The URL can be used to link to this page

18-100788 (2)DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South A�k_ Federal Way WA 98003-6325 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 CITY OF Federal Way www.eit offederalwa .cam DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 6 1, hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of ashingt n, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ 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 Other s 1�t'"l `(g 04 F.Vjj J OecC S(� A was kmailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/orVposted to or at each of the attached addresses on 2018. Project Name ' V\W-6�S& File Number(s) R—� —u'Lp Signature Date 1 21 tl � K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc Posting Sites. Federal Way City Hall - 33325 8th Avenue Federal Way Regional Library - 34200 1 st Way South Federal Way 320th Branch Library - 848 South 320th Street K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Decloratlon of Distribution with Posting Siteidoc 0 0 0 0I-IjLn 0 0 0 0 ` 000 ! I j N N N N N FN' N ((D � � O Q lD OLD t � -5. "o 00 tip lD lD lD OO � A°° w N G7 (y z TI LDrD f7 on) —0 0 7 O C n (D rr E 3 � O � rr O rt r O LM �I N N C S QO lD go O aq T C aU S "C 7 2 � (D ar 74z- + 00 n Ln c V a) = ao o� lN0 O 00 lD lD Q r r+ tD O C lD O n ", 00 00 Ul P. N p � pLn r C) ONO � r n w 0 w 1—' w v N O oo ` w O Tjr O v � a�i p n 0 O 11 n X C C v rr D rD f� N Q C oo nv (D O C (D Ln -< S I` V O� cnwcn�+ C m LI) w zLn O 0 0 r-r N Lrl U'I r+ (D O N LA O N O rD I w rCr S D < Ul -tii c� < ` n fD a = n C m 7 (D cu f<D C O Oz < � C=: fD < fD S r�r (� (D O (D (D (D (DRL v v o D 4�:- _ n O � D 00 w D Dt D � D IZ 'I lD lD O lD lD G O ON w L w w ID v D D °1 w 00 D 00 O O 01 Ln Ul Z (n r-r ((DD (D z O 00 CD O 0 (D D D_ Q 0 V, N Federal Way Crossings HC FW, LLC King County Transit 10655 N.E.4th Street, No. 700 211 Dexter Avenue North 201 South Jackson Street No.417 Bellevue, WA 98004 Seattle, WA 98109 Seattle, WA 98104 Brooklake Village, LLC 33400 9th Avenue South, Suite 206 FederalWay, WA 98003 Oh Chun Suk+Suk Duk 705 S.W. 353rd Place Federal Way, WA 98023 M.W.C.H. Investment Property 5312 Pacific Highway East Tacoma, W498424 R&G Property Holdings, LLC 15551 Sunny Cove Drive S.E. Olalla, WA 98359 Youngspring, LLC c/o Conrad Tsao 813 Lonna Lane Cupertino, CA 95014 KC Fire Protection District 31617 1st Avenue South FederalWay, WA 98003 KS & NH, Inc. 34827 Pacific Highway South Federal Way, WA 98003 Lakehaven Utility District P.O. Box 4249 FederalWay, WA 98063 t A CITY OF Federal VJay DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cifi offederalwa .com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 1, � hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ 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 Other v was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ,X e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on Project Name File Number(s) Signature 2018. -1�>' I t- —)nn7 S$ Date I)-]9- J g K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Dist ibution.doc/Last printed 1 /4/2018 12:02:00 PM Tamara Fix From: Ken Spurrell <legals@tacomadailyindex.com> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 10:49 AM To: Tamara Fix Subject: Re: Panattoni Legal Notice Attachments: i mage001 j pg thank you very much for sending the text in the email. With PDFs we have to type and proof read the notices. Anyway, this will pub on Friday. Ken Ken Spurrell Publisher Direct: 253-232-5219 Internal: 15001 Fax: 253-627-2253 15 Oregon Ave, Suite 101, Tacoma, WA 98409 FL-IR I Sound Publishing Mao PrintltnLes _010rie Rates Media Kit Sound tnro On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 10:40 AM Tamara Fix <Tamara.Fix .cit offederalwa .coma wrote: I've attached the PDF, but I'm thinking this below works better for you. Let me know if there are any issues with this. Please publish the following legal notice (Panattoni Variance, 18-100788) in Friday's (Nov. 23, 2018) issue. Please confirm and issue an affidavit of publication. Notice of Impending Decision — Administrative Variance Tilt -Up Warehouse (Panattoni Development) File #18-100788-00-UP 1 Proposal: Pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.45.015, the applicant is requesting an Administrative Variance from the required front yard building setback along Pacific Hwy South to reduce the building setback from 20 feet to 15 feet. The purpose of the setback reduction is to allow the building and site improvements to be located closer to Pacific Hwy South and reduce and minimize the extent of the intrusion into the critical area buffers. Applicant: Dan Balmelli, Barghausen, 18215 72ndAvenue South, Kent, WA 98032, agent representative. Project Location: 1019 S 351 ec St, Federal Way, Public Comments Due: December 7, 2018 Staff Contact: Planning Manager Robert `,Doc' Hansen, 253-835-2643 robert. hansen cit offederalwa .com Public Comment & Appeals: The official project file is available for public review at the Community Development Department (address below). Any person may submit written comments on the Administrative Variance Decision to the Director of Community Development by December 7, 2018. Only the applicant, persons who submit written documents to the director, or persons who specifically request a copy of the original decision may appeal the director's decision. Availability of File: The official project file and referenced environmental documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the Community Development Department, 2nd Floor / 2 • � 1 Permit Center, 33325 8mAvenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Published in the Federal Way Mirror November 23, 2018. Tamara Fix Administrative Assistant 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2602 Fax: 253/835-2609 www. c it vo ffederai way - cco m 41114k CITY OF Federal Way Centered on Opportunity Notice of Impending Decision — Administrative Variance Tilt -Up Warehouse (Panattoni Development) File #18-100788-00-UP Proposal: Pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.45.015, the applicant is requesting an Administrative Variance from the required front yard building setback along Pacific Hwy South to reduce the building setback from 20 feet to 15 feet. The purpose of the setback reduction is to allow the building and site improvements to be located closer to Pacific Hwy South and reduce and minimize the extent of the intrusion into the critical area buffers. Applicant: Dan Balmelli, Barghausen, 18215 72nd Avenue South, Kent, WA 98032, agent representative. Project Location: 1019 S 351s' St, Federal Way, WA 98003 Public Comments Due: December 7, 2018 N Q S 348TH ST S 348TH ST SR 18 CO s Q U Zr k, 0 hQ CO Staff Contact: Planning Manager Robert `Doc' Hansen, 253-835-2643 robert.hansen@cityoffederalway.com Public Comment & Appeals: The official project file is available for public review at the Community Development Department (address below). Any person may submit written comments on the Administrative Variance Decision to the Director of Community Development by December 7, 2018. Only the applicant, persons who submit written documents to the director, or persons who specifically request a copy of the original decision may appeal the director's decision. Availability of File: The official project file and referenced environmental documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the Community Development Department, 2nd Floor / Permit Center, 33325 8'h Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Published in the Federal Way Mirror November 23, 2018. Leila Willoughby -Oakes From: Johnson, Deborah L (DOH) <deborah Johnson@doh.wa.gov> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 11:17 AM To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes; Doc Hansen Cc: Carter, Brietta J (DOH); Rodriguez, Richard (DOH); sfrench@lakwhaven.org; agregg@cityoffife.org Subject: Comments - Panattoni Warehouse - FIle #18-100791-SE (SEPA #201805773) Hello, Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment upon the DNS for the proposed Panattoni warehouse project. We appreciate your sending additional information about the project & providing the critical areas report & associated documents. We have the following comments: Critical Areas. The subject site is located in three "stacked," modeled wellhead protection areas (WHPAs), two for Lakehaven & one for City of Fife (see screenshots below); thus is subject to critical aquifer recharge area (CARA) requirements in Article 5, Chapter 19.145 FWRC. This corrects preliminary communication that indicated only one Lakehaven well. (scroll down; comments continue below images) 6-month time of travel (TOT), Lakehaven W/S District source #12, well 15; & source #13, well 15A Ten-year time of travel — City of Fife source #7, well 5 (ABR146) srva v . •:.: m x p :srr, 3- att3n wn+ x % x p m+nsmasa : twr x p sv;a: ,+.c x + O x E - G • SL.m p'v:��u 7vn his n��srlfgrm3sswd rjwi,i .,,;: PJ»_,rrt':;,�Ir,:�i:�h;nJ Souris Warr Av omt Program(SWAP) Ynpplry Applkstbn — 4;w •ACC / k— I A* u_•' Map source: https://fortress.wa.gov/dohtQh/map SWAP/index.htmi Also as previously noted, the site surrounds an "exception" ownership where the Lakehaven wells are situated. Our regional staff has communicated with Lakehaven regarding this proposal; learned that the district has already submitted its own comments in December 2017, & did not wish to add to that. Notably, the December 2017 comments focused or the water service aspect &, except for backflow prevention, not source water quality. Wellhead protection should be achieved through collaboration with Lakehaven & by applying the City's critical areas requirements. You may also wish to communicate with the City of Fife about whether it has any concerns in relation to its WHPA. Because the entire site falls within "capture zones" (TOTS/WHPAs), the entire site falls within a designated CARA per FWRC 19.145.450. WAC 365-190-040(7) states that "where two or more critical areas designations apply to a given parcel [or portion of it], both or all designations apply." We've reviewed the various documents relating to critical areas, & the scope appears to have focused solely on the wetland, fish & wildlife habitat, & shoreline/stream buffer. The critical areas report should also have examined potential CARAs impacts. Since Lakehaven has conducted modeling for these sources, the District may have hydrogeological information related to the property that would be valuable in such an analysis (ref. FWRC 19.145.490(2)(c)). Of particular interest might be the proximity of the proposed storm pond & stormwater vault to the Lakehaven wells (ref. Sheets 2 & 4 of 7, 08-24-2018 review draft) & any planned infiltration or other dispersal, & also the relationship to FWRC 19.145.500(1)(b) & (2)(d). This was not addressed in the December 2017 Lakehaven comments. The notice required by FWRC 19.145.170 should include the CARA as well as other critical areas. As we understand it, Panattoni is an industrial developer that is not necessarily the end user of its projects. As such, the functional aspects (materials handled, stored, etc.) of any end user may not be fully known at this point, so except for those provisions relating to construction, it may not be clear how FWRC 19.145.480-.510 apply to the project at this time. Any conditions or other provisions the City includes in its project decision should be framed so as to apply equally to the end user(s) in order to afford enduring source water protection. Again because of proximity, we encourage the City to consider requiring a groundwater monitoring plan as allowed by FWRC 19.145.490(4) if the critical areas review indicates that would be valuable & in cooperation with Lakehaven (& Fife, if applicable). Crittal Areas Regulations. Irrespective of this particular project, this proposal spotlights needed amendments to FWRC 19.145.070 & .460. The current code exclusively calls out the capture zones, or WHPAs, associated with Lakehaven wells, but at the same time, .460 refers to "the city's public water source wells." While the majority of WHPAs within Federal Way are associated with Lakehaven wells, there are several other Group A public water systems whose WHPAs overlay at least portions of the city: City of Fife (pictured above), City of Milton, & Montessori Spring Valley Supply. (City of Fircrest also overlaps but has an inordinately large WHPA that has little bearing on the geographic relationship to its sources.) All of these may be viewed on our SWAP map at the link above. There is no legal basis for distinguishing between ownership of water supply in applying CARAs protections. Many jurisdictions refer more broadly to Group A public water supplies. Federal Way also has a handful of Group B supplies if you were to want to include those too, which include La Fratta Community Water System; Lakota Artesian; Stonehaven Water System; Line,B.L.; & Schliemann/Ellingson Water System. (To view these, adjust the "data" checkboxes on the SWAP map.) Please consider amending the specific reference to Lakehaven at the time of your next critical areas update. This concludes our comments. Please let me know if you have any questions or need additional information. For distribution of future SEPA notices, please note that our new email is SEPA.reviewteam@doh.wa.gov. DEBORAH JOHNSON Wellhead Protection Specialist Office of Drinking Water Environmental Public Health Division Washington State Department of Health deborah.johnson@doh.wa.gov 360-236-3133 1 www.doh.wa.gov 00000 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003-6325 CITY OF 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 Federal Way www.citvoffederalway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION RI le F(Akel I hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS and Scoping Notice El Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or osted to or at each of the attached addresses on 0t+b1A 1 D 2018. Project Name File Numb Signature K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc Posting Sites: Federal Way City Hall - 33325 8th Avenue Federal Way Regional Library - 34200 1 St Way South Federal Way 320th Branch Library - 848 South 320th Street Subject Site - K:\PLANNING INTERN\Declaration of Distribution notices\Declaration of Distribution with Posting Sites.doc CITY OF Federal Way DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT File No. 18-100791-SE Proposal: Construction of a 79,000 +/- square foot warehouse building along with associated site improvements, partially within a wetland buffer and a stream buffer. The applicant requests a Use Process III decision (isle #1 8-100788-00-UP) issued by the Director of Community Development pursuant to Federal Ifay Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.65, and further conditions may be placed upon the land use decision. Proponent: Brian Mattson, Panattoni Development Dan Balmelli, Barghausen, Agent Representative Location: Pacific Highway South and South 351s1 Street, Parcel 202104-9027 Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Staff Contact: Planning Manager Robert "Doc" Hansen robei-t.hansen cit offederafw7y.enm or 253-835-2643 Public Comments Due: November 2, 2018, 5:00 pm Appeals Due: November 26, 2018, 5:00 pm The city's Responsible Official has determined the proposal when developed by current city code does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an Environmental impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist; the Federal Way Comprehensil+e Plan; and other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations providing a basis for exercise of substantive authority under the Stale Environmental Policy Act pursuant to RCW 43.31 C.110. This information is available to the public on request. "Phis DNS is issued under WAC 197-1 1-340.(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on November 2, 2018. Unless modified by the city, this determination will become final following the above comment deadline. Pursuant to FWRC 14.10.060(3), any person aggrieved of the city's final determination may file an appeal with the Federal Way City Clerk (address below) within 21 days of the above comment deadline, no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 26, 2018, by filing a written letter stating the reason for the appeal of the detennination and associated fee. Only the applicant, persons who submit written documents to the director, or persons who specifically request a copy of the original decision, may appeal the director's decision. Any appellant should be prepared to state specific factual objections. Responsible Official: Brian Davis Title: Director of Community Development, City of Federal Way Address: 33325 8th Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003 Phone: 253-835-2612 r Date Issued: October 19 2018 _ Signature tnDavjs�-C--, 1111ity Development Director ➢- I.D. 78358 18-100791-00-SG 4ik CITY OF Federal Way DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT File No. 18-100791-SE Proposal: Construction of a 79,000 +/- square foot warehouse building along with associated site improvements, partially within a wetland buffer and a stream buffer. The applicant requests a Use Process III decision (file #18-100788-00-UP) issued by the Director of Community Development pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.65, and further conditions may be placed upon the land use decision. Proponent: Brian Mattson, Panattoni Development Dan Balmelli, Barghausen, Agent Representative Location: Pacific Highway South and South 351st Street, Parcel 202104-9027 Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Staff Contact: Planning Manager Robert "Doc" Hansen robert.hansen(dicityoffederalway.com or 253-835-2643 Public Comments Due: November 2, 2018, 5:00 pm Appeals Due: November 26, 2018, 5:00 pm The city's Responsible Official has determined the proposal when developed by current city code does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist; the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan; and other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations providing a basis for exercise of substantive authority under the State Environmental Policy Act pursuant to RCW 43.31C.I 10. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on November 2, 2018. Unless modified by the city, this determination will become final following the above comment deadline. Pursuant to FWRC 14.10.060(3), any person aggrieved of the city's final determination may file an appeal with the Federal Way City Clerk (address below) within 21 days of the above comment deadline, no later than 5:00 p.m. on November 26, 2018, by filing a written letter stating the reason for the appeal of the determination and associated fee. Only the applicant, persons who submit written documents to the director, or persons who specifically request a copy of the original decision, may appeal the director's decision. Any appellant should be prepared to state specific factual objections. Published in the Federal Way Mirror on October 19, 2018. 18-100791-00-SE Doc. l.D.78358 Natalie Kamieniecki From: Doc Hansen Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 12:53 PM To: 'Betsy Dyer'; Dan Balmelli; Leila Willoughby -Oakes Cc: Tim Johnson; Natalie Kamieniecki Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project / BCE#18943 Thanks, Betsy. I have sent out the SEPA and it will be published Friday. We don't need anything further at this time, But you want to recheck your calculation of board feet. Your revised checklist indicates that the area to be developed only has 56 board feet. This would account for fewer than two trees (fir) at 12" in diameter with only 16 feet high in merchantable timber. Even with trees only 12" diameter with only 8 feet of merchantable would equal 60 board feet in three trees. Looking at the aerial and visiting the site, I think there is a significant more number of board feet on site. Were some 0's left off? I'd indicated in the SEPA Threshold Determination that there were more than 5000 board feet to be taken from the property and 5600 board feet is more believable. Is that what you meant? We can deal with later since the DNS has been issued. Robert "Doc" Hansen Planning Manager Federai way Community Development Department 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2643 www.citvoffederalway.com From: Betsy Dyer [mailto:bdyer@barghausen.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 7:12 AM To: Dan Balmelli; Leila Willoughby -Oakes; Doc Hansen Cc: Tim Johnson; Natalie Kamieniecki Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project / BCE#18943 Hi Leila, I worked with Dan on the FPA and SEPA checklist yesterday and I realized that you had requested the checklist be dated prior to Friday. A revised copy is attached and the PDF for your records. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks. B et y D V e f-' Project Administrator Barghausen Consulting Engineers 18215-72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 bcIer bar hausen.com From: Dan Balmelli Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 8:51 PM To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes <Leila.Willoughby-Oakes@cityoffederalway.com>; Doc Hansen <Robert. Hansen@cityoffedera lway.com> Cc: Tim Johnson <Tim.Johnson@cityoffederalway.com>; Natalie Kamieniecki <Natalie.Kamieniecki@cityoffederalway.com>; Betsy Dyer <bdyer@barghausen.com> Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Leila, just letting you know that copies of the updated SEPA checklist and completed FPP were delivered to your attention this afternoon. Please confirm receipt. Thanks Dan Balmelli Executive Vice President (206) 396-8588 cel Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 - Phone (425) 251-8782 - Fax http://www.bargha,usen.com From: Leila Willoughby -Oakes fmailto:Leila.Willoughby-Oakes@cityofFederalway.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 8:34 AM To: Dan Balmelli; Doc Hansen Cc: Tim Johnson; Natalie Kamieniecki; Betsy Dyer Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Greetings Dan, If you are able to annotate the existing SEPA checklist under the appropriate heading and provide two copies to the permit center (date stamped prior to Friday) in this case- it should be sufficient. If there are issues- we may consider issuing a SEPA addendum pursuant if the CD Director determines there's no likely significant adverse environmental impacts. Thank you for your assistance. Let me know if you have any further questions about the process. With thanks, Leila Leila Willoughby -Oakes Associate Planner Ext. 2644 1 leii e.wi I to ug h4v-o a ke s(a)citvoffede ra,..ay. com From: Dan BaImelli [mailto:dbalmelli bar hausen.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 7:57 AM To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes; Doc Hansen Cc: Tim Johnson; Natalie Kamieniecki; Betsy Dyer Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Hi Leila, we are getting the Board Feet estimate from the contractor and will be sending by end of the day . You mentioned something about the SEPA checklist, we have never included an estimate of the board feet of trees to be removed in the SEPA checklist so please confirm if you need something added and where. Thanks Dan Balmelli Executive Vice President (206) 396-8588 eel Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 - Phone (425) 251-8782 - Fax lift ://www.bar hausen.com From: Leila Willoughby -Oakes rmaiIto: Leila. Willou hb -Oak ci offederaiwax com] Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 11:20 AM To: Doc Hansen; Dan BaImelli Cc: Tim Johnson; Natalie Kamieniecki Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Greetings Dan; One last thing- the will need to get a board foot calculation of the trees to be removed to determine if forest practices is required (tree length width divided by 144 for board foot calculations)- henceforth if this should be included in a revised SEPA checklist- and most importantly in the DNS language for Friday's paper. Forest practices was an oversight on our part with the staffing change- we apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. Our new Planner Natalie noted this on a site visit on Friday- mentioning that merchantable timber is timber that will be taken off -site. Non -merchantable timber is that timber only deemed as used on site. Also indicate the harvest method in your application. Sheet C2 of 8 on your February 22, 2018 submittal shows approximate tree placement- but not the approximate sizes or DBH of the trees. I think the full C1-8 civil plan -set was not submitted at the time of our critical area intrusion conversations. I've attached the Forest Practices Permit, which is relatively straightforward to this email to get you started. It will be associated with Environmental Checklist City File No. 18 100791 000 00 SE on submitting to the permit center. We will need that board foot calculation/approximation with a forest practices permit submittal prior to EOB Tuesday as the DNS deadline for the paper is AM on Wednesday. Let me know if you have any questions.. Kind regards, Leila Leila Willoughby -Oakes Associate Planner Ext. 26441 leita.willou hb -oaken cit o4federaiwa .corn From: Doc Hansen Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 10:15 AM To: 'Dan Balmelli' Cc: Leila Willoughby -Oakes; Natalie Kamieniecki; Tim Johnson; Brian Davis Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Dan; The SEPA will be signed tomorrow and I will have it in the paper on Friday. Dan; Any further work on the project should be directed to Leila and Natalie with a cc to me since they will be on the project, and have helped me in the review the resubmittal over the past month. Leila was at the meeting that we had in July when David was leaving. Natalie is our new planner and has 10 years' experience with Shorelines and critical areas. Leila will be gradually "passing the baton" to Natalie with my oversight as the project progresses. We will be sending out a letter soon indicating what information we need in order to make the land use decision, and what information we will eventually need when a specific building permit is submitted and being processed for approval. We are doing this for a number of projects in order to decrease the time of project process while yet not ignoring our responsibilities to insure that the Code and intent is being met. This should give you some idea of the time estimate for project completion. Robert "Doc" Hansen Planning Manager A. Federal Way Community Development Department 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone: 253/835-2643 www.citvoffederalway.com From: Dan Balmelli[mailto:dbalmell0barghausen.com] Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 6:13 AM To: Doc Hansen Cc: Tim Johnson Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Thanks Doc, that sounds great, Also, regarding the trail, I will send an exhibit later today showing the location of the trail relative to the project site. It looks like it is located on the back portion of the property that is not planned for development and not part of the project. Thanks for your help Dan Balmelli l;xecutive Vice .Presideftt (206) 396-8588 cel Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 - Phone (425) 251-8782 - lFax htip://www.barghausen.c-om From: Doc Hansen [mailto:Robert. Hansen Cdcityoffederalwa .com] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2018 4:28 PM To: Dan Balmelli Cc: Tim Johnson Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Dan. I have been talking to a number of staff and have decided to ask Brian to sign the DNS without the mitigation. Because of Plan and Code, we will most likely have to add something in the land use decision that requires the land owner to submit land for the purpose of trail (ped or bike) when found necessary. This land cannot provide space for a connection with 9th as shown in the Plan, but it may be a vital part when planned for construction. We can deal with that at the time of land use decision. Attached is the draft DNS that I will have Brian sign if that is what you wish, or we can wait until the land use decision is completed. Robert "Doc" Hansen Planning Manager A Federal Way Community Development Department 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2643 www.citvoffedera_lway.com From: Dan Balmelli rnailto:dbalmelli bar hausen.com] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2018 9:04 AM To: Doc Hansen Cc: Tim Johnson Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Doc, i am discussing this issue with the design team this morning so hold tight and I will get back to you. Thanks Dan Balmelli Executive Vice President (206) 396-8588 eel Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 -.Phone (425) 251-8782 - Fax htti)://www.barghausen.com From: Dan Balmelli Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2018 9:31 PM To: 'Doc Hansen' Cc: Tim Johnson Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Doc, thanks for the update, I think it would be fine if you issued an MDNS with the condition but let us know what you decide. We would like to get the SEPA decision issued as soon as possible. Also, any update on the Land Use Decision? Dan Balmelli Executive Vice President (206) 396-8588 eel Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 - Phone (425) 251-8782 - Fax http://www.barghausen.com From: Doc Hansen [ma iIto: Robert. Ha nsenObcitvnffederalway.com] Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2018 4:45 PM To: Dan Balmelli Cc: Tim Johnson Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Dan; I was ready to issue the DNS yesterday in time to make the paper but needed some feedback from the Traffic Division regarding the changes from the original submittal, and he did not get back to me before 10 when the public announcement was due. I will have to formally issue it next week, But I have the draft notice that will go in the paper. One issue that came up from Traffic. the pre -application meeting, Erik told me o t it was explained to the applicant, (maybe you were part of this) that the Comprehensive Plan showed a trail connecting from the Highway through the property, and that had to be showed upon the site plan being reviewed. I have yet to determine whether that can be handled through existing Code or if it has to be a condition of the threshold determination, which would make it an MDNS. The timeline for its review and appeal period would not change. There would just have to be a statement that a plan or agreement to provide the path would have to be established before any building permit could be issued. Call if you need to. Robert "Doc" Hansen Planning Manager Fe derai Way Community Development Department 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone: 253/835-2643 www. ritYoffedera IwaY.co m From: Dan Balmelli mailto:dbalmelli bar hausen.com] Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2018 10:35 AM To: Doc Hansen Cc: Tim Johnson Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Hi Doc, Just following up on the emails below regarding the SEPA decision and Land Use Approval ? Are we able to get the SEPA decision issued this week? Dan Balmelli Executive Vice President (206) 396-8588 eel Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 - Phone (425) 251-8782 - Fax hLt]2://www.bargh,iusen.colii From: Doc Hansen [ma i Ito: Robert. Hansen Cdcityoffederalway.com] Sent: Friday, October 05, 2018 9:00 AM To: Dan Balmelli Cc: Tim Johnson Subject: RE: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Dan; I mentioned to you in our phone message that I was going to look into the possibility of issuing the SEPA before the land use decision. That hasn't been done before now. They have always been issued simultaneously. I will talk with the Director about that when he is back next week (Monday). I bring this up in case he does not want to make that change, but I think it is a worthwhile effort. I would like such a process established under certain circumstances, and one would be that there are no wetland or traffic issues that can't be mitigated. I will pursue this and get back to you on Monday. If I don't, call me on Tuesday. Have a good weekend. Robert "Doc" Hansen Planning Manager A Fe'd eraI Way Community Development Department 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone: 253/835-2643 www.citvoffederalway.com From: Dan Balmelli Finailto:dbalmelli@barghausen.com] Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2018 7:15 PM To: Doc Hansen Cc: Michael Nuernberger; Martin Neumeier; Thad Mallory (tmallory@kiddermathews.com); Travis Hale (THale(6panattoni.com); Mark Neumeier; Costa Philippides Subject: SEPA and Land Use Update-Panattoni Fed Way Project Hi Mr. Hansen, Thanks for returning my call today and providing an update on the status of the SEPA and Land Use approval. Based on our discussion, you indicated that you are planning to meet with city staff from the other departments next week to get any final input or comments on the land use submittal. I also understand that the city's normal process is to issue the SEPA decision and Land Use Decision at the same time but if requested, you would be able to issue the SEPA decision first prior to issuance of the Land Use Decision and should be able to issue the SEPA decision sometime next week. After discussing this issue with our client, we are requesting that the SEPA decision be issued as soon as possible ahead of the Land Use Decision. As we discussed, issuance of the SEPA decision provides some assurance that there are no significant issues remaining that would impact approval of the project. Please proceed to issue the SEPA Decision and let me know if you need any further information. We will also wait to hear the status of the Land Use Decision once you meet with the other staff next week. Thanks again for your assistance. Dan Balmelli Executive Vice President (206) 396-8588 cel Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 18215 72nd Avenue South ^- - j&HA(j 1 CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING n u 0 2 �sGCr, • August 28, 2018 ACSUS�i�� Ng EN�a�� I 1 a Mr. Robert Hansen, Planning Manager AU6 3 0 2013 City of Federal Way Department of Community Development CITY Or FEDERAL WAY 33325 — 8th Avenue South COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: Site Plan and Stream Intrusion Plan Resubmittal for Panattoni Federal Way Tilt 348 Development City of Federal Way Project No: 18-100788-00-UP Our Job No. 18943 Dear Mr. Hansen, In accordance with your August 1, 2018 email, we are submitting revised site plans, preliminary grading and drainage plans and stream intrusion mitigation plans and exhibits to address the comments and impacts to the existing stream located along the west side of the project. As indicated in the email correspondence, the developer and design team has made every attempt possible to reduce the amount of intrusion into the existing stream while still providing a viable and feasible project. From the original site plan submitted with the initial SEPA and Site Plan Review application (Original SEPA Site Plan), significant changes and adjustments have been made to reduce and minimize impacts to the greatest extent possible. As a result of a meeting with city staff in early July, a revised site plan was submitted to the city outlining revisions made to reduce the stream buffer intrusion. These changes included the following : 1. Reduction of the number of parking stalls to meet the minimum required by city code based on the proposed use. 2. Reduction of the dock loading clearance from 130-foot to 125-foot to meet the minimum requirement of the proposed user for the size and type of semi -truck which will be used by the tenant. 3. Increase in the number of compact stalls vs standard stalls to reduce the overall site footprint. 4. Removal of the row of parking stalls along the west side of the project site adjacent to the dock loading area to further reduce the stream intrusion. Based on further input by city staff in a conference call between you and me on or about July 12, further adjustments to the site plan were completed based on your input and direction (1st Resubmittal Site Plan), These changes included the following: 1. The building and site improvements were shifted 5-foot east toward Pacific Highway South as requested. 2. The trash enclosure was relocated completely out of the 100-foot stream buffer. 3. The row of 90 degree parking stalls along the west side was relocated as much as possible to reduce and eliminate the stream intrusion by reducing the number of parking stall planters and providing parallel stalls where possible to meet the minimum code requirement. 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • KLAMATH FALLS, OR • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com Mr. Robert Hansen, Planning Manager City of Federal Way Department of Community Development -2- August 28, 2018 The resulting revised site plan being submitted for approval by the city is the Current Proposed Site Plan. All three site plans are included in this submittal to show the iteration process that was completed working with city staff to reduce and minimize impacts to the existing steam and 100-foot buffer. The resulting site plan provides minimal reduction to the 100-foot required buffer and results in a project that still meets the proposed tenants requirements. The current proposed site plan includes the following information: 1. Required 100-foot stream buffer and 190-foot wetland buffer lines. 2. Original proposed stream intrusion line. 3. Current proposed stream intrusion line. 4. Current proposed 142.5-foot wetland buffer line. 5. Area of stream buffer gained back between original and current site plan. 6. New location of dumpster outside of 100-foot stream buffer. 7. Proposed location of future boundary line adjustment line along revised wetland and stream buffer boundaries. 8. Proposed location of driveway to serve existing residence on south side of the project site. The revised preliminary grading and storm drainage plans incorporate the current proposed site plan and also show the required and proposed wetland and stream setback lines as well as the adjusted grading and retaining walls to maintain access to the existing residence on the south side of the site. The Technical Memo from Soundview Consultants addresses the wetland and stream comments in your email and also includes updated wetland and stream mitigation exhibits. Please review the enclosed plans and documents and let us know if you need any additional information to complete the SEPA and Process III Site plan review process. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Daniel K. Balmelli, P.E. Executive Vice President DKB/dkb 18943c.003.doc enc: As Noted cc: Michael Nuernberger, Panattoni Development Costa Philippides, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Betsy Dyer, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. a. CD U. C oCD 7 a o CD n n sv c' co CD �a aR o CD `��sis�rr►�r M1 - Q Z- _ o0 90 rl r+ 1-3 oll n n sv n'. `Si {° CIS CAD r'•FG r ACD ID CO t3 Cr CD R cu 'r w ° CD 0 0 R p r� co 0 CD D a CD 01 n CD ° CDrA CD CD 0 0 aq ° cn 0' CD ' a CD r:• G r'oQ �- P , C7, CD CD = CD � �'��°moo .�•�, o CD ° 0-°' CD� ye�o� CDZ� a cLnnopp='raw o' CD `e Co�•p J [fin co iyy C, CD gay CAD BCD CAD yrb a. bid ��z y y CD CD -t � � �C rD �•� C�i Pet o�� CI� ~ yz CD O y °z b � n� D o o � zo CDCD x CD z C]"C] G W N VJp r CG ox-VO� C � `2 -0 c_mi� c °� m W m cps�< omi Q^: °: �:, o ov St� W o oc �o� Wy cn w_ Sego Vsn cCmw m�y�p z W UTCn° ayc � � vi m CR o 3 � o z^° bQ'r�o�c3 N _a _ w— c4 ... io' a N o m'B cn a Q� m w �v �f n �1 .�oo_� rno N�Cw<n•_"2a CWTl °:�WtiN 0-9 •1-�i W �.�a'ar."p•' o-� c o a�W oa-n w. no �a�wa- w o 3.d °1 3 9 d m f 8 c i W G p Cfi 'J m 3 0 m 9 3 T� = O P* C m t0 O m'c m <m _E5. = mom a�Qc•�W?om� czar m m a 0- �7 C W o o ^^o pD, na CDC m=��p' aD� r:W jCey 33om�m CD W wCP c C G= W � cL n w a. '� -• m .0 CD a-- A o -0 �• � O w R o_m m ?W� no� 0_0 mwomCD p �0-yp C= m y Ca q OV " O N r,3 C W L C cDm3c W=ae��m W O NO vO m m = o y 03 din gy moo �u'iooaLO m3m ci _ CL N. f') �p C m m C �_ Ga V� tCb C �� G m O O 3 m C C CD C `WG m 3 CD• �' n G7 CJ t0 y Q_ _ @ m c G `� 22 N C N e'+ �o m¢ n C y C 33�oomy.co_�ma cnn�m�9 u' vi `C�;a3�ea W w r. 3 C ? °' ..y W C co .�:. • ' o .4 Cam-. �_-. N�Dc7 'amo w3m�c-'.awn CD mCD•7S WaWc�cvi• o� 1= pcD p� w c) o m �� qp iV� mmay o-<�o� nNcmCypma� c0�g Foy 9'Gw m �Fwwm m°. O� mc�o«-tam-'�.esa ma �� m wo =o c o c o m`nCr, � raa �am'��" c o n o_ N m W m �'- T 3 y c L Q� cp "= W W. C n O c 1° C. m cn 3 3 _ W ��QN� m �`c c_c° w_.+� m C'm aW ea m e'+� D m0y°o -mm WccW�. aW v d'LDmm 3' a m � `fin-. m om`L m o. m G W � u W o_ ��m = a � � Ell c3N�c vw =oo�m ,w CS +�77fi'dn_W oyam-.oQ>> mpm Mc c3-ma e?c�n• Qrnn' c^a� 5.� ac.mA _ o o 0 n o W vmi m 3 a y s �m3 a. 330 �m m rL a o c a �v c o a> >C com Q n 3 0 D c �• W eD ci W �p c•o-�c a o p "m � m c7 C]. — y cD O •c Co `G '� .... UJ C�q m ti a 4�� CIT Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www,cit offederalwa .com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 1, 1-A � A ,, hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a: ® Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ;K mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on D `\ I,C,� A 5 , 2018. Project Name _ 1 ► �� v u File Number(s) —jbb-70 Signature Date 3;'.Z9 - 010 J O K:\CD Administration Files\Declarotion of Distribution.doc/Last printed 1 /4/2018 12:02:00 PM A CITY OF Federal Way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Federal Way Tilt -Up Warehouse Federal Way File No:18-100788-00-UP Proposal: Construction of an 89,000 sq. ft. tilt -up warehouse building with associated site improvements, located partially within a wetland buffer and a stream buffer. Applicant: Brian Mattson, Panattoni Development, 900 SW 16"' St, Renton, WA 98057 Project Location: *no address*, corner of Pacific Hwy S & S 351s` St, parcel #202104-9027 Date of Application: February 21, 2018 Date Determined Complete: March 20, 2018 Date of Notice of Application: March 30, 2018 Public Comments Due: April 13, 2018 Lead Agency: City of Federal Way — Community Development Department Staff Contact: Senior Planner Dave Van De Weghe, david.vatideweghe@citvoffederalwa com, 253- 835-2638 Requested Decision and Other Permits Included with this Application: The applicant requests a Use Process III decision (file #18-100788-00-UP) pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.240 for project approval of a warehouse in the CE, Commercial Enterprise, zoning district; and development within a wetland buffer and within a stream buffer, pursuant to FWRC 15.10 and 19.145. Additional permits and/or approvals in conjunction with the Use Process decisions include a threshold determination pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Rules WAC 197-11 (file 418-100791- 00-SE). Environmental Documents: Environmental Checklist, Wetland & Stream Report, and Technical Information Report. Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Mitigation: FWRC Title 14, "Environmental Policy"; Title 16, "Surface Water Management"; and Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code." Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: The project will be reviewed for consistency with all applicable codes and regulations, including the FWRC, 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way, and the Public Works Department Development Standards. Public Comment & Appeals: The official project file is available for public review at the Community Development Department (address below). Any person may submit written comments on the Master Land Use applications to the director by April 13, 2018. Only the applicant, persons who submit written documents to the director, or persons who specifically request a copy of the original decision may appeal the director's decision. Availability of File and Environmental Documents: The official project file and referenced environmental documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the Community Development Department, 2"d Floor / Permit Center, 33325 8"' Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Published in the Federal Way Mirror March 30, 2018. 18-100788-00-UP Doc, LD. 77466 Tamara Fix From: Tamara Fix Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 9:52 AM To: 'planning@kentwa.gov'; dlathrop@desmoineswa.gov; jwojciec@fwps.org; 'holly.williamson@pb.com'; harold.taniguchi@kingcounty.gov, neil.fujii@kingcounty.gov; davidn@ci.normandy-park.wa.us; stimm@cityofmilton.net; 'jason.tesdal@centurylink.com'; hqcustomerservice@wsdot.wa.gov; 'info@edc- seaking.org'; 'basbury@lakehaven.org'; ksnyder@auburnwa.gov; eric.clarke@kcwd54.org Subject: Federal Way Tilt -Up Warehouse NOA Attachments: 20180320145514.pdf Attached is an NOA for the above -mentioned project. Please contact the Senior Planner David Van De Weghe at david vandeweghe _ cityoffederalway.com for any questions or comments. Tamara Fix Administrative Assistant � , Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2602 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cit ❑ffedera€wa .com M CM M M C`M CM M po ILB, ao 0 0_0_ a 0 a a� aa04 a0) 0) �j m m 00 O 00 M O d) M C`') O a a a 00 >; 00 >; a 0) � U CU >>' >m > > C > OJ O 4) > C ca y O N N N + + 0) fQ _ 0) N Q a) U O � Q �.: LL m m m N (n N (n N LL O O N LL N LL O U 0 LL 0) LL N F— 0) LL. � O _ O O U w WL > > O 0 0) _.. N .. 0) O Z (n O O C ❑ >� m U O O cu O❑ L ❑ m" N O C 0) > -C @ W N 3 L O> > U) C f n [n m C Y O O U = (6 O O O p 7 C 0 U O U O cu C > U co F- m> > A > J a Q a C ) a�� a .aL W W W LCO cu M-0 co C+� x U) C 7 C D (0 C Q0000ZpZp2 p X 7r,p O(n a C C00 O cv r(n (n C C 4.Lo NN��~�~ p �O Ln0 N ❑in- OrONr O OU7 N+ �UJN O O U)mC- N �r rlf) r l!) OJ U LMCO ++ M O 0 CD C) 0 CO C) O rr r O O "=InLLl00 M 0 Lo OLn O p MMQr r M M COLOLu r LO LoLu U� OM ` r (ncy) z zZ Z N NZM(nr(nco(n I� UOOMdU') ce)r(nr(n 000 N O (D pp Op) O m m rn m U 6) cD m I- U U J N N N ti N ti 00 p J 00 00 N CO N O i V J W LO O U7 U p 0 C) M M U d U) O p O M p C_ C Q) C m (D J C (� O ❑ 00 CO 00 cv cn !n O C J m O U N ❑ O CO _0 _ O U Ofn O O N (0 N m O 2 ti C m J +_' E cn � O 2 O 2 J O> -� 7 Y p = C CL O j 2 IL O O) O O) Q V Y CLMZ ��O) �O) cn p O N N � O LL p) O (� M od L U CA j 0L>UO Y? O�� N N N U.0 o�❑(n O +- ZUoiSQ�2f❑ O ZULL LL LL 2Y m tYMY O� UJ�O)Yewco r U7 0 r O V) O CO It 00 N N qt CO � LO ti 0o � " LO r M O 00 U') U) M CD 00 O Z r m o O O O O O O m O m O 0)m O O 0) CDO 0') 0') O m r 0')r Itr d7 r 0) r O O m d O In O) In O Ln 0)O - Nt O It O O CD CD It O It CD N O � O O I'll' O ct O r (,� c0 r N rn N Ln o0 N U) 00 N to 00 r N O r N O r N O r N O r N O r N O r N m r N O r N O r N O r N O r N O r N O N O d N r r r N N N N N 04 N N N N N N N N AGENCY DISTRIBUTION LIST - NOA CITY OF Federal Way SUBJECT: FEDERAL WAY TILT -UP WAREHOUSE - (18-100788-00-UP) 29805 Pacific Hwy S CITY OF KENT ECON & COMMUNITY DEV 400 W GOWE ST STE 300 KENT WA 98032 tannin kentwa. ov KING CO TRANSPORTATION 201 S JACKSON ST KSC-TR-0815 SEATTLE WA 98104 harold.taniguchi ,kingcounty gov SOLID WASTE DIV KING CO DEPT OF NATURAL RES 201 S JACKSON ST STE 701 SEATTLE WA 98104-3855 neil.fuiii(�kinqcoun .qo� CITY OF DES MOINES CITY OF NORMANDY PARK 21630 11T" AVE S 801 SW 174T" ST DES MOINES WA 98198 NORMANDY PARK WA 98166 dlath ro desmoineswa. oy davidn aC�ci.normandy-park.wa'us JENNIFER WOJCIECHOWSKI SUE TIMM FWPS CITY OF MILTON 33330 8T" AVE S 1000 LAUREL ST FEDERAL WAY WA 98003 MILTON WA 98354 LoiciecC7fwps.arg stirnm cit ofmilton.net HOLLY WILLIAMSON JASON TESDAL OLYMPIC PIPELINE CO CENTURY LINK COMMUNICATIONS 2319 LIND AVE SW 23315 66T" AVE S RENTON WA 98055 KENT WA 98032 holl-williamson b .com 0ason.tesdal@centurviink.com OSP ENGINEERING WA/OR/N. ID LAND USE SVC KCDDES AT&T CABLE MAINTENANCE 35030 SE DOUGLAS ST # 210 11241 WILLOWS RD NE STE 130 SNOQUALMIE, WA 98065-9266 REDMOND WA 98052-1009 M� WA ST DEPT TRANSPORTATION PO BOX 47300 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7300 hocustomerservice wsdot.wa.goy ECON DEV COUNCIL OF SEATTLE & KING COUNTY 1301 5T" AVE STE 1500 SEATTLE WA 98101 info .edc-seakinq.org BRIAN ASBURY LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DIST PO BOX 4249 FEDERAL WAY WA 98063 basbur lakehaven.or CITY OF AUBURN 25 W MAIN ST AUBURN WA 98001 ksn der auburnwa. ov WATER DISTRICT #54 922 S 219TH ST DES MOINES WA 98198-6392 eric.clarke kcwd54.or King County �•{r,a a i1L 9 7_, 9175 r3'!•ii{ i % 7,�, •� 0066 00t''- 7 rti 0065 01 i A) 07i7 U 9f? +X--76 � i� f QQQ di?mil G _l_l,f) fl i�i 4 r il'``Le� ' r 065 0090 �r�� ;103 �, _r f�i 1 _� w� /`F4 f 5 '}:_�t2� L97 Pi JJJJ �12 1 i.,vi,, `i f." 7 G .) cy `C r� 9i. ti' 072i� 91'Z ,S r� (� l am], r343r) Cj J h 6 (�j - ��% f �7� -- -'A iti i � f�i7f i ; '� 'J r OU 9()rJ2 lI1 0080 ��ii�_1% 9i!-}� ,. _ ,l l� r, idly 0020 _ c1d L rJ w� g o . _t� St 00-30 r� St 3� itl :I ` t Q Pa rk 4f �Qi} uG { rJ 90 9008 M8 a 9049 9021 0.7;9 _ 9128 ;�tl 9029 9i•6' -9065 go ) E Mare 1 Ykkk 90-36 9017 9076L � 9.[70 9f�rJ6 97i;�7 cl� 9u:"' .9?i2 � ��' �Gt� [7Q5(.�UQ QQii� t73�29r) Q 537 1-;1 r5i: 9i? 9 �sC �t •9rJ52 �ii?��'9 .i The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County Date: 2/15/2018 [Q1 N LQ King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is rye, not intended for use as a survey product. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages including, 05 jjQ GIS CENTER but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information contained on this map. Any sale of this map or information on D this map is prohibited except by written permission of King County. ��PA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 CITY OF 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 Federal Way www.dt offe eralwa .corn DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION 1 fX 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) ❑ 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 wassn ❑ mailed ❑ faxed )K e-mailed and/or ❑ posted to or at each of the attached addresses on 1V\ 2018, Project Name File Number(s) Signature Date � -a R— ) K:\CD Administration Files\Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 1 /4/2018 12:02:00 PM Tamara Fix From• Linda Mills <Imills@kentreporter.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2018 12:07 PM To: Tamara Fix Subject: Re: Legal Notice - Tilt -Up Warehouse Attachments: 2093916.PDF Hi Tamara, I have received your notice (re: Tilt -Up NOA, 18-100788) to be published in the Federal Way Mirror on Friday, March 30, 2018. Thank you, Linda 2093916 Linda Mills Legal/Public Notice Advertising - Obituary Representative Auburn, Bellevue, Bothell/Kenmore, Covington/Maple Valley/Black Diamond, Issaquah/Sammamish,Kent, Kirkland, Mercer Island, Redmond and Renton Reporters, Federal Way Mirror, Seattle, Weekly, Snoqualmie Valley Record, and Okanogan Valley Gazette -Tribune Direct:253-234-3506 Internal:36027 Fax:253-437-6016 19426 68th Ave. S., Ste A, Kent, WA 98032 Map Print Rates Onilne Rates Media Kit Sound Info On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Tamara Fix <Tamara.Fix ci offederalwa .cramp wrote: Please publish the following legal notice (Tilt -Up NOA, 18-100788) in Friday's (March 30, 2018) issue. Please confirm and issue an affidavit of publication. 111��IN CITY Of Federal Way NOTICE OF MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION Federal Way Tilt -Up Warehouse Federal Way File No: 18-100788-00-UP 1 Proposal: Construction of an 89,000 sq. ft. tilt -up warehouse building with associated site improvements, located partially within a wetland buffer and a stream buffer. Applicant: Brian Mattson, Panattoni Development, 900 SW 16`h St, Renton, WA 98057 Project Location: *no address*, corner of Pacific Hwy S & S 351" St, parcel #202104-9027 Date of Application: February 21, 2018 Date Determined Complete: March 20, 2018 Date of Notice of Application: March 30, 2018 Public Comments Due: April 13, 2018 Lead Agency: City of Federal Way — Community Development Department Staff Contact: Senior Planner Dave Van De Weghe, david.vandewe he cit offederalwa .com, 253-835- 2638 Requested Decision and Other Permits Included with this Application: The applicant requests a Use Process III decision (file #18-100788-00-UP) pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19.240 for project approval of a warehouse in the CE, Commercial Enterprise, zoning district; and development within a wetland buffer and within a stream buffer, pursuant to FWRC 15.10 and 19.145. Additional permits and/or approvals in conjunction with the Use Process decisions include a threshold determination pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Rules WAC 197-11 (file #18-100791-00-SE). Environmental Documents: Environmental Checklist, Wetland & Stream Report, and Technical Information Report. Development Regulations to Be Used for Project Mitigation: FWRC Title 14, "Environmental Policy"; Title 16, "Surface Water Management"; and Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code." Consistency with Applicable City Plans and Regulations: The project will be reviewed for consistency with all applicable codes and regulations, including the FWRC, 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual as amended by the City of Federal Way, and the Public Works Department Development Standards. Public Comment & Appeals: The official project file is available for public review at the Community Development Department (address below). Any person may submit written comments on the Master Land Use applications to the director by April 13, 2018. Only the applicant, persons who submit written documents to the director, or persons who specifically request a copy of the original decision may appeal the director's decision. Availability of File and Environmental Documents: The official project file and referenced environmental documents are available for public review during normal business hours at the Community Development Department, 2"a Floor / Permit Center, 33325 8 h Avenue South, Federal Way, WA 98003. Published in the Federal Way Mirror March 30, 2018. Tamara Fix Administrative Assistant ¢. Federal Way 33325 8tn Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2602 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cit o nderalwa .com CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8t" Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-7000; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityoffedercilway.com DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of 4- Washington, that a: Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Optional DNS/MDNS ❑ FWRC Interpretation ❑ Other ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document was ❑ mailed ❑ faxed ❑ e-mailed and/or 2/posted to or at each of the attached addresses on 1Jl oar CIA �� 2018. Project Name edlef t C+ File Number(s) JF_) 00 Sig Date , Z \\CFWFILEI \Department\CD\Dave\Public Notice Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 3/23/2018 8:29:00 AM Posted Sites: Federal Way City Hall: 33325 8th Ave South Federal Way Library: 34200 lst Way South Federal Way 320th Library: 848 S. 320th St \\CFWFILEI\Department\CD\Dave\Public Notice Declaration of Distribution.doc/Last printed 3/23/2018 8:29:00 AM AcE '# COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 33325 8`h Avenue South CITY OF Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-8352607; Fax 253-835-2609 Federal Wa� planning0citvof ederalwaxcom w w w.citvoffedera l svay.coni NOTICE OF APPLICATION SIGN INSTALLATION CERTIFICATE Project Name: Project File No: I � -- i 00 -% FP ' 00 jj II Project Address: N C N w_ SS-t- + sl 5 -� Installed By: !,�!k S L �� Date of Installation: !le Location of Installation: ti~ �"� �`� c ] W y S *Please email a picture of the sign installat'on(s) to the project planner.* d-jd-POulJ6Pdu@duP dLLld—!duld�l d-P dP d�P duP d—P Sul d-®d'•e d'&del d!a-Pa iJ�[+dµi d-B OWl Iul OLLl d�G OuO dLLP d-! I hereby testify that the sign installed fully complies with the installation standards outlined in Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19 `Zoning and Development Code' and that the sign will be maintained until a final decision is issued on the land use action and/or environmental threshold determination. I understand that failure to return this certificate within five days of posting may result in delays, notice of corrections, and re -mailings at the applicant's expense. 6 C .S c /,- J � Installer's Name Installer's Signature 3/23// 8 Date Phone Bulletin #036 —March 7, 2018 Page 1 of 1 k:\Ilandouts\Sign Installation Certificate CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: 2/26/18 TO: Cole Elliott, Development Services Manager Peter Lawrence, Plans Examiner Rick Perez, City Traffic Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue Lindsey Sperry, Public Safety Officer Rob Van Orsow, Solid Waste/Recycling Coordinator FROM: Dave Van De Weghe, Senior Planner FOR DRC MTG. ON: 3/15/18 - Internal FILE NUMBER(s): 18-100788-00-UP RELATED FILE NOS.: 17-105258-00-PC PROJECT NAME: FEDERAL WAY TILT -UP WAREHOUSE PROJECT ADDRESS: 1019 S 3 51 s t St ZONING DISTRICT: CE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposal to construct an 89,000 square foot concrete tilt -up building with truck and office nodes and associated site work improvements. LAND USE PERMITS: UP III, SEPA PROJECT CONTACT: Dan Balmelli, dbalmeli@barghausen.com MATERIALS SUBMITTED: Vicinity Map, SEPA Checklist, Technical Information Report, Wetland Report, Title Report, Plan Sets ¢0HAV� RECEIVE CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING m� * 5*� FEB 2 2 20 Gn Y OF FEDERAL W %y s a COMMUN" pEVELWiVENT c�r.NG �NG��ww� February 22, 2018 City of Federal Way Department of Community Development 33325 — 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: SEPA Environmental Review and Process III Land Use Review for Federal Way Tilt 348 Development located at 1019 South 351st Street, City of Federal Way, King County, Washington Tax Parcel No: 202104-9027 Our Job No. 18943 On behalf of Panattoni Development Company, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. is submitting the SEPA and Process III Land Use review application documents to begin review of the proposed Federal Way Tilt 348 project located on approximately 5.3 acres of a 15.8 acre site located along the west side of Pacific Highway South to the south of South 348th Street. The proposed development consists of the construction of a new approximate 89,000 square foot building and associated site work improvements. A boundary line adjustment application will be submitted as part of the development. A pre -application meeting for the project was held with the city on December 7, 2017 under File #17-105258-00-PC. The following plans and documents are enclosed for review: 1. One (1) each Master Land Use Application 2. One (1) each Owner Letter of Authorization to Act as Agent 3. One (1) each check for SEPA and Land Use Intake Fees 4. Eight (8) each Vicinity Map 5. One (1) each Traffic Concurrency Application and Fee in the Amount of $8,760 6. One (1) each Summary Letter and Checklists from Pre -Application Meeting 7. Two (2) each Title Report 8. Two (2) each Water Certificate of Availability from Lakehaven Utility District 9. Two (2) each Sewer Certificate of Availability from Lakehaven Utility District 10. Eight (8) sets Site Photographs 11. Eight (8) each SEPA Checklist 12. Eight (8) sets Preliminary Civil Engineering and Landscape Design Plans, including Topographic Survey, Preliminary Grading and Drainage, Preliminary Water and Sanitary Sewer, Preliminary Landscape and Tree Retention Plan 13. Eight (8) each Architectural Site Plan 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • KLAMATH FALLS, OR • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com City of Federal Way Department of Community Development -2- February 22, 2018 14. Eight (8) each Statement of Architectural Design Intent and Proposed Use 15. Eight (8) each Architectural Building Elevations 16. Four (4) each Preliminary Technical Information Report, including Downstream Analysis 17. Four (4) each Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report 18. Four (4) each Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) Checklist 19. One (1) set Property Owner List in 300-Foot Radius 20. One (1) each 300-Foot Property Owner Radius Exhibit 21. Two (2) sets Self -Addressed, Stamped Envelopes for Property Owners in 300-Foot Radius 22. One (1) each CD Containing PDF Document Files We believe that the enclosed plans and documents compile a complete application package to begin SEPA Environment Review and Process III Land Use Review for the proposed Federal Way Tilt 348 project. Please review at your earliest convenience and please feel free to contact me or Costa Philippides of our office if you have any questions or need any additional information. Thank you. Sincerely, Daniel K. Balmelli, P.E. Executive Vice President BSD/dm/bd 18943c.002.doc enc: As Noted cc: Brian Mattson, Panattoni Development Costa Philippides, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Betsy Dyer, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. RECEW ED FEB 2 2 2018 CITY OF FEJEPJ-L INAY COMMUNITY Orr-VEi OPME�f February 16`h, 2018 ATTN: City of Federal Way Statement of Architectural Design Intent and Proposed Use The proposed building is designed to be constructed of concrete tilt -up panels, painted warm gray and red. Currently, the site is empty of development. Our site proposal for all usable areas (not in wetland and stream setbacks) is an industrial building with a small amount of office, a truck court, and a pond for drainage. Design features on the Right of Way are included in our response below: 19.115.060 Building design — All zoning districts. la) Stormwater design and site access will be designed around the site's natural contours. lb) Not applicable. IC) This project does not include fences. Trash enclosure walls and screens match the building. 2a) Along the R.O.W., the North and South corners have an increase in height which creates vertical modulations. This is one of two options chosen, for the ends of the building only. 2b) This is the second design option chosen. 15' of landscaping is provided along the East property line, meeting the 10' landscaping setback requirement and also providing building screening. Due to the IBC requirement for fireman access every 100' lineal feet along the exterior of a building which may in the future contain high pile storage (IBC 2015 3206.6.1.1 and 3205.4), we must provide an access pathway along much of the building perimeter, so the landscaping must be clear of the walls in these locations. 2c) Trellis modulations are shown along the East elevation, and are the second design option chosen for the middle of the building. These trellises, shown on our elevations, will be designed to screen the 5' walkway adjacent to the building. 2d) Not included in our project. 3b) i) Storefront windows are shown around potential future office areas, with recessed entrances. ii) Paneling around windows is painted a contrasting color. iii) Vertical trellises are shown along the R.O.W. iv) Landscaping is provided along the entire R.O.W., somewhat screening the building. v) Not included in this project. vi) Decorative roof overhangs are shown on R.O.W. corner nodes. Steel canopies are located at office entrances. vii) Contrasting colors are used. viii) Not included. 4a) The building walls are broken into panels of 25' wide or less. The roofline changes at the office nodes. 12503 Bel -Red Road, Suite 101 Bellevue, WA 98005 425.646.1818 s City of Federal Way RE: Process III February 16`', 2018 Page 2 of 2 19.115.070 Building and pedestrian orientation — All zoning districts. la) Per Pre -application for this project, industrial building entrances are not required to be along the ROW. Building features along R.O.W. are described on previous page. lb) A pedestrian path is included from the R.O.W. 1 c) The occupancy of this building will not include human services and activities. 1 d) There is only one building on this site. 19.115.090 District guidelines. (CE) 2a) Surface parking is to the sides and rear of building. 2b) Per Pre -application for this project, industrial building entrances are not required to be along the R.O.W. However, the proposed building entrances are distinct due to the surrounding horizontal building modulations, and storefront glazing surrounding the doors. 2c) Entrances use storefront glazing, steel canopies, and panel reveals. 2d) No retail to be included. 2e) Reflective glazing will not be used. 2f) No fences are included in project. RECEIVED Lakehaven FEB 2 2 2018 WATER & SEWER DISTRICT CoMhfi1r OF FEI)SR4L yV y Nf71't�lo DEVELOPMEW V MT 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): 2021049027 Site Address: 1019 S 351st St Lakehaven GIS Grid: 3-12 Ex. Bldg. Area to Remain: N/A sf New Bldg. Area Proposed: 85,257 sf Applicant's Name: Federal Way RI. LLC WAFER SYSTEM INFORMATION 1. ® Water service can be provided by service connection to an existing 1" diameter water main that is on the site. 2. ® If additional/onsite fire hydrant(s) required, water service for the site will require an improvement to Lakehaven's water distribution system of: ® a. 37+ - feet of 8" Wor 12" diameter water main to reach the site; and/or ® b. The construction of a water distribution system on the site; and/or ❑ c. A major portion of Lakehaven's comprehensive water system plan would need to be implemented and/or constructed; and/or ® d. Other (describe): Lakehaven Developer Extension_Aoreement reouired. 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. 5. Water service is subject to: ® a. Payment of connection charges (to be determined by Lakehaven); ® b. Proof or reservation of easement(s) as required by Lakehaven; ® c. Other: If a pplicable DE Ag r ement 2 a hove must be a ted b haven riot o ervi a connec ion activation(s). Comments/special conditions: Service pressures greater than 60 psi indicated, Pressure Reducing Valves indicated.. contact local buildina official for re uire n & or additionpi in ormation. Care shall be taken tg avoid encroachment upon existingsewer and or w ter ma tL and or gjs ociated easemen s o e site. The nearest fire hydrant (proposed/new, anticipated installation in Fall 2017) is approximately 120+ - 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 2 500 GPM (approximate) 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. 538 Pressure Zone Est. Meter Elevation(s)-GIS: 250+/- Est. Pressure Range at Meter(s) (psi): Min. 116, Max. 124 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 E NEERING SUPERVISOR Signature: Date: iqllz A 2021049027 wtr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17�_/ Page 1 of 2 2021049027 wtr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 2 of 2 RECEIVED Lakehaven WATER & SEWER DISTRICT FEB 11 2018 COMMUNITY D y ORALPME'NT _ AILABILI 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): 2021049027 Site Address: 1019 S 351st St Lakehaven GIs Grid: 1-12 Ex. Bldg. Area to Remain: N/A sf New Bldg. Area Proposed: 85.257 sf Applicant's Name: Federal Way.RJ, LLC SEWER SYSTEM INFORMATION 1. ® Sewer service can be provided by service connection to an existing 8" diameter sewer main that is on the site and the sewer system has the capacity to serve the proposed land use. 2. ❑ Sewer service for the site will require an improvement to Lakehaven's sanitary sewer system of: ❑ a. feet of " diameter sewer main or trunk to reach the site; and/or ❑ b. The construction of a sanitary sewer collection system on the site; and/or ❑ c. A major portion of Lakehaven's comprehensive wastewater system plan would need to be implemented and/or constructed; and/or ❑ d. Other (describe): 3. ® a. The existing sewer system is in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Wastewater System Plan. ❑ b. The existing sewer system is not in conformance with Lakehaven's Comprehensive Wastewater System Plan and an Amendment to this Plan will be required. This may cause a delay in issuance of land use approvals or permits. 4. ® a. The proposed site land use is within the corporate limits of Lakehaven Water & Sewer District, or has been granted Boundary Review Board approval for extension of sewer service outside of Lakehaven's sewer service area. ❑ b. Annexation or Boundary Review Board approval will be necessary to provide service. S. Sewer service is subject to: ® a. Payment of connection charges (to be determined by Lakehaven); ® b. Proof or reservation of easement(s) as required by Lakehaven; ® c. Other: Sewer Service Connection ermit reouired. Comments/special conditions: Care shall be taken to void ncroac ent u on exicting sewer and r w ter main and or s ociate easement on the site. 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 N NEERIN SUPERVISOR L-;7 fi Signature: Date: 8 2021049027 swr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 1 of 2 c 2021049140 2021049042 s" P ve c 2021049045 2021049028 2021049044 CO r r 2021049131 4 } vc ti 2021049047 2021049148 r a S 352ND S T CO 1853180 020 1853180010 OT , 2921049048 t a 2921049158 2921049128 - 'E; Lakehaven Water and Sewer riot neither warrants nor guarantees accuracy of any facility information r ided. Facility locations and conditions subject to field verification. Sewer Certificate of Availability � a Parcel2021049027 zoo aoo 5 Feet 8/2/2017 EIS+, 2021049027 swr.docx (Form Update 1/3/17) Page 2 of 2 Federal Way RI, LLC 15 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 102 Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 869-2020 (425) 869-8433 fax February 12, 2018 City of Federal Way Department of Community Development 33325 — 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: Letter of Authorization for Federal Way Tilt 348 Development Address: 1019 South 351st Street Tax Parcel No: 202104-9027 RECEIVED FEB 2 2 2018 CITY OF FEDERO. L WAY COMMUNITY DEVELCPMLE-`, Please be advised that Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. is authorized to submit land use and civil permit related applications for the above referenced project. As owner, I further authorized Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. to sign any of the required land use and other permit applications and related documents as may be necessary throughout the land use approval and permitting pFocess. Sincerely, _ r Jeffrey E. Hamilton, CFO WIP dew 5 i •� ftiti •- 1. r ? i y pYf S _ � Z vY } 1 { Y 1 �*� Fri}�.* !�••u � her Lake nentary L =S-343RD ST QQ - � "—S 344-rm s?- LU St. Raocrs r Ilaspital p, IT r — �^�` �I S 348TWST I i w West Hylebos We110nds Park Hybelos Blueberry i S-356TH'ST=Farm Park 5.357TH=ST— Brook] -- — !Christ SCf7Ui z r 4 � � �c C t- m c; 2� REFERENCE: Rand McNally (2017) Scale: Horizontal: N.T.S. Vertical: N/A J� oq SITE 5 340TH=ST•S 3d9TH ST- 2 i Kitt$ ti a 'COrnef l 5-3415T - U ,.. - f — M =P ST i11 �1I 5-3�a4.•i arm -- 5-356TH ST M1 I X � d 4 � � O iN N =-S-359TH ST---- - —�� - : - r N rS-364TH ST - - s 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH to KENT, WA 98032 2 (425)251-6222 (425) 251-8782 S ��'�a CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, sKntiM6�� SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES S 360TH-- LU ua N Todd Searner High 5;hoo' / $ r 'y WAY- !Q RECEI[�3�TH:P�-:, F For Job Number Panattoni Fed�k E1VEL0w r, 943 Federal Way, Washington Title: VICINITY MAP 02/08/181 P:118000s1189431exhibitlgraphics118943 amap.cdr Scale 1 inch 2( 60 feet 50 feet j N 40 feet RECEIVED FEB 2 2 2018 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION COMMUNITY CEV5LOI'MENT DEPARTMENT OF COAIARINITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8°i Avenue South CITY OF Federal VVay, WA 98003-6325 Federal Way 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 u}� u,cit�e111rrdcrull+•a�.cum - )oo-]gs -CCU- U Date_ 2�2� APPLICATION No(S) -- Project Name Federal Way Tilt 348 Property Address/Location 1019 South 351 st Street Parcel Number(s) 202104-9027 Project Description Construction of new office/warehouse building and associated site work improvements. Boundary line adjustment will be processed as part of the proposed development, Type of Permit Required Annexation Binding Site Plan Boundary Line Adjustment _ Comp Plan/Rezone _ Land Surface Modification Lot Line Elimination Preapplication Conference Process I (Director's Approval) Process II (Site Plan Review) X Process III (Project Approval) Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) Process VI X SEPA w/Project SEPA Only Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use Short Subdivision Subdivision Variance: Commercial/Residential Required Information CE - Commercial Enterprise Zoning ❑csi;nation Commercial Enteef rrise Comprehensive Plan Designalion $1,000 Value of Existing Improvements Value of Proposed Improvements Inlernnlional Building Code (IBC): S-1 with S Accessory Occupancy Type IIIB Construction Type Bulletin 4003 - January 1, 2011 Applicant Name: Brian Mattson, Panattoni Development Address: 900 S.W. 16th Street, Suite 330 City/State: Renton, WA Zip: 98057 Phone: (206)838-6182 Fax: (206)442-1871 Email: bmattson@panafloni.com Sigtature �� _�� Agent (if different than Applicant) Name: Dan Balmelli, Barghausen Consulting Engineers Address: 18215-72nd Avenue South City/State: Kent, WA Zip: 98032 Phone: (425) 251-6222 F&m.-Cell: (206) 396-8588 Email: dbalmelli@barghausen.com Signature: 6f�K Owner Name: Federal Way RI, LLC Address: 15 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 102 City/State: Bellevue, WA Zip: 98005 -_ - ? 6.� [% Phone: �lL�j - - 7 y33 Fax: ! zS (�C �� /41, Email' Ff f Signature: Page I of I k:XFlandoutslMaster Land Use Application FELL CITY OF � Federal Way Centered on Opportunity April 17, 2018 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor Panattoni Development Email: BMattson(@ anattoni.eom Brian Mattson 900 SW 16`h St, Suite 330 Renton, WA 98057 RE: File #18-100788-00-UP; WETLAND/STREAM REPORT PEER REVIEW #1 Federal Way Tilt -Up Warehouse, *NO SITE ADDRESS*, Federal Way Dear Mr. Mattson: On March 15, 2018, the City of Federal Way received your request for third party review of the Wetland/Stream Critical Areas Report for parcel number 202104-9027, prepared by Soundview Consultants (February 14, 2018). The report indicated that there is a Category I wetland onsite (Wetland A) with a 190-foot buffer, and a Type F stream (Stream Z) with a 100-foot buffer. WETLAND/STREAM REPORT The city forwarded your request to our wetland consultant, Perteet, for their review. Perteet completed a site visit, reviewed relevant documents, and prepared a memo (April 16, 2018) in which they do not concur with some components of the Soundview report. The city concurs with Perteet's review and requests more information. NEXT STEPS Please review the findings in the enclosed memo prepared by Perteet. A revised wetland report must be submitted. The revised report will be peer reviewed at the applicant's expense in accordance with Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.080(3). Should you have any questions about this letter, I can be reached at david.vandewe he ci offederalwa .corm, or 253-835-2638. Sincerely, Dave Van De Weghe, AICP Senior Planner c: Dan Balmelli, Barghausen, dbalrneili@barghausen.cotn Jeremy Downs, lerem oun viewconsullants.com enc: April 16, 2018, Wetland/Stream Peer Review Memo from Perteet Resubmittal Information Form 18-100788-00-UP Doc LD. 77603 A CITY or � Federal Wav WETLAND CONSULTANT AUTHORIZATION FORM Date: February 27, 2018 Consultant: Jason Walker 2707 Colby Ave, Suite 900 Everett, WA 98201 (425) 252-7700 Project: Federal Way Tilt -Up Warehouse Building Wetland Report - peer review Location. 1019 S 351- St., Federal Way, WA, King County parcel #202104-9027 City File No.: 18-I00788-00-UP Applicant Contact: Dan Balmelli, 425-251-6222, City Staff Contact: Dave Van De Weghe, Senior Planner — 253.835.2638, .,r, _ ye `f ;11;:G1i.: c 9lc6ci!'2c!17cti i. -; C)i"n Documents Provided: • Weiland and Fish and Habitat A99am aentReport by Soundview ConsullantQ February 14, 2018 Task Scope: b Verify plan for compliance with FWRC 19.145.410-19.145.440— Wetlands. • Evaluate buffer reduction Ik enhancement plan for conformity to FWRC I9.145.440(6). (one site visit is budgeted for two Ferteet ecological staff for a In day • Conduct site visit as necessary. recon ofthe parcel and to verify the wetland habitat score) Provide written response to findings, recommendations, and request additional information from applicant if needed. (an initial review and first memo is budgeted) Possible meeting with applicant's engineer if nemssary.(a citylapplicant meeting is W4-led) o Review of resubmittedloorrectcd documents as needed. (one resubmittal mew and second memo is budgeted) Task Schedule: Provide task cost estimate ASAP. Review work is not authorized until authorized in writing by City. Task Cost: Not to emceed , $7,987` without a prior written amendment to this Task Authorization. 1$5,539 is budgeted for scope bullets 1-5, dw sectmd review (bullet 6) is estimated at $2.448. $7.987 total ]I.JMMa Oo-uP Due, M mSt Federal Way Tilt -Up Warehouse Building Wetland Report Review-18-100788-00-UP page 2 Acceptance: (Consultant — Perteec.'Inc.) (city Staff) (Applicant) Lf l- j L, Date 3/2- 712-0 1 F Date `I�rlie M-180254MUP Dae I.D. 77351 Emerald _ 'H ST S 48TH ST nr�I=zaf ` r "�,°` S 348TH ST RS35.0 wtN . West Hyle Wet an d "Park SE :v "• r=w:�r1•: }n�i �nyG Xeoo�7v .Ile -104 y�1 CE 0 YAarVYldMWAre t A� fr1�Sltr3 7rT9 }t?5144+S CIO 7Mi7 P in Esp,—x wt (VIU4, f A M 0 1! ;SUM �kI OJ Iye03 ��% 74.2 7 i3Ri9 B5-11" "?PS � i czj 4t 2%1" d• wz 34V4 3$1 list f J4;Ai �~1�1 06 212 313 424 Feet CE" CITY OF - Federal Way A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Federal Way Tilt 348 Dcvclopment C a'to" 1rJ 3. 4. Name of applicant: Brian Mattson Panattoni Development Department of Community Development 33325 8'" Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 u•u w.riU•nlfeslcr::ltt•a�•.rs�t� RESUBMITTED OCT 17 2018 pr�� tea, f�.•v ; Cr Y OF FEDERAL WAY ,.oMML1NrFY DEVELOPMENT Contact: Dan Balmelli/Costa Philippides Barghausen Consulting Engineers Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 900 S.W. 16th Street, Suite 330 Renton, WA 98057 (206) 838-6182 Date checklist prepared: February 16, 2018, Revised October 11, 2018 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Federal Way 6. Proposed tinning or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 18215-72nd Avenue South Kent, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 Construction to start in summer of 2018 or as soon as applicable permits are issued. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. There is no plan for future activity beyond the scope of work outlined in this proposal. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Environment Checklist Technical Information Report Level 1 Downstream Analysis Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Critical Area Report Wetland and Buffer Mitigation Report Traffic Concurrency Report Geotechnical Engineering Report Bulletin #050 —October 17, 2016 Page l of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist A CITY OF Federal Way Department of Community Development 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 ►s•n•uc ci1�•olTcdc�:3f �s:�a•_cnm 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 are known to be pending to our knowledge. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Process III Land Use Approval by City of Federal Way SEPA Determination by City of Federal Way Traffic Concurrency Permit by City of Federal Way Boundary Line Adjustment by City of Federal Way Building Permit by City of Federal Way Mechanical/Plumbing/Electrical Permits by City of Federal Way Fire Suppression Permit by City of Federal Way Clearing and Grading Permit by City of Federal Way Site Development Permit by City of Federal Way Forest Practice Application by City of Federal Way Right -of -Way Use Permit by City of Federal Way Developer Extension by Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Water Service Connection Permit by Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Sewer Service Connection Permit by Lakehaven Water and Sewer District ��,� NPDI~S Permit by Department of Ecology t All�a l 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 modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The proposed project will construct an approximate 89,000 square foot warehouse/manufacturing building on approximately 5.3 acres of a 15.8-acre undeveloped site. Along with building construction the proposal will include grading activities, paved parking and truck maneuvering areas, storm drainage improvements, waterline extension, sanitary sewer connection, landscaping, wetland and stream buffer clihancemen onstruction of new driveway for access to Pacific Highway South and franchise utility improvern its. A boundary line adjustment will also be processed along with land use and site development pppovals. �, ta.; l�. Location of t1 a proposal. Give sufficient infotrna loci fc�a person to understaltd the preclse`is]catrtin a your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and raiige, if known. if a4d a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a uJobad 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 (naps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. , J rvtay . The site is located along the west side of Pacific Highway South, to the south of South 348th Street and is a portion of the southeast quarter of Section 20, Township 21 N. Range 4E in the city of Federal Way, King County, Washington. Site Address: 1019 South 351st Street Tax Parcel Number: 202104-9027 Bulletin #050 — October 17, 2016 Page 2 of 15 k:\Handouts\Rnvironmental Checklist 111�k CITY OF Federal Way B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site: Department of Community Development 33325 81h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 tt-t+'tt•.cit�•n!'1ixl�� altt•st•.r� sits (circle one): Flat, rolling, RR steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? RESUBMITTED 00 17 2018 COMMUNGY aEVROPM NT CJ The steepest slope on site is approximately 35 percent. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, Hauck)? if r 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. According to the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service the on -site soils consist of AgC — Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8-15% slopes and AmB — Arents, Alderwood material 0-6% slopes. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None are known to exist to our knowledge. 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. Approximately 118,000 cubic yards of cut and 18,000 cubic yards of fill and 18,000 cubic yards of stripping material are anticipated for the project. The source of fill material is unknown at this time but will be from an approved source. ' I. PP (d��' PJ' 4 £ Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, genera IIyc escribe. �, I Yes, depending on weather conditions at time of construction, erosion could occu&rests t of construction activities. 01q(V W>Q' g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project C construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? CL! —i12 Approximately $�)erccnt ofthc site will be impervious surface upon project completion. r i �� 'Tt'►•i � r 5 uy1 �+'1 rl w �+ ltn'{� � wY�� 11 � G��k1�7'1' C � h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, ifany:�x, A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared, and the project will implement all appropriate temporary erosion and sediment control measure ; dd.'0 Bulletin #050 — October 17, 2016 Page 3 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist CITY OF Federal Way 2. Air Department of Community Development 33325 8"' Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 u•u•w_cityc�lle+lrrsl►►a�, _r�s=n 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. During construction, emissions from construction equipment would be present. Upon project completion, enissions fr m v hicular traffic to and from the site could be pr .9g. , �; I ; {dn Sa l f6-e f/�SfaIG'� Gr p-�'rndr� yrn el- b. Are there any Off -site sources of emissions or odor tl t may affect your proposal? If so, Y;'UI7 0& generally describe. G ie S' Emissions from vehicular traffic on area roadways could be present but would not be anlicipated to affect the project. 04t4 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Construction equipment will comply with emission standards. No other specific measures are proposed. 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. Yes, there is a stream bisecting the sitt a id wetland area ar ocated on the eastern portion of the sitee AV1gP7 of (4f-' )96—tea'' ' " 4tf/Ae/A . 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach availableplans. Yes, work will take place within 200 feet of the stream and wetland areas. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material, No fill or dredge material will be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No surface water withdrawals or diversion are proposed. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the siteplan. According to FIRM Map Panel 53033C1250F, the site is not located in a 100-year floodplain. Bulletin #050 — October 17, 2016 Page 4 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist Department of Community Development CITY OF 33325 8'h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Federal Way 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 unu'.C11) nllidct']IW.LsLmwo 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. 4- No waste materials will be discharged to surface waters under this propoR'ESUBMITTED b. Ground Water: CCl 17 2U18 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other puriz 7 If so &Jvegeneral description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities 1 Y well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and ENT approximate quantities if known. No water will be discharged to groundwater under this proposal. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground fi-om septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste materials will be discharged to the ground. All sanitary sewer effluent will be collected and conveyed to the existing Lakehaven Water and Sewer District sanitary sewer system. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. The source of runoff will be rainfall from building rooftop and pavement areas. Stormwater runoff from pavement areas will be collected and conveyed via storm pipe and catch basins to a stonnwater vault for detention and water quality treatment and runoff from building roof drains will be routed to a stone pond for- detention and water quality treatment. Runoff from both the vault and storm pond will discharge into the stream located on the west site of the site. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. t✓� No waste materials will enter ground or surface waters under this proposa 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. 46 Stormwater will continue to discharge to the stream located on the site as in existing condition. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage fn C. pattern impacts, if any: A storm drainage plan will be designed per city of Federal Way standards and constructed for the development to reduce and control surface water impacts. Bulletin #050 — October 17, 2016 Page 5 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist ' . A 4& CITY OF , --7�' Fede ra I Way 4. Plants a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs X grass Department of Community Development 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 m-'a.wr--ciivoIklj,-ttL%'" pasture crop or grain Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. X wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Vegetation within the portion of the site to be developed will be removed and vegetation within the disturbed portion of the stream buffer and wetland buffer areas will be enhanced per city of Federal Way standards. Approximately 5,600 board feet of merchantable timber is anticipated to be harvested from the site. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered plant species are known to be on or near the site to our knowledge. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Landscaping for the proposed development will be designed and implemented per city of Federal Way standards. Enhancement of the stream and wetland buffer areas is also proposed. Please refer to the Critical Area and Buffer Mitigation Plans and Report prepared by Soundview Consultants and included in this package. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Other than probably Himalayan blackberry, none are known to exist on or near the site. 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: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, � other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: C-0'ab;-i5 M(0" ■+. n t D�� t.S�i� r(},-j�� fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. Bulletin #050 — October 17, 2016 Page 6 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist Department of Community Development 33325 8`h Avenue South CITY of Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Federal i Way 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 �V 11'�ti'.l' lt�'i1fI1:dL:li! I �L':1�'.l.' 11iTl None are known to exist on or near the site to our knowledge. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. RESUBMITTED Yes, the site is part of the Pacific Flyway for Migratory Birds. UL 1 17 2018 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: .� Y OAMU FEDERAL WAY Implementation of landscaping and enhancement ol'buffer areas accordhig to city of Federal Way standards will help to preserve wildlife. > OR j; 7 foh'-t-n- 6uj P < l� t!� LJ e'e,) 11 �ru.4,d4"t � P-C 0. l�S -dab;h�bl e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. E*k&,,-w n to 6=re o[ I` I �., None are known to he on or near the site to our knowledge. G rej�d 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. Natural gas will be used for heating and electricity will be used for lighting and overall energy needs. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? if so, generally describe. It is not anticipated that the proposal would affect the use of solar energy by adjacent property owners. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: The project will comply with state energy code. No other specific measures are proposed. 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. None are known to exist to our knowledge. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site frompresent or past uses. There is no known contamination of the site from present or past uses to our knowledge. J 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. Bulletin #050 - October 17, 2016 Page 7 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist '44k Department of Community Development 33325 8"' Avenue South CITY OF Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Federal Way 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 tt tt tt=.riiva!'icticrahyay.ci�ni None are known to exist 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. i] r [During construction, chemicals associated ►�rith construction equipment would be on the site. [ Upon project completion, it is.not anticipated that hazardous materials would be present. Desghbe specia e�nergen y services that might be required. ` tier irLel, l olic� ai9 medical services already available in the area, no other emergency services are anticipated. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: A pollution and spill prevention plan will be implemented by the contractor for the construction phase of the project. No other specific measures are proposed. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Noise from vehicular traffic in the area could be present but would not be anticipated to affect the proposed project. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short- tenin or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? indicate what hours noise would come from the site. On a short-term basis, noise from construction equipment would be present from approximately 7 am to 6 pm, Monday - Friday. On a long-term basis, noise from vewcul -_ truck traffic to and from the site would be present •om approximately am to 6 pm,` 1Nonday�r' a�� 3) Proposed treasures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: OAQ Construction equipment will meet noise ordinance requirements. The use of perimeter landscaping will help to reduce and control noise impacts generated by the completed �l development. Dpl "- 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 site is currently vacant land. Commercial and residential use properties are located to the north of the site and a park is located to the west. Pacific Highway South and commercial use properties are located to the east and office and commercial properties are located to the south of the site. Bulletin #050 —October 17, 2016 Page 8 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist CITY OF Federal Wray Department of Community Development 33325 8"' Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands 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? The site has not been used as working farm or forest land 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, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: There are no er . 1, farm or forest lands in the vicinity of the site. A one-time har>>est of app►oxi►rac ely 6 b a feet of timber is proposed as part of the project. 00 c. Describe any s n the site. No existing structures are located on the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not applicable. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is zoned Commercial Enterprise (CE). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The comprehensive plan designation is Commercial Enterprise. RESUE3MI7TED C-OMMUN1Ty Ma7o !' 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. Stream and wetlands are located on the site and classified as critical areas per the city of Federal Way. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 60-75 persons will work at the completed project. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? No persons will be displaced. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Bulletin #050 — October 17, 2016 Page 9 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist Department of Community Development 33325 81h Avenue South ciry of Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Federal Way 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 No specific measures are proposed. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, ifany: The proposed use is an allowable use within the city of Federal Way zoning classification and the project will be designed to meet city of Federal Way zoning and design standards. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: There are no agricultural or forest lands of long-term commercial significance on or near the site. A one-time harvest of approximately 56 board feet of timber is proposed as part of the project. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. Not applicable. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high-, middle-, or low-income housing. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The building will be no taller than the maximum 40-foot as allowed by zoning. Principal building materials will be concrete tilt up wall panels and glass. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Views from adjacent properties would be altered but none are anticipated to be completely obstructed. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Building facades will incorporate fagade treatment per city of Federal Way building design standards and the use of landscape screening will also help to reduce possible aesthetic impacts created by the proposed development. Bulletin #050 — October 17, 2016 Page 10 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist A CITY OF Federal Way 11. Light and Glare Department of Community Development 33325 8`1' Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 uu'u. •i �'n " ri era .cnm a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Glare from window glass could be present during the day. Light or glare from vehicular traffic to and from the site and from lot lighting could be present at night. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? It is not anticipated that light or glare from the proposed project would be a safety hazard. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Light from vehicular traffic on area roadways would be present but would not be anticipated to affect the proposed project. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Lot lighting will be shielded and directed towards the project site and building glass will be non - glare. No other specific measures are proposed. 12. Recreation p a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immedia of ?r ttei V.8A41 West Hylebos Wetlands Park is located adjacent to the site to the west. Qer' l 2018 b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? ifs 4)E- b'A>� No recreational uses will be displaced. C0P'q6NT c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts -on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: No specific measures are 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 ? If so, specifically describe. No structures on the site are listed in or eligible for listing in preservation registers to our knowledge. 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. None are known to exist to our knowledge. Bulletin #050 —October 17, 2016 Page 11 of 15 k:\Handouts\Enviromnental Checklist Department of Community Development r 33325 8"' Avenue South CITY of Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Federal Way 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 �wti►r�i��'n�1��Ecra l �r�nta jinn 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. There are no known historic resources on or near the site according to the Washington Information System for Architectural and Archeological Record Data (WISAARD). 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. No specific measures are proposed, however if cultural artifacts were discovered on the site the proper agencies would be notified. 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 site is served by Pacific Highway South and one driveway onto Pacific Highway South is proposed as access to the site. 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? Yes, there is a Metro bus stop located just to the north of the site at the intersection of South 348th Street and Pacific Highway South. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed projector non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Approximately 100 parking stalls are proposed. No parking will be eliminated. d. Will the 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 roadway improvements are anticipated, however extension of the non -motorized trail system may be included in the development of the 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 nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? The proposed development will generate approximately 60 net new weekday PM peak hour trips per the ITE-Trip Generation — 10th Edition, land use code (140 Manufacturing). Bulletin ##050 — October 17, 2016 Page 12 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist Department of Community Development 33325 8`h Avenue South CITY of Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Federal Way 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 g. Willthe 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. There are no working farm or forest lands on or near- the site. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Payment of city of Federal Way transportation impact fees will control impacts to transportation that could result from the proposed development. 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. Yes, the project could create an increased need for public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Construction of a new fire line service and new fire hydrants, payment of system development charges, if applicable, and payment of traffic impact fees will reduce impacts to public services. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: lcctrici ratural a atc fuse servic elc hon k-anitaryseweiscytic �TIE, system, other y �M NRya��k w�lr �tQr�jy�A-, 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. Electricity: Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy Water: Lakehaven Water and Sewer District Sanitary Sewer: Lakehaven Water- and Sewer District Telephone: CenturyLink Cable: Comcast Refuse Service: City of Federal Way Bulletin #050 — October 17, 2016 Page 13 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist -44k CITY OF '' Federal Way C. SIGNATURE Department of Community Development 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 �y_•��•tt.�i{5•�slf'cdcr.� lu•.�}'.L'alit 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: Name of Signee: Daniel K. Balmelli. Agent Position and Agency/Organization: Barghausen Consulting Engineers. Inc. Date Submitted: February 16. 2018. Revised October 11. 2018 Bulletin #050 — October 17, 2016 Page 14 of 15 k:\Handouts\Environmental Checklist W Soundview Consultants LLC Environmental Assessment • Planning • Land Use Solutions 2907 Harborview Dr., Suite D, Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Phone: (253) 514-8952 Fax: (253) 514-8954 RESUBMITTED JUN082018 OO UNOF E1)E q� WAY rTYoEV�.oj,MExr Technical Memorandum To: Dave Van De Weghe, City of Federal Way File Number: 1638.0001 From: Jon Pickett, Soundview Consultants LLC Date: June 5, 2018 Re: Response to Comments —1019 South 351st Street Dear Mr. Van De Weghe, Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been assisting Panattoni Development Company (Applicant) with a wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessment and development of a buffer reduction and enhancement plan, and has prepared a Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report and Buffer Reduction and Enhancement Plan (report) for the proposed industrial development on an approximately 16.18-acre property located at 1019 South 351s` Street in the City of Federal Way, Washington. The subject property consists of a single parcel situated in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 20, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 2021049027). SVC conducted a supplementary site inspection on the subject property with Perteet (third -party consultant) on April 4, 2018, and is specifically responding to third -party comments dated April 14, 2018. SVC responses are provided below with third -party comments in italic: 1. The SVC Report submitted to the City complies with the requirements of F1dWMC 19.145.080 Critical Area Report for site characterisation. Acknowledged. 2. Perteet confirmed no evidence (structures, debris, foundations) of theprior-to-2009 demolished single-family houses are currently present on the subject property. Perteet observed extensive vegetation clearing and land disturbance for homeless encampments and disposal of refuse and debris on the subjectproperty and within critical areas buffers that began to appear in 2016 aerial imagery (images attached). Pursuant to F[Y/MC 19.145. 060 (2) Unauthorized alterations and enforcement - restoration plan, please include in the project's buBer enhancementplan a restoration performance and maintenance plan to 1) ,monitor the security, public safety, bazard, and cxiidcal areas' environmental damage created by unautho=cd cleanng and refuse disposal associated with the .homeless presence. Perteet recommends adding long -trim management and coutingencpstandards to ensure mitigation vegetation establisbmentandprotectiou for all critical areas and associated bugs from potential future homeless intrusion and refuse dumping throughout all critical areas on the subjectproperty. Soundview Consultants u.c June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 1 of 14 The homeless encampments and refuse disposal are present in Stream Z and along both east and west sides of the stream's critical area buffers in violation of FWMC 19.145.060 Unauthori.Zed alterations and enforcement. Perreetrecommends the proposed project enhance and tebabilitate degraded areas of5treaw Zandits bugs on bout sides ofStream 7 and the wetlands and wetland bufftw east ofStream Z See also Itern 7below. Illegal dumping, trespass, unauthorized clearing, unauthorized camping and damaging environmentally sensitive areas are unauthorized activities and out of the control of the Applicant. Adding a performance standard which holds the Applicant responsible for individuals outside of the Applicants organization committing such acts on the subject property is not practical. The Applicant is committed to protecting the onsite sensitive areas, and as such may secure the development area with fencing and further prevent unlawful intrusion into the stream, wetland and buffer area. In addition, a split rail fence and critical area signage will be place between the development side of the buffer area and the proposed development as required per FWMC 19.145.180. However, should such unauthorized activity continue in the buffer and critical area during the maintenance and monitoring period, the applicant may implement contingency/maintenance measures as included in the report: Contingency/maintenance activities may include, but are not limited to: 1. Replacing plants lost to vandalism, drought, or disease, as necessary; 2. Replacing any plant species with a 20 percent or greater mortality rate after 2 growing seasons with the same species or native species of similar form and function; 3. Irrigating the enhancement areas only as necessary during dry weather if plants appear to be too dry, with a minimal quantity of water, 4. Reseeding/replanting and/or repair of enhancement areas as necessary if erosions, sedimentation or unauthorized clearing occurs; 5. Spot treat non-native invasive plant species; 6. Removing all trash or undesirable debris from the wetland and buffer areas as necessary: 7. Removing additional shrub species to ensure better light penetration to herbaceous groundcover. SVC does not agree with the third -party consultants comment "no evidence (structures, debris, foundations) of the prior-to-2009 demolished single-family houses are currently present on the subject property" as the homeless encampments, trash and debris are located in the area of the prior demolished residences which are cleared and graded. Clearing and grading are alterations and evidence of prior established residences. 3. One concrete pad about 15 x 15 feet is present in the stream buffer about 55 feet east of the .Vtro v v) Z culvert immediatey north of the Lake Haven PUD access drireway. This renfnant feature is not mapped on the priectplans nor distinguisbed as a component of the proposed project. Please add this feature to the projectplan existing conditions drawings. Please include the removal and vegetation restoration ofthe unused coocretepadsite aspartoftheproject'sbuffer enbancement plan. The concrete pad has been added to the plan set and will be restored and replanted with native vegetation include in the plant schedule. 4. The SVC Report ident#ies one palustrine forested wetland (Wethwd A) on the subject property that corresponds to the previously mapped and documented West Hylebos Wetlands complex, an extensive Soundview Consultants LLC June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 2 of 14 wetland complex designated by Washington DNR as a Natural Heritage wetland. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145. 410, Perteet conAtms SVC's wetland delineation line (solid Aue) to the east/southeast of Stream Z within the subject property where the wetland burr extends into the proposed project action. Perteet did not confirm the entire on -site wetland boundary west/northwest ofStrnam Zas thisporlion ofthe West Hplebos wetland complex whew the buffer would not be impacted and does notmguence or extend into the project action. Acknowledged. 5. The SVC Report rates Wetland A as Category I using Ecology's 2014 Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. Pursuant to FWUC 19.145.420 Wetland Rating and Buffers, Category I wetlands with a combined babital score of 7 received 190 foot buffers The SVC Report andpreAwinarn,plan drnrvings illustrate the 190 foot wetland buffer. Perteet agrees with the Wetland A Ca tegory, Ila dw, habits t score of7points, and the 190-foot wetland buffer detetaum tion. The applicant requests in the SVC Report to use FWMC 19.145.440 (6) Buffer Reduction with Enhancement. Consistency of the proposed project with 19.145.440 (6) is evaluated later in this memo alongside dismrsion of project impacts andproposed wetland buffermbigatian. Acknowledged. 6. The SVC Report identifies one Type Ffish-bearing stream (Stream Z) that corresponds to apreviously mapped and documented unnamed tributary to West Hylebos Creek. The SVC Report flagged sections of the east or "stream left" bank OHWM on the subjectpropertyvhere stream buffers may influence, or be influenced by, the proposed project. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.270 Stream Buffers, fish -bearing streams rreeiue a 100 foot buffer. The SVC Report and preliminary plan drawings illustrate the rrgoired 100 foot stream buffer. Perteet conArms SVC's delineated OJYWM line (solid line on "stream left" bank) within the subject property. Perteet did not conAtm the entire stream OMWM as other Stream Z bu8er auras would not be impacted and do not 1n duence or extend into the project action. Acknowledged. 7. Sections 6.1.2 and 7.3 of the SVC Re ortpropose "minor intrusion" andproposed impacts into the oater50% of the Stream Z buffer are required and necessary for parking a trash duvrwer station, and driveways. The currentproject application requires 89 parking spaces to meet City reqiarments. The applicant is proposing 100 parking spaces, itrehyding 19 .paces within the stream buffer, reducing the 100 foot buffer down to a min4viai dimension of 52 feet in some areas. A trash dumpster station is also proposed within the stream buffer (per the Preh,winary Grading and StormwaterPlan). Additionally, section 6.1 of the SVC Reportstates the stream buffer intrusion is necessary within an.almady impacted buffer. Section 6.1 of the report assumes that an already impacted stream buffer allows for ixtr=ian purxuant to FWMC 19.145.330 (1) Intrusion in Stream Buffers. There is no express provision in FWMC 19.145 that allows for stream buffer intrusion based on historic or existing unauthori.Zed uses (FWMC 19.145.060). Perteet recognities however, that existing disturiwnce within the critical areas brq#s would benefit fmm proposed buffer enhancement. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145 LV IWtiga lion Sequencing, please detail the necessity ofplacing excess pazHag, driveways, and a teash dumpsterstationinside the Stream ZbuSerin lieu offull buffernestotation. See item 2above. The applicant proposes an approximately 88,974-square foot industrial building and associated infrastructure to support manufacturing of machined metal products to be utilized by regional and national Soundview Consultants u.c June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 3 of 14 aerospace companies. The proposed project will include associated infrastructure and right-of-way improvements including utilities, landscaping, and parking and paved open areas required for staging and receiving of equipment and supplies. The proposed design includes careful site planning in order to avoid all direct impacts to onsite critical areas; however, due to topography, site constraints and regulated hydrological features and in order to adequately address public safety measures and fire access requirements, stream buffer intrusion and wetland buffer reduction is necessary to allow reasonable development on the subject property required for the applicant. The proposed clear internal height of the building is over 30-feet which requires full length fire truck aerial apparatus drive and access on the north and south sides of the building and 28-foot internal turning radii. The proposed truck court is designed to 130-feet to accommodate large trucks. Further stream buffer impacts are being avoided through the use of a reinforced earthen slope that will be planted with native riparian vegetation. The Applicant must retain and improve an existing intrusion into the stream buffer and reduce the wetland buffer by 25 percent in some areas as allowed by FWRC 19.145.330 (3) and 19.145.440(6). The project proposes to retain an existing intrusion into the Stream Z buffer east of the stream. The existing 100-foot buffer west of the stream north of the access road will also be voluntary enhanced as part of the proposed project. Stream and wetland enhancement actions will be providing a net gain in ecological function. The proposed intrusion will extend less into the stream buffer than current impacts. Steam buffer enhancement is not a code requirement, and the voluntary enhancement actions proposed by the applicant would not be reasonably possible without the proposed stream buffer intrusion. The proposed stream buffer intrusion with the proposed enhancement will provide a much improved buffer conditions and function over current degraded conditions. The proposed reinforced earth slope, replanted with native vegetation will be constructed to provide soil retention for parking. This method provides stabilized slope, safe parking and access and buffer enhancement near the buffer east of Stream Z. The degraded buffer associated with Wetland A is proposed to be reduced by 25 percent at pinch points and enhanced as allowed by FWRC 19.145.440(6). All construction activities are avoiding direct wetland impacts through careful project designing and confining development to portions of the site that avoid critical areas. The wetland buffer reduction is necessary to allow construction of stormwater detention and treatment facilities, which in itself will further separate Wetland A from the proposed development. Stormwater will be treated and controlled to current standards before being discharged into the outer 25 percent of the wetland buffer. Direct impacts to Stream Z and Wetland A are entirely avoided. As the existing utility access for Lakehaven Utility District is a maintained gravel road without stormwater infrastructure, and sloping will utilize a reinforced earthen slope which is actually an enhancement, minor buffer impacts are anticipated to be minimal and temporary during construction. In addition, the project proposes grading, capture and treatment of stormwater from the access road through a collection and sump pump on the downslope side of the access. In addition, impacts associated with the buffer enhancement and installation of the reinforced earthen slope are temporal, and buffers will be enhanced with a net gain habitat or function. 8. Chapter 7 of the SVC Report describes proposed mitigation enhancements to stream buffers. The report does not address requirements for stream and htifj'er clearing and grading requirements. In particulargiven the extent ofproposed buffer intrusion and rehabilitation of bufers is the requirrr»ent forgrading only allowed between May 1 and October 1. Please Soundview Consultants u.c June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 4 of 14 address in the report and construction details all critical areas requirements lot cdeazwg and gm&ng activitiesbi stream bu$em pursuanttoFWMC 19.145.340Requitements lbrCesting and C;rsdmg. Nome also Itrm 10rrequirements below. Best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented that consist of high -visibility fencing (14VF) installed around native vegetation along the reduced perimeter of the buffer, silt fencing between the graded areas and undisturbed buffer, plastic sheeting on stockpiled materials, and seeding of disturbed soils. Highly degraded and disturbed areas may require additional BMP's following invasive species removal and may include, but are not limited to hydroseeding and/or installing coir logs along the Stream Z slope. These BMP measures should be installed prior to the start of development and enhancement actions and actively managed for the duration of the project. All equipment staging and materials stockpiles should be kept out of the wetland, stream, and associated buffers, and the area will need to be kept free of spills and/or hazardous materials. All fill material and road surfacing should be sourced from upland areas onsite or from approved suppliers, and will need to be free of pollutants and hazardous materials. Construction materials along with all construction waste and debris should be effectively managed and stockpiled on paved surfaces and kept out of the wetland and buffer area. Following completion of the development activities, the entire site should be cleaned and detail graded using hand tools wherever necessary, and TESC measures will need to be removed. In addition, permanent stormwater treatment features will need to be implemented as designed by the project engineer. Following completion of the proposed project, all stream and wetland buffer areas adjacent to the planned development areas will be protected by installation of split -rail fencing and critical areas signage to discourage intrusion and improper use of these areas. Per FWMC 19.145.340 Requirements for cleating andgrading: (T) Grading is allowed only during the dy season (May 1st to October 1st). The director may extend or shorten the dry season on a case-b v-we basis, determined on actual weatixr mmAions. Grading will only be allowed between May 1" and October 1" unless approved by the director. (2) The soil duff layer shall remain undisturbed to the maximum extent possible. When feasible, any soil disturbed shall be redistributed to other areas of the project area. To allow adequate treatment of invasive vegetation and remove hazardous materials with the buffer areas, the soil duff layer may be required to be disturbed. Where practical, the soil duff layer within the buffer area will remain undisturbed and remain in the project area. (3) The moisture -holding capacity of the topsoil layer shall be maintained by minimiVng soil compaction or reestablishing natural soil.st wawre and irfltrative capacity on all areas of the project area not covered by impervious surfaws. The buffer is heavily disturbed, degraded and compacted due to the ongoing anthropogenic activities. Enhancement action within the buffer may require soil decompaction. (4) Erosion and sedimea control that meets regviraments of FWRC Title 16. Soundview Consultants u.c June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 5 of 14 TESC will be implemented as required through construction, and permanent stormwater infrastructure will be installed as part of the proposed project. Please see Engineering Plans for Erosion and Sediment control measures and how they meet requirements of FWRC Tittle 16. (S) All fill muterial used must be nondisrolving and nondeco"ing. The fill material must not contain organic or inorganic material that would be detrimeptal to water quality or the cad rung habitat. Please see Engineer Plans for proposed fill materials. (6) The applicant may deposit dredge spoils on the subjectproperly only ifpart of an approved development on the subject property. Deposit of dredged spoils is not anticipated at this time. (7) The applicant shall atakhZe all areas left exposed after clearing andgrading activities with native vegetaeio n normalyassociated with the stream or buffer area. All disturbed areas within the buffer areas will be replanted or reseeded with native vegetation 9. Sheet 2 of 3 Proposed Project and Buffer Enhancement Plan illustrates improvement for the Lake Haven PUD access driiveway extending beyond the proposed project into the red hatched stream buffer. It was discussed with SVC during the site visit that the existing gravel driveway may be exempt from inclusion in the critical arras buffer. Federal Way code does not have a buffer e.yelusion for existing improvements. Pursuant to FIWMC 19.145.130A96ga don Sequencing and 19.145.330 (1) Intrusion in Stream Buts, please more accurately detail the access road improvements, proposed =puts, and proposed =;&&soon for temporary construction impacts and pem2aneut buferloss within the Stream Z burr. Note also Item 10 below. The access driveway cannot receive stream buffer mbigation enhancements, as indicated on Sheet 2 of 3 Proposed Project and Buffer Enhancement Plan. Please remove and relocate the stream buffer nuagation red hatching (SVC Report Sheet 2) to exclude the existing gravel ddrvway to PVDprapett7.. No access road improvement stormwater capture and treatment is illustrated for the extended access drimma}• improvements west byond the proposed parking lot. Unlrealed stormwater from this section of the project roadways could drain directly into Stream Z less than 40 feet from the end of the access road improvewcnii= Please describe stommwater capture and treatment for the access road extension improvements wrthia the stream buffer. The existing public utility access for Lakehaven Utility District is a maintained gravel road without stormwater infrastructure. The project proposes to maintain and improve the public utility access through grading, re -sloping and paving the access. The existing public utility access easement intrusion is required to be improved and maintained to allow continued access and use by Lakehaven Utility District to reasonably access their facility. Sloping will utilize a reinforced earthen slope which is actually an enhancement, and minor buffer impacts are anticipated to be minimal and temporary during construction. Any buffer areas temporarily disturbed will be replanted as part of the buffer enhancement plan. In addition, the project proposes recapture and treatment of stormwater from the access road through a collection and sump pump on the downslope side of the access. Currently this storm water flows directly into the stream and buffer areas untreated. Impacts associated with the buffer enhancement and installation of the reinforced earthen slope are temporal, and buffers will be enhanced with a net gain in habitat, function and protection. Soundview Consultants L[.c June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 6 of 14 The red hatching previously show over the proposed access are removed from the mitigation plans. 10. WDF1V Salmonscape illustrates documented presence of winter steel head, a federally threatened ESA species, and documented spawning of Coho salmon immediately downstream in Wlest Hylebos Creek upstream (north) of South 3561h Street. The King County Sensitive Areas map classifies Stream Z as a salmonid stream. The SVC Report references the King County classification. The SVC Report also confirms there are no darunsireurn fish passage barriers between the project area and Stream Z and Stream Zs connection with West Hylebos Creek on the north side of South 356t6 Street, approximatey1,900feet downstream from the proposed project. Suitable streams and riparian buffer habitat of primag association for salmonids is present within and upstream of the proposed project area. As detailed in Items 7 and 9 of this memo, Section 6.1.2 of the SVC Report states "minor intrusion" and proposed impacts up to approximately 52 feet into the 100 foot habitat conservation area buffer (stream buffer equivalent) are required for parking, trash dumpster, and driven ays pursuant to FWMC 19.145.330. The SVC Report does not discuss impacts to orprotection measures far anadromous fish habitat of ptiwary association or habitat conservation area buffers provided by FWMC 19.145.390 Fish Protection Measures and 19.145.400 T&E Species Protection Measures FWIMC 19.145.400 places limitations on development in habitat conservation area buffers where protected species may have a primary association. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.130 Mitigation Sequencing, 19.145.390 Fish Protection Measures and 19.149400 T & E Species Protection Measures, please discuss and include in the project plan avoidance and mimimxzatlon measures addressing the proposed project's intrusion far pa king and driveways into habitat conservation area bufirs ofpamary association to anadromous and fedetaN7 threatened fish species. Please describe how reduced stream buA&rs and bul&r enhancements will imp -rove anadromous fish pttmary associa ted habita t and buffers. During our onsite inspection with the City's third -party consultant in April of 2018, Steam Z was entirely dry during a period of above normal precipitation; however, SVC is still considering this portion of Stream a fish -bearing stream given its connection to a typed fish -bearing stream and lack of downstream fish passage barriers. The existing buffer for Stream Z consists of a remnant second -growth stand of mixed coniferous and deciduous trees located within a developed commercial/industrial area of moderate high - intensity land use, with the exception of the Hylebos Wetland Complex to the west. There is substantial use and degradation of the buffer area by homeless individuals, including encampments, patches of bare ground, medical and human waste and debris, which has a significant impact on salmonid and wildlife habitat and function, which could potentially utilize the stream and buffer area. The understory vegetation consists of a mix of native shrub species and bare patches (due to encampments) with a significant component of invasive Himalayan blackberry. The fragmented nature of the buffer surrounded by high - intensity land use and the amount of invasive shrub species in the understory limit the habitat function of the buffer and protection function it may provide to Stream Z and salmonid which may be present. The soils within the buffer are mapped as Alderwood series which are moderately drained but with a perched water table during the winter months which limits retention, recharge, and water quality function. Alderwood soils are not listed as highly erodible and onsite slopes are moderate within the buffers ranging from 15 to 25 percent which would not constitute a high erosion hazard. Mitigation Sequencing, FWMC 19.145.130 was included within the mitigation section of the report: Soundview Consultants LLc 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments June 5, 2018 Page 7 of 14 The project has been designed to avoid direct impacts to the stream and wetland, further, the project was designed to minimize impacts to buffers to the greatest extent possible. Over 65 percent of the site is encumbered by regulated hydrologic features and associated buffers and setbacks. In addition, the site contains a utility easement with Lakehaven Utility District. In order to reasonably develop the site, some buffer reduction and intrusion is necessary. Unavoidable impacts to potential critical area buffers include the retention and improvement of the existing stream buffer intrusion to Stream Z in the central portion of the site to accommodate safe access, fire access, truck turning and slope stability and to allow reasonable site development. Through careful planning efforts, the proposed stream buffer intrusion avoids direct stream impacts by limiting the extent of the stream buffer intrusion to the existing improvement and through the use of a reinforced earthen slope. The degraded buffer associated with Wetland A is proposed to be reduced by 25 percent in some areas and enhanced as allowed by FWRC 19.145.440(6). All construction activities are avoiding direct wetland and stream critical area impacts through careful project designing and confining development to portions of the site that avoid critical areas. The proposed planting actions will enhance the severely impacted and degraded stream and wetland buffer and improve ecological functions and value by providing additional functions according to the needs of the watershed and providing an overall improvement to stream and wetland buffer functions. Removing stream and wetland buffer degradations such as concrete pads, homeless encampments, patches of bare ground, medical and human waste and debris, and the significant presence of non-native, invasive vegetation, and replacing with native vegetation within the buffer will enhance the habitat functions provided by the site and improve hydrology and quality of water leaving the project site. A diverse herbaceous layer will be established to provide browse, cover, and nesting for small mammals, which in turn provide prey for raptors and other small mammals. Per 19.145.390 Fish Protection Measures: (1) All acdddes, uses, and alterations proposed to be located in water bodies used by fish or in areas that affect such seater bodies shallgive spedal consideration to the prrMlVa ion and enhancement of anadro wous fish habitat, uicl d iqg. but not limited to, the follarving standards.. (a) Activities shall be limed to occur only during the allowable work window as designated by the II/ashingtan Departmesrt of Fish and IWildlife; No in -water work is proposed; however, work with in the buffer area will be in accordance to the allowed work window as designated by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). It is unknow at this time if an Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) will be required. If an HPA is require an HPA application will be submitted to WDFW. (b) The activity is designed so that it will not degrade the functions or values of the fish habitat or other critical areas; The existing buffer to Stream Z is severely degraded with the prior removed residential dwellings and associated structures and existing concert pad, a maintained utility easement, homeless encampments, patches of bare ground, medical and human waste and debris, and the significant presence of non-native, invasive vegetation. The proposed buffer enhancement actions will remove such disturbances and degradations, that when coupled with project design elements such as treated stormwater, buffer Soundview Consultants L.c June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 8 of 14 enhancement with native riparian vegetation, are anticipated to provide a net gain and ecological lift and improvement in stream buffer function and critical area protection. Further, the proposed buffer enhancement plan will replant the remaining stream buffer with native plants which will provide a diverse vertical and horizontal vegetation strata beneficial to wildlife and salmonid which may utilize Stream Z and a much improved habitat to better protect habitat functions. This net ecological gain in habitat function would not be possible without the stream buffer intrusion as the voluntary enhancement is not required by code and is a voluntary offer by the Applicant. As such, the project is designed to not degrade the function or values of fish habitat or other critical areas and should result in a net gain in these values and function. (c) Any dnfpacts to the functions or values of the habitat conseon area are mitigated in accordance with an approved critical area r port. No negative impacts to the functions or values of the habitat conservation area are anticipated. The proposed enhancement plan is intended to provide increased stream and wetland protections through improvement of buffer functions. Impacts to the stream buffer are being minimized through careful planning efforts and project design. The objective of the proposed non -compensatory enhancement action is to enhance water quality and habitat function associated with the stream and wetland buffer to provide an overall net benefit in critical area functions by removing existing degradations and replanting native vegetation where appropriate. This proposal has utilized, to the maximum extent possible, the best available construction, design, and development techniques to ensure the least amount of impact on the critical area and associated buffer area within the subject property. (2) SAwcturos that prevent the migration of fish shall not be allowed in the portion of water bodies currently or historically used by fish Fish bypass facilities shall be provided that allow the upstrearN migration of adxli fssli and shall proni fry and juveniles migrating downstream from being &*ped or harmed. No in -water work is proposed. 11. The proposed developmentplaces a stormwater detention and treatment facility in the WetlandA buffer east of Stream Z and south of South 3515' Street. The applicant requests in the SVC Report to use FWMC 19.143.440 (6) Buffer Reduction with Enhancement for this proposed action. According to the SVC Report Sheet 2 of 3, the stormwater dispersion outfall would be located at 143 feet from the Wetland A boundary. The stormwaterfacdity and outfall meet the requirements for FWIMC 19.143.440 (6) Buffer Reduction with Enhancement. Acknowledged 12. Pursuant to FWIMC 19.143.160 Building Setbacks, all bwlelr.n,g setbacks shall be a minimum of S feet from the outer edge of critical area buffers. Acknowledged 13. Critical areas signage and fencing shall be installed at the outer edge of all critecal area buffers Parmwit to FWIMC 19.143.180. Please illustrate on projectplans the location of an cal areas buffer fencing and stg=ge for review. Critical area signage and fencing have been added to the mitigation plan set on the outer edge of the Stream Z and Wetland A buffer between the buffer area and the proposed development. Soundview Consultants LLc June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 9 of 14 94. FtrrsrraNt to FWMC 99.145.190 Physical Barriers, critical areas access and sediment/erosion control physical barriers shall be erected throughout pr ject conximetion. Best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented that consist of high -visibility fencing (HVF) installed around native vegetation along the reduced perimeter of the buffer, silt fencing between the graded areas and undisturbed buffer, plastic sheeting on stockpiled materials, and seeding of disturbed soils. Highly degraded and disturbed areas may require additional BMP's following invasive species removal and may include, but are not limited to hydroseeding and/or installing coin logs along the Stream Z slope. These BMP measures should be installed prior to the start of development and enhancement actions and actively managed for the duration of the project. All equipment staging and materials stockpiles should be kept out of the wetland, stream, and associated buffers, and the area will need to be kept free of spills and/or hazardous materials. All fill material and road surfacing should be sourced from upland areas onsite or from approved suppliers, and will need to be free of pollutants and hazardous materials. Construction materials along with all construction waste and debris should be effectively managed and stockpiled on paved surfaces and kept out of the wetland and buffer area. Following completion of the development activities, the entire site should be cleaned and detail graded using hand tools wherever necessary, and TESC measures will need to be removed. In addition, permanent stormwater treatment features will need to be implemented as designed by the project engineer. Following completion of the proposed project, all stream and wetland buffer areas adjacent to the planned development areas will be protected by installation of split -rail fencing and critical areas signage to discourage intrusion and improper use of these areas. Please see engineer plan set for additional TESC measures and location. 95. Theprojectproposes to rehabilitate the currently degraded Stream Z and W/edandA buffer impacted by homeless encampment and refuse. Topsoils in much of these degraded areas are highly compacted or appear to have been stripped away. Perteet recommends stockpiltug topsails £rom the upland forest being removedatproposed bud&nglocatron site to be reused to restore the top 8-incb topsoil Isy,er at impacted stream and wetland bugs where homeless encampments bare damaged topsoils. Soil decompaction and/or utilizing topsoil from onsite areas may be implemented during construction as necessary at the discretions of the Project Biologist. 16. The project proposes Stream Z butter nritigalion enhancements within the Lake Haven PUD exwing force main pipe easement. The mitigation plan does not clarify the vegetation planting plan and rsnintcnance plan within this pipeline easement. Please highlrgbtallLakeHavenPUOcasements within the buffirzones. Discusstn the nuagatron plan what vegetation growth restrictions the PUD maintains within their pipeline easements. Please update the buffer mitigation vegetation planting plan and maintenance/ contingency' measures to incorporate any, planting restuctrons and maintenance requirements. All know utility easements have been updated and added to the mitigation plan set. The propose voluntary buffer enhancement within the Lakehaven sewer easement will consist of shrubs and herbaceous cover only, consistent with current existing vegetation within the easement area. Soundview Consultants u.c June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 10 of 14 17. Chapter 7 and Sheet 2 of the S VC Report do ►rot incltrde plantn�g stock quantities, spacirr� or illustrate proposed specific planting areas to assess whether adequate quantities ofplantirg slock are proposed that will ensure mitigation plan success. Please add these details f+ar the City to estitva to pWbabilit7 ofbufferrrehabiGigtion success. A planting schedule detailing quantities and spacing has been added to the mitigation plan set. 18. The proposed construction Civil Drawings for SEPA submittal do not include critical areas mitigation or huffer rehabilitation plans and details Please add critical areas mitigation and bum zeAs ttstion drawings and details to the project construction plan set Critical area buffer enhancement areas will be added to the civil construction plan set. 19. Per item 2 above, Perteet reros mends rehabilitating the stream buffer on both sides of the Stream Z upstream of the Lake Haven PUD driveivrt�, culvert to the subjectpropery north boundary. Voluntary buffer enhancement actions north of the Lakehaven access and west of Stream Z have been added to the proposed project and are included in the mitigation plan set. 20. Section 7.6 Goal 4 Q jective land section 7.8 describes planting and sampling herbaceous vegetation, but pmrrides no defined or distinct performance standard for herbaceous vegetation. Please add penance standards forrnstaBcd herbaceous vegeinflon. Herbaceous vegetation will be added to Performance Standard 1.1, which will read: "Performance Standard 1.1 — By the end of Year 5, the buffer area (excluding utility easement within the Steam Z buffer area) will have at least 3 species of native trees, 3 species of native shrubs and 3 species of native herbaceous vegetation (native volunteer species included) present in all areas of enhanced buffer. To be considered, the native species must make up at least 5 percent of the vegetation class." 21. Performance Standards 1.2 and 1.3 are written such that they include existing native trees and shrubs. Yet in mrch of theproposed buffer relwbilitalion areas, the existing tree and sbrtrb canopies (separate and/or combined) wrrld goal: as meeting these performance standards without rrraitrtaining project installed vegetation. Pe cct recommeuds cx'cludmg e..aistwg well -established tomes and shrubs Aom these performance standards to place responsibility on the project's bu$errehabilita tion plan to measure rssitrgation success. The assumption of the comment is that monitoring plot locations will be in areas with well established mature vegetation. Areas with well -established existing mature vegetation will not be heavily planted with tree or shrub species as it would not reflect the goals or objectives of the buffer enhancement actions, and therefore monitoring plot locations will be better suited for locations which are currently heavily degraded and proposed to be adequately enhanced with plantings. The sample planting detail on Sheet 6 of the mitigation plan set illustrates areas with existing mature vegetation will not be over planted with native plantings; however, areas without existing vegetation will be appropriately planted and seeded with the native plant species listed in the plant schedule. Existing vegetation should not be excluded from the count as this would not accurately capture the vertical diversity of the tree and shrub strata and provide an inaccurate account of the percent cover, and potentially impact the need to implement contingency measures. Soundview Consultants LLc June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 11 of 14 Please note Performance Standard 1.2 clearly indicates "installed plantings" for survivorship performance measures. 22. Invasive species dominate large portions of the understory throughout the Stream Z and Wetland A buffers. Removal and control of invasive species may expose vast areas of bare soil to surface runoff and erosion in the fzrst fezvyears until installed plantings can establish root structure and provide aerial cover to erosive rains and surface water flows. For this project invasive species control and controlling soil erosion is much more important than just being a single perOmance standard. Additionally, these btffer areas are directly associated inth an anadrotmmous sahvionid stream (Stream Z and immediately doymstream West Hylebos Creek) and its habitat conservation area buffier. Perfect recommends elevating the control invasive species and subsequent soil erosion protections as a separate bu8er rehabilitation Goal with a distinct set of objectives and performance standards, including for reducing suzi cc water runof'and for controlling erosion into Stream Z. A separate performance standard goal and objective for reducing surface water runoff and erosion control is not practical and better suited as a best management practices; however, additional management recommendations such as using hydroseed and/or coin logs may be included. No stormwater improvements currently exist onsite. Impacts to habitat, retention, recharge, water quality, and erosion protection function resulting from a reduction in buffer and early buffer enhancements are being offset by a variety of methods including stormwater mitigation design measures, a reinforced earthen slope and long-term benefits of buffer enhancement actions. Stormwater from the developed area, will be collected and conveyed to water quality treatment facilities currently not existent onsite. The treated stormwater will then be conveyed to the buffers discharging through several energy dissipating structures to prevent erosion. Wetland hydrology will be maintained through planting design to decrease the flow rate and improve the potential for stormwater infiltration. By planting willow stakes in amended soils directly downhill from proposed stormwater discharge points, a dense mat of roots over which stormwater will be released will reduce flow rate and increase the likelihood of infiltration under typical rainfall events. In addition, beyond the discharge treatment plantings, the onsite buffer for the stream and wetland will be enhanced, include both the development side (eastside) and west side of the stream, with dense plantings which is exceedance of local requirements. The buffer enhancement adjacent to the stormwater pond will increase time of stormwater concentration as runoff flows through the wetland buffers. Effective buffer enhancement design will not only offset and improve stormwater impacts, a well thought out planting design can increase buffer screening function. The strategy of the buffer enhancement activities proposed will be to provide a dense vegetated screen in the shrub and intermediate tree canopy layers between the development and the stream and wetland. In addition, all exposed areas will be stabilized with a native seed mix. BMP's will be implemented that consist of high -visibility fencing HVF installed around native vegetation along the reduced perimeter of the buffer, silt fencing between the graded areas and undisturbed buffer, plastic sheeting on stockpiled materials, and seeding of disturbed soils. Highly Joundvlew Consultants L-e June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments Page 12 of 14 degraded and disturbed areas may require additional BMP's following invasive species removal and may include, but are not limited to hydroseeding and/or installing coin logs along the Stream Z slope. These BMP measures should be installed prior to the start of development and enhancement actions and actively managed for the duration of the project. All equipment staging and materials stockpiles should be kept out of the wetland, stream, and associated buffers, and the area will need to be kept free of spills and/or hazardous materials. All fill material and road surfacing should be sourced from upland areas onsite or from approved suppliers, and will need to be free of pollutants and hazardous materials. Construction materials along with all construction waste and debris should be effectively managed and stockpiled on paved surfaces and kept out of the wetland and buffer area. Following completion of the development activities, the entire site should be cleaned and detail graded using hand tools wherever necessary, and TESC measures will need to be removed. In addition, permanent stormwater treatment features will need to be implemented as designed by the project engineer. Following completion of the proposed project, all stream and wetland buffer areas adjacent to the planned development areas will be protected by installation of split -rail fencing and critical areas signage to discourage intrusion and improper use of these areas. It is important to minimize impacts to all wetlands and streams and associated buffers. Recommendations to further avoid and minimize impacts to these sensitive areas and buffers include: • Pre -treat invasive plants with a Washington State Department of Agriculture approved herbicide. After pre-treatment, grub to remove the invasive plants and replant all cleared areas with native trees, shrubs, and ground covers listed in Appendix C; Pre-treatment of the invasive plants should occur a minimum of two weeks prior to removal; • Remove all prior residential dwelling infrastructure which may remain, homeless encampments, medical and human waste and debris, from reduced buffer areas; • Replant all enhancement areas with native trees, shrubs, and groundcovers listed on the mitigation plan set, or substitutes approved by the responsible wetland scientist, to help retain soils, filter stormwater, and increase biodiversity; • An approved native seed mix will be used to seed the disturbed restoration and enhancement areas after planting; • Maintain and control invasive plants annually, at a minimum, or more frequently if necessary. Maintenance to reduce the growth and spread of invasive plants is not restricted to chemical applications but may include hand removal, if warranted; • Provide dry -season irrigation as necessary to ensure native plant survival; i Direct exterior lights away from the wetlands wherever possible; • Place all activities that generate excessive noise (e.g., generators and air conditioning equipment) away from the wetlands where feasible. We trust that these clarifications satisfy the City of Federal Way's third -party review comments. The Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report and Buffer Reduction and Enhancement Plan dated February 2108 has been revised with the proposed revisions included in this Technical Memorandum. Soundview Consultants u.c 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to Comments June 5, 2018 Page 13of14 Please contact me as soon as possible should you have any additional questions. Sincerely, une 5 201 S Jonathan Pickett Date Senior Planner/Scientist Soundview Consultants LLC June 5, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Drvrlopmcnt Company— Response to Ccnmmcnts Page 14 of 14 Attachment B — Bond Quantity Worksheet Soundview Consultants LLC August 24, 2018 1144.0012 Panattoni Development Company — Response to City Comments Page 4 of 4 I. Critical Areas Mitigation C24 09/09/2015 Bond Quantity Worksheet Is-wks-sensareaBQ.xls Is-wks-sensareaI3Q.pdf Project Name: Panattonl Federal Way Date: 8.24.18 Prepared by: Jon Pickett, Soundvlew Consult Project Number: Project Description: Industrial Development Location: Federal Way, WA Applicant: Panattoni Development Phone: 253-848-4282 PLANT MATERIALS (includes labor cost for Plant Inslanatlon T Unit Price Unit Quantity Uan-rA n Cost PLANTS: Pori d, 4" diameter, medium $5.00 Each 1892.00 $ 9.4fi0.Oa PLANTS: Conainer, 1 94on. medium soil S11.50 Each $ PLANTS: Container, 2 qaftm. medium sod S20.00 Each S PLANTS: Container. 5 qW.Ion. medium sail $35.00 Each $ PLANTS: SeedN. by hand $0.50 SY 17.035.78 $ 8.517.89 PLANTS: % (wkiow, red-osiar) S2.00 Each S PLANTS: Stakes (wikow) S2.00 Each 144,00 willow S 258.00 PLANTS: Slakes (willow) S2.00 Each $ PLANTS: FlalsrpUgs $2.00 Each S 70TAL S 18,265.39 INSTALLATION COSTS ( LABOR, EQUIPMENT, & OVERHEAD) TYM Unit Price Unit Cost Compost, vegelabte. devered and spread $37,88 CY S ADh8r4pan, medium, to V depth $1.57 CY 1613.33 area S 2.532.93 DecoffWing tiluhard an, medium, to 12" depth S1.57 CY S Hydmsaeding $0.51 SY $ Labor, g8fwral flandscOngolherthan 0antlt>51aHa60n $40,00 HR $ Labor, ganenA (ccoslrlrction) 540.0o HR $ . Labor. Consultanl, suipwyWrg S55-001 HR $ Labor: ConsullanL on.64e re -deal n S95.0o HR 5 Rental of decompaOng machinery 8 opralor S70.00 HR $ Sand, coarse bu6dels, delivered and Vread $42.00 CY $ Slak15 material sal per tree $7,00 Each S Surveying. line$ qm& $250.00 HR $ Su ical $250.00 HR $ Waled . 1"of water. 50'soaker how S3.62 MSF $ I on- NMPM $3,000A0 Acre 3.52 S 10.560.06 I ' lion -WOW 54,500.00 Acre S Tilrog 10"I. disk Wm. M VKW, 4'•67 creep $1 .021 SY $ TOTAL $ 13.092.99 HABITAT STRUCTURES" ITEMS Unit Cost Unit Cost I'mines (willow) $ 2.00 Each $ Lags,(sedan},w/Feet wads, 16'.ZVdim- Xlong $1.000,00 Each $ lags [cedar} *io root weds. l6'-24' dam., 39 $400.00 Each $ Loot, w/o motwads,l6'-24-Ifam..3o' '$245.00 Each $ Lop v 7 root wads, 16--24' diem.. 30' W9 S460.00 Each $ Rocks. one-man S60.00 Each S GENERAL ITEMS ITEMS Unit Cost Unit Cost Fencrng, chain link, 6' high t IBS89 LF $ Fencing. chain link, comer Is $111.17 Each $ Fencing, chain link, to $277.63 Each 5 S 10,013.00 rendn itraii, Thigh 2-reN $10.5d LF 950,00 LF around buffer area Fencing, lampora rNGI i1.20 LF 7 U0 S 8.40 $ Signs, sensitive area bou lnc. ttacfe ,postl $28.50 Each TOTAL 5 10,021.40 OTHER rCanstnrclroo Cost Sublotalj $ 60,173.28 Percentage ITEMS Of Construction Unit Cost Mobilization 10% 1 S 6.017.33 Contingency 30% 1 $ 18,051.99 TOTAL $ 24,069.31 Subtotal Cortstruclior; Cast and rOAL CONSTRUCTION AND OTHER AT 1109/6 other at 110% (not included in $ 92,666.86 total at bottom) NOTE: Projects with multiple permlt,egvrremeot6 may be required to have longer and maintenance terms. This will be evaluated on a case -by - tINTENA#CE AND MONITORING monitoring case basis for development applications. Monitoring and malntance ranges may be assessed anywhere from 5 to 10 years. Mainariance, annual (by owner or consultant) (3X 5F total for 3 annual events; Less than 1,000 sq.ff. and buffer mitigation only S 1.08 SF Inetudes monitoring) 5 Less than 1.000 sq.R with wetland or aquatic area (3 X SF total for 3 annual events; 5 mitigaw $ 1.35 SF Includes moNtori Larger than 100 sq. FL but less than 5,0D0 MR c! buffer S mid lion S 160.00 EACH t4hr a3451hr Larger than 1,000 sq. fl- but less than 5,0W sq.lt of S we or a4c wea rri don $ 270.00 EACH6hr S45fhr Larger than 5,000 sq.ff. but < 1 acre -buffer mitigation only S 360.00 EACH 8 hrs a 451hr S Larger than 5,000 sq.ft. but < t acre with wetland or aquatic $ area pon S 450.00 EACH 10 Mrs a $d51hr Larger than 1 acre but < 5 acres - buller and I or wetland or s a,000.co uatic.area mll" lion $ 1.600,00 DAY 5.00 WECcrew) Larger than 5 acres -buller and l orvretland or aquatic area 5 mlociation S 2,000.W DAY 115 X WEC crew Monitoring, annual (try owner or Consultant) Larger than 1,000 sq.ft. but less lhan 5,6W wetland or C ti r mi Oon S 720.00 EACH 8 hrs 901hr Larger than 5,000 sq.ft. but < 1 acre with weland or aquatic S 4, 560 00 area lmpacls, S 900,00 EACH 5.00 10 hrs iM S901hr Larger than 1 acre but < 5 acres - buffer and / or wetland or aquatic area impacts $ 1,440.00 DAY 16 hrs S901hr $ Larger than5 acres - buffer and / or wetland or aquatic area impacts $ 2,160.00 DAY (24 hrs $901hr Is TOTAL $ 12,500.00 Total $96,742.6t pERTEET B: rtcr comet w�i�ics, b� dcsi_; PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 ---m-DES-U BM ITTED To: Dave Van De Weghe, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way JUN 0 8 2018 From: Bill Kidder, Lead Ecologist CRY OF FEi7ERA! WRY Jason Walker, PLA, PWS, Environmental Manager and Wetland Ecologist COMMUNITY I)EVELOPMENT Date: April 16, 2018 Re: Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Initial Critical Areas Review PROJECT DESCRIPTION Perteet Inc. conducted a critical areas review of the Panattoni Development site, located at 1019 South 351'h Street, Federal Way, Washington. The 16.18-acre parcel is listed as King County Tax Assessor Parcel 2021049027 (subject property). It is located immediately west of Pacific Highway South about Y4 mile south of South 348'h Street in the SW quarter of Section 20, Township 21 North, Range 4 East. The applicant proposes an approximately 88,974-5quare foot warehouse building and associated infrastructure to support manufacturing of machined metal products to be utilized by regional and national aerospace companies. The proposed project will include associated infrastructure and right -of- way improvements including utilities, landscaping, and parking and paved open areas required for staging and receiving of equipment and supplies. The applicant submitted a Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report dated February 2018 (hereafter referred to as the SVC Report). Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.130, the proposed project avoids direct impacts to Wetland A (West Hylebos Wetlands Complex) and Stream Z. Wetland A is a state designated Natural Heritage wetland by Washington Department of Natural Resources. Stream Z is a tributary to West Hylebos Creek, a documented Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) spawning stream. The project does propose permanent direct impacts to portions of the Wetland A and Stream Z buffers. The project proposes stream and wetland buffer enhancement as mitigation for wetland and stream buffer area reduction associated with the project. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED The following documents and resource information websites were reviewed by Perteet prior to the site visit: • Wetland & Fish & Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report-1019 South 351 Street, prepared for Panattoni Development, prepared by Soundview Consultants, dated February 2018 • King County Online Parcel Viewer with historic aerial photography (httl2://www.ktngcounty.gov/operations/GIS/Maps/iMAP.ctsRg), accessed April 6, 2018 • City of Federal Way Critical Areas Map, dated May 2016 htt ://www.ci offederalwa .c m/siies/defa t files/ma s/s n itive 016. f , accessed April 6, 2018 • Washington Department of Natural Resources Wetlands of High Conservation Value (https://www.dnr.wa.gov/NHPwetlandviewer) , accessed April 6, 2018 • Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Salmonscape (http://opps.wdfw.wo.gov/salmonscape/map. htm lit , accessed April 6, 2018 Pagel Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street— Initial Critical Areas Review 10 p E RTE E T PERTEET.COM Fetter communities, by deslgr 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 ■ Google Earth Pro with historic imagery from 1990 to present SITE DESCRIPTION Perteet ecological staff completed a site visit on April 4, 2018. The day was overcast with intermittent rain. Jon Pickett and Emily Swaim from Soundview Consultants were present for the applicant during the site visit. The subject parcel is a mostly undeveloped forested parcel with undulating topography that contains an unnamed tributary to West Hylebos Creek flowing northeast to southwest through the middle of the subject property. The creek is listed as a Type F fish -bearing stream with salmonid presence documented in the upper reaches of the West Hylebos Creek drainage in the West Hylebos wetlands complex. The east half the subject property is dominated by Douglas fir (Psuedotsuga menziesii) canopy north of the existing Lake Haven Utility District access road easement and Douglas fir, big leaf maple (Ater macrophyllum), western red cedar (Thuja plicato) and red alder (Alnus rubro) south of the access road. The understory on the east half ranges from red elderberry (Sambucas racemosa) and sword fern (Polystichum munitum) north of the access road to an understory dominated by Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniocus) south of the access road. The west half of the subject property is dominated by the extensive West Hylebos Wetlands and stream complex that extend the north, west, and south off the subject property. The West Hylebos Wetlands are recognized as an area of High Conservation Value for a wetland rating of Category I. Beyond the subject property, the surrounding landscape to the north, east and south of the subject parcel is dominated by high density urban development. Off -site to the south, west, and northwest are over 100 acres of relatively intact natural open space containing the West Hylebos wetlands and stream upper tributaries directly connected with the on -site critical areas. The SVC Report and proposed project drawings illustrate the prior locations of three single-family dwelling units that were previously removed. Google Earth imagery and King County iMap imagery illustrate that these structures were demolished and removed sometime between 2007 and 2009 (images attached). The imagery also illustrates that the removed -house sites were naturally revegetating from 2009 through 2016 prior to the current issues with homeless encampments and significant refuse dumping. Throughout the east half of the subject property, squatters have cleared trails and vegetation to erect homeless encampments and have disposed of refuse and debris. Google Earth imagery for 2015 and 2016, and King County iMap imagery for 2015, indicate that the homeless encampments appeared sometime in late 2015 or early 2016 (images attached). The SVC Report submitted to the City for review includes discussion of proposed development actions, existing site conditions, project impacts, and offers proposed critical areas mitigation. This review includes: 1. an evaluation of prior and existing site conditions 2. review of the critical areas mapping and characterizations 3. an environmental critical areas evaluation of the proposed development action avoidance, minimization, impacts, and mitigation. Ponattoni Developmentl019 South 351 Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Pa9e2 pERTEET eerier communities, by design FINDINGS Listed below are Perteet's findings along with requested actions in bold type: PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 1. The SVC Report submitted to the City complies with the requirements of FWMC 19.145.080 Critical Area Report for site characterization. 2. Perteet confirmed no evidence (structures, debris, foundations) of the prior-to-2009 demolished single-family houses are currently present on the subject property. Perteet observed extensive vegetation clearing and land disturbance for homeless encampments and disposal of refuse and debris on the subject property and within critical areas buffers that began to appear in 2016 aerial imagery (images attached). Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.060 (2) Unauthorized alterations and enforcement - restoration plan, please include in the project's buffer enhancement plan a restoration performance and maintenance plan to 1) monitor the security, public safety hazard, and critical areas' environmental damage created by unauthorized clearing and refuse disposal associated with the homeless presence. Perteet recommends adding long-term management and contingency standards to ensure mitigation vegetation establishment and protection for all critical areas and associated buffers from potential future homeless intrusion and refuse dumping throughout all critical areas on the subject property. The homeless encampments and refuse disposal are present in Stream Z and along both east and west sides of the stream's critical area buffers in violation of FWMC 19.145.060 Unauthorized alterations and enforcement. Perteet recommends the proposed project enhance and rehabilitate degraded areas of Stream Z and its buffers on both sides of Stream Z, and the wetlands and wetland buffers east of Stream Z. See also Item 7 below. 3. One concrete pad about 15 x 15 feet is present in the stream buffer about 55 feet east of the Stream Z culvert immediately north of the Lake Haven PUD access driveway. This remnant feature is not mapped on the project plans nor distinguished as a component of the proposed project. Please add this feature to the project plan existing conditions drawings. Please include the removal and vegetation restoration of the unused concrete pad site as part of the project's buffer enhancement plan. 4. The SVC Report identifies one palustrine forested wetland (Wetland A) on the subject property that corresponds to the previously mapped and documented West Hylebos Wetlands complex, an extensive wetland complex designated by Washington DNR as a Natural Heritage wetland. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.410, Perteet confirms SVC's wetland delineation line (solid line) to the east/southeast of Stream Z within the subject property where the wetland buffer extends into the proposed project action. Perteet did notconfirm the entire on -site wetland boundary west/northwest of Stream Z as this portion of the West Hylebos wetland complex where the buffer would not be impacted and does not influence or extend into the project action. 5. The SVC Report rates Wetland A as Category I using Ecology's 2014 Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.420 Wetland Rating and Buffers, Category I wetlands with a combined habitat score of 7 received 190-foot buffers. The SVC Report and preliminary plan drawings illustrate the 190-foot wetland buffer. Perteet agrees with the Wetland A Category I rating, habitat score of 7 points, and the 190 foot wetland buffer determination. The applicant requests in the SVC Report to use FWMC 19.145.440 (6) Buffer Reduction with Enhancement. Consistency of the proposed project with 19.145.440 (6) is evaluated later in this memo alongside discussion of Ponattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street — Initial Critical Areas Review Page 3 PE RTE E T PERTEET.COM Ecttercommunities, Uydesign 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 42s.252.7700 project impacts and proposed wetland buffer mitigation 6. The SVC Report identifies one Type Ffish-bearing stream (Stream Z) that corresponds to a previously mapped and documented unnamed tributary to West Hylebos Creek. The SVC Report flagged sections of the east or "stream left" bank OHWM on the subject property where stream buffers may influence, or be influenced by, the proposed project. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.270 Stream Buffers, fish -bearing streams receive a 100-foot buffer. The SVC Report and preliminary plan drawings illustrate the required 100-foot stream buffer. Perteet confirms SVC's delineated OHWM line (solid line on "stream left" bank) within the subject property. Perteet did not confirm the entire stream OHWM as other Stream Z buffer areas would not be impacted and do not influence or extend into the project action. 7. Sections 6.1.2 and 7.3 of the SVC Report propose "minor intrusion" and proposed impacts into the outer 50% of the Stream Z buffer are required and necessaryfor parking, a trash dumpster station, and driveways. The current project application requires 89 parking spaces to meet City requirements. The applicant is proposing 100 parking spaces, including 19 spaces within the stream buffer, reducing the 100-foot buffer down to a minimum dimension of 52 feet in some areas. A trash dumpster station is also proposed within the stream buffer (per the Preliminary Grading and Stormwater Plan). Additionally, section 6.1 of the SVC Report states the stream buffer intrusion is necessary within an already impacted buffer. Section 6.1 of the report assumes that an already impacted stream buffer allows for intrusion pursuant to FWMC 19.145.330 (1) Intrusion in Stream Buffers. There is no express provision in FWMC 19.145 that allows for stream buffer intrusion based on historic or existing unauthorized uses (FWMC 19.145.060). Perteet recognizes however, that existing disturbance within the critical areas buffers would benefit from proposed buffer enhancement. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.130 Mitigation Sequencing, please detail the necessity of placing excess parking, driveways, and a trash dumpster station inside the Stream Z buffer in lieu of full buffer restoration. See item 2 above. 8. Chapter 7 of the SVC Report describes proposed mitigation enhancements to stream buffers. The report does not address requirements for stream and buffer clearing and grading requirements. In particular given the extent of proposed buffer intrusion and rehabilitation of buffers is the requirement for grading only allowed between May 1 and October 1. Please address in the report and construction details all critical areas requirements for clearing and grading activities in stream buffers pursuant to FWMC 19.145.340 Requirements for Clearing and Grading. Note also Item 10 requirements below. Sheet 2 of 3 Proposed Project and Buffer Enhancement Plan illustrates improvementfor the Lake Haven PUD access driveway extending beyond the proposed project into the red hatched stream buffer. It was discussed with SVC during the site visit that the existing gravel driveway may be exempt from inclusion in the critical areas buffer. Federal Way code does not have a buffer exclusion for existing improvements. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.130 Mitigation Sequencing and 19.145.330 (1) Intrusion in Stream Buffers, please more accurately detail the access road improvements, proposed impacts, and proposed mitigation for temporary construction impacts and permanent buffer loss within the Stream Z buffer. Note also Item 10 below. The access driveway cannot receive stream buffer mitigation enhancements, as indicated on Sheet 2 of 3 Proposed Project and Buffer Enhancement Plan. Please remove and relocate the stream buffer mitigation red hatching (SVC Report Sheet 2) to exclude the existing gravel driveway to PUD property. No access road improvement stormwater capture and treatment is illustrated for the extended access driveway improvements west beyond the proposed parking lot. Untreated stormwater from this section of the project roadways could drain directly into Stream Z less than 40 feet from the end of the access road improvements. Please describe stormwater capture and treatment for the access road extension improvements within the Ponattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street— Initial Critical Areas Review Page 4 10 PERTE ET Eater communities, by desi�,r stream buffer. PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 10. WDFW Salmonscape illustrates documented presence of winter steelhead, a federally threatened ESA species, and documented spawning of Coho salmon immediately downstream in West Hylebos Creek upstream (north) of South 356th Street. The King County Sensitive Areas map classifies Stream Z as a salmonid stream. The SVC Report references the King County classification. The SVC Report also confirms there are no downstream fish passage barriers between the project area and Stream Z and Stream Z's connection with West Hylebos Creek on the north side of South 3561h Street, approximately 1,900 feet downstream from the proposed project. Suitable stream and riparian buffer habitat of primary association for salmonids is present within and upstream of the proposed project area. As detailed in Items 7 and 9 of this memo, Section 6.1.2 of the SVC Report states "minor intrusion" and proposed impacts up to approximately 52 feet into the 100-foot habitat conservation area buffer (stream buffer equivalent) are requiredfor parking, trash dumpster, and driveways pursuant to FWMC 19.145.330. The SVC Report does not discuss impacts to or protection measures for anadromous fish habitat of primary association or habitat conservation area buffers provided by FWMC 19.145.390 Fish Protection Measures and 19.145.400 T&ESpecies Protection Measures. FWMC 19.145.400 places limitations on development in habitat conservation area buffers where protected species may have a primary association. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.130 Mitigation Sequencing,19.145.390 Fish Protection Measures and 19.145.400 T&E Species Protection Measures, please discuss and include in the project plan avoidance and minimization measures addressing the proposed project's intrusion for parking and driveways into habitat conservation area buffers of primary association to anadromous and federally threatened fish species. Please describe how reduced stream buffers and buffer enhancements will improve anadromous fish primary associated habitat and buffers. F C, o v* Map Con Vuls LIM, Fish P—d� Fedlltt�s Ejch1DWrlbutlon - 5r101 CI d Oh 5tr,•dirs I Y Ch t�o `k SU an:s r�hln tall _ Cohn Cleiu t[rs.l.ns e-:n1hu1 A. •., Resuh l Of 5 AN SaImutiScape Species c��nt�• �t,�.-neod streams 511mmx Stnelhi`a0M� - s �c4 •,.rilreams P1n� ''yen (Ev- t'—'., SC- L.: 11223268472761 f, a,l :,,hoo�� (oe; ,--rj5ro• _ lta:u-L:-.. _ -- _: E:I Trout 1'3PECRCCDE it': �i 9pwFi•WN &11d/r 9r.vkic �r • A•: S,.:;menscape Spcc1<s iFeU2s 5leelaeaC Trout €SP-U4tinu unit tint. 'h'Inlar H}Ldroar�phy' ,IsmDuoonTyC¢ IGowmen120 11Ydre_ i.ph 1st T,yr >re6Gncr Boundarie nis�.'1 VldurOm0115 ....,.+_• 11(rILt1�M 5- 131 � Baseman 'Topoglaph,c N i Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Poge5 PERTEET E_-'ter communities, h, des. PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 �'NOPNsm— h - c- I t�) .a gov,: ., :ys�c:::�• _G, ... 0 i7 "W1 T SalmonScape Mep Control% Ffs fan. . F�r�lllirs it Faaaio- I Fish Distribution " ;= Fish Distn7u h^n Spnng chmook streams 5- nwr Ch."_k Streams - Fall C!+rook St—m, �• C. .S Summer Crum Strc-am. F,II a,um Sp -ems Result 4 of 5 Tim[sr Chum Streams a ante: �steer,ead .:reams AY SalntonScape Species SunmarSGJh�ad s�ck.,e strum. _ - Pink 5alme1 "Even Yeer� St,- •..LID 122121847270 ^ink S;31"zn r 9dd \'aar; Str- eam tJam• - ouli Trout [ptCODE CCHO Fok.,n=e `1•.cIH/RYn Con, • ,!I Saln:or,5c ape Sp^ -Gies — FCA 1 isfipy Lrni[c I Sp�Gf1 ;•hO SY'.116a1 IE_r Uu&. piunTme cJv4 dtrue iDW..Y-h a NYAisa3PIN O,slnoub,niypa ,cume H,-G oy apli, Jee tte Bpanninp Dou"Jl ari¢s H sll,r, 1-aromous •' I1„r, -•.�4 r �: �.y� Miil{tdC/i] 1.3J t_t'.i, i,• Snape 9TLen�In1] tee E22789 '�I Topocra;,l:ic f N o goo nnnrl 11. The proposed development places a stormwater detention and treatment facility in the Wetland A buffer east of Stream Z and south of South 351" Street. The applicant requests in the SVC Report to use FWMC 19.145.440 (6) Buffer Reduction with Enhancementfor this proposed action. According to the SVC Report Sheet 2 of 3, the stormwater dispersion outfall would be located at 143 feet from the Wetland A boundary. The stormwater facility and outfall meet the requirements for FWMC 19.145.440 (6) Buffer Reduction with Enhancement. 12. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.160 Building Setbacks, all building setbacks shall be a minimum of 5 feet from the outer edge of critical area buffers. 13. Critical areas signage and fencing shall be installed at the outer edge of all critical area buffers Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.180. Please illustrate on project plans the location of critical areas buffer fencing and signage for review. 14. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.190 Physical Barriers, critical areas access and sediment/erosion control physical barriers shall be erected throughout project construction. 15. The project proposes to rehabilitate the currently degraded Stream Z and Wetland A buffer impacted by homeless encampment and refuse. Topsoils in much of these degraded areas are highly compacted or appear to have been stripped away. Perteet recommends stockpiling topsoils from the upland forest being removed at proposed building location site to be reused to restore the top 8 inch topsoil layer at impacted stream and wetland buffers where homeless encampments have damaged topsoils. Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street—Initiol Critical Areas Review Page b 10 pERTEET Beier communities, by PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 16. The project proposes Stream Z buffer mitigation enhancements within the Lake Haven PUD existing force main pipe easement. The mitigation plan does not clarify the vegetation planting plan and maintenance plan within this pipeline easement. Please highlight all Lake Haven PUD easements within the buffer zones. Discuss in the mitigation plan what vegetation growth restrictions the PUD maintains within their pipeline easements. Please update the buffer mitigation vegetation planting plan and maintenance / contingency measures to incorporate any planting restrictions and maintenance requirements. 17. Chapter 7 and Sheet 2 of the SVC Report do not include planting stock quantities, spacing, or illustrate proposed specific planting areas to assess whether adequate quantities of planting stock are proposed that will ensure mitigation plan success. Please add these details for the City to estimate probability of buffer rehabilitation success. 18. The proposed construction Civil Drawings for SEPA submittal do not include critical areas mitigation or buffer rehabilitation plans and details. Please add critical areas mitigation and buffer rehabilitation drawings and details to the project construction plan set. 19. Per item 2 above, Perteet recommends rehabilitating the stream buffer on both sides of the Stream Z upstream of the Lake Haven PUD driveway culvert to the subject property north boundary. 20. Section 7.6 Goal 1, Objective 1 and section 7.8 describes planting and sampling herbaceous vegetation, but provides no defined or distinct performance standard for herbaceous vegetation. Please add performance standards for installed herbaceous vegetation. 21. Performance Standards 1.2 and 1.3 are written such that they include existing native trees and shrubs. Yet, in much of the proposed buffer rehabilitation areas, the existing tree and shrub canopies (separate and/or combined) would qualify as meeting these performance standards without maintaining project installed vegetation. Perteet recommends excluding existing well -established trees and shrubs from these performance standards to place responsibility on the project's buffer rehabilitation plan to measure mitigation success. 22. Invasive species dominate large portions of the understory throughout the Stream Z and Wetland A buffers. Removal and control of invasive species may expose vast areas of bare soil to surface runoff and erosion in the first few years until installed plantings can establish root structure and provide aerial cover to erosive rains and surface water flows. For this project invasive species control and controlling soil erosion is much more important than just being a single performance standard. Additionally, these buffer areas are directly associated with an anadromous salmonid stream (Stream Z and immediately downstream West Hylebos Creek) and its habitat conservation area buffer. Perteet recommends elevating the control invasive species and subsequent soil erosion protections as a separate buffer rehabilitation Goal 2 with a distinct set of objectives and performance standards, including for reducing surface water runoff and for controlling erosion into Stream Z. ATTACHMENTS: Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Poge7 pERTEET Better communities, by design County iMap with 2009 aerial imc t kMrc x 1 R r " J1Now r P =7-ay. iAs .r 7 PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 houses removed and vegetation reestablishment. t eed +, Ujrorols xmp [aunty asna62073 LrL!fy -ena! _015 A"th AA"I 2042 ! •cn>r iuys A-1012 &anal 2013 Wo +vriA! 20* - �,Aea� f xwla r la '� lahr;c . AYrlll TPO: ��nal ;an' +cnai 2005 . AW.9 2OW -�ui iris Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Page 8 JPPERTEET AVENUE, 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 Better communities. by design EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 King Coun Map with 2013 aerial image showing new box culvert, houses removed, and vegetation reestablished siro• ec_lelu :ulc - srnme � �'� _ �' . r Kma� ^ Aerial 2015 .. 1 _ ' • I Nie _ 4 Aend 2tl3S .rkh tl;f �"t nW 19f3 wttfN :6t" r ,, • t.>bdf c - - , r� •x Y Artmal M a w,tt, Aerial 2012 t , .Jrnl•e _• !� �. t 1 Sil: well it [1ba y ;. t -- ;� ._na1203 rviyf Aerial 2009 lal�ol• _ R +—31.1007 Aerial 2005 lk Y k .:,srw12002 Aerial 2000 King County Mop with 2015 aerial ir7 O ae showing vegetation reestablished throughout area. r seattfe x q 111— -arch results for wattle =gnu nt. - u6el l � r = r Aerial 20l! with Aerial 261] •. �_ r �.�. •aral201179i) i na1�12017 aerial 2017 w;fi AN+.N 203I: IF ► ' �. L• y Aanal 201Y rrlth AwW 2009 :er>a12005 "F ,4.1 Panottoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Page9 10 pERTEET Bcite.r communit.s, by design PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 Google Earth April 2015 aerial image showing area of historic houses and stream buffer with reestablished vegetation. Gao9le Earth Pro t Ek Ldd yew 1ao1h Add 11e1p Google Earth June 2016 aerial image showing area of stream buffer vegetation being impacted by homeless encampment and refuse dum ip ng. ` Goc9le Earth Pro _ Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Page10 POPERTEET Better cc es, by design PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 Google Earth May 2017 aerial image showing area of stream buffer vegetation being impacted by homeless .,.,,.... 1 n 4 rafi ica rii innninn. END OF MEMO Ponottoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Initial Critical Areas Review Pagell 10 pERTEET Better communities, by design To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way Becky Chapin, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way Doc Hansen, Planning Director, City of Federal Way From: Bill Kidder, Lead Ecologist Date: November 19, 2018 PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 Re: Third Review - Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street, Critical Areas PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant proposes an approximately commercial facility located at 1019 South 351'I' Street, Federal Way, Washington. The proposed development would support manufacturing of machined metal products to be utilized by regional and national aerospace companies. The proposed project will include associated infrastructure and right-of- way improvements including utilities, landscaping, and parking and paved open areas required for staging and receiving of equipment and supplies. The project also requires substantial improvements, including fill slopes and retaining walls, to the PUD driveway. The applicant submitted a Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report dated February 2018 (hereafter referred to as the SVC Report). Perteet submitted to the City of Federal Way an initial review memo dated April 14, 2018. Soundview, the applicant's critical areas consultant, submitted a set of response comments on June 5, 2018. The proposed development action continued to be modified during discussions with the City through summer and early autumn 2018. Perteet is providing the second review memo based on the most recently provided documents (November 2018) listed below. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED The following documents were reviewed by Perteet during this second submittal review: • Panattoni Federal Way Engineering Plans Sheets C1 to C13 prepared for Panattoni Development, prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, dated November 6, 2018. • Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report —1019South 351 Street, prepared forPanottoni Development, prepared by Soundview Consultants, dated February 2018 Revised November 2018. • Ti#348ot 1019535P' Street, Federal Way, WA, prepared for Panattoni Development, prepared by Synthesis PLLC, prepared for Neumeier Engineering Inc, dated May 7, 2018, revised August 22, 2018 (SEPA submittal). FINDINGS Based on Perteet's April 14, 2018 memo, Soundview's June 5, 2018 response memo acknowledged the limits of wetland and stream boundary confirmation. No illustration had accompanied that memo. The attached Synthesis Site Plan markup clarifies in illustration where Perteet confined the April 14, 2018 wetland and stream boundary confirmation. Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Second Critical Areas Review Pagel PERTEET Better communities, by design PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 2. The project reports and drawings apply wetland buffer reduction with enhancement beyond the proposed project area. See attached Synthesis PLLC site plan markups, the Soundview Report sheet 2 markups, and the civil plans sheet 1 markups. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.440(6), Perteet recommends that buffer reduction shall apply on/yto the wetland buffer portions where buffer intrusion is proposed at the stormwater pond location. Buffer reduction would not apply to the remaining wetland buffer. Project related drawings would be updated to reflect this buffer reduction correction. Across all figures in the Civil Plans, the Soundview Report Nov 2018 figures, and the Synthesis site plan, variations on the limits of disturbance line (sometimes called "buffer intrusion line") exist. Some figures also illustrate an "original proposed buffer intrusion line." Please remove outdated, incorrect, or prior limits of disturbance / buffer intrusion lines across all civil plan sheets, the Synthesis site plan, and the Soundview Report to reduce confusion so reviewers can focus on the current proposed action's limits of disturbance. See attached documents various markups attached. 4. Differing limits of disturbance lines (buffer intrusion) exist across project related document figures. The varying lines also do not include all project action elements that change / alter grades, create impervious surfaces, upgrade roads, or remove current existingfeatures. For example, the PUD driveway is currently at grade with dirt / gravel surface. Proposed is a paved surface built over a sloped ramp with reinforced retaining walls. This substantial improvement within the stream buffer is necessary to maintain PUD access but needs to be included within the project's limits of disturbance / stream buffer intrusion because the road is being realigned and includes substantial structural upgrades. Additionally, one currently existing concrete pad is being removed adjacent north of the PUD driveway improvements. Removal / restoration of the cun-endyexisting concrete pad would "get subtracted" from the stream buffer intrusion square footage calculation but is still considered part of the project action within the critical areas buffer. Graded slopes to match parking lot elevations do get included in the limits of disturbance for permanent grading impacts. Graded slopes replanted with native vegetation, though, may not necessarily get added to the stream buffer intrusion square footage calculation. Please update the limits of disturbance line to capture all project action elements. Please update across all project related document figures. The calculated square footage of critical areas buffer intrusion may be different, reflecting all permanent built features (parking, upgraded PUD driveway with retaining walls, stormwater) minus removed / native - restored elements (currently existing concrete pad, old PUD driveway alignment, and graded slopes to be native vegetated). Civil Plgn$ dated November 6, 2018 The November 2018 Civil Plans, Storm Drainage Plan Sheet C6 of 13 proposes a small stormwater catch basin near the downslope (west) end of the PUD access road improved driveway ramp. Based on the grading and stormwater sheet drawings, the catch basin would only capture a small percentage of water draining down the slope. Most stormwater would sheetflow downslope past the small catchbasin with strong probability of draining to Stream Z less than 40 feet west of the catchbasin. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.330(2) Perteet recommends the project construct a trench drain across the full width of the driveway at the catchbasin to capture all stormwater that may flow downslope off the access road ramp. Upgrade the catchbasin, force main, and sump pump to accommodate the potential water input of a driveway wide trench drain. See attached Civil Plans Sheet C6 stormwater markup. There are no detail drawings, contractor notes, or explanation of how the sump pump and force main will be installed and operate. How will the sump pump receive electrical power to pump stormwater up the force main? Please add necessary details to the Civil Plans to ensure proper installation and operation of the sump pump and force main. Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street— Second Critical Areas Review Page 2 PERTEET Better communities, by design PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 42S.252.7700 6. The Civil Plans Sheet 3 TESC does not capture all project related soil disturbance and soil restoration construction. The scalloped "clearing limits" line does not include the concrete pad being removed just north of the PUD driveway upgrades in the stream buffer. The TESC plan does not address stream buffer restoration and wetland buffer enhancement. Within the restoration and enhancement areas, soils will be disturbed to remove invasive plant species, to remove homeless camp debris, to install native plants, and to restore highly impacted soils with native topsoils where necessary. These actions will occur on slopes that drain directly to Stream Z and Wetland A. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.390 and .400, please add TESC measures to the Civil Plans Sheet 3 at the upslope edges of Stream Z OHWM and Wetland A boundary within the buffer restoration and enhancement zones. See Civil Plan Sheet C3 markups attached. Perteet recommends that all restoration and enhancement area invasive species control, soil rehabilitation, and planting activities apply construction stormwater manual TESC and BMPs due to the immediate proximity to a salmon bearing stream. The Soundview Report mitigation figures Sheets 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9 reference and illustrate a "reinforced east slope (see Civil Plan Set)" retaining walls. Cross-referencing the Civil Plans, no information, contractor notes, detail drawings, or specifications could be found for these retaining walls on the Civil Plan November 6, 2018 drawings Sheets Cl through C13. These project elements are being constructed in the Stream Z buffer. As these retaining walls gets taller their width increases, likely extending further into the Stream Z buffer. Yet the Civil Plans only show a single even -width line approximating the presence of a retaining wall. Please illustrate on the Civil Plans the actual proposed footprint of these constructed retaining walls as they would extend into the stream buffer as the retaining wall increases in height and width. Please add to the Civil Plan any detail drawings and notes. 8. The Civil Drawings do not include critical areas mitigation or enhancement plans and details. Please add critical areas restoration and enhancement rehabilitation drawings and details to the project engineering plan set. As recommended in Perteet's April 14, 2018 initial review memo item 2, pursuant to 19.145.060 Unauthorized Alterations and Enforcement, the project is restoring to native habitat the Stream Z buffers to remove unauthorized homeless encampments and discarded refuse occurring within the critical areas and critical areas buffers. The restoration area includes east and west of Stream Z between the PUD driveway and the north property boundary, and the Stream Z east buffer between the PUD driveway and the Wetland A buffer. Perteet acknowledges the recommended restoration is included in the Soundview Report Chapter 7 proposed project mitigation and Soundview Report mitigation figures. 10. Based on Perteet's April 14, 2018 memo item 8, Soundview's June 5, 2018 response memo acknowledged possible construction related grading impacts to Stream Z fish and wildlife. Soundview's response agrees that "Grading will only be allowed between May 1s' and October 1'' unless approved by the director." Perteet acknowledges this commitment. Item 15 of Perteet's April 1, 2018 initial review memo discussed the soil compaction and loss of topsoil in the Stream Z buffers by homeless camp activities. Soundview's June 5, 2018 response memo acknowledged the "soil decompaction and / or utilizing topsoil from onsite areas may be implemented during construction as necessary at the discretion of the Project Biologist." Perteet recommends the project to stockpile topsoils from the upland forest being removed at proposed building location site to be reused to restore the upper 8-inch topsoil layer at impacted stream and wetland buffers where homeless encampments have damaged topsoils. Perteet recommends rehabilitating the stream buffer topsoils be a mitigation program objective for buffer areas with highly impacted topsoils. Ponattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Second Critical Areas Review Page 3 PERTE ET PERTEET.COM Better communities, by design 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 95201 425.252.7700 12. Item 17 of Perteet's April], 2018 initial review memo observed that the restoration and enhancement plan did not include certain native planting area details. Perteet acknowledges this information has been added to the Soundview Report November 2018 revision. 13. The Soundview Report Sheet 5 Plant Schedule lists western swordfern (Po/ystichum munitum) as a woody shrub. Swordfern is a herbaceous plant. Please reallocate western swordfern to a separate herbaceous plantings section. See Sheet 5 attached. 14. Item 20 of Perteet's April], 2018 initial review memo stated: "Section 7.6 Goal 1, Objective 1 and section 7.8 describes planting and sampling herbaceous vegetation but provides no defined or distinct performance standard for herbaceous vegetation. Please add performance standards for installed herbaceous vegetation." Soundview's June 5, 2018 response memo provided text that has been added to the Soundview Report November 2018 revision. The proposed Performance Standard 1.1 does not adequately address performance of herbaceous presence (aerial cover) throughout the restoration and enhancement areas. It only states "by the end of Year 5, 3 species of native herbaceous vegetation will be present." Woody species have additional performance standards for percent aerial cover (performance standard 1.3). Perteet recommends the Soundview Report include a herbaceous species performance standard that specifies percent aerial cover herbaceous growth in the restoration and enhancement areas similar to Performance Standard 1.3 established for woody species. 15. Sheet 4 of the Soundview Report figures locates fencing and NGPA signage south of the stormwater pond along D__teeI ............. a .fie that fencing and Signage be the re reduced buffer line. Pursuant to item 2 above, Pertee �c�.vn una.nv.a relocated along the south edge of the stormwater facility to the east property boundary. See attached Soundview Report Sheet 4 markup. 16. The public has pedestrian access to the PUD driveway and from the Park and Ride northwest of the project area. Perteet recommends NGPA signage along the north and south sides of the PUD access road within the Stream Z buffer. Perteet recommends one NGPA sign facing the Park and Ride near the property corner shared with the Park and Ride. See Soundview Report Sheet 2 attached. END OF MEMO Ponottoni Development 1019 South 351 Street — Second Critical Areas Review Page 4 t� c� Z _ _ _ xoris'sat t -• 1 x II' D'—� z e KE y { I i E{ . m q 1 .� un2 lysd- B s � 9 y r� 6 � sH} � x R o � o�X =zMN m� w U) sGU7y . %QQ - - RQw \ I /.77 r n /v m m E4 77 �' E �� ' F ��',=rE oz� mom. Vim• 00T ! `Ij l.' . �� v . N . IMU r v vDmD2 0 �.? �� F'' '�''�D~ (0z mm>, , + l ,C�� E/ F •� E E C)v ..z W cm) 0 0 Z m 1. 0 m � m .. ' ; ' [[ [� ' 1 ': �� •• . ' _ it 1 1 D 0 m O a� zp moJ m 1 Z o 03 If f m0 .—f -- - T1 U? r- m (J) �m ZO ;uD _ r-� j-vim mZ - -mr Co- Dv vD-c— KD` cZ-n�'0OX .. .0v.molvv 0 DO Z 0 00 mM 00 _w mm v r9 Z CO me 1 m 4, m m rnx n Z �1 c L O Z n `o o PANA'ITONI SOURCES: m y .> m 'J m FEDERAL WAY Soundview Consultants,,, "S 1B215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KE NT, WA 96032 ,YEm�nmenlai 1•-� —`".1 G 1019 S 351ST STREET FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON Asses I - Plil n.q - Land Use Solutions y (425)251-6222 ,c o c 98003 2W7HARRORVIENN DR7\'H,5L'YED 1•. 2±.i,iIJ, M'1i2 (425)251—B782 FAX r GTGFIARIIOR,\\.45Hl%'Gl'O,\95316 F. ?+i.511 tl9.51 - - THE SF. % OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 21N, crva ENaNaRiNc. w+o FUNNING, K\\4.cOl'\OYIF:\\C015G I.1'.4\IS.CO\1'�waa�a SURVEYING ENNRONUEMa1 SERNCES _ — PANGE04E,\C'.M n m m CLCD C D cf) -n a n 0 (D p�0K < C D :K O PROPERTY. -BOUNDARY pm (Z(<TI , �� — t«--#'f ram. .Y.y�a •t:• `� 0 _S m (Dia Ya: F 1 ' F ' F` n"" F` O q �n ' • �J� , ' ;'` 171i m m .-w �Zmm •' �. F'�'4. .'mom '��r�n, �E Imo ADD �•`F««`.h E ��v • Y" t 00, (nm�m 01 -m �` ,Eli ��`~z�# z mD O� zm m ca -,� x:.v0 zp m(n� �. c 1p o z O �CDZ Z "' F.�.`i�:` ,{� �D; Dy.mz_mm ~J mmX0 v �:.-. �� q--- 'l.l .f.' �.:.' rczi �zx-K>-vv > PUS 0pU �. l�il i 11 .'f.' ,'' mom. Dm 0D mt-LL. 1 , .�.i �Fl vDm mD v . ,�1� �isxm DK ZCO �4DO M m , [ n ;U Z t m� 11 _ Z I (n v? > CO)n Zc.�m mD - `— coW - - co C p oq- �yy�ZO �� coi cnWXD X-0 K> -I� /f��jj ///f my n;� = c- DDD- Z �l� co j r n u -1 cD _ TZ(n�.. m T - �a T Z O Z � Z . -__m �� vvl� ma, ,r. oD _ >z� W� mm, D D Y _ o r D Z ca ?� m< x m _ mF (n� m �. m n W O� z� co �(az'RCFY o PANATTONI m - = Y ? FEDERAL WAY Soundview ConsultantsO,. �GHAtj 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH VENT, WA 98032 1019 S 351ST STRL-ET anm„ma!Assessmem • Pmnn�n� • L�nc u.z su:ul�ons (425)251-6222 FAX FED VRAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 1907 l+nuilotacu:u uenr., SCITI{O c2ss;u,x9sa (425)251-8782 F _ = _ N o w THIz. SF-. y OF SrcnoN?O, TOP(•NSHTP 21N, RANGr04E,W.M. GIG I IAIUIOR• N ASS I ING"I ON 9X.A5 r. 53.i14.S95Jf N\\N SOCN SWIENS CONSUE.T4NTS CONS .� cm� MIN —NO. w D P—NI- •��•�s.KnMa�. SUrTVEYirvG ElmaoNUEMo1 SESMc6 r Z --I 00 M r !fir � \ � • � \ J m m m 0 �t W� r O ;U In pp O Om00 cn-00 mzo• p _<mm O Zmn m mm ... p cn _ XZc/) cn m0� 10 �ti ?mom m..•ZpD . \ �G)CF �mm... r 0 Z :. r D m Z m m 20 m j 7 v ��m -i D m c m G) C.)Z Z ti DnC� DKD m�- � F z c -_.-. m m x O- _ OEn m DDD� I1 r=�zZm p D Xc m p p 0 c�ncWi��m�0 1 �Wm nD�r�1 0 p = z < cG�Z�-I> D D X — mp<r-�m zmmWT -o p mx 0 D E 00 m O� m � «m m m D ;U 0m � m n r. m FDm c �NZcn D WO � < m -i r MO m W C mac) �=m- Dr six - yr >' m0z 'o �n�z Z I Iz nr G)D Dmim zzc y Z� n D Z >Omm %KG zLn O T Z zz^ s z o 0 z m 0 D m - � r o>- m m m = m Z1 m Z 0� m� � � m< mp m � �;0 Z n . 01 i `c PANATTONI SOUR(TS: n y = FEDERAL WAY e�'HA�'s lezts �xlw sacmr Soundriew Consultants.. W b 1019 S 351ST STREET FEDE-R.AL WAY,'WASHINGTON 98003 11 nelulR\I earimm vtlren H {sp5}Nys-ar�rgc y GlG fIiNIlt•\\\SHINCION981i5 r251.iu s9FJ >y T14F. SF. % OF SFCnON ?0, TO\X'NSIlIP 21 N, 4, p" ^''"� �^"Pi'�• \l\1U'.S()l'\f)\'ll.\\C(1\cI I.T•l\1S.(:O\I �e•n^�` ;yap{nr R\%CiMV>•c `.[n•%LS - RANGE 04E, W.M. z z d i i n m m E1 t E E f' E i El N `I E E E rf � +j} y < r E E E I� E `( N C)E ' E r ��Tl _ E CJt ou C, C N m D � D E NF... m W C: E E� E �� Z�v,,: rm mz cn2ZDlzzm ono E �D6;��z0 mD m�moozK O �00 > 1OD W� oo i�cnco ucc,c,m .E E `cZ``��_> C:z Cc�>m�r y c�Z2r>- f Ac'fl�l E E m E �� O mo�� OzcnFs nG�zDTCDi� s% -u = A — E E r41, y -n—X ocZmmao-u f mcn— )mom -nD m 0mcn-T Z, r m m zr-z.m omT10 = x InXC) Om—m rD� c =7zo C Z fan `' 7y G]Lzr r y N O rj 1 v v. liar C Z� s Szr_: y Z zr..v �zg z `� 0 P rril 0 PANATTONT _ 5 = FEDERALWAY Soundxiew Consuants ¢tliAV@ AVEPNAUxE SOUTH n R' 6215, KENT232 c S 351ST STREET FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 .PangLaC Use Soluuns W7F1<IIOH\1FC IIRII'F, SLI i:O 1 (41019 5712ND 25)2-6222 �• (4212s-67S2 GIG I1ARBOR, WASHING-1-ON 9833., C ull--X�/mil —NEEAINROYUEN1f1 G. =a�!! _ N O THE OF sF.CTION 20,TOWNSHIP_1 N, u A WSOLN Ov IIM CO�SL Ll aN I S.GO]1 C� SURVECML SEWCES ��X�µ n RANGE 04E, X'(.A4. Y'1 m a \nwN- =:a ti i 9m n 4 C c 7 m-- 5- k k _ _ - ? 1 z D - - 1 zAt 0;] N n a C r `° SC _ n C p 0� r •C - e_ C C 4 _ ° - n D z ' � c: c � � ¢ � F � � � � � ? /C^n� C) _ � c •• � � � g= Q to � pr a c G V zFrr� 5 m W, w' �° o-" 2 3 r �.,C. r7l 3 m 0 0, - 3 < y D > D > > > D •'� " D D D > " D D -n > > " -' D > 0C) r: n n fi n n CD] n CD'] f) C'� t'1 n n r) n C C n CD] c c F F F c c c c c c 6 O C - O O O4cn z m _ ^l ^♦ID CC O 0 h� O O& � �• w� • P C(�Dm CD CD ; c Cn U7 y P n g ' (D cn 73 O rn pot o tw T G ^ o S+ S 6 0^ e Ir Q CIA — 0� E. O 'J+ N N VI N VI U U VI N VI VI 1 N N N O N N N N W W W W W W W m m v 2 W CS W z W A W W W d n O PO n s n' 2 .�, P y P P P O 0 0 o 3 0 0 0 3 0 g 0 3 v o 0 3 - 0 0 0 a a c c u 6 C _ p � 6 G IS a m - - - - PANA170NT scl>'cces: = FEDERAL WAY Soundview Consultants,I+ (Lry�, �f ,82,E 72ND AVENUE SOUTH �(Q KENT. VIA M332 5 3�15T ST 10l CSl _ \ ') [iL:.LT A,,,zP,,,,r„ - p,�,,,,g- I,�--- - • `7� (125)251-6222 r FL-DLR1L\VAY• WASHINGTON98003 ,��*ii\u\nilcie\r oilier.. yl - (425)251-e7e2 FAX .� ae n\uuuiunsluvc, rn.�,.e\ss 1 �;, ;u ysaY = N TH%, 51:./ 01=5LCTION 20, TO\\TS}lIl'?IN, y p' SJ$ E�r�'+Er^i�G un� \\'\\ \\lll'\li\ I1:\\ (: (l \�l l I \ \ I� ((]\I M4 Mb RTv:, E,:v1�0,+v_vi�.L SEA. EES v z ysO m d m r 1 eoo Z D _ Z y�mm m m a a a a v i cc nN xpH �pym0=O~�m3 �tmil mp=OaOAAO�pID^ aCO�NO�my�yOoCj N�mO<CyNamm ZOATOZn m�O�AOmNDT�yOy tiODZa mOamaNs >2njA0A0Ocamm0 Atmi� mtiO`nna rwAmcOi _mAAacDSCT '-0my F o Z,L0PymN co A<� Amm MHO - O+CiX voi�irOD fn DOi_02AyNOACaCI ^`0m A A m ➢ C Aim 3 K A 2 0 A y a m y Z [�AJM m Q I p`�9rQ0w `'p 0. �ww�i ROB 47i(54Q�Q • 4�� c1tr._ _r�.� _ � ��+�ffi ors+ • - r. �'o � o,� �i ) vC4..:,iit .n °r ■ �... p G7% 0 y sc�r•ar.Ia: PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY Soundview Consultants lJl � 1B215 WAND AVENUE SOUTH KEM, WA 9BD32 - p 1U19S351ST STRHHT lonoin fn,ror,rnc�wlAwayrMd • Pg• L��d use s 5t-6222 (4zs)z51 622z FAX ^ PP.UI:RAI, WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 Plu]HARRORYIEWDRIVE SUITED e2;i.s 1J n,);� � (Q5)251-57R2 mid � = THE:. SG Ya of SGCTION 20,To\CNSIIIP 2IN, RANGE 04E, \\.CI GIGFIARIIOR,NVA51{I\Cf()�N '/6JJi I, ��i �IJ n"1�1 a�Na,SOUND IE CONSULFAN)SCOM CML MGINE ING —PIRnNIN 6�4.,.��i c� sumnNq sNnxauurxru ssmnees It -tea Wpm DmX cn�D-o �Oz� z =M>rn mOpZ ODORM. ' 7 z f cr. .! ci T O zz 0> n _ '.. •' D z m�� O �Wom r2o _s (nmpG ODzz 'n w t.0OA �m ry f = f m 0> m \- J -�T `K WG) _-Xmmm O<- ZWO . - ,. mpD D OmC •- _l m � zm_ L p O �oFn �o (?)00 Z 0000000*000s (De) o m y M y y y a a a a v; o n N c zncmAA m a v- ➢ Nmm y Slrm r OmO o�mm 23AmClrDm o�nwmmmo>im OHO Okr CODr DOy Nor ODn 02C « Dm�ODT.ASmONyN m"o°mmc�'ma�mm y NDC �y2�➢mcNAz(mi,IN ti�00py�yA mAOCTC]Oy�C� ozv iozA�m ➢ nmy CN; 00cZc ADDON macmx<noAo O zo�y mc� oT" p�mnN^A-OIOZNOm you opma<�"'➢"'➢amo�z rm� xo" - Anc AC�N�IIOAc .D-o� o➢-a��Qmvzim T9i y r n m<n 55 r AT yp� D<Oj 4i DOST=DCAKa �m� m ➢ z� z L7 a _ s m z � p !7 r o.: �® env � ••w - .,o ��° � �4'.0 ,�a �, :x:.;- �,.v�*��. o�}vim - :• : .+t�trllta�ilF��. • p - � D O; I %yin o 0 I :� s?.7 -a • r . r� iJ�a�•-'a '�''aa `der- �� 8•d 7�. _.=�119�_ ail/� +� �+ '� o - PANATTONI SOL'Itr ]S. _ = FEDERAL WAY �C*H qUp 1B2.15 72ND AVENUE SOUTH 1 Sound` le`L Consultants, � KENT, l:'A 98032 101) S351S'I'STRAHT e�r.o�.To�sx a=sos=mom . R--,, i.,ndu.�ss�l l;a;:< " S (c25.25t-6222 e e PIiD1iRAl. AC'Al', AC'ASHINGTOA98003 ,m7 iiaeuon�uc�c nnn•e, srir ro I'. �:uu"ns (a21 51-5792FAk C — UIf H.AIElio ll,WASHINCMN0..1.T1 1 "S13I46'B4 fd TIIG SGy c1P 5HC710\?O, Tc )\C'\SI IIP 21\, CInL EULIVEEZIrIG V.vJ Pu,vrliM1L, Lrp\ksoPKn\•n[�,r0.�>o�:ra�13 CO�i ��anwaar. wra-rnr�G rl,viaoav¢,v*a s¢an:cs 0 n X m eT_ m ooay� ec)D m _ ®0��®OOoO;® yv y m n a a a a m i y ON v v a a amp z S CT pDNr NCZO OA m�OtiD m O y➢p0>= m=Oyma In�y��lmOypppDl A >"m 0=0CClkii3H�➢r DOymNr2C�ImS-10Cm mD�01�11C�ymS��I aN NSmm mAOCT�ZLD�-OciU�02p0m➢D ray Ny An NC AmN nanT n��.l m �C�y pDaw'�'mn On A0 Z0TCNCL)0-2 ➢Aa pyA>m DCm xtj OpO o3TO m3 �Lm O�AADmDyy p2 O,2r m0 n00 On p�A mTym Tp2 y ,m zmm m>Tx j<p0Y vi DCI�02m ODC�1 ^`Ln 0 H<D y2mm� m 20 O 'm n c rr .mil, mom (/ �D� Z �1 _ ~= m y rt' O O Z O - f �_�� m - Em /rO�DOmO�/ ._�. z �GTD-'Dy Ti—mom /_- cnmm< N m D m m 3 \ 1 E o m m O< 1 mmm Zm0 X m p D n m c D _19 ' mzo �w� f o0Z mmJ O R 1 Vi N - G7' = :fir®+� ■r.�:;:.�= " �.a ��' _ .. q ' dTa "t ::• ��'v a a ♦ p fn- 4y!k'0 I. FOVia- n, M�k� 4 � ---�� i• p•..• .s ?�. sili' p D dYYr • P a a. SOURCt`'I - PANATTONI - WAY �� Sound%iew Consultantsl,l UE SOUTH 75'2"° AVEN KEM, WA 96°32 1019 S 351STSTRU T mlW VnNA Use S.M. � (426)251 -6222 ;- G o FEDERAL\\AY, WASH INGTON98003 2'lll'I FIAItIIOIt\'ll 1\ I1R1\1:, Sl ITI:O C. 2.ln1J.%'1;2 £ I g (azs)zsl-e7az FAX A .G- N O TIICSEY4 0FSF.Q0N 20,T0\CNSHIP2IN, GIGIIANIIOH,\\'ASI-UNGIU1'ISJ3� P. �.lilA.. X'?J aNA% Sol NDVII:\\CONSULIAN-I&CO.\1 r, CML ENLINFEftING, L D -NING, SO-G. EM'IftOYHEMAL SERNCES R z maoDm m Gl�vOm N y Tm O C) m 2 y ? n nO v O m x O w m mgm r m 0 m D 0. M IO D O m - Z!OCT m 0 T m n O5--'o o m 0.11�c no noel c Av omm n m 55 r T�F IPm m Ozox(nT Fz >� 'M M z n= r D x D O ox n o _$ 0 m m 0 p y C) > O m z D m ti o ZO ZZ o O O M z m m y to O 0 .TI N Ll 70-80 h OF STAKE ?1 P ;? p P= 0 INSTALLED BELOW GRADE �m3Zcrm W<M y c �N3Czx 3y�<om M a* m x n D w-C cram r�ommm T =y1p-i �1O1nnOv�� o �1(mnH OZ-� EZl O COO mZ3D m ,TmID l<pm7JwZ A ,Z�1ranD= OZ p -Dnmn z6MPd cZm 0 TO (o-obzzm< mrn-0 TNv1D20"7 rDr `L OO'�D MO Ts0'O41 mZ47 f�11 o C0z<T y3mZO� M m mO�LziN Z4 wm 70m i=O Np m z.Tm 2Aa o`e�0=0 SOD 'T O za 2> Co. ^'moioZ zoom Om(nmAOm N3N oZ0000 0mmrn Dm~paoo0 vxz Z.x� No 3 KA� omo Mzo�>. m?mm Apo o Z�w POW o2'!m 300, Or moo m POW mm�m DOCK m m m 1 m A m o z p n v o C) Tmm. m m O N D z C 2 Z D rnNm OO T(A 3�mM c .M D O A (" f*1 M (mn0 C zovo y r A 0 O m� Z me A>Oc _ m C q M -o _ �00 0 In A O Z D iV m D z 0 0 0 Q "-z m ti 0 M D_ r R �m cn a p4 nl o 3 m o m d Zo :� ZZ IMTI TM-W*C0 D(mii �C� �mD<rX§pZ(NOO Dn Z0 o yx [n0 A iQ m001111 <OC 00 = Co C) rm Dm*Ocx,0-im0 y -Dj A5 OZI �8 n fT10 O DG70j �0��0 3p m3 (n Dm <KMT0WC>0'D.' Cc M,N o jlj� �D0�0�04' om c� T= r� T oA m KO ��(n TOMx 1- O r W -0cG1{�-4 -uM (nmxrvxm ZCOD pT1 T1 (n 7 r� xm -m< m DZ <OZOOZ'm D,1A�DT mAx rT co O o� y '2Zm A� =mm T n O � 11(n 0,-<�(n 2 oz � �m��o< rZ^^ m N { 1z G) �m G r z O -I O 0 D m O 0 D m M M D Z 0 cn 2 c 03 r D Z Z G) 0 M D_ r n D r K `od PANATTONI svuRcts: m Y FEDERAL WAY 4Q 41. 18215 72NO AVENUE SOUTH Vr a G 1019 S 351ST STREET �Z So�indl"feu" Consultants II.1: P nay 0 KENT, WA 980J2 w enmenm Rwssm %9nnn!ng • Lantl Use 501uLan3 rJ y �azs)2s1-szzz FEDERAL. WAY, V;'ASHINGTOI� 98003 O?9U7 HARRORVII:\1 I1HI\'F, 5L'ITF. D I'.233,5I1 F9i2 (425)251-8782 FAX N GTGIIAH11OIt,U•,151i11CT(1\9tl.3.35 F.IJ.N9ii sy 1" o THE. SFY OF SECI70N20, TOWS 'SHIP 21N, a\\u,socn OVIJiUCONSPI.I:ASTS GO\i r4, ,fi r MLE^r.1.11—ll:-c, RANGE 04E,\N'.M, e �.cwa� So-noG, nmaouu—scmnccs i 1, SN�81O�V rnU�iALSN� �' � os Z92;6r,6r-ESZ3IZIStsIS m o i O ri rmriwua �i �i= 5itl v Q N"3R3e [A W co oo n -n 0� V O, W A[uN� f •.- 4r , ` _ ..` o - O 111 All - �a�f��SzgP �:� i - 'ti`ti ' - •�`�_ it a ! n7R F®R np_ 3m gf — '-�. g€ ignua$=m s o� 41 Rmo4 fin? N F A "s �Zv � sg >`` bR 43< �'e_ gj ;., � m^ VF£gNR'�xay€�'oR iII^"G= •teR a^o€�N > n off ^ po n m - y9'5�1- Hsg� g =fixJon� -AU- o n7n w w: v mrurtaa.,l.,.o.. Ec P01440 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH e'°' FOF Tft HENT• WAPANATTONI COVER SHEET (425)251-fi222DEVELOPMENT COMPANY(d25)251-E'E2 FA% 900 SW 16TH STREET. SUITE 330 FOR °'.��ew.�E saxnc ewarwxxrrtts o . '1u RENTON, WA 98057 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY •.�i{�pp,�,anf�n�+-.tvrvTm.�.rW I•.y34,• TA 'r MO 1 ' 1 Y i• r�....r�a r�.g�$ � � �' . �� as 6�" ens �3 � • g� � u4L ig 4W. .4 F .° �C•�.l!27 7 ��' • :F j0�q,�cL. ��. \Sr �`C �eF• � j N s R so o a tt� ~ Q.GHAG� IB215 72ND AVENUE SDU7H °i'°ia- Fon rTRW w. 1894 i E KENT, VIA 9BD32 cq �L p„may F^� .' PANATTONI STORM DRAINAGE PLAN r (425)251-6222 t-■ (425)251-8782 FAX �••�-'a• '�•0 "-Y DEVELOPMENT COMPANY r S� cNr ENaIEEwNG, uw ruNwxc ro�•.as� w�/. = ;y` 9W SW 16TH STREET, SURE 330 FOR nNG. EMARONYENfPE S-B e4r 14ci = RENTON, WA 9W57 PANATTOM FEDERAL WAY t Eglie _ N , { -r mgN I I I ~�'`f'�f� � i/ l �� •-, tea 9 � _ ti �� / / i �� ,•� � �:.�tipq � asp � �� 1��''f� .� � f—J^ • � � � \� _ mod=€ - CD r _ :RY- $ m v rn HIM rF SAM IF�F � � m a O ti 50 � 0 2 e m X&K x , t/{ru 10 � e rt(R• Y, rfr w,ar gP"40s 1s215 rnq WXWC WA, Fr- r� 943 mt RM• WA 003k a<M PANATTONI DEMOLMON PLAN [+ ws=-M2 w $�, = DEVELOPMENT COMPANY [�tslnt E+9x rWt 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 FOR .•� .uwscntarcr wwcc o,,. �scu "�• r rn . C2� 13�`°1•°"` RENTON, WA 96057 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY ._ I -A' i •1 r` ��Eas � xr I: aaR 1 K f _. Qp o 3 104.3 HID '��_''-� '�`•j :e�L /� �� - -- ' � � � � "' d � / m f o _ � o � ■ . ,Q FRS •Rr a .28 _ ® T ti�5 �•n4 � \ � `' JW rF � � • 4� � � r T � r I r.1 •.y� �` s�_�yi'7�=.� �f 5'C Y+ Jl? n J Aj o - - _ ��`�:�� :�� • t � +� A eft•, ' m F o D re. wen 18943 �H �U 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH VENT, WA 98032 WWW iL (425)251- 6272� (,25)251-97a2 FAX SUM'EENG! EEWMWEN/ SERv�[ES �"'0 �- [� ° "„ y .wu s�v min v.N7^. { - _ - a? - FW PANATTON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 900 SW 16TH STREET, WrrE 330 RENTON, WA 98057 Tft TESC PLAN FOR PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY T, m 88�o -4� hN i o x xn wa ¢�H'4U� 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH Tilla T89Qg �� KENT, WA 9B032 PANATTONI GRADING PLAN <2s)zs�-exzz-8782 FAX s -� DEVELOP MENT COMPANY zrn n (25)251 6iy v. won .c �� % ^ • , .+° 900 SW %TH STREET, SUITE 330 FOR C4 i3 x+.a^�` wmEnNc ENJiH ... SERn[ES � ,, �, � RENTON, WA 98057 PANATTONI FERAL WAY �„•re.., n..sw•�f stun mzl-zFa I�I .v. 1,r: t Z 4 3 O T rt X � i I � I ! 8& % It I _ T I Wr, ' 8 0 ➢'. 2 It tl 2 S tl 8 8 - I� 2Z 1 r i r i a I ! 7 nr I r ICY + � I oy rr _ s7 ip E X 19215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH �"`P1°• 18943 KENT. WA 98032 a. �. rN„ PANATTONI (425)25222 _ y.N 4 (425)21-5DEV 51-B782 FAX Sri y ...� _ ELOPIIIENT COMPANY S c.r ou mMc �„a n.A �c 7 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE WO RENTON, WA 98W � la lMhl SITE SECTIONS FOR PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY X 19215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH �"`P1°• 18943 KENT. WA 98032 a. �. rN„ PANATTONI (425)25222 _ y.N 4 (425)21-5DEV 51-B782 FAX Sri y ...� _ ELOPIIIENT COMPANY S c.r ou mMc �„a n.A �c 7 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE WO RENTON, WA 98W � la lMhl SITE SECTIONS FOR PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY � la lMhl SITE SECTIONS FOR PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY .� a ■ ■ ■ � A .. a § � : � � � �� ■ � � l §� q| & # � O -U q k q 2 z z -u m m 20 2 2 rn O > m E 0 2 @ 0 `/�§ z \ > �18943 % 115 °� P�7� � �naPOND SEcoe . s e_Z 2 \ 7 ,_,w / \ y COMPANY DEVELOPMENT 900 m,6TH STREET, SLUE 330 FOR � ero WA 98057 PmA � FEDERAL WAY c 2 o 'o m _ mco 51 co v Can m ,tam �'• _ o g m 4T' z J.! - s� sty D 000�� aY Mi & m €� m m $ C o'` z m a7 18943 x x ¢G �0. 1$215 72W AUE1N.fE i�liliN °iqre° �- X°`' (42512SI-57M c.t cb.u�+c, uw nww�c. 13 ween•��n.r•••a�w.t,w.H«.•. ,list �e sv.w gee PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 RENTON, WA 98057 TRW o - ygig gilRZ9 � T K 5$ WATER AND SANITARY SEWER PLAN FOR PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY ea M I I F1 g- HR if im Hli -;U x Uis HE 3 9 9 W MA w w "U, w, -o 0 Ilk75 pqq It 0 o m - co 0 0 -n —0 0 � 9 co > 1 z z N v N mW 0 8 0 M .A cl) zs!8 -n D 0 M rn 0 co 0 z z Cn L—i D m oa_am oho 0 .Hp! 22 51 0 o 0 '4 LU 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH Fw- rrtkr KENT, WA 11111 PANATTON! TESC NOTES AND DETAILS Z (425)251 -6222 DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (425)251-8762 FAX 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 FOR C9 13 RENTON, WA 98057 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY Ra��$ ca =11RA�i 1 x'Y � t°F g�a �" ag sg 1o9 "�€m F� Via_' eo $�a �- >:3 �r ng� 21d; 1s �'`gzy=s]"[rRfe pp g"F ;a �3 pp d ^o g q R 8 _ R' F `z_F i '" `m C RED k4 $^ �€ a �a€� 3P oPF d a�" 3 4�" z€ 'fie a 4:r "S `F! "� ^ 4' a �o� •4L it c� �" z ,d€ �i " £4.� n _ "aR f 9MT a s�y ' ^ n "y> RIP 'ae NoEli �o m F ti ■ IIII a'o_ "fi �[y$$y7Ey gao Fggg m F# q.�"� gARS m g 4€ya 3� 5 86 8d a ,i[ R� Ld°a �Y� n € ! ' $ �i3& R 6€ '' ee i- =Fig € �eg smci $�3g ,- itRB S �a j a €gRY wh y >n �xR��' � 8�s�ffl E'�f �4s mac• Oca O �,� ��Hai a�g�� O Z Z O O fllC c To x"g �g ;'iga Z € 01 a z� m A D co oz m a 0 €� ni >s �� Dof 1e g x U I D D 1C Ki O en M RV MI IEn E/n R1e� 16215 72NO AVENUE SOUTH m"4"" ` For Tft 18943 �T Fy VENT, WA 98032 emu_ wm m PANATTOM �S��TION NOTES AND DETAILS '(45251-6222 5) 45-8762 FAX DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Y ^°� ^^ 's; • 900 SW 16TH STREET. SUITE 330 FOR W ExGiNEEiNF, WID PI SEWC. !! :10 13 w�rnNc EM9ANUEMK SE MC S o . e _ RE TON, WA 98057 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY _ I a fling" 1 r 6 i � caa E 6 i �aav dp lac � o � o i Rgl i E Rill1 p Jim M IF La M PA •- * F. `� ❑ R m ill JIM; �� k It• '' I 't 1 � lilt, ; rs ire I Trdr WATER AND 3ANRARY SEWER NOTES AND DETAILS FOR PANATTONI FOAL WAY 7Ya lip }i§ �A y�N R ,m tee.. Q`GOAG� 18215 72NO AVENUE SOUTH 18843 �i fi� NEM wa saoaz _ Far (425)251-6222 , „ PANATTONI Tltla BOUNDARY 8 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 025)251-B7B2 FaX �—"'-C DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PTN OF THE SW1/4, OF THE SE1/4 OF SEC. 20, } Y Gi f mo,- urvo PUNnn„ i naino•'J 40e pNgNNENK SERN[ES� ~ e. TWP. 21 N., ROE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, KING COUNTY �eooa`oesu�,.-,�.�ies.�-.00,-vixr z�s o,i,ir.^ r„ s. zois ,z p um. r-w• au. n„�: rev. ar STATE OF WASHINGTON 0 z ii X 0 0 R M:E o mIZT, Ay fr o O 'o M -n C) z J> Z JE> 0 Z z A --I M 0 a M 7k....... 0 Z Z 3 0 rn >* Tills 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH m IsKENT, WA 98032 (425)251-6222 PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY VEHCLE MANEUVERING DIAGRAM (425)251-8782 FAX STREET, SUITE 330 FOR -1 E--.. — --- -- •9W SW % -rH -CL3, 13 .... .. RENTON, WA 98057 PANATTON! FEDERAL WAY RECEIVED DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEB 2 2 2018 33325 81h Avenue South CITY OF f f Federal Way, WA 98003 CffY OF FEDERAL WAY 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1i,,kv%v.cityoffederaiway.com Federal Way Crime Prevention Through Environmental (Design (CPTED) Checklist Directions Please fill out the checklist to indicate which strategies have been used to implement CPTED principles in your proposed project. Please check all strategies that are applicable to your project for each of the numbered guidelines. You may check more than one strategy for each guideline. Your responses will be evaluated by city staff, and will be integrated into the site plan and/or building permit review process. Section and I ✓ Functional Area Evaluation for Performance Performance Standard Agency Use Only Standard Strategy a Applicable during Site Plan Review e Applicable during Building Permit Review Section 1.0 Natural Surveillance 1.1 Blind Corners Avoid blind corners in pathways and parking lots. Pathways should be direct. All barriers along pathways should 14 be permeable (see through) including landscaping, fencing etc. ■ 0 Consider the installation of mirrors to allow users to see ahead of them and around corners. e Other strategy used:. n ❑Revise _ ❑NA Comments: 1.2 Site and Building Layout _ u�-vr Allow natural observation from the street to the use, from the _ ❑Revise use to the street, and between uses _ ❑NA Comments: Bulletin #022 — January 1, 2011 Page 1 of 9 k:\Handouts\CPTED Checklist Section and ✓ I Functional Area Performance Performance Standard Standard Strategy ■ Applicable during Site Plan Review e Applicable during Building Permit Review El Orient the main entrance towards the street or both streets on For Non -Single corners. ■ Family Development Position habitable rooms with windows at the front of the dwelling. ■ Access to dwellings or other uses above commercial/ retail development should not be from the rear of the building. ■ ❑ Offset windows, doorways and balconies to allow for natural observation while protecting privacy. ■ 13 Locate main entrances/exits at the front of the site and in view of the street. ■ For Commercial/ Retail/ Industrial If employee entrances must be separated from the main and Community ❑ entrance, they should maximize opportunities for natural Facilities surveillance from the street. r ❑ In industrial developments, administration/offices should be located at the front of the building. ■ Avoid large expanses of parking. Where large expanses of For Surface parking are proposed, provide surveillance such as security Parking and cameras. ■ Parking Structures Access to elevators, stairwells and pedestrian pathways should be clearly visible from an adjacent parking area. ! Avoid hidden recesses. ■ ca Locate parking areas in locations that can be observed by adjoining uses. ■ Open spaces shall be clearly designated and situated at For Common/ locations that are easily observed by people. Parks, plazas, Open Space ❑ common areas, and playgrounds should be placed in the front Areas of buildings. Shopping centers and other similar uses should face streets. ■ Other strategy used: 19-Pa rlkng-1 ocatedmea lJuildina entrances_ Bulletin 4022 — January 1, 2011 Page 2 of 9 Evaluation for Agency Use Only Section and ✓ Functional Area Evaluation for Performance Performance Standard Agency Use Only Standard 1.3 Strategy ■ Applicable during Site Plan Review e Applicable during Building Permit Review Common/Open Space Areas and Public On -Site Open _ ❑Cor Space ❑Revise Provide natural surveillance for common/open space areas. _ ❑NA Comments: Position active uses or habitable rooms with windows adjacent ❑ to main common/open space areas, e.g. playgrounds, swimming pools, etc., and public on -site open space. r Design and locate dumpster enclosures in a manner which ❑ screens refuse containers but avoids providing opportunities to hide. ■ Locate waiting areas and external entries to elevators/stairwells ❑ close to areas of active uses to make them visible from the building entry. e ❑ Locate seating in areas of active uses. e u Other strategy 1.4 Entrances Provide entries that are clearly visible. 14 Design entrances to allow users to see into them before entering. ■ Entrances should be clearly identified (Signs must conform to ❑ FWRC 19.140.060. Exempt Signs. (Applicable during Certi irate of Occu anc , Ins ecdon . Other strategy used: 1.5 Fencing Fence design should maximize natural surveillance from the street to the building and from the building to the street, and minimize opportunities fog• intruders to hide. Revise ❑NA Comments: 0—Revise _ ❑NA Comments: ❑C'o:l! Bulletin #022 — January 1, 2011 Page 3 of 9 k:\Handouts\CPTED Checklist Section and ✓ Functional Area Evaluation for Performance Performance Standard Agency Use Only Standard Strategy ■ Applicable during Site Plan Review e Applicable during Building Permit Review ❑ Front fences should be predominantly open in design, e.g. pickets or wrought iron, or low in height. e Design high solid front fences in a manner that incorporates ❑ open elements to allow visibility above the height of five feet. e If noise insulation is required, install double -glazing at the ❑ front of the building rather than solid fences higher than five feet. e Other strategy used: 1.6 Landscaping Avoid landscaping which obstructs natural surveillance and allows intruders to hide. Trees with dense low growth foliage should be spaced or their 14 crown should be raised to avoid a continuous barrier. ■ Use low groundcover, shrubs a minimum of 24 inches in ❑ height, or high -canopied trees (clean trimmed to a height of eight feet) around children's play areas, parking areas, and along pedestrian pathways. ■ Avoid vegetation that conceals the building entrance from the 14 street. ■ _ ❑Revise _ DNA Comments: Other strategy used: 1.7 Exterior Lighting — ❑Cor Provide exterior lighting that enhances natural surveillance. _ ❑Revise (Refer to FWRC 19.115.050(7)(a) for specific lighting _ ❑NA requirements.) Comments: Prepare a lighting plan in accordance with Illuminating Engineering Society of America (IESA) Standards, which ❑ addresses project lighting in a comprehensive manner. Select a lighting approach that is consistent with local conditions and crime problems. ■ Bulletin #022 — January 1, 2011 Page 4 of 9 k:\Handouts\CPTED Checklist Section and ✓ Functional Area Performance Performance Standard Standard Strategy ■ Applicable during Site Plan Review e Applicable during Building Permit Review Locate elevated light fixtures (poles, light standards, etc.) in a ca coordinated manner that provides the desired coverage. The useful ground coverage of an elevated light fixture is roughly twice its height. ■ For areas intended to be used at night, ensure that lighting ❑ supports visibility. Where lighting is placed at a lower height to support visibility for pedestrians, ensure that it is vandal - resistant. e ❑ Ensure inset or modulated spaces on a building facade, access/egress routes, and signage is well lit. e ❑ In areas used by pedestrians, ensure that lighting shines on pedestrian pathways and possible entrapment spaces. e Place lighting to take into account vegetation, in its current and ❑ mature form, as well as any other element that may have the potential for blocking light. e Avoid lighting of areas not intended for nighttime use to avoid ❑ giving a false impression of use or safety. If danger spots are usually vacant at night, avoid lighting them and close them off to pedestrians. e Select and light "safe routes" so that these become the focus of 14 legitimate pedestrian activity after dark. 0 ❑ Avoid climbing opportunities by locating light standards and electrical equipment away from walls or low buildings. e ❑ Use photoelectric rather than time switches for exterior lighting. e In projects that will be used primarily by older people 13 (retirement homes, congregate care facilities, senior and/ or community centers, etc.) provide higher levels of brightness in public/common areas. e Other strategy used: Evaluation for Agency Use Only 1.8 Mix of Uses In mixed use buildings increase opportunities for natural _ ❑Revise surveillance, while protecting privacy. ❑NA Comments: Bulletin #022 — January 1, 2011 Page 5 of 9 k:\Handouts\CPTED Checklist Section and ✓ Functional Area Evaluation for Performance Performance Standard Agency Use Only Standard Strategy K Applicable during Site Plan Review B Applicable during Building Permit Review Where allowed by city code, locate shops and businesses on lower floors and residences on upper floors. In this way, ❑ residents can observe the businesses after hours while the residences can be observed by the businesses during business hours. ■ ❑ Include food kiosks, restaurants, etc. within parks and parking structures. ■ Other strategy: used 1.9 Security Bars, Shutters, and Doors _ ❑Col When used and permitted by building and fire codes, security _ ❑Revise bars, shutters, and doors should allow observation of the street _ ❑NA and be consistent with the architectural style of the building. Comments: ❑ Security bars and security doors should be visually permeable (see -through). e Other strategy used: Section and ✓ Functional Area Evaluation for Performance Performance Standard Agency Use Only Standard Strategy ■ Applicable during Site Plan Review e Applicable during Building Permit Review Section 2.0 Access Control 2.1 Building Identification _ L It-oal Ensure buildings are clearly identified by street number to _ ❑Revise prevent unintended access and to assistpersons trying to find _ ❑NA the building. Identification signs must conform to FWRC Comments: 19.140.060. Exempt Signs. ❑ Street numbers should be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. e Bulletin #022 — January 1, 2011 Page 6 of 9 k:\Handouts\CPTED Checklist Section and ✓ Functional Area Performance Performance Standard Standard Strategy s Applicable during Site Plan Review e Applicable during Building Permit Review In residential uses, each individual unit should be clearly numbered. In multiple building complexes, each building entry ❑ should clearly state the unit numbers accessed from than entry. In addition, unit numbers should be provided on each level or floor. e 13 Street numbers should be made of durable materials, preferably reflective or luminous, and unobstructed (e.g. by foliage). e For larger projects, provide location maps (fixed plaque ❑ format) and directional signage at public entry points and along internal public routes of travel. e Other strategy used: 2.2 Entrances Avoid confusion in locating building entrances. Entrances should be easily recognizable through design �$ features and directional signage. (Signs must conform to FWRC 19.140.060. Exempt Signs. i ❑ Minimize the number of entry points. ■ Other strategy used: 2.3 Landscaping Use vegetation as barriers to deter unauthorized access. ❑ Consider using thorny plants as an effective barrier. e Other strategy used: 13 2.4 Landscaping Location Avoid placement of vegetation that would enable access to a building or to neighboring buildings. Bulletin #022 — January 1, 2011 Page 7 of 9 Evaluation for Agency Use Only ❑Can ❑Revise ❑NA Comments: _Conforms ❑_Revise _ ❑NA Comments: _ ❑Revise _ DNA Comments: k:\Handouts\CPTED Checklist Section and ✓ Functional Area Evaluation for Performance Performance Standard Agency Use Only Standard Strategy ■ Applicable during Site Plan Review 6 Applicable during Building Permit Review Avoid placement of large trees, garages, utility structures, fences, and gutters next to second story windows or balconies that could provide a means of access. ■ Other strategy used: 13 2.5 Security _ ❑Conf Reduce opportunities for unauthorized access _Revise ❑NA Comments: Consider the use of security hardware and/or human measures ❑ to reduce opportunities for unauthorized access. (Applicable during Cent' ncate o Uccu an: his ecti0i . Other strategy used: 2.6 Signage f ❑Conf Insure that signage is clearly visible, easy to read and simple ❑Revise to understand [Signs must conform to FWRC 19.140.060. _ ❑NA Exempt Signs]. Comments: Use strong colors, standard symbols, and simple graphics for informational signs. e Upon entering the parking area, provide both pedestrians and For Surface ❑ drivers with a clear understanding of the direction to stairs, Parking and elevators, and exits. e Parking Structures ❑ In multi -level parking areas, use creative signage to distinguish between floors to enable users to easily locate their cars. e ❑ Advise users of security measures that are in place and where to find them, i.e. security phone or intercom system. e ❑ Provide signage in the parking area advising users to lock their cars. e Bulletin #022 — January 1, 2011 Page 8 of 9 k:\Handouts\CPTED Checklist Section and ✓ Functional Area Evaluation for Performance Performance Standard Agency Use Only Standard Strategy ■ Applicable during Site Plan Review e Applicable during Building Permit Review ❑ Where exits are closed after hours, ensure this information is indicated at the parking area entrance. e Other strategy used: Section 3.0 Ownership 3.1 Maintenance _ ❑Conf Create a "cared for" image _ ❑Revise _ ❑NA Comments: Ensure that landscaping is well maintained, as per FWRC ❑ 19.125.090, in order to give an impression of ownership, care, and security. (Ongoing). Where possible, design multi -unit residential uses such that no - ❑ more than six to eight units share a common building entrance. ■ Other strategy used: 3.2 Materials ❑Conf( Use materials, which reduce the opportunity for vandalism. _ ❑Revise _ ❑NA Comments: Consider using strong, wear resistant laminate, impervious glazed ceramics, treated masonry products, stainless steel ❑ materials, anti -graffiti paints, and clear over sprays to reduce opportunities for vandalism. Avoid flat or porous finishes in areas where graffiti is likely to be a problem. e ❑ Where large walls are unavoidable, refer to FWRC 19.125.040(21) regarding the use of vegetative screens. e Common area and/or street furniture shall be made of long ❑ wearing vandal resistant materials and secured by sturdy anchor points, or removed after hours. e Other strategy used: Bulletin #022 — January 1, 2011 Page 9 of 9 k:\Handouts\CPTED Checklist 11/2/2018 EQUIPMENT» Neumeier Engineering Inc. AK�W Neumeier Engineering, Inc. MACHINE TOOLS - CNC MILLING (28 TOTAL) MATSUURAH.PLUS-630 Work Area (41.3in X 41.3in) 4 Axis 10 Pallet System CAT50 Spindle Taper (2ea) TOYODA FA800 Work Area (53.1in X45.2in) 4 Axis CAT50 Spindle Taper J,d7,W Neumeier Engineering, Inc. MACHINE TOOLS - CNC MILLING CONTINUED llertic I Machining Centers (2ea) MATSUURA MCI 000 VDC Work Area (41 5in X 20 1 in) Twin Spindle CAT50 Spindle Taper OKK MCV50ODS Work Area (41.3in X 22in) Twin Spindle 2 Pallet Changer CAT50 Taper MATSUURA MC2000V Work Area (80.3in X 30.7in) CAT50 Spindle Taper (2ea) TOYODA BM1600 MATSUURA RA-IIIF Work Area (62in X 31 5in) Work Area (45n X 17in) 4 Axis 2 Pallet Changer CAT50 Spindle Taper BT40 Spindle Taper (2ea) TOYODA FA800 MATSUURA RA -II Work Area (53.1in X 45 tin) Work Area (35in X 141n) 4 Axis 2 Pallet Changer CAT50 Spindle Taper BT40 Spindle Taper QUANTUM Q-1000 MATSUURA MC-800V Work Area (66 9in X 24in) Work Area (45in X 17in) 4 Axis BT40 Spindle Taper CAT50 Spindle Taper HAAS VF-2 http://neu meierl . com/capabilities/equipment/ 11 /2/2018 MA I bUUKA M1:9 bUUV Work Area (60 23in X 30 Tin) CAT50 Spindle Taper MATSUURA MC1250V Work Area (66, 9in X 24in) CAT50 Spindle Taper EQUIPMENT» Neumeier Engineering In (4ea) MATSUURA RA411FDC wom area (su n x a tim) Work Area (45in X 17m) BT40 Spindle Taper Twin Spindle 2 Pallet Changer BT40 Spindle Taper Zj7W Neumeier Engineering, Inc. MACHINE TOOLS - CNC MILLING CONTINUED 5 Axis Machiinina Centers (3ea) OKKVG5000 Work Area (29.75in x 35.25in x24in) CAT50 Spindle Taper (lea) MATSUURAMAM72-63V Work Area (29 92in x 33 26in x 25.980in) BT40 Spindle Taper (lea) OKKHMX6000 Wot-kArea (41in x 35in x 32in) CAT50 Spindle Taper (lea) GROB G750 Work Area (39 4in x 43 3in x 46.1 in) HSK-63a Spindle Taper http://neumeierl.com/capabilities/equipmenV 11 /2/2018 EQUIPMENT a Neumeier Engineering Irk\ 1 � 1 � Neumeier Engineering, Inc. MACHINE TOOLS - CNC TURNING CENTERS (14 TOTAL) NAKAMURA-TOME TW-20 TWIN SPINDLE NAKAMURA-TOME TMC-2011T 2 5in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle 2in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle Chucking to Sin Diameter Chucking to Bin Diameter 7 Axis Tailstock VDK Hydrostatic Barfeeder VDK Hydrostatic Barfeeder NAKAMURA-TOME TMC-2011 2in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle Chucking to Bin Diameter VDK Hydrostatic Barfeeder NAKAMURA-TOME SC-150M 2in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle Chucking to 6in Diameter VDK Hydrostatic Barfeeder NAKAMURA-TOME SC-250M 2.5in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle Chucking to Bin Diameter VDK Hydrostatic Barfeeder NAKAMURA-TOME SC-250T 2.5in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle Chucking to Bin Diameter Tailstock VDK Hydrostatic Bar feeder NAKAMURA-TOMESLANT 1 1 625in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle Chucking to Bin Diameter VDK Hydrostatic Barfeeder WASINO LG-60 1.375in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle 14in X-Travel (Approx. 12 tools) Gang -Tooled AlpsTool Automatic Bar Loader/Feeder hftp://neumeierl.com/capabilities/equipment/ 7/10 11/2/2018 EQUIPMENT » Neumeier Engineering Inr�.\ ZOW Neumeier Engineering, Inc. TAKISAWA TG-4010 5.16in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle INDEX C200 Chucking to 22in Diameter Twin Spindle, Three Turret 2.5 in Diameter (2ea)TAK1SAWA TS-4000 Capacity Through 3.22in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle Spindle Chucking to 6.3in Chucking to 14 5in Diameter Diameter LNS Bar LNS Bar Feeder Feeder http://neumeierl.com/capabilities/equipmentl 8/10 11/2/2018 EQUIPMENT» NeumeierEngineering Ind Neumeier Engineering, Inc. NC SWISS - TYPE SCREW MACHINES TSUGAMI BS32 III C 1.25in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle lemca Boss 432 Bar Feeder TSUGAMI BS19 III C .75in Diameter Capacity Through Spindle lemca Genius 120 Bar Feeder hftp://neumeierl.com/capabilities/equipmentl 9110 11 /2/2018 EQUIPMENT)) Neumeier Engineering Ind � 1 ,:_ � Neumeier Engineering, Inc. PRODUCTION SOFTWARE AND CON I EXACTJobBOSS ERP -Management Software CATIA Program generation SURFCAM Program generation VERICUT Production software CMM MANAGER Inspection software FANUC Symbolic FAPT lathe and screw machine programming QUALITY AG S U&AUC__E All QA procedures and policies are certified to ISO 9001:2008 and AS9100-C standards Fully equipped, climate controlled measuring facility, including: MITUTOYO 9166 Crysta Apex Coordinate Measuring Machine MOJAVE Granite Surface Plate, 48in X 72in MITUTOYO Profile Projector with MicroPak Software MITUTOYO Ceramic Master Gage Blocks MITUTOYO 24in Digital Height Gage, Glass Scale SURFTEST Profilometer Finish Gage Copyright © 2018 Neumeier Engineering Inc. • Return to top http://neumeierl.com/capabilities/equipmentl 10/10 11/2/2018 Neumeier Engineerng Inc. » Kent, Washinvton ■ HOME • COMPANY • CAPABILITIES o FQ IPl1 MEET • QUALM • _CONTACT o LMpjoyqlcnt Qpportunitie,% View full pow Company Overview Welcome to Neumeier Engineering, Inc. Learn more about our company, history and vision at our "Company" page. View full post Our Capabilities By utilizing modular tooling to reduce or eliminate set-ups, we create faster change-overs and minimize the impact on production schedules. Visit our "Capabilities" page to learn more. View full post Quality Standards Continuous improvement is integral to our culture, driving the expectations of excellence in all areas of business. Learn more at our "Quality" page. View full post Company Overview Welcome to Neumeier Engineering, Inc. Learn more about our company, history and vision at our "Company" page. View full post Our Capabilities By utilizing modular tooling to reduce or eliminate set-ups, we create faster change-overs and minimize the impact on production schedules. Visit our "Capabilities" page to learn more. Our CapabilitiesQuality StandardsCompany Overview f:[7UT1�1 Welcome to Neumeier Engineering Inc. Founded in 1957, Neumeier Engineering has been providing the U.S. and international communities with precision CNC machining of complex parts and sub -assemblies for aerospace, defense, electronics, and commercial industries. Neumeier Engineering is family -owned and operated, and we pride ourselves in being the dependable go -to supplier for our discerning customers. http://neumeierl.com/ 1/2 11/2/2018 ^ Neumeier Engineering Inc. �� Kent, Washinnton Through our full -service facility in Kent, Wasl ion, we provide world -class quality, on -time deliv,. acid competitive pricing for sophisticated manufacturing projects. Our experienced team is our greatest asset, and we look forward to discussing your vision, needs, and project goals. NEUMEIER ENGINEERING, INC We invite you to learn more about our innovative manufacturing solutions and diverse production capabilities by exploring our site. Copyright © 2018 Neumeier Engineering Inc. • Return to top http://neumeierl.com/ 2/2 11 /2/2018 COMPANY a Neumeier Engineering Inc. NEUMEIER INS r 5 J • 140ME ■ C ,COC IPAN Y • CAPABILITIES o LQILIPMENT • QUAI. V • CONTACT a Em—p- oymon—Pportunities COMPANY Today's manufacturing environment is complex, making it critical for industry leaders to select partners whom they can rely upon to provide products manufactured correctly and delivered on time —every time. Since 1957, Neumeier Engineering's family owned operations has provided precision milling and turning services to commercial, technical and aerospace industries. The cornerstone to our success has been: • state-of-the-art milling and turning machine tools, • innovative thinking, • customer collaboration, • industry leading standards certifications, and • strong quality commitment. At Neumeier, our willingness to explore creative solutions to manufacturing challenges has earned us a special niche among customers with unique requirements. Our highly -skilled team successfully completes challenging assignments ranging from aerospace to defense, and electronic to commercial industries. This select team is our greatest strength. From initial contact to the final product, our customers benefit from a synergistic atmosphere where projects are crafted with uncompromised excellence. Stable and reliable, Neumeier Engineering is a financially healthy company that continues to reinvest in the future of our company. For our customers, we offer cost savings and superior products that our competitors simply cannot match. We're here for the iattg-haul. With a fully implemented Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) program we maximize resource utilization through the integration of job planning, production control, traceability, and inventory control. This allows us to minimize throughput time, eliminate waste, increase customer responsiveness, and ultimately save our customers time and money. http://neumeierl.com/company/ 1/2 11 /2/2018 COMPANY a Neumeier Engineering €nc. Our Partners: ^Aft Western Toot & Supply Co. cEr1�Grr+up COMN�► NO TOOLING SYSTEMS 1 il� ,k04;14-. �/� LLIi17 F0 SF6Ea '�/www.[erhalk..,. rom Copyright © 2018 Neumeier Engineering Inc. • Return to top .i IIWPLT=R KURT CHICI L Power. Precision. Performance. i :N p li S rl�R R�9t7LilE Mitutoyo hftp://neumeierl.com/company/ 2/2 11 /2/2018 EQUIPMENT » Neumeier Engineering Irzc. ! V EUML Lit • Hone • COMPANY • CAPABILITIES o EQUIPMENT • QUALETI' ■ CONTACT o Ein*0yn=t DpRwTu-3itirs T Return to CAPABILITIES EQUIPMENT 2W Neumeier Engineering, Inc. GROB G-750 5-AXIS Machining Center hftp://neumeierl.com/capabilities/equipmentl 1 /10 11/2/2018 EQUIPMENT » Neumeier Engineering Inc. Neumeier Engineering, Inc,. INDEX C200 Production Turning Machine (equipped with bar feeder) http://neumeierl.com/capabilities/equipmentl 2/10 EQUIPMENT)) Neumeier Engineering In 11 /2/2018 2W Neumeier Engineering, Inc. Matsuura MAM72-63V5-AXIS PC2 Machining Center Matsuura H.Plus-630 Horizontal Machining Center High speed, heavy duty BT50 spindle Equippedwith 9-pallet changer System hftp://neumeierl.com/capabilities/equipmenV 3/10 7 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Tilt 384 1019 South 351 st Street Federal Way, Washington Project No. T-7844 R f bt..f ,,.a h. ; Terra Associates, Inc. A 4 � 4 j A & A PERMIT #: 19-101253-00-CO ADDRESS: 1019 S 351 St ST PROJECT-. Retaining Walls FEDERAL WAY TILT DATE: 03/19/2019 Prepared for: Panattoni Development Company Renton; Washington ❑ecember 19, 2018 RECEIVED MAR 19 2019 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUN[TY DEVELOPMENT TERRA ASSOCIATES, Inc. Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering, Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences December 19, 2018 Project No. T-7844 Mr. Brian Mattson Panattoni Development Company 900 SW 16th Street, Suite 330 Renton, Washington 98057 Subject: Geotechnical Report Tilt 384 1019 South 3 51 st Street Federal Way, Washington Dear Mr. Mattson: As requested, we conducted a geotechnical engineering study for the subject project. The attached report presents our findings and recommendations for the geotechnical aspects of project design and construction. Our study indicates the site is generally underlain by 2 to 12 inches of organics overlying 3 to 5 feet of medium dense silty sand with gravel over dense to very dense sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel to the termination of the test pits. There were two exceptions to this general condition. In Test Pit TP-1, we observed an approximately 1.5-foot layer of clean gravel between the upper silty sand with gravel and lower silty sand with gravel. In Test Pit TP-7, we observed approximately eight feet of silt overlying the medium dense sand with silt and gravel. Minor to moderate groundwater seepage was observed in Test Pit TP-7 at approximately five and nine feet below current site grades. In our opinion, there are no geotechnical conditions that would preclude the planned site development. The buildings can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on competent native soils or on structural fill placed on competent native soils. Floor slabs and pavements can be similarly supported. Detailed recommendations addressing these issues and other geotechnical design considerations are presented in the attached report. We trust the information presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require"lional information, please call. Sincerely ��1t Project 12220 113th Avenue NE, Ste. 130, Kirkland, Washington 98034 Phone (425) 821-7777 • Fax (425) 821-4334 TABLE OF CONTENTS Pac—No. 1.0 Project Description...........................................................................................................1 2.0 Scope of Work.................................................................................................................1 3.0 Site Conditions.................................................................................................................2 3.1 Surface 2 ................................................................................................................ 3.2 Soils....................................................................................................................2 3.3 Groundwater....................................................................................................... 3 3.4 Seismic................................................................................................................3 4.0 Discussion and Recommendations.................................................................................. 3 4.1 General................................................................................................................3 4.2 Site Preparation and Grading..............................................................................4 4.3 Excavations—...................................................................................................... 5 4.4 Foundations.........................................................................................................5 4.5 Slab -on -Grade Floors.......................................................................................... 6 4.6 Infiltration Facility..............................................................................................6 4.7 Lateral Earth Pressures....................................................................................... 7 4.8 Drainage.........................................................................................................7 4.9 Utilities................................................................................................................8 4.10 Pavements........................................................................................................... 8 5.0 Additional Services........................................................................................................10 6.0 Limitations.....................................................................................................................10 Fieures VicinityMap......................................................................................................................... Figure 1 ExplorationLocation Plan..................................................................................................... Figure 2 Typical Wall Drainage Detail............................................................................................... Figure 3 Appendices Field Exploration and Laboratory Testing.......................................................................Appendix A InfiltrationTest Results....................................................................................................Appendix B Geotechnical Report Tilt 384 1019 South 351 st Street Federal Way, Washington 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of developing the approximately 4.66 acres of the site with an approximately 79,000 square - foot industrial building along with a stormwater infiltration gallery and associated infrastructure improvements. Based on the grading plans prepared by Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated November 15, 2018, the building will be located in the eastern portion of the site with parking on the north and south sides of the building and dock high loading on the west side. Access to the site will be provided by a driveway entrance off Pacific Highway South. The building will have a finish floor elevation of 250 feet with the dock high loading at elevation 245 feet. Grading to achieve building lot and access elevations will be moderate with cuts and fills from 1 to 20 feet. Site stormwater will be collected and directed to a stormwater facility located in the southern portion of the project. The proposed infiltration gallery is approximately 100 feet by 74 feet with a bottom of stone elevation of 236 feet. This elevation is approximately two to six feet above existing site grades in the proposed location. Excavations between two and eight feet are expected in this area to reach the suitable infiltration soils. The building's floor slab will be constructed at grade with dock high loading on the west side of the structure. We expect the building will be constructed using precast concrete tilt -up wall panels with interior isolated columns supporting the roof framing. Foundation loads for this type of structure should be relatively light, in the range of 4 to 6 kips per foot for continuous bearing walls and 100 to 150 kips for isolated columns. The recommendations contained in the following sections of this report are based on our understanding of the above design features. We should review design drawings as they become available to verify that our recommendations have been properly interpreted and incorporated into project design and to amend or supplement our recommendations, if required. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK Our work was completed in accordance with our authorized proposal, dated January 5, 2018. Accordingly, on January 30, 2018, we explored subsurface conditions at the site by excavating 7 test pits to a maximum depth of 16 feet below existing surface grades using a track -mounted excavator in the eastern 4.66 acres of the site. Based on the results of our field study, laboratory testing, and analyses, we developed geotechnical recommendations for project design and construction. Specifically, this report addresses the following: ■ Soil and groundwater conditions • Seismic design parameters per the 2015 International Building Code (IBC) • Site preparation and grading • Excavations • Foundations • Slab -on -grade floors December 19, 2018 Project No. T-7844 • Lateral earth pressures for below -grade walls • Infiltration facility • Subsurface drainage • Utilities • Pavements It should be noted that recommendations outlined in this report regarding drainage are associated with soil strength, design earth pressures, erosion, and stability. Design and performance issues with respect to moisture as it relates to the structure environment is beyond Terra Associates' purview. A building envelope specialist or contractor should be consulted to address these issues, as needed. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS 3.1 Surface The project site consists of an approximately 15.8-acre parcel of land located at 1019 South 351 st Street in Federal Way, Washington. The approximate location of the site is shown on Figure 1. As we understand, only the eastern approximately 4.66 acres of the site are buildable due to a wetland and stream. The eastern portion of the site is currently undeveloped and covered with a moderate forest, very light understory, and a significant amount of trash. Site topography consists of a slight to moderate slope that descends from the northeast to the southwest with an overall relief of approximately 40 feet over the project area. 3.2 Soils In general, the soil conditions at the site consist of approximately 2 to 12 inches of organics overlying 3 to 5 feet of medium dense silty sand with gravel over dense to very dense sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel to the termination of the test pits. There were two exceptions to this general condition. In Test Pit TP-1, we observed an approximately 1.5-foot layer of clean gravel between the upper silty sand with gravel and lower silty sand with gravel. In Test Pit TP-7, we observed approximately eight feet of silt overlying the medium dense sand with silt and gravel. The Geologic Map of the Poverty Bay 7.5' Quadrangle, King and Pierce Counties, Washington, by D.B. Booth, H.H. Waldon, and K.G. Troost (2004) shows the site underlain by Recessional Outwash (Qvr) with Till (Qvt) mapped directly south and east of the site. The soils we observed in our test pits were consistent with both mapped soil descriptions. The preceding discussion is intended to be a brief review of the soil conditions observed at the site. More detailed descriptions are presented on the Test Pit Logs attached in Appendix A. Page No. 2 December 19, 2018 Project No. T-7844 3.3 Groundwater We observed minor to moderate groundwater seepage in Test Pit TP-7 at approximately five and nine feet below current site grades. This groundwater appeared to be perched within sandier layers within the silt formation. We would expect this water to be present year round but dissipate when exposed by excavation. We did not observe evidence of groundwater in any other test pit. 3.4 Seismic Liquefaction is a phenomenon where there is a reduction or complete loss of soil strength due to an increase in water pressure induced by vibrations. Liquefaction mainly affects geologically recent deposits of loose, fine grained sands underlying the groundwater table. Due to the dense and gravelly nature of the site soils, the risk of soil liquefaction resulting from ground shaking at the site is negligible. Therefore, in our opinion, unusual seismic hazard areas do not exist at the site, and design in accordance with local building codes for determining seismic forces would adequately mitigate impacts associated with ground shaking. Based on the site soil conditions and our knowledge of the area geology, per the 2015 International Building Code (IBC), site class "C" should be used in structural design. Based on this site class, in accordance with the 2015 IBC, the following parameters should be used in computing seismic forces: Seismic Design Parameters (IBC 2015) Spectral response acceleration ShortPeriod , Sm5 1.282 Spectral response acceleration 1 — Second Period), Seri 0.645 g Five percent damped .2 second period, SD, j 0.855 Five percent damped 1.0 second period, SDI 0.430 The above values were determined using the latitude/longitude coordinates 47.28733/-122.32181 and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) ground motion parameter calculator accessed on February 20, 2018 at the website, https:Hearthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php. 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 General Based on our study, there are no geotechnical conditions that would preclude the planned development. In general, the building can be supported on conventional spread footings bearing on competent native soils, or on structural fill placed on the competent native soils. Floor slabs and pavements can be similarly supported. Page No. 3 December 19, 2018 Project No. T-7844 The silty native soils contain a sufficient amount of soil fines and will be difficult to compact as structural fill when too wet. The ability to use these silty soils from site excavations as structural fill will depend on its moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions at the time of construction. The cleaner sands observed in our test pits have a relatively low percentage of soil fines and should be suitable for use as structural fill in most weather conditions. Depending on how the site is graded and the available volume of cleaner sands, the contractor should be prepared to import free -draining granular material for use as structural fill and backfill during the wet season. Detailed recommendations regarding these issues and other geotechnical design considerations are provided in the following sections of this report. These recommendations should be incorporated into the final design drawings and construction specifications. 4.2 Site Prnparationatnd Gradin To prepare the site for construction, all vegetation and organic soils should be stripped and removed from the site. Surface stripping depths of 4 to 12 inches should be expected to remove the upper vegetation mat and organic soils. Stripped vegetation and debris should be removed from the site. Organic soils will not be suitable for use as structural fill, but may be used for limited depths in nonstructural areas or for landscaping purposes. Once clearing and stripping operations are complete, cut and fill operations can be initiated to establish desired grades. Prior to placing fill, all exposed bearing surfaces should be observed by a representative of Terra Associates, Inc. to verify soil conditions are as expected and suitable for support of new fill. Our representative may request a proofroll using heavy rubber -tired equipment to determine if any isolated soft and yielding areas are present. If excessively yielding areas are observed, and they cannot be stabilized in place by compaction, the affected soils should be excavated and removed to firm bearing and grade restored with new structural fill. Beneath embankment fills or roadway subgrade, if the depth of excavation to remove unstable soils is excessive, the use of geotextile fabrics, such as Mirafi 50OX or an equivalent fabric, can be used in conjunction with clean granular structural fill. Our experience has shown that, in general, a minimum of 18 inches of a clean, granular structural fill placed and compacted over the geotextile fabric should establish a stable bearing surface. As discussed above, the silty soils at the site contain a sufficient percentage of fines (silt and clay size particles) that will make them difficult to compact as structural fill if they are too wet or too dry. Accordingly, the ability to use these soils as structural fill will depend on their moisture content and the prevailing weather conditions when site grading activities take place. Soils that are too wet to properly compact could be dried by aeration during dry weather conditions, or mixed with an additive such as cement or lime to stabilize the soil and facilitate compaction. If an additive is used, additional Best Management Practices (BMPs) for its use will need to be incorporated into the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) plan for the project. Soils that are dry of optimum should be moisture conditioned by controlled addition of water and blending prior to material placement. The cleaner outwash sands containing relatively low percentages of fines should be suitable to reuse as structural fill in most weather conditions. We recommend removing cobbles larger than six inches and boulders from the fill prior to placement and compaction. Page No. 4 December 19, 2018 Project No. T-7844 If grading activities are planned during the wet winter months, or if they are initiated during the summer and extend into fall and winter, the owner should be prepared to import wet weather structural fill. For this purpose, we recommend importing a granular soil that meets the following grading requirements: U.S. Sieve Size Percent Passing 6 inches 100 No. 4 75 maximum No. 200 5 maximum* *Based on the 3/4-inch fraction. Prior to use, Terra Associates, Inc. should examine and test all materials imported to the site for use as structural fill. Structural fill should be placed in uniform loose layers not exceeding 12 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the soil's maximum dry density, as determined by American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Designation D-698 (Standard Proctor). The moisture content of the soil at the time of compaction should be within two percent of its optimum, as determined by this ASTM standard. In nonstructural areas, the degree of compaction can be reduced to 90 percent. 4.3 Excavations All excavations at the site associated with confined spaces, such as lower building level retaining walls and utility trenches, must be completed in accordance with local, state, and federal requirements. Based on the cohesionless nature of the site soils and Washington Industrial Safety and Health Administration (WISHA) regulations, the soils observed would be classified as Type C soils. Accordingly, for temporary excavations of more than 4 feet and less than 20 feet in depth, the side slopes in Type C soils should be laid back at a slope inclination of 1.5:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) or flatter. If there is insufficient lateral distance to complete the excavations in the manners discussed above, or if excavations greater than 20 feet deep are planned, you may need to use temporary shoring to support the excavations. The above information is provided solely for the benefit of the owner and other design consultants, and should not be construed to imply that Terra Associates, Inc. assumes responsibility for job site safety. It is understood that job site safety is the sole responsibility of the project contractor. 4.4 Foundations The proposed building may be supported on conventional spread footing foundations bearing on competent native soils or on structural fill placed above the native soils. Foundation subgrades should be prepared as recommended in Section 4.2 of this report. Perimeter foundations exposed to the weather should bear at a minimum depth of 1.5 feet below final exterior grades for frost protection. Interior foundations can be constructed at any convenient depth below the floor slab. Page No. 5 December 19, 2018 Project No. T-7844 We recommend designing foundations being on competent soils fora net allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). For short-term loads, such as wind and seismic, a one-third increase in this allowable capacity can be used in design. With the anticipated loads and this bearing stress applied, building settlements should be less than one-half inch total and one-fourth inch differential. For designing foundations to resist lateral loads, a base friction coefficient of 0.35 can be used. Passive earth pressure acting on the sides of the footings may also be considered. We recommend calculating this lateral resistance using an equivalent fluid weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). We recommend not including the upper 12 inches of soil in this computation because they can be affected by weather or disturbed by future grading activity. This value assumes the foundations will be constructed neat against competent native soil or the excavations are backfilled with structural fill, as described in Section 4.2 of this report. The recommended passive and friction values include a safety factor of 1.5. 4.5 Slab -on -Grade Floors Slab -on -grade floors may be supported on a subgrade prepared as recommended in Section 4.2 of this report. Immediately below the floor slab, we recommend placing a four -inch thick capillary break layer composed of clean, coarse sand or fine gravel that has less than three percent passing the No. 200 sieve. This material will reduce the potential for upward capillary movement of water through the underlying soil and subsequent wetting of the floor slab. Installation of a capillary break layer will not be necessary where the floor subgrade consists of clean native outwash or structural fill constructed using the clean outwash soils. A representative of Terra Associates, Inc. should observe the subgrade at the time of construction to verify this condition and determine if an imported capillary break layer is required. _ The capillary break layer will not prevent moisture intrusion through the slab caused by water vapor transmission. Where moisture by vapor transmission is undesirable, such as covered floor areas, a common practice is to place a durable plastic membrane on the capillary break layer and then cover the membrane with a layer of clean sand or fine gravel to protect it from damage during construction, and aid in uniform curing of the concrete slab. It should be noted that if the sand or gravel layer overlying the membrane is saturated prior to pouring the slab, it will be ineffective in assisting uniform curing of the slab, and can actually serve as a water supply for moisture transmission through the slab that can subsequently affect floor coverings. Therefore, in our opinion, covering the membrane J with a layer of sand or gravel should be avoided if floor slab construction occurs during the wet winter months and the layer cannot be effectively drained. We recommend floor designers and contractors refer to the current American Concrete Institute (ACI) Manual of Concrete Practice for further information regarding vapor barrier installation below slab -on -grade floors. 4.6 Infiltration Facility _ As discussed above, site stormwater will be collected and directed to a stormwater infiltration gallery in the southern portion of the site. The gallery is approximately 100 feet by 74 feet with a bottom of stone elevation of 236 feet. This is approximately two to six feet above existing site grades. The soils suitable for infiltration are approximately two to eight feet below existing site grades. Therefore, the area will need to be over excavated and the material that is unsuitable for infiltration replaced with a free draining material that matches the infiltration rate for the facility. - Page No. 6 December 19, 2018 Project No. T-7844 On December 10, 2018, we completed a large scale infiltration test in accordance with the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual in the approximate center of the proposed infiltration facility. The results of the test showed the facility could be designed for a long-term infiltration rate of four inches per hour. The infiltration letter is attached in Appendix B. For water quality considerations, the native outwash will likely exhibit a low cation exchange capacity (CEC) and organic content. Therefore, pretreatment to remove pollutants as required by the design manual will need to be considered. The permeability of the native outwash soils will be significantly impacted by the intrusion of soil fines (silt- and clay -sized particles). Even a relatively minor amount of soil fines can reduce the permeability of the formation by a factor of ten. The greatest exposure to soil fines contamination will occur during mass grading and construction. Therefore, we recommend that the Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) plans route construction stormwater to locations other than the permanent infiltration facilities. 4.7 Lateral Earth Pressures The magnitude of earth pressure development on engineered retaining walls will partly depend on the quality of the wall backfill. We recommend placing and compacting wall backfill as structural fill as described in Section 4.2 of this report. To guard against hydrostatic pressure development, wall drainage must also be installed. A typical recommended wall drainage detail is shown on Figure 3. With wall backfill placed and compacted as recommended, and drainage properly installed, we recommend designing unrestrained walls that support level grades for an active earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 35 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). We recommend designing unrestrained walls that support a 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) backslope for an active earth pressure equivalent to a fluid weighing 50 pcf. For restrained walls, an additional uniform load of 100 psf should be added to the above values. For evaluation of wall performance under seismic loading, a uniform pressure equivalent to 8H psf, where H is the height of the below -grade portion of the wall should be applied in addition to the static lateral earth pressure. Friction at the base of foundations and passive earth pressure will provide resistance to these lateral loads. Values for these parameters are provided in Section 4.4 of this report. 4.8 D rainag Surface Final exterior grades should promote free and positive drainage away from the site at all times. Water must not be allowed to pond or collect adjacent to foundations or within the immediate building areas. We recommend providing a positive drainage gradient away from the building perimeters. If this gradient cannot be provided, surface water should be collected adjacent to the structures and disposed to appropriate storm facilities. Page No. 7 December 19, 2018 Project No. T-7844 Subsurface In our opinion, with the area immediately adjacent to the structure paved, and positive surface drainage maintained, perimeter foundation drains would not be necessary. If the grade is not positively drained away from the structure or is landscaped, perimeter foundation drains should be installed. Where foundation drains are installed, the drains should be laid to grade at an invert elevation equivalent to the bottom of footing grade. The drains can consist of four -inch diameter perforated PVC pipe that is enveloped in washed pea gravel -sized drainage aggregate. The aggregate should extend six inches above and to the sides of the pipe. Roof and foundation drains should be tightlined separately to the storm drains. All drains should be provided with cleanouts at easily accessible locations. 4.9 Ll'tililies Utility pipes should be bedded and backfilled in accordance with American Public Works Association (APWA) or City of Federal Way requirements. At minimum, trench backfill should be placed and compacted as structural fill as described in Section 4.2 of this report. Soils excavated on -site should generally be suitable for use as backfill material. However, there are silty soils which are fine grained and moisture sensitive; therefore, moisture conditioning may be necessary to facilitate proper compaction. If utility construction takes place during the winter, it may be necessary to import suitable wet weather fill for utility trench backfilling. 4.10 Pavements Pavement subgrades should be prepared as described in Section 4.2 of this report. Regardless of the degree of relative compaction achieved, the subgrade must be firm and relatively unyielding before paving. The subgrade should be proofrolled with heavy rubber -tired construction equipment such as a loaded 10-yard dump truck to verify this condition. The pavement design section is dependent upon the supporting capability of the subgrade soils and the traffic conditions to which it will be subjected. New pavements for the project will consist of drive aisles accessing parking spaces and loading dock areas. Accordingly, we expect traffic will consist of cars and light trucks, along with heavy traffic in the form of tractor -trailer rigs. For design considerations, we have assumed traffic in parking and in car/light truck access pavement areas can be represented by an 18-kip Equivalent Single Axle Loading (ESAL) of 50,000 over a 20-year design life. For heavy traffic pavement areas, we have assumed an ESAL of 300,000 would be representative of the expected loading. These ESALs represent loading approximately equivalent to 3 and 18, loaded (80,000-pound GVW) tractor -trailer rigs traversing the pavement daily in each area, respectively. With a stable subgrade prepared as recommended, we recommend the following options for pavement sections: Light Traffic and Parking: • Two inches of hot mix asphalt (HMA) over four inches of crushed rock base (CRB) • Full depth HMA — 3 '/z inches Page No. 8 December 19, 2018 Project No. T-7844 Heavy Traffic: • Three inches of HMA over 6 inches of CRB o Full depth HMA — 5 inches For exterior Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement, we recommend the following: 6 inches of PCC over two inches of CRB o 28-day compressive strength — 4,000 psi o Control joints spaced at a maximum of 15 feet The paving materials used should conform to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) specifications for 1/2-inch class HMA, PCC, and CRB. Long-term pavement performance will depend on surface drainage. A poorly -drained pavement section will be subject to premature failure resulting from surface water infiltrating the subgrade soils and reducing their supporting capability. For optimum performance, we recommend surface drainage gradients of at least two percent. Some degree of longitudinal and transverse cracking of the pavement surface should be expected over time. Regular maintenance should be planned to seal cracks as they occur. 5.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES Terra Associates, Inc. should review the final designs and specifications in order to verify that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in project design. We should also provide geotechnical services during construction in order to observe compliance with our design concepts, specifications, and recommendations. This will allow for design changes if subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. 6.0 LINUTATIONS We prepared this report in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. This report is the copyrighted property of Terra Associates, Inc. and is intended for specific application to the Tilt 384 project in Federal Way, Washington. This report is for the exclusive use of Panattoni Development Company and their authorized representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The analyses and recommendations presented in this report are based on data obtained from the subsurface explorations completed on -site. Variations in soil conditions can occur, the nature and extent of which may not become evident until construction. If variations appear evident, Terra Associates, Inc. should be requested to reevaluate the recommendations in this report prior to proceeding with construction. Page No. 9 330th 5t 3+3ifft Ln_ w L � s -?40th St Lei a q� -340th 3t-.--- 1 K,tts Comet _ ---41s3-r1' $ U3rd Se. 99 2 i� _S 3A4t �2 F2fIGY i tlSvft`dVs— _ 'V —9 f __jI}rJJ . 7 < �. S wth St _ imp Lj---- -- e -' 1, r al 0 5 361si ;1I 1000 2000 APRROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 15:2018 dt Corporation 0 2018 HERE { �� REFERENCE: https://www.bing.com/maps ACCESSED 2/21/18 Terra VICINITY MAP TILT 384 EO Associates, Inc. FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj.No. T-7844 Date: DEC 2018F Figure 1 FOUND 3"X3'• CONC. MONUMENT _F�I�II yy��q /1 W/ NAIL IN LEAD, 1.2- BELOW U PN 202II04-904,S GRADE PROPOSED (0.5 E, & 1,6• S.) f RETAINING WALL,,_ PROPOSED fi6tbrtlPlE �__1•_' � f;5Vr P RETAINING WALL F}`''—^--�- •— 1 .4�__—-T._�,_ F! 8.2.9 ir_ 6i77D'� d•i.D T 1 erg .!! RETAlRl� �- ie•. !r rA - .--�� t ; - ------ ��--�`�-�-�--�-- - -. I!/ EAST EDGE OF STREAMS / / ,. Irk'+ R1 TP-6 1 \ FOUND 4"X4" CON C- IN P SS MONUMENT W/ BRA ' I ��•?.;. ,' a ; AT GRADE WEST EDGE OF STREAM rp, �r `'J � •Y ,"�'�4 -' 7 % CONCRETE 03RUDED ( / / p�+` J :. r• I . � , � rm') PER WON. SH 1 I 1( I� , +e +, I r • , 54736'ZS•E R'ScSt• r I ORIGINAL PROPIMD STREAM r,+r+ d �R.� _ u [' �•+ F'AIf7:: _ rry BUFFER INTRUSION LINE . + rr 1 d4 A ,A 7 STREAM BUFFER / i"r)rr l^• ti !� . r •. � IN!TRI)SIDN LINE r y�.i � f,✓l -•. _ -. o SD BO�vm;—� / 'I 21La FSTOPQ��-CY4G TP-2 "°'+.�_, - '.��'o` JI> - n=T.D � ire i■ • __ 'r 4 '"�•` - ' r ' �i A } c 41 / r' .i i�i r�rf�` ■ 4 r-i; ` 1 �, ,`.-� �. 1 Y.. '.� a 4A •. rrf r r, ,+ � - fit. �� ` ll��, + CULVERT ;" 4 Y [ .f `�.. �G S5K 7� 4 ■ SD BOX LV"cRF� ��h i- ,��. .��.' «.4c�'� p _pL�R;IT�r RETAINNGP WALL ` 17 d729�� ll+ + `� '` r�■Ir l' f+r M1- `-. } EXISDNG ROAD TO BE REGRADED =- ! ' , `•' NOT A PART) 4 ACCESS TO BE PRESERVED `,f� ' '-Yr,1 'A� •i 1 OURING CONSTRUCTION •r+- r `�' IADJUST UTILITIES AS REQUIRED / 'I i i+■f f -"S. COL VRE I TP-7 4 I NOT A PART • 94t 7d TP-8 aTaRUTErHN:LTRA7MGALLERY _ APMPXIMATELY 100'.74' 1�i�` TOP OF STONE=2410 1 ,`��' �" — TOP OF CHAMBER=242-0 -J `';iq��', � �• 4 1 BOTTCM OF CHAMBER=237.0 ) ........ �t �','p,� �.,,• '. // BOTTOM OF STONE=236.0 VOLUME REQUIRED: 31,600 CF I VOLUME PROVIDED: 31.700 CF ��N��`it,��"ti : ^`` • _ -_ �..•'.' AREA 7,240 SF ~ ;,,4 �,1,1`Y ,1 i :ti'• AREA PRDYIDE6 7,250 SF .�ttt;�,tt • • �� `��- �•� .. - fr%r 000 DEFA - [�lt,r ti+rt. It t t•,t;`t V ULT 190' WETLAND BUFFER t„lltt •ate'+ .. � � Y+' 11 rl� t, t�t� �;1�'11 • i.. ++'' I NOTE: LEGEND: THIS SITE PLAN IS SCHEMATIC. ALL LOCATIONS AND Is APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. IT IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. REFERENCE:SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS. 0 80 160 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET CONCRETE EXTRUDED �v- oFO: .2 f !; •rs+^� (TYP-) PER DETAIL SREE; '1 ""„ttt •z 5 .� _ •� 1 �� 5}AT 1 - I • } 11 %C , •�N4i. 8�.�774 C. •+ ',10KKlE LQRS AHD G[tTTER �` : + (rl•P,) PER KT" SHEET CE -~. 4 + .�• . A .a� t* �� r. • { ._ , � y gip• EXISTING DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO BE PRESERVED TO y- EXISTING RESIDENTIAL HOME I Terra EXPLORATION LOCATION PLAN r TILT 384 Associates, Inc. FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and PNo. T-7844 Date: DEC 2018 Figure 2 ro Environmental Earth Sciences j 12" MINIMUM 3/4" MINUS WASHED GRAVEL 12"FFE SEE NOTE 6"(MIN.) SLOPE TO DRAIN COMPACTED STRUCTURAL FILL �_ — f f 12" OVER PIPE 3" BELOW PIPE 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE NOT TO SCALE NOTE: EXCAVATED SLOPE (SEE REPORT TEXT FOR APPROPRIATE INCLINATIONS) MIRADRAIN G100N PREFABRICATED DRAINAGE PANELS OR SIMILAR PRODUCT CAN BE SUBSTITUTED FOR THE 12-INCH WIDE GRAVEL DRAIN BEHIND WALL. DRAINAGE PANELS SHOULD EXTEND A MINIMUM OF SIX INCHES INTO 12-INCH THICK DRAINAGE GRAVEL LAYER OVER PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE. Terra TYPICAL WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL TILT 384 Associates, Inc. FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON o Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geoiogy and Environmental Earth Sciences Proj.No. T-7844 Date: DEC 2018 Figure 3 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Tilt 384 Pierce County, Washington On January 30, 2018, we investigated subsurface conditions at the site by excavating 8 test pits to a maximum depth of 16 feet below existing surface grades using a trackhoe. The test pit locations were approximately determined in the field by sighting and pacing from existing surface features. The approximate test pit locations are shown on Figure 2. The Test Pit Logs are presented on Figures A-2 through A-9. A geotechnical engineer from our office maintained a log of each test pit as it was excavated, classified the soil conditions encountered, and obtained representative soil samples. All soil samples were visually classified in the field in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. A copy of this classification is presented as Figure A-1. Representative soil samples obtained from the test pits were placed in closed containers and taken to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The moisture content of each sample was measured and is reported on the individual Test Pit Logs. Grain size analyses were performed on selected samples. The results of the grain size analyses are shown on Figures A-10 through A-13. Project No. T-7844 MAJOR DIVISIONS LETTER SYMBOL TYPICAL DESCRIPTION Clean GW Well -graded gravels, gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines. Gravels (less CO) GRAVELS o than 5% More than 50 /o GP Poorly -graded raded ravels, ravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines. Y-9 9 9 2, fines) co N of coarse fraction U) i .N is larger than No. GM Silty gravels, gravel -sand -silt mixtures, non -plastic fines. m m 4 sieve Gravels with GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. w Z � "in fines 0 C7 N LO Clean Sands SW Well -graded sands, sands with gravel, little or no fines. N o c Z SANDS (less than QU More than 50% 5% fines) SP Poorly -graded sands, sands with gravel, little or no fines. o of coarse fraction v 2 is smaller than SM Silty sands, sand -silt mixtures, non -plastic fines. Sands with No. 4 sieve fines SC Clayey sands, sand -clay mixtures, plastic fines. ML Inorganic silts, rock flour, clayey silts with slight plasticity. y E N SILTS AND CLAYS CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity. (Lean clay) p M m Liquid Limit is less than 50% OL Organic silts and organic clays of low plasticity. to am p UJI y Eo Z Q N MH Inorganic silts, elastic. W Z � o Z SILTS AND CLAYS t CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity. (Fat clay) o Liquid Limit is greater than 50 /o u. L a) •- `o OH Organic clays of high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SYMBOLS cn Standard Penetration 2" OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPILT SPOON SAMPLER W Density Resistance in Blows/Foot J 2.4" INSIDE DIAMETER RING SAMPLER OR p Very Loose 0-4 SHELBY TUBE SAMPLER v5 Loose 4-10 = Medium Dense 10-30 1 WATER LEVEL (Date) O Dense 30-50 rJ Very Dense >50 Tr TORVANE READINGS, tsf Pp PENETROMETER READING, tsf Standard Penetration W Consistancy Resistance in Blows/Foot DD DRY DENSITY, pounds per cubic foot W Very Soft 0-2 Soft 2-4 LL LIQUID LIMIT, percent = V Medium Stiff 4-8 Stiff 8-16 PI PLASTIC INDEX Very Stiff 16-32 >32 N STANDARD PENETRATION, blows per foot Hard Terra UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM TILT 384 ' • Associates, Inc. FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Pro .No. T-7844 Date: DEC 2018 Figure A-1 1 2 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-1 FIGURE A-2 PROJECT NAME: Tilt 384 PROJ. NO: T-7844 LOGGED BY:MX LOCATION: Federal Way. WashiUton SURFACE CONDITIONS: Brush APPROX. ELEV: N/A DATE LOGGED: January 30, 2018 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A Description DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A Consistency/ o Relative Density i (6 inches ORGANICS) Red -brown silty SAND with gravel, fine to medium sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, scattered organics, scattered cobbles. (SM) (Weathered till) Gray to light brown GRAVEL, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, some cobbles, scattered organics, some sand. (GP) ------------------------------- ----------------- Gray silty SAND with gravel, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, some cobbles, occasional boulder. (SM) (Till) "Slight cementation at 9 feet. 'Silt content increases at 9 feet. Test pit terminated at approximately 10 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 19.2 Medium Dense 3.6 6.4 Dense to Very Dense 8.5 • Terra NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pit location and should not be ' Associates, Inc. P 9 interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site. Consultants in Geotechnicar Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-2 PROJECT NAME: Tilt 384 , PROJ. NO: T-7844 . LOGGED BY: MX LOCATION: Federal Way, Washington SURFACE CONDITIONS: Brush FIGURE A-3 APPROX. ELEV: N/A DATE LOGGED: Janus _ 30, 2018 —DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A 0 Consistency/ o m Description r Relative Density CL © rn 0 1 - i 1 1 � 5 2 6- 7- 9— 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 (6 inches ORGANICS) Light brown silty GRAVEL with sand to GRAVEL with silt and sand, fine to medium sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, scattered organics, some cobbles. (GM/GP-GM) --------------- ----------------------------- G►ay silty SAND with gravel, fine to medium sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, some cobbles, occasional boulder. (SM) (Till) Test pit terminated at approximately 10 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. Medium Dense 10.4 6.8 6.2 _J Terra NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pit location and should not be Associates Inc. interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site.Cnnsullants in Geotechnical Ingineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences PROJECT NAME: Tilt 384 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-3 PROJ. NO: T-7844 LOGGED BY: MX LOCATION: Federal Wa Washington SURFACE CONDITIONS: Brush FIGURE A-4 APPROX. ELEV: N/A DATE LOGGED:Janua 30 2018 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A 6 z Z. E N m 0 1 1 2- 3- 4— 2 5 7 9 10 3 11 12 13- 14- 15 Description (6 inches ORGANICS) Red -brown silty SAND with gravel, fine to medium sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, scattered organics, some cobbles. (SM) (Weathered till) ----------------------------------------- Gray SAND with silt and gravel, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, some cobbles, some cementation. (SP-SM) (Sandy till) Test pit terminated at approximately 10 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. ' NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pit location and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site. Consistency/ Relative Density 14.0 Medium Dense Dense to Very Dense 6.1 10.8 Terra Associates Inc. % Consultants In Geotechnical Ingineering Geo4ogy and Environmental Earth Sciences PROJECT NAME: Tilt 384 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-4 PROJ. NO: T-7844 LOGGED BY: MX FIG U RE A-5 LOCATION: Federal Way,Washington SURFACE CONDITIONS: Brush APPROX. ELEV: N/A DATE LOGGED:Janua 30 2018 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A 0 Z Consistency/ o m Description Relative Density t a a E uD m 0 rn 0 1 1 2- 3- 4 2 7 8 3 9 10 ` 11 12 13 1 14 — 15 (6 inches ORGANICS) Red -brown silty SAND with gravel, fine to medium sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, scattered organics, scattered cobbles. (SM) (Weathered till) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gray SAND with gravel ,to GRAVEL with sand, medium to coarse sand, fine gravel, moist, numerous cobbles, occasional boulder, trace organics. (SP/GP) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gray silty SAND with gravel, fine to medium sand, fine gravel, moist, some cobbles, slight cementation. (SM) (Till) Test pit terminated at approximately 1 U teet. No groundwater seepage observed. 1 NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pit location and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site. Medium Dense Dense 13.4 5.2 10.5 Terra A-MAssociates Inc. _ Consultants in Geotechnical t=ngineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences PROJECT NAME: Tilt 384 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-5 PROJ. NO: T-7844 LOCATION: Federal Way,Washington SURFACE CONDITIONS: Brush DATE LOGGED: January 30, 20_1 8 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: - N/A FIGURE A-6 LOGGED BY:MX APPROX. ELEV: N/A n=DTLJ Tn f_AVINr-• NIA Z Consistency/ .. R Description -C U Relative Density 3 4 E 0] M d 0 0 (4 inches ORGANICS) 1 1 Red -brown to light brown silty SAND with gravel, fine to medium sand, fine gravel, moist, scattered 2— organics, scattered cobbles. (SM) (Weathered till) 3— 2 3 7 8— 9 10 11— j 12 J 13 _. 14 15 ------------------------------- Gray silty SAND with gravel to SAND with silt and gravel, fine to medium sand, fine gravel, moist, some cobbles. (SMISP-SM) (Sandy till) "Pocket of light brown sandy SILT observed at 10 feet. Test pit terminated at approximately 10 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pit location and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site. 13.1 Medium Dense I 8.7 9.4 Dense Terra Associates Inc. - Consultants in Geotechnical Ingineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-6 FIG UREA-7 PROJECT NAME: Tilt 384 PROJ. NO: T-7844 LOGGED BY: MX LOCATION: Federal Way,Washinaton SURFACE CONDITIONS: Brush APPROX. ELEV: N/A DATE LOGGED: January 30 2018 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A .. Z Consistency/ Description Relative Density ?� a a� E In cn 0 - (2 inches ORGANICS) 1 3 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 15 -d 2 1 2© Red -brown silty SAND with gravel, fine to medium sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, scattered organics, scattered cobbles. (SM) (Weathered till) Gray silty SAND with gravel, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel, moist, some cobbles. (SM) (Sandy till) Test pit terminated at approximately 10 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. Medium Dense Dense 12.1 10.6 7.7 Terra NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pit location and should not be _ Associates Inc ■ interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site. Consultants in Geotechnical Ingineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences PROJECT NAME: Tilt 384 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-7 PROJ. NO: T-7844 LOGGED BY: MX FIGURE A-8 LOCATION: Federal Way, Washington SURFACE CONDITIONS: Brush APPROX. ELEV: N/A DATE LOGGED: January 30, 2018 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: 5 & 9 Feet DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A i 6 ., z m t a a E a) m U) 0 1 _- 2 1 3 4 =5 2 8 7 3 Description (8 inches ORGANICS) Brown to light brown SILT with interbedded layers of silty SAND to sandy SILT, fine sand, moist to wet. (ML) Consistency/ I o Relative Density _ _ __--_-.. ____-. -- ---.. -- Medium Dense Gray SAND with silt and gravel, fine to coarse sand, fine to coarse gravel, wet. (SP-SM) s 9 10 11 4 12 13 14 15 5--------------------------------------------- - ---- ----------------- Dark brown to black SAND with gravel, fine to medium sand, wet. (SP) 16 6 Test pit terminated at approximately 16 feet. 17 Light groundwater seepage observed at approximately 5 and 9 feet. 18 19 l 20 — - — I 17.7 26.1 29.2 10.7 12.4 15.5 r Terra in only to this test it location and should not be _ •' Associates Inc. l NOTE: This subsurface information pertains y p ? interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site. 4 Consultants in Geotechnical Engineering Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences PROJECT NAME: Tilt 384 LOG OF TEST PIT NO. TP-8 FIGURE A-9 PROJ. NO: T-7844 LOGGED BY: MX LOCATION: Federal Way, Washing tan . SURFACE CONDITIONS: Brush DATE LOGGED: January 30,.2018 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER: N/A 6 z L � a E a) o U) 0 1 1 2- 3- 4- 21 6- 7- 8- 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 Description APPROX. ELEV: N/A DEPTH TO CAVING: N/A (12 inches ORGANICS) Brown to light brown SAND with silt, fine to medium sand, moist, scattered organics, slight cementation. (SP-SM) ------------ Brown to gray SAND with silt and gravel, fine to medium sand, fine gravel, moist, some cobbles, occasional boulder. (SP-SM) "Slight to moderate cementation from 8 to 15 feet. Test pit terminated at approximately 15 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. NOTE: This subsurface information pertains only to this test pit location and should not be interpreted as being indicative of other locations at the site. Consistency/ o Relative Density �: Medium Dense 1 24.3 Dense to Very Dense 11.4 8.6 8.1 Terra L' AssociatesConsultants in otechnical n 1 Inc. g g Geology and Environmental Earth Sciences Particle Size Distribution Report C C C O O 1p C N \ n c7 # q't ix # 100 1 I I 1! I I I I I I f I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I! I go I I I I I H i l l I I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I i 1 E I I I 80 I I II I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I { I I 1 1 70 I I I I I I I I I I 1! I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I w so I I I E E I I I l l i l z ,1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I z 50 1 11 II I I I I I I I I w I V 1 I uj ao a I I I I l l 1 1 I I I I I I I I I i I 11 1 1 1 I so I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I 10 I ! I I I I I I l I l 1 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 0 I I i l l 1 1 ! I11J.1117<" 4J. 100 10 1 0.1 a.o1 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines +3" Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0 0.0 55.7 30.2 4.3 3.3 3.9 2.6 ❑ 0.0 10.5 1 18.7 8.9 14.9 1 23.1 23.9 0 0.0 8.9 1 37.1 7.9 12.3 1 15.8 18.0 LL PL DSS DSfl D50 Dnn D D1p C C .0 50.7887 27.3778 21.7241 13.4621 6.3542 2.0957 3.16 13.06 i❑ 14.4725 1.5973 0.5429 0.1406 0 15.7656 7.3307 3.1862 0.2834 Material Description USCS AASHTO .0 Poorly graded GRAVEL GP i❑ Silty SAND with gravel SM L Silty SAND with gravel SM Project No. T-7844 Client: Panattoni Development Company, Inc. Remarks: Project: Tilt 384 oTested on 2/1/2018 Federal Way, Washington ❑Tested on 2/1/2018 0 Location: Test Pit TP-1 Depth: -3.5 feet Sample Number: 2 oTested on 2/1/2018 ❑ Location: Test Pit TP-1 Depth: -9 feet Sample Number: 4 o Location: Test Pit TP-2 Depth: -5 feet Sample Number: 2 Terra Associates, Inc. Kirkland WA- �- --- Figure A-10 Tested By:, FQ _ _ _ Particle Size Distribution Report C C G O O C C C C C pp O O O qD eC�p O_ V_ C, 100 I I II I { I I I 1 I I I I I I II ! I I I 1 I 1 1 1 so I I I I I I f I I I I I I I I I I I 1 i l l 1 80 I I ! I l I I I ! I I I I I I I I I ! 1 I I I I I I I! ISOI l I I I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I i l l l w60 [ I I l f 11 I I I I I I Z I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 w w I I a a° I I 1 1 1 I I I f 1 I I I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I 30 I I I 1 1 I I ! 1 I I I f I I 1 1 1 i t I I I I 20 i I I I I I I I 1 I l l i 10 I I !{ I I I I 1 I i I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I l l l 0 I I 1 1 1 l i I i I l i 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines % * „ coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine silt Clay 0 0.0 14.1 39.0 16.2 13.1 8.2 9.4 17 0.0 8.4 32.9 20.4 28.3 8.1 1.9 0 0.0 0.0 29.9 9.3 16.6 21.6 22.6 LL PL Dgg D D_gn D30 Dig Djp C C 0 18.4026 7.9324 5.4121 1.8974 0.2723 0.0953 4.76 83.20 I❑ 14.1890 5.0297 3.2825 1.3654 0.6046 0.4250 0.87 11.83 11.6098 1.8407 0.6761 0.1590 Material Description USCS I AASHTO �o Poorly graded GRAVEL with silt and sand GP -GM i❑ Poorly graded SAND with gravel SP SAND with ravel SM _ t No. T-7844 Client: Panattoni Development Company, Inc. rrojj Remarks: t: Tilt 384 oTested on 2/1/2018 Federal Way, Washington ❑Tested on 2/1/2018 o Location: Test Pit TP-3 Depth: -10 feet Sample Number: 3 oTested on 2/1/2018 ❑ Location: Test Pit TP-4 Depth: -4 feet Sample Number: 2 1.n, Location: Test Pit TP-6 Depth: -8 feet Sample Number: 3 Terra Associates, Inc. Kirkland, WA 1.Figure A-11 Tested By: FQ Particle Size Distribution Report c e o c a w c c c< < m y a N a 0 0 o v fD f7 NL�N � a a it 7t 100 I I I I ! I I I I I I I ! l I I I I l l l 90 1 1 1 I I I l E 1 1 1 I 1 80 1 I I I I I I I f l l I! I 70 E I I I I I I I I I I I ! I w so ,l I I I I I I I I I I I I I Z 50 I I E I M I I I I I I I w I I LU 40 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30 I k I I I! I I I N I I I I 20 I 1 i l f t l 4 I I I I I 10 I I I I I [ I I I 1 o I I I I I I I i I i t ' 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines %+3" Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0 0.0 0.0 13.3 10.2 54.6 15.5 6.4 13 0.0 5.6 6.9 4.8 1 62.9 16.6 3.2 I LL PL Dgs Dan D Dan D D C C11 0 4.0377 0.9868 0.7738 0.5147 0.3367 0.2477 1.08 3.98 ❑ 2.4669 0.9201 0.7550 0.5267 0.3721 0.3063 0.98 3.00 Material Description USCS AASHTO co Poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel SP-SM ❑ Poorly graded SAND with gravel SP Project No. T-7844 Client: Panattoni Development Company, Inc. -Remarks: Project: Tilt 384 oTested on 2/1/2018 Federal Way, Washington ❑Tested on 2/1/2018 o Location: Test Pit TP-7 Depth: -15 feet Sample Number: 4 Location: Test Pit TP-7 Depth: -16 feet Sample Number: 5 Terra Associates, Inc. Kirkland WA Figure A-12 Tested By: I Particle Size Distribution Report C � C �. C m q O ry (O(.]] yOy [P[pp O t► ryry 100 I I I l f I I I ! I I I 1 1 I 1 I l f! I 1 I I I I I 90 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 I I ! I I I I 1 l I l l I l I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 ! I I 70 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w 60 Z Z 50 1 I I I I i i i 1 1 wUi 1 1 11 a 40 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I! I I I I i I I I I I I I 30 1 I I I I l i I I I I I I 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 I I I I I I I l I I I 0 100 i 0 1 0.1 0.01 ©.tea' GRAIN SIZE - mm. %Gra_v_e_l_ %Sand Ip fines +3„ Coarse FineCoarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0 0.0 13.3 1 32.8 13.9 16.0 13.6 10.4 ❑ 0.0 16.6 23.1 10.1 28.2 I. 16.0 6.0 LL PL Dgr, DSO DSp Din Din C C11 0 17.8271 6.7069 3.8066 0.6887 0.1799 0 20.5104 4.6502 1.9483 0.5553 0.3224 0.2402 0.28 19.36 Material Description USCS AASHTO o Poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel SP-SM ❑ Poorly graded SAND with silt and gravel SP-SM Project No. T-7844 Client: Panattoni Development Company, Inc. Remarks: Project: Tilt 384 oTested on 2/1/2018 Federal Way, Washington ❑Tested on 2/1/2018 v Location: Test Pit TP-8 Depth: -5 feet Sample Number: 2 ❑ Location: Test Pit TP-8 Depth: -14 feet Sample Number: 4 Terra Associates, Inc. Kirkland, WA Figure A-13 Tested By: _FQ APPENDIX B INFILTRATION TEST RESULTS December 14, 2018 Project No. T-7844 Mr. Brian Mattson Panattoni Development Company 900 SW 16th Street, Suite 330 Renton, Washington 98057 Subject: Infiltration Testing Tilt 384 1019 South 351 st Street Federal Way, Washington Dear Mr. Mattson: As requested, we have completed infiltration testing at the subject property. Our infiltration testing consisted of a large-scale Pilot Infiltration Test (PIT) conducted in general conformance with the procedures outlined in Section 5.2.1 (General Requirements for infiltration Facilities) of the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The test was performed near the center of the proposed Infiltration Facility. The location was based on sighting from existing structures and GPS coordinates from Google Earth. The approximate location is shown on attached Figure 1. The test results are summarized below: Estimated Design Approx. Infiltration Rate Test Steady State Measured Infiltration Correction (Isar design = Isat initial x Test Elevation Flow Rate Rate (Isat initial) Factor FT) No. (ft) (gpm) 21.43 _ (_in/hr _ 19.64 CFT' _ PIT-1J 227.5 1 0.21 4.00 ft Feet based on available topography gpm Gallons per minute in/hr Inches per hour 1 Equation 5-11 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual Based on the results of our test, it is our opinion that the native soils at this location and depth are suitable for support of the proposed infiltration facility. Further excavation of the test location showed outwash continued to a depth of approximately 15 feet below -grade (elevation 217 feet). The raw pilot infiltration test data has been included as Figure 2. Mr. Brian Mattson December 14, 2018 We trust the information presented is sufficient for your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional information, please call. Sincerely �b� O IN S. V�iIt'�1% E Caro IdJO.Oeck F„1W IX YrojeC[kq47016 O �STS11�' ��Encl:��PLP ionMap ilot Infiltration Test Data _ ., Project No. T-7844 Page No. ii l I I I i Figure 2 - Raw Pilot Infiltration Test Data Test Number: PIT-1 Project Name: Tilt 384 Project Number: 7844 Test Date: 12/10/2018 hole dimensions 10.5' x 10' x 4.5' Hole area 105 square feet initial meter reading 1947 gal time (minutes) cum vol (gal) flow rate (gpm) Head (feet) 15 2308 20.81 1 30 2610 20.46 1 45 2927 20.08 1 60 3243 21.48 1 75 3592 22.73 1 Falling head test time (minute) HEAD (inches) 0 12 1 11.16 measured infiltration rate using 2 11 steady state data 3 10.44 5 10.2 measured infiltration rate using 7 9.6 falling head data 10 9 15 7.68 30 4.8 40 50 60 0 70 80 90 use mean flow rate of last half hour of test as steady state infiltration rate 21.43 gpm 2.86 cfm infiltration rate=steady sate flow divided by area of pit 0.03 feet per minute 0.33 inches per minute 19.64 inches per hour 96.00 inches per hour Figure 2 - Raw Pilot Infiltration Test Data Correction factors F-testing 0.3 F geometry 1 F-frequency 1 F-plugging 0.7 factors were otained from the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual corrected steady state infiltration rate 4.13 inches per hour corrected falling head infiltration rate 20.16 inches per hour PERMIT #: 18-105640-00-CO ADDRESS: 1019 S 351 st ST PROJECT: New Building Shell TILT 348 DATE: 1 1 /30/2018 TMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8`h Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 CITY OF 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 Fede�� Wa w w.cit at'federalw�a .corn y P LAN N I N Go" HAZARDOUS .MATERIALS INVENTORY STATEMENT CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AND WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS I. WHY SHOULD THIS INVENTORY STATEMENT BE FILLED OUT? Critical Aquifer Recharge (CARAs) and Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPAs) are considered "critical areas" pursuant to Federal Way Revised Code (FWCC) Title 14, `Environmental Policy." This inventory statement must be filled out by the applicant or agent for any proposed activity listed in Section II of this handout, and which are located within Wellhead Capture Zones 1, 5, and 10 as shown on the Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Areas Maps. Please refer to the handout on Critical Aquifer Recharge and Wellhead Protection Areas for a description of the review process. II. ACTIVITIES GOVERNED BY CARA AND WHPA REGULATIONS The inventory statement must be filled out for the following activities: a Construction of any residential structure, including single-family development Construction of any barn or other agricultural structure Construction of any office, school, commercial, recreational, service, or storage building Construction of a parking lot of any size Other minor new construction (see WAC 197-11-800[2]) ■ Additions or modifications to or replacement of any building or facility (does not include tenant improvements) • Demolition of any structure Any landfill or excavation • Installation of underground tanks a Any division of land, including short plats • Change of use, which involves repair, remodeling, and maintenance activities ■ Dredging • Reconstruction/maintenance of groins and similar shoreline protection structures ■ Replacement of utility cables that must be buried under the surface of the bedlands a Repair/rebuilding of major dams, dikes, and reservoirs • Installation of construction of any utility, except for on -going operation and maintenance activities of public wells by public water FttEIVED ■ Personal wireless service facilities ilk NOV 3 0 2010 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Project Name Project Location Applicant Tracking No III. TYPES AND QUANTITIES OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Please provide the approximate quantity of the types of hazardous materials or deleterious substances that will be stored, handled, treated, used, produced, recycled, or disposed of in connection with the proposed activity. If no hazardous materials will be involved, please proceed to Section IV. MATERIAL ll[tulu ai (1) Acid or basic solutions or solids (2) Antifreeze or coolants C$� (3) Bleaches, peroxides, detergents, surfactants, disinfectants, bactericides algaecides (4) Brake, transmission, hydraulic fluids (5) Brine solutions (6) Corrosion or rust prevention solutions (7) Cutting fluids $0 (8) Deicing materials (9) Dry cleaning or cleaning solvents (10) Electroplating or metal finishing solutions (11) Engraving or etching solutions (12) Explosives (13) Fertilizers CP (14) Food or animal processing wastes 0 (15) Formaldehyde (16) Fuels, additives, oils, greases 2S (17) Glues, adhesives, or resins (18) Inks, printing, or photocopying chemicals c� (19) Laboratory chemicals, reagents or standards (20) Medical, hospital, pharmaceutical, dental, or vete ' fluids or wastes (21) Metals (hazardous e.g. arsenic, copper, chromium, lead, mere , silver, etc. (22) Paints, pigments, dyes, stains, varnish, sealers. , 25 (23) Pesticides, herbicides or poisons $ (24) Plastic resins, plasticizers, or catalysts iS (25) Photo development chemicals (i] (26) Radioactive sources (27) Refrigerants, cooling water (contact) �1 (28) Sludges, still bottoms (29) Solvents, thinners, paint removers or strippers (30) Tanning (leather) chemicals (31) Transformer, capacitor oils/fluids, PCB's (32) Waste oil (33) Wood preservatives (34) List OTHER hazardous materials or deleterious substances on a separate sheet. SOLID w�w fk� 0 Bulletin #056 -January 1, 2011 Page 2 of 3 k:\Handouts\Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement Project Name Applicant Project Location Tracking No. IV. FURTHER INFORMATION Provide the approximate quantity of fill and source of fill to be imported to the site. roximate Quarttity of Irn Fill Source of Fill t-� � P Check box # 1 if you do not plan to store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous material or deleterious substance listed in Section 111. Check box(s) #2 through #5 (and fill in appropriate blanks) of the below table if they apply to your facility or activity. #1 [ ] The proposed development will not store, handle, treat, use, produce, recycle, or dispose of any of the types and quantities of hazardous materials or deleterious substances listed above. #2 [ qAbove ground storage tanks, having a capacity of gallons will be installed. #3 [ onstruction vehicles will be refueled on site. Storage within wholesale and retail facilities of hazardous materials, or other deleterious #4 [ ] substances, will be for sale in original containers with a capacity of _ gallons liquid or mounds solid. The presence of chemical substances on this parcel is/wil.1 be for "temporary- non -routine #5 [ ] maintenance or repair of the facility (such as paints and paint thinners) and are in individual containers with a capacity of_ gallons liquid or pounds solid. Check any of the following items that currently exist or are proposed in connection with the development of the site. #1 Stormwater infiltration system (e.g., french drain, dry well, stormwater Swale, etc.) 42 [ ] Hydraulic lifts or elevator, chemical systems. or other machinery that uses hazardous materials 43 [ ] Cathodic protection wells 94 [ ] Water wells, monitoring wells, resource protection wells, piezometers 45 [ ] Leak detection devices, training for employees for use of hazardous materials, self-contained machinery, etc. SIGNATURE r Signature Date Print Name If you have any questions about filli►ig-out this application form,please contact the Department of Community Development's Permit Center at 253-835-2607, or pernsiteenterC&,cityoffedeahvay.com. Please be advised that an application for a development permit lacking the required information will not be accepted. Bulletin #056 — January I, 2011 Page 3 of 3 k:\Handouts\Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement JO pERTEET Better communities, by design To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way Becky Chapin, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way Doc Hansen, Planning Director, City of Federal Way From: Bill Kidder, Lead Ecologist Date: November 19, 2018 PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 95201 425.252.7700 Re: Third Review - Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street, Critical Areas PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant proposes an approximately commercial facility located at 1019 South 351'h Street, Federal Way, Washington. The proposed development would support manufacturing of machined metal products to be utilized by regional and national aerospace companies. The proposed project will include associated infrastructure and right-of- way improvements including utilities, landscaping, and parking and paved open areas required for staging and receiving of equipment and supplies. The project also requires substantial improvements, including fill slopes and retaining walls, to the PUD driveway. The applicant submitted a Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment Report dated February 2018 (hereafter referred to as the SVC Report). Perteet submitted to the City of Federal Way an initial review memo dated April 14, 2018. Soundview, the applicant's critical areas consultant, submitted a set of response comments on June 5, 2018. The proposed development action continued to be modified during discussions with the City through summer and early autumn 2018. Perteet is providing the second review memo based on the most recently provided documents (November 2018) listed below. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED The following documents were reviewed by Perteet during this second submittal review: • Panattoni Federal Way Engineering Plans Sheets Cl to C73, prepared for Panattoni Development, prepared by Barghousen Consulting Engineers, dated November 6, 2018. a. Wetland and Fish and Wildlife Habitat/lssessment Report —1019 South 351 Street, prepared for Panattoni Development, prepared by Soundview Consultants, dated February 2018 Revised November 2018. • Ti#348at1019535�`5treet, Federal Way, WA prepared for Panattoni Development, prepared by Synthesis PLLC, prepared for Neumeier Engineering Inc, dated May 7, 2018, revised August 22, 2018 (SEPA submittal). FINDINGS Based on Perteet's April 14, 2018 memo, Soundview's June 5, 2018 response memo acknowledged the limits of wetland and stream boundary confirmation. No illustration had accompanied that memo. The attached Synthesis Site Plan markup clarifies in illustration where Perteet confined the April 14, 2018 wetland and stream boundary confirmation. Panattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Second Critical Areas Review T Page 1 JOPERTEET Better communities, by design PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 The project reports and drawings apply wetland buffer reduction with enhancement beyond the proposed project area. See attached Synthesis PLLC site plan markups, the Soundview Report sheet 2 markups, and the civil plans sheet 1 markups. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.440(6), Perteet recommends that buffer reduction shall apply on/yto the wetland buffer portions where buffer intrusion is proposed at the stormwater pond location. Buffer reduction would not apply to the remaining wetland buffer. Project related drawings would be updated to reflect this buffer reduction correction. 3. Across all figures in the Civil Plans, the Soundview Report Nov 2018 figures, and the Synthesis site plan, variations on the limits of disturbance line (sometimes called "buffer intrusion line") exist. Some figures also illustrate an "original proposed buffer intrusion line." Please remove outdated, incorrect, or prior limits of disturbance / buffer intrusion lines across all civil plan sheets, the Synthesis site plan, and the Soundview Report to reduce confusion so reviewers can focus on the current proposed action's limits of disturbance. See attached documents various markups attached. 4. Differing limits of disturbance lines (buffer intrusion) exist across project related document figures. The varying lines also do not include all project action elements that change / alter grades, create impervious surfaces, upgrade roads, or remove current existingfeatures. For example, the PUD driveway is currently at grade with dirt / gravel surface. Proposed is a paved surface built over a sloped ramp with reinforced retaining walls. This substantial improvement within the stream buffer is necessary to maintain PUD access but needs to be included within the project's limits of disturbance / stream buffer intrusion because the road is being realigned and includes substantial structural upgrades. Additionally, one currently existing concrete pad is being removed adjacent north of the PUD driveway improvements. Removal / restoration of the currently existing concrete pad would "get subtracted" from the stream buffer intrusion square footage calculation but is still considered part of the project action within the critical areas buffer. Graded slopes to match parking lot elevations do get included in the limits of disturbance for permanent grading impacts. Graded slopes replanted with native vegetation, though, may not necessarily get added to the stream buffer intrusion square footage calculation. Please update the limits of disturbance line to capture all project action elements. Please update across all project related document figures. The calculated square footage of critical areas buffer intrusion may be different, reflecting all permanent built features (parking, upgraded PUD driveway with retaining walls, stormwater) minusremoved / native - restored elements (currently existing concrete pad, old PUD driveway alignment, and graded slopes to be native vegetated). The November 2018 Civil Plans, Storm Drainage Plan Sheet C6 of 13 proposes a small stormwater catch basin near the downslope (west) end of the PUD access road improved driveway ramp. Based on the grading and stormwater sheet drawings, the catch basin would only capture a small percentage of water draining down the slope. Most stormwater would sheetflow downslope past the small catchbasin with strong probability of draining to Stream Z less than 40 feet west of the catchbasin. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.330(2) Perteet recommends the project construct a trench drain across the full width of the driveway at the catchbasin to capture all stormwater that may flow downslope off the access road ramp. Upgrade the catchbasin, force main, and sump pump to accommodate the potential water input of a driveway wide trench drain. See attached Civil Plans Sheet C6 stormwater markup. There are no detail drawings, contractor notes, or explanation of how the sump pump and force main will be installed and operate. How will the sump pump receive electrical power to pump stormwater up the force main? Please add necessary details to the Civil Plans to ensure proper installation and operation of the sump pump and force main. Panottoni Development 1019 South 351 Street— Second Critical Areas Review Page 2 10 pERTEET Better communities, by design PERTEET.COM 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 95201 425,252.7700 6. The Civil Plans Sheet 3 TESC does not capture all project related soil disturbance and soil restoration construction. The scalloped "clearing limits" line does not include the concrete pad being removed just north of the PUD driveway upgrades in the stream buffer. The TESC plan does not address stream buffer restoration and wetland buffer enhancement. Within the restoration and enhancement areas, soils will be disturbed to remove invasive plant species, to remove homeless camp debris, to install native plants, and to restore highly impacted soils with native topsoils where necessary. These actions will occur on slopes that drain directly to Stream Z and Wetland A. Pursuant to FWMC 19.145.390 and .400, please add TESC measures to the Civil Plans Sheet 3 at the upslope edges of Stream Z OHWM and Wetland A boundary within the buffer restoration and enhancement zones. See Civil Plan Sheet C3 markups attached. Perteet recommends that all restoration and enhancement area invasive species control, soil rehabilitation, and planting activities apply construction stormwater manual TESC and BMPs due to the immediate proximity to a salmon bearing stream. T The Soundview Report mitigation figures Sheets 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9 reference and illustrate a "reinforced east slope (see Civil Plan Set)" retaining walls. Cross-referencing the Civil Plans, no information, contractor notes, detail drawings, or specifications could be found for these retaining walls on the Civil Plan November 6, 2018 drawings Sheets Cl through C13. These project elements are being constructed in the Stream Z buffer. As these retaining walls gets taller their width increases, likely extending further into the Stream Z buffer. Yet the Civil Plans only show a single even -width line approximating the presence of a retaining wall. Please illustrate on the Civil Plans the actual proposed footprint of these constructed retaining walls as they would extend into the stream buffer as the retaining wall increases in height and width. Please add to the Civil Plan any detail drawings and notes. 8. The Civil Drawings do not include critical areas mitigation or enhancement plans and details. Please add critical areas restoration and enhancement rehabilitation drawings and details to the project engineering plan set. Soundview Report November 2018 revisian� 9. As recommended in Perteet's April 14, 2018 initial review memo item 2, pursuant to 19.145.060 Unauthorized Alterations and Enforcement, the project is restoring to native habitat the Stream Z buffers to remove unauthorized homeless encampments and discarded refuse occurring within the critical areas and critical areas buffers. The restoration area includes east and west of Stream Z between the PUD driveway and the north property boundary, and the Stream Z east buffer between the PUD driveway and the Wetland A buffer. Perteet acknowledges the recommended restoration is included in the Soundview Report Chapter 7 proposed project mitigation and Soundview Report mitigation figures. 10. Based on Perteet's April 14, 2018 memo item 8, Soundview's June 5, 2018 response memo acknowledged possible construction related grading impacts to Stream Z fish and wildlife. Soundview's response agrees that "Grading will only be allowed between May 1" and October 1'' unless approved by the director." Perteet acknowledges this commitment. 11. Item 15 of Perteet's April 1, 2018 initial review memo discussed the soil compaction and loss of topsoil in the Stream Z buffers by homeless camp activities. Soundview's June 5, 2018 response memo acknowledged the "soil decompaction and / or utilizing topsoil from onsite areas may be implemented during construction as necessary at the discretion of the Project Biologist." Perteet recommends the project to stockpile topsoils from the upland forest being removed at proposed building location site to be reused to restore the upper 8-inch topsoil layer at impacted stream and wetland buffers where homeless encampments have damaged topsoils. Perteet recommends rehabilitating the stream buffer topsoils be a mitigation program objective for buffer areas with highly impacted topsoils. Page 3 Panottoni Development 1019 South 351 Street— Second Critical Areas Review 10 PE RTE ET PERTEET.COM Better communities, by design 2707 COLBY AVENUE, SUITE 900 EVERETT, WA 98201 425.252.7700 12. Item 17 of Perteet's April 1, 2018 initial review memo observed that the restoration and enhancement plan did not include certain native planting area details. Perteet acknowledges this information has been added to the Soundview Report November 2018 revision. 13. The Soundview Report Sheet 5 Plant Schedule lists western swordfern (Po/ystichum munitum) as a woody shrub. Swordfern is a herbaceous plant. Please reallocate western swordfern to a separate herbaceous plantings section. See Sheet 5 attached. 14. Item 20 of Perteet's April], 2018 initial review memo stated: "Section 7.6 Goal 1, Objective 1 and section 7.8 describes planting and sampling herbaceous vegetation but provides no defined or distinct performance standard for herbaceous vegetation. Please add performance standards for installed herbaceous vegetation." Soundview's June 5, 2018 response memo provided text that has been added to the Soundview Report November 2018 revision. The proposed Performance Standard 1.1 does not adequately address performance of herbaceous presence (aerial cover) throughout the restoration and enhancement areas. It only states "by the end of Year 5, 3 species of native herbaceous vegetation will be present." Woody species have additional performance standards for percent aerial cover (performance standard 1.3). Perteet recommends the Soundview Report include a herbaceous species performance standard that specifies percent aerial cover herbaceous growth in the restoration and enhancement areas similar to Performance Standard 1.3 established for woody species. 15. Sheet 4 of the Soundview Report figures locates fencing and NGPA signage south of the stormwater pond along the reduced buffer line. Pursuant to item 2 above, Perteet recommends that fencing and signage be relocated along the south edge of the stormwater facility to the east property boundary. See attached Soundview Report Sheet 4 markup. 16. The public has pedestrian access to the PUD driveway and from the Park and Ride northwest of the project area. Perteet recommends NGPA signage along the north and south sides of the PUD access road within the Stream Z buffer. Perteet recommends one NGPA sign facing the Park and Ride near the property corner shared with the Park and Ride. See Soundview Report Sheet 2 attached. END OF MEMO Ponattoni Development 1019 South 351 Street —Second Critical Areas Review Page 4 o� n -n N N m m PROPERTY BOUNDARY �~ I E �� E f. `• •om l�vm E�T,�+ � m��' mD m =z�.'. h E< ',i �.`E`... •• pzK gym. moz• rD cf)�'. =z� J�u �, El kk fir. �� mm €I OX mmmm �'r {'. :'1�' `•l.. . . .< E`. .'EO �v.'. .'I�_. X0 . . v�W i a �, lam. .1�'•. -- - . z m Z� zv�0 z �. .�� m z� mm 1. { 1 1 mp ry mm i �• J p Zm pD m t-n TIT 0 D � (n On Z z 0 -n I- om v� c �� rr'�� °.►III„' � �- ~N 1 mco Ca mD CO_ m r mcn `cn 0 0 �J_Am zO �D z AI vX mZ 0 --mr 00<-Dv fll () v - -n z �� mC2 - .z jZ_ z - m r oz > 8 _<N z rZ' C Zvy i o PANATTONI souttcL�: FEDERAL WAY •�GsaAo� 16215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH S _j�yp. , Consultants,,., "�ullt{'�Y �a{■�' l��ns�lltants Il): p n (�1 KENT, WA 98032 F-� = •" d ti 1019 S 351ST STREET Em.anmenlni4`q{.nlyq Manning •Lena Use Salulions m (425)251-6222 o c FEDERAL WAY, IC'ASHINGTON 98003 zWn HAxuox\o-:a uane, Srrrr-.n r. zs3su N'rr (425)251-8782 FAX y N n GIG HARROR, WASHING'fON IS335 f 2.1 .514 N'Isf ` y - 1" THE. SFY, OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 21N, cmL Euc1N¢aiuc. uNo al,wninc, CML B4 EIMRONVED P YFNCES W'\\\I:SOL',\DY11:W C0\il'I.T4\IS,CO\I yrl. RANGE 04E, \C'.M. 6iNY'•4,•y 0 U) X O ; m 0�O� C D K O x- PROPERTY aCUNDpARy z 2 W < S (D p S CD Wm 0 En CO 2 > w> O m m z • \ t- rm0� � .� 1 ... rv.cDm z - :U cn t ., z z �mm Y . ' �'= I �m �•Nz--I z mD ,� mcn�� m. .�._�I � E.` ,'�I�'cKi Wry z� z� ccXr-z oc; ,. { .' � �.. ` F -0DL ,m mz_mm It r C r 0 z. �. �~ _ D D' MK D C 0 mmxm jj k i y r�-�[-r, �. f',' �Z� om2 zcn U) Z DUO° E�d� f F;' E E, i'. ..f m� --I --I 2;o TI •,� E • -� � ,• •i- ;o m m c ]] , f ADO mw w e „ O --I m z a CzMX m>\o- , W Dr 9D:5- r-m cncn•<cn DO,-i�_CO z 0 � pOp� D� _�cnD~ _\ D -n C) - po D r- � -IZcn` m� `, z-ZZ_ � R � x z W o ITI o z 0 N U) cncn0 > ;o cn0 or V z� m e c �� m Z N D n 0 ro D D �z Vim\ ITJ ITI m D Z D m oD m F -. 0 U) < m � K x z "'c R�" Z♦ y _ - o PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY Soucldview Consultants V, 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 Fy 1 [J c = p " c 10195351ST STRL-GI• FEDERALWAY,WASHINGTON 98003 1r'ponmemninrrwi • Pirin9- E-u use suw••.ons nq HA1111011CI EU'IINIPIy S61TEu P. 2liN,Pas� m "y - 3 (425)251-6222 (425)251-8782 FAY. G_ N GIG IIAIII OR,MASI II NC.TON'IS.335 1: ?�i.; 4 F•!N =�. �! CML ENUNELaiNC, UNC PUwNlr;4 TI IE SEy OF SECTION 20. TOWNISHIP 2IN, W lcu•SUE NDYNiWCNSN1:r4N1S,CO.,1 µai.ow•`�Y su,wrnN4 ErmaaNNeNrw s¢mnccs - m RANGE 04E, W M• 7. v o _3 c I; D 1 cz _ zc y' T - z o /vyy s n Z 7 ^ Z�3Z Cn u m r =� 57r r zr�v y z J C 0 II C IT, G C�J r D m m H *D V Xm z mc � + c� U m0 cnU) KX > Z 00 � �7 z r� m z H It r z MM z /d FV H PANATTONI �nl'8ti=ti: G = FEDERAL WAY Soundview Consult4�„ 4�s ~' ants,,, 18215 72NO AVENUE SOUTH t -i W m G 1019 S 351 ST STREET % 4x KENT, WA 95032 l ^ fA [ar•o--;,IA}q�yp • Plan,.np' T,II,N U,, 5c ocns C PEDER-ILL \�1Y, UASHINGTON 98003 � (<2s)251-62zz riIa'2,M-taR3a1eleauenH,srlTr.o 425)251-e7e2 FAX GIG UAR1101t,WASH1NGIDC98135 -2S4 III------111 W CNIL ET'LINMINO W D P—NC o THE SE% OF SECn0N20, TO\C'NSHIF 2IN, %TWW1SUC IN IV,1!Nl U)NSVI.T.'. NTScov sua✓mNc. erenaowcmu scm�ces RANGE 04E, WINt d y,K e•e�-`�r• z cn;ou DNpm W cnq W o- < 9 r coc D r mmm z—� Z— no -u Z p C� r z G� -IDDT nD ��Z zLn DOmm �z mz D m 0 D D D 10 r=�zzm DT1m0Dk cn U m m <O m mo=Zcn< O�Z�-,> mp�r-Km .cmmWv _0C0�T D 'ammZom-1 m -o>m cnxm \` Omn m VDU) m .�J 7 f LE3E E F E E l ' V/ If 1 t 1 N C-)1�i E E4� E 1 e E E E E nm� H E D cn�\CA c>, ��D E .. �HCt E Er E' q:1 Zm�Nill �-I �D � cnDDD�1^•~ rn y� �c� I m �m mZ I m=�zzm E 6 �z0 �D �moo� z�L D E ��m ��/ - mcco D�oO-� O �� o� C°� WO �m`*_-moomom_ r E E f.Z E DD ICz -TI O - �. �Z�D�Z 1. (� coo m �- 2zcn<�_.; E pf-' zCn _I m�r�7 (n�Z�TD ..,- Eo E m,E OZ z _ z01 a:;o 0< E E 00m� mp0<rKm --$ E lE ..:II T—;o �ZMX�� J I�� ,:.I � mU)� m�m0TZ E- may„ pmcnm-I Q ZrZ <cnm�� `_ It f r E zr-z m 1 X Cl)� D �_ O Z m 7 ti ==iy< H XrJ �zxz o� ;z � r H � Z zH,�y M0 u ° C c 9 I mll d \,\\\\ r r / cn -�� Zp`j � j m r� � 0 z C' r I Z , m r I V. F-- SOURCES: u,xA�d' p PANATTONI m = -� 71 FEDERAL WAY �� Soundview Consultants, 1EI, r2NR AVENUE soon xFNl, wa ee032 ti1019 S 3515T STREET WAY, W!,SHINGTON 98003 E„�,ro„ms•�nai a—ss,— L:,nc u.e soim�o�z GI (a25)zs-6222 "C. (425)251-8782 Fax c a o FEDERAL 1wq XIARLORCI F:a DRIVE, SL ITF. D Ra;.lslteo;z 8 - o 1" N THESEY, OFSEMON 20,T0\C'NSH1P21N, RANGE 04E, W.M. GIG HAllB0R, \\'ASlll\G-f0N'1811i lMa SDCNDVIENNCONSUu'ANTS.Go�I WL BGINOF Na I D —NING 4y'0 jwp� sumrtnNG, DrvIsoNunvra sER,�css 0 M -i i@ D m C_ m D -o y p rn Z. § e 3 zr o- o o c = � •i -�0i r' E. o. e a o'� S RE n c c =_° >0r) n nrj D7nnnn>nn >nn>>nnm m= c f f _ c^ c^ c c c c c F c c c c a 0 m O � e N C v ga'�z pp a Cn l!�� _ VJ W' aCD ID m O O\ S A? d-n 7 O-O O :--. Q - p n .--F -0 (7 °s ' - (O (D (D m O 0 O a C 'g. $° c+ c a p .Na o o a a N c i n L cn (n (n 3 _ P m •. n (D (n _ o p b S O A ° w 7 a 2 c C o cn c s s. r. r. s y a o cam sae I � O R Oi p A A A A A A A A A A A A i� A A A A A A A• < n a a'e 'o 'o o' 'o a 'o 'o o' 'o T m w m m m c d 10 a S 3 3 1 a 3 ° o0 0 0 a a a m 0 10 6 6 6 a Z G m r D Z -i cn n m 0 m - - - PANATTONI a = W FEDERAL WAY ry X.(./ Soundv,iew Consultants,,,: Pjt 18215 22No AVENUE SOUTH WA Ul - ,: 10195 3515T STRLLT \\'.AY, U'ASHINGTO\98003 �� -- (425) 62272 C unlnJAsse:PI:�r.�,n,•L�nJ IJ.�=Su'u; o:i> (C25)251-6222 oFEDERAL - - „nr I L\Itl1011. nn;ulo¢clr:�e nRlw;srrn;u c�s:su.na,, (a2s)2sl-8782 FAx GIG ��•.�cI IINCI'O �\ 9si ; 1:'_3151J x95i - _ N N T14F.sE% OF SECFI ON'_0, TOWNSHIP 21 N, CML—INMRING. — PLhN'NING �c��%cso C N m•I eat CONS L1:1 kN 1,,co\l su nxq cxneaNvcuru scPw,ccs n RANGE 04E, E� mm 0 Z 0000000*000@ cm_-c�<cT-moi-x rps<'<�2`nan'am�Ama�C�orp�p��_ymanmaiAamtCyaiizo�omanZaarpomoyampciciz�3=o�c y•UAm p ao�vOZ<vaCn w-�Pnmamyma�m�Smm�mnnm� m��; im (�{rpyo pmm=pmNc�romm t_pm� pa<yoo0"oaAnscmyHo-aO o9r p ti �p� Zo m n c Gi �A N a c`m�m� n o\ 3 m Z� Z z O v j�, �FX�• 'a��a� 'e t�' ;'yi a>re, ccti*}'AG� ' aCi QIU� p � 31l1� 5f7�RC:f'S - PANATTONI _ - FEDERAL WAY SoundNiew Consultants,,, P � VENNT,T. %VNA t6° AVENUE SOUTH A 99°]2 1019 $ JJIST STRT_TT nnmenlal Assessment Plcnnln� • L-d Ux Scluuons �- (425)251-6222 ofFD}iRAL\VA1', \YASHINGI'ON 96003 2nn 11>enoncu:3c Den•r;, ccln-u ezt;1}x�r� '(425)251-e2e2 FAx = _ = N \ o THE SEy OF SECFION 2(, TOWNS] I1P 21N, RANGE (MI" \C:AI. GIG IIA"110", MAS111NGT 3eo\3.sDUNDY117PCONSUI.T4rcTS„CDot �Y CML EM1'GI 11G IAND PUNNING �'°�rCMc'T surrrEneG EuvlaoHUE,tru sEmncss z �11 1 q O m m v ^^ fin` m �A3m (n�am z O m D 1 m�oZ oDOZ f? x f �OaO Z O(7a0 11 m m1m om �_> CODzcrt �m3��. ❑ m0. n m m p - 7oZ 1 n?aN --- m m((Dn aocnmpZ�TTy lImD a Am(NiIN p��pmNYmm Da O� p CpN pam�NmDyy2ypmC N30DG Noa pnramncmx�yoAo O m3 mpATD<m'"am Dzl=iiO��mpm� ^Onm o�As:ALA'fmwm T�2 N r pTX yppri fn >C1�02 ��Dn �n T ZKD ypAm� m w m a $ i� y v A y m y z O Im z� X c - t C vmz mom �1 f m o -i �n o- ~�- -WL - - PANATTONI SOURCTs: - J - FEDERAL wAY 4.rjY4R U�, 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH 1019 S 3515T STREETSound�riew Consultants H f: P NEM, WA 98032 (� Chnonmenlal A—,-- • Pl--, - 1-d U,e Sawecv CI Z (425)251-5222 Fr DLRAL\\''AY,V'ASHlNGTO\ 98003 ,�nr,IIAHHOHCIr:\r DRI\'I,crlTI.D 11 _'i1,51J,A9i2 (425)251-8782 FAX �] y GI(:HAR)10H,\\ASHINCION'16333- �l o TIiI3SGy0FSECrI(1N20,T0\\NSII1P21N, cm�F.l+ciNnawc. IAHo rlauNiec _\\A\VSDUN0\'11:\\CON*SUI.I'ANISCCI\I �J•I�IYO*`4�� AIRVEYINC,—RCN—&SERNCES RANGI-, 04E.\C',\L �a e0o Z m D y� m m m w a a a a i m mm rj L ,-�x amypST��mo3m zm<�O�yAmmDTA<DiaCCDm;im��_LmDra>-1m0m<cm4maOmizoOTDOoaC+maSo��aAoO� . �w�`p�oYic��L]ax�mAozc >acAooaa xA DmGNmO<aamnZmcnymDn�mDmmmnO� _aD A (ZrrAmx`ovm c"u a'!.P %$m Onm mtO mSZmEzmm z2TDnSOAn mmma i n -nS COmmmmAam"inWzOz�Zlomcx omO m Y1�I A A r' n n A Z i m< D z O A m D m i = z _ o �C) ^J_ �m Zlm fn �D z%pv F =mM, 0,z � m O Z =2 M 1. co N � O Z Z O D co N mDrD �m�m / mo1-3 w= V.r cn �m�� m � z On On 0 � o \ K I 4�o� o W« f N21 mz0 Amy ��- N N = N 00Z mm� N N = 0 O � 0 to N•:.. N N N • � C4 rn �... - N � F 0 :1 i . s s �'►�^aa wr-i=r';ar�►a,7F.2vG 'vv s a. PANATTONI SOURCFS& FEDERAL WAY Q� 4Vp 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH _ �1 Sound�rieW Consultants p n 0 KENT, WA 98032 00 C7 = 1019 S 351 ST STREET iR!{nnmcnlal ass�smem • PIN�N�o� • LN1a use BNmmos m i (425)211-8222 FFDERAI. WAY, WASHINGTON 98003 i��0]fl>RIIOR\'IF.U'I1RIt'I:, tiT:ITf:n I`. 2:;t511M1'1.i2 �. (425)251-8]B2 FAX G GIG 1{\RII01t,\%ASHINCTI) N9833= F. 253,i1{.SI>{ L. CML ENLINFEAINC. IANP PUNNING, N THr s[; y or s[-.crIoN 20, TOWNSI 11P 21N, \\'\\\L SOCNfI\'II:\\CO\Sl'LTANT\CO\I g/. '`V SUm/EnN4 ENnR— M' SEFNCES = RANGE. 04E, \C 'M ■e La+�`` C b x z Z -T A fJ N Z IJ G m r Z o r DD-OZXZZ� m w,- x,..1 D Ill Gl�vOm IN m m m $ �y N DZ m�m�coD��ccz�n an z� o Ill M. D O D m ^ - mm-zm z o O Z �Z 1! )K �D�� 2 �o 'D 0 D D-oo c7m .T 0m o my �0 rD �0Ztnx D x-t m Z ~�yZT ,0 o� N� o - - m D:p ��z=�o"'DnoA �5 vA z z c,� -T >y A o� moomoo-00< v p x ��tiA "� ogo �� a �� rn omio�-+�x0` m o� �ocn f fll mycx3�mvo^^U' p v-i T 2 m�ma° I ?`aA om z o Illy >O- L)ODOmommmw,m 0.0 3T m3 DmDm� y vo D PAz D m <�� V ONCD� y2 CC AlN/l M. C >�� _1 y om (7D TyxZZDFj�-m zzn "� 00 m yor vo 00 O O�r�m A m mOD o }}}ffj m� OC -AX-M MCZmD 0x OO 0 r v>z°-im 1 -n OZ-0OZ<1�A0O> 'i �p D m_ m 1r 2 �o occ�inm=�vvm v)m r� Z m°co M co 21 �~� ) r � nC 1�r oD (A�OZ Dm C mr Z ° 5 m° f I I r < o zl iu X 0 Z m 0 m 9 p momAc o �`� i fn� om r cl<mozUj- 1TI <� G) o0"mo� _3 i f m� rnv �n pmo��zAa = 1^N Dm�sm o_ mm co zm OmA D-U>,z m -1 cl raoD D_ m � z y D �= o i I n D D 0 m 3, D� m C O x °x�o msg� <C) o r m �x0 r zmxrD So ` �' z`o z o rZ m 1 �Z f�� LJ m y D DO nO m 1 1 m ice• `> m C n 0 m m i m -- ' _ I C_ f•' m o= - UZ7 Dm> ? A o o z o cO m z o �_ y y O Z m�I ^, • � a cn 70-BO % OF STAKE ?' p p. I•' N' zo t INSTALLED BELOW GRADE y Z c r IN W CD 0 Cr 0 m G��Nti <• m C (Q N D U) my�m2� � -M •J� O omoM°o Q1 m + 1l mycx3m = O fA 5 iF Z 7 m>ym1 Ci °�myI� yZT 0 COo mZ �Dy ADmAmz� �spp •�' Q 61 3 D D�= y O D� ti m m O ti m r 0 z m O m m= ^ �� S m m y y U/ mvbzzm< mNoo �;,. Sy°og �*°m°m> 0 m COCOy mz6m7m 0m zc O p Z'o 5m �nm m gP m -Ic4 �o �x_czNm zxm ` r xwos=1x mzmm m�2m3x�t zm '2mm 9m6p.m zyT� �m�Y��O�' m r o I O*O-imZ D�z° '�°OmOcx o°o o '1 �'.0=,z zoom Oy y mom y3r.� O tao O7O1 O� o��y Dm0D�z y �DT.Z m < ^'OK� K°m°m omo Q O R> z m LID m y m m 0 c 0 m y 9' y mm>� O r Or as Or o- �0, fmilZ lm °°_yam m cmz �v m m.Zm1mm O, 1 O L7 �..I yymy m m= y O y z Z <� D�m� Z D D oomm D = 0 O jai 3iimm mm Domm L7 m o Tv rz Gzrn ZoZOD Tzi - >K n»N rZ �oN-4 0 _ 0 0DE L- 10, mmmz mfC) U) D m CDOy 50 0On o I-T-J1 mmN ,1 z oo m� °gym O T Z i m Nm 1 D 0 m ~� m '08 D � o �� 1 z O z f o �x m m m Fn < d G PANAT"I'ONI m � FEDERAL WAY Vr T G .. 1019 S 3i1ST STREET y � � souRcrs: d V 16215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH �~• SoundNriew Consultants. � �n KENT, WA 96032 FamE.mema! a:.osvoem • cinn��n9 • Lem7 use sorono�s � •� (<25)251-6222 FEDERAL NAY, IX'ASHINGTON 98003 zvu7 HaaHOKc ie\c DRIVE , svlren r. sTsapesz (azs)zsl-e7e2 FAx crc HARBOR, u'asHivcTon WTs csuu"ee:� � •�i THF. SF % OF SF.CfION z0, TOWNSHIP 21 N, cm� ouuNEt�Nc, w+o vLwHwc, \\'U'1t SOU \U\'llr\f CO\tiL'I.TA.\TS,CU\I SUmrtnnG EVNROt+uEvrel Ym�C6 RANGG 04E, \\'.M. 4 �I z s>, ■ $r s , I I I 2229pp22Qo-.22p222p2p f T�IT�IT11iIT'11T�IT�1 z � •�- �} Doroi (Orll ioJ ppp _ � O� oVo odo oNo o� �I T T ll 71 � i 11 �� - ■ . 0��00000+ - B t 5mm 2 =��L Da�-o n2v O JJ m i x l ° A D m i.y a O y r O + >°z < f�8, Tam i, 0 m ro CA m 1, yr m DZ O _ D S 'p'" `�nc5A '•-� in >-€f,U oA o;z iifw= ;sm$ss GN gH= PxjpEpg 3 �•'- aA�$ _ AT; .RNOU S� ^?" '�' _R �FSie ^R^ =:R �Camgy�^� _ •,�� s � < - o ag£s��n g all n- n m o g Ix m O ,a1�e • !f CM1 V �Itl4 � 1�v 1[1SI QGHAZJ� 6216 72N0 AVENUE SOUTH "' rW Titles 16943 ■7 VENT, WA 98032 m _� a, PANATTONI COVER SHEET (425)251-6222-.,�°.� DEVELOPMENT COMPANY s•.n S - (425)251-8762 SE —ES s"_ nw cNIE ENGiNEEFiNG, uNo ruNNiNa — r f 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 FOR Cl 13 $UM -G- YEMAI NNGES 1V� wpei. �N/' +m=.w -,- E—NRENTON, WA 98057 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY t I 1 1 1 � 1 i moRd°moo N = o F F _--- 0 d. Xr 0 WE; ■T ET Vim^ c,-� _ • y 63 s 1e _ �• ! ll D_2 n ' M� \ : 71.2, 0 A!, 4 0 sa } eFr� tee? a"' lac f n a A 5P, `� •cam. . ! •-r4 ' H� ^s vi�� '; t= D Z 1 ._ �' ¢ � uc•��:�"" � SQ, � • ¢ �,, �� '" `� gas• _� j o � TpD_ c s Q D ! 4 �• e13 ¢: D Ill ea 31 ma FQ �g �40 X a� 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH sw. Tlw- ism mt KENr, WA e6o32 ,, c PANATTONI STORM DRAINAGE PLAN (425)251-6222 , •.o �: ' (42s)zs1-e7az FAX - - DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ..., aw. o,ar[EmNc. uNo curvwuc "°'°�� „7• �4, 900 SW %TH STREET, SUITE 330 FOR C6 13 "+n..•*'``Y �` LNG. E1H".ENTW SE—M �, RENTON, WA 98W PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY 1 11 Ail IR7 V T�' co Z inky 9 ' 3o � q. :,.. '.a,.a . • a rr % i / �' : I ` r-- ice �.•'��_�'� �'�� \ \ 4 �� O z m l=mpi 3YL! maN r KN-Tr_L'St _� per... •,.. `��\ rq, �' � fil if ,� - „-,-„ - ____ �� :��,--'y;,�i.+' � • - _ mil+ �� r I ; 3 g$ gods go a if m # Op x >4 1 y o D Ow A d+ ,,, •• ¢aH' IQ7 t5 rx++o. nvLwX 3Wl" o.�v�-r- Fm T 18943 �? �p KW, ,1 96M m y PANATTONI DEMOLITION PLAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY M w }n ' 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 FOR RENTON, WA 98057 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY ,ro !M! IiIDI P O}e d 14Yw W e�E wYR til+ 18215 7 D AVENUE SOU- For Trds TESC PLAN 1� � (425)251 -6222 (425)251-8782 FAX w fl "•'�—�- r K - - - S -- _ PANAI-fONI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ME ENG!NEEfxNG, VNJ %AxNM4 M V f• xi 900 SW 16TH STREET, SURE 330 FOR C3 13 cA4, �� ' E 'µ SEM t[5 p� x/x inn RENTON, WA 98057 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY e d zo Z K O x D x D i W. W •[a P P erKM r�r 1ru rf.+. M 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH °e"ne°� x�. Wjfflp. 18943 @P 'ENT, WA 98032 „„ PANATTONI GRADING PLAN (425)251-6222 H b , -,o _ _ DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (425)251-8782 TAX c,oRa� Mc Ex . emw, uxo nwuxwc. „„ 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 FOR La ... E— RENTON, WA 98057 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY r 1'em.Etnlxrr�+w.ylY�ltltly�w, t1�u•et wt iW 8co FIn n IS- ..4 M.9 x $ gg 6 $ I S d S co 9 A on � m D m�D � O D�z m me �o Cl) n m � � � m r- CO �z A fo mi nil o a D y �v 1 x x > ism�,k �O µAS$ NR?5 t2r� AYp D[„ KENT, WA 9BD32 (e25)251-fi222 (425)251-6762 [ML ENGNEERNL, UND PUNNNL, D oa.. �D_ "` �o,zaa S - i Fr PANATTONI DEVELOPMEtdi COWPANY EW M %7H STREET, SUITE WO THo- 9M SEC110M FOR '� r� l6��E•` SURYFtN4 EM'NDNYEMK SEfMLES Oab - p��1T�V� ffMC� REN 1 ON, WA 980 PANATfONI FEDERAL WAY I3.f.61 �� 35D.9� AC I SSS 1 1 . �l 1 Y _y r i w mo a02 S. z _ 00 pm z � 0 z ° 0 Y' f�• z a .... mD 8 -n go 12 -uj + �� - _ - a. p z m M zm Oo '1 55 z 44 - m 1 iiis': '8y rs�rr,1 Sm a ��g x a xa x 1B215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH °�"R- Fm T�s 18943 P fi KENT. WA 98032 PANATTONI DETENTION POND SECTIONS m x (425)251-6222-,o :Sr �� DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (425)251-87B2 FAX 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 FOR i„' CNA EN G. [W C. . PU 1— C7 , 13 R NG, fNNRq YEN A SCRhC 5 0 „ ,uw, RENTON, WA 9805/ PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY X •gam v r : NE a� "' d�ei _ jo \ 9 m gg€ m Z O I X x 18215 -ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425)251-6222 _ Y(425)251-e792 FAX CMS ENGINEEMNG, U1N0 %AHNING. �yM1 C6 . N k•�K 119d'•� SIINVEYIHG, EIMNONUEM•L SERvyES Dale � . ex.., EMYy�fpYypy.aly �1/Ai2aH !91 a 1Ep c r Q 1 •�. C wS 1 j �" < N Z ohm RE; RQEaa? D R SEga€: � cam- �y PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 RENTON. WA 96057 `li WATER AND SANITARY SEWER PLAN FOR PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY jgws. m pt* k gg. p zgp v p z -2 15. g w 2 v MUM afl - z j - W. . 'gE 9�.j'a f 111F i-R Us Z�26 a eggs as npu -- F .p ;N j7 gj IN I m A %A 'R m r 0 0 12 92 0 -n C9 0 m AC0 co ms a > Z R N > 0 -4 3mH gK > z Z co 0 O m 0 8 w co Z Z D m IIi 16215 72ND AVENUE SDUTH°i'pni0Tft 18943 IENT M32 od PANATTON! TESC NOTES AND DETAILS (425)251-6222 DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (425)251 -8762 FAX 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 FOR C9 13 SU E-RON—k SE —ES RENTON, WA 98057 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY ��$� �=mgR _ • _@ $g �� ;�s � ;54� - g q£�s ��; 8� g �. �� R' � q� s �� "� gs � m��9 eR$ �� n�'£ u�� R � � g �a�" a �$� a � �� -��g' ;F o �P•� a ;�� >rR g � �§ �� s e a FpOR At e � R = � a5�m m �p�� s� =F � xg; �..� � � �� ■ �� gas €gm <s �� gm mm ��$� _ s# ' f 1 ;� 10 — �_ n3 a - a— Q g; S afi TWA �E�� oz o 44 60 U 0 oo Am to RiGsAg 5r•ip "�c ; Z m D Y �• ii rt� Z 72 IN 4@' Z j i sRdP RyL IId�� 9 6p "bn m 6£p¢ §�ia[;� 75 O E�EE �Q1 O � �4€��= _ �� Ld E � fr S¢ �E da 5 �� F�3&� E �Es.s •-� A � � I"Il g� 6�g� till O Z m A D VJ 1 05 a � mg °z pp 6 � 60 - 5 F og� �i '6' ? z�� 6 f o i w z0-1 Sq S 11 n01 O �g e s F$ x .ft gee ,OHA& 16215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH D" —�- ^ For. Ttla +T 16943 �� KENT, WA 98032 emu_ PANATTONI CONSTRUCTION NOTES AND DETALS (425)251-6222 (Sz5)z51-6762 FAX DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ca ENLiN LdNL, wo wnomc, m"°� - 9W SW 16TH STREET, SURE 330 FOR e ya+•'� wRVEnxe EWWNuEN-SEWCES oae ,isle /lr FIENTON, WA 9W57 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY I Q•G1i ArJ8 7 In m Z 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT WA 98032 (425)251-6222 's (425)251-0782 FAX odn""C', mNo � Ebm A L4� Ff� g d�3. FgHS IgR� S�g sx ax R [ F �,- t 53 5 � deg IS'! l - a � 6 € �• �y,O � `Yid i AFT411 F ' �� ]• ILA � a$$ _;5� 8 • ; � � � 9� } :• € rl€E: Y a6 zi�i � a till i } PANATTON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 900 SW 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 RENTON, WA 98057 111 q Z co co o o1 cl) 0°-0 Z o D D 0 nn—< � jgz co om$� o 0 m D Z i r Q �0 —A o co Z D � a T WATER AND SANITARY SEWER NOTES AND DETAILS FOR PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY !w N•� 18843 pRAN'%`n 18215 72NO AVENUE SO v^a— � L KENT, WA 90032 _ �- (425)251-e222 PANATTONI y i (425)251-8782 FAX W° DEVELOPMENT COMPANY y SU ExgNCC tANO PUNN;NL, M _LSI_iNR�Y SUTkIING. FNNRJNMcMAL SERv10E5 ors lL B000s ,i 09�]\v°vn\�e9<]-r00�_:U1T 2 oaoRm� Cep 1< 2015 - 1201 Sc°i° ,- 50 oN p. oll—E. 9 Tm« BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PTN OF THE SW114, OF THE SE114 OF SEC. 20, TWP. 21 N., RGE 4 EAST, W. M. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, KING COUNTY STATE OF WASHINGTON 0 0 IM go 0 OEM um 0.II n 0 0 co > M 229 �9 T z z ;0, !2 > z fll 0 M. r O > u m Z z Ill"0 -n Z' m < 0 0 M m m 13 0 > 0 ->> !�'4 Fan Tft A&,_D 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH IN KE 189g9INT. W4 11803 PANATTONI Z (<25)251-622 (425)251 _8782 FAX DEVELOPMENT COMPANY VEHICLE MANEUVERING DIAGRAM 900 SW 16TH 6-MEET, SWE 330 FOR —DWENT& MWMS RENTON, WA 98057 PANATTON FEDERAL WAY r, R EC E I VE RPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 81" Avenue South CITY OF Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 OCT 16 2018 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 Federal WayCITY OF FEDERAL,vn•u•rinorlecler:�ls�srr•.con� WAY COMMUNRY DEVELOPMENT FOREST PRACTICES APPLICATION CLASS IV - GENERAL TYPE OR PRINT IN INK 1. Landowner, Timber Owner, and O era or Information Legal Name of LANDOWNER Legal Name of TIMBER OWNER Legal Name of OPERATOR Federal Way RI, LLC Federal Way RI, LLC Sierra Construction Mailing Address: Mailing Address: Mailing Address: 15 Lake Bellevue Drive 15 Lake Bellevue Drive 19900-144th Avenue N.E. Suite 102 Suite 102 City, State, Zip City, State, Zip City, State, Zip Bellevue, WA 98005 Bellevue, WA 98005 Woodinville, WA 98072 Phone (425) 869-2020 Phone (425) 869-2020 Phone (425) 487-5200 Email: jeffh@taylordev.com Email: 'effh to lordev.com Email: rickb04sierraind.com 2. Contact Person Information Name Dan Balmelli, Barghausen Engineers Phone (425) 251 Email: dbalmelli@barghausen.com 3. Enter the Applicable City of Federal Way Development Permit Application Number(s): 1810079100000SE; V2gc1•-{-'� 4. Enter the Forest Tax Reporting Account Number of the Timber Owner. 800 067 831 For tax reporting information or to receive a tax number, call the Department of Revenue at 1-800-548-8829. 5. Legal description where the forest practices will occur. See attached Parcel Number Within'/ section of. Section Township Range E/W 202104-9027 SE 20 21 4E 6. Answer each question as it applies to your proposed forest practice. No ( Yes Is the activity within the "Natural Environment" as regulated by Federal Way Revised \ Code (FWRC) Title 15, "Shoreline Management"? Bulletin #072 —November 10, 2016 Page 1 of 2 k:/Handouts/Forest Practices Application ( ) No (X) Yes Is the activity within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area and its associated buffer area (wetland, stream, wellhead capture area, and/or geologically hazardous area)? ( ) No (X) Yes Have you reviewed this forest practices activity area to determine whether it may involve historic sites and/or Native American cultural resources? 7. What is the intended future use of the land proposed to be logged? ( ) Single Family Residence ( ) Residential Subdivision (includes plats and short plats) (} orrmnerctal or Multifamily Residential (� Other —Warehouse 8. How much merchantable timber are you cutting and/or removing? Complete the table below and indentify all timber harvest and salvage activity boundaries on the site plan. Unit # Acres (net) Volume of Merchantable Timber to be harvested (board feet) Percent (%) of Total Merchantable Timber on site. 1 5.2 56 MBF 31 (%) 9. Summarize below the proposed timber harvest method, how the site will be accessed, and the proposed timing of the timber harvest within the context of the overall project timeline. Trees will be cut and limbed with chain saws and loaded with tracked excavator. Access to the site will be via the approved construction entrance on to Pacific Highway South. Duration of clearing is anticipated to be approximately 2 weeks. We affirm that the information contained herein is true and understand that this proposed forest practice is subject to the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120, "Clearing, Grading, and Tree and Vegetation Retention," as well as all other federal, state, or local regulations. Compliance with the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120 does not ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act or other federal, state, or local laws. Signature of LANDOWNER Signature of TIMBER OWNS - Signature of OPERATOR (If different do►►mer) 7 (If different than landowner) Print Na e: Print Nam �,-��yei y� Print Name:NJ- Date: 10/1612018 Date: 10/16/2018 Date: 10/16/2018 Department Review (For O iace Use Only) Department of Revenue Notified (dare): J `q Date Approved:. Comments/Conditions: ; r j # `t6-e 0� s j S c(. �t b t� r ^_ Bulletin #072 —November 10, 2016 Page 2 of 2 k:/Handouts/Forest Practices Application ( ) No (X) Yes Is the activity within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area and its associated buffer area (wetland, stream, wellhead capture area, and/or geologically hazardous area)? ( ) No (X) Yes Have you reviewed this forest practices activity area to determine whether it may involve historic sites and/or Native American cultural resources? 7. What is the intended future use of the land proposed to be logged? ( ) Single Family Residence ( ) Residential Subdivision (includes plats and short plats) ( ) Commercial or Multifamily Residential 00 Other Warehouse 8. How much merchantable timber are you cutting and/or removing? Complete the table below and indentify all timber harvest and salvage activity boundaries on the site plan. Unit # Acres (net) Volume of Merchantable Timber to be harvested (board feet) Percent (%) of Total Merchantable Timber on site. 1 5.2 56 MBF 31 (%) 9. Summarize below the proposed timber harvest method, how the site will be accessed, and the proposed timing of the timber harvest within the context of the overall project timeline. Trees will be cut and limbed with chain saws and loaded with tracked excavator. Access to the site will be via the approved construction entrance on to Pacific Highway South. Duration of clearing is anticipated to be approximately 2 weeks. We affirm that the infonnation contained herein is true and understand that this proposed forest practice is subject to the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120. "Clearing, Grading. and Tree and Vegetation Retention," as well as all other federal, state, or local regulations. Compliance with the State Forest Practices Act and Rules and FWRC Chapter 19.120 does not ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act or other federal, state. or local laws. Signature of LANDOWNER Signature of TIMBER OWNER r1tr941 re O ERATOR (Irdifferen(than landowner) S%rent than d rr Print Name: Print Name: Pr nt Name. Date: 10/16/2018 Date: 10/16/2018 Date: 10/16/2018 Department Review ( For Offic-c Uso Only) Department of Revenue Notified (date): Date Approved: Comments,, Conditions: EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description Parcel 1: That portion of the South 147.7 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, in King County, Washington, lying West of Pacific Highway South; Except that portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said subdivision; Thence South 89°34'47" East 643.69 feet to the Westerly margin of said Pacific Highway South; Thence South 21 °50'33" West, along said margin, 40.82 feet; Thence North 86°07'16" West 629.93 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: That portion of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, in King County, Washington, lying West of Pacific Highway South; Except the following described tract: Beginning at the intersection of the Westerly margin of said pacific highway South and the South line of said tract; Thence North 21 °02'00" East 241 feet; Thence North 59°42'00" West 221.3 feet; Thence South 21 °02'00" West 357.3 feet to the South line of said tract; Thence East 232.9 feet along said South line to the point of beginning; and Except the following described property: Beginning at the Southwest corner of said tract; Thence North 00°09'56" East, along the West line thereof, 525.19 feet; Thence South 89°44'00" East, parallel with the North line of said South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, 372.28 feet to the true point of beginning; Thence North 00'16'00" East 25.00 feet; Thence South 89°44'00" East 200.00 feet; Thence South 00°16'00" West 250.00 feet; Thence North 89°44'00" West 200.00 feet; Thence North 00'16'00" East 225.00 feet to the true point of beginning. Except those portions of Parcels 1 and 2 conveyed to the City of Federal Way by deed recorded under recording number 20150714001953. AM ICAN CLAND TITLE .QpyrightAmerican Land Titte Association. All rights reserved. LAND T .5f5a ixVti The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commitment (06/17/2006) Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM Page 3 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPs•1-17.0108794-06 � GHA[rst� a `C"'kG ENGI`� Leila Willoughby -Oakes City of Federal Way Community Development 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 November 6, 2018 RE: Administrative Variance Request Panattoni Federal Way Tilt 348 Development City of Federal Way Project No: 18-100788-00-UP Our Job No. 18943 Dear Leila: CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING, SURVEYING RESUBMITTED NOV 0 7 2018 OO uiv m a�LOPMEENT Panattoni Development Company is requesting an Administrative Variance from the required front yard building setback along Pacific Highway for their proposed warehouse project. The request is a reduction in the building setback from 20-foot to 15-foot. The purpose of the setback reduction is to allow the building and site improvements to shift to the east and reduce and minimize the extent of intrusion into the required 100-foot stream buffer along the west side of the project and provide adequate area to meet the requirements for a stream buffer averaging and buffer mitigation plan to be completed which would result in an overall improvement to the current existing condition of the stream buffer. The proposed reduced building setback from 20-foot to 15-foot would still provide for the required 10-foot of landscaping along Pacific Highway as well as a 5-foot pedestrian walkway. Over the past 12 months, Panattoni Development has been working closely with the City of Federal Way staff to revise, adjust and reduce the project development size and configuration to the greatest extent possible to minimize the area of intrusion into the stream buffer while still providing a project which is feasible and marketable. Numerous site plan and building alterations have been completed through an iterative sequential process through the city to reduce and minimize the impacts to the stream buffer. Copies of these site plan iterations are included with this submittal along with a summary of the main changes made with each iteration. The proposed building setback variance is one of the final site plan revisions incorporated into the project as required by the city to reduce the impacts. We believe that the proposed reduced building setback will result in a decrease of overall impacts to the environment and an improvement to the condition of the stream buffer. (Please refer to the updated site plan, landscape plans and stream mitigation report and plan included in this submittal.) 4. A written statement discussing the following criteria: a. That the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located. Response: The proposed variance will not result in a grant of privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone of the project and will not result in any increased impacts to other adjacent properties or businesses in the area. The proposed variance results in shifting the building and site improvements 5-foot to the east which still allows for the required 10-foot of required landscaping aiong Pacific Highway as well as a 5-foot wide pedestrian walkway. The requested variance does not result in any increased negative impacts on the east side, north side or south side but reduces the impacts on the west side by providing additional clearance between the proposed development and the required 100-foot stream buffer. With the requested 18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 (425) 251-6222 (425) 251-8782 FAX BRANCH OFFICES • TUMWATER, WA • KLAMATH FALLS, OR • LONG BEACH, CA • ROSEVILLE, CA • SAN DIEGO, CA www.barghausen.com Leila Willoughby -Oakes City of Federal Way Community Development -2- November 6, 2018 building setback reduction, only a small area of the proposed pavement on the west side (approximately 406 square feet) intrudes into the stream buffer by 3-foot to 5-foot maximum and the revised site plan provides more than adequate area to meet the requirements for a stream buffer averaging and mitigation plan. b. That the variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, locations, or surroundings of the subject property to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located. Response: We believe that the proposed building setback variance from 20-foot to 15- foot is necessary due to special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography, and surroundings which includes extensive grade change and topography constraints, existing utility easements, access restrictions and extensive critical areas and buffers which encumber the majority of the site and constrict the developable area to approximately 36.1 % of the overall site area. The proposed variance is only one of many project changes and adjustments completed over the past 12 months through an iterative sequential review process working with city staff to reduce and minimize impacts to the stream buffer. The resulting development plan provides the best overall option to allow for a feasible development which creates the greatest extent of reduced impacts to the existing stream and buffer. c. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located. Response: Approving the proposed building setback variance from 20-foot to 15400t along Pacific Highway will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity. Since the proposed does not change or modify the building or site plan layout from what is currently proposed, the change does not have any impact on the general public or adjacent properties and would not even be substantially noticeable to the public or adjacent properties. The resulting change would provide more than adequate setback between the building and right-of-way and still provides for the required landscape setback of 10-foot along Pacific Highway in addition to a 5-foot pedestrian walk. Shifting the building and site to the east provides for additional clearance and setback between the stream buffer and the edge of pavement and parking areas of the proposed development and reduces both the area of the buffer intrusion to approximately 406 square feet and the width of the intrusion to a maximum of approximately 5-foot. A chain link fence will also be placed along the back edge of the development to prevent entrance into the buffer and provide a physical barrier to help mitigate any sound, light, glare, noise and pollutions impacts to the stream and buffer. The chain link fence is proposed to be located two feet behind the back edge of the curb and would be part of the proposed buffer mitigation. (Please refer to the proposed site plan, landscape plan and critical area report and mitigation plan included in this submittal.) Leila Willoughby -Oakes City of Federal Way Community Development -3- November 6, 2018 d. That the special circumstances of the subject property are not the result of the actions of the owner of the subject property. Response: The special circumstances of the property resulting from the proposed building setback variance from 20-foot to 15-foot are not the result of actions of the owner or developer of the property. Due to the extent of critical areas located on the project site which include wetlands, stream and buffers, only approximately 36.1 % of the property is useable for development. In addition, existing utility easements, access limitations and topographic relief add to the development constraints and limitations of the site. The iterative sequential building and site plan options which have occurred over the past 12 months working with the city staff, the developer and design team have resulted in a project layout and design which reduces impacts to the critical areas and buffers to the greatest extent possible but also provides for a project that is still feasible and marketable for the developer. These changes combined with the proposed stream buffer averaging and mitigation plan should result in a stream buffer which is of better quality than existing conditions of the buffer. The following plans and documents are enclosed: 1. Four (1) each Letter Discussing Administrative Variance Criteria 2. Four (4) each current Preliminary Site Plan 3. Four (4) each Preliminary Site Plan Previous Iterations and Emails Summarizing Site Plan Changes 4. One (1) each Updated Master Land Use Application 5. One (1) each Stamped Envelopes for Property Owners within 300-Foot Radius 6. One (1) each CD Containing PDF Document Files 7. One (1) each Check for Administrative Variance Fee in .the amount of $811.25 We believe that the above plans and documents compile a complete administrative variance request package. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. Sincerely, Daniel K. Balmelli, P.E. Executive Vice President DKB 18943c.005.doc enc: As Noted cc: Brian Mattson, Panattoni Development Costa Philippides, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Betsy Dyer, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. 4ik CIT 40':t�� Federal Way APPLICATION No(S) 18-100788-00-UP MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 33325 8"' Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253.835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 x�� cum Date 3/8/2019 Project Name Federal Way Tilt 348 Property Address/Location 1019 South 351st Street _ Parcel Number(s) 202104-9027 Project Description Construction of new officelwarehouse building and associated site work improvements. ------------------------------- ------------------------------------ An administrative modification to address retaining wall height will also be processed. FVUI\ 1 Type of Permit Required Annexation Binding Site Plan _ Boundary Line Adjustment Comp Plan/Rezone Land Surface Modification Lot Line Elimination Preapplication Conference _ Process I (Director's Approval) Process II (Site Plan Review) X Process III (Project Approval) Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) _ Process VI X SEPA w/Prcject _ SEPA Only _ Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use Short Subdivision Subdivision _ _ _ _ _ }; Administn rative Modificatio 3/9/2019 a Required Information CE - Commercial Enter rise Coning Designation Commercial Egte__ _r ri�Comprehensive Plan Designation $1,000 Value of Existing Improvements Value of Proposed Improvements Inlernalional Building Code (IBC): S-1 with B Accessory occupancy Type IIIB Construction Type Bulletin #003 — January 1, 2011 Applicant Name: Brian Mattson, Panattoni Development Address: 900 S.W. 16th Street, Suite 330 City/State: Renton, WA Zip: 98057 Phone: (206)838-6182 Fax: (206) 442-1871 Email: bmattson@panattotti.cco'om ��r Agent (if different than Applicant) Name: Dan Balmelli, Barghausen Consulting Engineers Address: 18215-72nd Avenue South City/State: Kent, WA Zip: 98032 Phone: (425) 251-6222 Tax: -Cell: (206) 396-8588 Email: dbaimelli@barghausen.com Signature:) Owner Name: Federal Way RI, LLC Address: 15 Lake Bellevue Drive, Suite 102 City/State: Bellevue, WA Zip: 98005 r 7 Phone: Email ga� Signature � • r - Page I of 1 k:\HandoulsWlaster Land Use Application 6ARGWAUSEN March 8, 2019 Becky Chapin City of Federal Way Community Development 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: Administrative Modification Request for Retaining Wall Height Panattoni Federal Way Tilt 348 Development City of Federal Way Project No: 18-100788-00-UP Our Job No. 18943 Dear Becky: RESUBMITTED MAR 0 8 2019 CITY OF FEDE I WAY COMMUNITY DEVEL PME'NT Panattoni Development Company is requesting an Administrative Modification per FWRC 19.120.050, from the required 6-foot maximum retaining wall height for portions of the retaining walls to be constructed with their proposed warehouse project. The request is to allow for a wall height of 13-foot without steps instead of the maximum 6-foot. The purpose of the wall height increase is to allow the building and site improvements to be constructed and reduce and minimize the extent of intrusion into the required 100-foot stream buffer along the west side of the project and provide adequate area to meet the requirements for a stream buffer averaging and buffer mitigation plan to be completed which would result in an overall improvement to the current existing condition of the stream buffer. The proposed increased wall height would also reduce and minimize the extent of intrusion into the wetland buffer and the adjacent property owner in the southeast corner. Over the past 18 months, Panattoni Development has been working closely with the City of Federal Way staff to revise, adjust and reduce the project development size and configuration to the greatest extent possible to minimize the area of intrusion into the stream buffer while still providing a project which is feasible and marketable. Numerous site plan and building alterations have been completed through an iterative sequential process through the city to reduce and minimize the impacts to the stream buffer. The proposed increase to retaining wall height variance is one of the final site plan revisions incorporated into the project as required by the city to reduce the impacts. We believe that the proposed increase to retaining wall height will result in a decrease of overall impacts to the environment and an improvement to the condition of the stream buffer. (Please refer to the updated site grading plan included in this submittal.) 4. A written statement discussing the following criteria: a. That the modification will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located. Additionally, that there are no other feasible and reasonable alternatives to the clearing, grading or tree/vegetation removal activity being proposed. Response: The proposed modification will not result in a grant of privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone of the project and will not result in any increased impacts to other adjacent properties or businesses in the area. The proposed modification results in allowing small sections of the proposed walls to extend more than 6-feet in height. The requested modification does not result in any increased negative impacts on the east, north or south sides of the development but reduces the impacts on the west side by providing additional clearance between the proposed development and the required 100-foot stream buffer. With the requested wall height increase, only a small amount of grading will be required within the stream buffer and the increased wall height will provide adequate area to meet the requirements for a stream buffer averaging and mitigation plan. BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. 1821572ND AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WA 98032 P) 425-2S1-6222 F) 425-251-8782 BRANCH OFFICES: TUMWATER, WA KLAMATH FALLS, OR LONG BEACH, CA ROSEVILLE, CA SAN DIEGO, CA barghausen.com Becky Chapin City of Federal Way Community Development -2- March 8, 2019 b. That the proposed modification will result in the same or less impacts than meeting the standards. Response: We believe that the proposed wall height increase modification from 6-Foot to 13-foot is necessary due to special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography, and surroundings which includes extensive grade change and topography constraints, existing utility easements, access restrictions and extensive critical areas and buffers which encumber the majority of the site and constrict the developable area to approximately 36.1 percent of the overall site area. The proposed modification is only one of many project changes and adjustments completed over the past 18 months through an iterative sequential review process working with city staff to reduce and minimize impacts to the stream buffer. The resulting development plan provides the best overall option to allow for a feasible development which creates the greatest extent of reduced impacts to the existing stream and buffer. The additional criteria) below were also reviewed for this modification request; c. That the granting of the modification will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is located. Response: Approving the proposed wall height increase modification from 6-foot to 13- foot will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity. Since the proposed wall height variance does not change or modify the building or site plan layout from what is currently proposed, the change does not have an impact on the general public or adjacent properties and would likely not be substantially noticeable to the public or adjacent properties. The requested modification has been approved on a number of other projects within the City including both Wal" Mart projects and according to staff is currently being reviewed as a potential change in the new design standards manual. d. That the special circumstances of the subject property are not the result of the actions of the owner of the subject property. Response: The special circumstances of the property resulting from the proposed retaining wall height increase modification from 6-foot to 13-foot are not the result of actions of the owner or developer of the property. Due to the extent of critical areas located on the project site which include wetlands, stream and buffers, only approximately 36.1 percent of the property is useable for development. In addition, existing utility easements, access limitations and topographic relief add to the development constraints and limitations of the site. The iterative sequential building and site plan options which have occurred over the past 18 months working with the city staff, the developer and design team have resulted in a project layout and design which reduces impacts to the critical areas and buffers to the greatest extent possible but also provides for a project that is still feasible and marketable for the developer. These changes combined with the proposed stream buffer averaging and mitigation plan should result in a stream buffer which is of better quality than the existing conditions of the buffer. Becky Chapin City of Federal Way Community Development -3- March 8, 2019 The following plans and documents are enclosed: 1. Four (1) each Letter Discussing Administrative Modification Criteria 2. Four (4) each Site Grading Plan 3. One (1) each Updated Master Land Use Application 4. One (1) each Stamped Envelopes for Property Owners within 300-Foot Radius 5. One (1) each CD Containing PDF Document Files 6. One (1) each Check for Administrative Modification Fee in the Amount of $709 We believe that the above plans and documents compile a complete administrative modification request package. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at this office. Thank you. Sincerely, Costa Philippides, P.E. Senior Project Engineer CXP/cxp 18943c.008.doc enc: As Noted cc: Brian Mattson, Panattoni Development Daniel K, Balmelli, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Betsy Dyer, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. ALTA COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued By agent: RECEIVED CHICAGO TITLE FEB 2 2 2018 COMPANY OF WASHINGTON ` l CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Commitment Number: 0108794-06 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Florida corporation ("Company"), for a valuable consideration, commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions of this Commitment. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A by the Company. All liability and obligation under this Commitment shall cease and terminate six (6) months after the Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue the policy or policies is not the fault of -the Company. The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by a validating officer or authorized signatory. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. Countersigned By: Authorized Officer or Agent —J xsuctyn s qp R4F SEAL Chicago Title Insurance Company By: Attest: A� President Secretary AMERICAN Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commitment (06/17/2006) Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM Page 1 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.62247Fi-SPS-1-17-0108784-06 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON COMMITMENT NO. 0108794-06 ISSUING OFFICE: FOR SETTLEMENT INQUIRIES, CONTACT: Title Officer: Commercial / Unit 6 Escrow Officer: Paula K. Adams Chicago Title Company of Washington Chicago Title Company of Washington 701 5th Avenue, Suite 2700 10500 NE 8th St., Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98104 Bellevue, WA 98004 Main Phone: (206)628-5610 Phone: 425-646-9882 Fax: 425-637-3367 Email: CTISeaTitleUnit6@ctt.com Main Phone: (425)455-4995 SCHEDULE A ORDER NO. 0108794-06 1. Effective Date: September 14, 2017 at 08:00 AM 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: a. ALTA Owner's Policy 2006 Proposed Insured: PDC Seattle LPIV, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Policy Amount: $2,350,000.00 Premium: $ 4,343.00 Tax: $ 434.30 Rate: Prior Title Standard Owners Total: $ 4,777.30 b. ALTA Loan Policy 2006 Proposed Insured: To Be Determined Policy Amount: To Be Determined Premium: To Be Determined Tax: To Be Determined Rate: Lender Simultaneous Extended Total: To Be Determined 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is: Fee Simple 4. Title to the estate or interest in the land is at the Effective Date vested in: Federal Way RI LLC a Washington limited liability com an 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF END OF SCHEDULE A AME0.ICAN Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. LAN"TITLE ASSOCIATION The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commitment (061171200v") Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM Page 2 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPS-1-17-0108794-06 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description Parcel 1: That portion of the South 147.7 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, in King County, Washington, lying West of Pacific Highway South; Except that portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said subdivision; Thence South 89°34'47" East 643.69 feet to thei Westerly margin of said Pacific Highway South; Thence South 21 °50'33" West, along said margin, 40.82 feet; Thence North 86'07'16" West 629.93 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel 2: That portion of the South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, in King County, Washington, lying West of Pacific Highway South; Except the following described tract: Beginning at the intersection of the Westerly margin of said pacific highway South and the South line of said -tract; Thence North 21 °02'00" East 241 feet; Thence North 59042'00" West 221.3 feet; Thence South 21 °02'00" West 357.3 feet to the South line of said tract; Thence East 232.9 feet along said South line to the point of beginning; and Except the following described property: Beginning at the Southwest corner of said tract; Thence North 00°09'56" East, along the West line thereof, 525.19 feet; Thence South 89°44'00" East, parallel with the North line of said South Half of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, 372.28 feet to the true point of beginning; Thence North 00'16'00" East 25.00 feet; Thence South 89°44'00" East 200.00 feet; Thence South 00'16'00" West 250.00 feet; Thence North 89°44'00" West 200.00 feet; Thence North 00'16'00" East 225.00 feet to the true point of beginning. Except those portions of Parcels 1 and 2 conveyed to the City of Federal Way by deed recorded under recording number 20150714001953. ri AMERICAN Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. LAND TITLE The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as ' of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commitment IOCUlT2,006) Printed: 09,22.17 @ 07:32 AM Page 3 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPS-1-17-0108794-06 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON COMMITMENT NO. 0108794-06 SCHEDULE B Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: GENERAL EXCEPTIONS A. Rights or claims of parties in possession, or claiming possession, not shown by the Public Records. B. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land. C. Easements, prescriptive rights, rights -of -way, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. D. Any lien, or right to a lien, for contributions to employee benefit funds, or for state workers' compensation, or for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, all as imposed by law, and not shown by the Public Records. E. Taxes or special assessments which are not yet payable or which are not shown as existing liens by the Public Records. F. Any lien for service, installation, connection, maintenance, tap, capacity, or construction or similar charges for sewer, water, electricity, natural gas or other utilities, or for garbage collection and disposal not shown by the Public Records. G. Unpatented mining claims, and all rights relating thereto. H. Reservations and exceptions in United States Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. I. Indian tribal codes or regulations, Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. J. Water rights, claims or title to water. K. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the Public Records, or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commilmeni (06/17/2006) Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM Page 4 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPS-1-17-0108794-06 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON COMMITMENT NO. 0108794-06 SCHEDULE B (continued) SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Puget Sound Power & Light Company Purpose: Electric transmission and/or distribution system Recording Date: December 14, 1953 Recordina No.: 4404206 Affects: as located, staked out and established across said premises Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Puget Sound Power & Light Company Purpose: electric line and appurtenances Recording Date: October 21, 1964 Recording No.: 5801644 Affects: portion of said premises and other property Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Purpose: ingress and egress, drainage, public and private utilities and for the installation, maintenance, repair and replacement of a pipe line or pipe lines, power lines and signal and control circuits Recording Date: November 13, 1964 Recording No.: 5811223 Affects: portion of said premises and other property 4. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Company Purpose: underground communication lines and above ground telephone equipment and cabinets and other appurtenances Recording Date: January 29, 1987 Recordin No.: 8701291409 Affects: portion of said premises and other property Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Federal Way water and sewer district Purpose: sewer mains with necessary appurtenances Recording Date: July 24, 1987 Recordina No.: 8707240920 Affects: portion of said premises and other property AMERICAN Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. LAND TITLE A... IATwN The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commitment (06/17/2006) Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM Page 5 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPS 1-17-0108794-06 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON COMMITMENT NO. 0108794-06 SCHEDULE B (continued) `l 6. Easement(s) for the purpose(s) shown below and rights incidental thereto, as granted in a document: Granted to: Lakehaven Utility District J Purpose: stormwater culvert facility l Recording Date: June 29, 2010 Recording No.: 20100629000642 Affects: portions of said premises as described and delineated in document 1 7. Agreement and the terms and conditions thereof: ~ Executed by: Dorothy M. McElhiney and Water district no. 100 Recording Date: November 15, 1971 Recording No.: 7111150335 Regarding: ground water rights 8. Right of Entry and the terms and conditions thereof: Executed by: Federal Way RI, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company In favor of: City of Federal Way Recording Date: July 14, 2015 Recording No: 20150714001954 9. Terms and conditions of notice of charges of water, sewer, and/or storm and surface water utilities, recorded under recordinn number 8106010916 and 8608041129. 10. Payment of the real estate excise tax, if required. The Land is situated within the boundaries of local taxing authority of City of Federal Way. Present rate of real estate excise tax as of the date herein is 1.78 percent. Any conveyance document must be accompanied by the official Washington State Excise Tax Affidavit. The applicable excise tax must be paid and the affidavit approved at the time of the recording of the conveyance - documents. (NOTE: Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavits must be printed as legal size forms). An additional $5.00 Electronic Technology Fee must be included in all excise tax payments. If the transaction is exempt, an additional $5.00 Affidavit Processing Fee is required. _i AMERICAN Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. LAND TITLE The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commitment (06/17/2006) Printed' 09,22.17 @ 07:32 AM Page 6 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPS-1-17-0108794-06 T CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON COMMITMENT NO. 0108794-06 SCHEDULE B (continued) 11. General and 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: Tax Account No.: Levy Code: Assessed Value -Land: Assessed Value -Improvements: General and Special Taxes 2017 202104-9027-07 1205 $1,938,200.00 $1,000.00 Billed: $ 27,119.79 Paid: $ 13,559.90 Unpaid: $ 13,599.89 12. Liability for Sewer Treatment Capacity Charges, if any, affecting certain areas of King, Pierce and Snohomish Counties. Said charges could apply to property connecting to the metropolitan sewerage facilities or reconnecting or changing its use and/or structure after February 1, 1990. Please contact the King County Wastewater Treatment Division, Capacity Charge Program, for further information at 206-296-1450 or Fax No. 206-263-6823 or email at Ca Char eEscrow kin count . ov. * A map showing sewer service area boundaries and incorporated areas can be found at: hftp://www. kingcounty.gov/services/gis/Maps/vmc/Utilities.aspx#4E564EB5E6894FBC95694BE009A45399 Unrecorded Sewer Capacity Charges are not a lien on title to the Land. NOTE: This exception will not appear in the policy to be issued. 13. A Deed of Trust to secure an indebtedness in the amount shown below, Amount: $2,500,000.00 Dated: November 27, 2007 Trustor/Grantor: Federal Way RI, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company Trustee: Chicago Title Insurance Company Beneficiary: Kevin C. Taylor and Angela C. Taylor, husband and wife Recording Date: November 27, 2007 Recording No.: 20071127001268 Note, said Deed of Trust has been partially released as to that portion conveyed to the City of Federal Way by deed recorded under recording number 20150714001953, by a Partial Reconveyance recorded under recording number 20150807000054 Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM W A-CT-F N S E-02150.622476-S P S-1-17-0108794-06 ALTA Commitment (06/17/2006) Page 7 AMERICAN AN D TITLE ASSOCIATION CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON COMMITMENT NO. 0108794-06 SCHEDULE B (continued) 14. The Company will require the following documents for review prior to the issuance of any title insurance predicated upon a conveyance or encumbrance from the entity named below. Limited Liability Company: Federal Way RI, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company a. A copy of its operating agreement, if any, and any and all amendments, supplements and/or modifications thereto, certified by the appropriate manager or member. b. If a domestic Limited Liability Company, a copy of its Articles of Organization and all amendment thereto with the appropriate filing stamps. c. If the Limited Liability Company is member -managed a full and complete current list of members certified by the appropriate manager or member. d. A current dated certificate of good standing from the proper governmental authority of the state in which the entity was created e. If less than all members, or managers, as appropriate, will be executing the closing documents, furnish evidence of the authority of those signing. The Company reserves the right to add additional items or make further requirements after review of the requested documentation. 15. In the event title to said Land is acquired by the party(s) named below, the policy(s), when issued, will show the following additional item(s) in Schedule B, unless disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: Party(s): PDC Seattle LPIV, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Item(s): at paragraph 16 AM ERICAN Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. LAND TITLE .TLyUC1ATItlN The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commitment (06117/2606) Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM Page 8 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPS-1-17-0108794-06 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON COMMITMENT NO. 0108794-06 SCHEDULE B (continued) 16. The Company will require the following documents for review prior to the issuance of any title insurance predicated upon a conveyance or encumbrance from the entity named below. Limited Liability Company: PDC Seattle LPIV, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company a. A copy of its operating agreement, if any, and any and all amendments, supplements and/or modifications thereto, certified by the appropriate manager or member. b. If a domestic Limited Liability Company, a copy of its Articles of Organization and all amendment thereto with the appropriate filing stamps. c. If the Limited Liability Company is member -managed a full and complete current list of members certified by the appropriate manager or member. d. A current dated certificate of good standing from the proper governmental authority of the state in which the entity was created e. If less than all members, or managers, as appropriate, will be executing the closing documents, furnish evidence of the authority of those signing. The Company reserves the right to add additional items or make further requirements after review of the requested documentation. 17. Matters disclosed by a survey of said premises by Axis survey & mapping, dated November 27, 2007 under job no. 07-161 as follows: Encroachment of a wood frame house, appurtenant to the southeasterly adjoiner, up to 2.5 feet onto a southeasterly portion of said premises. 18. TO PROVIDE THE EXTENDED COVERAGE POLICY AND/OR ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A, GENERAL EXCEPTIONS A THROUGH D WILL BE CONSIDERED WHEN OUR INSPECTION AND/OR REVIEW OF SURVEY, IF REQUIRED, IS COMPLETED. A SUPPLEMENTAL COMMITMENT WILL FOLLOW. If there have been recent improvements on the property within 90 days prior to closing we will require a signed indemnity agreement and a recent financial statement from each indemnitor. If construction financing is to be insured, please contact the title officer for requirements. The Company reserves the right to add additional exceptions or make further requirements after review of the property inspection and requested documentation. ., •.s 1. nrCAN Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. avn,Isu Aib[IA*ION The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commitment (0611712006) Printed: 09.22.17.@ Q7:32 AM Page 9 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPS-1-17-0108794-06 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON COMMITMENT NO. 0108794-06 SCHEDULE B (continued) % Your application for title insurance was placed by reference to only a street address or tax identification number. Based on our records, we believe that the legal description in this report covers the parcels) of Land that you requested. If the legal description is incorrect, the seller/borrower must notify the Company and/or the settlement company in order to prevent errors and to be certain that the correct parcel(s) of Land will appear on any documents to be recorded in connection with this transaction and on the policy of title insurance. END OF EXCEPTIONS NOTES The following matters will not be listed as Special Exceptions in Schedule B of the policy. There will be no coverage for loss arising by reason of the matters listed below because these matters are either excepted or excluded from coverage or are not matters covered under the insuring provisions of the policy. Note A: Note: There are NO conveyances affecting said Land recorded within 24 months of the date of this report. Note B: Note: Any map furnished with this Commitment is for convenience in locating the land indicated herein with reference to streets and other land. No liability is assumed by reason of reliance thereon. Note C: Note: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per Amended RCW 65.04.045. Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description within the body of the document: Portion of SW SE, section 20-21-4. Tax Account No.: 202104-9027-07 END OF NOTES END OF SCHEDULE B Iris AAiCRIGN Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. LAIN TIM MIWIA}IOP The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. - ALTA Commitment (0611712006) Printed: Q122.17 @.07V AM Page 10 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPS-1-17-0108794-06 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON COMMITMENT NO. 0108794-06 CONDITIONS 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquired actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. 5. The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at httpllwww.alla.orq. " END OF CONDITIONS AMERICAN Copyright American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. LAND TTIE ASSOCIATION The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. ALTA Commitment (06/17/2006) Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM Page 11 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.622476-SPS-1.17-0108794-06 RECORDING REQUIREMENTS Effective January 1, 1997, document format and content requirements have been imposed by Washington Law. Failure to comply with the following requirements may result in rejection of the document by the county recorder or imposition of a $50.00 surcharge. First page or cover sheet: 3" top margin containing nothing except the return address. 1" side and bottom margins containing no markings or seals. Title(s) of documents. Recording no. of any assigned, released or referenced document(s). Grantors names (and page no. where additional names can be found). Grantees names (and page no. where additional names can be found). Abbreviated legal description (Lot, Block, Plat Name or Section, Township, Range and Quarter, Quarter Section for unplatted). Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description which must also appear in the body of the document. Assessor's tax parcel number(s). Return address (in top 3" margin). **A cover sheet can be attached containing the above format and data if the first page does not contain all required data. Additional Pages: 1" top, side and bottom margins containing no markings or seals. All Paces: No stapled or taped attachments. Each attachment must be a separate page. All notary and other pressure seals must be smudged for visibility. Font size of 8 points or larger. Recording Requirements Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM by KM WA00000924.doc / Updated: 05.23.16 Page 12 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.620761-0106794-06 FIDELITY NATIONAL FINANCIAL PRIVACY NOTICE Effective: May 1, 2015; Last Updated: March 1, 2017 At Fidelity National Financial, Inc., we respect and believe it is important to protect the privacy of consumers and our customers. This Privacy Notice explains how we collect, use, and protect any information that we collect from you, when and to whom we disclose such information, and the choices you have about the use of that information. A summary of the Privacy Notice is below, and we encourage you to review the entirety of the Privacy Notice following this summary. You can opt -out of certain disclosures by following our opt -out procedure set forth at the end of this Privacy Notice. Types of Information Collected. You may provide us with certain personal information about you, like your contact information, address demographic information, social security number (SSN), driver's license, passport, other government ID numbers and/or financial information. We may also receive browsing information from your Internet browser, computer and/or mobile device if you visit or use our websites or applications. Use of Collected Information. We request and use your personal information to provide products and services to you, to improve our products and services, and to communicate with you about these products and services. We may also share your contact information with our affiliates for marketing purposes. Choices With Your Information. Your decision to submit information to us is entirely up to you. You can opt -out of certain disclosure or use of your information or choose to not provide any personal information to us. Privacy Outside the Website. We are not responsible for the privacy practices of third parties, even if our website links to those parties' websites. How Information is Collected. We may collect personal information from you via applications, forms, and correspondence we receive from you and others related to our transactions with you. When you visit our websites from your computer or mobile device, we automatically collect and store certain information available to us through your Internet browser or computer equipment to optimize your website experience. When Information Is Disclosed. We may disclose your information to our affiliates and/or nonaffiliated parties providing services for you or us, to law enforcement agencies or governmental authorities, as required by law, and to parties whose interest in title must be determined. Information From Children. We do not knowingly collect information from children who are under the age of 13, and our website is not intended to attract children. International Users. By providing us with you information, you consent to its transfer, processing and storage outside of your country of residence, as well as the fact that we will handle such information consistent with this Privacy Notice. The California Online Privacy Protection Act. Some FNF companies provide services to mortgage loan servicers and, in some cases, their websites collect information on behalf of mortgage loan servicers. The mortgage loan servicer is responsible for taking action or making changes to any consumer information submitted through those websites. Your Consent To This Privacy Notice. By submitting information to us or by using our website, you are accepting and agreeing to the terms of this Privacy Notice. Access and Correction: Contact Us. If you desire to contact us regarding this notice or your information, please contact us at r)rivacyafnf.com or as directed at the end of this Privacy Notice. Privacy Statement Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM by KM WA00000924.doc / Updated: 05.23.16 Page 13 WA-CT-FNSE-02150.620761-0108794-06 FIDELITY NATIONAL FINANCIAL PRIVACY NOTICE Effective: May 1, 2015; Last Updated: March 1, 2017 Fidelity National Financial, Inc. and its majority -owned subsidiary companies providing title insurance, real estate - and loan -related services (collectively, "FNF", "our" or "we") respect and are committed to protecting your privacy. We will take reasonable steps to ensure that your Personal Information and Browsing Information will only be used in compliance with this Privacy Notice and applicable laws. This Privacy Notice is only in effect for Personal Information and Browsing Information collected and/or owned by or on behalf of FNF, including Personal Information and Browsing Information collected through any FNF website, online service or application (collectively, the "Website"). Tunes of Information Collected We may collect two types of information from you: Personal Information and Browsing Information. Personal Information. FNF may collect the following categories of Personal Information: • contact information (e.g., name, address, phone number, email address); • demographic information (e.g., date of birth, gender, marital status); • social security number (SSN), driver's license, passport, and other government ID numbers; • financial account information; and • other personal information needed from you to provide title insurance, real estate- and loan -related services to you. Browsing Information. FNF may collect the following categories of Browsing Information: • Internet Protocol (or IP) address or device ID/UDID, protocol and sequence information; • browser language and type; • domain name system requests; • browsing history, such as time spent at a domain, time and date of your visit and number of clicks; • http headers, application client and server banners; and • operating system and fingerprinting data. How Information is Collected In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: • applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative; • the correspondence you and others send to us; • information we receive through the Website; • information about your transactions with, or services performed by, us, our affiliates or nonaffiliated third parties; and • information from consumer or other reporting agencies and public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain directly from those entities, our affiliates or others. If you visit or use our Website, we may collect Browsing Information from you as follows: • Browser Log Files. Our servers automatically log each visitor to the Website and collect and record certain browsing information about each visitor. The Browsing Information includes generic information and reveals nothing personal about the user. • Cookies. When you visit our Website, a "cookie" may be sent to your computer. A cookie is a small piece of data that is sent to your Internet browser from a web server and stored on your computer's hard drive. When you visit a website again, the cookie allows the website to recognize your computer. Cookies may store user preferences and other information. You can choose whether or not to accept cookies by changing your Internet browser settings, which may impair or limit some functionality of the Website. Use of Collected Information Information collected by FNF is used for three main purposes: • To provide products and services to you or any affiliate or third party who is obtaining services on your behalf or in connection with a transaction involving you. • To improve our products and services. • To communicate with you and to inform you about our, our affiliates' and third parties' products and services, jointly or independently. Privacy Statement Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM by KM WA00000924.doc / Updated: 05.23.16 Page {{Page}} WA-CT-FNSE-02150.620761-0108794-06 When Information Is Disclosed We may provide your Personal Information (excluding information we receive from consumer or other credit reporting agencies) and Browsing Information to various individuals and companies, as permitted by law, without obtaining your prior authorization. Such laws do not allow consumers to restrict these disclosures. Please see the section "Choices With Your Personal Information" to learn how to limit the discretionary disclosure of your Personal Information and Browsing Information. Disclosures of your Personal Information may be made to the following categories of affiliates and nonaffiliated third parties: • to third parties to provide you with services you have requested, and to enable us to detect or prevent criminal activity, fraud, material misrepresentation, or nondisclosure; • to our affiliate financial service providers for their use to market their products or services to you; • to nonaffiliated third party service providers who provide or perform services on our behalf and use the disclosed information only in connection with such services; • to nonaffiliated third party service providers with whom we perform joint marketing, pursuant to an agreement with them to market financial products or services to you; • to law enforcement or other governmental authority in connection with an investigation, or civil or criminal subpoena or court order; • to lenders, lien holders, judgment creditors, or other parties claiming an interest in title whose claim or interest must be determined, settled, paid, or released prior to closing; and • other third parties for whom you have given us written authorization to disclose your Personal Information. We may disclose Personal Information and/or Browsing Information when required by law or in the good -faith belief that such disclosure is necessary to: • comply with a legal process or applicable laws; • enforce this Privacy Notice; • investigate or respond to claims that any material, document, image, graphic, logo, design, audio, video or any other information provided by you violates the rights of a third party; or • protect the rights, property or personal safety of FNF, its users or the public. We maintain reasonable safeguards to keep your Personal Information secure. When we provide Personal Information to our affiliates or third party service providers as discussed in this Privacy Notice, we expect that these parties process such information in compliance with our Privacy Notice or in a manner that is in compliance with applicable privacy laws. The use of your information by a business partner may be subject to that party's own Privacy Notice. Unless permitted by law, we do not disclose information we collect from consumer or credit reporting agencies with our affiliates or others without your consent. We reserve the right to transfer your Personal Information, Browsing Information, and any other information, in connection with the sale or other disposition of all or part of the FNF business and/or assets, or in the event of our bankruptcy, reorganization, insolvency, receivership or an assignment for the benefit of creditors. You expressly agree and consent to the use and/or transfer of the foregoing information in connection with any of the above described proceedings. We cannot and will not be responsible for any breach of security by a third party or for any actions of any third party that receives any of the information that is disclosed to us. Choices With Your Information Whether you submit Personal Information or Browsing Information to FNF is entirely up to you. If you decide not to submit Personal Information or Browsing Information, FNF may not be able to provide certain services or products to you. The uses of your Personal Information and/or Browsing Information that, by law, you cannot limit, include: • for our everyday business purposes — to process your transactions, maintain your account(s), to respond to law enforcement or other governmental authority in connection with an investigation, or civil or criminal subpoenas or court orders, or report to credit bureaus; • for our own marketing purposes; • for joint marketing with financial companies; and • for our affiliates' everyday business purposes — information about your transactions and experiences. Privacy Statement Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM by KM WA00000924.doc / Updated: 05.23.16 Page {{Page}} WA-CT-FNSE-02150.620761-0108794-06 You may choose to prevent FNF from disclosing or using your Personal Information and/or Browsing Information under the following circumstances ("opt -out"): • for our affiliates' everyday business purposes — information about your creditworthiness; and • for our affiliates to market to you. To the extent permitted above, you may opt -out of disclosure or use of your Personal Information and Browsing Information by notifying us by one of the methods at the end of this Privacy Notice. We do not share your personal information with non -affiliates for their direct marketing purposes. For California Residents: We will not share your Personal Information and Browsing Information with nonaffiliated third parties, except as permitted by California law. Currently, our policy is that we do not recognize "do not track" requests from Internet browsers and similar devices. For Nevada Residents: You may be placed on our internal Do Not Call List by calling (888) 934-3354 or by contacting us via the information set forth at the end of this Privacy Notice. Nevada law requires that we also provide you with the following contact information: Bureau of Consumer Protection, Office of the Nevada Attorney General, 555 E. Washington St., Suite 3900, Las Vegas, NV 89101; Phone number: (702) 486-3132; email: BCPINFO@ag.state.nv.us. For Oregon Residents: We will not share your Personal Information and Browsing Information with nonaffiliated third parties for marketing purposes, except after you have been informed by us of such sharing and had an opportunity to indicate that you do not want a disclosure made for marketing purposes. For Vermont Residents: We will not share your Personal Information and Browsing Information with nonaffiliated third parties, except as permitted by Vermont law, such as to process your transactions or to maintain your account. In addition, we will not share information about your creditworthiness with our affiliates except with your authorization. For joint marketing in Vermont, we will only disclose your name, contact information and information about your transactions. Information From Children The Website is meant for adults and is not intended or designed to attract children under the age of thirteen (13).We do not collect Personal Information from any person that we know to be under the age of thirteen (13) without permission from a parent or guardian. By using the Website, you affirm that you are over the age of 13 and will abide by the terms of this Privacy Notice. Privacy Outside the Website The Website may contain links to other websites. FNF is not and cannot be responsible for the privacy practices or the content of any of those other websites. International Users FNF's headquarters is located within the United States. If you reside outside the United States or are a citizen of the European Union, please note that we may transfer your Personal Information and/or Browsing Information outside of your country of residence or the European Union for any of the purposes described in this Privacy Notice. By providing FNF with your Personal Information and/or Browsing Information, you consent to our collection and transfer of such information in accordance with this Privacy Notice. The Caiifornia Online Privacy Protection A t For some FNF websites, such as the Customer CareNet ("CCN"), FNF is acting as a third party service provider to a mortgage loan servicer. In those instances, we may collect certain information on behalf of that mortgage loan servicer via the website. The information which we may collect on behalf of the mortgage loan servicer is as follows: • first and last name; • property address; • user name and password; • loan number; • social security number - masked upon entry; • email address; • three security questions and answers; and • IP address. The information you submit through the website is then transferred to your mortgage loan servicer by way of CCN. Privacy Sfatemerrl Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM by KM WA00000924.doc / Updated: 05.23.16 Page {{Page}} WA-CT-FNSE-02150 620761-0108794-06 The mortgage loan servicer is responsible for taking action or making changes to any consumer information submitted through this website. For example, if you believe that your payment or user information is incorrect, you must contact your mortgage loan servicer. CCN does not share consumer information with third parties, other than (1) those with which the mortgage loan servicer has contracted to interface with the CCN application, or (2) law enforcement or other governmental authority in connection with an investigation, or civil or criminal subpoenas or court orders. All sections of this Privacy Notice apply to your interaction with CCN, except for the sections titled "Choices with Your Information" and "Access and Correction." If you have questions regarding the choices you have with regard to your personal information or how to access or correct your personal information, you should contact your mortgage loan servicer. Your Consent To This Privacy Notice By submitting Personal Information and/or Browsing Information to FNF, you consent to the collection and use of the information by us in compliance with this Privacy Notice. Amendments to the Privacy Notice will be posted on the Website. Each time you provide information to us, or we receive information about you, following any amendment of this Privacy Notice will signify your assent to and acceptance of its revised terms for all previously collected information and information collected from you in the future. We may use comments, information or feedback that you submit to us in any manner that we may choose without notice or compensation to you. Accessing and Correcting Information, Contact Us If you have questions, would like to access or correct your Personal Information, or want to opt -out of information sharing with our affiliates for their marketing purposes, please send your requests to privacv(cDfnf.com or by mail or phone to: Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 601 Riverside Avenue Jacksonville, Florida 32204 Attn: Chief Privacy Officer (888)934-3354 Privacy Statement Printed: 09.22.17 @ 07:32 AM by KM WA00000924.doc / Updated: 05.23.16 Page {{Page}} WA-CT-FNSE-02150.620761-0108794-06 20071127001267.001 WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO FEDERAL WAY RI, LLC 15 LAKE BELLEVUE DRIVE, SURE 102 BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98005 )071127001267 CHICAGO TITLE WD 45.00 PAO£001 OF 006 11/27/2007 14:33 KING COUNTY, LA 0 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 1237111 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED THE GRANTOR(S) FLORA C. H. LIU YEN, AS TRUSTEE UNDER THE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT, DATED APRIL 1J, 1900 for and in consideration of TEN DOLLARS AND OTHER GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION in hand paid, conveys and warrants to FEDERAL WAY RI, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY the following described real estate situated in the County of KING State of Washington: LEGAL DESCRIPTION ATTACHED HERETO AS EXHIBIT WAND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF AS IF FULLY INCORPORATED HEREIN. SUBJECT TO: EXCEPTIONS SET FORTH ON ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B" AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOFAS IF FULLY INCORPORATED HEREIN. CHICAGO TITLE INS. CO® REF# ;47. 1 -/c Abbreviated Legal: SW Wt, 20.214 Talc Account Number(s): 20210449027-07 Dated: 21.NOV 2007 BY: FLORA C.H.LIUYEN, ASTR TEE UNDER THE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT LPB10/KLC/052006 E2321722 11127 /2007 M 30 KING COUNTY, VA TAX S35S1B.00 SALE $1, 95,,000.00 PFGE001 OF 001 Page 1 of 6 Requested By: krismcewen, Printed: 9/22/2017 7:15 AM Doc: KC:2007 20071127001267-53033 20071127001267.002 STATE OF (3t'dx0bsl0at } SS COUNTY OF K, ;" .� :;Qjam l I CERTIFY THAT I KNOW OR HAVE SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE THAT FLORA C. H. LIU YEN IS THE PERSON WHO APPEARED BEFORE ME, AND SAID PERSON ACKNOWLEDGED THAT SHE SIGNED THIS INSTRUMENT, ON OATH STATED THAT SHE WAS AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE THE INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED IT AS TRUSTEE UNDER THE JOINT VENTURE AGREZMENT, DATED APRIL 10, 1980, TO BE THE FREE AND VOLUNTARY ACT OF SUCH PARTY FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES MENTIONED IN THE INSTRUMENT. V z, Nov tom 'PRINTED NAME: MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES Ieart L. Pler1re•[.01,111 Special NDrary(PL 96-8) Duty appointed :tnd quuliFied My commission expires: August27,2009 Page 2 of 6 Requested By: krismcewen, Printed: 9/22/2017 7:15 AM Doc: KC:2007 20071127001267-53033 20071127001267.003 NOTARY'S AFFIDAVIT Notary: Please complete one affidavit for each signer TOw" n) Ci�t :.r Xn�&slunk A-w-:caR SuSSdtuie la 131hM ) W 1 Kno2u Un-7 amaek Qcww I, Jew L Pie , (print notary's name) hereby certify under the penalty of perjury, that I am authorized to act as a Notary Public, in and for the above County and State, and that in performing my duties as a Notary Public, I have complied with all applicable state and local laws and that I have been presented with at least one form of government issued identification which matches the signature on the documents being executed herein. A copy of signer's identification is attached: YES /� Date: NOV 20 I notarized the signature of: r r (print signer's name here) Form of identification presented to notary: o State driver's license o State identification e Passport o Military/Government identification Second form of identification presented to notary (if requested): Type: ID #: tary Signature Notary Phone Number Special Notary (PL -96-8) Page 3 of 6 Requested By: krismcewen, Printed: 9/22/2017 7:15 AM Doc: KC:2007 20071127001267-53033 20071127001267.004 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY EXHIBIT A Escrow No.: 1237111 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The land referred to is situated in the State of Washington, County of KING and is described as follows: PARCEL 1: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH 147.7 FEET OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING WEST OF PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH 89-34147" EAST 643.69 FEET TO THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH; THENCE SOUTH 21150133" WEST, ALONG SAID MARGIN, 40.82 FEET; THENCE NORTH 86-07116" WEST 629.93 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 2: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING WEST OF PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH; EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED TRACT: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH AND THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT; THENCE NORTH 21°02'00" EAST 241 FEET; THENCE NORTH 59°42'00" WEST 221.3 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 21002'00" WEST 357.3 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT; - THENCE EAST 232.9 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT; THENCE NORTH 00°09'56" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF, 525.19 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°44'00" EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, 372.28 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 00016'00" EAST 25.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°44'00" EAST 200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00116'00" WEST 250.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89144'00" WEST 200.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00°16'00" EAST 225.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. F� I s:r 6 L.r /nDAIND9 Page 4 of 6 Requested By: krismcewen, Printed: 9/22/2017 7:15 AM Doc: KC:2007 20071127001267-53033 20071127001267.006 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY EXHIBIT B EsaowNo.: 1237111 EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PURPOSE: ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION AND/OR DISTRIBUTION LINE AREA AFFECTED: AS LOCATED, STARED OUT AND ESTABLISHED ACROSS SAID PREMISES RECORDED: DECEMBER 14, 1953 RECORDING NUMBER: 4404206 EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PURPOSE: ELECTRIC LINE 1 AREA AFFECTED: A 20 FOOT STRIP OF LAND WITHIN PARCEL 1 RECORDED: OCTOBER 21, 1964 RECORDING NUMBER: 1 5801644 EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: 1 PURPOSE: INGRESS, EGRESS, DRAINAGE, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES, AND FOR THE INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT OF A PIPE LINE OR PIPE LINES, POWER LINES AND SIGNAL AND CONTROL CIRCUITS AREA AFFECTED: A PORTION OF SAID PREMISES AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT RECORDED: NOVEMBER 13, 1964 RECORDING NUMBER: 5811223 EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY PURPOSE: UNDERGROUND COMMUNICATION LINES AND ABOVE GROUND TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT AND CABINETS AREA AFFECTED: 5 FEET IN WIDTH ACROSS A PORTION OF SAID PREMISES AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT RECORDED: JANUARY 29, 1987 RECORDING NUMBER: 8701291409 EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: FEDERAL WAY WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT PURPOSE: SEWER MAINS AREA AFFECTED: A STRIP OF LAND 10 FEET IN WIDTH AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT RECORDED: JULY 24, 1987 RECORDING NUMBER: $707240920 AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: MCMBIr/RDA/OM Page 5 of 6 Requested By: krismcewen, Printed: 9/22/2017 7:15 AM Doc: KC:2007 20071127001267-53033 20071127001267.006 CERCAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY EXHIBIT B EscrOWNo,: 1237111 (continued) BETWEEN: DOROTHY M. MCELHINEY AND: WATER DISTRICT NO. 100 RECORDED: NOVEMBER 15, 1971 RECORDING NUMBER: 7a11150335 REGARDING: GROUND WATER RIGHTS TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF NOTICE OF CHARGES BY WATER, SEWER, AND/OR STORM AND SURFACE WATER UTILITIES, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8106010916 . TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF NOTICE OF CHARGES BY WATER, SEWER, AND/OR STORM AND SURFACE WATER UTILITIES, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8608041129 . er.},e 4itOrin/121196 Page 6 of 6 Requested By: krismcewen, Printed: 9/22/2017 7:15 AM Doc: KC:2007 20071127001267-53033 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREA DEFINITION JUNE 1996 Robinson &Noble, Inc. 5915 Orchard St. W Tacoma, WA 98467 ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. GROUND WATER 6 ENVIRONMENTAL GEOLOGISTS 5915 ORCHARD STREET WEST TACOMA. WASHINGTON 98467 (20S) 475-771 1 FAX 472-5946 J LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREA DEFINITION June 1996 by Joseph E. Becker LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Section 1. Introduction .. . ................. . . .... .. .... 1-1 Section 2. Physical Definition of the Hydrogeologic System Layer 1, Vashon Till ... .... .... .. . . . . . . . . ..... .. 2-2 Layer 2, Vashon Advance Aquifer System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 Layer 3, Lower Confining Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 Layer 4, Intermediate Aquifer System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 Layer 5, Deep Confining Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 Layer 6, Deep Aquifer Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 Hydrogeology at Wells 27M and 29T . . . . . . ....... . . . . 2-4 Section 3. Water Quality Iron .............3-1 Manganese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 Nitrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-2 Chloride . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. . 3-3 Specific Conductance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4 Water Quality Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4 Section 4. Modeling Methodology MODFLOW.................................4-1 MODPATH.................................4-3 Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3 Section 5. General Ground Water Flow Ground Water Paths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 Travel Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-2 Table of Contents Section 6. Capture Zone Delineation Three -Dimensional Aspects of Capture Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1 Capture Zone and Wellhead Protection Area Definitions . . . . . . . . . 6-2 Relationship of "Real World" Zones to Modeled Zones . . . . . . . . . . 6-2 One -Year Capture Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-3 Five -Year Capture Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-4 Ten -Year Capture Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-6 One -Hundred Year Capture Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-7 Modifications Due to Changing Stress Conditions . . . . . 6-8 Section 7. Conclusions and Recommendations. . . . . . .. . .. . .... 7-1 References ..... ................... ........ 7-5 Tables 1. Layer/Unit Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2. Minimum Predicted Travel Times to RMC Wells .. . . . . . . . . . 2-2 3. Nitrate Concentration Trends in LUD Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3 4. Average Chloride Concentrations by Aquifer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4 5. Summary of Selected Parameters by Aquifer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5 6. Assigned Porosity Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3 7. Amounts of Horizontal & Vertical Movement on Sample Ground Water Flow Paths . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-2 8. Travel Times and Velocities for Sample Ground Water Particles . . . . . 5-3 9. One -Year Capture Zone Details. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-4 10. Five -Year Capture Zone Details. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-5 11. Ten -Year Capture Zone Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-6 12. Lakes Which Potential Recharge LUD Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-7 13. One Hundred -Year Capture Zone Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-8 Figures 1. Iron Concentrations, 1990-1995 2. Manganese Concentrations, 1990-1995 3. Nitrate Concentrations, 1990-1995 4. Chloride Concentrations, 1990-1995 5. Specific Conductance Values, 1990-1995 6. Average Nitrate Concentration vs. Chloride Concentration vs. Specific Conductance Value for the Federal Way Upland Aquifers, 1990-1995 7. Ground Water Production, Lakehaven Utility District, 1990-1995 Table of Contents 8. Modeled Potentiometric Surface, Vashon Advance Aquifer System, Layer 2, 1991 9. Modeled Potentiometric Surface, Intermediate Aquifer System, Layer 4, 1991 10. Modeled Potentiometric Surface, Deep Aquifer System, Layer 6, 1991 I la. Sample of Modeled Ground Water Paths to Three Wells, Map View I lb. Sample of Modeled Ground Water Paths to Three Wells, Cross Section View 12. Vertical Discretion of 100-Year Capture Zone, Well 23 13. 100-Year Capture Zone, Well 23 14. Effect of Placing Defining Particle Locations at Edge of Model Cell Instead of at Exact Well Position 15. 1-Year Capture Zones, Well 16 and Redondo -Milton Channel Aquifer Wells, Layer 2 16. 1-Year Capture Zones, Wells 10C, 22/22A, and Mirror Lake Aquifer Wells, Layer 4 17. 1-Year Capture Zones, Federal Way Deep Aquifer Wells, Layer 6 18. 5-Year Capture Zones, Well 16 and Redondo -Milton Channel Aquifer Wells, Layer 2 19. 5-Year Capture Zones, Wells IOC, 22/22A, and Mirror Lake Aquifer Wells, Layer 4 2O. 5-Year Capture Zones, Federal Way Deep Aquifer Wells, Layer 6 21. 10-Year Capture Zones, Well 16 and Redondo -Milton Channel Aquifer Wells, Layer 2 22. 10-Year Capture Zones, Wells 10C, 22/22A, and Mirror Lake Aquifer Wells, Layer 4 23. 10-Year Capture Zones, Federal Way Deep, Aquifer Wells, Layer 6 24. 100-Year Capture Zones, Well 16 and Redondo -Milton Channel Aquifer Wells, Layer 2 25. 100-Year Capture Zones, Wells 10C, 22/22A, and Mirror Lake Aquifer Wells, Layer 4 26. 100-Year Capture Zones, Federal Way Deep Aquifer Wells, Layer 6 27. Production Sensitivity, Change in 10-Year Capture Zone in South RMC 28. Recharge Sensitivity Deficit, Change in 10-Year Capture Zones, Well 10/10A 29. Recharge Sensitivity Excess, Change in lOYear Captures Zones, Well 10/10A 30. Wellhead Protection Areas for Wells in the Qva Aquifer System, Layer 2 31. Wellhead Protection Areas for Wells in the Intermediate Aquifer System, Layer 4 32. Wellhead Protection Areas for Wells in the Deep Aquifer System, Layer 6 Table of Contents iii LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Lakehaven Utility District is mandated under federal and state laws to implement a wellhead protection program. The general purpose of the program will be to protect the ground waters used by the District. The first major step in creating a wellhead protection plan is defining the management area for which the plan will be in effect. This management area is called a wellhead protection area. This report defines the wellhead protection areas for the District. The state Department of Health recommends that wellhead protection areas be based upon the areas for which water travels to a well within one, five, and ten years. These areas which contribute water to a well are called capture zones. There are several methods of delineating capture zones, the most accurate of which is generally considered to be numerical modeling. In 1992, a numerical ground water model of the Federal Way upland was constructed for the District as a ground water resource management tool. This model has been employed to delineate the capture zones for the District wells. Prior to using the model to define the zones, reviews were made of the upland's hydrogeology and water quality. The review of the water quality data focused on five parameters: iron, manganese, chloride, nitrate, and specific conductance. Generally, the current water quality is good, with the exception of high manganese concentrations at some wells. While the water quality is still good, there are indications that development on the upland over the years has impacted the water quality somewhat, especially that of the upper aquifers. These impacts, seen in the nitrate, chloride and specific conductance data, is not problematic and should not affect the potability of the ground water. Several numerical model runs were made using average recharge rates and average production rates for District wells. Results from these model runs were used to delineate the one-, five-, ten-, and 100-year capture zones for all District production wells. These model runs also allowed the general routing of water through the ground water system, from recharge points to production wells, to be investigated. It was found that ground water moves primarily vertically through confining layers and primarily horizontally through aquifers. Water can move up to hundreds of feet per year through aquifers, but is as slow as several feet per year through the confining layers. The project finished by defining wellhead protection areas for each production well and each aquifer system. Definition of the areas was based upon the interpretation of the delineated capture zones, tempered by knowledge of the limitations of the numerical model and knowledge of the hydrogeology and general response of ground water system of the upland. Executive Summary iv SECTION LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION INTRODUCTION Lakehaven Utility District (LUD), a Group -A public water system which uses ground water as a source, is mandated under federal and state law to implement a wellhead protection program. The overall goal of the mandating laws is to create an awareness of the areas contributing water to wells supplying the system, and to prevent the contamination of ground water used by Group A public water systems. This is to be accomplished through a protection plan which provides management zones around public wells, detects existing ground water contamination sources in the management zones, and manages potential contamination sources within the zones. Washington State requires that a wellhead protection plan (WHPP) shall, at a minimum, include the following: a completed susceptibility assessment a delineated wellhead protection area • an inventory of potential contaminant sources • a distribution of findings to required entities contingency plans for alternative water sources • appropriate spill/incident response measures Lakehaven Utility District has the primary responsibility for developing and implementing the WHPP to protect its ground water resource. Since the District serves a community of 100,000 and relies on ground water for more than 90 percent of its supply, the task of developing and implementing a WHPP is formidable. The task is further complicated by the fact that LUD relies on wells in four major aquifers: the Redondo -Milton Channel (RMC), the Mirror Lake Aquifer (MLA), the Eastern Upland Aquifers (EUA), and the Federal Way Deep Aquifer (FWDA). The first major step in developing a WHPP is defining the management zones around the protected wells. These zones are called wellhead protection areas (WHPA). This report describes the process by which the delineation of the WHPAs was accomplished for LUD, and presents the WHPAs as defined by that process. Wellhead protection areas can be defined by technical or non -technical methods, although technical methods are preferred so that the WHPP better protects the areas of the aquifer that actually contribute water to a well, known as capture zones. In general, there are four methods Introduction 1-1 for delineating capture zones. They are, from generally least to generally most accurate: the calculated fixed radius method (a non -technical method), analytical modeling, hydrogeologic mapping, and numerical modeling. Several steps are necessary to accurately delineate areas which contribute water to a well. First, geologic and hydrogeologic data for the general region must be collected and analyzed. Secondly, a conceptual model of the hydrogeologic system which encompasses the well or wells needs to be developed from the data analysis. Third, by using the data analysis and conceptual model, a capture zone delineation method can be chosen and the zones defined. Finally, using the defined capture zones as a base, the WHPAs can be delineated. The state Department of Health (DOH) requires that each well have three designated WHPAs, labeled Zone 1, Zone 2, and Zone 3, based upon the one-, five-, and ten-year captures zones. They also recommend wells have an additional WHPA outside of Zone 3, termed the Buffer Zone, which may protect additional aquifer or recharge areas. Based on the methodology used and the level of uncertainty involved, the designated WHPAs may generally encompass or greatly resemble the defined capture zones. In this case, the first two steps of this process had previously been completed and are reviewed in Section 2 of this report. Section 3 of the report adds to the basic data analysis by examining the typical water chemistry of the LUD aquifers. The remainder of the report deals with the delineation method and the actual definition of the capture zones and WHPAs for the LUD wells. The previous work completed for LUD to facilitate resource management included the development of a very sophisticated, three- dimensional, numerical model of the Federal Way Upland. Therefore, the numerical modeling methodology was chosen for the capture zone delineation method. The method is described in Section 4. Results and definition of the WHPAs are presented in the last several sections. 1-2 Introduction SECTION 2 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION PHYSICAL DEFINITION OF THE HYDROGEOLOGIC SYSTEM Prior to delineating the capture zones for the LUD wells, the hydrogeology of the Federal Way Upland was reviewed. A complete description of the hydrogeology is given in our previous report entitled, Hydioaeologic Analysis of the Federal Way Area, Washington (Becker, 1992). The discussion presented below summarizes that work and adds new insights derived from the drilling of Wells 27M and 29T. The 1995 report by the USGS, entitled Occurrence and Quality of Ground Water in Southwestern King County, Washington, was also reviewed for this effort. However, the USGS report fundamentally misidentified many of the unconsolidated units in the Federal Way area and, therefore, discussion of the report is not included in this review. In the 1992 report, the hydrogeology is described by model layer, with each model layer representing a different hydrostratigraphic layer. The nomenclature used is shown on Table 1. In total, there are six major hydrostratigraphic units delineated on the Federal Way upland reaching to 700 feet below sea level. Beneath these are hundreds of feet of additional unconsolidated sediments which have not been differentiated. Table 1: LaverlUnit Nomenclature Model Laver H drostrati ra hie Unit Notes 1 Vashon Till Also contains, at some locations, a thin recessional outwash at top. 2 Vashon Advance Contains the RMC, Auburn West Hill Springs, and Well 16 Aquifer System Aquifers. 3 Lower Confining Layer Confining layer beneath the RMC, above the MLA. 4 Intermediate Aquifer Contains the Mirror Lake, Eastern Upland, and North Shore System Aquifers. 5 Deep Confining Layer Confining layer beneath the MLA, above the deep aquifer. 6 Deeu Aquifer System Contains the Federal Way Deep Aquifer. Physical Definition of the Hydrogeologic System 2-1 Layer 1, Vashon Till Layer 1 includes the Vashon till and Vashon recessional deposits which overlie the till in some areas. The unit is generally less than 150 feet thick and covers most of the upland. However, it is thin to absent in some areas, particularly in the Hylebos wetland area and in Jovita and Peasley Canyons. The recessional deposits are typically coarse sand and gravel and may supply perched water in some areas. The till is a compact mixture of sand and gravel in a silt and clay matrix. The till has a low permeability, which retards ground water flow through it. Because of the low permeability, water movement through the till will be primarily vertical. Travel times through the till will vary widely depending upon the vertical gradient, the thickness of the till, and the till's porosity and vertical permeability. Using typical values for these parameters, projected travel times through the till in the RMC area between the Hylebos wetlands and Mirror Lake range from 300 to 2,000 days. However, where the till is thin, absent, or fractured, travel times can be substantially reduced. Indeed, the model -predicted travel times for RMC wells through the till were as short as 123 days (Table 2)'. Table 2: Minimum Predicted Travel Times to RMC Wells Well Minimum Predicted Travel Time (days)' 1-Year Analysis 5-Year Analysis 10-Year Analysis 10/10A >365 272 228 15/15A 137 123 123 17/17A >365 247 241 18 288 202 202 20A >365 601 534 21 358 192 185 23A2 46 38 38 Minimum backwards (discharge cell to recharge point) travel times for 1-, 5-, and 10-year MODPATH runs. Predicted travel times decrease with length of modeling analysis due to the declining RMC water table predicted by MODFLOW (see page 4-2). Short travel times for Well 23A result from particles recharging from the bottom of a constant -head cell and may, therefore, be artificially shortened. ' The shortest travel time for any RMC well was 38 days at Well 23A. However, this travel time represents water originating from a constant head cell (representing Mirror Lake) and, therefore, was not considered. 2-2 Physical Definition of the Hydrogeologic System Layer 2, Vashon Advance Aquifer System Over much of the upland, Vashon advance outwash deposits exist beneath the Vashon till. These deposits form the Vashon advance aquifer system, with distinct aquifers formed in the higher permeability portions of the unit. The major aquifers in the unit on the upland are the Redondo -Milton Channel, the Auburn West Hill Springs Aquifer, and the Well 16 aquifer. The outwash deposits which make up the unit are varied, ranging from silty sand to very clean, sandy gravel. The unit's thickness varies from absent to more than 200 feet at the thickest portion of the RMC. Because of the variation in the unit, its horizontal and vertical permeabilities vary widely. Therefore, water movement through the layer can be strongly horizontal, primarily vertical, or a combination thereof. Layer 3, Lower Confining Unit Layer 3 is herein labeled the lower confining unit. It represents the aquitard between the Vashon advance aquifer system and the intermediate aquifer system. It is formed by a thick sequence of silt and clay -rich sediments, including the Lawton Clay member of the Vashon Drift and, in places, a till. At many locations, the unit is predominantly silt and clay; at other locations, it is primarily a mixture of sand and gravel with silt and clay. The unit varies widely in thickness. Where the RMC reaches its maximum thickness, layer 3 is very thin to absent. Elsewhere, it can exceed 300 feet thick. Generally, it is thickest on the eastern upland. Because of the wide variations in thickness and vertical gradients for the unit, travel times through the unit should range from less than 100 days to many years. For example, Well 25 travel time results were examined and showed that, through layer 3, particle travel times ranged from less than 200 days to more than 100 years. Water movement through the layer is, at most locations, primarily in a vertical direction. Layer 4, Intermediate Aquifer System The intermediate aquifer system is a mixture of isolated aquifers and low permeability sediments between the aquifers. The most significant aquifer in the unit is the Mirror Lake Aquifer. The aquifer system also includes smaller, isolated aquifers on both sides of the upland, collectively referred to as the Eastern Upland Aquifers and the North Shore Aquifers. The unit has upper and lower aquifer zones within it. This zonation is particularly evident in the Eastern Upland Aquifers. A good example is at Well 29T where aquifer zones were found at depths of 450-480 feet and 525-620 feet. Both of these zones are included in the current intermediate aquifer system definition. Physical Definition of the Hydrogeologic System 2-3 The materials within the unit probably have more variation in permeabilities than any other unit on the upland. The materials between the aquifers may be as impermeable as the confining layers, while the aquifer materials can be highly permeable, especially in the MLA. The layer is absent beneath the south and south-central portions of the RMC. Elsewhere, its thickness generally varies from 50 to more than 150 feet. Because of the large amount of low permeability material in the unit, water movement in the unit outside the aquifers may be primarily in a vertical direction. In the aquifers, there may be a substantial horizontal component to water movement, especially if there is significant well production in the aquifer. Layer 5, Deep Confining Unit Layer 5, herein labeled the deep confining unit, is the aquitard between the intermediate aquifer system and the deep aquifer system. It is the most substantial confining layer on the upland. It is found throughout the upland and is 200 to 400 feet thick at most locations. It consists largely of low permeability materials ranging from clay to silty, fine sand. Water movement through the unit is primarily vertical. Travel times through the unit are very long due to the layer's thickness and low vertical permeability. For example, model -predicted travel times for particles through layer 5 to Well 19 ranged from 20 to more than 100 years. Layer 6, Deep Aquifer Unit Little is known about the deep aquifer system, which contains the Federal Way Deep Aquifer (FWDA) and is in probable continuity with the deep aquifers in the Puyallup Valley. The unit includes the fine -to -medium sand deposits of the Federal Way Deep Aquifer, as well as lower permeability sediments found elsewhere on the upland where the FWDA is missing. Because the unit is probably in direct continuity with Puget Sound, much of the water movement through the layer should be horizontally directed toward the Sound. Hydrogeology at Wells 27M and 29T Wells 27M and 29T were drilled after the 1992 hydrogeology study was completed. Both wells were drilled to depths greater than 1,000 feet and provide new insights into the upland's hydrogeology. Well 27M encountered all six layers and is completed in the Federal Way Deep Aquifer. It also helped define the northwestern edge of the MLA. The MLA at the site is quite deep, 150 to 230 feet below sea level, and is formed by 15 feet of coarse sand and gravel topping 65 feet of silty, fine sand and gravel. This aquifer configuration fits well with the interpretation of the 2-4 Physical Definition of the Hydrogeologic System MLA as a deltaic formation. Previously, it was not known that the MLA extended this far to the north and west. The other layers at the well are very similar to elsewhere in the northern RMC area. Well 29T is located on the northern part of the eastern upland. The Vashon till is thin at the site; less than 25 feet thick. Layer 2 at the well incorporates a silty sand and gravel which is believed to be part of the Auburn West Hill Springs Aquifer. Layer 3 is fairly thick, 315 feet, but otherwise is similar to elsewhere on the upland. The intermediate aquifer system, layer 4, is also fairly thick at the site and contains upper and lower aquifers. Layer 5, the lower confining layer, is distinctly different than elsewhere on the upland. The upper portion of it is very gravelly, although it still has a low permeability. The lower portion is fine-grained silt and clay. Layer 6 is either absent from the site or is similar to the lower portion of Layer S. The Federal Way Deep Aquifer is missing from the site. Physical Definition of the Hydrogeologic System 2-5 SECTION 3 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION WATER QUALITY To provide a baseline for future comparisons of water quality within the designated WHPA, the inorganic water quality results for the LUD wells from 1990 through 1995 were examined. During that time period, many parameters were not found above their detection limits. Many of those parameters detected low concentrations with little variation. After examining the complete data set for the 1990-1995 time period, five parameters were selected for more detailed study. These parameters are: iron, manganese, nitrate, chloride, and specific conductance. Iron Overall, there is little problem with iron; only one sample collected between 1990-1995, collected at Well 19A in 1993, had an iron concentration above the maximum allowed contaminant level (MCL) at 0.3 mg/1 (Figure 1). The observed concentrations indicate that waters in the Federal Way aquifers are generally similar to other south King County ground water in terms of iron. Woodward, et al. (1995) found the median iron concentration of southwestern King County wells to be 0.035 mg/l, the 1990-1995 LUD samples have a median concentration of 0.05 mg/l. There are no distinct trends in the iron data with time, except that wells that exhibit high concentrations continue to have high concentrations with time.' Spatially, wells with higher iron concentrations are scattered throughout the upland. Consistent, higher -than -average concentrations were found at Wells 7 and 19A in the RMC, and at Wells 10C, 22, and 22A in the EUA system. Manganese High manganese concentrations are a larger problem than iron in Federal Way ground waters, with many wells exhibiting concentrations above the MCL of 0.05 mg/l (Figure 2). The median manganese concentration for southwestern King County is 0.04 mg/l (Woodward, et al., 1995). The median for the LUD samples is 0.067 mg/l. Fifteen of the twenty-three production wells had at least one water sample with a manganese concentration above the MCL during the 1990-1995 time period. ' There are possible decreasing trends in the FWDA for both iron and manganese. Water Quality 3-1 There are no clear trends with time in the manganese data.' Spatially, high manganese concentrations are scattered across each aquifer, except for the Well 16 aquifer. In the RMC, manganese concentrations are lower in the south than in the north. Woodward, etal. (1995) reports that manganese concentrations often show an increasing trend with aquifer depth. Nitrate Nitrate concentrations are often used as an indicator of contamination from septic systems and fertilizer. While none of the LUD samples are approaching the MCL for nitrate (10 mg/1) (Figure 3), there are indications of rising trends in the nitrates. The median nitrate (as nitrogen) value for southwestern King County is less than 0.1 mg/l (Woodward, et al., 1995). The median value of the LUD data set was essentially the same, at less than 0.2 mg/l.' These median values represent the natural background value for nitrate. Therefore, any concentration greater than 0.2 mg/l typically represents non -pristine water. Approximately half the LUD production wells have nitrate concentrations above 0.2 mg/l. Combining the present data set with the results of a previous study (Robinson & Noble, 1991) shows that there are only three Federal Way aquifers without any current nitrate contamination: the FWDA (Wells 17B and 19), the Wells 22 and 22A aquifer, and the Well 10C aquifer. Only one RMC well, Well 21, and one MLA well, Well 23, failed to show any sign of nitrate above the detection limit. The remainder of the wells fall into three categories (Table 3): low levels of nitrate (less than 0.5 mg/1) with no visible trends, higher levels of nitrates (0.5 - 2.0 mg/1) with no visible trends, and higher levels of nitrates with an increasing trend. No consistent decreasing trends were found. ' There are possible decreasing trends in the FWDA for both iron and manganese. 2 0.2 mg/l is the standard detection limit for nitrate and was used for the LUD samples. Woodward used a detection limit of 0.1 mg/l. 3-2 Water Quality Table 3: Nitrate Concentration Trends in' LUD Wells Nitrate Concentration (mg/1) Well / Aquifer System No contamination <0.2 21, RMC 10C, EUA 22/22A, EUA 17B, FWDA 19, FWDA 23, MLA Minor contamination No visible trend <0.5 7, RMC 10A, RMC Medium contamination No visible trend 0.5 - 2.0 17/17A, RMC 20A, RMC 23A, RMC 20, MLA Medium contamination Increasing trend 0.5 - 2.0 10, RMC 15/15A, RMC 18, RMC 16, EUA (Shallow) 25, MLA Chloride Like nitrate, chloride can be an indicator of septic system contamination. It can also be an indicator of salt water intrusion. The MCL for chloride is 250 mg/l; none of the LUD samples had concentrations above 10 mg/l (Figure 4). The LUD samples have a median concentration of 4 mg/l, slightly higher than the south King County median of 2.9 mg/l. The chloride data shows no indication of salt water intrusion. Values are slightly higher in the shallow aquifers (the RMC and Well 16 aquifer) and in the MLA than in the deeper aquifers (Table 4). Water Quality 3-3 Tah1P 4- AVPrnonn C:hlnrirle C:nnnentrntinnc hv Annifer Aquifer Average Concentration (m 1) Number Data Points RMC 5 22 Well 16 6 2 MLA 5.5 6 Well 10C 2 2 Wells 22/22A 2.8 4 FWDA 2.3 1 4 Specific Conductance Specific conductance can be used as an approximation of the dissolved solids concentration within ground water. In southwestern King County, Woodward, et al. (1995) found that approximately 65 percent of the specific conductance value (in }rmhos/cm) is due to the dissolved solid concentration (in mg/1). They found a median specific conductance of 174 pmhos/cm, slightly less than the median value of the LUD data set at 186 pmhos/cm (Figure 5). There are spatial and temporal variations or trends in the LUD conductance data. While there does not appear to be any correlation with depth, the northern RMC wells generally have higher specific conductance values than the southern RMC wells, with medians of 206 and 181 }imhos/cm, respectively. Temporally, specific conductance is increasing with time. If the data set is split into two subsets, 1990-1992 and 1993-1995, the trend is evident. In the earlier set, the median value was 178 pmhos/cm, a value very close to the average for southwest King County. In the later data set, the median is 192 pmhos/cm. The trend can also be seen by comparing values at individual wells. There are 18 wells in the complete 1990-1995 data set that have two or more measurements. Of these wells, two had values that were unchanged between the measurement dates, two had values decline with time, and 13 had specific conductance values increase with time. Water Quality Summary Generally, the ground water quality of the Federal Way upland is very good, except for high concentrations of manganese. There are also indications of nitrate contamination, although current concentrations are well below the MCL and are not problematic. The observed nitrates 3-4 Water Quality may arise from septic system return flow from the unsewered areas of the upland and fertilizer use throughout the upland. Higher than average chloride concentrations in the shallow aquifers may also be due to septic return flow. Each aquifer has different chemistries, although there seems to be general groupings for shallow and deep aquifers (Table 5, Figure 6), with the MLA falling in the shallow type chemistry group. In fact, the MLA chemistry, at least for the five parameters examined, appears more like the RMC than the deep aquifers. In general, the deeper aquifers have lower nitrates, chlorides and specific conductances than the shallower aquifers. There also appears to be general differences between the northern and southern RMC.' Manganese is lower in the south RMC than in the north, as is specific conductance and, to a lesser extent, chloride. Tahle 5_ Slimmnry rlf ParamPtPrc hx7 ❑ n,,;fv,- Aquifer I Iron' Manganese' Nitrate' Chloride4 Specific Conductances RMC (whole) generally low generally high high, 3 high high, increasing North RMC generally low high high, 1 high high, increasing South RMC generally low low high, 2 high low, increasing EUA (shallow) low low high,1 high high, steady MLA low mixed high, 1 high high, increasing EUA (deep) high high low low low, increasing FWDA generallv low mixed low low mixed. steadv ww -- .i ni&y 111gn = w.t Ing/i Z low <0.05 mg/l, high = >0.05 mg/l, mixed contains both low and high values ' relative concentration and number of wells with increasing concentration trends with time; low <0.2 mg/I, high = >0.2 mg/1 4 low <3 mg/l, high = >3 mg/l 5 relative specific conductance and temporal trend direction; low <180 Nmhos/cm, high = >180 }mhos/cm, mixed contains both low and high values 3 North defined to include Wells 7, 17, 17A, 18, 20A, and 23A. South defined to include 10, 10A, 15, 15A, 19A, and 21. Water Quality 3-5 SECTION 4 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION MODELING METHODOLOGY Numerical modeling techniques were chosen to delineate the LUD capture zones. By using the previously constructed, three-dimensional MODFLOW numerical model of the Federal Way upland (Becker, 1992), the capture zone analysis was a two-step process. First, the model was run to generate sets of head and flux distributions for the modeled area. These model - generated data sets were input into a particle tracking program to trace water paths from recharge sources to discharge points. In this case, the particle tracker MODPATH, Version 3 (Pollack, 1994), was used. Where the hydrogeologic system is well defined, as it is in the Federal Way area, the numerical modeling methodology can "provide a very high degree of accuracy" (DOH, 1995) in capture zone delineation. The methodology works by dividing the area into a three-dimensional grid and assigning aquifer (or confining layer) property values to each grid cell. First, in this case through MODFLOW, the head at every cell is computed. A detailed description of how MODFLOW computes head values is given by McDonald and Harbaugh (1988). The same aquifer parameter data set is then used to track the paths and travel times of specific water particles through the model grid. Capture zones are delineated by determining which sets of ground water particles enter a modeled well while it is pumped. This is most efficiently accomplished by particle backtracking; that is, starting particles at the well and running the model backwards through time. With this method, particles start at their discharge point (a well) and travel through the model to their recharge point, typically a point on the uppermost water table surface in the model or a constant -head model cell (typically used to simulate lakes and other bodies of water). MODFLOW The first step in capture zone delineation is the production of a head distribution array for the modeled area, which is done with MODFLOW. Prior to running the model to produce the head distribution, the set of stress conditions for the run had to be established. In particular, two conditions had to be defined: the amount of recharge and the amount of well production. Both of these factors are affected by seasonality. Therefore, prior to setting these conditions, the seasonality of LUD production was examined. Modeling Methodology 4-1 Data from LUD wells for the six -year period 1990-1995 was analyzed for total production and production by aquifer. Overall, total average daily production of the time period has been fairly constant at 9.9 mgd. However, the total ground water production data shows large, distinct summer production peaks, generally lasting from June through September (Figure 7). The summer production peaks for the individual aquifers are not so distinct. The RMC and EUA productions have summer peaks in four out of six years. The MLA has summer peaks in five out of six years, but these peaks are not always aligned with June through September. The FWDA production has summer peaks for the last three years of the data set. Based upon this data, each year in the model runs was divided into two stress periods: a June -September period representing summer peaking, and an October -May period representing non -peak times. Precipitation data was also examined. The average annual effective' precipitation at SeaTac between 1945 and 1994 was 23.5 inches. Monthly data shows that, on average, there is no effective precipitation in the months of May through September. Consequently, the stress periods chosen based on the production data, June -September and October -May, also approximate the seasonality of precipitation. Data inputs were prepared for two transient MODFLOW runs, one simulating ten years, and one simulating 100 years. The ten-year period was divided into twenty stress periods representing the annual peaking and non -peaking periods. Average well productions and average estimated recharge values were used as shown in Appendix 1. For the 100-year run, the seasonality was ignored and average production and recharge values were used in a single, 100-year long stress period. The MODFLOW results of these two runs can be reviewed at the Robinson & Noble offices. Both runs were started with 1991 simulated water levels developed during the 1992 modeling project (Becker, 1992). Results from both runs showed larger -than -expected water level declines in the RMC, but were deemed suitable for the project's requirements. These larger -than -expected declines are due to modeling error. The model was constructed so that the RMC is always confined. Yet in the real world, as water levels have fallen with time, portions of the RMC have become unconfined. When these areas become unconfined, the storage coefficient of the aquifer increases, and water level changes become less severe. So, while this change in conditions has happened in the real world, it is prevented from occurring in the model and, therefore, the model over -predicts the declining water level. For this project, the model was not adjusted to correct for this error. This is because: 1) if corrected, a lengthy model re -calibration would be required, and 2) capture zone size and shape is relatively insensitive to storage coefficient. Because capture zone size and shape is insensitive to storage coefficient, these MODFLOW results can be safely used to delineate capture zones. ' Total precipitation minus estimated evapotranspiration. 4-2 Modeling Methodology MODPATH Prior to running the particle tracking program MODPATH, porosity values had to be entered for all model cells. Assigned porosities were based upon tables of measured porosities for various unconsolidated materials (Driscoll, 1986, Fetter, 1980) and upon the hydraulic conductivity values assigned to model cells as shown on Table 6. T.�l.lo F.- A oo;rsr,ari Pnrncii-cr Val>>Pe Material Represented Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/d) Porosity Till (Layer 1) 2 1591o' Sand, sand and gravel >100 20% Fine sand, silty sands 5 - 100 2551o' Silt, clayey silts 0.1 - 5 30% Clays <0.1 40% After porosities were entered, appropriate MODPATH data files were created and starting particle locations were selected so that the capture zones could be defined by backtracking. MODFLOW and MODPATH assume wells to be centered in their respective model cells and to be fully penetrating in those cells. It was assumed, for the purposes of this study, that water along the sides and top of a model cell containing a well enters the well shortly after production begins. 125 particles were chosen to define each well's capture zone. These particles were placed equally along the four sides and top of the cell containing a particular well, 25 particles per side. Using these starting particle locations and the results from the first MODFLOW run (10 years, 20 stress periods), the one-, five- and ten-year capture zones were defined for each well. The results of the second MODFLOW run (100 years, 1 stress period) with identical starting particle locations were used to define the 100-year capture zones for each well. Uncertainty Every method of capture zone delineation involves a certain amount of uncertainty. While the numerical modeling methods used here are considered to be highly accurate, there is a certain amount of uncertainty involved, especially in areas of the model that are poorly defined. In this case areas of poor model definition, due largely to lack of data, occur around the edges of the model. In particular, these areas include the eastern -most portion, the southwest portion, and the western portion of the upland. The deep aquifer system, layer 6, is also relatively poorly Modeling Methodology 4-3 defined. We also now know, due to Well 27M, that the MLA is undersized (on the west) in the model. These model uncertainties lead to capture zone uncertainties in these areas. However, the model is well defined in the central portion of the upland, where most the capture zones exist and, in general, is very well suited to the definition of capture zones. Another potential problem exists in areas that have gone dry in the model. The model was originally constructed for a MODFLOW code which did not allow re -wetting of model cells that went dry during a simulation. Once dry, cells remain dry throughout a run and essentially become "dead space' in the model, thereby not allowing particles to track through them. This situation presents potential uncertainties in three major areas of the model: much of layer 1, the southwest portion of the upland in layer 2, and portions of the eastern upland in layer 2. Uncertainties in capture zones due to drying in layer 2 will be discussed in the sections on the individual well capture zones. Drying of layer 1, which represents the Vashon till, has little effect on capture zone shape because the travel direction through the till is slightly horizontal to mostly vertical (see next section). Therefore, if layer 1 had not been dry, particle paths would only be slightly different in map view than they are where the layer is dry. Travel times are slightly shortened in the model compared to the "real world" where layer 1 is dry. This is because the MODFLOW/MODPATH method does not account for travel time through the vadose zone (the dry area above the water table). However, in the model, it makes little difference if a layer 1 cell is completely dry or slightly saturated (cells that should be highly saturated are not likely to go dry). This limitation of MODFLOW/MODPATH does mean that time -related capture zones are somewhat larger than they would be if vadose zone travel was included! This is equally true for all areas in layer 1, not just those that have gone dry during simulations. As explained earlier, capture zones are delineated by backtracking water particles from near the well to the points where they enter the water table. The size and shape of capture zones are partially dependent on the number of, and starting positions used, for these defining particles. The fewer particles used, the more uncertainty in the defined zone. The more concentrated the starting locations, the greater the uncertainty in the zone. By using 125 particles to define each capture zone and spreading these particles widely over the model cell containing a well, this particular uncertainty was minimized. Another uncertainty built into the model involves well, placement. The MODFLOW code requires that wells be placed at the center of model cells while, in reality, a well may occur anywhere within a cell. This modeling limitation can cause differences between simulated and Travel times through the vadose zone are dependent on the thickness of the zone, the amount of recharge involved, the soil moisture content, the specific moisture capacity, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity. Typical times for materials on the Federal Way upland could range from days (for unsaturated recessional gravels) to possibly years (for thick sequences of dry till). 4-4 Modeling Methodology "real world" capture zones, especially *for the one-year time frame. This uncertainty is explained in greater detail in the next section. The capture zones defined by the numerical methodology are predicated upon the stress conditions, chiefly production rate and recharge rate, that are applied to the model. In other words, if these stress conditions are changed, the defined capture zones can change. By inputting these conditions into the model, the modeler assumes future conditions. In this case, average well productions and average recharge conditions were input. If, in the future, production rates are changed or long periods of drought or surplus precipitation occur, the "real world" capture zones may be different than the predicted ones. Therefore, the uncertainty in future stress conditions must be kept in mind when using model results. Even with the various uncertainties involved in the capture zone delineation, the general shape and size of the capture zones are believed to be as accurate as possible with the existing methodology and level of subsurface definition. This is especially true of the wells in the central portion of the upland, which represents the preponderance of the WHPA areas defined. Modeling Methodology 4-5 SECTION 5 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION GENERAL GROUND WATER FLOW Ground Water Paths At a sufficient distance from boundary conditions (wells, springs, surface water features, ground water divides, etc.), ground water flow is primarily vertical in low conductivity materials, such as confining layers, and primarily horizontal in high conductivity materials, such as aquifers. This allows general flow directions to be estimated for aquifer systems by examining head, or potentiometric, maps. Potentiometric maps, representing 1991 water levels in the three Federal Way aquifer systems, drawn from the 1992 numerical model results (Becker, 1992), are presented as Figures 8, 9, and 10. Flow in the Vashon advance aquifer system is generally from the eastern and western portions of the upland towards the RMC which serves as a north -south trending line sink for the system (Figure 8). Once in the RMC, flow is mostly southerly. Flow in the RMC itself is primarily horizontal, as can be seen on particle path A in Figures 1la and 1lb. In the less permeable sections of the aquifer system, represented on Figure 8 where the ground water gradient is steep (i.e., contour lines are close together), flow becomes more vertical. This can be seen on particle path C, Figure 11b, which steepens at its western -most point in the layer 2 sediments (the Vashon advance system). Because the intermediate aquifer system is dominated by relatively large areas of moderate to low hydraulic conductivity with pockets of higher conductivity aquifer materials, the flow patterns through the system vary laterally. At some Iocations, ground water flow has a large vertical component, such as on path A in Figures lla and llb (also see Table 7); at other locations horizontal flow dominates (see path Q. The general directions of the horizontal flow components in the aquifer system are shown on Figure 9. Flow in much of the north -central portion of the upland is toward the MLA. Elsewhere, flow is toward the Auburn valley or Puget Sound. General Ground Water Flow 5-1 Table 7: Amounts of Horizontal & Vertical Movement on Sample Ground Water Flow Paths Path Laver Horizontal Vector Com onent (ft) Vertical Vector Component (ft) Horizontal/Vertical Ratio A 1 480 20 24 2 14720 90 164 3 I50 170 0.9 4 310 40 8 5 280 310 0.9 6 3930 130 30 B 1 80 30 3 2 4340 40 109 C 2 8580 150 57 3 560 75 7 4 3560 160 22 Little is known about the deep aquifer system, so the potentiometric surface represented on Figure 10 is estimated. However, the existence of the FWDA in the north -central portion of the upland is confirmed. In the FWDA, flow is northwesterly toward Puget Sound. The lack of good, deep aquifers in much of the northeastern portion of the upland is also confirmed; therefore, there is probably horizontal flow (with a large vertical component) from the northeast toward the FWDA as indicated on Figure 10. Conditions southwest of the FWDA have not been confirmed and, except for the Puyallup Valley, flow patterns in this area are speculative. Flow through the confining layers is primarily vertical (Table 7, Figure 11b), especially where the confining layers are primarily silt and clay, which have very low hydraulic conductivities. In the Vashon till, layer 1, which has a higher hydraulic conductivity than silt and clay, a bit more horizontal movement can be expected and was reflected in the modeling results. Travel Times Obviously, ground water travel time from a recharge point at the surface to an aquifer increases as the depth of the aquifer increases. In general, modeled travel times for particles to reach the RMC wells were from less than a year to approximately thirty years. Travel times to the MLA wells range from ten years to more than 100 years. Ground water particles traveling from the surface to the FWDA wells can take more than 1,000 years. 5-2 General Ground Water Flow Generally, water moves faster through the aquifers than it does through the confining layers, as shown on Table 8 for the three sample paths on Figures 1la and 11b. Groundwater velocity is a function of porosity, gradient and hydraulic conductivity. While porosities and gradients differ between aquifers and confining layers, the values in aquifers and confining layers are generally within an order of magnitude difference of each other. Hydraulic conductivities, however, can be several orders of magnitude higher in aquifers, thus leading to appreciably faster velocities within aquifer materials. Table 8: Travel Times and Velocities for Sample Ground Water Particles Path Laycr Travel Time Through Laver (vrs) Average Velocity (ft/vr) A 1 4.5 107 2 31 475 3 37 6 4122 10 31 5 3 E6 120 33 B 1 0.6 142 2 14 310 C 2 32 268 3 9 63 4 9 396 General Ground Water Flow 5-3 SECTION 6 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION CAPTURE ZONE DELINEATION Three -Dimensional Aspects of Capture Zones Using the three-dimensional, numerical modeling method of capture zone delineation, ground water particles can be traced from their recharge source at the surface, through any overlying layers, into the subject aquifer, and eventually into the subject well. By defining numerous such paths for a well, the three-dimensional zone that contributes water to a well may be outlined. The ground water travel paths which define a capture zone exhibit different shapes and directions in each layer they pass through depending on the parameters of the layer and the stresses to which the layer is subjected. Obviously, the resultant capture zone, when examined layer by layer, may have a differing appearance and geometry depending on which layer is examined. To demonstrate how a particular capture zone may change with each layer, the 100-year capture zone for Well 23 was "sliced" into three map -view sections in Figure 12. Figure 12a shows the capture zone at the top of the MLA, the production aquifer for Well 23. This zone represents the area from which water in the aquifer travels to the well. Figure 12b shows the capture zone at the top of confining layer (layer 3) above the MLA (and, consequently, also represents the bottom of the RMC). This zone presents the area through which water travels through the confining layer to the production aquifer capture zone (shown on Figure 12a). Not surprisingly, it has basically the same size and shape as the production aquifer capture zone because water primarily moves vertically through the confining layer, Figure 12c shows the Well 23 capture zone at the top of the water table surface in layers 1 and 2. In other words, the areas shown in Figure 12e are the actual recharge areas for Well 23. Essentially, recharge to the areas in Figure 12c enters the top of the RMC (or associated Vashon advance sediments) and moves through the aquifer (largely horizontally) under differing gradients and stresses until it reaches the bottom of the aquifer, where the same particles have coalesced to the shape of Figure 12b. There the water enters layer 3, the confining layer, and moves (mostly vertically) downward to layer 4, the MLA, where the particles have the shape of Figure 12a. Once in the MLA, the water particles move vertically and horizontally to the well. As. can be seen from the above example, capture zone shape can be expected to increase in complexity for each confining layer and aquifer through which water must move to reach the well. Capture Zone Delineation 6-1 Capture Zone and Wellhead Protection Area Definitions A capture zone is defined as the region surrounding a well which contributes flow to a well. Capture zones can be limited by time, such that a time -related capture zone is the region surrounding a well that contributes flow to the well within a specified time. Capture zones represent three-dimensional volumes that are usually projected onto a two-dimensional surface (a map). Capture zones are not easy to map and, therefore, are typically estimated by various mathematical -based methods, such as numerical modeling. In Washington State, wellhead protection areas, by DOH guidelines, are based upon estimated one-, five-, and ten-year travel paths for water moving through an aquifer to a well (DOH, 1995). The vertical path and time, from the surface to the aquifer, is typically not considered. For this reason, the 103-page Wellhead Protection Program Guidance Document written by DOH (1995) purposely does not mention capture zones. Thus, by ignoring vertical components, WHPAs typically resemble the capture zone in Figure 12a, a capture zone delineated solely in the geometric plane of the aquifer (i.e., a two-dimensional capture zone). For deep wells, the actual surface area which contributes recharge to a well may not resemble the two-dimensional representation of a well's capture zone within its production aquifer, as was shown in Figure. U. However, if the three-dimensional capture zone is delineated and projected to a two-dimensional area, this area will always include both the surface recharge area anu the production aquilLr "n-wo-dii—nensional" capture zone (Figure 13). By using the two- dimensional representation of a three-dimensional capture zone as the WHPA, the entire area which contributes water to a well within the stipulated time frame is protected. By using this method for definition of a wellhead protection area, the area defined is more accurate, and yet, because it includes additional areas influenced by overlying aquifers, it is more conservative than the definition method proposed under DOH guidelines. Relationship of "Real World" Zones to Modeled Zones When a well is simulated in a MODFLOW model, the program places the simulated well at the center of the model cell and makes the simulated well fully penetrating through the cell. In reality, the well may be located anywhere within the cell boundaries and have any degree of penetration (Figure 14a). Because of these differences, model capture zones will be somewhat different from "real world" capture zones, particularly for near well response predictions. The differences in defined capture zones result from both non-specific well locations within the cell and from particle "starting points" on the cell perimeter rather than at the specific well location. Because the accuracy of well locations within the model is necessarily limited to the cell size (660 feet for most model cells, 1,320 feet for other model cells), the differences in capture zones will be greatest when particle paths used to define the zones are approximately 6-2 Capture Zone Delineation (or less than) the same as the cell length. Placing the starting locations for the defining particles along the edges of the cell (as was done for this project) instead of at the modeled well location, causes the model -defined capture zone to be larger than the "real world" zone. It will, however, always include the "real world" zone (Figure 14a). As the length of the defining path grows longer, the percentage of difference arising because of imprecise positioning of the simulated well decreases. Because MODFLOW simulates wells at the center of model cells, cells that contain two production wells were simulated as having a single well with the combined production of both wells. This was done for Wells 10 and 10A, 15 and 15A, 17 and 17A, and 22 and 22A. In the "real world" case for two wells near each other, two separate capture zones will be formed. In the model, a single zone will be simulated. The simulated zone will, however, closely approximate the shape of the combined zones in the "real world" case (Figure 14b). One -Year Capture Zones The model was run to produce capture zones for LUD production wells for time periods of one, five, ten, and one -hundred years as discussed earlier. The locations of the layers 2, 4, and 6 aquifer systems' one-year capture zones are shown on Figures 15, 16, and 17, respectively. In all the one-year capture zones, the uncertainty due to cell -centered well locations in the model is significant. Defining path lengths were generally less than one cell length for all wells except for Wells 10 and 10A. Path length was especially short compared to cell size for Wells 10C, 21, and 22/22A where larger cell sizes were employed in the model. Consequently, all the one-year capture zones are conservatively larger than would be expected in the "real world" case. Even so, they are generally quite small and, in most cases, water from the surface takes longer than one year to reach the wells (Table 9). In all cases, water reaching the wells within a one-year period has come from the aquifer in which that well is completed or the confining layer above the source aquifer (Table 9). Capture Zone Delineation 6-3 Table 9: One -Year C antui-e Zone Details Well Aquifer, Layer Water From Surface Reaches Well, Minimum Time (days) Layers Water Started Time Period In 10/10A RMC, 2 No 2,1 10C EUA, 4 No 4,3 15/15A RMC, 2 Yes, 137 2,1 16 EUA (Shallow), 2 Yes, 140 2,1 17/17A RMC, 2 No 2,1 17B FWDA, 6 No 6,5 18 RMC, 2 Yes, 219 2, 1 19 FWDA, 6 No 6,5 20A RMC, 2 No 2,1 20 MLA, 4 No 4,3 21 RMC, 2 Yes, 358 2,1 22/22A EUA, 4 No 4,3 23A RMC, 2 Yes, 46 2,1 23 MLA, 4 No 4,3 25 MLA, 4 No 4,3 Five -Year Capture Zones The five-year capture zones for layers 2, 4, and 6 are presented on Figures 18, 19, and 20, respectively. They are sufficiently large that the uncertainty due to cell -centered well placement is minimal with the exceptions of Wells IOC, 21, and 22/22A. For these three wells, the defined five-year capture zones are only slightly larger than the one-year zones, and the capture zone radius is still close to the length of the model cell. For the other wells, the five- year zones are considerably larger than the one-year zones and the model cells. Most of the five-year zones take their shapes from the prevailing gradients of the aquifers in the regions of their respective wells. Zones for the RMC wells generally extend north of the wells (Figure 18). In the MLA, the zones for Wells 20 and 25 extend to the east and north. Some of the five-year zones are impinging on each other, especially the zones for Wells 10/10A and 15/15A and those for Wells 20 and 23. In essence, these zones are "deformed" by the production from the neighboring well, and the zone shape would be different had the neighboring well not been producing. Therefore, for these wells, it should be remembered that 6-4 Capture Zone Delineation capture zone shapes are dependent on the pumping pattern being employed by the District and may change if the neighboring wells are taken off-line for long periods of time, or are decommissioned. Re-evaluation using the model to simulate the change in pattern could be accomplished fairly easily, but should not be necessary unless significant changes in production patterns are implemented. While the five-year capture zones are considerably larger than the one-year zones, most of the water reaching the wells within the five-year period, like the one-year zones, started the five- year period in the production aquifer or the confining layer above the production aquifer (Table 10). In the deeper wells of layers 4 and 6, only Well 25 had water from above its confining layer reach the well within the five years. In all of the Qva aquifer system wells (RMC wells and Well 16), some component of the water reaching the wells within five years started at the surface. This was not the case in any of the wells in layers 4 and 6. Table 10: Five -Year Capture: Zone Details Water From Surface Reaches Well, Layers Water Started Time Well Aquifer, Laver Minimum Time (years) Period In 10/10A RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 10C EUA, 4 No 4,3 15/15A RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 16 EUA (Shallow), 2 Yes, <1 2,1 17/17A RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 17B FWDA, 6 No 6,5 18 RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 19 FWDA, 6 No 6,5 20A RMC, 2 Yes, 1.6 2,1 20 MLA, 4 No 4,3 21 RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 22/22A EUA, 4 No 4,3 23A RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 23 MLA, 4 No 4,3 25 MLA, 4 No 4, 3, 2 Capture Zone Delineation 6-5 Ten -Year Capture Zones The ten-year capture zones for each of the three production systems are presented on Figures 21, 22, and 23. Uncertainty due to cell -centered well placement within the model is probably only a factor for Wells 10C and 22/22A. The zone for Well 16 encountered several dry model cells which caused the simulated capture zone to be conservatively larger than it would be if these areas are not truly dry. After 10 years of production, all of the defined capture zones in the RMC and the MLA are influenced by not only the prevailing gradients, but also by the production of other wells in the aquifers. In particular, in the RMC aquifer, the zone for Wells 10/10A is influenced by production at Wells 1S/15A and 18; the zone for Well 23A is influenced by production at Wells 17/17A and 20A; and the zone for Well 20 in the MLA is influenced by production from Wells 23 and 25. Within the ten-year period, several of the intermediate aquifer wells draw water from above their confining layer. Well 2S is predicted to draw water from the surface within the 10-year period (Table 11). Table 11: Ten -Year Capture Zone Details Well Aouifcr. Laver Water From Surface Reaches Well, Minimum Time (nears) Layers Water Started Time Period In 10/1OA RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 10C EUA, 4 No 4,3 15/15A RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 16 EUA (Shallow), 2 Yes, <1 2,1 17/17A RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 17B FWDA, 6 No 6,5 18 RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 19 FWDA, 6 No 6,5 20A RMC, 2 Yes, 1.5 2, 1 20 MLA, 4 No 4, 3, 2 21 RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 22/22A EUA, 4 No 4,3 23A RMC, 2 Yes, <1 2,1 23 MLA, 4 No 4,3 25 MLA, 4 Yes, 5.0 4, 3, 2, 1 6-6 Capture Zone Delineation One -Hundred Year Capture Zones The one -hundred year capture zones for aquifer layers 2, 4, and 6 are presented on Figures 24, 25, and 26, respectively. They are all sufficiently large that uncertainty due to imprecise well placement in the model is not a factor. Uncertainty due to model cell drying is again a factor for Well 16, leading to a conservatively large zone, as explained previously. Drying of modeled cells also affected the western -most portion of the Well 15/15A and Well 21 zones, the southwestern corner of the Well 10/10A zone, and the eastern -most edge of the Well 15/15A zone. In all of these cases, the uncertainty due to drying is believed to be minor. Had the cells not been dry, these zones would still be approximately the same size and shape. All the capture zones, except those for Wells 17B, 19, and 22/22A, are influencing each other. Essentially, the entire north -central portion of the upland becomes a single management zone. The simulation indicates that many of the wells may be potentially recharged from the lakes on the upland (Table 12). All of the wells are intercepting water from the surface within the 100-year time period, except for Wells 10C, 17B, and 19 (Table 13). Average travel times from land surface to the wells range from five to more than 100 years. It should be noted, however, that no consideration has been given to the transfer of water through the non -saturated material of the upland. Were the non -saturated materials included in the travel time calculations, the travel times would be expected to be slightly longer. Tahle 12: Lakes Which Potentially Recharge LUD Wells Lake Wells Possibly Recharge Mirror Lake 20, 20A, 23, 23A Fischer Bog 17/17A, 18, 23 Twin Lakes 10/10A Steel Lake 20, 20A, 23 North Lake 10/10A Lake Geneva 16 Capture Zone Delineation 6-7 One -Hundred Year Capture Zones The one -hundred year capture zones for aquifer layers 2, 4, and 6 are presented on Figures 24, 25, and 26, respectively. They are all sufficiently large that uncertainty due to imprecise well placement in the model is not a factor. Uncertainty due to model cell drying is again a factor for Well 16, leading to a conservatively large zone, as explained previously. Drying of modeled cells also affected the western -most portion of the WeII 15/15A and Well 21 zones, the southwestern corner of the Well 10/10A zone, and the eastern -most edge of the Well 15/15A zone. In all of these cases, the uncertainty due to drying is believed to be minor. Had the cells not been dry, these zones would still be approximately the same size and shape. All the capture zones, except those for Wells 17B, 19, and 22/22A, are influencing each other. Essentially, the entire north -central portion of the upland becomes a single management zone. The simulation indicates that many of the wells may be potentially recharged from the lakes on the upland (Table 12). All of the wells are intercepting water from the surface within the 100-year time period, except for Wells IOC, 17B, and 19 (Table 13). Average travel times from land surface to the wells range from five to more than 100 years. It should be noted, however, that no consideration has been given to the transfer of water through the non -saturated material of the upland. Were the non -saturated materials included in the travel time calculations, the travel times would be expected to be slightly longer. Table 12: Lakes Which Potentially Rechnroe T .T TT) WAN Lake Wells Possibly Recharge Mirror Lake 20, 20A, 23, 23A Fischer Bog 17/17A, 18, 23 Twin Lakes 10/10A Steel Lake 20, 20A, 23 North Lake 10/10A Lake Geneva 1 16 Capture Zone Delineation 6-7 For the first set of conditions, the production at Wells 10 and 10A were set at the stated pumping capacities for the wells. In essence, the run simulated turning both wells on nonstop for ten years. The production rate changed from 414,706 cfd (3.1 mgd) to 860,602 cfd (6.4 mgd), an increase of nearly 108 percent. The results for the run are presented on Figure 27. The figure shows that, under maximum production conditions, the capture zone for Wells 10 and 10A approximately doubles in area. This change also affects the capture zones for other nearby wells in the RMC, as Wells 10 and 10A, under this scenario, intercept water that was destined for Wells 15/15A, 18, and 21; these wells are forced to draw water from another direction. As can be seen by comparing Figures 21 and 27, under maximum production from Wells 10 and 10A, the capture zone for Well 15/15A loses its western lobe and is forced to expand to the east, the capture zone for Well 18 shifts north and east to draw its required water, and the capture zone for Well 21 is forced southward. Obviously, production rate can have a significant effect on the size and shape of capture zones of both the well for which production is changed and its neighboring wells. The system, however, seems much less sensitive to changes in recharge rate. In order to test the implications of drought, the 90th worst 10-year recharge period between 1892 and 1991 was used as the recharge condition.' Over that ten-year period, the recharge averaged 14.08 inches per year, or nearly 2 inches less than the 16 inches defined as the average recharge for the upland. This constitutes a deficiency of 12 percent each year of the drought period. The results are shown on Figure 28. The capture zone under the drought scenario is approximately the same size and general shape as for average recharge conditions, but is shifted slightly south. The shape is slightly different, with the lobe in the northwest corner of the zone not as well developed in the drought case as in the higher recharge case. Capture zone size, at least in the RMC, is apparently not affected significantly by increased recharge. The run with above -average recharge showed minor response similar in scope to the below -average recharge scenario response. For the above -average run, the 90th best 10-year precipitation period between 1892 and 1991 was used as the recharge condition. This corresponded to the 1952-1961 period when the average recharge was calculated to be 21.67 inches per year, or 5.67 inches more than the presumed average condition, an excess of 35 percent. The results are shown on Figure 29. The capture zone for the above -average recharge condition is slightly smaller than the average condition and is very similar to the shape of the below -average condition, again with the northwestern lobe not as well defined. 1 This same recharge data set was used previously. See our letter of August 31, 1992, to John Bowman. Capture Zone Delineation 6-9 SECTION 7 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS As discussed in the introduction, there are four basic steps in delineating a WHPA: 1) study the hydrogeologic data, 2) develop a conceptual model, 3) define the capture zones, and based on the previous three steps, 4) delineate the WHPA. The first two steps and a portion of the third step were completed in our 1992 hydrogeologic analysis of the upland (Becker, 1992). This work was reviewed at the beginning of this report. New data for Wells 27M and 29T, which was not available when the 1992 report was written, was also examined. The data from the new wells is generally consistent with the interpretations within the conceptual model developed for the 1992 report. The 1992 numerical model, however, could be modified in the future to better represent the areal extent of aquifers indicated by the new well data, particularly for the MLA. Well 27M provides information to better define the northwestern edge of the MLA and the northern extent of the FWDA. The numerical model, as currently built, adequately represents the knowledge gained for the FWDA, but it simulates the MLA as being smaller than it is now known to be. It was not within the scope of the present project to revise the numerical model and, therefore, the capture zones delineated by using the model were interpreted with recognition of the knowledge that zones extending into and northwest of the MLA may not be accurately modeled. However, none of the capture zones extended into the questionable area and, therefore, the model, without modification, is believed to be adequate for the intended purposes of this project. In addition to reviewing previous work and examining new insights from Wells 27M and 29T, the water quality of the Federal Way aquifers was briefly examined. Because of the large number of water quality parameters normally tested, and the typical results of "not detected" for many of these parameters, five parameters with detectable results were chosen for a more detailed study. These were: iron, manganese, chloride, nitrate, and specific conductance. Results of the study indicate that ground water in the Federal Way area is generally of high quality, except for high concentrations of manganese. The data does indicate that, in a general sense, development of the upland has affected the ground water quality to some degree. While the water is generally of high quality, there are signs that nitrate and specific conductance are increasing with time. The data also shows that each of the aquifers have slightly different chemistries, and generally can be differentiated, based on chemistry, into shallow and deep groups. The RMC and the Well 16 aquifers are generally similar, and are distinct from the chemical signatures of the FWDA and the deeper EUA aquifers. The MLA is unusual in that it fits more with the shallow aquifer chemistry than that of the deeper aquifers. This may be Conclusions and Recommendations 7-1 because the MLA itself is relatively shallow at its northeastern end though relatively deep at its southwestern end; it could also be because it is recharged primarily by leakage out of the RMC. Following the water quality review, preparation was made to define the capture zones. Defining capture zones using the selected numerical modeling approach is a two-step process. First, the model is run to establish and record the predicted water level surfaces for the stress conditions of the intended run. These model results are then input to a particle tracking program which determines the pathways and travel times of ground water particles implied by those surfaces. The model was run with MODFLOW to generate head values; the particle tracking program used was MODPATH. Two sets of stress conditions were used for the MODFLOW runs. The first involved a time period of ten years over which there was a simulated 16 inches of precipitation recharge each winter, and no precipitation recharge in the summer. In this simulation, each well was assumed to produce year-round at its average production rate. Results of this run were used to delineate the one-, five-, and ten-year capture zones for each well. The second run also used average production values and 16 inches of natural recharge per year, except the run was for 100 years and the recharge was not divided into summer and winter periods. This run was used to delineate 100-year capture zones. In addition to delineating capture zones, the results of the MODPATH particle tracking were used to generally describe how water moves through the regional ground water system. Aquifer and confining layer properties greatly affect the direction and speed of water movement through the system. In clay -rich confining layers, water moves generally in a downward, vertical direction at speeds as low as several feet per year. However, through till layers, water can move more than 100 feet per year and move hundreds of feet horizontally as it travels downward through the till. In aquifers, water can move thousands of feet horizontally at speeds of hundreds of feet per year. One-, five-, ten-, and one hundred -year capture zones were delineated for each LUD production well. These zones, as depicted on Figures 15-26, represent the two-dimensional expressions of the three-dimensional volumes that supply water to the wells within the stated time periods. They are the best technical representations of the areas that contribute water to each of the wells. However, even with the high degree of technical analysis involved, they should not merely be accepted at face value as equivalent to the WHPAs due to uncertainties inherent in the model. Uncertainties that must be considered when using the delineated capture zones to define wellhead protection areas include: ■ modeling error due to portions of the model being less reliably defined • inaccuracies due to model response to cell drying • incomplete travel time calculations due to the fact that MODPATH does not include travel through the vadose (nonsaturated) zone 7-2 Conclusions and Recommendations • error introduced by simulating well placement at the center of the model cells in which they occur uncertainty in the assumption that the stress conditions (pumping and recharge) used in the model were actually represent future, "real world" stresses • variability in capture zone shape resulting from defining particle starting locations How these uncertainties affect the definition of capture zones is demonstrated by the three supplemental model runs that were made following the initial capture zone delineation. Long- term changes in production rates can greatly affect capture zones for both the well in which the production is changed and for its neighboring wells. As compared to production changes, captures zones appear to be relatively insensitive to recharge changes (within the expected range of possible recharge rates). Even so, the differences seen for the various recharge rates in the supplemental runs show that even relatively insensitive factors can affect the outer edges of predicted capture zones. While the wellhead protection areas are necessarily based upon the capture zones, other factors need to be considered when defining the WHPA boundaries. The capture zones are based on a numerical model which was built from a well -substantiated conceptual model and an extensive hydrogeologic data study. In the effort of defining the WHPA, compensation was made for the uncertainty in the capture zones by invoking the understanding of hydrogeologic response gained from the conceptual model and from data analysis. Therefore, the areas recommended for wellhead protection management, as presented on Figures 30, 31, and 32, are based on an interpretation of the capture zones, recognizing where model confidence is high or low, and by compensating where appropriate by applying our hydrogeologic knowledge of the upland and our insight for the responses of the ground water system in the area. However, if current production patterns are significantly altered on a long- term basis, changes that may result cannot be factored into the current WHPA definition. Should significant changes occur, re-evaluation of the affected capture zones and WHPAs should be accomplished. Production changes that may require WHPA re -calculation include long-term increases or decreases in average production rates at any well or related set of wells, decommissioning of any well, or the addition of any major production well in the aquifers currently used for production. The wellhead protection areas for the three major aquifer systems are shown on Figures 30, 31, and 32, and are also available on computer disk in an AUTOCAD-compatible format. The WHPAs are designated, using the DOH -recommended terminology, as: Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 3, and Buffer Zone. Zone 1 is based upon the defined one-year capture zones. Zone 2 is based upon the defined five-year capture zones. Zone 3 is based upon the defined ten-year capture zones. The Buffer Zone is based upon the 100-year capture zones. Separate zones are presented for each aquifer system because it is likely that the final WHPP may wish to afford Conclusions and Recommendations 7-3 different levels of protection and different types of management to zones within the different aquifers. For example, RMC wells will need a greater degree of protection than FWDA wells. The WHPP will need to give special consideration to the lakes within the WHPAs. While none of the lakes are believed to be in direct continuity with the aquifers, they definitely contribute water to the aquifers. Consequently, if the surface drainage areas for the lakes are not already in the WHPAs, the WHPP should consider adding the draining areas to the appropriate Buffer Zone. 7_4 Conclusions and Recommendations LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT WHPA DEFINITION REFERENCES Becker, J.E., 1992, Hydrogeologic analysis of the Federal Way area, Washington: prepared for Federal Way Water and Sewer District by Robinson & Noble, Inc., Volume 1, 122p. Driscoll, F.G., 1986, Groundwater and wells: St. Paul, Johnson Division, 1089 p. Fetter, C.W., Jr., 1980, Appliedhydipgeology: Columbus, Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 488 p. Krautkramer, F.M., 1993, Federal Way Water and Sewer District construction report for monitor well 27M.• prepared for Federal Way Water and Sewer District by Robinson & Noble, Inc., 9 p., figures, attachments. McDonald, M.G., and Harbaugh, A.W., 1988, A modularthree-dimensional finite-differenceground- waterflow model. • U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water -Resources Investigations Book 6, Chanter A 1 � 586 p° Pollack, D.W., 1994, User's guideforMODPATH/MODPATH--PLOT, version3: aparticletracking post processingpackage forMODFLOW, the U.S. Geological Survey finite -difference ground water flow model. • U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 94-464, 6 sections, appendices. Robinson & Noble, Inc., 1991, letter to Steve Weinke from F. Michael Krautkramer concerning septic tank issues, 3 p., figures. Robinson & Noble, Inc., 1993, Report of construction and findings, Federal Way Water and Sewer District exploration We1129T.• prepared for Federal Way Water and Sewer District, 12 p., figures, appendix. Washington State Department of Health, 1995, Washington State wellhead protection program guidance document: Washington State Department of Health, 78 p., appendices. Woodward, D. G., et al., 1995, Occurrence and quality of ground water in southwestern King County, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Water -Resources Investigations Report 92-4098, 60 p., plates. References 7-5 Figure 1 30 Z8 Al Wells Iron Concentrations 26 1990-1995 24 1 v 22 I Q 20 I Measured iron concentration from 18 routine water quality sampling. - 16 The MCL for iron is 0.3 mg/I. The I p median concentration for south - I 14 western King County is 0.035 mg/I n 12 I (Woodward, et. al., 1995). E 10 I Iz 8 I 1 6 4 I 2 I I 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 Concentration (mg/I) r _ 18 18 j RMC Wells MLA Wells I 16 16 I 14 l v 14 } E 12 I 12 i N 10 !'^ 10 I v 8 O 1 1 v 8 I 6 � III b I z 4 11z 4 l I 2 2 I 0 1 1 'I 0 0 O I ] 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 fV W -P Ln 10 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I iV W J� Ul b, 4 OD Concentration (mg/1) I Concentration (mg/1) ; r 18 EUA Wells '• r 18 FWDA Wells I 16 6 14 I I Q 14 I ICL 12 I I I_ 12 I Ln 10 � � 10 0 I v 8 0 Iv 8 I E 6 I E 6 I l z 4 I IZ 4 2 i� 2 1 o -� --�� 11 I' p I l l 0 O 0 0 -0 0 00 0 0 —tV W -P l I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O — f j Concentration (mg/1) I Concentration (mg/1) J l Figure 2 Al10 Wells i Manganese Concentrations 1990-1995 Measured manganese concentrations from routine water quality sampling. The MCL for manganese is 0.05 mg/I. The median con- centration for southwestern King County is 0.04 mg/I (Woodward, et. al., 1995). I 1 O � 11 � I I O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 O O O O -- -� N N N N W O fV In �! O fV In V O fV Un V O i O un O In O In O t n O In O Ln O Concentration (m /1 r 1 o RMC Wells ! i i 9 MLA Wells 8 Q v v Q 7 7 I ti ! ry i 6 6 0 5 0 5 I 4 I� 4 I 3 j Ij 3 I z Z F1, Iz 2 ' I ° ° - F I i 11- O O O O O O O CD O O O O! O CIO CD O O O O O O O O Cl O O O O — —— -- N N fV N W O O O O— — —— tV N 1V N W I Concentration (mg/1) l i Concentration (mg/1) 10 r 10 EUA Wells 1 FWDA Wells I 9 �I 9 I $ IN 8 i Q 7 ;Q 7 i' u i u 6 f 6 0 S 1 1 4 I [� 4 1 D 3 1 3 z I 2 Ijz 2 i ° Ij ° I o 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 11 O o 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0— --- -- fV fV N IV W 6 6 6 6--- -- fIJ N N fV W O N vt V O N in V O N In V O I O N In V O N In V O N Vt V O I O V7 O un O Ln O Ln O to O Ln O I O Ln O V, O M O In O In O VI O Concentration (mg/1) f I Concentration (mg/1) Figure 3 l 24 I 22 20 iv 18 1 P 16 I to 14 E Nitrate Concentrations 1990-19.95 Measured nitrate (as nitrogen) con- centrations from routine water quality sampling. The MCL for p l nitrate is 10 mg/; however, the median for southwestern King County is less 10 I than 0.1 mg/I (Woodward, et. al., E 8 I 1995). iz 6 ! E 4 I I I I 2 I 0 0 o O O — N I O N i11 V O N Ln V O I O Ln O Ln O Ln O Ln O Concentration �mg11j 12 RMC Wells I r 12 MLA Wells 10 I I 10 I a Iv a 8 11 8 I :I E ) IN 0 6 E :0 6 I 4 4 I i z I iz 2 2 I - I I i 0 i 1 1 0 _I I �I O O O O N O N Un N 1-n _IJ O I I O IV ill V O N un V O CD Ln O U 1 O LnO Ul CD CDUl O U1 O In O Ul O ; I Concentration (mg/I) I Concentration m /1 12 r r EUA Wells 12 FWDA Wells 10 E 10 8 I I E I V) I� 0 6 I :0 6 I E 4 f� 4 z I Iz I 2 I 2 I E 1 0 li 0 I l O tV Ul V O tv U1 -40 O U9 O Ul O Ln O Ul O O Un O Ln O Ln O '_n O Concentration (mg/1) I Concentration (mg/1) 14 I Figure 4 12 H Chloride Concentrations 1990-1995 Measured chloride concentrations from routine water quality sampling. The MCL for chloride is 250 mg/I; however, the median for south - I a) 6 1 western King County is 2.9 mg/I I Q 4 (Woodward, et. al., 1995). D lz 4 1 i 2 I 0 I I 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 Concentration (mg/1) 12 RMC Wells i 12 MLA Wells j 1 10 1 10 a 1 1 0- 8 I 0 6 1 0 6 I I 4 4 I z I l z i I 2 l 2 I 0 I i 0 I 0 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 1 I 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 1 1 Concentration (mg/1) I Concentration (mg/1) / l 12 EUA Wells 12 FWDA Wells 1 10 i I 10 a, I C- 8 I I v F= 8 I 0 6 1 0 6 I v l 4 1 v I � 4 z 1 1 z I 2 1 1 2 I 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 I 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910 1 1 Concentration (mg/1) 1 Concentration (mg/I) l l Figure 5 Specific Conductance '.'ciiues 1990-1995 �v ; Measured conductance values from F$ routine water quality sampling. The MCL for conductivity is 700 umhos/cm; O6 however, the median southwestern King County value is 174 umhos/cm L ) (Woodward, et. al., 1995). IE 4 I 2 , -- O O -- -- -- N IV M O N M O Ln O M IN fV Ln --II O M W O O W N Ln Concentration (umhos/cm) — 12 — — — -- - — RMC Wells r 12 MLA Wells I 10 1 10 I v 8 1 a, 1 E 8 I I M 0 6 . IL ; 0 6 v 2 4 1v 1 j 4 :3 z I •z 1 I Z z 0 11 II 0-T-F- i 1 71 O NJ N NJ N W U1 O Ln O in O In O W I Ln I I I N N Ili N W W 1 O Vl O Ul O Ln O Ln O Ln I Concentration (umhos/cm) I Concentration (umhos/cm) 12 —� EUA Wells I 1 l z i FWDA Wells I I I v 10 I I v 10 1 l P 8 I I Iti 8 0 6 1 IV 0 6 I 1 4 1F= 4 I z I 'z i z Z ' 0 I ! 11 0 I E I O O NJ Ili N fV W Nil Ln V O N U1 V O Ln O U'1 O kn O Ln O W I N Ln I 1 -- N N N N W W I O N Ln V O fV Vl V O fV O Ln O Ln O Ul O Ul O Ln Concentration (umhos/cm) I Concentration (umhos/cm) Figure 6 E o E WU c 13 c U u 1 a s Average nitrate (as nitrogen) concentration versus chloride concentration versus specific conductance value for the Federal Way upland aquifers, 1990-1995 LUD data set. North RMC includes Wells 7, 17, 17A 18, 20A, and 23A. South RMC includes Wells 10, 1 OA, 15, 15A, 19A, and 21. EUA (shallow) represents Well 16. EUA (deep) includes Wells 1 OC, 22, and 22A. FWDA includes Wells 17B and 19. Figure 7 Ground Water Production, Lakehaven Utility District, 1990 - 1995 All Wells 5 E C 0 0 4-j U 1990 0 10 5 0 0 1990 10 - --- 5 0 1990 10 - ---- 5 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 RMC Wells .. . ......... I I I 1 177 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17-1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 MLA Wells 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 EUA Wells ------------- --- - -- ---------------- - - ----- --- --------- - ---- - ---- ----------------- MfTfi I I I I W I M I i:111111 I I 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 FWDA Wells ------- - --- - --- - - --- ------- 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1%-.0.P"" APPROXHATE GROUND WATER DIVIDE e T21N T20N T22N T21N T 21 N T20N W I W FIGURE 8 5 Modeled Potentiometr. is Surface, Vashon Advance Aquifer System, Layer 2, 1991 o LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & NOBLE. INC. �q T 71 N I LU N %`��APPROXIMATE GROUND WATER DIVIDE I T22N T21N T 21 N T20N w W FIGURE 9 Modeled Potentiometric Surface, Intermediate Aquifer System, Layer 4, 1991 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBWSON & NOBLE. INC. ROBINSON & NOBLE. INC. nst-9L 'ON °Or `9\6& l8dV Z Z cc N N L Q l w Li N _ � U � o- z w C� w 2 F- } > } } } Q J Q J Li J J c CD rt 0) tD N 0 CD j I ' >- Q) II �I�O am ,? � � a as Q J CJ Q C i 0 a: o E Ln Q W J _1 �. L u r L `.1( TA OFS CRc Fly 9- d Ln HiVd—ado\anl\SJNIM` 6G nn LAYER i, CONFINING A 200 AYER 2, RiMC 100, 0' —100, —200' —300, —400' WELLS WELL 17/17A 20 17B r -500' -600' . LAYER 6, FWDA. -700 LAYER•7, C-QNr-111,i! Q- . ;'vo 7-S, 1) ✓E W IS INTENDED TO S%!OW GPOUNr PVA % E.P P 4 THS 0A Y. 141EL L SCREEN L OCA TIONS, LAND SUr F-A C� OVA 7EP, TABL E, AAID L A YEP C CON; ACTS APE APP,ROXA A E. 00 00 2) Pf EOICTED .T-FA %EL 7-1111S FGR THE C-';OU10 01A TEP PA THS APE OVEN ON TA2LE & �o z .o i� MILE FIGURE 11b o 1/2 ? Sample of Modeled Ground Water Paths to hree Wells, SCALE Cross Section View LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT a ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. T " N Li M So��Ip � P��ET w -t � 6 5 q T 21 N 3 STE£C 7OLLOFF LAID 11 Li 8 9 >0 A r- V ELL 23 LAKE o OR a LA 15 14 p 16 NORTH LAKE T 77N w M 50 U00 pU�ET 1 w d 6J g tp 5 4 \ T 21 N 3 - STEEL LAKE L�F 1I g 9 t0 Xl V ELL 23 LAKE aWAE LAA Ei )4 n k NoRrr� LAKE T 77 N w toT p� Np w w x $ ;�) 5 q 21 N 3 AKE LLOFF L 10 23 LAKE d 1 O1i£NE LAk _ i %5 14 X E h 4a n 1s 1s NORTH LAKE WE 0 V2 1 SCALE CAPTURE ZONE AT TOP I OF MIRROR LAKE AQUIFER. 12a. CAPTURE ZONE AT TOP OF CONFINING LAYER (LAYER 3) AND BOTTOM OF RMC. 12b. CAPTURE ZONE AT WATER TABLE SURFACE (WITHIN LAYER 1 AND 2, VASHON TILL AND RMC). FIGURE 12 Vertical Discretion of 100—Year Capture Zone, Well 23 0 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & NOBLE. WC. t I T 77N W O n UIv � 5° 1 I`� �E PU W � s g 5 n T21N 4 3 STEEL A AKE L✓LL L�F i! Li , AMNOd AK 8 9 76 ID ^V R ELL 73 LAKE a 15 S4 XA IE Z D 15 b J AV RTH LAKE MLE 0 1/2 1 SCALE T 77N TWO-DIMENSIONAL CAPTURE ZONE FOR WELL 23 WITHIN THE MIRROR LAKE AQUIFER. 13a. SURFACE AREAS WHICH CONTRIBUTE RECHARGE TO WELL 23. 13b. TWO-DIMENSIONAL REPRESENTATION OF THE THREE-DIMENSIONAL, 100- YEAR CAPTURE ZONE FOR WELL 23. NOTE THE AREA ENCOMPASSES BOTH THE ABOVE AREAS. 13c FIGURE 13 100—Year Capture Zone, Well 23 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & NOBLE. INC. nsi7-8L 'ON 80f 9661 ll dd7 W Z W O Z m I_- O W JZ W f.p W E U W N Q N r CLap W W ry 0 U OQ 0 }2H al=� Ali ix O F-�F- QJZ J QJ W J U W _ W L- �?o h 099--;�1 w U S N� Z O F- L) O - J C) Z �Q jQ F- IL (f) w J J x Q M U U O w F- F- w Q Q QO U1 0 ! z p o Z � � U O 3 J W Z > d L 3 s U O J N �- j ,o W W z� Q 4 W J (n -J 0 Jp J p W W W 1 3: u n " s IH18VldVA-->i r O co to I K—.099—�I J W O O W 13 F- w Z Q U Z U J Li J 0 J W N C F- C O U O p Z _ F F= rn v 0 Q V �r Z UW w �- V Q = J �wJ O � + li C)O 0 -0 W U � O � t �V fn D O � 0 0 C) K—,099—)q U-0 0 o 4.-� T w 0 Ito V to I � IF318b18VA-N M lfi w . cr� Q w z cn o W N Z OW N � w F- �CL �Q F- U CL Q 0 U -j 0 L..I O O :2 3z W J = �- a F- z r F�_ MILE 0 1/2 1 SCALE M ; of x Well 16 and Redondo —Milton Channel FIGURE 15 1—Year Capture Zones, Aquifer Wells, Layer 2 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT a I a r C C 0 a 0 0 ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. Il rI� MILE 1/2 1 SCALE FIGURE 171 1—Year Capture Zones, Federal Way Deep Aquifer Wells, Layer 6 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRIT] a d I Ix r c a c ROEWSON & NOBLE, INC. N2 33 34 35 w w T22N � � D T 21 N -( U^I 5O I` 6 5 4 3 2 P��E ,0 11 8 PLL 20A s � n WE L 23A WE n/17A 15 is 16 to ELI. 18 22 3 24 19 /1 ?1 ,,,, 23 WELL 10/10A Jc 2 26 WELL 21 -- — W 15 15A _ _ 25 30 - 29 28 WELL 15 27 26 34 35 31 32 [w 33 34Q 5 T 21 N T21N T20N T2❑N 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 01 HGHWAY 99 FIGURE 18 0 MLE 1/2 5—Year Capture Zones, Well 16 and Redondo —Milton Channel Aquifer Wells, Layer 2 sca_E LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. L nLE 1/2 1 SCALE FIGURE 16 1—Year Capture Zones, Wells 10C, 22/22A and Mirror Lake Aquifer Wells, Layer 4 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT RO&NSON & NOBLE, INC. n MLE PO I It FIGURE 20 o 1/2 5—Year Capture Zones, ' Federal Way Deep Aquifer Wells, Layer 6 SCALE LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. a I a Is z c cr a a I WE 0 1/2 , SCALE W I w M 1q, Of x Well 16 and Redondo -Milton FIGURE 21 10—Year Capture Zones, Channel Aquifer Wells, Layer 2 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT a Z I Ex r c z a c I?OrSINSON & NOBLE, INC. F-1 I WE 0 ,/2 , SCALE FIGURE 19 5—Year Capture Zones, Wells 10C, 22/22A and Mirror Lake Aquifer Wells, Layer 4 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. i M FIGURE 23 MLE o 1/2 10—Year Capture Zones, Federal Way Deep Aquifer Wells, Layer 6 SCALE LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. mu! FIGURE 22 1/2 10—Year Capture Zones, sC&E Wells 10C, 22/22A and Mirror Lake Aquifer Wells, Layer 4 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. n MLE 0 1/2 t SCALE FIGURE 24 100—Year Capture Zones, Well 16 and Redondo —Milton Channel Aquifer Wells, Layer 2 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT U ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. 11 FIGURE 25 1/2 100—Year Capture Zones, SC,E Wells 10C, 22/22A and Mirror Lake Aquifer Wells, Layer 4 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT Oc a I a rn C z cc Lc v a a ROBINSON & NOSLE,, INC. ri M I � FIGURE 26 MLE x iy o v2 t 100—Year Capture Zones, Federal Way Deep Aquifer Wells, Layer 6 SCME LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. I LEGEND WELL 10/10A CAPTURE ZONE WITH AVERAGE PRODUCTION WELL 10/10A CAPTURE ZONE WITH MAX IUM PRODUCTION OTHER CAPTURE ZONES AFFECTED BY WELL 10/10A PRODUCTION CHANGE ku 0 1/2 , SCALE a I a r C a C FIGURE 27 Production Sensitivity, 8 Change in 10—Year Capture Zone in South RMC o LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ° IWINSON & NOBLE, INC. LEGEND ® CAPTURE ZONE WITH AVERAGE RECHARGE STAR LAKE ® CAPTURE ZONE WITH BELOW AVERAGE 33 34 35 RECHARGE h, F� T22N w Li T 21 N 50 1 6 s 4 3 2 P AKE SFEEL aL OFF MRRO LAKE 10 n L 7(�AK 9 �� n LAKE ORE14E a IAR is 44 „EA E 17 16 15 14 N�RTN LAKE 22 24 19 21 23 AKE LAKE GENE LAR 2 26 - 25 30 - 29 28 27 26 F1V,'MtE LAKE 34 � TRO T 5 35 31 32 33 340 LA �y �P T 21 N T 21 N T20N T20N S 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2Y� LAKE a� HIGHWAY 99 5CA7PRISE r w w I 0 V2 t SCALE u Recharge Change in 10—Year Capture FIGURE 28 1 Sensitivity, Deficit, Zone, Well 10/10A LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT 0 0 r c C C RQBFNSOM & NOBLE, INC. LEGEND P 1:� MLE fif w Q 1/2 Recharge SCALE Change in 10—Year Capture a d I a r Le r. I a FIGURE 291 c Lf Sensitivity, Excess, 17 Zone, Well 10/10A ` LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT I ROBINSON & NOBLE, INC. i LEGEND ZONE 1 ZONE 2 I N #Y ZONE 3 BUFFER ZONE 1 i 5 U rr f ir; " f �fT f ELL 234 W$LL 20A it 10 :.. 15 1 14 3 is 17 7.56 WELL 22 ;_• 23 24 f 19 27 j 141 WELL 21 • � ! - 5 so 3 1 f —29 . 34 35 36 31 32 T21 N g 2 1 6 5 1/2 SCALB FIGURE 30 Wellhead Protection Areas for Wells in the Qva Aquifer System, Layer 2 LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBWSON&NOBLE, INC. LEGEND KLE 0 112 1 SCALE FIGURE 31 Wellhead Protection Areas for Wells in the Intermediate Aquifer System, Layer 4 LAKEHAVEQ UTILrrY DISTRICT ROSINSON & NOBL9 PVC LEGEND zoilm zoI'M ZONE BLTFFEI M is 14 i. 23 34 3S T 21 N T 2() N 3 2 MILE SCALE FIGURE 32 Wellhead Protection Areas for Wells in the Deep Aquifer System, Layer 6 LM.EHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ROBINSON & IVOBIF- INC. WETLAND AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ASSESSMENT REPORT 1019 SOUTH 351 STREET REVISED FEBRUARY 2019 REVISED NOVEMBER 2018 FEBRUARY 2018 Soun view Consultants Environmental Assessment Planning + Land Use Solutions RESUBMITTED FEB 2 0 2019 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WETLAND AND FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT ASSESSMENT REPORT 1019 SOUTH 351 STREET REVISED FEBRUARY 12, 2019 REVISED NOVEMBER 8, 2018 FEBRUARY 14, 2018 PROJECT LOCATION 1019 SOUTH 3515T STREET FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 PREPARED FOR PANATTONI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 900 SOUTHWEST 16TH STREET, SUITE 330 RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057 1 PREPARED BY JI SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS LLC 2907 HARBORVIEW DRIVE, SUITE D GIG HARBOR, WASHINGTON 98335 (253) 514-8952 J SOundview Consultants Environmental Assessment Planning + Land Use Solutions Executive Summary Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been assisting Panattoni Development Company (Applicant) with a wetland and fish and wildlife habitat assessment and development of a buffer reduction and enhancement plan for the proposed industrial development on an approximately 16.18-acre property located at 1019 South 351" Street in the City of Federal Way, Washington. The subject property consists of a single parcel situated in the Southwest t/a of Section 20, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 2021049027). SVC investigated the subject property for potentially -regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species in January 2018. Using current delineation and assessment methodology, the site assessment efforts identified and delineated the onsite portions of a large wetland complex (Wetland A), the ordinary high water (OHW) mark of a tributary of Hylebos Creek (Stream Z). Wetland A is located on the western portion of the subject property and continues offsite onto the adjacent parcels to the north, south and west. Wetland A is an eastern extension of the West Hylebos Wetland Complex, which is listed as a Wetland of High Conservation Value (WHCV) per Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR). As such, the wetland unit is rated based upon special characteristics as a Category I wetland. Stream Z is classified as a Type F, salmon -bearing waterbody. No other potentially regulated wetlands or fish and wildlife habitats were identified on or within 225 feet of the subject property. The applicant proposes an 78,845-square foot industrial building and associated infrastructure. The proposed project included careful site planning in order to avoid direct impacts to all onsite critical areas; however, due to site constraints and regulated hydrological features and in order to adequately address public safety measures and fire access and turning requirements, parking requirements, landscaping and other required improvements, some impacts to wetland and stream buffers is necessary to development the subject property. The project has been carefully designed in order to avoid and minimize impacts to sensitive areas to ~ 1 the greatest extent feasible; however, complete avoidance of impacts to critical areas is not possible as it over 65 percent of the site is encumbered by regulated critical areas and associated buffers and setbacks. In addition, the site contains an utility easement with Lakehaven Utility District. To develop the site, the applicant proposes a 25 percent wetland buffer reduction. The applicant proposes a minor (406-square feet; 0.5-percent of the stream buffer area north of the access road) intrusion into the outer buffer associated with Stream Z. This intrusion is proposed in an area of buffer already impacted to some extent. The existing buffer associated with Stream Z is highly degraded with anthropologic disturbances, a maintained utility easement, and invasive plant species. The proposed project will include the removal of these existing buffer impacts through clean up and enhancement actions which is anticipated to provide a net gain and lift in ecological function for the stream and wetland buffer and provide improved protection of these resources, which would not be possible without the stream buffer intrusion. The stream buffer intrusion will be reviewed under wetland buffer averaging as requested by the City, with enhancement of the remaining stream buffer as mitigation for the intrusion. The stream buffer intrusion is necessary in order to provide safe vehicle access, required fire access and truck turning, and slope stability. Further stream buffer impacts are being avoided through the use of a reinforced earthen slope that will be planted with native riparian vegetation. An iAdministrative Variance from the front yard building setback is proposed to further reduce stream J buffer intrusion impacts from the proposed project, to allow the building to be located further closer to Pacific Highway and further minizine indirect stream impacts. 1144.0012 — South 351' Street i Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 The snmmanr table below identifies relation by different ligencleS. Approximate Type/ Regulated Under FWRC Regulated Under Regulated Under. Feature Name Size/Length Category' Chapter 19.145 RCW 90.48 Clean Water Act dnsite Wetland A —250,000 sf I Yes Yes Yes Stream Z —1,110 if F Yes Yes Yes 1. Current Washington State Duparoncnt of Ecology (Hrub}, N114) Noland rating methods and Il4RC wetland and stream - a 1144.0012 — South 3515, Street ii Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 Ilk\ 91111 .�Izl -Niedill I QIGNOLLAIMVJ"JIJI 0 li-- W'131 4T-MT%'TSICC S61M YQ—1 v s1umjnsuo:)v)puno4S C44 b LLJ t 0 LL LL =) - , LL m LL Z LLJ 0 Z 0: 0 i OUP U) U) m Ld U) z az 0 EL -j LLJ ILD MLU L, §L LL T 0 Iz U) w F- C, w < LL 0 LL 2 0, :) co LL ova :C-,A o wz 0 1-0 00 t) < p o z Z 0z an c -0 W 1z uj Lu a. Z w ••c/) aw WZ cr 'M cn Es a. CZ3 0, < w F-20 z 0 ZO T (WD U) LL (L F- mm., < x zm, 7> Table of Contents Chapter1. Introduction.............................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2. Proposed Project....................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Location...........................................................................................................................................2 2.2 Project Description........................................................................................................................2 Chapter3. Methods.................................................................................................................... 4 Chapter4. Background Information........................................................................................... 5 4.1 Landscape Setting..........................................................................................................................5 4.2 Soils..................................................................................................................................................5 4.3 Vegetation.........................................................................................................--..----......................6 4.4 Local and National Stream and Wetland Inventories...............................................................6 4.5 Priority Habitats and Species.......................................................................................................6 4.6 Precipitation....................................................................................................................................6 Chapter5. Results....................................................................................................................... 8 5.1 Wetlands........................................................................................................................................8 5.2 Streams and Drainages................................................................................................................11 Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations....................................................................................... 12 6.1 Local Regulations......................................................................................................................12 Chapter 7. Buffer Reduction and Enhancement Plan ................................................................ 21 7.1 Purpose, Need and Existing Buffer Function.........................................................................21 7.2 Mitigation Sequencing.................................................................................................................21 7.3 Description of Impacts and Minimization...............................................................................22 7.4 Management Recommendations...............................................................................................22 7.5 Buffer Enhancement Strategy.......................................--•........................................I--•--............23 7.6 Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards......................................................................25 7.7 Plant Materials and Installation..................................................................................................25 7.8 Maintenance and Monitoring Plan............................................................................................28 7.9 Reporting.......................................................................................................................................29 7.10 Contingency Plans ................. ...... ..................... ............................... ......................... ................ 29 Chapter8. Closure.................................................................................................................... 31 Chapter9. References................................................................................................................ 32 Figures Figure1. Vicinity Map.................................................................................................................2 Figure 2. Aerial View of the Subject Property..............................................................................5 J Tables Table 1. Precipitation Summary'....................................................... Table 2. Wetlands Summary............................................................. Table 3. Wetland A Summary........................................................... Table 4. Functions and Values of Existing Onsite Wetlands ............. Table5. Stream Z Summary............................................................. Table 6. Buffer Reduction Measures ................................................. 1144.0012 - South 3511, Street Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan ........................................... 6 ........................................... 8 ............. I ............................ 9 .........................................10 .........................................11 70 Soundview Consultants LLC February 12, 2019 Table7. Buffer Plant Species.......................................................... Table8. Buffer Seed Mix................................................................ Appendices Appendix A — Methods and Tools Appendix B — Background Information _ Appendix C — Site Plan Appendix D — Data Forms Appendix E — Wetland Rating Forms Appendix F — Qualifications .................... 26 ..... - -- ........... 27 1144.0012 — South 351" Street v Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 Chapter 1. Introduction Soundview Consultants LLC (SVC) has been assisting Panattoni Development Company (Applicant) with a wetland, and fish and wildlife habitat assessment and development of a buffer reduction and enhancement plan for the proposed Federal Way industrial development on an approximately 16.18- acre property located at 1019 South 35151 Street in the City of Federal Way, Washington. The subject property consists of a single parcel situated in the Southwest '/a of Section 20, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 2021049027). The purpose of this wetland, and fish and wildlife habitat assessment, and buffer reduction and ^1 enhancement plan is to identify the presence of potentially -regulated wetlands, waterbodies, fish and wildlife habitat, and/or priority species that may be found on or near the subject property; assess potential impacts to any such critical areas and/or species from the proposed project; and provide j non -compensatory mitigation. This report will be used to obtain the following approvals: ■ City of Federal Way Use Process III Application Review * City of Federal Way SEPA review This report provides conclusions and recommendations regarding: * Site description and area of assessment; l* Identification, delineation, and assessment of potentially -regulated wetlands and other hydrologic features within the vicinity of the proposed project; * Identification and assessment of potentially -regulated fish and wildlife habitat and/or priority species located on or near the subject property; * Standard buffer recommendations, building setbacks, and development limitations; i * Existing site map detailing identified critical areas and standard buffers; * Proposed site plan with proposed project details; * Documentation of impact avoidance and minimization measures; * Description of temporary impacts, stream buffer intrusion, buffer reduction, and I I enhancement actions; and * Supplemental information necessary for local regulatory review. 1144.0012— South 351' Street 1 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction and Enhancement Plan Februan, 12, 2019 Chapter 2. Proposed Project 2.1 Location The proposed project is located at 1019 South 351" Street in Federal Way, Washington. The subject property consists of a single parcel situated in the Southwest 'A of Section 20, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, W.M. (King County Tax Parcel Number 2021049027). To access the site from Interstate-5 North, take exit 142B and merge onto WA-18 West toward South 348``' Street. Continue for 0.2 miles and turn right onto South 351" Street. The subject property will be on the right-hand side after 0.6 miles. Figure 1. Vicinity Map. T,.m Ia k%-_. r_oH Com Lounln. Ride C: lu t. CO 3 Celebranon = Park u m m Federal �-s Way &�,ohahe —� SW 340th St ?r K rk Part, FbrF: �+ w I z�.♦`� Subject Property ` He . :F.: ' Location s saett, sr a , n lei w95t Hgjol.+0 ♦ Aeffinds Parb +i 29th SINE SW 356th St W r � n C � Su4 Q ♦ r � II 2.2 Project Description S 356th St 6' S 360th St � � N m Hybhnsa Wetbod. - 0'IT 4� � d � A S 373rd-St f� The applicant proposes an approximately 78,845-square-foot industrial building and associated infrastructure to support manufacturing of machined metal products to be utilized by regional and national aerospace companies. The proposed project will include associated infrastructure and right- of-way improvements including utilities, landscaping, and parking and paved open areas required for staging and receiving of equipment and supplies. Several site plan and building alterations have been completed through an iterative sequential process with the city to reduce and minimize the impacts to critical area buffers. The proposed design includes careful site planning in order to avoid all direct impacts to onsite critical areas; however, due to topography, site constraints and regulated hydrological features and in order to adequately address public safety measures and fire access requirements, stream buffer intrusion and wetland buffer reduction is necessary for the applicant. The proposed clear internal height of the building is over 30-feet which requires full length fire truck aerial apparatus drive 1144.0012 — South 351" Street 2 Soundaiew Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 and access on the north and south sides of the building and 28-foot internal turning radii. The —� proposed truck court is designed to 125-feet to accommodate large trucks, which has been reduced by 5-feet. Further stream buffer impacts are being avoided through the use of a reinforced earthen slope that will be planted with native riparian vegetation. The Applicant must retain and improve an existing intrusion into the stream buffer and reduce the wetland buffer by 25 percent in some areas as allowed by FWRC 19.145.330 (3) and 19.145.440(6). The project proposes to retain an existing intrusion into the Stream Z buffer east of the stream. The existing 100-foot buffer west of the stream north of the access road will also be enhanced as mitigation of the stream buffer intrusion. Stream and wetland enhancement actions will be providing a net gain in ecological function. The proposed intrusion will ! extend less into the stream buffer than current impacts. Steam buffer enhancement is not a code requirement, and the enhancement actions proposed by the applicant would not be possible without the proposed stream buffer intrusion. The stream buffer intrusion will be reviewed under wetland l buffer averaging as requested by the City, with enhancement of the remaining stream buffer as mitigation for the intrusion. The proposed stream buffer intrusion with the proposed enhancement will provide a much improved buffer conditions and function over current degraded conditions. The 1 proposed reinforced earth slope, replanted with native vegetation will be constructed to provide soil iretention for parking. This method provides stabilized slope, safe parking and access and buffer enhancement near the buffer east of Stream Z. All construction activities are avoiding direct wetland impacts through careful project designing and confining development to portions of the site that avoid critical areas. The Stormwater treatment infrastructure has been relocated outside of the standard and reduced wetland buffer. The open stormwater pond has been replaced with underground detention vault to minimize spatial requirements and impacts to the standard wetland buffer. Wetland buffer reduction is only required for sloping and grading to accommodate the required parking. Parking was remove from prior site 1 plan revisions to minizine impacts to the stream buffer intrusion; however, this additional parking is 1 necessary and required by the Applicant to accommodate the intended use. A retaining wall may be used to further reduce the impact to the reduced buffer area. The area required to be graded due to l topographical constrains to accommodate the stormwater vault and parking area within the reduced I buffer area will only be temporary impact during construction. The reduced buffer area originally proposed as stormpond will now be graded, enhanced and revegetated with native plantings, which is J a permitted activity within the buffer area. J An Administrative Variance from the required front yard building setback along Pacific Highway is requested to reduce the building setback from 20-foot to 15-foot. The purpose of the setback reduction is to allow the building and site improvements to be located closer to Pacific Highway to reduce and minimize the extent of intrusion into the required 100-foot stream buffer. A wetland buffer reduction and enhancement plan is provided in Chapter 7 of this report to outline the buffer impacts and enhancement actions to improve existing wetland and stream buffer functions to offset those impacts. 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 3 Sound -view Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 Chapter 3. Methods SVC investigated, assessed, and delineated wetlands, drainages, and other potentially -regulated fish and wildlife habitat on or within 225 feet of the subject property in the winter of 2018. All determinations were made using observable vegetation, hydrology, and soils in conjunction with data from the U.S. Geographic Survey (CJSGS) topographic map, the Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) Soil Survey, DNR stream typing map, U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) National I Wetland Inventory (NWI), King County geographic information systems (GIS) data, City of Federal Way GIS data, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) and SalmonScape maps and data, local precipitation data through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and various orthophotographic resources. Appendix A contains further details for the methods and tools used to prepare this report. Wetland boundaries were determined using the routine approach described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and modified according to the guidelines established in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wletland Delineation Manual.• Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (USACE, 2010). Qualified wetland scientists marked boundaries of on -site wetlands with orange surveyor's flagging labeled alpha -numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation along the wetland boundary. Pink surveyor's flagging was labeled alpha -numerically and tied to 3-foot lath or vegetation at formal sampling locations to mark the points where detailed data was collected (DP1-DP6). Additional tests pits were excavated at regular intervals inside and outside of the wetland boundaries to further confirm each delineation. i SVC classified all wetlands using both the hydrogeomorphic (Brinson, 1993) and Cowardin (Cowardin, 1979; Federal Geographic Data Committee, 2013) classification systems, and assessed wetlands using the llletland Functions Characterisation Tool for Linear Projects (Null et al., 2000). Following classification and assessment, Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDOE)-trained scientists rated and categorized all wetlands using the iYlasl�inagton State Wetlands Bating System for Wlestern Wlashington (Hruby, 2014) and the definitions established in FWRC 19.145.420. Streams and surface water features were classified using the DNR Water Typing System as outlined in WAC 222.16 and the guidelines established in Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.145.260. Ordinary high water (OHW) mark determinations were made using Washington State Department of Ecology's (WSDOE's) method as detailed in Deterrnininag the Ordinary High Wlater Mark for Shoreline ManagementAct Compliance in Washington State (Anderson et. al., 2016) and the definitions established in the Shoreline Management Act (Revised Code of Washington [RCW] 90.58.030(2)(b) and WAC 173- 22-030(11). To mark the centerline or banks of potentially -regulated streams and shorelines, blue Jsurveyor's flagging was alpha -numerically labeled and tied to vegetation. The fish and wildlife habitat assessment was conducted during the same site visits by qualified fish I and wildlife biologists. Experienced biologists made visual observations using stationary and walking survey methods for both aquatic and upland habitats noting any special habitat features or signs of fish and wildlife activity. 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 4 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 Chapter 4. Background Information 4.1 Landscape Setting The subject property is located in an urban setting in the City of Federal Way, Washington (Figure 2). The subject property is primarily undeveloped and consists of a mixed coniferous and deciduous forested canopy except for South 351"Street that intersects the parcel within the center of the subject property. Highway 99 is located directly adjacent to the east side of the subject property with various commercial developments adjacent. West of the propem- is an undeveloped forest. The stream channel located on the subject property begins in the northcast portion of the parcel and exits the southwest portion of the parcel. Topography on the subject property consists of an upper terrace on the east side that transitions downward to the stream channel and wetland basin (Appendix B1). The site is located within Water Resource Inventor Area (WrM) 10 — Puyallup/White. 4.2 Soils The NRCS Soil Survey of King County identified two soil series on the subject property: Everett- Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, and Seattle muck. A description of the onsite soil series is below: 1144.0012 — South 35111 Street 5 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes According to the NRCS survey, Everett-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam is a soil complex consisting of roughly equal parts Everett and Alderwood soils. In a typical profile, both Everett and Alderwood soils have a consolidated substratum at a depth of 7 to 20 feet. Surface water runoff is slow to medium (Snyder, et. al., 1973). Everett-Alderwood soils are listed as not hydric on the King County Hydric Soils List (MRCS, 2001). Seattle Muck (Sk) ~� According to the survey, Seattle muck is very poorly drained. The slopes are less than 1 percent. In a typical profile, the subsurface layers are stratified mucky peat formed from sedges. Seattle muck is listed . , as a hydric soil on the King County Hydric Soils List (MRCS, 2001). I 4.3 Vegetation Upland vegetation on the subject property is dominated by a forested canopy of Douglas fir (Pseudostuga men#erat), red alder (Alnus mbra), western red cedar (Tbuja plicata), and big leaf maple (Ater macroplylluur) with an understory of salal (Gaultberia sl0allon), sword fern (Pajhslichum munitunz), and non- native invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rebus armeniacus). Vegetation transitions to wetland species discussed further in the results section (Chapter 5). 4.4 Local and National Stream and Wetland Inventories The USFWS NWI map (Appendix 135) and the City of Federal Way Wetlands Map (Appendix 134) identify a potential wetland on the subject property. The King County Sensitive Areas map (Appendix 133) identifies a potential salmon -bearing stream feature traversing southwest through the subject property. DNR stream typing map (Appendix 138) do not identify any wetlands or streams on or within 225 feet of the subject property. 4.5 Priority Habitats and Species The WDFW PHS map (Appendix 136) identifies a freshwater forested/shrub wetland on the eastern half of the subject property. The SalmonScape map (Appendix 137) do not identify any priority fish or wildlife species or habitat in the vicinity of the project area. No other priority habitats and/or species presence are identified near the subject property. 4.6 Precipitation Precipitation data was obtained from NOAA for SeaTac International Airport in order to obtain percent of normal precipitation during and preceding the investigation. A summary of data collected is provided in Table 1. 'ro111P 1 hrprinitatinn S�immnrv► ` + Percent of Day Day 1 Week 2 Weeks 30 Days Prior Year to Date Normal Date of Before I Prior Prior (Observed/Normal)z (Observed/Normal)z (Month/Year) 1/3/18 0.0 1 0.0 1.95 L2.39 4.32/5.30 18.86/15.95 82/118 1. Precipitation volume provided in inches. Data obtained fwm NOAA (http://ev2.weather,gov/cfimxc/xmnri,�.plip?wlu-scw) 2. 30 days prior precipitation includes accumulated precipitation beginning 30 days before the on -site date(s) 3. Year-to-date precipitation is for the 2017/2018 water rear from October 1st to the onsite date(s) 4. Percent of normal shown for both 30 days prior and 2017/2018 water year 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan Soundview Consultants LLC Februan- 12, 2019 Precipitation was at 118 percent of normal for the calendar year during the site investigatum on January 3, 2018. However, 30 days prior precipitation levels were at 82 percent of statistical normal. This precipitation data suggests that site conditions were relatively normalized. Such conditions were considered in malting professional wetland and stream typing determinations. I j I Ij I I I J I 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 7 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February- 12, 2019 J Chapter 5. Results 5.1 Wetlands 5.1.1 Wetland Overview The site investigation identified one potentially -regulated wetland on the subject property (Wetland A). No other potentially -regulated wetlands were identified within 225 feet of the subject property. The identified wetland contains indicators of wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation according to current wetland delineation methodology. Wetland data forms are provided in Appendix D, and wetland rating forms are provided in Appendix E. Table 2 summarizes the wetland identified during the site investigations. j Table 2. Wetlands Surnmary Predominant Wedand Classification / Rating Approximate Buffer Wedand Size Width Wedand Cowatdinl HGMZ WSDOE3 Federal Way4 On site (feet)5 (acres) J A PFO/SSEH Depressional, Slope, I I 5.7 190 Riverine - Notes. 1. Cowardin et al. (1979) Federal Geographic Data Committee 2013 or NVII Class based on vegetation: PFO = Palustrine Forested; SS = Scrub - Shrub; Modifier for Water Regime or Special Situations: E= Seasonally Flooded and Saturated, H= Permanently Flooded. 2. Brinson, M. M. (1993). 3. WSDOE rating according to Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington — Revised Hruby (2014). 4. FWRC 19.145.420(1)(c) definition. 5. FWRC 19,145.420(2) buffer standards. Wetland A Wetland A is approximately 250,000 square feet (5.7 acres) in size onsite and is located on the western portion of the subject property and extends offsite to the north, south, and west. Wedand A is part of a larger wetland complex and the size of the unit including offsite portions is estimated at ' approximately 4,448,500 square feet (102-acres) based on aerial imagery. The offsite portion was inspected but not delineated. Hydrology for Wetland A is provided by several streams, direct precipitation, and a seasonally -high groundwater table provided. Wetland vegetation onsite is dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra), western red cedar (Tbuja plicata), vine maple (Ater circirratum), salmonberry (Rebus Spectabilis), Himalayan blackberry (Rebus armeniacus), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), and skunk cabbage (Ljsitcbiton amerzcanum).. Wedand A is a Palustrine Forested and Scrub -Shrub, Seasonally Flooded, Saturated, and Permanently Flooded wetland. Wetland A is listed as part of the West Hylebos Wetland Complex (WHCV) per the DNR Database. As such, Wetland A is rated using the `Special Characteristics' section in the 2014 wetland rating form as a WHCV (Appendix B9). Per FWRC 19.145.420(1)(c)., Wetland A is a Category I wetland. Table 3 summarizes Wetland A. 1144.0012— South 351" Street 8 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 -r }hlP 3 M-t-land A .g1riT[1i7 am WETLAND A — INFORMATION SUMMARY Located on the western portion of the subject property and continues further offsite to the west, Location: north, and south as part of the West H •lebos Wetland Complex :. Local jurisdiction Federal Way 10 — Puyallup -White WRIA I WSDOE Rating (Hruby, 2014) Federal Way RatingI +'S T t Federal Way Buffer Width 190 feet 5.7 acres (onsite) Wetland Size —102 acres (total includin offsite Cowardin Classification PFO/SSEH Depressional, Slope, HGM Classification & Riverine Wetland Data Shect(s) DP-2, DPA DP-6 Upland Data Sheet (s) DP-1 DP-3, DP-5 Boundary Flag Color Orange Dominant Wetland vegetation is dominated by red alder, western red cedar, vine maple, salmonberry, Vegetation Himalayan blackberry, slough sed e, and skunk cabbage. Soils Hydric soil indicator A4 (hydrogen sulfide) was observed. Hydrology for Wetland A is provided by several streams, direct precipitation, and a seasonally - Hydrology high groundwater table. Rationale for The wetland boundary was determined by point of saturation and a transition to a hydrophytic Delineation plant community. Local rating is based upon WSDOE's current wetland rating system and FWRC 19.145.420(1). Rationale for Wetland A is rated using the Special Characteristics section of the rating form for a WHCV per Local Rating DNR Database (Appendix 139). Wetland Functions Summary Wetland A has high potential to retain sediments and pollutants from surface runoff and flooding events due to the presence of trees and shrubs and depressional hydrogeomorphic position. Water Quality Various hydroperiods include long -duration seasonal flooding and saturation as well as areas of permanent ponding that pro -,rides longer time to filter out pollutants and sediments. The wetland is located in a watershed that has been identified as locally important for maintaining water quality. Wetland A has a high potential to provide hydrologic function to the watershed due to overall size Hydrologic and capacity as well as the presence of dense vegetation. In addition, down -gradient flooding occurs within the sub -basin. Wildlife habitat potential provided by Wedand A is high due to having multiple Cowardin plant Habitat classes and hydroperiods, high species richness and interspersion of habitat, and identified high conservational value. Wetland A's score for Habitat Functions using the 2014 method is high (7). The buffer surrounding Wetland A is dominated by Douglas fir, bigleaf maple Himalayan Buffer Condition blackberry, and western swordfern. 1144.0012 —South 3511, Street 9 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 5.1.2 Wetland Buffers Per FWRC 19.145.420(2), Category I wetlands with habitat scores of five (7) points are subject to `l standard 190-foot buffers. In addition, buildings and other structures require a 5-foot setback from the regulated wetland buffer edge (FWRC 19.145.160). 5.1.3 Wetland Functions Using the rapid assessment method (Null et al., 2000), the wetland on the subject property provides several water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions, such as sediment and toxic removal, stormwater retention and infiltration, water quality enhancement, and habitat for wildlife (Table 4). 1 Wetland A provides a high degree of water qualit}- and hydrologic functions due to its multiple 1 hydrogeomorphic classifications (depressional, slope, and riverine) as the potential for sediment, nutrient, and toxicant removal, and flood water attenuation is high. Due to the diversity of plant communities and structural complexity of Wetland A, it has the potential to provide functional habitat for aquatic invertebrates, amphibians, and wetland associated mammals, and birds. Wetland A provides overhanging vegetation along Stream Z's banks and refuge for migrating and juvenile 1 salmonids. However, the buffer of this unit is severely degraded and disturbed and has a presence of non-native, invasive Himalayan blackberry. The onsite wetland is listed as a WHCV by the DNRdatabase and is included in Federal Way's comprehensive plan and provides educational value to the community. J J J Function / Value' Wetland A Water Quality Functions Sediment Removal + Nutrient and Toxicant Removal + Hydrologic Functions Flood Flow Alteration + Erosion Control & Shoreline Stabilization x Habitat Functions Production & Export of Organic Matter + General Habitat Suitability + Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates + Habitat for Amphibians + Habitat for Wetland -Associated Mammals + Habitat for Wetland -Associated Birds + General Fish Habitat + Native Plant Richness + Special Characteristics Educational or Scientific Value + Uniqueness and Heritage + 1. "-" means that the tunctton is not present; x means mat me luulUVli „ P.III ui a.,� the function is present and is of higher quality. 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 10 Soundview Consultants U-C Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 -1 5.2 Streams and Drainages J5.2.1 Stream Z (Tributary of Hylebos Creek) Using current methodology, the site assessment efforts identified and delineated the OHW mark of one unnamed stream (Stream Z) on the subject property. Stream Z enters the northcentral portion 1 of the site and flows to the southwest corner of the site. This stream is an unnamed tributary of Hylebos Creek. Hydrology for Stream Z is mainly provided by a system of above ground conveyance features. Stream Z enters the subject property at the the northcentral parcel boundary with a consolidated clay bottom and sharply defined banks. The stream transitions to a large cobble/sandy bottom with evident aggregate sorting and a defined channel. Vegetation overhangs the stream banks and extensive aerial cover of riparian canopy shades the length of the stream reach. King County _1 Sensitive Areas Map has identified the Stream Z as salmonbearing and no downstream fish passage 1 barriers were identified that would likely prevent fish access. Heliocoidal flow has created scouring at bends in the stream, and may provide resting habitat for salmonids. Garbage, waste and debris were I located throughout the stream reach. Wetland A has outlets into Stream Z at different locations. Stream Z continues to flow south offsite and through the large West Hylebos Wetland Complex, and is located within the Puyallup -White Watershed (WRIA 10). A summary of Stream Z is pro -tided in Table 5 below. 5.2.2 Stream Buffer 1 Steam Z meets the definition of a Type F stream feature per FWRC 19.145.260 and WAC 222-16-030 due to a bankfull width of 11 feet within defined channels and the presence of potential fish habitat. 1 As such, Stream Z requires a protective buffer of 100 feet and an additional 5-foot building setback from the buffer edge (FWRC 19.145.160). However, the buffer is severely degraded anthropologic disturbances waste and debris, and a significant presence of non-native, invasive plants. 1144.0012 — South 351" Street 11 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 J Chapter 6. Regulatory Considerations ' 6.1 Local Regulations _1 Due to the presence of on -site wetlands and streams, this report has been prepared pursuant to 1 FWRC 19.145.080(2). An evaluation of whether on -site wetlands are regulated under FWRC 19.145.030(2)(c), wetland and associated plant communities descriptions, lists of observed plants, wetland classifications, and an evaluation of the existing or potential functions and values of the wetlands can be found in Chapter 5 of this report. Avoidance and minimization measures have been implemented to the maximum extent possible; however, allowed wetland buffer reduction and J stream buffer intrusion are proposed and necessary within an already impacted (anthropologic J disturbances, waste and debris, and a significant presence of non-native, invasive vegetation) segment of the buffer associated with Wetland A and Stream Z. The stream buffer intrusion will be reviewed 1 under wedand buffer averaging as requested by the City, with enhancement of the remaining stream j buffer as mitigation for the intrusion. No impacts are proposed within identified wetland or drainage features; however, limited project actions are proposed within regulated buffers and setbacks to accommodate development of the site. Further, negative impacts to Steam Z are being avoided through the use of a reinforced earthen slope within the existing buffer intrusion in place of retaining walls. The proposed project is designed to meet the City of Federal Way's critical areas protections as 1 outlined in FWRC 19.145 and follows the mitigation sequencing protocol established in FWRC 19.145.130. The following section details how these codes are being met. i (1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a cedain action orparts of an action; All construction activities are avoiding direct wetland impacts through careful project designing and confining development to portions of the site that avoid critical areas — no direct impacts to the stream or wetland are proposed. As such, the project has been designed to avoid direct impacts to critical areas. However, indirect impacts to critical areas cannot be fully avoided as over 65 percent of the site is encumbered by regulated hydrologic features and associated buffers and setbacks along with a utility easement with Lakehaven Utility District (LUD). Wetland buffer reduction and stream buffer intrusion is necessary to accommodate a the building footprint, associated parking and infrastructure, required stormwater detention 1 and treatment facilities, and grading within the reduced wetland buffer for slope stability for 1 the stormwater vault and parking above. The site design has been revised numerous times to remove all originally proposed parking stalls from the stream buffer intrusion to further limit indirect stream impacts and to minimize the impact within the wetland buffer by relocating the stormwater treatment facility outside of the standard wetland buffer. (2) Minimising impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology or by taking aff ative steps, such aspr ject redesign, relocation, or timing to avoid or reduce impacts; 1 The project was designed to minimize impacts to buffers to the greatest extent possible. The project has been redesigned several times to eliminate a majority of the stream and wetland 1 buffer impacts. These design efforts include limiting the extent of the stream buffer intrusion Jj to the existing improvement, the use of a reinforced earthen slope, building size reductions, relocating stormwater treatment facilities outside of the standard buffer, and elimination of 1144.0012— South 351` Street 12 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 parking spaces and other site amenities. All parking infrastructure has been removed from the stream buffer, and the remaining required stream buffer intrusion is limited to less than 5-feet I (even then only at critical pinch points). The degraded buffer associated with Wetland A is proposed to be reduced by up to 25 percent to accommodate required grading for the underground stormwater treatment vault and parking area, and the buffer will be 1 enhanced/restored as allowed under FWRC 19.145.440(6). Parking was remove from prior site plan revisions to minizine impacts to the stream buffer intrusion; however, this additional 1 parking is necessary and required by the Applicant to accommodate the intended use. The area required to be graded due to topographical constrains to accommodate the stormwater vault ` and parking area within the reduced buffer area will only be temporary impact during _ construction. The reduced buffer area originally proposed as stormpond will now be graded, 1 enhanced and revegetated with native plantings, which is a permitted activity within the buffer 1 area. This has resulted in an increase in buffer enhancement area from prior designs. All stormwater will be treated and controlled to current standards. An Administrative Variance 1 from the required front yard building setback along Pacific Highway is requested to reduce the building setback from 20-foot to 15-foot. The purpose of the setback reduction is to allow the building and site improvements to be located closer to Pacific Highway to reduce and minimize the extent of intrusion into the required 100-foot stream buffer. (3) Recti ing 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 pr ojecE; The proposed cleanup and restoration planting actions will enhance the severely impacted and degraded stream and wetland buffers and provide for improved protection of the wetland and stream. Removing stream and wetland buffer degradations and disturbances, waste and debris, and the significant presence of non-native, invasive vegetation will eliminate existing indirect impacts to the critical area functions the buffers are intended to protect, and native vegetation replacement within these buffers will enhance and restore the habitat and water quality protections. (4) Reducing or eliminating the impact overtime by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; 1 The proposed project eliminates existing buffer intrusions and cleans up existing impacts to critical areas and protective buffers. The project also provides for permanent protection of these areas from further development and/or impacts in the future. The proposed cleanup iand restoration planting actions will restore buffer functionality over time and include 1 maintenance and monitoring provisions to ensure enhancement/restoration success. It is also anticipated the development in conjunction with the proposed enhancement plantings, J fencing and signage will discourage further anthropogenic disturbances within the critical areas and buffers. ' (5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, orproviding substitute resources or environments; and The proposed project fully avoids direct impacts to wetlands and streams through J confinement of development to portions of the site that lack such critical areas (LUD's facilities are existing and protected by easement - retention of the existing access road is not a new impact). Buffer reductions and intrusions are not direct critical areas impacts; rather, such J1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 13 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February- 12, 2019 J impacts are indirect and fully remediated by project design addressed in mitigation sequencing items 1— 4 detailed above. The critical areas will be fully protected under the proposed actions; as such, no compensatory mitigation is required. (6) Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. As a part of the enhancement/restoration actions, all trash and human disturbance within the buffers will be removed and the buffers maintained to keep free of further anthropologic disturbances to the best of the Applicant's ability. The site improvements and Applicant's long-term presence will eliminate further illicit degradation of these areas by discouraging disturbance and illicit dumping. In addition, a long-term monitoring and maintenance plan has been prepared to ensure long-term success of the proposed enhancement/restoration actions. j 6.1.1 Wetland Buffer Reduction with Enhancement 1 Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.440(6), wetland buffer reduction may be approved when the buffer reduction is not greater than 25 percent and includes a buffer enhancement plan that provides i improved and additional protection of the wetland functions and values. The City of Federal Way will review and decide upon buffer reduction using process III in Chapter 19.65 FWRC, based on the six criteria listed below. (a) It will not adversely affect water quality; Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces of the proposed project will be conveyed to water quality treatment vaults to be detained and treated prior to infiltration with overflow discharge into the wetland buffer. As the existing site currently does not have stormwater detention and treatment facilities and has a significant presence of anthropologic disturbances onsite draining untreated into the stream, it is anticipated the proposed project will benefit water quality onsite. The water which flows from the east side of the subject property into Stream Z and Wedand A is contaminated with the listed degradations which the propose project will remove; therefore, the proposed project will not adversely affect water quality and will benefit water quality. (b) It will not adversely affect the existiirg quality of the wetland or buffer wildu'fe habitat; As the existing buffer to wetland A is severely degraded with anthropogenic disturbance waste and debris, and a significant presence of non-native, invasive vegetation, the proposed buffer enhancement actions will remove such disturbances and degradations that when coupled with project design elements such as treated stormwater, buffer restoration and enhancement, and utilization of a reinforced earthen slope that will be planted with native riparian vegetation, is anticipated to provide a net gain in ecological lift of buffer functions compared to the current baseline. Further, the proposed buffer enhancement plan will replant the remaining stream buffer with native plants which will provide diverse vertical and horizontal vegetation strata beneficial to wildlife and a much improved habitat to better protect habitat functions. J(c) It will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capalailities; 1144.0012 — South 35111 Street Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan 14 Soundview Consultants LLC February 12, 2019 J The portion of the site which is proposed to be developed slopes west to Wetland A and Stream Z and has little stormwater retention capability. No stormwater treatment or detention facilities are onsite, and as such, stormwater currently flows unimpeded downslope through anthropologic disturbances onsite into the Wetland A and Stream Z untreated and undetained. Stormwater runoff from new impervious surfaces of the proposed project will be conveyed to stormwater vaults to be detained and treated prior to infiltration with overflow discharge into the wetland buffer. As the existing site currently does not have stormwater detention and treatment facilities and has a significant amount of garbage, debris and anthropologic disturbances onsite, it is anticipated the proposed project will benefit water quality, drainage and stormwater detention capabilities onsite with the proposed enhancement actions and stormwater facilities. (d) It will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion ba,,,,ards; All appropriate erosion control and best management practices will be used to prevent unstable conditions. Runoff will be detained a released through a dispersion trench to dissipate discharge flow velocities. The proposed project has been designed with specific j erosion prevention and stabilization elements to avoid the creation of unstable earth J conditions and erosion hazards. The project will utilize a reinforced earthen slope that will be planted with native riparian vegetation to prevent erosion. The developed site will stabilize once all proposed landscaping matures are completed. The entirety of the reduced buffer will be stabilized and replanted with native seed mix, shrubs and trees. (e) It will not be materially detrimental to any otberproperty or the city as a whole; and ' As the existing buffer to Wetland A is severely degraded with anthropologic disturbances, waste and debris, and a significant presence of non-native, invasive vegetation, the proposed actions to remove such disturbances and degradations coupled with project design elements such as treated stormwater facilities and buffer restoration actions are anticipated to provide a net gain and ecological lift for the wetland and buffer. This improvement will not be materially detrimental to other properties or the City of Federal ] Way and should benefit the facilities and buffer restoration actions as a whole. 0 All exposed areas are stabilised with native vegetation, as appropriate. The reduced wetland buffer will be enhanced and replanted with native plantings (please see Chapter 7 for Buffer Enhancement Plan). The existing buffer to Wetland A is severely degraded and has several open and exposed areas, waste and debris, and a significant presence of non-native, invasive vegetation; all buffer degradations will be removed and replanted with native plantings. 6.1.2 Stream Buffer Intrusion with Enhancement This project requires a minor intrusion into the outer portion of Stream Z's buffer in order to develop the site and provide safe vehicle access, required fire access and truck turning, and slope stability. The stream buffer intrusion will be reviewed as a wetland buffer averaging. Further stream buffer impacts are being avoided through the use of a reinforced earthen slope that will be planted with native riparian vegetation. This design provides stabilized slopes, safe access and buffer enhancement. Stream buffer intrusions may be approved on a case -by -case basis if the project includes a buffer enhancement plan 1144.0012 — South 3515, Street 15 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 that clearly substantiates that an enhanced buffer will function at an equivalent or higher level than the standard buffer. Under FWRC 19.145.330 — Intrusion into Stream Buffers, a project can intrude into ^� a portion of a stream buffer; however, the proposed project must ensure the following criteria under 19.145.330 (2) and 19.145.330 (3) are met in order to request approval for clearing and grading in the stream buffer: (a) It will not adversely affect water quality; Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces of the proposed project will be conveyed to water quality treatment vaults to be detained and treated prior to infiltration with overflow discharge into the wetland buffer. As no water quality treatment or detention facilities currently exist onsite, and the existing buffer is severely degraded due, the proposed project will benefit water quality onsite as currently the water which flows from the east side of the subject property into Stream Z and Wetland A is contaminated with the degradations which the propose project will remove. Further, the proposed project will mitigate the associated stream buffer with enhancement of the remaining buffer through native plants, cleanup of the degradation and utilization of a permeable reinforced earthen slope; therefore, the proposed project will not adversely affect water quality and will benefit water quality. This net gain in water quality function would not be possible without the stream buffer intrusion, and enhancement/mitigation is not required by code and is only being proposed mitigation for the stream buffer intrusions. (b) It will not adversely affect the exisLirr,g quality of wildl fe habitat within the stream or buffer area; JAs the existing buffer to Stream Z is severely degraded with anthropologic disturbances, patches of bare ground, waste and debris, and the significant presence of non-native, invasive vegetation, the proposed buffer enhancement actions will remove such disturbances and degradations that when coupled with project design elements such as treated stormwater, buffer restoration and enhancement with native riparian vegetation, such actions are anticipated to provide a net gain in ecological lift and improvement in stream buffer functions. Further, the proposed buffer enhancement plan will replant the remaining stream buffer with native plants which will provide diverse vertical and horizontal vegetation strata beneficial to wildlife and a much improved habitat to better _ I protect habitat functions. This net ecological gain in habitat function is proposed as 1 mitigation for the intrusion and would not be possible without the stream buffer intrusion. (c) It mill not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities; The portion of the site which is proposed to be developed slopes west to Stream Z and has little stormwater retention capability. No stormwater treatment or detention facilities are onsite, and as such, stormwater currently flows unimpeded downslope through anthropologic disturbances currently onsite into Stream Z untreated. Stormwater runoff from new impervious surfaces of the proposed project will be conveyed to stormwater vaults to be detained and treated prior to infiltration with overflow discharge into the wetland buffer. As the existing site currently does not have stormwater detention and treatment facilities and has a significant amount of anthropologic disturbances onsite, it is anticipated the proposed project will benefit water quality, drainage and stormwater 1144.0012 — South 35111 Street 16 Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan Soundview Consultants LLC February 12, 2019 J detention capabilities onsite with the proposed enhancement actions and stormwater facilities. (d) It hill not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards; All appropriate erosion control and best management practices will be used to prevent unstable conditions. Runoff will be detained a released through a dispersion trench to dissipate discharge flow velocities. The proposed project has been designed with specific erosion prevention and stabilization elements to avoid the creation of unstable earth conditions and erosion hazards. The project will utilize a reinforced earthen slope that will be planted with native riparian vegetation to prevent erosion. The entirety of the reduced buffer will be stabilized and replanted with native seed mix, shrubs and trees. (e) It will not be vaterialydehimental to any otherproperly or the city as a whole; and As the existing buffer to Stream Z is severely degraded, the proposed actions to remove such disturbances and degradations coupled with project design elements such as treated stormwater facilities and buffer restoration actions are anticipated to provide a net gain and ecological lift for the wetland and buffer. This improvement will not be materially detrimental to other property or the City of Federal Way and should benefit the city as a whole. (fi It is necessary for reasonable development of the subject properly. Development of the site is necessary for the applicant to manufacture aerospace components near Interstate 5 and centrally located within the Puget Sound. The proposed building construction is location dependent to the site which is centrally located between Seattle and Tacoma near Interstate 5 with connection to a major thoroughfare (Pacific Highway), necessary for the applicant to ship the machined metal parts to aerospace companies throughout the greater Pacific Northwest, and beyond, with the Applicants planned market expansion. The Applicant requires the minimum proposed paved yard storage for recycled material storage in large 40-yard containers, as well as material and shipping containers. The paved yard storage is also required for receiving large machinery to allow assembly and rigging of equipment. The Applicant cannot reduce other paved areas due to numerous site encumbrances beyond the proposed parking fire access and public safety requirements. All parking stalls have been removed from the stream buffer intrusion area to further lessen indirect impacts. This project requires a minor intrusion into the outer portion of Stream Z's buffer in order to develop the site and provide safe vehicle access, required fire access and truck turning, and slope stability. In addition, Per FWMC 19.145.440.5 (use of wetland buffer averaging for review of stream buffer intrusion review per coordination with City staff), development within the buffer, buffer averaging is allowed if the project meets the following: a) The total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without aperugin The proposed stream buffer intrusion is approximately 406-square feet adjacent to the truck court and 1,814-square feet for improvement of the existing utility access to be 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 17 Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan Soundview Consultants LLC February 12, 2019 _. J _A J I J improved (2,220-square feet combined total). The additional proposed stream buffer enhancement along the west side of the stream is approximately 36,376-square feet and 37,533-square feet along the east side of the stream, providing an increase in enhanced stream buffer area (73,909-square feet total) which would not be possible without the stream buffer intrusion. In addition, 225-square feet of current stream buffer intrusion from an existing concrete pad will be restored, and 900-square feet of the utility access enhanced with the reinforced earthen slope. An additional 93,220-square feet of wetland buffer will be enhanced south of the access road. This buffer stream enhancement area is much greater than area proposed stream buffer intrusion area, and is proposed as mitigation for the stream buffer intrusion. b) The buffer is increased adjacent to the higher functioning area of habitat or more sensitive portion of the wetland and decreased adjacent to the lover functioning or less sensitive portion; The project proposes to enhance the entire onsite portion of the stream buffer on the west side of the stream which is currently degraded. The proposed stream buffer intrusion is approximately 406-square feet adjacent to the truck court and 1,814-square feet for the existing access which will be improved (2,220-square feet combined total); however, 225-square feet of current stream buffer intrusion from an existing concrete pad will be restored, and 900-square feet of the utility access enhanced with the reinforced earthen slope. The additional proposed stream buffer enhancement along the west side of the stream is approximately 36,376-square feet, providing an increase in enhanced stream buffer area. This will provide an improved buffer function and protection for the stream from the offsite improvements to the west. c) The buffer at its narrowest point is not reduced to less than 75 percent of the required width; and The proposed stream buffer intrusion at it's narrowest point is approximately 5-feet, which is not less than 95-percent of the standard buffer width. d) Unless authorz.Zed in mrxting by a consenting neigbboring property owner, the averaging will remain on the subject proper y. The proposed buffer enhancement area is proposed to remain onsite and not proposed to project offsite. In addition, Per FWMC 19.145.340 requirements for clearing and grading must be met to allow clearing and grading in a stream buffer: (1) Grading is allowed only dunng the dry season (May 1st to October 1st). The director may extend or shorten the dry season on a case -by -case basis, determined on actual weather conditions. Grading will only be allowed between May 1" and October 1" unless approved by the director. (2) The soil duff layer shall remain undisturbed to the maxiri mai extent possible. Where feasible, any soil disturbed shall be redistributed to other areas of the pr ject area. 1144.0012 — South 35111 Street 18 Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan Soundview Consultants LLC February 12, 2019 To allow adequate treatment of invasive vegetation and remove hazardous materials with the buffer areas, the soil duff layer may be required to be disturbed. Where practical, the soil duff layer within the buffer area will remain undisturbed and remain in the project area. (3) The moisture -holding capacity of the to layer shall be maintained by miniwhy ing soil compaction or reestablishing natural soil structure and infiltrative capacity) on all areas of the pr iect area not covered by impervious surfaces. The buffer is heavily disturbed, degraded and compacted due to the ongoing anthropogenic activities. Enhancement action within the buffer may require soil decompaction. (4) Erosion and sediment control that meets reguimments of FW�RC Title 16. TESC will be implemented as required through construction, and permanent stormwater infrastructure will be installed as part of the proposed project. Please see Engineering Plans for Erosion and Sediment control measures and how they meet requirements of FWRC Tittle 16. (5) Allfill material used must be nondissolving and nondecomposing. The fill material must not contain organic or inorganic material that would be detrimental to water PaND, or the existing habitat. Please see Engineer Plans for proposed fill materials. (6) The applicant may deposit dredge spoils on the subject properly only if part of an approved development on the subjectproperiy. Deposit of dredged spoils is not anticipated at this time. (7) The applicant shall stabili.Ze all areas left exposed after clearing andgrading activities with native vegetation normally associated with the stream or buffer area. All disturbed areas within the buffer areas will be replanted or reseeded with native vegetation. In order to prevent adversely affecting water quality and hydrologic functions on -site, adequate stormwater detention and treatment facilities will be constructed. All existing hydrologic features and native trees and shrubs within avoided buffers and setbacks will be preserved to maintain existing habitat within the wetland and stream buffers. Currently, native vegetation is compromised by sparse cover, invasive plants, and deposits of trash and debris. Therefore, the proposed intrusion will not negatively impact the typical hydrologic or habitat functions associated with this portion of the buffer. Instead, the project will result in an increase in habitat functions due to the proposed clean up, invasive plant removal, and restorations. 1144.0012 — South 35111 Street 19 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 I I Table 6. Buffer Reduction Measures Disturbance Minimization Measures Lights . Direct lights away from wetland Noise • Locate activity' that generates noise awa • from wetland ■ Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is Toxic runoff not dewatered • Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetlands Change in water • Infiltrate or treat, detain and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious regime surfaces and new lawns * Use privacy fencing; plant dense native vegetation to delineate buffer edge and Pets and human discourage disturbance; place wetland and buffer/corridor in a separate tract or disturbance easement Dust • Use Best Management Practices (BNIPs) to control dust 1144.0012 —South 351"Street 20 Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan Soundvlew l.onsultants i.i _ February 12, 2019 Chapter 7. Buffer Reduction and Enhancement Plan The following sections present the proposed buffer reduction and enhancement plan to address the minor indirect impacts associated with the proposed development. The proposed wetland buffer reduction, stream buffer intrusion, and enhancement actions outlined below attempt to closely adhere to FWRC 19.145 (Environmentally Critical Areas). 7.1 Purpose, Need and Existing Buffer Function The purpose of the proposed project is to provide an industrial manufacturing facility within the greater King County area consistent with zoning and nearby uses to meet the Applicant's aerospace manufacture needs. The applicant proposes an 78,845-square foot industrial development which will manufacture machined metal parts for regional and national aerospace companies. The existing buffer for Stream Z and Wetland A consist of a remnant second -growth stand of mixed coniferous and deciduous trees located within a developed commercial/industrial area of moderate high -intensity land use, with the exception of the Hylebos Wetland Complex to the west. There is substantial degradation of the buffer area, which has a significant impact on wildlife function. The understory vegetation consists of a mix of native shrub species and bare patches (due to anthropogenic activities) with a component of invasive Himalayan blackberry. The fragmented nature of the buffer surrounded by high -intensity landuse and invasive shrub species in the understory limit the habitat function of the buffer. The soils within the buffer are mapped as Alderwood series which are moderately drained but with a perched water table during the winter months which limits retention, recharge, and water quality function. Alderwood soils are not listed as highly erodible and onsite slopes are moderate within the buffers ranging from 15 to 25 percent which would not constitute a high erosion hazard. 7.2 Mitigation Sequencing The project has been designed to avoid direct impacts to the stream and wetland, further, the project was designed to minimize impacts to buffers to the greatest extent possible. Over 65 percent of the ` site is encumbered by regulated hydrologic features and associated buffers and setbacks. In addition, the site contains a utility easement with Lakehaven Utility District. In order for the Applicant to develop the site, some buffer reduction and intrusion is necessary. I Unavoidable impacts to potential critical area buffers include the retention and improvement of the existing stream buffer intrusion to Stream Z in the central portion of the site to accommodate safe access, fire access, truck turning and slope stability are proposed. Through careful planning efforts, the proposed stream buffer intrusion avoids direct stream impacts by limiting the extent of the stream buffer intrusion to the existing improvement and through the use of a reinforced earthen slope. Parking was remove from prior site plan revisions to minizine impacts to the stream buffer intrusion; however, this additional parking is necessary and required by the Applicant to accommodate the intended use. Grading and enhancement will be required within a portion of the reduced wetland buffer; the area required to be graded due to topographical constrains to accommodate the parking area within the reduced buffer area will only be temporary impact during construction. The degraded buffer associated with Wetland A is proposed to be reduced by up to 25 percent in some areas and enhanced as allowed by FWRC 19.145.440(6). All construction activities are avoiding direct wetland 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 21 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 and stream critical area impacts through careful project designing and confining development to portions of the site that avoid critical areas. The proposed planting actions will enhance the severely impacted and degraded stream and wetland buffer and improve ecological functions and value by providing additional functions according to the needs of the watershed and providing an overall improvement to stream and wetland buffer functions. Removing stream and. -,vetland buffer degradations and presence of non-native, invasive vegetation, and replacing with native vegetarian within the buffer will enhance the habitat functions provided by the site and improve hydrology and quality of water leaving the project site. A diverse herbaceous layer will be established to provide browse, cover, and nesting for small mammals, which in turn provide prey for raptors and other small mammals. The stream buffer enhancement area is proposed as mitigation for the stream buffer intrusion. 7.3 Description of Impacts and Minimization In order to provide safe vehicle access, required fire access and truck turning, slope stabilization, required stormwater treatment and utilities, while allowing the Applicant to develop the site for this site specific project, the Applicant must retain and improve an existing intrusion into the stream buffer and reduce the wetland buffer by 25 percent in some areas as allowed by FWRC 19.145.330 (3) and 19.145.440(6). The project proposes to retain an approximate 25 percent existing intrusion into the Stream Z buffer east of the stream, which will retain and lessen and proposed intrusions into the stream buffer from the proposed project. Enhancement actions will be providing a net gain in ecological function. The proposed intrusion will extend less into the stream buffer than current impacts and the maintained utility easement. A reinforced earth slope, replanted with native vegetation will be constructed to provide soil retention for access and parking. This method provides stabilized slope, safe parking and access and buffer enhancement near the buffer east of Stream Z. The degraded buffer associated with Wetland A is proposed to be reduced by 25 percent and enhanced as allowed by FWRC 19.145.440(6). All construction activities are avoiding direct wetland impacts through careful project designing and confining development to portions of the site that avoid critical areas. The wetland buffer reduction is necessary or sloping and grading to accommodate the required underground stormwater vault and parking. Stormwater will be treated and controlled to current standards. Direct impacts to Stream Z and Wetland A are entirely avoided. As the existing utility access for Lakehaven Utility District is a maintained gravel road, and sloping will utilize a reinforced earthen slope which is actually an enhancement, minor buffer impacts are anticipated to be minimal and temporary° during construction. In addition, impacts associated with the buffer enhancement and installation of the reinforced earthen slope are temporal, and buffers will be enhanced with a net gain habitat or function. 7.4 Management Recommendations Best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented that consist of high -visibility fencing (HVF) installed around native vegetation along the reduced perimeter of the buffer, silt fencing between the graded areas and undisturbed buffer, plastic sheeting on stockpiled materials, and seeding of disturbed soils. Highly degraded and disturbed areas may require additional BMP's following invasive species removal and may include, but are not limited to hydroseeding and/or installing coin logs along the 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 22 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 Stream Z slope. These BMP measures should be installed prior to the start of development and enhancement actions and actively managed for the duration of the project. All equipment staging and materials stockpiles should be kept out of the wetland, stream, and associated buffers, and the area will need to be kept free of spills and/or hazardous materials. All fill material and road surfacing should be sourced from upland areas onsite or from approved suppliers, 111 and will need to be free of pollutants and hazardous materials. Construction materials along with all construction waste and debris should be effectively managed and stockpiled on paved surfaces and kept out of the wetland and buffer area. Following completion of the development activities, the entire site should be cleaned and detail graded using hand tools wherever necessary, and TESC measures will need to be removed. In addition, permanent stormwater treatment features will need I to be implemented as designed by the project engineer. Following completion of the proposed project, all stream and wetland buffer areas adjacent to the planned development areas will be protected by installation of split -rail fencing and critical areas signage to discourage intrusion and improper use of these areas. It is important to minimize impacts to all wetlands and streams and associated buffers. j Recommendations to further avoid and minimize impacts to these sensitive areas and buffers include: a Pre -treat invasive plants with a Washington State Department of Agriculture approved 1 herbicide. After pre-treatment, grub to remove the invasive plants and replant all cleared Jareas with native trees, shrubs, and ground covers listed in Appendix C; Pre-treatment of the invasive plants should occur a minimum of two weeks prior to removal; a Remove all prior degradations and disturbances, waste and debris, from reduced buffer areas; e Replant all enhancement areas with native trees, shrubs, and groundcovers listed Section 7.7.2, or substitutes approved by the responsible wetland scientist, to help retain soils, filter stormwater, and increase biodiversity; e Reuse topsoil removed within the upland forest at the proposed building location within buffer enhancement areas wherever possible; a An approved native seed mix will be used to seed the disturbed restoration and enhancement - areas after planting; e Maintain and control invasive plants annually, at a minimum, or more frequently if necessary. Maintenance to reduce the growth and spread of invasive plants is not restricted to chemical -1 f applications but may include hand removal, if warranted; ■ Provide dry -season irrigation as necessary to ensure native plant survival; a Direct exterior lights away from the wetlands wherever possible; ■ Place all activities that generate excessive noise (e.g., generators and air conditioning equipment) away from the wetlands where feasible. —! 7.5 Buffer Enhancement Strategy The proposed enhancement plan is intended to provide increased stream and wetland protections through improvement of buffer functions. Impacts to the stream buffer are being minimized through careful planning efforts and project design. The objective of the proposed non -compensatory J enhancement action is to enhance water quality and habitat function associated with the stream and wetland buffer to provide an overall net benefit in critical area functions by removing existing degradations and replanting native vegetation where appropriate. This proposal has utilized, to the 1144.0012 —South 3511, Street 23 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 ^l maximum extent possible, the best available construction, design, and development techniques to ensure the least amount of impact on the critical area and associated buffer area within the subject property. The enhancement actions should occur immediately after development actions have concluded and should be completed during one enhancement effort if possible. 1 Impacts to habitat, retention, recharge, water quality, and erosion protection function resulting from 1 a reduction in buffer are being offset by a variety of methods including stormwater mitigation design measures, a reinforced earthen slope and buffer enhancement actions. Stormwater from the I developed area, will be collected and conveyed to water quality treatment facilities. The treated stormwater will then be conveyed to the buffers for infiltration to prevent erosion. Wetland hydrology will be maintained through planting design to decrease the flow rate and improve the potential for J stormwater infiltration. By planting willow stakes in amended soils directly downhill from proposed J stormwater discharge points, a dense mat of roots over which stormwater will be released will reduce flow rate and increase the likelihood of infiltration under typical rainfall events. In addition, beyond I the discharge treatment plantings, the onsite buffer for the stream and wetland will be enhanced, include both the development side (eastside) and west side of the stream, with dense plantings which is exceedance of local requirements as mitigation for the stream buffer intrusion. The buffer enhancement adjacent to the stormwater pond will increase time of stormwater concentration as runoff flows through the wetland buffers. Effective buffer enhancement design will not only offset and improve stormwater impacts associated with buffer reduction, a well thought out planting design can increase buffer screening function. The strategy of the buffer enhancement activities proposed will be to provide a dense vegetated screen in the shrub and intermediate tree canopy layers between the development and the stream and wetland. In addition, all exposed areas will be stabilized with a native seed mix. As with most forested areas which have undergone the stem exclusion stage of forest succession, there are currently natural gaps in the understory and intermediate tree canopy level within the stream and wetland buffers from the shading created by the existing dominant and codominant trees, as well as the excessive disturbance. During clearing activities to prepare the site for the proposed project, a distinct edge in the existing canopy will be created exposing these gaps in the lower tree and shrub components of the buffer. These lower levels in the canopy will now be exposed to sunlight. Because Himalayan blackberry currently exists onsite, and without preemptive measures would most likely 1 invade these gaps and take over the newly exposed edge of the buffer. Proposed enhancement activities call for a dense planting of native thorny and evergreen shrub species. Adjacent to this dense shrub screen, a second screen consisting of evergreen trees further inside the buffer will provide for Jthe gaps in the mid canopy creating a complex vertical layering at the buffers edge as the enhancement f plantings mature. J Additional understory plantings will replace existing invasive species grouting within the buffer. These enhancement actions will provide several additional functions including, preventing artificial light penetration and human intrusion into the buffer to provide better habitat function to the buffer and fwetlands, increased hydrologic and water quality function through greater stem density, and greater J erosion protection associated with a dense root system at the interface of the proposed development and native environment. —� As a part of the enhancement activities, all trash and disturbance within the buffers will be removed and the buffers maintained to keep free of anthropogenic disturbance to the best of the Applicants J1144.0012 — South 351s� Street 24 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 J ability. The stream buffer enhancement as proposed would not be possible without the stream buffer intrusion as it is not a code requirement, but is proposed as mitigation for the stream buffer intrusion. It is also anticipated the development in conjunction with the vegetation will discourage anthropogenic disturbance from degrading the critical areas and buffers. This will have a positive effect on the fish and wildlife and habitat function of the buffers and wetlands. 7.6 Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards The goals and objectives for the proposed buffer enhancement actions are based on providing additional habitat and protection for Stream Z and Wetland A and providing supplementary water quality and hydrologic functions. The buffer enhancement actions are capable of improving habitat function for the wetland and stream over time, by establishment of a dense vegetation barrier between the project and the critical areas. The goals and objectives of the enhancement actions are as follows: Goal 1— Improve and protect Stream Z and Wetland A by restoring and enhancing the shared buffer. Objective 1— Establish dense cover of native trees, shrubs, and grasses and forbs within the shared buffer to create diverse horizontal and vertical vegetation structure and improve wildlife habitat. Performance Standard 1.1— By the end of Year 5, the buffer area (excluding utility easement within the Steam Z buffer area) will have at least 3 species of native trees, 3 species of native shrubs and 3 species of native herbaceous vegetation (native volunteer species included) present in all areas of enhanced buffer. To be considered, the native species must make up at least 5 percent of the vegetation class. Performance Standard 1.2 — Minimum plant survivorship will be at 100 percent of installed plants at the end of Year 1 (replacement of lost plants allowed), 85 percent at the end of Year 2, 80 percent at the end of Year 3, and 75 percent at the end of Year 5. Survivorship measurement will be based upon net stem density after Year 1. Native volunteer species may be counted towards survivorship totals. Performance Standard 1.3 — Minimum native woody species cover in the restoration 1 and enhancement area will be a minimum 30 percent total cover at the end of Year 3 and 50 percent at the end of Year 5. Performance Standard 1.4 — Minimum native herbaceous species cover in the restoration and enhancement area will be a minimum 5 percent total cover at the end of Year 3 and 10 percent at the end of Year 5. Performance Standard 1.5 — Non-native invasive plants will not make up more than 20 percent total cover in any growing season during the monitoring period following Year 1. 7.7 Plant Materials and Installation _1 1144.0012 —South 351 z� Street 25 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 J 7.7.1 Plant Materials Plant materials for use in the restoration and enhancement areas are detailed in Table 7 and 8 below. All plant materials to be used for buffer restoration and enhancement actions will be nursery grown stock from a reputable, local source, unless cuttings are obtained. Only native species are to be used. Plant material provided will exhibit normal, densely -developed branches and vigorous, fibrous root systems. Plants will be sound, healthy, vigorous plants free from defects, and all forms of disease and infestation. Container stock, if used, shall have been grown in its delivery container for not less than six months but not more than two years. Plants shall not exhibit rootbound conditions. Under no circumstances shall container stock be handled by their trunks, stems, or tops. Bare root plants may be substituted for container stock at the discretion of the Wetland Scientist. Seed mixture used for hand or hydroseeding shall contain fresh, clean, and new crop seed mixed by an approved method. The mixture is specified in Table 8 below. All plant material shall be inspected by the Wetland Scientist upon delivery. Plant material not conforming to the specifications below will be rejected and replaced by the planting contractor. Rejected plant materials shall be immediately removed from the site. Fertilizer will be in the form of Agroform plant tabs or an approved like form. Mulch will consist of I sterile wheat straw, woodstraw, or clean recycled wood chips approximately 1 /2 inch to 1 inch in size j and 1 /2 inch thick. If free of invasive plant species, the mulch material may be sourced from woody materials salvaged from the land clearing activities. 7.7.2 Plant Scheduling, Species, Density, and Location Plant installation should occur as close to conclusion of clearing and grading activities as possible to j limit erosion and limit the temporal loss of function provided by the wetland and buffer. All planting 1 should occur between September 1 and May 1 to ensure plants do not dry out after installation, or temporary irrigation measures may be necessary. All planting will be installed according to the procedures detailed in the following subsections using the species and densities that are outlined in planting schedule. j Table 7. Buffer Plant Species. Species Name' Common Name Size Abiesgrandis Grand fir Bare Root Acer macropbyllum Big leaf maple Bare Root Betula papyrifera Paperbark birch Bare Root Picea sitcbensis Sitka spruce Bare Root Pninus emaTinata Bitter cherry Bare Root Pseudotsuga men.Ziesii Douglas fir Bare Root Tl)uja plicata Western red cedar Bare Root 1 Cornus sencea Red -twig dogwood Bare Root J Gaultberia sballon Salal Bare Root Lonicera involucrata Black twinberry Bare Root J1144.0012 — South 3515, Street 26 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 J Pob,stichum rnunitwn Western swordfern Bare Root Rosa nutkana Nootka rose Bare Root Rebus spectabilis Salmonberry Bare Root Salix scolleriana Scouler's willow Bare Root Sambucus racemosa Red elderberry Bare Root 1. Native plant species may be substituted or added with Biologist ipprovni. 2. Quantities estimated. Final quantities subject to as -built site ncquircments. Table 8. Buffer Seed Mix. Species Name Common Name Percentage (by volume) A mstis exarata Spike bent ass 10 10 Descham sia cesPdosa Tufted hair ass Descham sia danthonioides Annual hair ass 10 Descham sia elon ata Slender hairgrass 10 Elymus laucus Blue wildrye 25 Hordenx brachyantherum Meadow barley 25 Lu inus pofjphyllus Streamside lupine 10 7.7.3 Quality Control for Planting Plan All plant material shall be inspected by a qualified Wetland Scientist upon delivery. Plant material not conforming to the specifications above will be rejected and replaced by the planting contractor. Rejected plant materials shall be immediately removed from the site. Under no circumstances shall container stock be handled by their trunks, stems, or tops. The landscape contractor shall provide the responsible Wetland Scientist with documentation of plant material that includes the supplying nursery contact information, plant species, plant quantities, and plant sizes. 1 7.7.4 Product Handling, Delivery, and Storage All seed and fertilizer should be delivered in original, unopened, and undamaged containers showing weight, analysis, and name of manufacturer. This material should be stored in a manner to prevent wetting and deterioration. All precautions customary in good trade practice shall be taken in preparing plants for moving. Workmanship that fails to meet industry standards will be rejected. Plants will be packed, transported, and handled with care to ensure protection against injury and from drying out. If plants cannot be planted immediately upon delivery they should be protected with soil, wet peat moss, or in a manner acceptable to the Wetland Scientist. Plants, fertilizer, and mulch not installed immediately upon delivery shall be secured on the site to prevent theft or tampering. No plant shall Jbe bound with rope or wire in a manner that could damage or break the branches. Plants transported on open vehicles should be secured with a protective covering to prevent windburn. j 7.7.5 Preparation and Installation of Plant Materials } The planting contractor shall verify the location of all elements of the enhancement plan with the Wetland Scientist prior to installation. The responsible Wetland Scientist reserves the right to adjust j the locations of landscape elements during the installation period as appropriate to the enhancement actions outlined above. If obstructions are encountered that are not shown on the drawings, planting 1144.0012 — South 35111 Street 27 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 �1 operations will cease until alternate plant locations have been selected by and/or approved by the 1 Wetland Scientist. Circular plant pits with vertical sides will be excavated for all container stock. The pits should be at - least 12 inches in diameter, and the depth of the pit should accommodate the entire root system. The bottom of each pit will be scarified to a depth of four (4) inches. Broken roots should be pruned with a sharp instrument and rootballs should be thoroughly soaked prior to installation. Set plant material upright in the planting pit to proper grade and alignment. Water plants thoroughly midway through backfilling and add Agroform tablets. Water plants again upon completion of backfilling. No filling should occur around trunks or stems. Do not use frozen or muddy mixtures for backfilling. Form a ring of soil around the edge of each planting pit to retain water, and install a four (4)- to six (6)-inch layer of mulch around the base of each container plant. 7.7.6 Temporary Irrigation Specifications While the native species selected for enhancement are hardy and typically thrive in northwest conditions, and the approved enhancement actions are planned in areas with sufficient hydroperiods for the species selected, some individual plants might perish due to dry conditions. Therefore, temporary irrigation or regular watering will be provided as necessary for the duration of the first two (2) growing seasons while the native plantings become established. 7.7.7 Invasive Plant Control and Removal Invasive species to be removed include Himalayan blackberry and all other listed noxious weeds. To 1 ensure these species do not expand following the enhancement actions, non-native invasive species 1 within the buffer enhancement areas will be pretreated with a root -killing herbicide approved for use in aquatic sites (i.e. Rodeo) approximately 2 weeks prior to being cleared and grubbed from the entire ` buffer area. The pre-treatment with herbicide should occur prior to all planned enhancement actions, and spot treatment of surviving non-native invasive vegetation should be performed again each fall prior to senescence for a minimum of 5 years. 7.8 Maintenance and Monitoring Plan 1 The Applicant is committed to compliance with the restoration and enhancement plan and overall } success of the project. As such, the Applicant will continue to maintain the buffer enhancement area, keeping the site free from of non-native invasive vegetation, trash, and yard waste. JThe buffer restoration and enhancement actions will require continued monitoring and maintenance to ensure the enhancement actions are successful. Therefore, the enhancement site will be monitored i for a period of 5 years with formal inspections by a qualified Wetland Scientist. Monitoring events Jwill be scheduled at the time of construction, 30 days after planting, and late in the first through final year's growing seasons in Years 1, 2, 3, and 5. Monitoring will consist of plant counts and percent cover measurements at permanent monitoring stations, walk-through surveys to identif , invasive species presence and dead or dying enhancement plantings, photographs taken at fixed locations, wildlife observations, and general qualitative habitat and buffer function observations. _i 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 28 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 J To determine percent cover, observed vegetation will be identified and recorded by species and an estimate of areal cover of dominant species within each sampling plot. Circular sample plots, approximately 30 feet in diameter (706 square feet), are centered at each monitoring station. The sample plots encompass the specified wetland areas and terminate at the observed wetland boundary. Trees and shrubs within each 30-foot diameter monitoring plot are then recorded to species and areal cover. Herbaceous vegetation is sampled from a 10-foot diameter (78.5 square feet) within each monitoring plot, established at the same location as the center of each tree and shrub sample plot. Herbaceous vegetation within each monitoring plot is then recorded to species and includes an estimate of percent areal cover. A list of observed tree, shrub, and herbaceous species including percent areal cover of each species and wetland status is included within the monitoring report. Routine maintenance is necessary to ensure the integrity and success of the enhancement actions. Long-term management actions include continuous invasive plant removal, removal of potential garbage, and ensuring survival of native plant species. 7.9 Reporting Following each monitoring event, a brief monitoring report detailing the current ecological status of the stream and wetland buffers, measurement of performance standards, and management recommendations will be prepared and submitted to the City of Federal Way within 90 days of each monitoring event to ensure full compliance with the enhancement plan, performance standards, and regulatory conditions of approval. This monitoring report may be consolidated with the stream and wetland buffer monitoring report detailed in Chapter 7 of this document. 7.10 Contingency Plans If monitoring results indicate that performance standards are not being met or if unauthorized alterations or degradations are evident due to anthropologic disturbance, it may be necessary to implement all or part of the contingency plan. Careful attention to maintenance is essential in ensuring that problems do not arise. Should any portion of the site fail to meet the success criteria, a contingency plan will be developed and implemented with regulatory approval. Such plans are adaptive and should be prepared on a case -by -case basis to reflect the failed enhancement characteristics. Contingency plans can include additional plant installation, erosion control, and plant i substitutions including type, size, and location. Contingency/maintenance activities may include, but are not limited to: 1. Replacing plants lost to vandalism, drought, or disease, as necessary; 2. Replacing any plant species with a 20 percent or greater mortality rate after 2 growing seasons with the same species or native species of similar form and function; J3. Irrigating the enhancement areas only as necessary during dry weather if plants appear to be too dry, with a minimal quantity of water; 4. Reseeding/replanting and/or repair of enhancement areas as necessary if erosions, sedimentation or unauthorized clearing occurs; 5. Spot treat non-native invasive plant species; 6. Removing all trash or undesirable debris from the wetland and buffer areas as necessary: 7. Removing additional shrub species to ensure better light penetration to herbaceous groundcover. 1144.0012 — South 35111 Street 29 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 .J Chapter 8. Closure The findings and conclusions documented in this report have been prepared for specific application to this project. They have been developed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area. Our work was also performed in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in our proposal. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report I are professional opinions based on an interpretation of information currently available to us and are made within the operation scope, budget, and schedule of this project. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due to such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this project may need to be revised wholly or in part. All wetland and stream boundaries identified by SVC are based on conditions present at the time of the site inspection and considered preliminary until the flagged wetland boundaries are validated by the jurisdictional agencies. Validation of the wetland and stream boundaries by the regulating agency provides a certification, usually written, that the wetland and stream boundaries verified are the boundaries that will be regulated by the agencies until a specific date or until the regulations are modified. Only the regulating agencies can provide this certification. As wetlands and streams are dynamic communities affected by both natural and human activities, changes in aquatic boundaries may be expected; therefore, delineations cannot remain valid for an indefinite period of time. Local agencies typically recognize the validity of wetland and stream delineations for a period of five years after completion of a wetland assessment report. Development activities on a site five years after the completion of this wetland assessment report may require revision of the wetland or stream delineations. In addition, changes in government codes, regulations, or laws may occur. Due of such changes, our observations and conclusions applicable to this site may need to be revised wholly or in part. I wi w 1144.0012 — South 351�� Street 31 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 Chapter 9. References Anderson, P.S., S. Meyer, P. Olson, and E. Stockdale. 2016. Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State. Publication No. 16-06-029. Final Review Draft. Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program, Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, Washington. Brinson, M. M., 1993. A {ydrogeomoob * classification for wetlands, Technical Report WRP-DE-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Cooke, S.S. 1997. Wetland Plants of Western Washington. Seattle Audubon Society. Seattle, Washington. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Washington D.C. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation .Allanual. Technical Report Y-87- 1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FGDC-STD-004-2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC). 2017. Chapter 19.145 — Environmentally Critical Areas. Passed September 5, 2017. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wletland Rating System for Wlesteni Wlashington — Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 14-06-29. Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wletland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X Munsell® Color. 2000. Munse110 Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, New York. Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 2001. Hydric Soils List in King County Area, Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington D.C. _ Null, William, G. Skinner, and W. Leonard. 2000. Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects. Washington State Department of Transportation Environmental Affairs Office Wetland Strategic Plan Implementation Project J Snyder, Dale E., Philip S. Gale, Russell F. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey of King Count Area, Washington. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.• Western Mountains, Vallgis, and Coast Region (fler2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. 1 1144.0012 — South 3511, Street 32 Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 J J J J Appendix A Methods and Tools Table A-1. Methods and Tools Used to Prepare the Report. Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference Stream Classification Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Forest Practices Water TvninF: ivm:11� www,stagcc.d�glv I forest Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 222-16-030. DNR Water typing system. practices/watertt•ning/ WAC 222-16-030: Water Typing System Wetland Delineation USACE 1987 Weiland Delineation Manual Imp-11c! er<ir usacc Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, /ndf/wlman87.odf Vicksburg, Mississippi. Regional Supplement to the Core of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version /Documents/cecwo/reg/west mt f U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplemcm to the Corps of Engineers 1t,'etlatui Delincation Manual: Western Mountains, Valley's, 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 inalsu_ n.ndf 2.0) Center. Wetland Classification Cowardin Classification System 1979 and 2013 Re n s ss ss Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. "II i t ll' S S oiecrs/wetlands/nvcs-2013 Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2013. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FGDC-STD-004-2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Comm ttee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. Hydrogeomorphic Classification (HGM) System hrm:I/eI cnlc.ussce.armc.milAvetlan Brinson, M. M. (1993). "A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands," Technical Report WRP-DE-4, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. ds/ndfs/wmde4.ndf Wetland Rating Washington State Wetland Rating System 1,,;-trnc:I forreess.ya,l>uv/_ uhlicat Hruby, T. (2014). lVlasbington Slate Velland Rating Sjwem jor- 117eslem il'/arbinglou:2014 Update. (Publication 414-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology. ions/documents/1 Federal Way Revised Code Most current western Washington wetland rating system adopted per FWRC 19.145.420. A/FederaIVG'av/ Wedand Indicator Status 2016 National Wetland Plant List omrnts/Na Tonal_Wetland-Plant- [l 6 — Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National IYedand Plant List. 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X Plants USDA Plant Database h4-//plants.usda.gov/ Website Flora of the Pacific Northwest s/search/hooks/HITFLC.html Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Soils Data NRCS Soil Survey biro IIuehulilsnn•c..nres.usdn.gpx/ Website Soil Color Charts Munsell® Color. 2000. Munsell® Soil Color Charts. New Windsor, New York. Threatened and Endangered Species Washington Natural Heritage Program htm://data- Washington Natural Heritage Program (Data published 07/19/17). Endangered, threatened, and sensitive plants of Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Washington Natural /u_nhF-etLrrenr.clement-ttecprrenres Heritage Program, Olympia, NXrA Species of Local Importance Washington Priority Habitats and Species w s PHS Program (Data requested 9/13/17). Map of priority habitats and species in project vicinity. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1144.0012 — South 35151 Street Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan Soundview Consultants LLC February 12, 2019 J Parameter Method or Tool Website Reference Washington hIFP;//aLIj2q SalmonScape (Data requested on 9/13/17). Washington SalmonScape V&LMaR tml State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Report Federal Way Revised h u 0 7/Av,,,,Nv.codg au bi i sh i 0 Us OmfW FWRC Chapter 19.145 — Environmentally Critical Areas Preparation Code AI era Naa 1144.0012 — South 351�� Street Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 Appendix B Background Information This appendix includes a King County topographic map (BI), NRCS Soil Survey Map (K), King Count), Sensitive Areas Map (B3), Federal Way Wetlands Map (134), USFWS NWI Map (135), WDFW PHS Map (BG), WDFW SalmonScape map (B7), DNRStrearn Typing Map (138), and DNRWetlands of High Conservation Value Map (B9). 1-1 I I j j j jSoundview Consultants LLC 1144.0012—South 35111 Street February 12, 2019 Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan j 4 Qo O N (� 6 Q M V K G Z.-. a�7 z E Y W _ Q 7 2' o p u'1 P V � Ww o ail F 2 � o CD Q �I o N O W � O [V V C p U � N O x � C f+ Q o c 8 E o Ia 2 M N th E aD a 1 J c _a Ld rl M M tl 6aiupRaU3 5 ., h�l i�l O .O Imo"4 (� �+ U ` a SIdgM H P��S � Ili�Od 71tr � n ra S OAy 4f4 #3 M 06 S I I I W Appendix C Site Plan 1144.0012 — South 35111 Street Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY — EXISTING CONDITIONS I PROPOSED STREAM BUFFER INTRUSION (ORANGE DASHED LINE) -406 SF THIS SIDE OF STREAM MAPPED BUT NOT DELINEATED (DASHED LINE) EXISTING CONC. PAD TO BE REMOVED AND RE -PLANTED 3 r W • W w W w W + 1 .y w W • +F i ' 1F' 4 w w +. w • W ,��lZ. 'Fi W W r Wow w WETLAND MAPPED • r BUT NOT DELINEATED w W w (DASHED LINE) W �✓ - 37 ;28- +" wW"W 142.5'WETLAND ry'y"4/ 'BUFFER REDUCTION w W• W + i W W W V i i W Y i W i (NOT A - y W i W W r r +" i i w W�W w .. PART) y w *STREAM Z"" W i i•+ , wy y-(TYPEF) w OHI1S � w W •F W W W W �/ V P SH wW yw WETLANDA W +ter CATEGORY I y w �� " ` + " q," W W iY �✓ r r W W W + ♦ W W �► �F � /� C'-2A DP-4 i ' w ``-1A D u�} z Z-21 W W W W +' • •" W" W -6W r W • i W w W� r + r + + w �F • • w " + i" i W O y y + W W I - P W �✓ w i V _ Y W Y �✓ i 4 d• w " .y` I,.f i i w.� `3'W W W`=I Y -y +T `=Ii 0 W ` Wvw �YW "•WTF F � ► w wwW i 12 �Y W i " •i W �C _ w PROPERTY BOUNDARY B-14 �8-15 THIS SECTION 1 MAPPED BUT NOT DELINEATED (DASHED LINE) / to _TA' F,8_3 r i STANDARD 100' .. �� B84s 1� r STREAM BUFFER IJNE� 3' WIDE I / $ " ' CATEGORY 1 190' ' WETLAND BUFFER IK,41ID 011 I D 5 1 5' BUILDING �- SETBACK I GRAPHIC SCALE I'-100' PRELIMINARY INFORMATION O LY 15 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION— SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS, LLC. ASSUMES `NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, OR ESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET 11) Cl O z N 00 r" O P. P x z�� W /' P, W w � a W x DATE: 2/08/2019 JOB: 1144.0012 BY: DS SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC SHELT 1 OF 9 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY - PROPOSED PROJECT AND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN 11 I PROPOSED STREAM BUFFER INTRUSION �- f ' (ORANGE DASHED LINE) —406 SF LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT 10' SEWER ACCESS EASEMENT - B Z'M. R ADDITIONAL STREAM BUFFER ENHANCEMENT /-" A ?; 1 AREA 36,376 SF PROPOSED REINFORCED EARTH SLOPE TO BE PLANTED - - (SEE DETAILS AND CIVIL PLAN SET) - AREA OF CURRENT BUFFER INTRUSION TO BE IMPROVED 1,814 SF (914 SF OF IMPROVED ACCESS, 900 SF OF REINFORCED EARTHEN SLOPE ENHANCEMENT) --- I _ NW NE STORM DRAIN .w w AND SUMP PUMP n� w i A 4 �� w w + w + ♦ W . . W t w W ♦ +`J .. . W F 142.5' WETLAND W w W BUFFER REDUCTION W+ v ` + " STREAM Z w W w (TYPE F) ` ' OHW w w y \5 w ♦ ♦ w w ` I ' .1�y�Y, 1 .ff ITI" ` Iw, y r W .�!'+ W! w I w w W �� 8H ��J! w .A• � lr w w�W V ' WETLAND A + CATEGORY I wOP-4 DWI w + W �✓ •JW � + C-2A n " N� C-1A �. w�! �w w w w W Y i w`I'i W •F Z I \vIR/ � I i PA T) "" � EXISTING CONC. PAD TO BE REMOVED AND RE -PLANTED (225 SF) n.. •.. -_ It tit t ,c ..;'R MA� 11I 0 a. �y w • i F V� • W i �i^ ^� PROPERTY BOUNDARY B-14 REMOVE INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES AND DEBRIS 1 B-15 FROM BUFFER AREA AND REPLANT ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITH NATIVE TREES, SHRUBS AND GROUND COVER (SEE PLANT SCHEDULE) 168,029 SF x� 1 ' 5' BUILDING SETBACK CRITICAL AREA 1 SIGN (150MAX. SPACING) SPLIT RAIL FENCE BUILDING LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT ACCESS EASEMENT -A S BUILDING ' �— SETBACK / �1 GRAPHIC SCALE r PRELIMINARY / INFORMATION O LY NOT FOR CONSTRU ON SOUNDVIEWF CONSULTANTS, LLC. ASSUMES NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCnON, IMPROVEMENTS, OR ESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET 0 M O z N oo z Z .eq w u O�xz H Ln z W M L z w Q w w x DATE: 2/08/2019 JOB: 1144.0012 BY: DS SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC SIIEET 2 OF 9 PANATTONI FEDERAL QUAY - PROPOSED PRO I ECT AND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN - NORTH DETAIL PLAN LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT — 10' SEWER ACCESS EASEMENT - B ADDITIONAL CRITICAL AREA SIGN (FACING PARK AND RIDE) REMOVE INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES AND DEBRIS FROM BUFFER AREA AND REPLANT ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITH NATIVE TREES, SHRUBS AND GROUND COVER (SEE - PLANT SCHEDULE) PROPOSED REINFORCED EARTH SLOPE TO BE PLANTED - SEE DETAILS (ALSO SEE CIVIL PLAN SET) STORM DRAIN — AND SUMP PUMP BUILDING 5' BUILDING SETBACK SPLIT RAIL FENCE NOTE: INSTALL FENCE Z BEHIND BACK OF PAVEMENT THIS AREA CRITICAL AREA SIGN (150' MAX. SPACING) GRAPHIC SCALE 1'=60' PRELIMINARY INFORMATION ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SOUNDVIEW CONSULTANTS, LLC. ASSUMES NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, OR ESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET o O z N 00 G� z � cW �z Q H DATE: 2/08/201 9 JOB: 1144.0012 BY: DS SC ALE: SEE GRAPHIC SHEET 3 OF 9 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY - PROPOSED PROJECT AND BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLAN - SOUTH DETAIL PLAN =..t 0000 -2A C-1A "'" STANDARD 100' STREAM BUFFER _ 1 J In Z CATEGORY 1 190' — v WETLAND BUFFER ti �- CRITICAL AREA SIGN (150' MAX. SPACING) 41 y l 1 1 SPLIT RAIL FENCE "L V * 1 `P' `1' / I N 0- 5' BUILDING [+CTM A t�V B-15 1 STORM TANK 0 25 50 100 GRAPHIC SCALE 1,=5w PRELIMINARY INFORMATION ONLY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SOUNDVIE\Y' CONSULTANTS, LI-.C. ASSUMES NO LIABILITY OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS, OR ESTIMATES BASED ON THIS PLAN SET cM O O z N OO ON 2 `7L 7 0 l cn �¢ N W z Z loz rW1 .a w O < W � (� W DATE: 2/08/2019 JOB: 1144.0012 BY: DS SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC SHEET T OF 9 —J PAN ATTONT FEDERAL WAY - PLANT SCHEDULE I I NATIVE PLANT SCHEDULE 50% trees, 50% trees, 50% trees, 100% 1 1000 50% 50% 50% shrubs@ shrubs@ shrubs@ shrubs@ i shrubs@ 100% cov'g100% ' cov'g 50% cov'g 50% cov'g 50% cov'g Plant Name Planting Areas Rein - Buffer Buffer Buffer Rein -forced forced Scientific Common Plant Status Enhance't Area - Enhance't Area - Enhance't Area - Earth Slope Earth Total Spacing Size Condition Planting Area - North Slope - North East North West South South 168.029 3.86 1_ Feet: 37,533 1 36,376 93,220 450 450 Trees _ Acres: 0.86 0.84 2.14 0.01 0.01 Abies grandis Grand fir FACU 14 12 14 12 28 24 - - - - 54 10 -12 ft 50 10 -12 ft 3 - 4 ft Bare root Dry Bare root Dn - outer edges of buffer Acer macrophyllum Big leaf maple FACU 3 - 4 ft Betula papyrifera Paperbark birch FAC 8 8 20 - - 36 8 - 10 ft 3 - 4 ft Bare root l7rvlhioist -near stream and wetland y Picea sitchensis Sitka spruce FAC 8 8 20 - 36 12 -15 ft 3 - 4 ft Bare root Moist _near stream and wetland Primus emarginata Bitter cherry FACU 1 14 12 31 - - 57 10 -12 ft 3 - 4 ft Bare root Dry Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir FACU 12 12 27 - - 51 10 - 12 ft 3 - 4 ft Bare root Dry - outer edge of buffer Thuja plicata Western red cedar FAC 12 12 27 - - 51 10 - 12 ft 3 - 4 ft Bare root Dry/Moist Totals 1 82 I 76 I 177 0 _ 0 335 Cornus sericea Gaultheria shallon Lonicera involucrata Mahonia aquifolium Ribes sanguineum .Rosa gymnocarpa Rosa nittkana Rubus spectabilis Salix scolleriana racemosa arnos albus Red -twig dogwood Salal Black twinberry Tall Oregon grape Red -flowering currant Bald hip rose Nootka rose Salmonbeny Scouler's willow Red elderberry Snowberry FACW FACU FAC FACU FACU FACU FAC FAC FAC FACU FACU Totals l Herbaceous Polystichum munitum lWestern swordfern FACU Totals —111irr Seed Mix 301bs/acre 1igms,* exerata 5 ikc berltgrass FACW Descban sia cespitosa ITufted hair ass FACW Descban sia dantbonioides I Annual hair ass FACW Descban sia elan ata Slender hairgrass FAC E/ymus bucus Blue wildrye FACU Hordeum beach antberum Meadow barley FACW LuNnur bobbhvllus Streamside lupine FAC 1 - Scientific names ands ecies 2 - Over -sized or container plant 3 - All plans and schedules are 5 - Planting density and location 6 - All disturbed and bare soil areas identification taken from Flora s are suitable for replacement 22 21 46 - - 89 37 36 80 I 4 4 161 22 21 46 - - 89 37 36 91 I 4 4 172 48 45 128 4 4 229 48 45 109 4 4 210 37 36 94 4 I 4 175 37 36 80 - - 153 37 36 80 - - 153 37 36 105 - 4 - 178 37 36 88 - 165 399 384 947 24 20 1,774 37 36 1 92 - 4 169 37 36 92 0 4 169 % by wt. Totals Shrubs and Herbaceous 1,943 10 10 10 10 25 25 10 100 � the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock and Cronquist, 1973). c anc foal for re latory review and im ct anal sis. Final lens ma be needed for s may+ retire ad'ustment in the field, as directed by. project binlagist. I . ineludina reinforced earth slope areas, to be seeded with buffer seed mix. 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Bare root Moist/Wet - near stream and wetland 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Bare root Dry 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Bare root Moist/Wet - near stream and wetland 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Bare root Dry 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Bare root Dry/Moist 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Bare root Dry/Moist 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Bare root Dry 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Bare root Moist 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Stakes Dry 4 - 5ft 2 - 4 ft Bare root Dry 4 - 5ft 1 2 - 4 ft Bare root Dry 4- 5ft 1 2- 4 ft I Bare root and may be subiect to o G z N 0 z n z =� ]_I a F P.W�� a C] u. H DATE: 2/08/2019 JOB: 1144.0012 BY: DS SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC Fs,_,EL, 5 OF 9 hANATTONT FF.DF,RAL WAY -PROPOSED BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTING PLAN -NORTH AREA NATIVE PLANT SYMBOL LEGEND TREES ABIES GRANDIS GRAND FIR ILLY ACER MACROPHPYLLUM *0 BIG LEAF MAPLE BETULA PAPYRIFERA / PAPERBARK BIRCH PICEA SITCHENSIS l SITKA SPRUCE ✓� PRUNUS EMARGINATA BITTER CHERRY PSEUDOTUGA MENZIESII / DOUGLAS FIR THUJA PLICATA l WESTERN RED CEDAR SHRUBS CORNUS SERICEA l ® RED -OSIER DOGWOOD • GAULTHERIA SHALLON SALAL LONICERA INVOLUCRATA l O BLACK TWINBERRY MAHONIAAQUIFOLIUM/ O TALL OREGON GRAPE RIBES SANGUINEUM l 0 RED FLOWERING CURRANT ROSA GYMNOCARPA/ ® BALDHIP ROSE ROSA NUTKANA l ® NOOTKA ROSE SPECTABILIS ORUBUS + SALMONBERRY SALIX SCOULERIANA SCOULER'S WILLOW SAMBUCUS RACEMOSA E RED ELDERBERRY SYMPHORICARPOSALBUS ® SNOWBERRY HERBACEOUS POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM / WESTERN SWORD FERN f f' SEED MIXES J Ji BUFFER SEED MIX li THROUGHOUT BUFFER AT ALL DISTURBED AREAS CRITICAL AREA SIGN — (FACING PARK AND RIDE) PRELIMINA INFORMATION NOT FOR CONS T UCT ONE SOUNDVIEW CONSULT TS, L SSLsNI" NO LIABILITY OR DNS IL-r ll� CONSTRUCTION, RO 1EN At . + ESTIMATES BAr 'c ❑ 1-I15 p NOTES: +� PLANTING DENSITIES, QUANTITIES / •; - 14.1 AND LOCATIONS MAY BE SUBJECT 'r TO CHANGE BASED ON CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS. EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION TO REMAIN. ALL DISTURBED AND S, BARE SOIL AREAS TO BE SEEDED WITH BUFFER 'SEED MIX/ ,l\ V / `,� _� I L ./ BOFFER "'•'•� • � ENHANCEMENT r- AREA - I/INOR TH WE5 T r r MFA, Or ir 2 w z U zw aN a QO N N Z 95 zmZ3,66 wW N N J n � ab8 C : ccrsyy N r o !V Chi N N J` r L O m U = a a N M z �Evz vi E � ^ O � � N T .r r z O cc N P-4. z O �- Z�z V PL w w < w NZ Q L'a DATE: 2/08/2019 JOB: 1144.0012 BY: DS SCALli: SEE GRAPHIC sHEI r 6 OF 9 ..-... �� 1 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY - PROPOSED BUFFER ENHANCEMENT PLANTING PLAN - SOUTH AREA NATIVE PLANT SYMBOL LEGEND TREES ABIES GRANDIS GRAND FIR ACER MACROPHPYLLUM } BIG LEAF MAPLE BETULA PA / PAPERBARKRK BIR BIRCHH PICEA SITCHENSIS l ' SITKA SPRUCE PRUNUS EMARGINATA BITTER CHERRY PSEUDOTUGA MENZIESII / DOUGLAS FIR THUJAUJA PLICATA l WESTERN RED CEDAR SHRUBS CORNUS SERICEA / ® RED -OSIER DOGWOOD .+` GAULTHERIA SHALLON SALAL LONICERAINVOLUCRATAI O BLACK TW INBERRY MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM / TALL OREGON GRAPE SANGUINEUM l ®RIBES 0 RED FLOWERING CURRANT ROSA GYMNOCARPA/ ® BALDHIP ROSE ROSA NUTKANAI ® NOOTKA ROSE RUBUS SPECTABILIS SALMONBERRY SALIX SCOULERIANA SCOULER'S WILLOW RACEMOSA ®SAMBUCUS E RED ELDERBERRY SYMPHORICARPOSALBUS ® SNOWBERRY HERBACEOUS POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM / WESTERN SWORD FERN SEED MIXES BUFFER SEED MIX li THROUGHOUT BUFFER AT ALL DISTURBED AREAS W W 0 W,Afflffm ELi� AI Q�RLTTO ONLY ' NST ION 1 ] A -ANTS, LLC. ASSL'. ]R RESPONSIBILITY ON, IMPRt MEN TO BASED ON 41S Pl., �i. S S S � • + + i N PLANTING DENSITIES, QUANTITIES AND LOCATIONS MAY BE SUBJECT - - ):1, TO CHANGE BASED ON CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS. 22 ' EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION TO REMAIN. ALL DISTURBED AND BARE SOIL AREAS TO BE SEEDED f WITH BUFFER SEED MIX. �r ONE . im + BUFFI ENHANCE • AREA -S • C / f r SPLIT RAIL FENCE CRITICAL AREA SIGN w C =5 z� O 5W" a� aONco �K �> ep N r Zrn(Dao ww a I I z c> n L> w Yvv UN � - w I Q In M 0 W z N z c N w �I � � z C 1••'N••1 z w�� a w Q w W x DATE: 2/08/2019 JOB: 1144.0012 BY: DS SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC SHEET 8 OF 9 PANATTONI FEDERAL WAY - SITE DETAILS TREE AND SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL (TYPICAL) NOT TO SCALE LOCATOR LATH (IF SPECIFIED) SET TOP OF ROOT MASS / ROOT BALL FLUSH WITH FINISH GRADE OR SLIGHTLY ABOVE 3 to 4 INCH LAYER OF MULCH - KEEP MULCH MIN. 3" AWAY FROM TRUNK OF SHRUB NOTES: 1. PLANT SHRUBS OF THE SAME SPECIES IN GROUPS OF 3 to 9 AS APPROPRIATE, OR AS SHOWN ON PLAN. AVOID INSTALLING PLANTS IN STRAIGHT LINES TO ACHIEVE A NATURAL -LOOKING LAYOUT. 2. EXCAVATE PIT TO FULL DEPTH OF ROOT MASS - s! AND 2 X ROOT MASS DIAMETER. SPREAD ROOTS ' TO FULL WIDTH OF CANOPY. SCARIFY SIDES OF PIT. 3. MIDWAY THROUGH PLANTING ADD AGROFORM TABLET AND WATER THOROUGHLY. 4. BACKFILL TO BE COMPACTED USING WATER ONLY. 5. WATER IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION. UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBGRADE REINFORCED EARTH SLOPE FACING DETAIL (PLANTABLE FACE FILL - SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS) NOT TO SCALE , INSTALL PLANTS IN FACE OF REINFORCED EARTH SLOPE C350 TURF REINFORCEMENT MAT (TRM) INSTALL PLANTS IN FACE OF REINFORCED EARTH SLOPE OFFSET VARIES (6" MIN.) REINFORCED EARTH SLOPE FACING UNIT (SEE NOTES 1 AND 2) 6" (MIN.) BOTTOM WRAP OF C350 TRM INSTALL PLANTS IN FACE OF REINFORCED EARTH SLOPE NOTES: LOCKING TAIL STRUCT TENSAR BX1120 GEOGRID // 16" REINFORCED FILL 3" (MIN.) TOP WRAP OF C550 TAM EXTENDING BENEATH THE UNIT ABOVE MAXIMUM LIMIT OF TOPSOIL (SEE NOTE 3) SHALL NOT EXTEND MORE THAN 3" UNDER SUCCESSIVE FACING UNIT TENSAR UNIAXIAL GEOGRID IN ACCORDANCE WITH ELEVATION VIEW REINFORCED EARTH SLOPE CONNECTION (PULL SLACK OUT OF CONNECTION) 1. SEE REINFORCED EARTH SLOPE FACING UNIT DETAIL FOR FACING MATERIAL AND DIMENSIONS. 2. FACING UNITS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FROM BLACK STEEL. 3. TOPSOIL SHALL BE LOAMY SAND OR FINER GRADATION WITH 10% -15% ORGANIC CONTENT OR MATERIAL APPROVED BY A QUALIFIED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 4. VEGETATION TYPE SHALL BE SPECIFIED BY A QUALIFIED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. SPLIT RAIL FENCE DETAIL NOT TO SCALE CEDAR TYPE 1 RDu�� 1 � �Ij II 11 III To 16' 4' I 4'X4' ROUGH CEDAR POST (TRIANGULAR) I`I 2' MIN. I CRUSHED SURFACING }ILA TOP COURSE (CSTC) + lI' NOTES: DIAMETER 1. POSTS AND RAILINGS ARE PRECUT FOR ASSEMBLY. POSTS ARE PRE -DRILLED FOR FENCE RAIL INSERTS '4' TO 6" ROUGH CEDAR RAIL 2. 3 RAILS ARE PERMITTED 3, FENCES SHALL BE PLACED AT THE APPROVED BUFFER EDGE, LIVE STAKE PLANTING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 1. LIVE STAKES TO BE 1 TO 2 INCH DIAMETER 24 TO 32 INCHES LENGTH. 2. USE 1/2 INCH DIAMETER REBAR OR ROCK BAR TO MAKE PILOT HOLE. 3. INSTALL LIVE STAKES TAPER END DOWN WITH BUDS POINTED UP. 4. MINUMUM TWO BUDS ABOVE GRADE. 5. SET LIVE STAKES WITH DEAD -BLOW HAMMER. 6. WATER IMMEDIATELY AFTER INSTALLATION. STORAGE OF LIVE STAKES - ALL WOODY PLANT CUTTINGS COLLECTED MORE THAN 12 HR PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, MUST BE CAREFULLY BOUND, SECURED, AND STORED OUT OF DIRECT SUNLIGHT AND SUBMERGED IN CLEAN FRESH WATER FOR A PERIOD OF ww UP TO TWO WEEKS. Q OUTDOOR TEMPERATURES MUST BE LESS C9 O THAN 50 DEGREES F AND TEMPERATURE Y INDOORS AND IN STORAGE CONTAINERS IQ- w MUST BE BETWEEN 34 AND 50 DEGREES F. U) DO O w IF THE LIVE STAKES CANNOT BE a INSTALLED DURING THE DORMANT 00 SEASON, CUT DURING THE DORMANT o Z SEASON AND HOLD IN COLD STORAGE AT TEMPERATURES BETWEEN 33 AND 39 DEGREES F FOR UP TO 2 MONTHS. 3' NGPA SIGN DETAIL (CRITICAL AREA SIGN) NOT TO SCALE PLASTIC SIGN WITH WHITE VE BACKGROUND AIL, BELOW TREATED WOOD POST WITH AT TOP CRETE TO DRAIN POST ETE COLLAR )EPTH CRUSHED ROCK SIGN POST DETAIL NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION AREA THIS WETLAND AND UPLAND BUFFER ARE PROTECTED TO PROVIDE WILDLIFE HABITAT AND MAINTAIN WATER QUALITY. PLEASE DO NOT DISTURB THIS VALUABLE RESOURCE. SIGN DETAIL o O z cal 00 c, z 0 zx a� �� zo z P. W a W � Q W w x F DATE: 2/08/2019 JOB: 1144.0012 BY: DS SCALE: SEE GRAPHIC SHEET 9(F9 Appendix D Data Forms 1144.0012 — South 35151 Street Soundview Lonsultants L.(- Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1144.0012 - FedWay City/County: Federai Way / King Sampling Date: 01!03r2018 Applicant/owner: Panattoni State: Sampling Point: DP-1 Investigator(s): Emily Swaim. Richard Peel Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): 20 Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: 47.288001722 Long:-122.319776513333 Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification - Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ❑x No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑ No 21 Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No 9 Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No ❑x within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No ❑x Remarks: Homeless encampments. Heavily polluted VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Straturn (Plot size: 30 ft) % Cover goecies? tatus Number of Dominant Species 1. Pseudotsuga menziesii 80 Yes FACU That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A) 2• Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 1 (B) 4. 80 Percent of Dominant Species = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 0 (A/B) Sat)linQlShMb Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1 No 2 Total % Cover f: _ Multiply oV: 3. OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 4 FACW species 0 x 2= 0 5 FAC species 0 x 3= 0 0 = Total Cover FACU species 80 x 4 = 320 He Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 1. No Column Totals: 80 (A) 320 (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 4 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 ❑ Dominance Test is >50% B ❑ Prevalence Index is <_3.0' 7 ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting 8 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 0 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1 No Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes ❑ No ❑x % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 LA!1A Sampling Point: DP-1 Profile Description. (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Mat6m finches] Color [moist) _ % Redoes Features Color (moist) % Type, Loc' Texture Remarks 0 - 14 10YR 3/2 100 SaLo Gravelly Sandy loam 12 - 14 10YR 4/4 100 SaLo Very gravelly Sandy loam 'T e: C=Concentration D=De letlon RM=Reduced Matrix. CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. kocation. PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ❑ Histosol (At) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (178) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No 0 Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators !minimum of one re uired: check all that aooly) n Indicators r more reguiredl ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 413) 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (B11) ❑ Drainage Patterns (610) ❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (62) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (63) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Iron Deposits (135) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (66) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (137) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No © Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No 0 Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No 0 includes capillary,fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/site: 1144.0012 - Fedway City/County: Federal Way / King Sampling Date: 01 /03/2018 Applicant/Owner: Panattoni State: Sampling Point: DP-2 Investigator(s): Emily Swaim,Richard Peel Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): 10 Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: 47.2867600556667 Long:-122.321847260167 Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ❑x No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil ✓ , or Hydrology ✓ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑ No x❑ Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes x❑ No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ within a Wetland? Yes ❑x No ❑ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ Remarks: Downslope from homeless camp and potential meth lab VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) ° Cover Soeciez? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Alnus rubra 70 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2. Tsuga heterophylla 20 Yes FACU Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. 90 Percent of Dominant Species = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75% (A/B) Saolin !Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1. Rubus Spectabilis 20 Yes FAC 2. Acer circinatum 30 Yes FAC T ° r f: Multiolv bv: 3. OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 4 FACW species 0 x 2= 0 5. FAC species 120 x 3 = 360 50 = Total Cover FACU species 20 x 4 = 80 Her Stratum (Plot size: —5ft) UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 1. No Column Totals: 140 (A) 440 (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.14 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 ❑x Dominance Test is >50% li. ❑ Prevalence Index is 53.0' 7. ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting ti data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11 Q 'Indicators of hydre soil and wetland hydrology must Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. W_qgdv Vine Sf m (Plot size: 30 ft) 1 No Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes x❑ No ❑ % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 100 Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 i I SOIL Sampling Point: DP-2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Malri x (inches) Color (moist) % Redox Features Color (moist) % Tvoe, Locz Texture Remarks 0 - 16 10YR 2/2 100 McLo 'Type-- C=Concentration D=De letion RM=Reduced Matrix. CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 21-ocation: PL-Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (Al 0) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes © No ❑ Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators )minimum of one required: check all that aanh,) Secondary Indlcators (2 or more r it ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (69) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 413) 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Water Marks (61) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (84) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Iron Deposits (135) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes © No ❑ includes ca ilia fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 11 44.001 2 - Fedway city/county: Federal Way / King Sampling Date: 01/03/2018 Applicant/Owner: Panattonl State: Sampling Point: DP-3 Investigator(s): Emily Swaim,Richard Peel Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): 0 Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: 47.2863353881667 Long:-122.321071949667 Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Z No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation ✓ , Soil ✓ , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑ No R1 Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 9 No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Z No ❑ Remarks: Disturbed from fill to the south VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. Alnus rubra 2.- 3.- 4. Sanlin Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 2, Rubus spectabilis 3. 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) 1. Rubus ursinus 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine ralurn (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 90 Remarks: Absolute Dominant Indicator Dom ina nce Test worksheet: ° Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 90 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 90 = Total Cover 65 Yes FAC 25 Yes FAC 90 = Total Cover 10 Yes FACU 10 = Total Cover No 0 = Total Cover Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75 (A/B) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 180 x 3 = 540 FACU species 10 x 4 = 40 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 Column Totals: 190 (A) 580 (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.05 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ❑x Dominance Test is >50% ❑ Prevalence Index is 53.0' ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No ❑ US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-3 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color (moist) _% Color moist % Tvpe_ Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 16 10YR 2/2 100 SaLo 6 - 16 2.5Y 3/1 100 SaLo Very Sandy loam 12 - 16 10YR 3/2 99 10 YR 3/6 1 CS m SaLo 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 21-ocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (Al 0) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Greyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Prima y Indicators fminimum of one r aired: r,,hQCk all that appJy1 Secondary In icatoM (2 or more_reauired) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (69) (except MLRA ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (69) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Water Marks (61) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (613) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (62) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (63) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (133) ❑ Iron Deposits (135) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes Z No ❑ Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes © No ❑ includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1144.0012 - Fedway city/County: Federal Way / Kina Sampling Date: 01/03/2018 Applicant/Owner: Partattoni State: Sampling Point: DP-4 Investigator(s): Emily Swalm,Richard Peel Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): 20 Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Let: 47.287039505 Long:-122.3224260825 Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ❑x No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes ❑ No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ within a Wetland? Yes ❑x No ❑ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x❑ No ❑ VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5aylinglShrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Alnus rubra 2. 3. 4. 5. Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) 1. Tolmiea menziesii 2_ Rubus ursinus 3. lycopus uniflorus 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1. 2. % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 55 Remarks: Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species No That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 0 Percent of Dominant Species = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67% (A/B) 30 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cov r f: Multigly by: OBL species 5 x 1 = 5 FACW species 0 x 2 = 0 FAC species 50 x 3 = i50 30 = Total Cover FACU species 20 x 4 = 80 UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 20 Yes FAC Column Totals: 75 (A) 235 (B) 20 Yes FACU 5 No OBL Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.13 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ❑x Dominance Test is >50% ❑ Prevalence Index is s3.0' ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 45 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. No Hydrophytic Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes X❑ No ❑ US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-4 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Feature (inches) Color o% Color (moist) % woe' Loc2 Texture Remarks 0 - 12 7.5YR 2.5/1 100 SaLo 6 - 12 2.5Y 2/1 100 LoSa Gravelly loamy sand. Course 'Type.- C=Concentration, D=De Iebon RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 'Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (Al 0) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑x Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (FS) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes © No ❑ Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one reauired: check all that anr)ly) 5goondarvJndiotgrs (2 or more Wguired) ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 41B) 4A, and 41B) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (62) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Iron Deposits (65) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/Site: 1144.0012 - Fedway City/county: Federal Way / Kinq Sampling Date: 01/03/2018 Applicant/owner: Panattonl State: Sampling Point: DP-5 Investigator(s): Emily Swaim,Richard Peel Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): 5 Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: 47.286920579 Long:-122.322417755333 Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes I] No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑ No [] Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No [] Is the Sampled Area H dric Soil Present? Yes El9No y within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ Remarks: Collected between stream Z and wetland A VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator DominanceTest worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) ° v r Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Acer macrophyllum 55 Yes FACU That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2• Total Number of Dominant 3• Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4. 55 Percent of Dominant Species = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) 5aolinglShrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ft) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1. Acer circinatum 40 Yes FAC 2. Alnus rubra 20 Yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by: 3 OBL species 0 x 1= 0 4 FACW species 0 x 2= 0 5 FAC species 60 x 3 = 180 60 = Total Cover FACU species 115 x 4 = 460 Herb Stra m (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species 0 x 5= 0 1. Rubus ursinus 60 Yes FACU Column Totals: 175 (A) 640 (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.66 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 5 ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ti ❑ Dominance Test is >50% ❑ Prevalence Index is _<3.0' 7. ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting 8 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 60 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1 No Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes ❑ No [] % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40 Remarks US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-5 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix (inches) Color [moist) _ % Redox Features Color (moist) % Type' Locz Texture Remarks 0 - 16 7.5Y 2.5/1 100 SaLo Gravelly Sandy loam with son' 14 - 16 5Y 4/1 100 SaLo Gravelly Sandy loam 'Type-- C=Concentration D=De pletion, RM= Red uced Matrix CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. kocation: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (173) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (177) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:, Depth (inches)' Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No ❑x Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: PrimaryIndicator.* minimum of one re guired:check all that applyl SgUondary I n 2 or m ore rea u it ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (69) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4113) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (613) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (64) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Iron Deposits (65) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (137) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 12 Saturation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 8 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No ❑ Includes ca illa fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region Project/site: 1144.0012 - Fedway city/County: Federal Way / King Sampling Date: 01 /03/2018 Applicant/Owner: Panattonl State: Sampling Point: DP-6 1 Investigator(s): Emily Swaim,Riehard Peel Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): 0 Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): Subregion (LRR): Lat: 47.2867875253333 Long:-122.322411244667 Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ❑x No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ❑ No 21 Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 9 No ❑ Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ within a Wetland? Yes ❑x No ❑ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) y r ec'es? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. Alnus rubra 75 Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2• Total Number of Dominant 3. Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4' 75 Percent of Dominant Species = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B) Sa lin /Shrub t tum (Plot size: 15 ft) 1. Rubus armeniacus 30 Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet: 2 Total % Cover of: MultiDly bv: 3. OBL species 0 x 1 = 0 4 FACW species 0 x 2= 0 5. FAC species 135 x 3 = 405 30 = Total Cover FACU species 0 x 4 = 0 Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ft) UPL species 0 x 5 = 0 1. Equisetum arvense 30 Yes FAC Column Totals: 135 (A) 405 (B) 2. Prevalence Index = B/A = 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5 ❑ Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 6 ❑x Dominance Test is >50% ❑x Prevalence Index is <_3.0' 7. ❑ Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting $ data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9. ❑ Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 30 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must Total Cover be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft) 1 No Hydrophytic 2. Vegetation 0 = Total Cover Present? Yes x❑ No ❑ % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 70 Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: DP-6 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix (inches) for moist % RWQtl Features Color ist) % Type' Loc2 mo Texture Remarks 0 -16 10YR 2/2 SaLo Sandy loam with some organi, T e: C=Concentration D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pare Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soil53: ❑ Histosol (Al) ❑ Sandy Redox (S5) ❑ 2 cm Muck (Al 0) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ElRedox Dark Surface (F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present, ❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer (if present): Type:_ Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No ❑ Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators Primary Indicators (minimum of one reakrired chock all that aDs71y] Indicatorsr m r i ❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (except MLRA ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (69) (MLRA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 413) 4A, and 4113) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Salt Crust (1311) ❑ Drainage Patterns (B10) ❑ Water Marks (61) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (613) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (62) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) ❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Iron Deposits (135) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) ❑ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 0 Saturation Present? Yes ® No ❑ Depth (inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0 Appendix E Wetland Rating Forms 1144.0012 — South 351' Street Assessment Report & Buffet Reduction & Enhancement Plan Soundvlew (:onsultants LL.I, February 12, 2019 ME Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex RATING SUMMARY — Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): Wetland A 1144.0012 Federal Way Rated by J. Downs, R. Peel, E. Swaim HGM Class used for rating Depressional & Flats Date of site visit: 1/3/2018 Trained by Ecology?El Yeses No Date of training 3/31/2016 Wetland has multiple HGM classes? o Yes ❑ No NOTE: Form is not complete with out the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map ESRI 2017 OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY I (based on functions El or special characteristics o ) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS X 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 List appropriate rating (H, M, L) Site Potential H Landscape Potential L Value H Total Score Based on 7 Ratings 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC Category Estuarine Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog Mature Forest Old Growth Forest Coastal Lagoon Interdunal 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 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 1 WSDOT Adapted Form -March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex Maps and Figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington IDepressionO Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes 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 another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 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) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) I D 3.3 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 another figure) 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 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 another figure) 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 Ecologywebsite) 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 another figure ) S 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (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 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 3 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecolcgy website] S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) I S 3.3 L:::::� Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 4 WSDOT Adapted Form -March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex HGM Classification of Wetland in Western Washington For questions 1 -7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If 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? ❑ NO - 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)? o NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) ❑ YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. 1 If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be 1 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. o NO - go to 3 ❑ YES - The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional 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 1 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). jo NO - go to 4 ❑ YES - The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) ,j 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? o The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), o 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. Jo The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. ❑ NO - go to 5 o 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? ID The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding J from that stream or river, o The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. ❑ NO - go to 6 o YES - The wetland class is Riverine --1 NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. u Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 5 WSDOT Adapted Form -March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex 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-goto7 o 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. o NO-goto8 ❑ 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 BACK 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. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM class to use in rating Slope + Riverine 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 if you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 6 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 j Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex 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 ❑ 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 laver 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 > 1/z of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants < 1/1of area points = 0 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal oonding or inundation: This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > 1/2 total area of wetland points = 4 Area seasonally ponded is > 1/4 total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < 1/4 total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 0 Rating of Site Potential If score is: ❑ 12 - 16 = H ❑ 6 - 11 = M ❑ 0 - 5 = L Record the rating on the first page Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: ❑ 3 or 4 = H ❑ 1 or 2 = M u 0 = L Kecora me raring on me nrsi [Jaye Rating of Value If score is: ❑ 2 - 4 = H ❑ 1 = M ❑ 0 = L Kecora the raring on me nrst page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update jRating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 8 WSDOT Adapted Form -March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex 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 outlet points = 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 paints = 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage durina 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 ❑ 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 inpoints = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storagein 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. o 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 2oints in the boxes above 0 Ratina of Site Potential If score is: ❑ 12 -16 = H ❑ 6 -11 = M ❑ 0 - 5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0 Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic function of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland unit 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=O 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=O Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above 0 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 hi hest 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 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 10 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex ❑ 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 = 0 Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above 0 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 11 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex I 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 ac. Add the number of structures checked. ❑ Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 2 ❑ Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 o Scrub -shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points - 1 ID Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: o 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 ). o Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 o Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 3 ❑ Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 o Saturated only 1 types present: points = 0 o Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland o 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 ft2. 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 2 If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 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. -) 0 a None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams r. r in this row are n _ _ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 12 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 IWetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex HIGH = 3 points Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 13 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex 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. o Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long) o Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland o 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) 5 e 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) o At least'/4 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 15 Rating of Site Potential If Score is: 0 15 - 18 = K ❑ 7 - 14 = m ❑ u - o = L r%ecvra uia iauny un u1c m01 Nays H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat function of the site? H 2.1 Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: 1.22 % undisturbed habitat + ( 3.12 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2) = 2.78% If total accessible habitat is: >'/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 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. Calculate: 17.1 % undisturbed habitat + ( 18.65 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2) = 26.4250I Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon Undisturbed habitat 10 - 50% and in 1-3 patches Undisturbed habitat 10 - 50% and > 3 patches Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon H 2.3 Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use < 50% of 1 km Poi on is high intensity Total for H 2 U points = 3 1 points = 2 points = 1 ❑oints = 0 points = (-2) aints = 0 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential It Score is: ❑ 4 - o = n u 'I - s = m LJ `- I _ 1. ncluru L11W 1QUIly ,,,— rays H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? 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 = o It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page) o 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 o It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources o It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a 2 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 14 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) with in 100m points = 1 Site does not meet anv of the criteria above points = 0 Rating of Value If Score is: 0 2 = 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 15 W SDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex 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. htt :fiwdfw.wa. ovl ublications/00165/wdfw00165. df or access the list from here: htta://wdfw.wa.govfconservation/phs/listl 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). o 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). 11 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 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. 158 — see web link above). o Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. 11 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. JNearshore: 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). n 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. 1 Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. o 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. 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 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 16 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex 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 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 17 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. List the category when the appropriate criteria are 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 o 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? ❑ Yes = Category 1 o 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 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. ❑ The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. ❑ Yes = Category I o No = Cateaory 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? o Yes - Go to SC2.2 ❑ No - Go to SC2.3 SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? o Yes = Category I ❑ No = Not WHCV Cat. I SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http:/Iwwwl.dnr.wa.gov/nho/refdesk/datasearch/wnhowetiands.pdf o Yes - Contact WNHPMDNR and to SC 2.4 o No = Not 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 = Cateaory 1 o No = Not 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 o No - Go to SC3.2 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 o 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 o 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. SC 3.4. Is an area with pests or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 18 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex 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? o Yes = Is a M No = Is not a Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 19 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 Wetland name or number West Hylebos Wetland Complex SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 continuous 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 o No = Not a forested wetland for this section 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) ❑ Yes - Go to SC 5.1 ID 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). ❑ 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'/10 ac (4350 ftZ) ❑ Yes = Category I n No = Cateqory 11 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 ❑ 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 for the three aspects of function)? ❑ Yes = Category I o 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 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 = Catenory III ❑ No = Cate-piory 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 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 20 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015 n f •i •1 •! �" 00 l� 1 C V N cq r r.. 4c a 4k t I ❑ c c n L }i C� O C +� v mi v ci u ai 00 -ell [T � N z O N H O � F-I w u i y �� V m •n ao M ��• , �' c t v G` R 7 w a ti ft V A c � P. ate+ N � v t V J W N .4 7 00 C) w O .N. 7 r4 � N r r �-^-• ? N Id C O N N N i Q - Appendix F Qualifications All field inspections, wetland determinations, OHW and habitat assessments, and supporting documentation, including this wetland. Stream, and Fish and ildEfe Ha ita t Assessment and Buffer Reduction and Ehhancme= Plan prepared for Panattani Devel= Compan7' were prepared by, or under the direction of Jon Pickett of SVC. In addition, site inspections were performed by wetland scientists Emily Swaim and Richard Peel, and report preparation was completed by Erin Harker and Emily Swaim. Jon Pickett Senior Environmental Planner Professional Experience: 9 years Jon Pickett is a Senior Scientist/Environmental Planner with diverse professional experience in habitat development as a Regional Biologist and Environmental Project Manager, with an emphasis in wetland restoration and enhancement. Jon has extensive experience successfully planning, developing, securing funding, managing and implementing numerous large-scale wetland habitat projects aimed at restoring the biological and physical functions of wetlands throughout California's Central Valley and Southern California. During this time he managed a 2,200 acre private wetland and upland habitat complex as a public trust resource for conservation and consumptive use. He worked to ensure projects were designed and implemented to achieve habitat restoration goals, including reclamation of wetland and floodplain habitats, reintroduction of aquatic complexity and habitat, and reestablishment of riparian corridor. JJon has worked with Federal and State agencies and private entities on land acquisitions for conservational habitat and public use, including prioritizing acquisitions relative to value and J opportunity and funding. In addition, Jon has experience in regulatory coordination to ensure projects operated in compliance with Federal, State and local environmental regulations, preparing permit documentation, coordinating with all pertinent agencies and stakeholders, and developing and maintaining appropriate permitting timelines to ensure timely approvals. He also oversaw earthwork construction components and revegetation efforts, as well as post -project monitoring, with an emphasis in native vegetation establishment and natural channel morphology. Jon earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Natural Resource Sciences from Washington State 1 University and Bachelor of Science Minor in Forestry from Washington State University. He has been formally trained in Advanced Wetland Delineation Methods Using the USACE Regional Supplements, the use of the Washington State Wetland Rating System, How to Determine the Ordinary High Water Mark, Using Field Indicators for Hydric Soils, and the Using the Credit -Debit f Method for Estimating Mitigation Needs. _ 1 Richard Peel Wetland Scientist — Professional Experience: 6 years Richard Peel is a Wetland Scientist with diverse professional experience in wetland ecology, monitoring, and delineation throughout Washington and Oregon. Richard is Washington State trained in conducting wetland delineations, assessing wetland systems, mitigation planning and design, implementation of monitoring programs, mitigation monitoring and reporting. He also has extensive 1144.0012 — South 351 11 Street Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan Pebruarl, 12, 2019 experience in an analytical laboratory using state-of-the-art equipment in bacteriological and chemical analysis of soil and water samples. Richard is a graduate of The Evergreen State College, with dual degrees in Ecology and Economics. I He has focused his academic career on ecology, disturbance ecology, chemistry, and the economic impacts of current environmental management. Richard has extensive training and field experience in wetland related disciplines, and has experience in wetland both east and west of The Cascades. He has 1 been trained by The Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) Wetland Ecology and Monitoring team in the use of the wetland delineation, mitigation, monitoring, and restoration techniques. In addition, he was directed by WSDOT's Wetland Protection and Preservation Policy to ensure wetlands are preserved and protected whenever possible. This direction ensures no net loss in the quantity or quality of wetlands in the future and minimization of impacts to wetlands in the present. Richard is a certified Professional Wetland Scientist (#2858). He has been formally trained in the use of the Washington State Wetland Rating System, Shoreline Stabilization, Eelgrass Delineation, and several other critical area assessment and restoration projects from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Washington State Department of Ecology. He is also a Pierce County Qualified Wetland Specialist, and he holds similar qualifications from other jurisdictions. Emily Swaim Wetland Scientist/Field Geologist Professional Experience: 4 years Emily Swaim is a Wetland Scientist and Field Geologist with a background in conducting Phase I, II and III Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs), underground natural gas pipeline and overhead electrical transmission line project assessment and environmental inspections, construction oversight, stormwater compliance inspections, soil sampling, delineating and assessing wetland and aquatic systems, and stormwater, floodplain, and wetland permitting. Ms. Swaim's expertise focuses on Iprojects involving sensitive wetland and stream habitats where extensive team coordination and various regulatory challenges must be carefully and intelligently managed from project inception to completion. Emily earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Geology from Illinois State University and Wetland Science and Management Professional Certification from the University of Washington, Seattle. She is also educated in Environmental Science from Iowa State University. Her education and experience has provided her with extensive knowledge on soils, wetland science, hydrogeology, sedimentology, environmental law, environmental geology, landscape ecology, and structural geology. Ms. Swaim has been formally trained in Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) and is Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) 30-hour Construction and 10-hour Construction certified. She is also a Pierce County Qualified Wetland Specialist and Wetland Professional In -Training (WPIT) through the Society of Wetland Scientists. ` 1144.0012 —South 3511, Street Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan Februan, 12, 2019 Erin Harker Staff Scientist Professional Experience: 3 years 1 Erin Harker is a Staff Scientist with diverse ecological experience in both field and laboratory settings in the Pacific Northwest. She has gained hands-on experience involving research on water quality, salmon runs, restoration project performance, and marine mammal hydro -acoustics. Erin is proficient in collecting and analyzing environmental data; riparian restoration and wetland mitigation monitoring principles and techniques; analyzing local, state, and federal environmental code and regulations; and technical writing. Erin has additional experience engaging students in a suite of environmental curriculums. She currently assists clients through the various stages of land use planning by conducting environmental code analysis; preparing environmental assessments, mitigation reports, and biological evaluations; and completing permit applications. Erin graduated from Western Washington University with a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Science with a Marine Ecology focus. She has received formal training through the WSDOE and Coastal Training Program in conducting forage fish surveys; amphibian identification I and survey guidance; using the credit -debit system for estimating wetland mitigation needs, determining the ordinary high water mark; Puget Sound coastal processes; conducting eelgrass ldelineations; using the 2014 wetland rating system; and using field indicators for hydric soils. 1144.0012 — South 35PI Street Soundview Consultants LLC Assessment Report & Buffer Reduction & Enhancement Plan February 12, 2019 J