaintairu a factor of safety to reduce the risk of affecCuig underlying artesian pressures. The project will not require long-term ground water discharge or removal. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground fiom septic tanks or other sources, if any, (for example: domestic sewage; industrial containing dne 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 hnunans the system(s) are expected to serve. None This project may elinwiate the need for existing and future septic tanks within the project area. No waste material will, be discharged into the ground as a result of this project. c. Water runoff (including storm -water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm-,vater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will diis water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Existing runoff originates from precipitation and surface water runoff. The proposed pump station site is approximately 9,500 sf and contained within a single drainage basin. The site is predominately wooded/vegetated and includes an existing asphalt: access road to the District's existing pump station 33(A) along its west boundary. Existing sheet flow runoff from the access road and South 359th Street is dispersed to the adjacent vegetated areas. Runoff not infiltrated or dispersed onsite sheet flows in a south-east direction to Hylebos Creek. During construction, any surface water runoff from the construction areas will be filtered through appropriate filtering mechanisms (i.e., silt fence, straw waddles) to remove sediments before diversion overland. Once the construction is completed and the sewer line route is stabilized, the surface runoff will be restored to the pre -project conditions. Existing surface water runoff flow and/or direction from existing impervious areas will not be altered by this project. Page 8 of 21 Surface %rater runoff originating From the new impervious area at the pump station site will be collcaed and disposed of in accordance with applicable drwnage standards, codes, and requirements included in the 2016 King County NVashington Surface Water Design Manual (l<CSWDN� and City of Fede", Way requirements. The proposed site drainage system consists of porous asphalt, catch basins. to collect porous asphalt overflow, storm drain piping, and a dispersion trench. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Was tewater could enter ground or surface water in the unlikely event of a break in the sewer or sower bypass system, but this condition already exists and die proposed replacement pump station will be more reliable than the existing. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: An approved temporary erosion cotittol plan will be implemented to prevent untreated, sediment laden storm water from entering wetlands and I.1,ylebos Creek Any surface water runoff from the construction areas will be filtered through appropriate filtering mechanisms (i.e., silt fence, straw waddles) to remove sediments before diversion overland. Appropriate measures wi1L be implemented during. construction, pursuant to applicable KCSVUM, Cite' of Federal Way, and Lnkehaven Water and Sewer District standards, to reduce and control runoff water impacts. Land disrupted by construction of the pipeline will be restored to pre -construction condition. Temporary dewatering discharge areas will be established in the southeast corner of the pump station site. A temporary energy dissipater will be installed to protect the adjacent overland and stream buffer/riparian area from scour, erosion sedimentation and other damage. The groundwater will be disposed of in accordance with City of Federal Way regulations. All withdrawn groundwater will be detained in holding tanks (Baker tanks) to allow seduzaent to settle prior to being discharged. The projectAvill use a sink -in place caisson type construction. This methodwas selected to maintain a factor of safety to reduce die risk of affecting underlying artesian pressures. 4. Plants a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: Deciduous trees: red alder bi -leaf ma . le India Lum black cottonwood Pacific will v ! in w vine tma oak Evergreen trees: Douglas J4_ western lietnlock. western red cedar I�;nglish holly Shrubs: DMV as spuhl ckbe Herbs: sword fern re n grape, stinging net e giant horsetail- flfeweqd Lad, fern Grasses: b nt ass b ue 'a s reed canary Foss r rass velve r_as Wet Soil Plants: reed c nar rr s bla k coon wood r d alder Pacific willo v Sitka willow saltnonberr snF rush D u las s iraea slow l 'ed e , un abba Page 9 of 21 Water Plants: none witltin the pipe installation corridor deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fit, cedar, pine, other shrubs morass pasture crop or grain orchards, vineyards, or other permanent crops ---wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, radfoil, other other types of vegetation b. VIhat kind and amount of vegetation -will be removed or altered? A total of approximately 0.5 acre of vegetation at the pump station site and along the gravity and force main routes will be disturbed by construction. Because of the use of existing cleared road right-of-way, tree and sltrrb removal along the sewer system route is expected to be mitvmal. Most of the vegetation disturbance will be temporary. Permanent removal will be necessary at the Pump Station 33B site to accommodate the new facility. Approximately 4 trees (12" alders)will have to be removed at the Pump Station 33B site. C. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. The Washington Department of Nattu-al Resources (WDNR) Natural Heritage Program GTS Database does tint identify any threatened or endangered plant species ar crucial habitat in the project area or in the immediate vicinirl, of the project area. Given the disturbed Mature of the project site (located within existing sxnproved road rights of way and easements) it is unlilcely that any threatened or endangered plant species exist on or near the project site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. tlll disturbed areas will be restored upon project completion to as nears pre -constriction conditions as possible. A mitigation plan will be developed in accordance with City of Fedea al Way requirements for impacts to wetland and stream buffer areas and will include the replacement of invasive blackberry witli appropriate native vegetation. Grass and weedy areas disturbed by the pipe said storage structure installation will be te-seeded by hydtoseeding with a grass nurture or with red fescue.grrass upon completion of the project. The proposed development is very similar in size to the existing developed area, there is proposed mitigation for both areas. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None to our knowledge 5. Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site, or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: Invertebrates: shellfish, insects, other Fish: bass, salmon, trout,, herring, scuff ins other F h Page 10 of 21 Amphibians: frogs. salamande►_'s, other Reptiles: lizards, snakes, turtles, other Birds: hawks, heron ea lc s n birds ducks bInck-carmedshickadce. n s atro�v tltnericaan robin American crow, and Stellar's jay Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, arouse tat vote, M 1 It is assumed some small mammals exist along the proposed sewer lie route area. birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mamanals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other _ b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. According to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WD17wo Priority Iiabitats and Species and database, winter steelhead, a federally threatened species, are present in West Hylebos Creek, located east of the existing pump station. Downstream reaches of Hylebos Creel: are known to support Chinook Salmon, also a federally threatened species. other priority fish species present include Coho Salmon in the portion of Hylebos Creek that flows from the center of the project area south and in West Hylebos Creek. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Although the area is located within the Pacific Fly -way, the project site is not known to be a critical part of the migration route. Hylebos Creek serves as a migration corridor for salrnonids and its riparian area likely serves as a wildlife movement corridor. The closest known bald eagle nest is approximately 1.5 miles northwest of the project on the east side of I-5. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. The route for the sewer system will be designed to avoid work within streams, in order to avoid or minimize disturbances to surface waters, riparian habitat, and wildlife habitat. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None to our knowledge 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, Nvood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. -17he completed Pw-np Station 33B will require the use of electrical power for the operation of the pumps and appurtenances. In the event of power outages, a standby generator will be installed on the pump station site to provide an alternative temporary source of electrical power. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No Page 11 of 21 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. High-energy efficient pump station motors and lighting are proposed for the site. 7. Environmental Health a. Ate thcze any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fie and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occtu: as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Yes. The standby generator will require the installation of an abm e ground fucl stor.,age tank of approximately 3,000 gallons for diesel heel at Pump Station 33B. The diesel storage tank will be designedwith double walled construction and in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. The proposed generator and fuel tank will replace the existing "older" style equipment. The newer equipment will be further away from the creek and state of the art. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None to our knowledge. 2) Desc6be existing hazardous chetnieals/conditions thatmight affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None to our knowledge. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that night be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at m7 time during the operating life of the project. None. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None to our knowledge 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. The diesel storage tank will be designed with double walled construction and in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations, including UFC regulations for tank leakage, spill containment, and secondary containment. b. Noise 1) ghat types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with, the project on a short -teen or a long- term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short-term construction related noise will be created by the project but will predominantly be limited to daytime hours as allowed under City of Federal Way Municipal Code. For a short span of the project Page 12 of 21 (estimated 4 weeks max), sound attenuated temporary bypass pumps may operate at night during reconstruction of die gravity sewer system in S359th Street and the switchover of flows to the new pump station. Upon project completion of construction, noise levels will return to pre -construction levels. With the exception of the standby generator at Pump Station 33B, which will include treasures to reduce the noise during operation, the noise generated by the opmation of the pump station will be very minimal. The pump station will be designed to meet City of Federal '\Vay noise standards. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction activities related to this proposal will meet all applicable codes and ordinances relating to noise. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a . What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The pump station and pipeline will be located within easements and property dedicated to Lakehaven Water and Sewer District, and existing improved street rights -of -way. The project site is adjacent to open space property belonging to the City of federal Dray; to the north, south and east. The large tract residential property to the west is privately owned but encumbered by sensitive areas. b. Ilas the project site been used as working farinlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultut-al or forest land of long-tesxn commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres an farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or non forest use? Not to our knowledge. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business open-Ations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, telling, and harvesting? If so, how. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. None. An approximately 450-foot paved driveway is located on the west side of this study area that facilitates access to the existing sewer pump station. The pump station is surrounded by a cyclone fence and consists of two buildings that were built on a paved turn -out d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The existing pump station structures will be removed to allow for site restoration and enhancement. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The zoning designation in the vicinity of Pump Station 33B site is SR 35 (single family residential -min 35,000 sq ft lots). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Page 13 of 21 The comprehensive plan designations widen the project area is Open Space. g. If applicable, what is die current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by die city or county? If so, specify. Yes. The Pump Station 33B site is located within wetland and stream buffers associated with. Hylebos Creek. See response to checklist question B(3){2) for further information on Pump Station 33B site and potential to affect wetlands, streams, and buffers. 'Me project ax-ca lies within a designated 100-year wellhead protection area. Wellhead protection areas sire based on proximity to and travel time of groundwater to the public water source wells. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in tie completed project? None j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any, Not applicable 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. The proposed server pump station and appurtenance and related pipelines are being sized to accommodate the existing and fume needs for sever service Widhin die service area. All of tie proposed sewer facilities are located within the City of Federal Way where urban services are expected. m. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with nearby agricultural and forest lands of long -tern commercial significance, if any. Not applicable 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No units will be eliminated. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. Not applicable 10. Aesthetics Page 14 of 21 a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Widi die exception of the pump station standby power generator, power panel, electrical equipment, odor control system, the above ground diesel tank, and electrical aarisFonner, the entire system (puunp station, and pipelines) ,will be located below the existing ground surface. The pump station Nvill require a 33 foot by 35 foot building, with an approximate height of 20 feet, to house the pump station electrical equipment and standby generator. Retaining walls up to 6 feet high will be constructed on the west, south, and east sides of the site. b. 'What views in die immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. The Pump Station 33B footprint site will be fenced. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mail occur? Project construction mill take place largely during daylight hours. Temporary site lighting may be used at the beginning and end of ,vprk days during consuvction when daylight hours are short. The completed project will require sufficient light for safety and security. Outside areas of the new building will be lit. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No c. `'Vhat 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. All exterior lights will. be focused or shielded as necessary to cast light only in area that require it and to minimize light spilling onto adjacent areas. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in tie immediate vicinity? Tliere are existing walking trails in the vicinity of South 359a' Street located on the property owned by the City of Federal Way. The City of Federal owns the recreational property in the vicinity of South 3591h Street. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. Page 15 of 21 None proposed. 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers located on or near the site? If so, specifically describe. There are no aboveground buildings, structures, or sites in or near the subject property that are listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, Washington Heritage Register, or King County Landmarks Register (Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, 2019; King County Historic Preservation Program, 2018). The existing structures date to at least 1985. The access road was established c.1980 (UistoticAerials.com, 2019). b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. No archaeological sites, cemeteries, or traditional cultural places are recorded in or near the project site. The Statewide Predictive Model for encountering precontact-era sites classifies this location as Moderate to High Risk (Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, 2010). This model does not take into account potential impacts from development or potential for historic -era archaeological deposits. Thirteen cultural resources assessments have been completed within one mile of the subject property; Three were done within 0.25-mile. None of the assessments identified archaeological resources or historic properties near the subject property. Approximately one mile southwest of the subject property are two cemeteries, one established in the 1970s and the other in at least the 19th century as a Native American cemetery that was later associated with the St. George Indian School. There are three recorded archaeological sites within one mile: a historic barn, cemetery, and historic automobile service station. The subject property is within the traditional territory of the Puyallup people. Ethnographic studies do not record any specific Puyallup use or occupation along the upper Hylebos Creek and its tributaries, however the waterway was likely an important resource for traditional subsistence practices such as fishing, hunting, and gathering. Historical maps and aerial photographs do not show evidence of any development at the subject property prior to its current function (Histo-ticAerials.com, 2019; U.S. Geological Survey, 1898, 1900, 1949, 1961, 1968, 1973, 1981; U.S. Surveyor General, 1868). In 1897 the area was classified as merchantable forest, however there is no evidence of past logging (U.S. Geological Survey, 1897) and the area appears to have remained forested since at least 1936. The property was originally part of the Northern Pacific Railway land holdings, however no track was constructed in this area. The property was sold and subdivided by 1907. Fortner owners include H.F. Reynolds (1907), H.L. Reynolds (1912), and Hans Olson (1926 to at least 1936). Nearby South 356th Street was constructed c.1912 and South 359di Street was constructed c.1926 (Kroll Map Company, 1926; Metsker Map Company, 1936). c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. As cited in response to questions 13a and 13b above, the following types of documents were reviewed in order to identify any potential cultural resources in the project vicinity: Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's Statewide Predictive Model and Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data, historical maps, aerial photographs, and published ethnographies and local histories. No consultation with tribes has been conducted to date. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Page 16 of 21 Should cultmal resources be inadvertently identified during the project, die District will comply Md'i state: laws requiring die protection of cultruai resources and human remains (RCIyI 27.53, RCW 27.44, RC\V 68.50, and RC\V 68.60). The District will temporarily halt work in the immediate vicinity of the identified resources and notify Department of Archaeology and Historic Preseti ation and tribes to negotiate mitigation and/or avoidance measures. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and lvgh%vays searing die site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The Pump Station 33B, pipelines and related appurtenances will be constructed in existing road rights -of -way, and property and easements dedicated to Lakehaven Water and Sewer District. Existing public streets that construction vehicles \mill be used for access to the site include South 359th Street, Pac IIwy, South 356th Street, 1st Avenue South, 361st Street, and 3rd Ave South. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Pacific Highway South is served by Pierce Transit Route 500. No public transit serves S 3591h St. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed projector non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Not applicable d. Will the proposal rewire any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle, or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. However, all existing streets disturbed during project construction will be returned to pre -construction condition upon project completion. There is an existing driveway thatwould be used to access the Pump Station 33B site. e. Will the project or proposal 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 projector proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non -passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Pump station and pipeline maintenance will occur on an "as needed" basis. Maintenance for the pump station will be performed at least once a week. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect, or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. In the short term, pipeline construction may cause periods of "normal traffic flow" disruption, however, in the long term, the sewer pump station and pipelines will not create transportation impacts. The contractor will be Page 17 of 21 responsible for providing the City of Federal Way, and the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District with detour and traffic control plans prior to construction. 15. Public services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The pump station and pipelines willrequire periodic maintenance by District personnel. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Provision of service will be consistent with all applicable land use plans. 16. Utilities a. Underline/circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other All of the above utility services referenced above are available adjacent to and `vidnin the project site. 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 which might be needed. A new electrical service will be required for Pump Station 33B. The provider for electrical service in the area is PSE. Public water service will also be required for the new pump station and two existing houses. Lakebaven Water and Sewer District is the water service provider. During pipeline construction, some existing utilities may have to be relocated to avoid conflicts. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Printed Name of Signee: Position and Agency/Organization: Date Submitted: AA l�iS�C21L"T Page 18 of 21 References Anderson Map Company. 1907. Anderson's Atlas of King County. Available at: http://www.historicmapviorl(s.c )n)Ma US 1250014 Pa e+14+++Townshi +21+Nortli++Ran a+4+East Kin +C ount +1907 Washin ❑n . Accessed: January 2, 2019. Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 2010. Statewide Predictive Model. Last updated 2010. Available at: htto:j/www.dahp.wa,gov/. Accessed: January 2, 2019. Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 2019. Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD). Restricted Database. Available at: htt :j/www.dahP.wa. av . Accessed: January 2, 2019. Hilbert, Vi, Jay Miller, and Zalmai Zahir. 2001, Puget Sound Geography: Original Manuscript from T. T. Waterman. Lushootseed Press, Federal Way, WA. HistoricAerials.com. 2019. 1936, 1964, 1968, 1969, 1980, 1990, 1998, 2002, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2013 Aerial Coverage. Available at: www.HistoricAerials.com. Accessed: January 2, 2019. King County Historic Preservation Program. 2018. Technical Paper No. 6 - King County and City Landmarks List. Last Revised December, 2018. Available at: https://www.kingcounty.gov/services/home-property/historic- preservation/resources-links.aspx. Accessed: January 2, 2019. Kroll Map Company. 1912. Kroll's Atlas of King County. Available at: htt www.historicma works.com Ma US 503547 Townshi +21+N+Ran e+4+E Kin +Count +1912 Washin ton . Accessed: January 2, 2019, Kroll Map Company. 1926. Kroll's Atlas of King County. Available at: htto: www,histuricma works.corn Ma US 1610883 P€ate+014+++T++21i-N+++R++4+E+++Ed ewood++Jovita+ +Pacific+Cit +i-Auburn++Pu et+Sound Kin +Count +1926 Washin tan . Accessed: January 2, 2019. Metsker Map Company. 1936. Metsker's Atlas of King County. Available at: htt :1 www.historicma works.com Ma U5 12600121Townshi +2.1+N+++Ran e+4+E+++Auburn++Jovita++Paci fic+Cit ++Buenna Kin +Count +1936 Washin ton . Accessed: January 2, 2019. U.S. Geological Survey. 1897. Tacoma, WA. Land Classification Sheet. 30' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1898. Tacoma, WA. 30' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1900. Tacoma, WA. 30' Series Quadrangle, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1949. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1961. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1968. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1973. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle, U.S: Geological Survey, Reston, VA. Page 19 of 21 U.S. Geological Survey. 1981, Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. 1995. Poverty Bay, WA. 7.5' Series Quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. U.S. Surveyor General. 1868. Township 25 North, Range 5 East Survey Map. Electronic document, https://www.blm.gov/or/landrecords/survey/yPlatViewl_2.php?path=PWA&name=t2lOn040e_001.jpgl accessed January 2, 2019. Page 20 of 21 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report CONTENTS 1.0 Project Authorization and Scope of Work......................................................................................1 2.0 Project Overview and Description..................................................................................................1 SITEDESCRIPTION................................................................................................................................................1 PROJECTDESCRIPTION..........................................................................................................................................1 2.1.1 Pump Station 33b..................................................................................................................1 2.1.2 Gravity Sewer Line and Force Main....................................................................................... 2 3.0 Exisitng Conditions..........................................................................................................................2 STREAMS............................................................................................................................................................ 2 WETLANDS.........................................................................................................................................................2 WELLHEADPROTECTION AREAS..............................................................................................................................3 4.0 Results of Field Investigation..........................................................................................................3 WETLANDDETERMINATION...................................................................................................................................4 4.1.1 Wetland D..............................................................................................................................4 4.1.2 Wetland E..............................................................................................................................4 4.1.3 Wetland F..............................................................................................................................5 STREAMS............................................................................................................................................................5 4.1.4 North Fork West Hylebos Creek.............................................................................................5 OTHERWILDLIFE HABITATS....................................................................................................................................5 5.0 Project Impacts and regulatory Requirements.............................................................................. 6 BUFFERIMPACTS..................................................................................................................................................6 6.0 Buffer Mitigation Plan..................................................................................................................... 7 MITIGATIONSEQUENCING.....................................................................................................................................7 6.1.1 Avoiding Impacts through Construction BMPs ......................................................................8 6.1.2 Construction Dewatering.......................................................................................................8 BUFFERMITIGATION STRATEGY..............................................................................................................................9 6.1.3 Mitigation Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards.................................................11 6.1.4 Mitigation Construction Plan...............................................................................................11 MONITORING....................................................................................................................................................12 6.1.5 Schedule...............................................................................................................................12 6.1.6 Data Collection....................................................................................................................12 6.1.7 Reporting.............................................................................................................................13 MAINTENANCE................................................................................................ ........ -- ................ -.............. 13 CONTINGENCY...................................................................................................................................................13 7.0 Limitations.....................................................................................................................................13 8.0 References.....................................................................................................................................14 FIGURES......................................................................................................................................................17 APPENDIXA: METHODS...........................................................................................................................A-1 APPENDIX B: COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF PLANTS AND THEIR WETLAND INDICATORSTATUS.....................................................................................................................B-1 APPENDIX C: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEETS AND RATING FORMS....................................C-1 APPENDIXD: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS...........................................................................................................D-1 t.5A page March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Summary of Wetlands and Streams Identified in the Pump Station 33b Study Area....................3 Table 2. Buffer Mitigation Plant Species.......................................................................................................9 LIST OF FIGURES 1 Vicinity Map 2 Critical Areas Map 3 Priority Habitats and Species Map 4 Soils Map 5 Wetland and Stream Survey Map 6 Project Impacts and Conceptual Mitigation Plan page h March 2019 ESA Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report 1.0 PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK The Lakehaven Water and Sewer District (District) is proposing to construct a new sewer pump station (Pump Station 33B) and pipelines to serve existing development and increased growth in the City of Federal Way (City), Washington. At the request of the District, Environmental Science Associates (ESA) delineated wetland boundaries and streams and prepared this technical report and mitigation plan for the proposed project. This report is organized to meet the requirements of the City's critical areas code, Chapter 19.145 — Environmentally Critical Areas. Other critical areas regulated by the City include critical aquifer recharge areas, wellhead protection areas, geologically hazardous areas, and lakes. ESA's scope of work for this project is limited to wetlands and streams; however, other types of critical areas regulated by the City and present in the project vicinity are briefly discussed. 2.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND DESCRIPTION The project location is east of State Route (SR) 99 (NE % of Section 29, Township 21N, Range 4E; Figure 1) in Federal Way, WA. The project area and site for this critical areas study is located south of S 359' Street. The project will occur on Parcels 2921049152 and 2921049157 and within City right-of-way. Site Description The site lies within the Hylebos Creek watershed (WRIA 10). The North Fork West Hylebos Creek crosses the eastern edge of the study area (Figure 1). This stream joins with the main stem West Hylebos Creek approximately 0.75-mile south of the project area and the water eventually enters Puget Sound in approximately 4 miles. The site generally slopes from the northwest to southeast toward the North Fork West Hylebos Creek (Figure 1). An approximately 450-foot paved driveway is located on the west side of this study area that facilitates access to the existing sewer pump station. The pump station is surrounded by a cyclone fence and consists of one building built on a paved turn -out. Adjacent to both sides of the paved driveway, mowed grass occupies an approximately 10-foot swath. Beyond the grass, closed -canopy forest exists to the west, south, and east. Project Description The District proposes to construct a sewer pump station and appurtenances (Pump Station 33B) along with a new gravity sewer line and force main. The proposed facilities will be located in public road rights -of -way and easements dedicated to the District. 2.1.1 Pump Station 33B The pump station will include a rectangular wet well and valve vault with approximate dimensions of 28 feet by 23 feet by 23 feet deep and separate flow meter vault with approximate dimensions of 17 feet by 14 feet by 11 feet deep. Other facilities will include an electrical building to house electrical ESA page 1 March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report equipment and a standby generator, an aboveground diesel fuel storage tank, packaged odor control system, transformer, and terminal enclosures, influent manholes, and related facilities. All of these structures will be surrounded by a retaining wall set atop a quarry spall base. 2.1.2 Gravity Sewer Line and Force Main The project includes approximately 380 feet of 48-inch gravity sewer line and approximately 110 feet of 10-inch force main. The new 10-inch force main will be constructed within the permanent pump station easement and within the right of way. The force main and the gravity line will be 6 to 8 feet deep on average. The deepest portion of the gravity line (15 feet) will be located at the pump station site. 3.0 EXISITING CONDITIONS Critical areas regulated by the City and mapped within the study area include one stream (North Fork Hylebos Creek), wetlands, and wellhead protection areas (Figure 2). Existing information about these critical areas and applicable City code requirements is provided below. Streams The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) identifies both winter steelhead trout and coho salmon in the North Fork West Hylebos Creek (PHS, 2019; Figure 3). Salmonscape maps also show both of these species in addition to fall Chinook salmon, fall chum salmon, and pink salmon (odd year) in this stream and in West Hylebos Creek located to the west of the study site (Salmonscape, 2019). The latest critical areas mapping shows North Fork West Hylebos Creek on this site (Federal Way, 2016). Wetlands ESA reviewed existing literature to determine the likely presence of wetlands including soils maps from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, and City critical area inventories. ESA reviewed NRCS soil inventory maps and identified one soil type mapped in the project area (Figure 4; NRCS 2013): Bellingham Silt Loam. Bellingham silt loam consists of very deep, poorly drained soil in depressions on terraces. This soil type forms in a mixture of loess, alluvium, and glacial deposits. Bellingham silt loam is listed as a hydric soil (NRCS, 2013). The City's critical areas maps show a large wetland system (in part labeled Spring Valley Open Space) extending along the North Fork West Hylebos Creek. This wetland system encompasses part of the study area (Figure 2). The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps also show wetlands within the project area (USFWS, 2019). The City categorizes wetlands based on the Washington Department of Ecology wetland rating system (FWRC 19.145.420(1)). Wetland buffers are based on the category of the wetland and the number of habitat points scored by the wetland during the wetland rating (FWRC 19.145.420(2)). Page 2 ESA March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report Wellhead Protection Areas The study area lies within a designated 100-year wellhead protection area (Figure 2). Wellhead protection areas are based on proximity to and travel time of groundwater to the City's public water source wells. City code regulates activities in these areas involving hazardous materials or other uses that could affect the water supply (FWRC 19.145.470 and 19.145.490). 4.0 RESULTS OF FIELD INVESTIGATION The following sections describe the results of the field investigation conducted by ESA biologists on February 10, February 13, and December 23, 2015. These sections describe critical areas identified and delineated on the site, including wetlands and streams. Methods used to identify these critical areas are included in Appendix A. Common plant names are used throughout this report; scientific names are provided in Appendix B. Wetland delineation data forms and rating forms are provided in Appendix C. The study area for this project is shown on Figure 5. The boundaries of the study area were established based on maps provided the District. ESA identified one stream (North Fork West Hylebos Creek) and three wetlands designated as Wetlands D, E and F within the study site (Figure 5)1. The wetland boundaries and stream ordinary high water marks (OHWM) were flagged in the field and located by licensed surveyors. Wetland and stream characteristics are summarized in Table 1 and described below. Table 1. Summary of Wetlands and Streams Identified in the Pump Station 33B Study Area Vegetation City of Buffer Wetland/ Area Hydrogeomorphic Community Federal Way Requirement Stream ID (HGM) Class Type" Rating/Typeb (feet) <0.1 acre on site Wetland D (>30 acre located Depressional PFO Category 1 225 offsite) Slope PFO Category III 165 Wetland E 0.88 (onsite portion only) Depressional PEM Exempt l Exempt Wetland F 0.01 NF West Hylebos I — __ _ F 100 Creek a PFO = palustrine forested; PSS = palustrine scrub -shrub; PEM = palustrine emergent. bWetland categories are described in FWRC 19.145.420. Stream categories are provided in FWRC 19.145.260. c Wetland buffers are listed in FWRC 19.145.420(2). Stream buffers are listed in FWRC 19.145.270. 1 A fourth wetland is located offsite, north of S 359th Street. This wetland is not discussed further in this report; however, the wetland's presence is noted should the project alignment change. ESA March 2019 page 3 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report Wetland Determination 4.1.1 Wetland D Wetland D is located southwest of the intersection of SR 99 and S 359th Street (Figure 5). The wetland slopes down to the south and is part of a large wetland complex (> 30 acre) that extends as far south as South 373`d street. Data Plot 8 characterizes the wetland and DP-11 characterizes the adjacent upland. Wetland data forms are in Appendix C. Site photographs are shown in Appendix D. Hydrology. Wetland D primarily receives water from a high groundwater table and exhibits characteristics of a depressional wetland. During the February 10, 2015 site visit, soil within a large portion of the wetland was saturated to the surface with a water table at 10 inches below the surface. Soils. Soil within Wetland D met requirements for hydric soil indicator All, Depleted Below Dark Surface. A black (10 YR 2/1) loam layer above a dark grayish brown (2.5Y 4/2 with 10 percent redox 10YR 4/6) was observed throughout the wetland. Vegetation. Wetland D is a palustrine forested wetland with a mixed canopy of deciduous and evergreen trees. Many of the trees are quite large and include red alder, black cottonwood, and western red cedar in the wetter areas and western hemlock and Douglas fir on raised hummocks. The dominant shrubs are red -osier dogwood, vine maple and salmonberry, which provide moderately dense cover. Skunk cabbage, creeping buttercup, large -leaved avens, and giant horsetail are the dominant herbaceous plants. Himalayan blackberry and reed canarygrass are common along the perimeter of the wetland. Wetland Category and Buffers. According to FWRC 19.145.420, Wetland D rates as a Category I wetland, with an overall rating score of 24 points and 9 Habitat points. Completed rating forms are in Appendix C. The wetland rates high overall because it has dense vegetation, an ability to improve water quality and reduce flooding, and provides multiple habitat functions. Category I wetlands with 9 Habitat points have a standard buffer width of 225 feet in Federal Way. 4.1.2 Wetland E Wetland E is located along the western stream bank of North Fork Hylebos Creek, south of S 359th Street (Figure 5). The wetland slopes down to the southeast to the stream and appears to extend offsite and on the east side of the stream. Data Plot 12 characterizes the wetland and DP 13 the adjacent upland. Wetland data forms are in Appendix C. Site photographs are shown in Appendix D. Hydrology. Wetland E primarily receives water from a high groundwater table and exhibits characteristics of the slope wetland. During the December 2015 site visit, wetland soil was saturated to the surface, had a water table at 10 inches below the surface, and had a hydrogen sulfide odor. Water leaves the wetland primarily by draining to the stream. Soils. Soil within Wetland E met requirements for hydric soil indicator F6, Redox Dark Surface. A black (10 YR 2/1) gravelly loam layer greater than 16 inches deep was observed throughout the wetland. Page 4 ESA March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report Vegetation. Wetland E is a palustrine forested wetland. The tree canopy consists primarily of red alder over the majority of the wetland. Lady fern, giant horsetail, and Himalayan blackberry are the dominant plants in the understory. Wetland Category and Buffers. According to FWRC 19.145.420, Wetland E is considered a Category III wetland, with an overall rating score of 16 points and 6 Habitat points. Completed rating forms are in Appendix C. The wetland provides moderate water quality (e.g., proximity of pollution generating surfaces) and floodwater attenuation (e.g., proximity of surface flooding downgradient) functions. Category III wetlands with 6 Habitat points have a standard buffer width of 165 feet in Federal Way. 4.1.3 Wetland F Wetland F is located adjacent to the east side of the driveway, between Wetlands D and E (Figure 5). The approximately 450 square -foot depressional wetland contains an emergent plant community and does not have a surface water connection to other wetlands or streams. Due to its small size Wetland F is exempt from buffer requirements under FWRC 19.145.420(3). The project will avoid direct impacts to all wetlands including Wetland F. Streams 4.1.4 North Fork West Hylebos Creek North Fork West Hylebos Creek is approximately 2 to 6 feet wide within the study area. The stream flows within a culvert beneath S 359th Street and then along the eastern boundary of Wetland E (Figure 5). The stream discharges to the main channel of West Hylebos Creek approximately 4,500 feet south of the study area. An overstory of red alder and understory dominated by salmonberry, provide significant riparian cover over the stream. Cobbles and gravels dominate the stream channel, forming riffles and glides within the channel. The West Fork is documented to support anadromous salmonids as discussed in Section 3.1. The City classifies streams in accordance with the Washington Department of Natural Resources water typing system (WAC 222-16-030). The North Fork West Hylebos Creek is classified as a Type F stream (i.e., supports fish habitat). The standard buffer width of Type F streams is 100 feet (FWRC 19.145.270(1)). Other Wildlife Habitats The study area contains primarily closed -canopy forest. The tree canopy consists of western red cedar, Douglas fir, western hemlock, red alder and black cottonwood. Many of these trees are quite large and together with a sub -canopy of small trees and dense understory of shrubs provide quality wildlife habitat. ESA March 2019 page 5 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report 5.0 PROJECT IMPACTS AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS The project was designed to avoid impacts to wetlands and streams. Impacts to buffer area are unavoidable because all areas outside of wetlands on the project site are within regulated buffers (Figure 6). Wetlands and streams are protected at the federal, state, and local levels and the City regulates the associated buffers of these resources. Buffer areas are regulated at the local level by the City. Public utilities are allowed within wetland buffer, provided no practical alternative with less impact on the critical area(s) exists (FWRC 19.145.120(1)). In addition, the specific location and extent of the intrusion into the buffer must constitute the minimum necessary encroachment to meet the utility's requirements and not pose an unreasonable threat to the health, safety, or welfare on or off the subject property. Critical area functions and values must be protected and mitigated. The City requires mitigation for impacts to buffers, which is discussed below. Buffer Impacts As discussed above, complete avoidance of buffer impacts is not possible on this site because the entire area within the project site is either wetland or regulated buffer. Requests for reduction of the buffer width are considered by the City following process III in Chapter 19.65 FWRC. Buffer reduction requests must demonstrate that the proposed project meets the following criteria: (a) It will not adversely affect water quality; (b) It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland or buffer wildlife habitat; (c) It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities; (d) It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards; (e) It will not be materially detrimental to any other property or the city as a whole; and (f) All exposed areas are stabilized with native vegetation, as appropriate. The proposed project would result in permanent buffer impacts of 9,511 square feet (Figure 6). Impacts would result where the new pump station and associated facilities are installed. The functions of the impacted buffer area are currently low because it consists of primarily disturbed habitat dominated by invasive plant species (Himalayan blackberry) and a few red alder trees. Functions related to water quality improvement and wildlife habitat are low in the existing buffer because of the overall simple vegetation structure. Site conditions are shown in photographs of the proposed construction areas in Appendix D. Temporary buffer impacts will occur in an approximate 6,384 square foot construction staging area located immediately south of the new pump station (Figure 6). This area is largely covered by grasses Page 6 ESA March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report and invasive Himalayan blackberry, but does contain some red alder trees along the south end. Temporary impacts will also occur in an approximately 3,006 square foot area along a temporary construction access road west of the proposed pump station site (Figure 6). This area contains buffer and wetland and is covered by mowed grasses and invasive Himalayan blackberry. The portion of the wetland in this area is low functioning and of low value due to the condition as maintained lawn adjacent to the paved driveway. Following construction, the soil will be de -compacted in all temporary impact areas and native trees and shrubs will be planted. A third area of temporary impact is in the buffer to the northeast of the proposed pump station site (Figure 6). Two existing red alder trees are very close to the construction area and will be removed for construction safety reasons. After construction has been completed, two conifers (western red cedar) will be planting in this same area to replace the two red alder removed. 6.0 BUFFER MITIGATION PLAN The proposed project will impact wetland and stream buffer, requiring mitigation. This section describes the mitigation sequencing, proposed conceptual mitigation actions, goals and objectives, and performance standards associated with the proposed project. Mitigation Sequencing The City requires that applicants who proposed to alter wetlands or their buffers must follow a mitigation sequencing process, in the following order of preference (FWRC 19.145.130): (1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; (2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts; (3) Rectifying the impact to the critical area by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project; (4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; (5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and (6) Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. ESA March 2019 page 7 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report 6.1.1 Avoiding Impacts through Construction BMPs Direct impacts to wetlands or streams have been entirely avoided through site selection and design considerations. Wetland and stream impacts will be further avoided and minimized during construction by directing staging areas and construction access points away from wetlands, streams, and their buffers to the greatest extent possible and by using construction best management practices (BMPs). BMPs include erosion and water quality control measures to prevent negative impacts to wetlands and downstream areas. Construction access points will use existing paved surfaces to the greatest extent possible. Standard construction access pads consisting of rock or wood chip mulch will minimize the tracking of mud and debris onto roadways and paved surfaces. Water quality BMPs may include silt fencing, straw bales, plastic covering, and grass seeding. Final exposed cut and fill slopes will be grass seeded. A spill prevention and control plan will also be prepared to prevent any petroleum, chemical, or other deleterious substances from entering aquatic habitats in case of an accident during construction. 6.1.2 Construction Dewatering The project will require lowering of the groundwater table to accommodate construction of pump station components including flow meter vault, force main, gravity sewer piping and manholes and other miscellaneous on -site piping. Shallow groundwater exists year round in this area. The groundwater supporting the wetlands in the vicinity of the project is plentiful and flows through the site generally from north to south. During wetland delineation field work we observed water in soil observations pits within a few inches of the surface and extending to a depth of at least 20 inches. The amount of groundwater observed is on the high end of what is typically seen in slope wetlands in the Puget Sound area. Groundwater likely provides some hydrologic support for the North Fork Hylebos Creek; however, hydrologic support for the creek is primarily from the channel north of South 359th Street. Construction plans include detaining dewatering effluent in holding tanks (Baker tanks) to allow sediments to fall out. Clean water from the holding tanks will be discharged through energy dissipaters in the portion of Wetland A to the southeast of the construction area. The flow rate from the dissipaters will be monitored and adjusted to prevent potential sediment from entering the North Fork Hylebos Creek. Based on geotechnical analyses prepared by Robinson Noble, a maximum dewatering rate of 25 gallons per minute is estimated at the site (Robinson Noble, 2018). Dewatering of the construction site is expected to last for a maximum of 16 weeks during the drier summer months. There is potential for the flow rate in a short portion of North Fork Hylebos Creek to be temporarily reduced by the dewatering activity; however, it is not expected to be measureable due to the large amount of in -stream water entering the site from north of 359th Street. Groundwater removed for the pump station's construction is expected to flow southeast from the discharge point, spread out into the wetland, and support in -stream flows to the south. There may also be potential for dewatering to temporarily affect the hydrology of portions of Wetland A. However, due to large amounts of Page 8 ESA March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report groundwater supporting the wetland, it is anticipated that sufficient water will still remain to support wetland vegetation. After dewatering is discontinued, the natural groundwater levels are expected to reestablish in the wetlands and in North Fork Hylebos Creek. Buffer Mitigation Strategy The proposed buffer mitigation strategy for this project is to restore and enhance a total of 11,447 square feet of regulated wetland and stream buffer to compensate for 9,511 square feet of buffer impacts. The buffer restoration (7,805 square feet) will be accomplished by removing the paved driveway, existing pump station, and hardscape associated with the existing pump station (Figure 6). After the pavement and pump station facilities are removed, soil will be amended (e.g., de -compaction, application of organic material) and native tree and shrub species will be installed. The buffer restoration area does not fully replace the area of buffer impact at a 1:1 ratio, therefore, an additional area is designated for buffer enhancement (See Figure 6). The buffer enhancement area (3,461 square feet) has a forested cover consisting of primarily red alder and salmonberry. The strategy for this area (greater than 2:1 ratio) includes enhancing a by underplanting with native conifers to improve wildlife habitat and structural diversity in the plant community. The existing condition of most of the buffer restoration area is pavement and therefore does not provide buffer functions. Precipitation failing on the pavement is not retained since there is little or no vegetation. Wildlife habitat is non-existent in the proposed buffer restoration area because of the lack of food sources and nesting habitat. The addition of natural soil surface and native vegetation to replace the existing pavement would improve the functional attributes of the wetland buffer and provide additional protection to wetland functions and values. Natural surface will allow for the infiltration of precipitation that can contribute to groundwater recharge and stormwater retention. Re-establishing native vegetation will improve the erosion protection and water quality improvement functions of the buffer area by slowing flows and trapping sediments. Native vegetation will also add wildlife habitat to the buffer area that currently does not provide usable habitat. The native trees and shrubs chosen for the planting plan (Table 2) will provide nesting materials, nesting locations, and food sources for native birds and small mammals. Native trees and shrubs planted in the buffer area will also add a more complex vegetation structure and increase species diversity. Conifers planted in the buffer enhancement areas will add structural complexity, species richness, and wildlife nesting and feeding opportunities. Proposed plant species and associated spacing are detailed in Table 2. Table 2. Buffer Mitigation Plant Species Scientific Name Common Name Size Spacing Picea sitchensis Sitka spruce Psuedotsuga menziesii Douglas fir Pinus contorta I Lodgepole pine 1 gal I 12' OC* 1 gal 1 12' OC* 1 gal I 12' OC ESA March 2019 page 9 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report Thuja plicata Western red cedar 1 gal 12' OC Cornus sericea I Red -osier dogwood I 1 gal I 6' OC Rubus spectabilis I Salmonberry 1 1 gal I 6' OC Rubus parvitlorus ' Thimbleberry 1 gal 6' OC � J Lonicera involucrata Black twinbery 1 gal 6' OC Physocarpus capitatus Pacific ninebark 1 gal 6' OC *OC=on-center The buffer mitigation plan as described in this report will compensate for proposed buffer impacts and result in improved buffer conditions. The project and mitigation plan meet the requirements in Chapter 19.65 FWRC, based on the following criteria: (a) It will not adversely affect water quality; Construction BMPs and stormwater control design will limit the risk of water quality impacts from the new pump facility. Construction will be undertaken during the dry summer months to reduce the likelihood of adverse effects to water quality. Dense planting of native trees and shrubs will improve the water quality improvement functions of the buffer. (b) It will not adversely affect the existing quality of the wetland or buffer wildlife habitat; The portion of the buffer planned for the new pump facility is primarily covered by invasive plants (Himalayan blackberry) and provides only limited wildlife habitat functions. The loss of functions from this buffer area will be more than off -set by restoration of buffer where the existing paved access road and existing pump station are located. The result of the buffer mitigation is expected to be an overall increase in buffer functions by increasing the quality of the habitat structure for wildlife. (c) It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities; Drainage and stormwater retention capabilities of the buffer area will not be adversely affected. Replacing the existing paved area with native woody plant species is expected to improve the overall drainage and stormwater retention functions in the buffer. (d) It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards; Page 10 ESA March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report The project will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards. The design includes a retaining wall along the south, east, and west sides of the project area to create a level pad for the pump facility and stabilize the ground. Construction BMPs and revegetation will ensure no erosion hazard is created. (e) It will not be materially detrimental to any other property or the city as a whole; and The pump facility will improve the sewage conveyance in this portion of the city and the buffer mitigation plan will improve wildlife habitat functions within the watershed. (f) All exposed areas are stabilized with native vegetation, as appropriate. As described in the buffer mitigation plan above, all buffer areas outside of the pump facility will be planted with native trees and shrubs. 6.1.3 Mitigation Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards The overall goal of the mitigation project is to restore and enhance the wetland buffer to improve buffer functions following construction. Mitigation objectives and performance standards are as follows: Objective 1: Improve buffer functions in restored buffer areas by removing pavement and existing pump station facilities, amending with topsoil, and replanting the restored areas and enhanced buffer areas with native tree and shrub species. Performance Standard 1a: 100 percent survival of installed native woody species 1 year after installation. Survival will be determined using a complete plant count. Performance Standard 1b: Year 2—At least 20 percent coverage of native woody species in the buffer mitigation area (installed and desirable volunteers). Performance Standard 1c: Year 3—At least 30 percent coverage by native woody plant species in the buffer mitigation area (installed and desirable volunteers). Performance Standard 1d: Year S—At least 70 percent coverage by native woody plant species in the buffer mitigation area (installed and desirable volunteers). Objective 2: Remove non-native, invasive vegetation in wetland buffer mitigation area. Performance Standard 2a: Himalayan blackberry, English ivy, reed canarygrass, and other noxious weeds will not exceed 20 percent coverage in planting areas throughout the monitoring period. Invasive knotweed (Polygonum spp.) will be eradicated from all mitigation areas. 6.1.4 Mitigation Construction Plan Figure 6 depicts the location of the proposed mitigation area. Detailed plant lists and specifications are shown on mitigation plan sheets (Appendix Q. The sequence of steps during construction includes: ESA page 11 March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report 1. Remove driveway pavement and base material, pump station and associated facilities, and pavement associated with the pump station. 2. Clearly mark the boundaries of the buffer restoration area. 3. De -compact soil and remove gravel and other incompatible surfacing materials from planting areas. 4. Apply soil amendments as needed. 5. Install plant materials in accordance with approved plans. 6. Seed disturbed soil areas with an appropriate herbaceous seed mix. 7. Apply mulch rings around installed woody plantings. Monitoring The City requires five years of monitoring for mitigation projects (FWRC 19.145.140(8)). The main objective for mitigation monitoring is to document the level of success in meeting the project's performance standards. The following describes the preliminary monitoring approach to be refined and updated during development of the final mitigation plan. 6.1.5 Schedule An initial stem count of the installed shrubs and trees will be conducted following construction (an as - built count). Monitoring of mitigation areas will continue annually for five years after installation. A qualified biologist or landscape designer will conduct the monitoring. The as -built plan will be used as the basis for monitoring of plant survival. Monitoring will begin with Year 1, the first full growing season after construction is complete and the plants have been installed and continue for Years 2, 3, and 5. 6.1.6 Data Collection Shrub and tree cover will be evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively each of the four monitoring years. Data collection will occur during the late summer (i.e., September -October). The following information will be recorded during each of the monitoring site visits: • Survival rates of installed vegetation during plant warranty period. • General plant health assessment and plant aerial coverage from established sampling points and transects (e.g., line -intercept). • Documentation of the presence of undesirable plants (weedy and/or non-native species) with estimated percent cover. • Photo documentation of site conditions from established photo points. • Impacts to the wetland buffer from human use (e.g., dumping of debris). • Signs of wildlife use. Page 12 ESA March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report Results of the annual monitoring events will be discussed in a yearly monitoring report prepared for the City. 6.1.7 Reporting Monitoring reports will be prepared by a qualified biologist or landscape designer for review and approval by the City. The reports will compare the performance standards described in the mitigation plan to the field observations, and will recommend species replacements or other maintenance activities, if necessary (see Maintenance section below). Reports will present data collected during the monitoring site visit and document successes in meeting specific performance standards. Photographs will be included to illustrate and document site conditions. Monitoring reports will be submitted before December 31st each monitoring year. Maintenance Maintenance of the mitigation area will begin after completion of the project and continue, as needed, for five years. After the initial planting acceptance by the project biologist, the landscaping contractor will be responsible for plant survival for a period of 1 year. The District will provide maintenance, as necessary. Maintenance could include, but may not be limited to the following: ■ Irrigate during dry periods (minimum June — September). • Remove non-native or invasive plant species. • Add soil amendments and/or mulch. ■ Install fencing around woody plants to prevent animal damage. • Construct fencing to prevent vandalism or damage caused by humans. ■ Install supplemental plantings as needed. Contingency If any portion of the mitigation is not successful, a contingency plan will be implemented. Such plans are prepared on a case -by -case basis to remedy any aspects of the mitigation that do not meet the performance standards. The plan, if required, would be developed in cooperation with the City. 7.0 LIMITATIONS Within the limitations of schedule, budget, scope -of -work, and seasonal constraints, we warrant that this study was conducted in accordance with generally accepted environmental science practices, including the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time this study was performed, as outlined in the Methods section. The results and conclusions of this report represent the authors' best professional judgment, based upon information provided by the project proponent in addition to that obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. ESA March 2019 page 13 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report 8.0 REFERENCES Brinson, M. 1993. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wetlands Research Program. Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2005. Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05-05: Ordinary High Water Mark Identification. December 7, 2005. Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Corps (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2016. National Wetland Plant List, Version 3.3. Accessed at: http://wetland-plants,usace.army.mil. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10. 2006a. Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance. Version 1, March 2006. Publication # 06-06-011a. Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10. 2006b. Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans. Version 1, March 2006. Publication # 06-06-011b. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and Corps (US Army Corps of Engineers). June 5, 2007. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the US Supreme Court's Decision in Rapanos v.United States & Carabell v. United States. Federal Register. 1986. 33 CFR Parts 320 through 330: Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. Vol. 51, No.219, pp. 41206-41260. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington — Revised. October 2014. Ecology publication number 14-06-029. Olympia, WA. Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. GretagMacbeth, New Windsor, New York. NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 1995. Hydric Soils List for Washington. Revised December 15, 1995. NRCS. 2013. Custom Soil Resource Report for King County Area, Washington - Lakehaven Utility District. Accessed February 14, 2013. Page 14 ESA March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report Robinson Noble. Revised Geotechnical Engineering Report- Lakehaven Pump Station 33B. September 24, 2018. Vepraskas, M.J. 1999. Redoximorphic Features for Identifying Aquic Conditions. Technical Bulletin 301. North Carolina Agricultural Research Service, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina. ESA page 15 March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report FIGURES ESA page 17 March 2019 Lakehaven.206061.08 SOURCE: ESA, 2013; NAIP, 2013 Figure 1 Vicinity Map Federal Way, Washington Lakehaven.206061.08 SOURCE: Federal Way, 2012; NAIP, 2013 Figure 2 Critical Areas Map Federal Way, Washington Lakehaven.206061.08 SOURCE: WDFW, 2010; NAIP, 2013 Figure 3 Priority Habitat and Species Map Federal Way, Washington Legend Project Location L Parks Streams Hydric Soils Ev6 EwC AgC EwC 11 KpB s 0 Ur EvC King County Area 633 Soils (NRCS) a 2 AgC, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes Sk, Seattle muck AgD, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes Sm, Shalcar muck m b AkF, Alderwood and Kitsap soils, very steep So, Snohomish silt loam Bh, Bellingham silt loam ® Tu, Tukwila muck 0 EvB, Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes Ur, Urban land w EvC, Everett gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes 1" W, Water EwC, Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loams, 6 to 15 percent slopes n n KpB, Kitsap silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes a . No, Norma sandy loam SOURCE: NRCS (USDA), 2008; NAIP, 2013 -t 0 440 880 Feet EwC W Lakehaven.206061.08 Figure 4 Soils Map Federal Way, Washington •aft- � •.r1}}, •�� � �► �'�" I "` i. ', ` s ri � — _ ' 7? � -- ► � y' _ � � �, .rid- J. i� � —� i �� 4p - '`" r r s: i fi . -low � - • rr Y N 2 PROPERTY LINE r _ w _ w wW ETLAN 17 a .y w EASEMENT LINE =w —` k- % e• v w w w • �' I `t' / JW% .! 1 ,'= • � � �; ;�� . j4 'TEMP CONSTRUCTION ACCESS — 3,00B SF' rI J • _ I r r • r "y�r" �r f� If� -+• �. f f f �/ • /f / �� r': rf ♦� / i �,� BUFFER RESTORATION = 7,805 SF 1 ,t � s .WETLAND F r l l I !r • .s?0 0000000000''❑ nnnn.6nnnnn1nER 16_ 1' 0 BUFFER 6UFFER l: 1 << + r EX PUMP STATION AND EX J REVEGETATION ENHANCEMENT /' y ;',� �•' / 4r , ACCESS ROAD TO BE REMOVED = 3,642 SF = 6,384 SF ra ! --).a0❑00010 6,00 Y '� 13 > 0. f� I ti , - �'� w w •YI w w � ,y w>> w w w � I - � �-y� jI + 1'• � 1 I 1 opY` 4�� w w �1 --v .• ,: 1 .:. •. Y �� w � I !l ►• w `y v le�i v �� �- v`� : w TEMPORARY STAGING AREA,, r�� j i rr 1 ' ,'r l 4� ---y-� _ v , r. w `•v . �� w�� w ',w �`--_ w ♦ y iw �fl �t J 1 i +' TREES TO BE REMOVED AND t, PROPOSED PUMP STATION = i w ,rJi ,' : REPLACED WITH TWO (2) w v w -u a• w w w w Y , . t w v w w m 1 } - '♦------- E - ��►' ► : WESTERN RED CEDAR CLOSE �, y ^r� CONSTRUCTION SITE: 9,5� SF r .,. • w w w a y w + ,, w w w• .41 ,Y .4. � v OF BUFFER IMPACT -1r I �A f TO OUTER EDGE OF ' r' ♦ ' / 1 + WETLAND E AS PART OF /a• w w w w w w w v w w w WETLAND E` w w w ti> ti- w �. 1 ♦�. 1k, '" w] +► r t •s w a y ,• w w w ti w w e w �� -, Y • `♦ ` �� '� Ir �� r�.' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION �- _ - w .. y a• w w w It,a w sr ,>1 w w �— w �11 w;♦ w ♦` y ♦ � s ACCESS PLANTING v w ti, yr w w w �• v w, w ` w ♦♦ IYp - � �...^.—.� ♦ Ili ' I '." �I ' w �. w w w w .r w w w ,i• w a• .rr w u• � � t� � fa .I �• ! 1 w ,r w w s• w a• . w w w _'1' _ .` `,, it,i w w Icy r 1; w w �'Irlr jf 1 1 I 1 �Ft►� / 11 ��. w s�, yr �• �. � ��F 14��xOr, cREL -- � � � � �I ! 1 : •'r 11 i i / I �• w w w ♦{. Cps ! j! ► r r Y, 0 20 40 (D Feet Lakehaven.206061.08 Figure 6 Project Impacts and Conceptual Mitigation Plan Federal Way, Washington r ESA J Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report APPENDIX A: METHODS ESA Appendix A March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report ESA reviewed existing information and conducted an on -site investigation to identify and assess streams and wetlands. REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION ESA reviewed existing literature, maps, and other materials to identify wetlands or site characteristics indicative of wetlands in the study area. These sources can only indicate the likelihood of the presence of wetlands; actual wetland determinations must be based upon data obtained from field investigations. Key sources of information included the following: ■ U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 1961— Poverty Bay, WA. Topographic map; ■ National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Wetland Mapper (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS], 2016); WDFW Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) on the Web • WDFW Salmonscape ■ City of Federal Way critical areas mapping (May 2016). WETLAND DEFINITION AND DELINEATION Wetlands are formally defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) (Federal Register 1982), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Federal Register 1988), the Washington Shoreline Management Act (SMA) of 1971 and the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) as follows: ... those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas (Federal Register, 1982, 1986). In addition, the SMA and the GMA definitions add: Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non - wetland site, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass -lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990 that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificially created wetlands intentionally created from non -wetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands. Methods defined in the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Regional Supplement (Corps, 2010) to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual (Manual) were used to determine the presence and extent of wetlands in the study area. These methods are also consistent with state ESA March 2019 Appendix A-1 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report requirements in WAC 173-22-035. The methodology outlined in the manuals is based on three essential characteristics of wetlands: (1) hydrophytic vegetation, (2) hydric soils, and (3) wetland hydrology. Field indicators of these three characteristics must all be present in order to determine that an area is a wetland (unless problem areas or atypical situations are encountered). These characteristics are described below. The "routine on -site determination method" was used to determine wetland boundaries that had not been previously delineated. Formal data plots were established where information regarding each of the three wetland parameters (vegetation, soils, and hydrology) was recorded. This information was used to distinguish wetlands from non -wetlands. If wetlands were determined to be present within the study area, wetland boundaries were delineated with sequentially numbered colored pin flags or flagging. Data plot locations were also marked with colored flagging. Data sheets for each of the formal data plots evaluated for this project are provided in Appendix C. Vegetation Plants must be specially adapted for life under saturated or anaerobic conditions to grow in wetlands. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has determined the estimated probability of each plant species' occurrence in wetlands and has accordingly assigned a "wetland indicator status" (WIS) to each species. Plants are categorized as obligate (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), facultative (FAC), facultative upland (FACU), and upland (UPL). Definitions for each indicator status are listed below. Species with an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC are considered adapted for life in saturated or anaerobic soil conditions. Such species are referred to as "hydrophytic" vegetation. Key to Wetland Indicator Status codes: OBL Obligate: species that always occur in standing water or in saturated soils. FACW Facultative wetland: species that nearly always occur in areas of prolonged flooding or require standing water or saturated soils but may, on rare occasions, occur in nonwetlands. FAC Facultative: species that occur in a variety of habitats, including wetland and mesic to xeric non -wetland habitats but commonly occur in standing water or saturated soils. FACU Facultative upland: species that typically occur in xeric or mesic non -wetland habitats but may frequently occur in standing water or saturated soils. UPL Upland: species that rarely occur in water or saturated soils. Areas of relatively homogeneous vegetative composition can be characterized by "dominant" species. The indicator status of the dominant species within each vegetative stratum is used to determine if the plant community may be characterized as hydrophytic. The vegetation of an area is considered to be hydrophytic if more than 50% of the dominant species have an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC. The Regional Supplement provides additional tests for evaluating the presence of hydrophytic Appendix A-2 ESA March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report vegetation communities including the prevalence index, morphological adaptations, and wetland nonvascular plants. The Supplement also addresses difficult situations where hydrophytic vegetation indicators are not present but hydric soils and wetland hydrology are observed. soils Hydric soils are indicative of wetlands. Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil profile (Federal Register, 1994). The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, has compiled lists of hydric soils (NRCS, 1995). These lists identify soil series mapped by the NRCS that meet hydric soil criteria. It is common, however, for a map unit of non -wetland (non-hydric) soil to have inclusions of hydric soil, and vice versa. Therefore, field examination of soil conditions is important to determine if hydric soil conditions exist. The NRCS has developed a guide for identifying field indicators of hydric soils (NRCS, 2010). This list of hydric soil indicators is considered to be dynamic; revisions are anticipated to occur on a regular basis as a result of ongoing studies of hydric soils. In general, anaerobic conditions create certain characteristics in hydric soils, collectively known as "redoximorphic features, that can be observed in the field (Vepraskas, 1999). Redoximorphic features include high organic content, accumulation of sulfidic material (rotten egg odor), greenish- or bluish -gray color (gley formation), spots or blotches of different color interspersed with the dominant or matrix color (mottling), and dark soil colors (low soil chroma) (NRCS, 2010; Vepraskas, 1999). Soil colors are described both by common color name (for example, "dark brown") and by a numerical description of their hue, value, and chroma (for example, 10YR 2/2) as identified on a Munsell soil color chart (Munsell Color, 2000). Soil color is determined from a moist soil sample. The Regional Supplement provides methods for difficult situations where hydric soil indicators are not observed, but indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology are present. Hydrology Water must be present for wetlands to exist; however, it need not be present throughout the entire year. Wetland hydrology is considered to be present when there is permanent or periodic inundation or soil saturation at or near the soil surface for more than 12.5 percent of the growing season (typically 2 weeks in lowland Pacific Northwest areas). Areas that are inundated or saturated for between 5 percent and 12.5 percent of the growing season in most years may or may not be wetlands. Indicators of wetland hydrology include observation of ponding or soil saturation, water marks, drift lines, drainage patterns, sediment deposits, oxidized rhizospheres, water -stained leaves, and local soil survey data. Where positive indicators of wetland hydrology are observed, it is assumed that wetland hydrology occurs for a sufficient period of the growing season to meet the wetland criteria. The Regional Supplement provides methods for evaluating situations in wetlands that periodically lack indicators of wetland hydrology but where hydric soils and hydrophytic vegetation are present. ESA AppendixA-3 March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report CLASSIFYING WETLANDS Two classification systems are commonly used to describe wetlands. The hydrogeomorphic (HGM) system describes wetlands in terms of their position in the landscape and the movement of water in the wetland (Brinson, 1993). The USFWS classification system (Cowardin et al., 1979) describes wetlands in terms of their vegetation communities; these include, for example, emergent, scrub -shrub, and forested community types. ASSESSING WETLAND FUNCTION The City of Federal Way specifies the use of Ecology's Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington —Revised (Hruby, 2014) for rating wetlands. This rating system was developed by Ecology to differentiate wetlands based on their sensitivity to disturbance, their significance, their rarity, our ability to replace them, and the beneficial functions they provide to society. Although this system is designed to rate wetlands, it is based on whether a particular wetland performs a particular function and the relative level to which the function is performed. An assessment of wetland functions is inherent in the rating system. Appendix C provides additional information about the rating system wetland categories and completed rating forms for the Project. The rating system was designed to differentiate between wetlands based on their sensitivity to disturbance, their significance, their rarity, our ability to replace them, and the functions they provide. In addition to rating a particular wetland, the rating system also provides a qualitative assessment of several wetland functions, including water quality improvement, flood flow alteration, and wildlife habitat. Wetlands are given points based on a series of questions regarding water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions, and then scored into four categories: Category I (highest score) through Category IV (lowest score). Because detailed scientific knowledge of wetland functions is limited, evaluations of the functions of individual wetlands are somewhat qualitative and dependent upon professional judgment. IDENTIFYING STREAMS ESA marked the locations of the ordinary high water (OHWM) of streams in the study area with blue and white striped flagging. For purposes of determining its lateral jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act (33 CFR 328.3(e)), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers defines the OHWM as: "that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas" (Corps, 2005). Other physical characteristics that should be used to determine the OHWM include wracking; vegetation matted down, bent, or absent; sediment sorting; leaf litter disturbed or washed away; scour; deposition; multiple observed flow events; bed and banks; water staining; and a change in plant community (Corps, 2005). Appendix A-4 ESA March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report APPENDIX 6: COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF PLANTS AND THEIR WETLAND INDICATOR STATUS ESA Appendix e March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report PLANT SPECIES LIST FOR THE LAKEHAVEN WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT PUMP STATION 33B PROJECT IDENTIFIED DURING FEBRUARY AND DECEMBER 2015 COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME WETLAND INDICATOR STATUS* Trees Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC Big -leaf maple Acermacropyllum FACU Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU red alder Alnus rubra FAC Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC Shrubs common snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Hardhack (Douglas' spiraea) Spiraea douglasii FACW Himalayan blackberry Rubus bifrons (Rubus armenicus) FACU Indian plum Oemleria cerosiformis FACU Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC Red elderberry Sombucus racemosa FACU Red -osier dogwood Cornus sericea (Cornus alba) FACW Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC Willow Salix sp. FACW Herbs American speedwell Veronica americana OBL Bentgrass Agrostis sp. FAC Bittercress Cardamine sp. FAC common velvetgrass Holcus lanatus FAC creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FAC false -lily -of -the -valley Maianthemum dilatatum FAC giant horsetail Equisetum telmateia FACW Lady fern Athyrium filix femina FAC Mannagrass Glyceria sp. OBL reed canarygrass Phalaris arundinacea FACW Skunk cabbage Lysichiton americonum OBL Small -fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL stinging nettle Urtica dioica FAC Timothy grass Phleum pratense FAC Water parsley Oenanthe sormentosa OBL Youth -on -age Tolmiea menziesii FAC ESA Appendix B-1 March 2019 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report APPENDIX C: WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEETS AND RATING FORMS ESA Appendix C March 2019 Permanently flooded Area of of outlet I Z 2016 Gong - ---- I ws.-. - --- -- X HyieboVCrftkEs' x. jWH*bcnW4�envl�. W Hylebas C X CP federal L*, Sing hil"s hylebcw creak & X rw �c i" Lake Killarney - Y_ ibl X reek - V I Way, WA X ? 17' Federal Way PL -.=aLitO&'-c,-,-(J=ci&t-node=�DanL -�892E�,datL�P,�=nad27&zoom=8cmal- i,ttps:lr,,"www.topoquest.com/riai:)p�ll-i-,Iit=47,294118�-on=-=2' -n USGS Map Name. Poverty �2AA Map MRC- 47122C3 Click on n Ma D Center N47.29411' W122.31892' Datum. NAD27 Zoom: Bm[Pixel Zoom in (x2) Zoom out (4) + Re -center Map contgnta� Choose Automatically Overall Coverage 12 r I 24K Coverage (US) 1:24K Topo maps (US) 1,50K Coverage (Canada) 1:5DK Topo maps (Canada) 1-100K Coverage (US) V pit 1 - 1 OOK Topo m aps (U S,, 1 250K Coverage (US) 1:250K Topo maps (US) L Satellite Irn Gwerap Satellite 1m (US) 42 A Zoom lutel: pt� mltp i-q 4 - _. \-_k-, 1 m per pixel (Sat) 2m per pixel (Sat) -A V -7 4m per pixel Sm per pixel 16m per pixel 32m per pixel a -UFO! 01. 64m per pixel " - i 128m per pixel 266m per pixel . r all 512m per pixel J L: r . N k _. - Ikm per pixel 2km per pixel 4km per pixel .44 1, A, 10km per pixel 4b. T; NO M11—ap S _1z e TA T. Sniall'ish (512x512) Y -tedium Rare (768x768) Grande! (1024x1024) J1 A. Extra Grande! (1280x1280` Q2tUM: NAD27 NADBVAv GS134 Coordinate format: UTM N ddd ddd' Wddd ddd' N ddd'mm-m' Wddd'mm Nddd'mm'ss" VVddTinm'ss" N Refresh .— X10 % lkm Figure 2 TR Orang e polygon s= und isturbed habitat I ''-353PO—St a 68th-St 4f soma it -352r)-d- w S OKII� Is S-36) 4L rn 79 0 or lillip RJR~ • + rr , � f r,Water Quality Assessment ... 0 ®❑ ❑® ® MR 9 9 9 0 Althre: �' U a _� . .. —_ . — � �r � . � • �: , - -S 338th St-. 1 ., SW 338th St 4 w� S 3 6 - 49 w S W 339:11 S t pis a, P r 44 Z SW 34{)th S1 S 8=340th St S 340tn St o Lai kk ILm t5t P1 S 342nd!St-- w Lu Sw 3•i4th St 'AH Shy. 691 AveS -5 344th St-4 — � rWay 344th St iil - Z Z r N ; - s incr m V a o 38th StA a , c S 348th St 1 3j S 348th lrj - E d M SW 348th St r y vy ;oD amply � `3W 3491hP1 � � q jJ . -- S 349Fh S! (a� '1G1j y Q LIM I cr S1s[ 51 yy Q m St N w r. y S 357hd St v �2nd St NE SW 353rg1?I Q 31stStWE ti ro 30thStNE 3� 2 � r 29th St NE SW-356th St y ?p in �'S56th=St 5.2 th St u S 35F St ! r to :, $ . .k�. c9 rn w 4 w-;58th` i m A a f a £� 2fith Si NP E D 5 359th St A N S360th St t� s1 St - SLN3s• 11rr.� 5362'rod5t Er fly 21 st St -NE q n S 3 th Sr Kam, S 364th S t rw toil. L 1. �t1 ® County r 4 A :S a S 366th St Park dyjgr 't'iy s� ) 14th SL NE 18ih St NE B h .. ;. F:ik a S 366di PI Q IV _ 3 klrvp G 7=_ Pa t > Q - a � r -S �� ° a a b S 3 d Stcc M ter~ > F ry a S• > a � :1) CI7 rn h � vs 4� S312nd-St r T r lhsrntn v 376th St 0 4 y 1r vi dy�oi w -:athc-k a :S a; 3 •r+ Q Ly. z 1r:errreteni l4 14 V) Q CO - ", e S 3801'�S! iP S 361gr 3: � v IN Y f x Alder St .. .. - - - - 5-384th St d + n 72 i "r w u; v I Ave F Mwshalf-Ave 4C sth Si E ¢ } d Fir Ct -N> y 4th St E co n a i r Qit ry w Ts Porter Zppag. 8th w m i,' ' e��� Milton Wary � 3th -St E--Milton Map Search © Layers 0 I Help ' SuperfoAll 167 1 G S4 5uperriiall Way Perk oundary Slv.d 11 th Ave N 1 ath Ave N 2 5 V--� N V 9th Ave N - 4 fI` �' c` aQ1i m '� � U 0 5th Ave N I G 4th Ave N 3rd Ave N 2nd.Ave N r7 Algona 'o b 4i � 4 � � y¢ 0 y . a z 2 = G a 4rr Ell ngson-Rd e- 4? 1 c� Q r 1 st-Ave E veSW N pp dficc F5th SW4th Ave S E SW 6Ul Ave SW P l .- - _ CountyKing, -- L--0ib Rd _ - - '. 2nd St E w r a 1 Et •,tt sth St-E m Stewart Rd 1 — Figure 4 "Find a Water Quality Improvement Project" Map This map shows the water quality improvement projects, including total maximum daily loads, managed by the Washington state Department of Ecology. The boundaries represent the area where the project applies. (Note, The web map may take a few seconds to display completely, depending on your internet connection speed.) Total maximum daity load (TMDL) projects are required by the Federal Glean Water Act to identify pollution sources and pollution load reductions needed for water bodies to meet state water quality standards. once a TMDL project is approved by the U.S. EPA, it enters an implementation phase where both point source and non -point source pollution is reduced through permit limits regulated under the NPDES system and through best management practices (BMPs) for land uses that contribute to non -point source pollution. Category 4b projects are other water pollution control programs that have been approved by the U.S. EPA as part of the water quality assessment for Washington State. 0 0 Manzanita View Larqgr Ma q Fin _: doir WoodmoIlt Beach feral 'ay 1g, Esri. HERE, USG... I*' •'aE�r►7 �iaunrinrFr°s Ret=red Approved In Devc'•apmfrt scoped Map Instructions -To pan the map, hold the left -mouse button and drag the mouse. -To zoom the map, use the +f - buttons in the neap frame or use the mouse wheel to zoorn in and out. •A single left -click while hovering over a feature will open a pop-up box that provides information on the selected feature. Use the ">" arrow next to the project name to select ar, overlapping, boundary. Figure 5 Wetland name or number I RATNG SU�° MARY -Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): akjlr� Date of site visit: �� _ tDI ZOOS Rated by Lucc r� �Q Ck Trained by Ecology?_X Yes No Date of training_ :_'�''' HGM Class used for rating Wetland has multiple HGM classes?_Y A N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY (based on functions_ or special characteristics_) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS _Category I -Total score = 23 - 27 Category II - Total score = 20 - 22 Category III -Total score = 16 -19 Category IV -Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving Hydrologic Habitat Water Quality I I I Circle the appropriate ratings ite Potential H (g L H L �i,, M L andscape Potential H M L �H� M L j M L Value H M H L f ', M L M L TOTAL core Based on < q :atings T 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above Score for each function based on three ratings (order or ratings is not important) 9 = H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M,M,L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L,L,L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number k Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington De ressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 1 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 1 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydraperrods) D 1.1, D 4.1 1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 1 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 4 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 5 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to anotherfrgure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream fcan be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland {can be added to anotherfrgurej L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) S 4.1 Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including poly ons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat S 2.1, S 5.1 H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number i HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe - go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. � N6 go to 3 YES - The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for DeP sessional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; _At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO - o to 4 YES - The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? _The wetland is on a slope (slope can be verygradual), The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, _The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. Ngo to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? _The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, _The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number N O go to 6 YES - The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 YES The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO - go to 8 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO SACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to Identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. ifyou are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or ifyou have more than 2 HGM Classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number I_ DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet. points = 2 2— Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1 D 1.2. The soil_2 in below the surface for duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions). Yes = 4 No = 0 D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub -shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has �— persistent, ungrazed, plants > % of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > V, of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <S/10 of area points = 0 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal pondine or inundation: This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > %: total area of wetland points = 4 Area seasonally ponded is > % total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < % total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:__12-16 = H M 6-11= M _0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1-D 2.3? Source Yes = 1 No = 0 0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 or 4 = H _1 or 2 = M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub -basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality (answer YES if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 3 Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H �Lir `A 1= M _0 = L Add the points in the boxes above Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System For Western WA: 2014 Update 5 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ❑EPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints = 2 n Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 ;L Wetland has an unconstricted, orslightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing Doints = 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wetperiods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5 Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3 3 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 Entire wetland is in the Flats class points:!: 5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above Q Rating of Site Potential If score is:_12-16 = H _LV16-11= M _0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes =1 No = 0 I D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:"3 = H _1 or 2 = M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. ❑o not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met. The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds): • Flooding occurs in a sub -basin that is immediately down -gradient of unit. points = 2 • Surface flooding problems are in a sub -basin farther down -gradient. points = 1 2 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub -basin. points =1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why points = 0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes=2 No=O Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is:-B-2-4 = H _1= M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 6 Rating Form — Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of /< ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 cc. Add the number of structures checked. A uatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 emergent 3 structures: points = 2 1/Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1 ✓Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If..the unit has a Forested class, check if. _The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub -canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or % ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). ►—Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 t/6ccasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 Vsaturated only 1 type present: points = 0 1/ Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland _Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland _Lake Fringe wetland 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ftZ. Different patches of the some species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 n 5 -19 species points = 1 G < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. ( 1D (:0 ) (*) (: None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams L� in this row are HIGH = 3points Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number H 1.5. Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. ✓Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). -"'Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) At least Y. ac of thin -stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg -laying by amphibians) H 1.1 list Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see for of strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: r i 15-18 = H _7-14 = M _0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). 25 Calculate: %undisturbed habitat [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2]L If total accessible habitat is: 03 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 3 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-19% of 1 km Polygon points =1 < 10% of 1 km Polygon — points = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. 2 _i Calculate: % undisturbed habitat+ [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2A = % Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 2 2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points = 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2) /1 1 5 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:_OL_4-6 = H _1-3 = M _< 1= L H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? Record the rating on the first page H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2 — It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page) — It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists) �It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1 does not meet above Rating of Value If score is: A 2 = H _1= M _0 = L fits = 0 Record the raring on me first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 14 Wetland name or number WDFW Priority Habitats Ptaft habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. I�ttl�:l uFt��.tva.�o]III III i cations 00165 tvd %Ann 165 for access the list from here: nit a dit•,+_Gva. Gov nns rt+� 'n ohs list ) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat. — Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha). Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report). Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. Old-growth/Mature forests: Cam -growth west of Cascade crest - Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi - layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests - Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old -growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest. Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 1 S8 - see web link above). — Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. — Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non -forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 - see web link above). — Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. — Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report - see web link on previous page). — Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. — Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. — Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (OAS - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that appiy to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria ore met. SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? — The dominant water regime is tidal, — Vegetated, and — With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes -Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? Cat. Yes = Category i No - Go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less Cat. than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25) At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. Cat. II —The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Cat. Conservation Value? Yes - Go to SC 2.2 No - Go to SC 2.3 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Townsh 1 p/ Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? htt wwwl.dnr.wa, ov nh /refdesk datasearch wnli V_g�dI Yes -Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. if you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No - Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or pond? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No - Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. Cat. SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy? Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. — Old -growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi -layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more. — Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? — The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks — The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom) Cat. I Yes - Go to SC 5.1 No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100). Cat. II — At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. — The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ftz) Yes = Category I No = Category II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: — Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103 — Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105 Cat — Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Yes - Go to SC 6.1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M Cat. II for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes = Category II No - Go to SC 6.3 Cat. III SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? Yes = Category III No = Category IV Cat. IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics If you answered No for all types, enter "Not Applicable" on Summary Form Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 ,f E8W-51 a 7 i r gill ca 0 Water Quality Assessment,,, i- ® 0 ❑® 14 0 0 Aafive: - ' `Jw SW S38tttSt 1 SVfJ 3391rt St 4* S �T S 340 'ar � PE:S30th Z SW 340th 5# FS s2 Lai. ark St o'l Q f S 30i'p[ rc} — a r a Y W W ` SW34{[hSty � SN�� 6th AveS S 34-4th St C 2 � I- Inc N 4 J(i / 38 th St > F O _ € , w oop,-�+ a M SW TN 348ih Sr 3g9Th Pl '_ u) a S-348th-St Iff g9l Is 351st5t Map Search n Layers a 1 Help -8 338th St S 340th St 107 GSA. w Q Supertnall Way Perk S 342nd St :Way a Uj344th St t+undary B1v.d Airy CO � v, ttlhAva. N a 1 Oth Ave N z yr 913tAv0-N 48tti S-34gElt St rn S 352n6St a 1 �i �2nd St NE SW 353rd pV 31stStN! ti .It� s 5thAve N 30th St NE ; 3� °" " „? �S 4 * 29th StNE - SW 356th S t o H 356th-St S yh St S 356th St 4th Ave N n ' to y S ' '� ° 3rd Ave N C S"„58thSt m a a a ndAveH 26th, St NF w S 359th St N g II' S 360th St - Ssv 3S� - N �` � Algona � St St ' � a �ej'j � � y362rdSt a � IN 21 st StNEQ h S 3 it) St Kv. CountyS 36d1h Sl iw Mile Lakes y 4 s8i m = �{ THY! I 19th St NE 18th St NF ":. y Y. 'ls•fi+ S 366thst S' F ParF. ' a Qr Fh m4; xb S 353i1 I Q = 2 Q Ell n on Rd z c � > $ w y G�c1` a to a } Q s r rn } rn ? Q S372ndSS 1st-AveF � a c+r ' S - S 7 d St to 2nd Ave SW rn Ave J� Marshall Aver L Q �sN `S 376th St ' d s d AvC $W -- - .- CA Ctil [ n-e -�x -7rR s 17 City F:-:- z i :e etery 1. sGS n Q M ¢ d T 4th Avn SW ar 4th Ave S E z 6 5th Ave SW z S 384t'-' S S 381 r r ' rn ' G Ave � '3r'�` 0 M ti` a 382ndS1 641 Ave SW ti ?I ct s m l �ouiity L9na Rd I`''1, 1 - E k. r 1 Alger St - - - - - S 384th St � 1st8tF 11• I'ieire a yf Cr Q n t I o $( 4' c y`ty9 ►, 2ndSt-E n M S 1 E a b �+ u N. a a 4th St E Fir C1 07 z Porter < �dN a s 8th St-E Stewart Rtl 8itr 6 w t MiRom Way � lGly -o� a m -- — Ken—,��' m Figure 3 "Find a Water Quality Improvement Project" Map This map shows the water quality improvement projects, including total maximums daily loads, managed by the Washington State Department of Ecology. The boundaries represent the area where the project applies. (Note, The web map may take a few seconds to display completely, depending on your Internet connection speed.) Total maxim rn daily aad {TMDL) projects are required by the Federal clean Water Act to identify pollution sources and pollution load reductions needed for water bodies to meet state water quality standards. once a TMDL project is approved by the U.S. EPA, it enters an Implementation phase where both point source and non -point source pollution is reduced through permit limits regulated under the NPEIES system and through best management practices {BMPs) for land uses that contribute to non -point source pollution. Cateaary¢b projects are other water pollution control programs that have been approved by the U.S. EPA as part of the water quality assessment for Washington State. a Manzanita .ew Larger Maw Woodmort Beach ral Y , Esri, HERE, s 4h Proied BOUndaries IN s 1'MI)L i10till dorio , ` � Retired J Approved in Development scoped Map Instructions -To pan the rnap, hold the left-Moilse button and drag the mouse. -To zoom the map, use the +/- buttons in the map frame or use the mouse wheel to zoom in and out. •A single left -click while hovering over a feature will open a pop-up box that provides information on the selected feature. Use the ">" arrow next to the project name to select an overlapping boundary. Figure 4 Wetland name or number K-"ATN G SUMMARY - Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): 6 Date of site visit: Rated by :Scic5,T(` Trained by Ecology?_ Yes _No Date of training HGM Class used for rating SLA�:)J�J Wetland has multiple HGM classes?_Y N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map. OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY � (based on functions_ or special characteristics_) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS Category I —Total score = 23 - 27 Category II —Total score = 20 - 22 Category III — Total score = 16 - 19 Category IV — Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving Hydrologic Habitat I Water Quality_ _ Circle the appropriate ratings Site Potential H M© H M H M Landscape Potential H L H L H L Value H L H L M L TOTAL Score Based on — Ratings 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine 1 II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9=H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M,M,L 4=M,L,L 3 = L,L,L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number ( - Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressionai Wetlands Mao of: _ A f - — - — To answer auestions: - - Figure # Cowardin plant classes f D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4� Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1. 1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to anotherfigure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin _ 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat J D 4.3, D 5.3 H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) DM Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: I Figure # Cowardin plant classes _ FH 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 i Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to anotherfigure) R 2,4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to anotherfigure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of To answer auestions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes l L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to anotherfigure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Mal; of: To answer auestions: TFieure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1,3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) 54.1 j f Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 2- Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 2 Wetland name or number HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? 0 -got 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe - go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. L go to YES -The wetland class is Flats 5;7-etland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at anytime of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; _At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO - o YES - The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ^The wetland is on a slope (slope can be verygradual), The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NO - go to 5 YES - Th wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. Wetland Rating system for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number q - go3;P YES - The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at sometime during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. Nffnfftff�e o 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is etland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a Few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO go to 8 YES - The wetland class is Depressional S. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS 1N THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM class to use in rating Slope + Riverine T Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE Ifyou are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or ifyou have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number �T DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Qualitv Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet. points = 2 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1 D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface for duff layerlayerl is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions), Yes = 4 No = 0 D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub -shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > X. of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <1/10 of area points = 0 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ondin or inundation: This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > %2 total area of wetland points = 4 Area seasonally ponded is >'/ total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < % total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:12-16 = H �6-11 = M �0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0 Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1-D 2.3? Source Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:3 or 4 = H _1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0 Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub -basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality (answer YES if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H �1 = M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form — Effective January 1, 2015 5 Wetland name or number DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation D 4,0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints = 2 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5 Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3 The wetland is a "headwater" wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:_12-16 = H �6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D S.O. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:_3 = H 1 or 2 = M !0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0 Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met. The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds): • Flooding occurs in a sub -basin that is immediately down -gradient of unit. points = 2 • Surface flooding problems are in a sub -basin farther down -gradient. points = 1 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub -basin. points = 1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why points = 0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes=2 No=O Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is:-2-4 = H _1 = M —0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 201S Wetland name or number RIVERINE AND FRESHWATER TIDAL FRINGE WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality R 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? R 1.1. Area of surface depressions within the Riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event: Depressions cover >'A area of wetland points = 8 Depressions cover >'% area of wetland points = 4 Depressions present but cover < % area of wetland points = 2 No depressions present points = 0 R 1.2. Structure of plants in the wetland (areas with >90% cover at person height, not Cowardin classes) Trees or shrubs > 2 /3 area of the wetland points = 8 Trees or shrubs >'/3 area of the wetland points = 6 Herbaceous plants (> 6 in high) > 2/3 area of the wetland points = 6 Herbaceous plants (> 6 in high) >'/3 area of the wetland points = 3 Trees, shrubs, and ungrazed herbaceous <'/3 area of the wetland paints = 0 Total for R 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:12-16 = H _6-11= M _0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page R 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? R 2.1. Is the wetland within an incorporated city or within its UGA? Yes = 2 No = 0 R 2.2. Does the contributing basin to the wetland include a UGA or incorporated area? Yes = 1 No = 0 R 2.3, Does at least 10% of the contributing basin contain tilled fields, pastures, or forests that have been clearcut within the last 5 years? Yes = 1 No = 0 R 2.4. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 R 2.5. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions R 2.1-R 2.4 Other sources Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for R 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3-6 = H _1 or 2 = M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page R 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? R 3.1. Is the wetland along a stream or river that is on the 303(d) list or on a tributary that drains to one within 1 mi? Yes=1 No=O R 3.2. Is the wetland along a stream or river that has TMDL limits for nutrients, toxics, or pathogens? Yes=1 No=O R 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality? (answer YES if there is a TMDL for the drainage in which the unit is found) Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for R 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: __2-4 = H _1 = M _O = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 7 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number RIVERINE AND FRESHWATER TIDAL FRINGE WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that site functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion - R 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? R 4.1. Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides: Estimate the average width of the wetland perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the stream or river channel (distance between banks). Calculate the ratio: (average width of wetland)/(average width of stream between banks). If the ratio is more than 20 points = 9 If the ratio is 10-20 points = 6 If the ratio is 5-<10 points = 4 If the ratio is 1-<5 points = 2 If the ratio is < 1 points = 1 R 4.2. Characteristics of plants that slow down water velocities during floods: Treat large woody debris asforest or shrub. Choose the points appropriate far the best description (polygons need to have >90% cover at person height. These are NOT Cowardin classes). Forest or shrub for >1/3 area OR emergent plants > 2/3 area points = 7 Forest or shrub for > 1/10 area OR emergent plants > 1/3 area points = 4 Plants do not meet above criteria points = 0 Total for R 4 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:___ 12-16 = H _6-11= M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page R 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site? R 5.1. Is the stream or river adjacent to the wetland downcut? Yes = 0 No = 1 R 5.2. Does the up -gradient watershed include a UGA or incorporated area? Yes = 1 No = 0 R 5.3. Is the up -gradient stream or river controlled by dams? Yes = O No = 1 Total for R 5 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: _3 = H _1 or 2 = M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page f R 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? R 6.1. Distance to the nearest areas downstream that have flooding problems? Choose the description that best fits the site. The sub -basin immediately down -gradient of the wetland has flooding problems that result in damage to human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds) points = 2 Surface flooding problems are in a sub -basin farther down -gradient points = 1 No flooding problems anywhere downstream points = 0 R 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes=2 No=O Total for R 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H _1 = M _0 = L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Record the rating on the first page Wetland name or number LACE FRINGE WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality L 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? L 1.1. Average width of plants along the lakeshore (use polygons of Cowardin classes): Plants are more than 33 ft (10 m) wide points = 6 Plants are more than 16 ft (5 m) wide and <33 ft points = 3 Plants are more than 6 ft (2 m) wide and <16 ft points =1 Plants are less than 6 ft wide points = 0 L 1.2. Characteristics of the plants in the wetland: Choose the appropriate description that results in the highest points, and do not include any open water in your estimate of coverage. The herbaceous plants can be either the dominant form or as an understory in a shrub or forest community, These are not Cowardin classes. Area of cover is total cover in the unit but it can be in patches. Herbaceous does not include aquatic bed. Cover of herbaceous plants is >90% of the vegetated area points = 6 Cover of herbaceous plants is >2/3 of the vegetated area points = 4 Cover of herbaceous plants is >1/3 of the vegetated area points = 3 Other plants that are not aquatic bed > 2/3 unit points = 3 Other plants that are not aquatic bed in > 1/3 vegetated area points = 1 Aquatic bed plants and open water cover > 1/3 of the unit points = 0 Total for L 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:_8-12 = H 4-7 = M �0-3 = L Record the rating on the first page L 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality Function of the site? L 2.1. Is the lake used by power boats? Yes = 1 No = 0 L 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of wetland unit on the upland side in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes=1 No=O L 2.3. Does the lake have problems with algal blooms or excessive plant growth such as milfoil? Yes = 1 Nc = 0 Total for L 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential: If score is: _2 or 3 = H _1= M _0 = L L 3.0. is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? Record the rating on the first page L 3.1. Is the lake on the 303(d) list of degraded aquatic resources? Yes = 1 No = 0 L 3.2. Is the lake in a sub -basin where water quality is an issue (at least one aquatic resource in the basin is on the 303(d) list)? Yes = 1 No = 0 L 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality? Answer YES if the is a TMDL for the lake or basin in which the unit is found. Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for L 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is:--2-4 = H 1= M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form — Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number I LAKE FRINGE WETLANDS T Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to reduce shoreline erosion L 4.0. _Does the site have the potential to reduce shoreline erosion? _ L 4.1. Distance along shore and average width of Cowardin classes along the Lakeshore (do not include Aquatic bed). Choose the highest scoring description that matches conditions in the wetland. > Y. of distance is Scrub -shrub or Forested at least 33 ft (10 m) wide points = 6 * % of distance is Scrub -shrub or Forested at least 6 ft (2 m) wide points = 4 > % distance is Scrub -shrub or Forested at least 33 ft (10 m) wide points = 4 Plants are at least 6 ft (2 m) wide (any type except Aquatic bed) points = 2 Plants are less than 6 ft (2 m) wide (any type except Aquatic bed) points = 0 Rating of Site Potential: If score is:____6 = M 0-5 = L -- Record the rating on the first page L 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site? L 5.1. Is the lake used by power boats with more than 10 hp? Yes = 1 No = 0 L 5.2. Is the fetch on the lake side of the unit at least 1 mile in distance? Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for L 5 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:�2 = H �1= M _0 = L L 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? Record the rating on the first page L 6.1. Are there resources along the shore that can be impacted by erosion? If more than one resource is present, choose the one with the highest score. There are human structures or old growth/mature forests within 25 ft of OHWM of the shore in the unit points = 2 There are nature trails or other paths and recreational activities within 25 ft of OHWM points = 1 Other resources that could be impacted by erosion points =1 There are no resources that can be impacted by erosion along the shores of the unit points = 0 Rating of Value: If score is:_2 = H —_1= M ____0 = L Record the rating on the first page NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 10 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number - SLOPE 'i WETLANDS— l�idater Quality Fun s - .ii�,�itia_, that tale site func.inr.s Ca r�,p;�vp Ovate- GE:aRv S 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? S 1.1. Characteristics of the average slope of the wetland: (a 1%slope has a 1 ft vertical drop in elevation for every 100 ft of horizontal distance) Slope is 1% or less points = 3 Slope is a %-2% points = 2 pe-i�ater flints =15 ope i5% points 0 S 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface or duff layeris true clay or true organic (use NRCS defnitions).: Yes = 3 o = 0 C] S 1.3. Characteristics of the plants in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits the plants in the wetland. Dense means you have trouble seeing the soil surface (>75% cover), and uncut means not grazed or mowed and plants are higher than 6 in. Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > 90% of the wetland area points = 6 Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > A of area points = 3 Dense, woody, plants > % of area ants = 1 Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > % of area points = 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for plants points = 0 Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:_12 = H _6-11= M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page I S 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? S 2.1. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft on :he uphill side of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? es = No = 0 l S 2.2. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in question S 2.1? Other sources Yes =1 == Total for S 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:_41-2 = M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page S 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? S 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 6r=0 S 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub -basin where water quality is an issue? At least one aquatic resource in the basin is on the 303(d) list, CfV= No = 0 S 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality? Answ E5 if there is a TMDL for the basin in which unit is found. Yes = 2 ❑ = 0 Total for S 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H rr1 = M _ _ _0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 11 Rating Form — Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number Hydrologic Fuktions - Indicators_that the sjre function; to reduce Flooding af1d stream ercaion 5 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion? S 4.1. Characteristics of plants that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms: Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits conditions in the wetland. Stems of plants should be thick enough (usually> 1/a in), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows. Dense, uncut, rigid plants cover > 90% of the area of the wetland points = 1 All other conditions o� Rating of Site Potential If score is:-1= M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page S 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site? S 5.1. Is more than 25% of the area within 150 ft upslope of wetland in land uses or cover that generate excess surface runoff? S - 1 = 0 I Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:7y 1 = M —.0 = L rating on the first page S 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? S 6.1. Distance to the nearest areas downstream that have flooding problems: The sub -basin immediately down -gradient of site has flooding problems that result in damage to human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds) points = 2 Surface flooding problems are in a sub -basin farther down -gradient rs: No flooding problems anywhere downstreamin0 S 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for Flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes = 2 ]46_7t, Total for S 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is:__2-4 = H _C1= M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 12 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number These questions apply to wetlands of aN HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1,0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland.. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of Y. cc or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 cc, Add the number of structures checked. Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 Scrub -shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: po i Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: poi If the unit has a Forested class, check if.• The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub -canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or % ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: 1197 1 Saturated only 1 type present: points - 0 Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland Lake Fringe wetland 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft'. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species p t5 - < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. QLO-- None = 0 points int Moderate = 2 points 1 All three diagrams 1 in this row are HIGH = 3points l _ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number r� H 1.5. Special habitat features: 1 Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) At least % ac of thin -stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg -laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:_15-18 = H _7-14 = M _X0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2,1. Accessible habitat (include onlyhobitat thotdirectly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: % undisturbed habitatt + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] If total accessible habitat is: >'/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 j 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-19% of 1 km Polygon p in _ < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. �( Calculate: % undisturbed habitat+ N moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] t = 0% Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches p 'nt�2-- Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If I > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = ( 2) S 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: _4-6 = H 1-3 = M —< 1 = L H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? Record the rating on the first page H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highestscore that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: po' is = 2 It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page) It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists) It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above Rating of Value If score is:_X2 = H _ -1= M .-__.0 = L Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Z points = 0 l Record the rating on the first page 14 Wetland name or number 6 WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.LTovot blicatio 60165 wdfwQO165. df or access the list from here: http: j /wdfw.wa. goy /conservation/pig/list/ ) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE. This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha). Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report). — Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. Old-growth/Mature forests: Old -growth west of Cascade crest - Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi - layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests - Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover maybe less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old -growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest. Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 - see web link above). Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non -forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 - see web link above). Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats, These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report - see web link on previous page). Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. — Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. X Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS _ s?tland Type - - Ca tegory i i neck ojf,_on yrixeria chat P A feria tire mer, SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands _ Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? — The dominant water regime is tidal, I --Vegetated, and — With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes -Go to SC 1.1 No= No an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under AC 332-30-151? Yes = CategoryI No - Gto SC 1.2 Cat. I SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (if non-native species are Spartina, see page 25) Cat. At least 3% of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. —The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with n water, or Cat. II contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I -- ategory II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Conservation Value? Yes - Go to SC 2.2 o �- Go to SC 2.3 Cat. 1 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? �_ Yes = Category I No = of a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http://wwwl.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetiands.pdf Yes - Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 .'-No = Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value an4 listed it on their website? Yes = Categoryl %'No = \lot a WHCV SC 3.0. Bogs `----- Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that mpose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 %o3 )Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less'than 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floatingor of a lake or pond? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 r �fo� not a bog east a 30% SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level,�%No- cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. Cat. 1 SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover un a canopy? Yes = Is a Category I bog J No = 9 not a bog Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number e SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. — Old -growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi -layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more. — Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes = Category I//-- No =-Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? — The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks —The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs t e ►raesured near the bottom) Cat. Yes -Go to SC 5.1 No = Nnt wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100). Cat. II —At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. —The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2) Yes = CategoryI N❑ = Ca#e ry II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands -� Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: — Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103 — Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105 Cat I — Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Go SC 6.1 / No = interdunal wetland for rating Yes - to not an SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat f nu tions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M Cat. II for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category, 1 N6= Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes = CategoryII No" Go to SC 6.3 Cat. III SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac,? Yes = Category III . No = Category IV Cat. IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics n I If you answered No for all types, enter "Not Applicable" on Summary Form l `E Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report APPENDIX D: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ESA March 2019 Appendix D Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report Photo 1: Google Earth street view image from October 2016. Looking southeast at proposed location for pump station 33B. Paved driveway that provides access to existing pump station is on right of photo. Wetland D is located to the right of the driveway. Wetland E is located behind the trees to the left. Goy.= to [art h , t - � 3 ESA March 2019 Appendix D-1 Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report Photo 2: Looking southwest at Wetland E on left of photo. Pink flagging marks wetland boundary. Proposed pump station site is located behind photographer. Photo taken December 2015. Appendix D-2 ESA March 2019 Photo 3: Interior of Wetland D. Photo taken February 2015. Pump Station 33B Critical Areas Report ESA March 2019 Appendix D-3