19-102748-PCCITY OF
Aftk�, Federal Way
Tuly 22, 2019
Yuriy & I,yubov Melnichuk
32830 20tn Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
iY214 rl rJy11 t2".Co i
Re: File #19-102748-00-PC, PREAPPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
Melnichuk Duplex and Wetland Buffer Intrusion, 32830 20th Avenue South
Dear ib1r. & Ms. Melnichuk:
CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
(253) 835-7000
www. cityoffederalway. con)
Jim Ferrell, Mayor
Thank you for participating in the preapplication conference with the City of Federal Way's Development
Review Committee (DRC) held on J my 11, 2019. We hope that the information discussed at that meeting was
helpful in understanding the general requirements for your project as submitted.
This letter summarizes comments given to you at the meeting by the members of the DRC. The members
who reviewed your project and provided comments include staff from the city's Planning and Building
Divisions, Public Works Department, and representatives from Lakehaven Water and Sewer District and
South King lire and Rescue. Sorne sections of the Federal lFay Revised Come (FWRC) and relevant information
handouts are enclosed with this letter. Please be advised, this letter does not represent all applicable codes. In
preparing your formal application, please refer to the complete FWRC and other relevant codes for all
additional requirements that may apply to your project.
The key contact for your project is Associate Planner Leila Willoughby -Oakes at 253-835-2644, or.
It il:�.u+illr�u 7lsla.--nal; x(cc'st x ffLtiCr:tluSlV.Cr.�tli. For specific technical questions about your project, please
contact the appropriate DRC representative as listed below. Otherwise, any general questions about the
preapplication and permitting process can be referred to your key contact.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is a proposed duplex development on a 0.53 acre parcel, zoned FUM-3600, and with a stream,
wetland, and their buffer areas..] t .is undetermined if work will occur within the wetland buffer. Prior
development on the septic system, as well as unauthorized work in critical areas, occurred during a mobile
home demolition in 2018. The site requires rehabilitation of the stream and wetland buffer areas impacted by
heavy machinery used during the dernolition.
MAJOR ISSUES
Outlined below is a summary of the major issues of your project, based on the plans and information submitted
for the preapplication meeting. Issues can change due to plan modifications and revisions when the formal
application is submitted. The Major Issues section .is only provided as a means to highlight critical requirements
or issues. Please be sure to read the comments made by all department staff.
a
M
Yuri; & Lrubov Melnichulc
'age 2) of 1<t
] illy 22, 21119
O Planning Division
1. The proposed site contains critical are:,ts: v7t larid, wetland buffer, si:re:am, and stream l:>uf:iet:. r1
Critical Areas Report acceptable to the city and a. initigation plan is required.
2. Any proposed overland buffer intrtrsicn -averaging shall reclui.rc: £t I?rotes III "Project Approval"
submittal. However, this submitt:,tl may not be required as there appears to be sufficient: area on the
site. to avoid impacting the 35400t stream buffer.
3. Depict the strearri buffer width, tvi)ing, grid sr.trve f the tivetland buffet: on the land use plans.
4. Third -party review of the buffer planting plan is required and shall be prepared by a qualified
p.r:ofc:ssional, such as a landscape desizitie.r or architect.
5. T`he proposed dul:>lex shall be moved closer. to t:he rear property line and the parking area shall be
reduced. A rear yard of 30 feet: is depicted, furthertno.re, anti the project must demonstrate mitigation;
sequencing under 19."145.130(1;- 6). '11he ,applicant shall demonstrate avoidance of an itnpact
to critical areas altogether, or .nlinin-i2e. the .impacts by lirnitin-a the degree or maZrtitude of the action
bV us.i.rzlr afl:irmat:i'�.e steps, such as project redesign and relocation of improvements.
G. A licensed .land surveyor shall locate: the wetland boundar;". Wetland b€€filer Ideation, and stream
Ordinary .Kig a \Vater TvIark (OH1X-M), and prepare a reap depicting the locatiora of these areas.
/. The applicant: shall relocate the dispersion trench outside of the: stream buffer.
8. A restoration plan .is .required of critical area buffer intrusions under the. prior property violation.
• Public Works Traffic Division
Alarquemew (1 IVEC U.90) — A ,transportation coricurrency, perinit with the
application fee of 81,721 is required for the proposed project.
2. Trr e 1?�p•r t t='ee. (:1 71x`RCC' 19.911 —.A traffic: impact fees payment will be assessed and paid at the
building permit issuance.
3. Frarta,�e a�,,er,v nkr 171Mr C; 19,13S.040)--- Construct street frontage iinp.rove:tnents and dedicate
right-of-�vay along the property frontage on 20 Avenue Sr utl.�.
4.19.1 - .260)—The development shall meet access rnan.11genent standards.
* Building Division
1. Prior to cotismict:.iorr, a residential building perm,it: application is required. Land use approval shall
be completed prior to building permit submittal. Incomplete building perniit applications will
turf be accepted by the Permit Center. The applicant Nvill received a custom checkhs€ at the ti.rrte of
the, director', land use decision.
+ South King Fire and Rescue
1. The applicant: is to provide sprinklers .if no vehicle turn-arourid is approved due to the critical area
bufierprotec:tion requirerner€cs.
It W•; Kla rr.
M
Pagc 3 of 14
July 22, 2019
2. -l'he applicant is to provide a structural report at the tune of the gavel• -use application sho-,,v,ing the
maximurn •,veig ht 1hrtit f(A.- the culvert.
3. 'lhe applicant is to install rnaxinatim load sigrage on the driveway and the culv-erl. for heavy vehicles,
4. It,is recommended the applicant install and arbor to restrict fire truck access if the bridge crossing?
cannot accommodate loads.
DEPARTMENT COi1 M.FNTS
Outtined below are the comments made by the representative; of each department present at the
pre.ac�p iczEtiotl cortf c t ctu:e. T ac:la section should be react thorout>hly. If you l•_avc. questions, please contact the
repre:sentanv-e listed `or that section.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT — PLANNING DIVISION
Leila Willoughby -Oakes, 253-835-2644, Leila.Willoughby-Oakes@cityoffederalway.com
1. Zorin4—The site: is zoned Multi-Fa.trlily ;IZI`.'I 3600). A duplex or "attached dwelling unit" is a permitted
use in this zone, pursuant: to 19 205.010.
2. Land Depending ora the scope of work and impacts to the critical areas, the foLlowing
revic:vv processes may be required. The city's nutigation sequencing; criteria requires applicants proposing
work in a critical area to demonstrate: il.lat all reasonable efforts have been examined with the intetlt to
avoid and minimize trllpaL:ts to crtt:,cal :trews.
W Requests to intrude into a wetland buffer require a Process III rev-tevv. 1'roces s 111 is an
administsat:iv'e review conducted by city staff a-ith a fznal decision issued by the Director of
CoYilnlulllt�,, Development. "I'lle Process III decision criteria are contained in F'WRC 19.65.1001-11a.
See FA"RC Chapter 19.145 fo.r additional requirements.
0 A stream crossing project (i.e. working on the existing strearn crossing?) requires Process ITT review
per 1rC WC 1.9.145.320, as the proposal would not be SEPA exempt TAXIRC 19.15.030[3 ),;
s If the applicant does not propose to intrude into criticalareas, the proposal requires a Process IT.
"Site: Plats" Review. Process II is an administrative review conducted by staff.
I-Cetin - f.'nlr`rjw-I. � 'T`he applicart ma'y .reduce the vvettancl buffer intrusion requested by redesigning; their
proposal by: al reducing; the rear yard-scrback from 30 feer to 5 feet; bl reducing t:he side yard setback
from 18 meet to 5 feet; and c) reducing the parking; spaces to 18 feet: or 15 Beet in length. See the enclosed
preapplicauon plan redlines.
'Fhe Cotumunity Developnzcnr Department cannot approve a stream buffer intrusion per rcvic,% criteria
l'WW" 19.145.330(3): "[An intrusion]... is [fiot] necessary for reasonable development of the subject
property unless the bridgc: c:rosstnp must be replaced." There is sufficient building area on site:.
`;yearn Grassi :l :> wi11 Lc rc i�Ne l .:ncl cecidc:d t3pon i. tifij process III in Chapter 19.6 f ?x%1IC;. Rc•spons..s ;r, .lec1, C_,Il c.it;:ria arsd
de;il;n rcquir:m-cntS in this section sha1.1 Lc incl-dec in the critical areas n:p,)rt.
151
Nib
Yuri` & Lyubov TvIch-.ticbuk
Page 4 of 141
jdyMM9
& Ww— As proposed, a duplex is cntegoricalt., cxenipt teviev,-, under
My M (SERA) purwant to FW%C 1111030; the proposd does no exceed 70
Mulling imim. Any work on Ends covered by wmer would require an environmental cheddst Re.
replacement of stream crossing, work on culvert to accomrnod,.ite trucks, etc). SETI.,A review is processed
concurrently with the Process III application, witl-i an initial public notice of application being issued aCter
determination of a complete appucaticmj . of a SEPA decision, Process III, and twin
guideline decision, be Conmnunity'.Developmcnt DirecLor issues vnitten decision(s).
All property owners vvith-in 300 W of be she are notified'ofthat dccision.T.he notific-ation includes a
14-day, corvinicntand 21-dayal..)peal period. SETA review must be concluded before Ind use appWVal
may A granted.
4, A, Process III application and SEPA. require three separate notices (Notice of.Application, SEPA, and
Notice of Public Hearing). NOW 14 days of issuing ffie Letter of Complete Application, a Notice of
AI)I)bcation will be published in the,Fedemi Wlay ikfirmr, mailed to persons within 300 feet of the subject
property, posted c-)n thes-abject property, and phced at the city's three dedgriand notice boards. The.
applicant is responsible for posting a pubhc notificationSign prepared by the My and submItting We
enclosed sign installation certif---icares-
The apphunt is required to subadt We sus of swnqmd ina,iling envelopes to persons rccehing tax
mmurnents within 300 feet: of the subject propeaT T'he city's CAS Division provides this semice For a
ticAninal fee, or the applicant may provide and own mailing envelopcs via King; County Assessor records
Or a title, ccnnpany. Pkue End be enclosed nmlng labels bulte6n; for ftird-ier inforn-i-ation and contact
Adrninbumbe Assisma Tina Iliety at 253.835-2601, or
Opier, S'pafe -- Use Zone Chart Fr%XrRC. 19.205.010, Note. 6 requires at least 400 square fect of open space
per d,,velling unit (total of 800 square feeen This includes a minimum of'200 square feet of private open
s Private open ;pacctnay "inCIL d,
,.pace for each unit: and the remainder as useable common open space. I L C,
yudq pmAt and balconies; please submit an open space plan with be formal land use application.
6. NOW the Process HI or II applicadon,a clearing and gradin�(), plan addi.-ess-ing items
listed in FWRC 11120140y)(a) through (D is required. Prior to beginning clearing and grading, activities,
all, critical awas, buffers, and trees,/vegetation that are to be preserved within and adjacent: to the
construction area shall be clearly marked and protected per guidelines prescribed Whin FVURC
1112M 16R Permanent barriers shall be installed throughout construction and silt fencing to prowctimi
of critical areas and their buffers.
7� 'D,6v citys tree standards require. each developiiiei-it/rc!(IeTelopiiici-it to
rylaintain 21 tree Unit delisity.'rtie minimum tree derisiv..! requirements foi.-R.M zones are 30 tree units per
acre. The required density k-,,r the subject property evil] be detcrii-Lined bye multiplying the gross site
acreage by 30 (0,53 acres x 30 tree units :1 16 tree units). A tree retention plan detailin, how the subject
proper -I dtding
property will tneet tree unit density requirements shall he wbmirted with the land use and b� Permit
application, Items required to be included in be plan are itemized in FWRC 191I0.(M0(`' G) thn"61 (e).
The table below identifies tree unit values fir .regained and replacernenr trees.
Re yii iions (I t'117RC 1,9,205. 010/1 —
M
'1'uriy Ll�,,. 1 yubr)v _1Iz:lIi1£'ll ti {
ll.i£ c r! of 14
1 ahr 22, 21019
i1. .,Ma_,cinium height of structures — 35 feet above avcragc building elevation.
b. Setbacks for structures are minimum 20 feet front -yard and 5 Beet side and rear yards.
C. 1t,-laxi.rnum lot coverage -- no m;tximurn lot coverage is established. Thc• buildable area twill be
determined by other site dewelopi-nent requirements.
d. Required parking spaces — two per dwelling unit.
e. I)rivcway anchor park.ing pad may not be closer than fn c feet to any side property fine.
i.It73 llai A-wf--.ids stio vvii on the ci v''S critical areas mans, the propertles cont£lm two e.r."tica aTl.as and/o3
associated buffers: wetland anre d starns. 1)ui'suant to F'��L-itC., 19.145.080, a critical areas report that
adequately eValuateS the p.ropc�sal and probable Inlpac€S is required. 11)e. report must also dernonst:.rate
that all reascmable GICOrts liave been examined with the intent to avoid and minirnizC lnlpacts to the
critical areas per FWRC 19.145.130 "?Mitigation Sequencing." The applicant: i responsible for coverins.
the cost of the: city's corlst.Iltants who may review the reports per PN,RC 19.145.080(3); review of
mitigation plans arid planting plans shall be required.
_flee rt 1 r)r off I:. j — Critical area buffer disturbance occurred during the de€nol.it.ion of an existing rnoh.ile
home. The applicant mUSU Submit a wetland and st:reani buffer rehabilitation plan during land use review.
Cleared critical areas without permits do not entitle the applicant to development Jr. those areas under the
current request.
1Vet�rrh'— _'1 cle:li.neat:iai't (sun,'c'vcd as the applicant proposes intrusic>ns)' and rating of the c!rl-site wetland
.will be required with the land use application to determine the exact impacts to the wetland and wetland
buftei.-. See F \NRC 'l9.145,11f:7•,421.t for ;ve land dt-fi Ieation and rating; standards.
L etl ind bt.f feril:ig ivt:raring request; will be reviewed Arid decided upon using I'itocesc III "l.,and Lase.
Re:vievw." Pursuant to IAXIRC 19.145.440, the buffer at' its narrowest point is not to be reduced to less
than 75 percent of the; required width. The following criteria shall be added to the critical area, report
(please note: that buffer averaging vi buffer reduction requests rtiay, not: be combiiit:d under: one request;:
(ai The total area of the buffer after averaf>'fig is equal to the area .required without averaging);
(1); The buffer is inct•eased adjacent.to the higher runctioning area of habitat, or more sensitive portion
(.-)f the: wetland, .Intel der..reased adjacent to the lower functioning, or less sensitive portion;
(c! ".fife buffer at its narrowest poini is not reduced to less than75 percent of the required width; ant,
(d L1nc:;s .tut:llcirizcd in writin;; lit' a <:onsenting nei;;hhorirat; plop<:rtq ovwner, the tlweras inl? ��rill
remain on the subte:ct ;)rOl7ei-m
Intrusions into the. xet:land buffer will be reviewed and decided upi)t'I USinr Process III ` I.arld Use
Review." Pursuant: to F;WRC 19.145,4,10buffers may be reduced by up to 25 percent on a case-by-casc
basis if the project includes a buffer" enhancement plan that clearly substanitat:es that: an enhanced buffer
will irril)rowe and provide additional protection of -,wetland furlctions and values. Buffer reductions nlay
not be used in combination with buffer averaging. The applicant must demonstrate how the buffer
intrusion .will meet the following critet-.i:l:
I-)
Yuiri,,,r & Lvt:1bov.'v1e1nichuk
Pape 6 of'14
July 22, 2019
aj It will riot adversely
affect water quality;
b); It will not adversely- affect the existing quality of the wetland or buffer wildlife habicac;
c',: It will not adversely, affect drainage or storinwater retention capabil.1 ties;
d) Tt will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create erosion hazards:
It will r)ot be materially detrimental to any other. property, or the city as awhole; and
All exposed areas are stabilized with native vegetation, as appropriate.
A buffer entrancement plan, prepared by, a clitatif-5ied professional, shall be incorporated into the critical
area report. The plan shall assess the .habitat, water quality. storinwater retention, groundwater recl-large
and erosion prmtection functirms of the c--dsU*'ng buffer. assess the effects of the proposed modifi<mtlou
on those ftmctlons; and address the six approval criteria of this section.
,A,fee F-i"'n, U)- ']'he applicant is to depict an accurate and surveyed wetland echre and wetland btj[fe- CAI
the survc,"T .7.
,S',ovemv —Therel's a 'I'vpe Ns stream on the subject. prOpCttZT With a 35-foot buffer measured froth the
ordinary h].2gh wa tei- mark. Per the applicariCs 1.5. -Jones critical areas report, please delineate the stream
ordinary water rnqrk as, this was not completed. No new site improvements shall be placed in the stream
buffer as there are areas on site to accommodate reasonable develoj:nnent, Please depict the sucarn buffer
width --and critical area building setback lines on the land use plans.
1'he proposal is not eligible for a strearn btiff.cr intrusion request under the intrusion
dC(J8.10n,.L1 criteria FWRC' 19.145.330. The present site plan depicts a drainage trench located within the
7 1'ype Ns, strearn buffer, please relocate this feature.
10. -1ppXicah;(m.Fecv contact thellermit: Center ox
253-835-2607, for the follo-,xing review fees applicable for your project:
• Process Ill Project .11pl-irova1;
• Process Ill Project Approval w/ SEPA (if work on land, covered by water. proposed);
• Process 11 Site Plan Approval,
• Concurrency; and
• Right-of-W,,iv.'.vto(iificat.iori, Request.
This list does not include the building permit, erigincering, review, inspection, traffic ifripact, and other
fees that may be applicable prior, concurrent, or following building constriction.
-Appro""(11 Duna"ic)- — Per FWR( - 19.15.100, Process Ill and 11 decisions expire rive } ears From the date of
the Coryu-nunity Development Director's approval, unless the applicant mjUests an extension as
provided in FWR , C 19.15.110,
N.I,clnichllk
P f 14
uly 22, 2-' 019
PUBLIC WORKS — DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
Kevin Peterson, 253-835-2734, rahnayxam
Land Use Issues — Stormwater
t Surface water runoff, control and water quality- treatment will be required peer the 120 16 J*J, - I N." � j -
CO
h ir
R`a6er D,�ri 11 It appears that this ements['Dralull
-ReV -ieW, )",t the tirnC Of 1',Irl-d Use site Plan submittal, a prelitninan-, Techn ical IfJOrma-tion Report
(M), addressing the relevance, of the project to the Time core and five speci-lrecjt-i.irerfietits : OF the
KCSWDIA ,vill be, required, A Level 1 ciowftscreani analysis shall also be provided in the pretirnIn-,iry'FIR.
1 'I'li (.-. 1 -,v control area, thLIS, tii he applicant rnst design the (low control
. 1)roject lies within a consenation flo
facility, to rneet these performance criteria. In addition to control facilities, Best Management Practices
(I , �MP'S ") are .is outlined in the "Flee project also lies within an Enhanced Basic Water
Quality Area. Water quality treatment: shall be designed to meei the treatment criteria of the I '11hanced
Basic Water QLI'11.11.V .'Menu. Beside those water quality treatrrient: systems identified in [lie KCSNX,,T)M, the
city will accept those Systems That have been Approved for E,.;nhanced Basic'Treittxient under the
Washington State. Department of Ecology '(WATY'Al'.) Ckncral Use Level Designation (GI-fLD), criteria.
1 If -infiltration is proposed, soil logs prepared by licensed gee technical engineer or septic des'lg ner must
be provided to verify infiltration suitability.
4. Sli(..)w the proposed location anti dimensions of the detention and water quality facilities on the.
preliminary plans.
k is to be done below the orchilary high v,,aterrnark, a Hydraulic Project Apon-wal (1-11 permit
may be required. Infori-na [Iota regarding this permit can be obtained frorn the Washington Departi-neat of
]-"i,,h and Wildlife:.
Right -of -Way Improvements
'I, See tlle'.Fraffic Division c(ATin-le-tits from SenlorTransportation Planning Engineer Sarady Long, for
traffic related items.
2. dedication of addit
ional )TItage improve
additionalto strectfrx ments, the dedication
shall be conveved to the cio,., throul.!Ill a StOtUtom, warranty deed. The dedicated area Must have clear title
1:)rior to recording,
3. All stortuwater treatnientand deteiitioii.recl,,iii-eiiic.,ni:F, outlined above may apply to anvirnprovements
wi[hin the public
Building Permit Issues
E-- gitie.ered plans are required for clearing gtading, construction, construcon, and utilitywork-Plar s TTI-11s. be
revicwcLl and approved by the cit,,,. Englncerinj? review Cees (2019) -ire ','52.,003,00 for the first: 12 hm7ms of
rrsl 18 hours of review for plats ocommercial building for ;lion plats OR 8-3,00-4.00 for the fi r
'Pertylits), and S10.1.00 Per hour for additional review time:. A ff-lrial'TIR sli-all be prepared for the project:
i uriy &_ Lyubov- `, 6.iiclluk
gage 8 C) f 14
lilk" 22, 2019
and submitted with the engineering plans. Both the TIR anti the plans will require the: signature seal of a
processional enzineer registered/licensed .in the State of `,'ti'ashirrgton.
2. Inaddition to enr;i.tu:e.rirrrt. approval proiects that-i11 be filling or grading in the area of the. faturc
buildirt�.r pads are ro:,gr:ired to obtain a Sep:tratc grading pc:rn,i: from t:he'Buildrng lltvt.sron.
3. To assist the applicant's engineer in preparing tl:re plans and'FIR, the 1' f= rrl Kay 1'✓h lYr1r � De: elpfsn.e a
a..alara.. >t.sa/ including standard detail dray.+,-ings, standard 11c;tec and engineering checklists' is
avarlatrle on the cit's `ve.hsite at: htr',:f lunye�:cir„��lFrclt ral.��{,n.c�.lsn�iticict,:lsl7x? [ =:1?1.
Bantling 1s required for all street lmprovenierit�, and temporary erosion and sedlmttlt control rneasure:S
associated -with the: project. T he bond amount shall be 120 percent of the estimated costs of [he
rrnprovcmecnts. An admtntstrau've fee deposit -kill need to accompany the: bolid to cover an;', passible
lei>al fees in the event the bond mast be called. llporl completion of the installation of the irnnroverrlents,
anti final approval of the Public ti\'o.rl s Inspector, the: bond will be reduced to 30 percent of file oril>inal
amount and held for a two -gear maintenance period.
The developer will be responsible for the rn:tiritetlance of all storm drainage f:,tcilities (including the
detention arid water quality facilities) and street. systems during the t:wo-l-ear nlaintenanc_e perioc, 1..ttl:ing
that time, the Public Works kspector will make: periodic visits to the site to ensure the developer's
compliance -With the: rnaint:enatrcc requiremen€:s. Upon satisfactory completion of the tvvo-year
maintenance period, the remainder of the band will be released. i1�:ta.interratac:e for public roads and
p
subdivision drainage faci.l.iLies then becomee the responsibility of the city. Maintenance for priv ate roads
and drainage faci.lit:ics, Including short flats, remain the responsibility of the indivridual property owners.
6. ` lien topographic survey lnforin"It.Ion is shown on the plans, t:he vertical datum block shall include the
phrase "DATU A: N.(:.V.D.-29" or "DATU`-1: I ..C;,., .:5„" on all sheets %vhere vertical elevations are noted.
?. an review shall be printed on 24" s 36" or: 22" x 34" paper. Site. plans shall be
I.)raw-in ;s s.lbrnitte d for ph
dravvn at a scale of V = 201, or larl;er. Arcllitcctural scales are. not I?zl:tlaittecl on engitlecr_rri; flans.
S. Provide cut and fill quantities on the cical•.in" acid grading plan.
9, Ternporai-v Erosion annrd SeAtment: C;ool "ITLSC rrreasure:s, per._lppendix D of the 2016 K.CSW'.1X,-1,
must be shown on the end inec:rinp plans.
10, 'Fhe site plan shall shout the location of any existing and proposed ut:ilit:ies in the areas affected b ° corrsi:ructic�n.
PUBLIC WORKS TRAFFIC DIVISION
Sarady Long, 253-835-2743, saric��.ln�}t7citr srfCccl�rtl��s>a�.cn=iY
Transportation Concurrency Analysis (FWR("I 19.90)
1. Based on the submitted rrrater.1als for a nvo-urut duplex apartment, the Institute. of Transportation
Engineers €.1'l E L Y'ip Cr.metutsofr — 8 t' Edition, land use code 220 "Multifamily, 1Io€_:st11g Lovv-1 r.se;, the
e
1.proposed 11)roiect: is esurnate to generate one ncvv weekday PIM peak hour trip.
ln�p `•Y�Ch•'��;
Y€,ri":- &-. LVILI)OV INIelatchuk
P,(e9of14
1 €31,; 22, 2019
2. A concurrency pe., tnir is tecluire.d for this devclopine:.tlt project. The Pw Traffic Division will perform a
coricurrency atalysis to determine if adecluare roadway capacity exists during the weekday PM peals
period to accommodate the proposed development. Please, note that supplemental transportation analysis
and concur.rencv 111.ttigaticstl play t)c recluirecl i.f tkie. proposed project creates an impact not: anticipated in
the. six -year Transportation improvement Plan (T1P).
The estimated fee for the: concurtc:nc=y permit application is ; f,721.00 (1 - 10 Pt l trips). "1'lt.is fee is an
estimate and based on the materials submitted for the preapplication meeting. The concurrency applicant
fee must: be,: paidin full at the time the coticurtenc : peri-nit application .is submitted with the land use
applieat:ior,. The te.e n1a7 shall e: ba (:cl c)t't :lle nett/ t�,eelccia}' 1:'n1 pea' 1.1our trips as identified in the
concurrency trip gerle:rrtion. The applicant has the option of having an inde-pendent tratEic CA Uiz'tee:-
prepare the concurreticy analysis consi;,tent kvit:h city, procedures; however, the fee remains the same.
Transportation Impact Pees (I`Ii~) (FWRC 19.91)
1. Based on the submitted nEaterials fora two -unit duplex, the estimate traft:ic itnprtct• fee is S5.,342. Please
note, the actual .impact: fee: will be calculates{ based on the fee schedule in effect at the dryie a completed
building lm.-m:t application is filed and paid prior to permit issuance 1FWRC 19.100.071}[.3 [a]
Street Frontage Improvements (FWRC 19.1,35)
'.l hC1 applicant/owner swill be expected tc, corISITM.-t street: improveillents cotisiste:nt: With the planned
rsauvav cross -sections as �l)wrln Mal) lIl-�in €;lapter II1 of :nc.1°s�•.ral11'rCai rvh_e;.3ev i , a.:
I'1Y CF') and Cap.i:a.l Improvement Program ;C1.1'`; sho,,x-n as Table 111-10 (P'WRC 19.135.0401, Based on
the materials submitted, staff conducted a limited analysis to determine the required street: i.ntprovenlents.
The applicant will be e.,::pec:ted to construct improvements on the following streets to the city's planned
roadway ct•oss-sections:
1"v7eiltieth Avenue South is t Tt-linoit Collector planned , a Type "R" street, consisting of a
40-foot street with curb and gutter, 4-foot planter \vith street: trees, 6-foot sidewalks, and
street l.igllts itl a 66-foot right-of-way. 'T'he froinrage on 20" Avenue South has beet:t
improved with two lanes, includin a vertical curb;'gutter and sidewalks on the :vest: side of
the street. Assuming a sv.nl.tnetrical cross section, the applicant will be expected to
construct half street itnprovenlent as measured fr( to the street centei-line and dedicate
approxinlateb," three feet right -of -:way.
2. The applicant may inake. a Nvi teen request to the Public Works Director to inodiiy, defer, or -,valve the
required street itnp.rovetnen€:s (FWRC, 19135.070). [tlfo.rznataon about a nloclification
requests are available through the Public Works Development Services Division. Tilese rnod.tttc,160ti
re:CluCStS ilawf. it 11(')n11.**1al r(:VteCV 1'ec; (:t1.1're11t1�
Access Management (FWRC 19.135)
1.. Access managen.)ent standards are 1xise:d on rc)ad:vay safeoi and capacity re.qui.rerrients. MV., 19.135.280
provides access starida.rds for strce.ts based on planned road`,vav cross -sections. Please dote that access
classifications are per Drawing 3--lA in the Public Works Development Standards.
Yiiiiv & Lyubov N1elnichu.k
Pare 10 of 1`4
lz:ty- 22, 2019
'. othe.r than si.ngle-farn.ily residential uses and zero lot line. townhouse:
l^o.c drivewayrs that serve uses
developments, the maxitxaunn cl.rivewa'y width is 30 feet !nor a t•.vo-lane two-way drive%%ay and 40 feet for a
tl't.reo-lane two-way driveway- ;`FWR(]' 19.135.2 Y,1. Driveway %ridths may be increased in order to provide
adequate width for vehicles that may be reasonably expi!.:cted to use die diivevay, as determined by the
Public Works Director. The driveway shall maintain a minimum 20-foot -,cade paved surface.
3. Verifjr intersect.inn sight distance in meeting-LAS1-I'I"O standards fc>z the proposed access on 2W
Avenue South.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT — BUILDING DIVISION
Greg Kirk, 253-835-2621, greg.kirk@cityoffederalway.com
1. 13�i1c:'i� C as. The structure will be treated as a nt w bt'rilding l)erniit application and must meet all current
codes including:
• In`ernrrt%cnai" 13irifr#n-, Code (I.K..), 2015
WashingL na State Ainendinents %:3C 51-50
.�71f%ri?[2t G?:al i�;�C';.:+1(i/ill.Glrl C. JI e �Il�r'I(_,", 201 J
Wasl,ington State A.,mendrnents W%A;C 51-52
• Inter ,,a2t;ona/ r C o::l. (Ilk—, 2015
t ashin ton State: -Amendments WAC 51 -54
• Natto;zai (NEC), 2014
• ✓;Cibili' 1 Code JC'C;'(llv�3 .� I ] r.1„ 20t?f}
r
e t;n/vi7n:'iu t7lJtg Code (l.I'(;;, 2015
Washington :State Amendments,
W!C C 51-56 & ` AC 51.-57
I,.iarn aria al.lZc sirlenlia/ C63d . 2015
Washin2ton State Amcndments WAC 51-51
0 IVi7.rfdngtor. Starve 1:lnery C,o2015 W.AC:. 5 1 - 1
I3rrelrli�:lrf (,Wfena. The following applies to the proposed Structure:
G Occupancy Classi.Ficadon: R-3 ! Nurnber. of Stories: TBI:)
p -Upe. Of Co nSt2ticti011: V-_l3 Fire Protection: Fire sprinkler:
Floor Area: IBD a !Find; Seismic: Basic hind speed 85 Mph, Exposure.,
25-t'-'f Snow load, Seismic Lone D-1
3. Bleilrltitu Perm,:''V=1p,(7#r-r2 ion Proaus. A completed building perinit application aml commercial checklist: arc:
required. The commercial checklist will be Ei.iled cut by staff and provided at the lime of the tared use
approval. Copies of the application and checklist may be obtained at N.kA%-t� cih_r,�k t:cstltrra.i�ti;lt�.ccyi.te.
,Appointments are required for intake: of rie,v comrne.rcial building- perrltir submittals, Please contact the
Permit Center to schedule. alit (253; 835-260?, or per�<.cratsrf. r��c tta �flircic•t,tltv�y,..c 173n..
Some projects mile require -a third party, 'review or inspection,The he cost to cover these fees IS the
responsibility of the applicant. Arw third patty Fee is in addition to regular permit fees and costs.
Yuriy & Lyubov ivfclnichuk
Page 11 of 14
gal•: 22, 2019
Please note, land use approval is recommended prior to subtnittiii€; the building permit application to
avoid delay .iri project review. if the project has not received ed laracl usc:tl�proval, .it niay be placed on hold
until land "t;se review is completed.
7. 1�gji1g. 1"ederal Way reviews plans oil a first in, first C)Ut l�nSis; } owcver, there are some small
projects with inconsequentsal review requirements that ITI:ty be revle'lved out of order.
The: first comment letter can be expected within five to seven weeks of subrnittal date. Re-cl"teck of plans
will -cur one to three Nveeks after re-submrttal.
Revised or resubmitted plan; sliall be provided in the same for�rnat, size, and amonrit as the orig;finally
s ubn:rit:ted plans. Revised; resubmitted dra vvings shall indicate by means ol' clotading or written response,
what changes have been made: from the original drawings. Plans for all involved departrirents will be
forwarded from the C.:otnmumv,, Development Department
5. 0,0ar jleimifr iv-11-11speakiis, Separate pern-lits may be required leis electrical, mechanical, plumbing, fire
suppression systems, and signs.-kpplicams may apply for separate permit, at any Lane prior to
commencernelit of construction.
%`hen required, special inspeciions shall be performed by WABC) approved agencies, or by agencies
approved by the building official prior to petniii: issuance:. C:onstructif�ri must be approved b , all
reviewing depaiclments prior to final building division inspection.
All concerned departments fp.lantl.ing, public: works, electrical, ck fire;; must sign off before the. Building,
I.:).iv.is.ion can final the structure for occupancy. Building final must be approved prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
Construction projects may be required to 1a "e' a pxe-construction conference. If a pre-cor. meeting .is
required, the general or re.p.re:seritaiive, all subs, the architect or representative, the engineer or
representative, electrical conrracto.r, and ariy other interested party should attend this meeting. ivlcetings
will occur at the Building l-)ivision and will be scl:teduled by the inspector of record For tl• e project,
The information provided is based on limited plans and information. The comments provided are
not intended to be a complete plan review and further comments are possible at time of building
permit plan review.
LAKBHAVEN WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT
Brian Asbury, 253-946-5407, BAsbury@lakehaven.org
Water
A Water Certificate. of Availability issued separately bill Lakehaven may be required to be subraitted with any
land use and/or building; permit: application (check land use agency for requirement j. The certificate is
valid for one year ftom die date of issuance. If a cert:ificire is needed, alloy- one to two working; days to issue
for typical prc)cessirig;.'I'1ic: 2019 cost for a Water Cerdficate of Availal:).ility.is ;,,S'7 .OrJ.
• 1'tlri> LC..L.,vtrl;c,�`;I.clrlickufc
f,age12oi14
j ilk y 22, 2019
Fire t o%v at no less 1 "lan 20 t)Sl avat.able within the existing \vater distribution %s tci-A Is a 1111r111nurn of
GPIN4 (appro-,amatc) for t-�vo.holits orj-lio i.e. 1111 1iL3vY- figure rCprE:senLS 1- ilSellaven's <<di?ptC'd ni1I1111ium
level cif Service goals for residential areas reparding performance of the exisung water diurlt)ution systcm
cinder lagj) detriand comiitions. If more precise available, anti/or estimated onsite, fire flow Eik?utes are
required or desired, the applicant: can teq• iesr. Lakehaven lx.tfort.n a system hydraulic model analysis
(separate from, or concurrent �xitli, an application for availabilit:y). The. 2019 cost fora sw[ern- hvdraulic
rnL:Jdel anal,-sis is ,�230.00.
'i'lie site has an existing residential water service connection (SvcNo 196, "All x /4" meter;. The existing
meter needs to be evaluated under UT(". and Lakehaven standards to deterrmne if it's adequate for the
proposed duplex use..
• '1 water service connection applicatior5 subrrli"tted to .L,al<ehaven is required for each new service
connection to the water distribution ,ystem, or any modification to an exist:ina water Set. -vice ca.r)nectton
(c., . lar(yei'r`letel;i Seil., etc.j, In accordance wit1) standards defined in Lakehaven's current "fees and
(,urges Resol-ution."
Based r>n the proposal sulinitted, prelin inary estimated L_alcchaven «,atett sel ;.ic(-. connection fet:s, charges,
and/or deposits (2019 schedule; .7111 be as follows. Actual connection charges will be deterl'nined upon
subn-iittal of service connection application:,$)" to I.,akel i.t, en. ,,111 Lakehaven fees, charges, and deposits are
1 l)icalla% reviewed oriel ',16LIstcd (if ne.cc.S ar}'i annually, and ate subject to chan�?e �x. itluxlt rir>tice.
• Water Ser ice; Meter Installation, new "ll/z" size: 35, 230,00 deposit. Actu:ll size required to be determined
byL akehaver) based on UPC: plumbing fixture count:.
• Watet• Servicei Meter Installanon, renlavL ex. Service coilnection/nieter: $3,740.00 deposit. Only,
applicable if existing .meter is .riot InW enough for proposed nciV duplex rise.
• (:;apital Facilities (har ,e<s;-Water; tZ 1 ?i.OG Water system capacity credits are available for this property:
from srstenz capacity charges previously assessed, paid directl r to Lakehaven, and/or credited to the
propert;,, for 1.ii(I I?gl.livalent: Re:s.uierltial Units Please contact Lakehaven for further deuldl.
• Right:-oC_Wa}' Petniit lee City of Tredcral Wav : 930,00.
Sewer
• A Sewer CerL111,cate of'Avi:labiht'y issued setnratelz by Lakehaven may be required to be submIt:ted ;vit:h any
land use and/or building pet.txlit application (checlx .vith land use agency for requirement), The c.ertiticate is
valid for one year from the date of issuance. If t certificate is needed, allow one to two working days to isst€e
iol. t j,ical processing. The 2019 cost for a Sewer (..:cruf[cate of Availability is 970.00.
A separate Lakehaven Sewer Service ("onriection Perinit is required for each new, connection to the sanirary
Sewer. Sv-steal, in accordance with standards defined in Lakel.Zaven's current- 4 ees and Charges Resolution."
_Mirlirnuun pipe. slope for gravity sewer sery ice connectic-ris .is t:wo 1>crcctzt.
• .Based on the proposal submitted, prelirriirlarL* estini-,ued Lakehaven sewer se£i lu connection fees, charges,
and/ or deposits (2019 schedule, v711 be as follows. Actual connection charges will be detcrilaincd upon
submittal of service connection appli.catiom s) to Lakehaven. All Lakehaven fees, charges, and deposits are
rypical.ly reviewed and Adjusted if necessary) arr u-ally, and are Subject to change without notice.
0 Sewer Scarce (.onnect:loIl Pern7it': ;F;120,2.3.00 tee..
M
Yun:iy & L ulxnv \Melnichuk
Page I of 14
july 22, 2011"
• C tl>it:al Facilities C;h' e(s;E-Se,,1cr: „5(l.. 0. Sewer sy-steni capacity- credits are available for this property
from system cap:tciry charges previously assessed, paid directly to Lakehavera, and; ar credited to the
proper ty- for 6.00 T clttivalent: Residential Units (I:RU . Please contact l.,akehav-en for further detail.
Sel ice.. A reeirient Charge J riv:ate Grinder Purnp;: S750.00.
• County Document Recording lees: S1; 0.00
o Right -of -Way Permit Fee (::its of Federal Waz is ; M.00.
General
* All Lakehaven development engineering related application fo.rrns, and associated standards inForniaaoll,
can be accessed at liti�;1__' vt.�t_•!a;;t 6,J;iyet3 rrzf;/ ?ii11� t-cl�rl},t};rt'ii.r.:: f ;�. s�; ttc c;imir,J,�;.
• ,:?ell comments herein are valid for one year and are based on the proposalts, submitted :tncf Lakeha err's
current regulations and policies. Any change to either the development proposal(s) or T,akehaven's
regulations and policies may affect the above comments accordingly.
SOUTH KING FIRE AND RESCUE
Sean Nichols, 253-946-7242, Sean. Nichols r1 soutlikingfire.
Emergency Access
Fire apparat:us access roads sl:€all comply Nvit:h all requirements of Fire._=tce-ess Polic '10.006:
r!l?^r' .,ou 11111,i, 7�;tue.�rrl '! )�€a trrr�cntf. rriteti ! lrrr}�r 11'is:�t ! �1.
No apprc),�-ed to riarc)und is provided. Ln lieu of an approved turnaround, fire sprinklers. for all hones served by
the di shall be installed.
'Ibe culvert under the d.tiveNvay rnat,' nc:ot be rated for fire engzites/ladclei trucks. Prop-ide structur-.d support
documentation to shoe, the load limit of the culvert. Sigiage will be required if culvert cannot support fire
engines/ladder trucks.
See the enclosed pol.ic:y regarding fire apparatus access roads.
Fire Sprinklers
Unless an alil3rc>ved emeit};ertcy .recess/t:trtnaround is inststl.lecl; fire spriirklers :vi.11 be required for all 1€cn:rres oil
(:Iris lot,
CLOSING
This letter reflects the inforrnation provided at the preappl.icatio n rneeting and rs .tnterided to assist you in
t:u el�a.t:.ing plans and i-naterials for formal atopLcat:iott. We hope you found the comments useful to your project.
We have: made ec;cry effort to identify rn rjor is ues to eluiun rte ;ttrpriscs during the City's review of the. kori.nal
applicatioon. "I he completion of the preapplication process in the content of this letter does not vest an - futu+ e
project application. Comments in this letter are only valid for one: year as per F\` ,`R- C 19.40.070(A.
This is a preliniitialy review only and does not tape the place of the full review that will follow submission of
:t fo.rtnal appl.icatic:m. Con-tments provided iti-d:tis letter are based on preapplication materials s,tbrnit.ted.
7Y:7li6y & 1_yul:iov Nielnichuk
Page'] 4 of 1 4
]uly 22. 2019
Modifications and revisions to the l).roject as presented for this pteapplicatlon may influctice and modify
information regarding development requirements outlined above. In addition to this preappllcarion letter,
please examine the complete FWRC and other relevant codes carefully. Reclt.drements that are found in the
codes that are not addressed in this letter are still requited for y€ UK project.
If you have questions :about an indi-vidual €:onatnent, please contact the appropriate. department representative
noted above. Any general questions can be directed towards rne, the key project contact, at ? i3. 435-2644, or.
�ila��►ill�.uil�liln_ <rll c5 tr it l,4 ilcr:elua, rt��ti. We look fo.i-ward to -working NVith you.
Sincerely,
7 r I
Leila W'illoughby-Oakes
Associate Planner
enc: ii•fister Land Use Ap-plicatiora
Pr:ress II Submit] Requircnients
Process III Submittai.R,equirenicFiis (De-,cloprnerit ;Ti Weiland Iiuffcr
F%VRC It•'litigation Sequencing RequirernetIts
Euvirofimental Checklist
C()1j C[i.rrcocs Ap Jllcatiou
Right -of -Way tModiucation
Critical Area Signage
I14;iiling ]-;nvclopes
fire Apparatus Access Roads
I.,aluiinven Enclas(lres
It:(l1F;e'(l Prcalll [iCati(Ht SiLC Pj,113
c: K<:vili Peterson, E_.:i rnecring Plans R vi(r�(:r
Sara(ly Lwig, Senioa• Transtiortation I'caliF ing l.,ngir.ecr
Brian :isburv• I._ikeliaveil Watca & Scwe! Distri(:€
Sian Nicjiok, South King lire & Rcscue
Brucc S. blaNci gh. 11E, f.:onsultunt, liiitrc—.nLu'91 a ilFrlr:I�T.ncr
f — _._._._.._
11�k
CITY OF
Federal Way
DATE: July 2, 2019
TO: Leila Willoughby -Oakes
FROM: Kevin Peterson
SUBJECT: MELNICHUK - (19-102748-00-PC)
32830 20TH AVE S
Please insert these comments into the pre-app summary letter:
Public Works Development Services
kevin.peterson@cityoffederalway.com)
Land Use Issues — Stormwater
MEMORANDUM
Public Works Department
Division (Kevin Peterson, 253-835-2734,
1. Surface water runoff control and water quality treatment will be required per the 2016 King
County Surface Water Design Manua/ (KCSWDM). Initial review suggests that the project meets
the requirements for a Full Drainage Review, however, the final site design may allow for other,
less stringent criteria as provided in the KCSWDM. At the time of land use site plan submittal, a
preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR), addressing the relevance of the project to the
nine core and five special requirements of the KCSWDM will be required. A Level 1 downstream
analysis shall also be provided in the preliminary TIR.
The project lies within a Conservation flow control area, thus any flow control facility will need to
meet this performance criteria. In addition to flow control facilities, Best Management Practices
(BMP's) are required as outlined in the KCSWDM. The project also lies within an Enhanced Basic
Water Quality Area. Any Water Quality Treatment system shall be designed to meet the
treatment criteria of the Enhanced Basic Water Quality Menu. Beside those water quality
treatment systems jdentified in the KCSWDM, the City will also accept those systems that have
been approved for Enhanced Basic Treatment under the Washington State Department of
Ecology (WADOE) General Use Level Designation (GULD) criteria.
3. If infiltration is proposed, soil logs prepared by a licensed geotechnical engineer or septic
designer must be provided to verify infiltration suitability.
4. Show the proposed location and dimensions of the detention and water quality facilities on the
preliminary plans.
5. If work is to be done below the ordinary high water mark, a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)
permit may be required. Information regarding this permit can be obtained from the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Right -of -Way Improvements
See the Traffic Division comments from Sarady Long, Sr. Transportation Planning Engineer for
traffic related items.
2. If dedication of additional right-of-way is required to install street frontage improvements, the
dedication shall be conveyed to the City through a statutory warranty deed. The dedicated area
must have clear title prior to recording.
3. All stormwater treatment and detention requirements outlined above may apply to any
improvements within the public right-of-way.
Building Permit Issues
Engineered plans are required for clearing, grading, road construction, and utility work. Plans
must be reviewed and approved by the City. Engineering review fees (2019) are $3,004.00 for
the first 18 hours of review for Commercial Building Permits, and $167.00 per hour for additional
review time. A final TIR shall be prepared for the project and submitted with the engineering
plans. Both the TIR and the plans will require the signature/seal of a professional engineer
registered/licensed in the State of Washington.
2. The Federal Way Public Works Development Standards Manual (including standard detail
drawings, standard notes, and engineering checklists) is available on the City's website at
http://www.cityofFederalway.com/index.aspx?nid=171 to assist the applicant's engineer in
preparing the plans and TIR.
3. Bonding is required for all street improvements and temporary erosion and sediment control
measures associated with the project. The bond amount shall be 120 percent of the estimated
costs of the improvements. An administrative fee deposit will need to accompany the bond to
cover any possible legal fees in the event the bond must be called. Upon completion of the
installation of the improvements, and final approval of the Public Works Inspector, the bond will
be reduced to 30 percent of the original amount and held for a two-year maintenance period.
4. The developer will be responsible for the maintenance of all storm drainage facilities (including
the detention and water quality facilities) and street systems during the two-year maintenance
period. During that time, the Public Works Inspector will make periodic visits to the site to ensure
the developer's compliance with the maintenance requirements. Upon satisfactory completion of
the two-year maintenance period, the remainder of the bond will be released. Maintenance for
public roads and subdivision drainage facilities then become the responsibility of the City.
Maintenance for private roads and drainage facilities, including short plats, remain the
responsibility of the individual property owners.
When topographic survey information is shown on the plans, the vertical datum block shall
include the phrase "DATUM: N.G.V.D.-29" or "DATUM: K.C.A.S.," on all sheets where vertical
elevations are called out.
6. Drawings submitted for plan review shall be printed on 24" x 36" or 22" x 34" paper. Site plans
shall be drawn at a scale of 1" = 201, or larger. Architectural scales are not permitted on
engineering plans.
7. Provide cut and fill quantities on the clearing and grading plan.
8. Temporary Erosion and Sediment control (TESC) measures, per Appendix D of the 2016
KCSWDM, must be shown on the engineering plans.
9. The site plan shall show the location of any existing and proposed utilities in the areas affected
by construction.
CIT
Federal Way
C17y Oc F-p..
cL]M1NIJryl IY DEV O"7f,at r
MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEKTSERVICES
33325 8`h Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609
www.citnffederalwly.com
APPLICATION NO(S) I 1 - ` Od, / -1 O — P CI Date
Project Name
Property Address/Location
Parcel Number(i)
Project Description
PLEASE PRINT
i}') e An e Aa Cr .&
3c,2dP3 c::2
;? -7 ;7 1.-2 S',-2 /
Type of Permit Required
Annexation
Binding Site Plan
Boundary Line Adjustment
Comp Plan/Rezone
Land urface Modification
LorLine Elimination
reapplication Conference
Process I (Director's Approval)
Process 1I (Site Plan Review)
Process III (Project Approval)
Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision)
Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone)
Process VI
SEPA w/Project
SEPA Only
Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use
Short Subdivision
Subdivision
Variance: Commercial/Residential
Required Information
_/ELI 76 0,0 Zoning Designation
Comprehensive Plan Designation
Value of Existing Improvements
_G�; ��' U Value of Proposed Improvements
International Building Code (IBC):
Vlolf; ' Occupancy Type
Construction Type
7'.W-I' V�
a ig a l Goa
c tJ
Applicant
Name: Yu.", Y /. 7 e /r) rG
Address: 3 a;7e 3 4
City/State: �'e�t r /
Zip: qr a 0 3
Phone: :�i p 4f- ;? 93
Fax: iiN.E Email: 1yted4VVge C�iipo. CO
r-T']G�Ir/� i a `r
Signature:
Agent (if different than Applicant)
Name:
Address:
City/State:
Zip:
Phone:
Fax:
Email:
Signature:
Owner
vK rr' q n � �Y ar �o �✓ /'�'� � /r-� i c Lr r-� E
Name: ! `�
Address: 67e c9-1 V a(ak 0700;2
City/State: I%C./ Sri r h I
3
Phone: 3�- $G�f
Fax:
Email:
Signature:L
r
Bulletin #003 — January 1, 2011
Page I of 1
kAHand o uts\M aster Land Use Application
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PREAPPLICATION CONFERENCE
Project Name:
Applicant/Agent:
Vorel y /1ev_ 1-e1 eA1&*Ae
File No(s):
Required Submitted
Date: 7 -7--/-1 '/ q
2- V Completed Master Land Use application.
Application fees.
/ Eight copies of a written narrative of the project including proposed uses for all structures.
(� Eight copies of a vicinity map.
❑ Eight complete sets of required drawings, folded to 9 x 12 inches.
• Plans must be drawn to scale and include a north arrow.
• Maximum plan sheet size shall be 24 x 36 inches.
• Plans do not need to be prepared by an architect or engineer.
• All information is to be legible, dimensioned, aAd r4r'esentative of existing and proposed
conditions.
• For a thorough review by staff, the plans should depict as much of the following information
as possible:
Conceptual Site Plan
• Site area.
■ Total gross floor area of all proposed floors or levels.
■ Location of Environmentally Critical Areas.
Type of Construction and proposed Occupancy Type per the International Building Code
■ Existing and proposed property lines, sidewalks, existing right-of-way improvements, and
street edges with existing and/or proposed easements.
• Dimensions'of existing/proposed structures, parking and drive aisle layout, property lines
and right-of-way, including location of barrier free stalls.
• Existing and/or proposed access points, including driveways within 150 feet of the site (both
sides of the street) measured from center, lines of driveway (250 feet when development
abuts Pacific Highway South and Dash Point Road).
+ Total existing and proposed parking stall count.
■ Approximate location of proposed storm drainage facilities.
• Width of existing and proposed perimeter buffering.
■ Existing and proposed landscaping. Landscaping and trees may be shown in masses on the
plan rather than indicating individual tree and shrub species. Refer to Chapter 19.125,
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC), Article I, "Landscaping," for (further information.
■ Show proposed internal roadway design. RECEIVED
Conceptual Drawings (if applicable and available)
• Front, rear, and side building elevations; indicating height.
• Floor Plans CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
I • Structural Plans COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
--�,�,�,C-f��'.a�- /S `are /✓v11�o �� ,�,�®..� OC41107iU,
Bulletin 4044 —January 17, 2019- Page 2 of 2 k:\Handouts\044 Preapplication Conference
V(Z~L
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL
DATE: 6-11-19
TO: Cole Elliott, Development Services Manager
Scott Sproul, Building Official
Rick Perez, City Traffic Engineer
Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District
Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue
FROM: Leila Willoughby -Oakes
FOR DRC MTG. ON: June 27, 2019- Internal
July 11, 2019, 9:00 AM - with applicant r
0 L4 �' st J : C4__
FILE NUMBER (s) : 19-102748-00-PC
RELATED FILE NOS.: 18-104201-00-AD (Critical Areas Peer Review)
PROJECT NAME: MELNICHUK DUPLEX W/ CRITICAL AREAS
PROJECT ADDRESS: 32830 20TH AVE S
ZONING DISTRICT: RM 3600
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed duplex on a site with wetlands and
stream. Demolition on site resulted in critical
area intrusions.
ill
021-vlb
LAND USE PERMITS:
PROJECT CONTACT:
MATERIALS SUBMITTED:
Process II Required
YURIY & LYUBOV MELNICHUK
lyubovmelnichuk@yahoo.com
Preapp Narrative
Plans
Critical Area Report
Geotech Report
Vicinity Map
EKE G4WCA,� 1jetSer— W •0
S�� 1 (� ��5 c��Lef►�s w�i0`.k
�ivr+c 1 u��liev ((
Mcull,t elv- 1Q\gcLlAy
1 J
2
I 3
tj 1,
` LIMITS OF
RIPRAP,
END CULVERT CROSSING. �OULET P
(
I
I
E 1.274,838.4� _
�
rPC{THOLE .
LOCATION
EL 367 „••t ,1
PROTILCT
l ,I .
^ LIMITS, OF RIPRAP
I
EXST 124" MP
ABAN 'EX 1 CC
i ....�.. INLET PAD`
i' �`�1 •
. ri tY. •.
AB AN EX 2 CMP,'
SEEN TE'�-
i
,,.� _.•
- -.
A _.
-
EX.8'� RCP
LL
_c
r f
_ . 1 T
��Ap48" RCP
VE HI RESET
• •, CRpSSINp
I� E
8EG15,1�2�4xR*
=;"
.............1.-...r'
[PLAIN
E.5 6' GH
"'
CHAIN LINK FENCE .;
r
E" 1,274,849.4
,
-
ST. CULV.
I
EL 367 PIPE 'ARC (95" $PAN
-•
z
67'+ RIS ) CONNECT
1
TYP) EASEMENT Y "- it TO EXISTI G. 48" .RCPTEMP
i
N
SO EASEMENT
1
(TYP) - Z
INDICATES FIELD
-
;_ ;w MEASURED ELEVATION
OR DIMENSION
CHAIN LINK FENCE
TYPE 3 (INSTALLED
BY CITY)
i
1 NOTES:
LE SING3 FT, GATE
1, ABANDON EXST 24" CMP UPSTREAM
i OF EXST CB AND FILL WITH CDF. MAINTAIN
EXST 24'' CMP DOWNSTREAM OF EXST CB
PLAN
a•.�•.
390 ...... ............. _ ...._._.. _.._..__..__ -_ . W . _.. uy..._._. ............._............... _-.:...... ............ _..... :.... '.'.�:..:.....
44 x x x d x D_x x - ---
w w w cam' w w w
PIPE ARCH
....._._.__ ....... 390
2" CLR
"5 (2 12''
i I 02"0" LAP
18 LF PLAIN ST.
CULV. PIPE ARCH
c
I.E. OUT 364.81 ' I GRADE CONCRETE ENCASEMENT
_..........�,_._._..........._..._...
I- 380 -- - r ..;.... ....... I_ ----------- _._ ... ..1... _ _... 380
w 3 25-YR WSEL �� w
372.0 DETAIL I 11 U-
z !
-t]E8R1RACK NTS
Zp EX CULVERTS OUT i REMOVE TEMP SEEM 0
I- E 366.108" CONC)
a j -p'• i PLUGS CONNECT 1 -S-3 Q
IE 365.6 (24" CMP) i TO EXST 48'' RCP--r - - EX CULVERTS IN w
I /
1_ IE (18" CO»N..C.. )w u'
370 ......................_....- ......
370 .....7 ..................
I
------ - III
EXST CHANNEL ` / iIIC
L 364.1 /
4 I 5 I 6
PROTEL AST - ac
RHODODENOROO1
AS DIRECTED .BY
Z� ENGINEER_ EXTEND 6" CSTC 76'*TO
_ �4• M� Q EDGE OF 20TH-AVE S.
tea, %a 0.
STA 0,56
N-115424.4 + _" j b _' fi" CSTC
12747.89.3
TwCy r MATCH '
N 115*Tl8 m EXST GRADE
E 1274806,6 -PROTECT ENST
ENQ CULV fs=2T ��QSSIhIG r , CHAIN LINK FENCE 5" FRUIT TPE=
-N TS 4i TEE 6 (GALV)
JGTN CU RT R 5$iN
E 1274813.4 IN 115452A
1274810,4 ••'
LIMITS laF RIPRAP I I . a-3 rFTY
OUTLET PAD - _ ( ; . _ c LIMITS-DE-RIPRAP
INLET PAD,---
MATCH EXST G r PROTECT...
CHANNEL_ .6,..WILLON7 - o r' �__-_--- -
k.YU
_
REMOVE"&,RESET
EXST 6' EX57 GRADE
HIGH I _ S 7 F MATCH to
CHAIN LINK J l� R•f0'� 2 _ {I
FENCE -
PRDTECT E7fST % 'r �a° p �-- �-
224, WILLOW p o Q l�' PROTECT EXST BRIDGE B
SEE_NGTE 1.. _ . o _a
REMOVE .�X"ST 6" WILLOW 1 (� ('a 1 p an° 0 C REMOVE EXST
II
REMOVE EXST 15" CEDAR � + o° pp� n . a ❑� fl 12 CMP; 16" CONC,
R-TO' aoe ° ,,, p 18" CMP CUL`J�TS
GABION- BASKET❑'i°� J
RETAINING WALL '.,a a. p BR-7.YPFfpTECT EXST j
a fJ
PROTECT "''?( `_ 4"-: CEDAR
-EXST 34" FIRS' L.- f�1 ' ! FELL I70i4[) j
••�, TO ELEV 380.0
"�••�.• .- P r "-PERMANENT .DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
PROTECT EXST 34" CEDAR
NTfl5-00 j - MATCH PLAN TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
E 1274839.7 EXST GRADE EASEMENT j
............................................_.._._............_ -.. _ ...r._.
4' HIGH
4' HIGH CHAIN LINK
CHAIN LINK �I 2, FENCE r SELECT GRANULAR FILL
GABION GRAVITY FENCE //
RETAINING WALL 4'! 12' r6" CST DEBRIS RACK
@ 6V:1H BATTER 11 FINISH SEE
1 i w xGRADE r t 1
g
(EL 380') S-3 EXST C
N CVERT R S ING /
1..... x.................:...... � � O / BRIDGE
EX CULVERTS OUT 13• I ! 25 YR WSEL
IE 372.7 (12" CMP) �1 f 378.2
IE 372.8 (18" CONC) I
BEGIN CULVERT CROSSING
IE 372.5 (18" CMP) ._ t'� 6 =I ��� IE 373.16*
�...
EXST - - ir .-....... t........... ...................... .......... _......
...
GROUND.......................... _.�. _......__ _..» ..
-------------- ---------
�k � EX CULVERTS IN
IE 373.6 (12"" CMP)
RIPRAP OUTLET 34.5 LF 48" @ 3.3Z E 373.2 (18CONC)
PAD SEE IE 373.3 (18" CMP)
-
hOl
� (s 1 � V RT OSSINC
I
RIPRAP INLET
tia eq 5o Op"
L IE 36RC
IN 48" RCP
IE 36b.o3
I
DR-10 I
I PAD, SEE 4
o a o ;3
4n
OUT IE 365.81
17.5 L.F. 48"360
k
I
CR 10
0 00 RIPRAP OUTLET CONC.ENCASE
JOINT, SEE j
PAD, SEE
0.50 1.00
RIPRAP INLET
360.00 NOTES: 0-50
1.00
,.
DR-10
STATIONING IN FEET PAD SEE®
1. INSTALL TEMPORARY CONTRACTOR'S STATIONING IN FEET
FENCING AT 5' RADIUS AROUND TREE.
�G,C-r &a 4-7
SECTION DR-10
1"-10' HORIZ -
1"-5' VERT
)SGN S.J. Wasson RECORD DRAWINGS
I)R THESE RECORD DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN PREPARED. IN PART, ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION
r �.D.C. Stapp COMPILED BY OTHERS. THEY ARE NOT INTENDED TO REPRESENT IN DETAIL THE EXACT
CHK LOCATION. TYPE OF COMPONENT. NOR MANNER OF CONSTRUCTION THE ENGINEER WILL NOT
S.J. Wasson BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO
THE RECORD DRAWINGS.
,APVD J H Rogers DECEMBER 1998
2, CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE SECTION_
FOR LOCATING AND REPLACING PRIVATE
UTILITIES AS REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION 1"=10' HORIZ �� l ��
OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS 1"=5'VERT
IDCUMENTS WH10-CIPOI S. 324TH TO S. 336TH TRUNK STORM DRAINAGE SHEET
AN HARD COPY OR IN BAR IS ONE INCH ON CFEYOF � AN M R R I NA T RAG FA TY R NT PROJECT 8
MEATS OF SERVICE POR THIS ORIGINAL DRAWING_ WG
ECT xE.OR AlZf OR NOT GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN NO, DR-5
CHANCE.OR ALr it N 13E OL IF NOT D`1 ROAD CROSSINGS AND SECTIONS DATE APRIL lass
RiITT{N IRAYSSION OF THIS
THIS SHEET, IADJUSTN ��
�TY'S SOLE RISK. SCALES ACCORDINGLY. PRIVATE DRIVE AND S. 330TH ST. 7J 132472.P1
FILE NAME: 16s004dr.dly 17-rr13-1959 15=77=i.L
1 1 2 T 3 4 i 5 6
I _
PROTECT F�}[•57 7 ~�
RHODODENRDr�ES r
r^� LIMITS OF RIFR AS DIKCTED �!
END CZJLVERT'CROS53N� OULET P. G� % - r. -_-
_ Z ENGIhPEER a XTEND 6" C TC 76'*_TO
Il N ��``1i F r w_ - {]GE OF 2OTH- AVE S.
1.27 .O ` _ T i I i i� Ewa/fr' �` '4s :.
STA V50•
�5 f15424. I_ I ' CSTC
_ ............... PROT�CT y` f 1 Y .__: F MATCH-,
t { EXST 124" I P ;'frf N f Lll4T�•bF'R AP 11Vlrf _ - . _ EXST GRADE. IIAX-T P L�•_1154i7 8 j - z� :,
' L ! ABAN 'EX 1 CC ' I . ��•,��r - _ r j• PR'QTECT -Y r
i t l A i �• :} I274805.6 1
a 1j '" C Adi4 LINK FENCE �6' FRUIT TREE
ABAN �X 2 CASP 1 ill'1 , '1 , ;;u HD CULVERT CRO SING i }`t T , ;TypN 6 (GALV3
• ` 1 L. 1 A. SEE NOTE 1 I Vy % N 1. 4 _ ��' s 4 f ]N C VERT CftD551NG
`. j (1 ;..s i i f c'1 E 1274812.3 r �y k 1V 1154 4,4
7 I i�l�~ -E 127480a
• � _�� _ �• � � _ T ' roc. s _ '
Y - - - L '• t t '�'1,s-: -l• EX' 4&8 RCP ! Y' ..1�a�,- ' - �-} s"•� f •, • f ..Y, S� '*, ' •'�j W........ ' -
{ _ 1 `��� LIMITz QF. RIPRAP"., ; - % , Q.
i } _ �,' iH111TFFIPRAP
�y rr ' 1 rl.; 0, -^ ��^+ -OUTLET Phi r � �: ! :.�l14E7 9#L.-
i i1 f�y IN CULVERT ~' � MATCH ExSEf..7 I, =!•.fir' -: " WILL6VY
!EXST 6' HIGH N 115,170,5 r ` CkIA4!tNEL
r.CHi11N LINK FENCE ' ,, ..�.....�_E 274,849 _ _ f __ _ _ �.�.r _ _-- -
1 1 , 'n; ....P ,y fie_ t _1 ,! ,1 0 4 1 4
ALAIN ST. CULV. F. _-v? - _ • ."-� p +!
EL 367� j 11 PIPE 'ARC (95' SPAN ,y , i. _ '` - : _ i _ _r
TEMP) EASEMENT _ " 11 ,I 7Q 7175 SIT, I,CONNIRCP ! i ` ` �! f
} i 4 1 .z REMOVE
^ & 14ESi p�TG
�fA H a
SD EASEMENT r } t = EXST 6' HIGH - 1 = f ~�
(TYP)' 0 .� cr ! . f I 1 I 15 1 W i I CHAIN LINK 1 ! 1 j °.:I+ P.
3r _EXST GRADE!
FENCE
{ --PRDTrECT EXST
1 Ix I I 1 = ki'. �l -,' - 22" WILL
��{..• PROTECT EXST - 1
SEE-NOTE-1. { -
_ _ _.�- i :f �_ -- _ -:.:_• ; = •� _ _ BRIDGE
_
y@ -
-y--` REMOVE -EXST 6" WILLOW = - -'114REMOVE EXST.
12" CMP, 18(t&019C,
REMOVE EXST 15" CEa - - ° 1�18" CMP C0TRTS 1
GABION -BASKET L' •
I ; NOTES: RETAINING WAL_I'
l - I r 1 PR TECT EXST
2111
1. ABANDON EXST 24" CMP UPSTREAM PROTECT--- Z - A _;1 aEOAR
F T A FILL ROAD
} 1 0 EXST CB AND FILL WITH CDF.MAINTAIN EXST 34'' FIR ,r'. ,
=- - TO ELEV 380Q
EXST 24" CMP DOWNSTREAM OF EXST CB. _„� -__•_- sj-
r PERMANENTd'AINAGE +
� �•� I �~- EASEMENT,
PLAN PLAN N y w , A f PROTECT EXST 34" CEDAR
$ -s. A 1•0
0
N PLAN TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
1"=101115420-8 j MATCH
E 274839-7 EXST GRADEEASEMENT
PIPEARCH„...... 390 ........ _......._..�.......... ... ............. ..............._------- _� _^ - 39,....,.,,......,....,.,.,...........:.
CD
Lu 0 2" CLR 4' HIGH
j 4' HIGHI CHAIN LINK;
n r CHAIN LINK �IFENCE SELECT GRANULAR FIILL
N N w GABION GRAVITY FENCE 2'
��
w (� ww w °5 @ 12" RETAINING WALL 4•! 12• 5" CSTC /j DEBRIS RACK
I I I I
6V:1H BATTER I ee FINISH! SEEM 18 LF PLAIN ST. I I I I i n2' 0" LAP I w GRADE
CULV, PIPE ARCH I i I I EXST ! I > EL 380.) S 3 EXST
� _ 1.E OUT 364.1 CONCRETE ENCASEMENT Ergo ctl v RT Caassl G �Q
_. 380 1....._............._ 1.....}_............ �R_........--.... .. n _.._...__....» IE - i I
GRACE E?BRIDGE
Ld
% I 25 YR WSEL
� 372.0 DETAIL
z DESI#IS RACK NTS
f I I I I SEEa)
T
o EX CULVERTS OUT I I REMOVE TEMP o 6 \" I �;d '
E 3661108" CONC) g _p• PLUGS CONNECT ;5=3
� IE 365.6 (24" CMP) A,TO EXST 48" RCP EX C VERTS IN
LIj
I kf E 364.0 (18'' CONC)
Lj 370.......-.-.._.._.:._.....�.._._. --- •--•• E 36 .7 (24''CMP)
EXST CHANNEL --- EL 364.1 j •
}j ».
d' SEX 4$" RCP b° L "CRT CROSSING
�_-. :Q.-.e. ......._... ..- ...1 ..366.a 2.... ... _._....__.... ..
ao -0 op � ao -0 eo � iFi•'lE��>6�:75. ..............._......
OUT IE 365.81
17.5 Lf. 48" I
1. 4X
360
0+00 RIPRAP OUTLET CONC.ENCASE O�50 l 1�00
PAD, SEE i JOINT, SEE STATIONING IN FEET RIPRAP INLET
DR-10 PAD SEE, w1
SECTION DR-10
a Pis yf 1..-10' HCRIZ r-`
1"=5' VERT
IDSGN S.J. Wasson
IDR P Ag�ESE
i, t6�6 D.C. Sta P P�.OJEI
REUSE
ONAL �� � 'OHI< S.J. Wasson 1HE CI
OF TK
E %PWfS s.r,e• APVD J.H. Rogers IIINO. DATE REVISION BY JAPVD1 aCN;m
w 380
z
z
o
r-
w
w 370
EXST
I '- EX CULVERTS IN
IE 373.E 02" CMP)
IE 373.2 (18" CONC)
IE 373.3 (18" CMP)
RIPRAP INLET
PAD, SEE®
DR_10
36o,00 NOTES: 0.50 1.00
1. INSTALL TEMPORARY CONTRACTOR'S STATIONING IN FEET
FENCING AT 5' RADIUS AROUND TREE.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE SECTION
FOR LOCATING AND REPLACING PRIVATE
UTILITIES AS REOUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION I"-l0' HORIZ
OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. 1"=5'VERT 9
I MMENTS Gm tlF WH10-CIPOI S. 324TH TO S. 336TH TRUNK STORM DRAINAGE SHEET $
IS HARE) COPY OR N BAR IS ONE INCH ON � qND .1 o T P V N7 PR T
Et'r 18 OF SERVICE FOR IFAs ox.c+HK oRAwa�c. �� �E�,�,�L GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN 1d . DR-5
EC'f IS CM,PLETEd 6R HOP.
krWCHAf1GE U 4 OR Or,pH 9Y O�1N ROAD CROSSINGS AND SECTIONS ATE APRIL 199E
ItT THROUGH OR ON BEHALF IF NOT ONE INCH ON
gTy'sS PERNISs. of THIS S ACCET, RDINGL PRIVATE DR. AND 330TH ST. p�4 132472.P1
DJUST
�TY•5 SOLE RISK, SCALES ACCORDINGLY.
LE iiAAE: ISSO64dr.dly D6-MAY-1998 IY•31:36
RIPRAP OUTLET
PAD, SEE r>rj
DR,-10,
- cE .. • ........._A.......:.._ ..... _..._.................
�5-YR WSEL
EX CULVERTS OUT I 1 3' 1 1 z 114378.2
E 372.7 (12" CMP)
IE 372.8 (18" CONC
! $ BEGIN CULVERT CROSSING
IE 372.5 (18" CMP) 1� I{!
ZD,I ; I g i tiC I IE 373.3
�-�-� - {!
t.5 LF 48'' 12 3.3/
A
f1
B
C
Fire -Application Narrative
for
Duplex
Single Family Residence
32830 20th Avenue S.
Federal Way, WA 98003
Parcel No.: 797880-0521
SWA 6-21-4
Prepared for:
Yurly Melnichuk
Date:
June 7, 2019
Prepared by:
Bruce S. MacVeigh, P.E.
14245 59th Avenue S.
Tukwila, WA 98168
206-571-8794
bruce engr91Qcomcast.net
yudymfedwaygeofechO1/1915
7Rtt1?ED
JUN 0 7 2019
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AE2017-34
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Parcel No.: 797880-0521
Address: 32830 20th Avenue S., Federal Way, WA 98003
Existing Site and Present Condition
The 23,306 square foot lot is located in 328XX block of 20th Avenue S. in Federal Way.
The parcel for this duplex is located on the east side of the street. The property was the
site of a single-family residence, now removed. The site is largely cleared, with a
preserved wooded area along a stream running through the site, to be discussed in more
detail below. The site has no established drainage system, however the stream is the
natural location for all site flows.
The new residence on this parcel will have an estimated 10,000 square feet of new
impervious area comprised of building roof, paved parking area and access driveway into
the site. The final site configuration has not been determined, however the building and
parking area will all be located in the east portion of the site, with a driveway connecting the
developed area with the street, crossing at the location of the previous residential driveway,
with the stream culverted at the crossing.
The stream has been investigated formally and buffer limits established. The report for the
stream is available separately. Buffer mapping is in the report.
Important Stream Note: The stream in the site runs through a major 40 foot long (+/-)
section of installed 4-footdi_ameter.-concretes and
equipped with government -grade features such as steel trash grill, etc. It is obvious it was
not installed by property owners, and was formally installed many decades ago by King
County, who would have had area jurisdiction at the time. The project will not after the
culvert or change or enlarge the location of the driveway over the culvert.
The site slopes down from the street to the stream, and then slopes upward to the east rear
portion of the site. As mentioned, the main buildable area is in the east portion of the site.
The typical slopes for both sloped areas about 3 to 8 percent. The site has no steep
slopes, cuts or adjacent rockeries or retaining walls. (Note that some portions of the stream
bank have greater slopes, but will not be disturbed by the proposed site development.)
Earthwork for the duplex construction is roughly estimated at 750 cubic yards of Cut, most
to be removed from site, and 200 cubic yards of Fill, mostly from suitable re -used cut soils.
The Total Earthwork is an estimated 950 cubic yards.
The site is underlain by fairly consistent soils. Typically, site soils were found to consist of
an upper layer of silt loam, underlain at various depths by clay -based soils. The observed
soils are typical Alderwood Association soils, consisting of a surface loam layer, underlain
AE2017-34 2
by till or other clay -based soils. The upper loam layer, if deep enough, is suitable for on -site
infiltration. Per attached soil logs, the upper loam layer is not deep enough for use for
general stormwater infiltration. Use of permeable pavement is possible, but not likely,
depending on the grading design for the site. Soil logs are provided in the separately
provided Geotechnical Report.
Due to topography and good draining surface soils, there is little or no runoff from
neighboring properties into this site.
The site has the mentioned stream crossing the site. The stream runs northwest to
southeast, transecting the site approximately one-third of its depth from the street. The
necessary access driveway connecting the rear buildable area to the street will likely be
in the same loca ion as the I , along the south bounda7F51 the
site. The stream at that location is culverted, likel with lar er i e. The final
site design will determine new culvert or reuse o existing culvert. Reference is made
to the formal report documenting the stream and required buffers. Aside from the
stream, there are no other documented sensitive environmental areas or critical aquifer
recharge zones.
The site is served by public water and sewer.
Important Administrative Note: Mr. Melnichuk has performed massive removal of piles of
trash and old construction debris to date. The debris was deposited over decades while
the original double -wide mobile home was in use. Some removal has been in the vicinity
of the stream, although never in the stream. In some places the debris was 2 to 4 feet
thick. The material will be removed in time as part of the new duplex project. He has a
Stop Work order on further removal, which considering the benefit and good service to
the stream itself is unfortunate. All material removed was taken to legal dump site.
Project Scope of Site Disturbance
Proposed Impervious Areas: (Rough estimate only)
House, Parking pad and Access Driveway 10,000 sf
Total area of Land Disturbing Activity: Rough estimate only
15,000 square feet (entire parcel to be disturbed, except stream buffer)
Soils Information for Drainage Evaluation
Site soils were investigated with two soil logs on December 29, 2018.
AE2017-34
4
1. Due to poor deeper site infiltrative soils, the site is not generally suitable for
stormwater infiltration. The shallow 36 inch found loam depth may be removed for the
parking area construction, exposing the clay -based layer. For that reason, most areas
are likely not projected as feasible for permeable pavement.
2. The drainage to the site will involve allowing site runoff to continue to be routed to
the stream since it is the "Natural' runoff location. Proposed is the use of pavement
sheet flow and building roof dispersion trench.
3. The drainage and installation of the access driveway/parking area will require
interpretation of the combined stream and wetland buffers, the "grandfathering" of the
existing driveway area. That is the primary purpose of the pre -application review. It will
allow the drainage review staff to coordinate with the environmental staff to determine
what can be done.
Erosion, Site Stability and Building Design Factors
The topography observed during the site visit indicates no evidence of catastrophic
slope failure. No areas of obvious surface erosion or telltale exposed surface soils were
observed on the site or on neighboring sites.
The site has no soil characteristics which require restrictions on the construction of the
building and its paved area.
Summery and Conclusion
1. The site is suitable for conventional residential construction.
2. The site is not feasible for general stormwater infiltration, and likely not feasible for
permeable pavement, depending on location and grading cut.
3. Site will require some creative design work to accommodate the site runoff into the
stream and meet identified environmental restrictions/buffers.
Questions relating to this discussion may be directed to this office through the site
owner.
r
Bruce S. MacVeigh, P.E.
Civil Engineer
yuriymfedwaypreappinartafive/1915
AE2017-34 4
Ll
niz
�3•
�,• _ may tiov
-,;,, .. :,• ,, -) �":i�: ;Y Via: � ,. ..
CIT
Federal Way
COM U ~ l t '4 7�,
l+irn ii'
cCLbr :1 NT
MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
33325 8"' Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609
www.c i tvoffederal way.coin
APPLICATION NO(S) / �' 6 / —f O Date -7 I
Project Name Y /
Property Address/Location .3,2,--P3
Parcel Number(s) 7 9 7c�9,�:;,l2 s,-2 1
Project Description A /& X jI lr v4([ 2 rr -
�S 6I, S 1 �.
�
PLEASE PRINT
Type of Permit Required
Annexation
Binding Site Plan
Boundary Line Adjustment
Comp Plan/Rezone
Land Surface Modification
ine Elimination
Preapplication Conference
Process I (Director's Approval)
Process II (Site Plan Review)
Process III (Project Approval)
Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision)
Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone)
Process VI
SEPA w/Project
SEPA Only
Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use
Short Subdivision
Subdivision
Variance: Commercial/Residential
Required Information
��76 Zoning Designation
Comprehensive Plan Designation
0 Value of Existing Improvements
�� A ��' O Value of Proposed Improvements
International Building Code (IBC):
Occupancy Type
Construction Type
Name: Y" r i Y .*, ? e /.-i.E-
Address: 3e?d' 3O
City/State: Ce,,-e C ' Ok
Zip: 9'de a 0 3
Phone: :;2 p 41'- 9 3
Fax:
Email: /yrfdOvYY7a/1-7ie-17N,E p YCr vo. co
Signature:
Agent (if different than Applicant)
Name: ( fr,vt;`�, R"'-'/ /y`r��lr�
Address: GF 0-/ (/Glgr // /� L .S F tl F rp d o;2
City/State:
Zip:
Phone:
Fax:
Email: Iyudov r+-7G/.-�7c ii�lh
3 3 / - SGl1r
Signature: �f --- %';,i e-X? i'e— /7 tr
Bulletin #003 —January 1, 2011 Page 1 of 1 k:\Handouts\Master Land Use Application
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL
DATE: 6-11-19
TO: Cole Elliott, Development Services Manager
Scott Sproul, Building Official
Rick Perez, City Traffic Engineer
Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District
Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue
FROM: Leila Willoughby -Oakes
FOR DRC MTG. ON: June 27, 2019- Internal
July 11, 2019, 9:00 AM - with applicant
FILE NUMBER(s): 19-102748-00-PC
RELATED FILE NOS.: 18-104201-00-AD (Critical Areas Peer Review)
PROJECT NAME: MELNICHUK DUPLEX W/ CRITICAL AREAS
PROJECT ADDRESS: 32830 20TH AVE S
ZONING DISTRICT: RM 3600
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed duplex on a site with wetlands and
stream. Demolition on site resulted in critical
area intrusions.
LAND USE PERMITS: Process II Required
PROJECT CONTACT. YURIY & LYUBOV MELNICHUK
lyubovmelnichuk@yahoo.com
MATERIALS SUBMITTED: Preapp Narrative
Plans
Critical Area Report
Geotech Report
Vicinity Map
CITY OF
Federal Way
Centered on Opportunity
June 11, 2019
Yuriy & Lyubov Melnichuk
6821 Udall Place SE, Unit E202
Auburn, WA 98092
1 m ❑ lni h aha . rn
Re: File #19-102748-00- PC; PREAPPLICATION CONFERENCE
Melnichuk Duplex, 30005 21s, Avenue SW, Federal Way
Dear Mr. & Ms. Melnichuk:
CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
(253) 835-7000
www. cityoffederalway. com
Jim Ferrell, Mayor
The Community Development Department is in receipt of your preapplication conference request. The
application has been routed to members of the Development Review Committee and the conference has been
scheduled as follows:
10:00 a.m. — Thursday, July 11, 2019
Hylebos Conference Room
Federal Way City Hall, 2nd Floor
33325 81h Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
We look forward to meeting with you. Please coordinate directly with anyone else you would like to attend
the conference as this will be the only notice sent by the department. If you have any questions regarding the
conference, please contact me at leila wiUouglzby- akes aciUffederabwR � , or 253-835-2644.
Sincerely,
Leila Willoughby -Oakes
Associate Planner
Doc. La 79268
19-102748-00-PC
j jl!
�`�`�"--LICANT TO RESTORE ALL STREAM/WETLAND BUFFER AREAS FROM 2018
W�,�1:nRs '1b a MOLITION WITH PLANTING, MITIGATION & MONITORING PLAN**
delineate and flag ordinary high water mark and associated stream
fc-typing/ 35 ft. stream butler on plans. Dispersion trench appears to be
in stream buffer. Process III required for stream crossings/HPA
required for work past OH WM by WDFW/ work on lands covered by
$, a water requires SEPA checklist Relocate house and
• • +•• m ai �' m Gpr improvemen
ut t footprint
oof wetland buffer
to greatest extent
1 ll jl I possible to the for
S89 -2122 "E 211.01 , mitigation sequencing
14' W7 q>• Sr
WILY Al
42' Ceda .' l5"� 1 I _�
�60
C
Z
rllr
� � . n � maul• n � \
cu
014
l ' \ LO
1 , iD
41
j- dS 1
aaa
1
46- F1r
FX. 4B"1 tip � 04
LDV;
LULVE.PT. ■
Parking areas to not
VERTICAL DATUM locate in required
yards.
/ ASSUMED 100.00 AT NORTH RIM OF MDN CASE IN THE /
■ ■ ■�� HORIZONTAL
OF S. 330THE ST. AND 20TH AVE. S.
\rr iL{ O.�}RIZONTAL DATUM �nn nk.'L fr 1 IaPA rC-
at
PROCEDURE USED F �p
■ • FIELD TRAVERSE G ELECTRONIC DATA COLLECTION Sr
Si EGENE] /
FOIM+D PROPERTY CORNER AS INDICATE
SET REBAR G CAP LSO 6220
19.146.130 Mitigation sequencing. _ �•-__-.. _ -.-. .. OWER POLE I�tp
IRE HYDRANT r Q'FC_ I
Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to ATFR VALVE
critical areas When alteraton to a critical area Is Proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized, or compensated in the nC ATFR METER
following order of preference: �` ! + �]4 MANHOLE -GRAIN OR SEWER
p r V GAS STU13 1' (1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or pwis of an ac� I* CONIFER AS DESCRIBED
�5 (2}A7in -Sn mpects 4 MN9ng the dsgrse ar magn@oda of lme 4a- w4d+1s WM OW"i"iam 9 * DECIDUOUS AS DESCRIBED
OVER
%dw4cV, arty Wimp admaf" atsPr. srxh ea pa)erx rad°1am Vim 20. r• Or a• � Gild a ft"M 6n`P=.—P—tow—EDOEDGE HEAD ELECTRIC LINES
OF PAVEMENT
(3) Rectifying the impact to the critical area by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to ma conditions O— CWO�NFENCE WIC FENCE
LINK OR 11 4('�{ �j�.1� I4FlfY.P. i�CT F�IGec
existing at the time of the iniltation of the project; —G— GASLINE Rj - ]]/SpFRS/d •� �•�s ¢
—W-- WATERLINE 1/I1UyiV+
(4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over rime by preservation and maintenance operations durhg the life of the action; STREAM
SANITARY SEWER
6 Compensating for the impact replacing.enhand or providing substitute resources or environments; CULVERT BOUNDARY
() g pac rg, prov gsu CULVERT --
(6) Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. WOOD EOOD OF PAVING AT FACE OF CURB t Y � (J�l�- - _ D e o F OrS p E es/cos-r
= RETAINING WALL Pp ✓e "ie.rr DrSv6P�/uu
®ROCK RETAINING WALL /
(Ord No. 15797, § 22, 6-16-15) CONCRETE SIDEWALK
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Tiff 90UTH tW1. G14 FEET OF THE NORTH 172.428 FEET AS MEASURED
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 07. SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT IN SECTION! 16,
TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST. W.N.. IN KIM COUifY. WASR,NSTON, ��F-AQ�� , ��jef•�O�
ACCORGINO TO 'Oe PLAT 1HFFE0F RECOFOM IN VOWHE 42 OF PLATE. PAGE 23. IN KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON. t 5CAL E• 1 r = 10
� .'" RI=C IVED.
l]
rJ JUN i 2019 ' MF� t r�
�6id/ s�i^�a� �� �y S -0Sw%
1 �i '--1i , 1 d oOtAMMNY
C r'Yil i . r r r�r ..-�f s 01
I*-F AS t
11 1 I
54" Cad
MLF A3 t
ti I `{yG71AN0
24" Will
A6
Call
I� NLF. Ail � pow,
32• + �r ��
f I Z re ■ /
If i I,
.P.0d
12• Aide r
-Be g 9a S89 °2 22 "E 27101
�`�`�"--LICANT TO RESTORE ALL STREAM/WETLAND BUFFER AREAS FROM 2018
W�,�1:nRs '1b a MOLITION WITH PLANTING, MITIGATION & MONITORING PLAN**
delineate and flag ordinary high water mark and associated stream
fc-typing/ 35 ft. stream butler on plans. Dispersion trench appears to be
in stream buffer. Process III required for stream crossings/HPA
required for work past OH WM by WDFW/ work on lands covered by
$, a water requires SEPA checklist Relocate house and
• • +•• m ai �' m Gpr improvemen
ut t footprint
oof wetland buffer
to greatest extent
1 ll jl I possible to the for
S89 -2122 "E 211.01 , mitigation sequencing
14' W7 q>• Sr
WILY Al
42' Ceda .' l5"� 1 I _�
�60
C
Z
rllr
� � . n � maul• n � \
cu
014
l ' \ LO
1 , iD
41
j- dS 1
aaa
1
46- F1r
FX. 4B"1 tip � 04
LDV;
LULVE.PT. ■
Parking areas to not
VERTICAL DATUM locate in required
yards.
/ ASSUMED 100.00 AT NORTH RIM OF MDN CASE IN THE /
■ ■ ■�� HORIZONTAL
OF S. 330THE ST. AND 20TH AVE. S.
\rr iL{ O.�}RIZONTAL DATUM �nn nk.'L fr 1 IaPA rC-
at
PROCEDURE USED F �p
■ • FIELD TRAVERSE G ELECTRONIC DATA COLLECTION Sr
Si EGENE] /
FOIM+D PROPERTY CORNER AS INDICATE
SET REBAR G CAP LSO 6220
19.146.130 Mitigation sequencing. _ �•-__-.. _ -.-. .. OWER POLE I�tp
IRE HYDRANT r Q'FC_ I
Applicants shall demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to ATFR VALVE
critical areas When alteraton to a critical area Is Proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized, or compensated in the nC ATFR METER
following order of preference: �` ! + �]4 MANHOLE -GRAIN OR SEWER
p r V GAS STU13 1' (1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or pwis of an ac� I* CONIFER AS DESCRIBED
�5 (2}A7in -Sn mpects 4 MN9ng the dsgrse ar magn@oda of lme 4a- w4d+1s WM OW"i"iam 9 * DECIDUOUS AS DESCRIBED
OVER
%dw4cV, arty Wimp admaf" atsPr. srxh ea pa)erx rad°1am Vim 20. r• Or a• � Gild a ft"M 6n`P=.—P—tow—EDOEDGE HEAD ELECTRIC LINES
OF PAVEMENT
(3) Rectifying the impact to the critical area by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to ma conditions O— CWO�NFENCE WIC FENCE
LINK OR 11 4('�{ �j�.1� I4FlfY.P. i�CT F�IGec
existing at the time of the iniltation of the project; —G— GASLINE Rj - ]]/SpFRS/d •� �•�s ¢
—W-- WATERLINE 1/I1UyiV+
(4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over rime by preservation and maintenance operations durhg the life of the action; STREAM
SANITARY SEWER
6 Compensating for the impact replacing.enhand or providing substitute resources or environments; CULVERT BOUNDARY
() g pac rg, prov gsu CULVERT --
(6) Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. WOOD EOOD OF PAVING AT FACE OF CURB t Y � (J�l�- - _ D e o F OrS p E es/cos-r
= RETAINING WALL Pp ✓e "ie.rr DrSv6P�/uu
®ROCK RETAINING WALL /
(Ord No. 15797, § 22, 6-16-15) CONCRETE SIDEWALK
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Tiff 90UTH tW1. G14 FEET OF THE NORTH 172.428 FEET AS MEASURED
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 07. SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT IN SECTION! 16,
TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST. W.N.. IN KIM COUifY. WASR,NSTON, ��F-AQ�� , ��jef•�O�
ACCORGINO TO 'Oe PLAT 1HFFE0F RECOFOM IN VOWHE 42 OF PLATE. PAGE 23. IN KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON. t 5CAL E• 1 r = 10
� .'" RI=C IVED.
l]
rJ JUN i 2019 ' MF� t r�
�6id/ s�i^�a� �� �y S -0Sw%
1 �i '--1i , 1 d oOtAMMNY
C r'Yil i . r r r�r ..-�f s 01
I*-F AS t
11 1 I
54" Cad
MLF A3 t
ti I `{yG71AN0
24" Will
A6
Call
I� NLF. Ail � pow,
32• + �r ��
f I Z re ■ /
If i I,
.P.0d
12• Aide r
-Be g 9a S89 °2 22 "E 27101
1.
2.
3.
4.
Pre -application Conference Sin in Sheet
c�ry o� pp f g
Federal Way
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
July 11, 2019 City Hall
10:00 a.m. Hylebos Room
Project Name: McIinchuk Duplex! Critical Area Intrusion Bequest & Rch ab iiitaticn
Address: 32830 20 Avenue South. Federal Wav
File Number: 19- -00-PC
NAME DEPARTMENT / DIVISION TELEPHONE NUMBER
Leila Willoughby -Oakes, Planning/Community 253-835-2644
Associate Planner Development Dept. L,eila.Willoughb
C'RKERMW to
s��
17v.] ' f 161L Dw.
�� /V 1 CIO1 s Sow
5.
3
7.
8
so
10. Vs,, 6�, Berl
11
12.
XAJ& VAVA-AI-jZ
6ST, Z5¢ ;
1 I-- - - -—.I _If
Ctrn(AL *tE A
1 w I m
i
b �o
1
delineate and flag ordinary high water mark and associated Ns stream
typing/ 35 ft. stream buffer on plans. DLSperaion trench appears to be
in stream buffer. Process III required for stream crossings/HPA
required for work past OHWM by VVDFN// work on lands covered by
water requires SEPA checklist
4 s2 I
j M °21'221 271.0f
F qy
42'
\\ �\ I °•�.�
CC7aR l
ttl.F A2
WLF � T y - 54" CBtl rl
1 I
a'
\ I 1 WLF• 05
r
/AJI 9,PEA7
l
I / � � � -BG � •� 9 jf
°2122T 271.01 s
Relocate house and
improvement footprint
out of wetland buffer
to greatest extent
possible to the for
mitigation sequencing
1
CU
N
LO
00
W
A
�a
o�
z
�-
I'XrVW 'aJA. I m lt� Lu �l 7 - k I
em".. g
=rau�i
pATVM
ASSUMED rM O At NORTH RIM of MON CASE IN THE
F WORE T AL OF
S. 330THE ST. AND 20TH AVE. S. �I
wy[1 HORIZONTAL OgTIM n i V
ASSUMED
� PROCEDURE USED ZOr
�� FIELD TRAVERSE 8 ELECTRONIC DATA COLLECTION ((�� D F
i FLEGOU0.0
ND
O lJ� v^-
FOUNO I+ROPERTI' CORNER AS INDICATED
REBAR G CAP LSi 6228
R POLE
Applicants shall demonstrele that all reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to Q IRE HYDRANT 0.
ATER VALVE
crlligl areas. When alteratlon to a critical area is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized or compensated in me � C ATER METER
following order of preference: % + It
MANOLE-DRAIN OR SEWER
(1)Avoiding lhelmpeciallagetherbynollaking a certsinacbWtorpY ofanacion; r GASH STUB
IpC CONIFER AS DESCRIBED
[tj MinimlzJng impacts bw lim,Rg me defpar or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using approprNe f >� DECIDUOUS AS DESCRIBED End I f
technology or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or liming, to avoid or reduce impacts; —P'—OVER HEAD ELECTRIC LINES
—EDGE OF PAVEMENT ` T��OJIrA4�
(3) Rectifyin the impact to me cdtical area b repairing. rehahllltadn or restoring the affected environment to me cenditions —K— CHAIN LINK OR WIRE FENCE - Y �N�JJr.P- N�7 FE'/ee'�
9 P yr P g• 9 —o— WOOD FENCE „I1 Ijr
existing at the time of me initiation of the project: —G— GASLINE I i.tZ' '�'�("�" # .
—W— WATERLINE l V 1SP�RSraK �'�QD
(4) Reducing or eliminating me impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during me life of me allon: STREAM J 5 J { -act
9— SANITARY SEWER ve- LJ'FF 4 h
(5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and �'— WETLAND BOUNDARY {
k=-( CULVERT
(6) Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. EDSE OF PAVING AT FACE OF CURB
= NOOD RETAINING WALL
®ROCK RETAINING WALL rSVFPc/��
(Ord. No 15-797, g 22, 6-16-15) i CONCRETE SIDEWALK
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THE SWTH 06. 214 FEET OF THE 110RT4 172. 42S FEET AS MEASURED
ALOM6 IP EAST NORTH.
OF LOT B7, SUPPLEMENTAL'PLAT IN B. WASH NG
ACCOROIP 27 NORTH, PLAT
4 BAST, W.M., IN KING C 4Ug O 11AAHINOTON,
PAGE aI. TO THE PLA7 THEREOF NGTOfApOq IN
VOLUE 4P OF
SiATB.
PAGE 23. 7N KING LVWTY. WASISIH0TLW1. � -{ SCALE.' 1 1Q
CL
JUN07 2019 S tp�rf1
I
Geotechnical Report
for
Duplex
Single Family Residence
32830 20th Avenue S.
Federal Way, WA 98003
Parcel No.: 797880-0521
SW-16-21-4
Prepared for:
Yurly Meinichuk
Date:
April 27, 2019
Prepared by:
Bruce S. MacVeigh, P.E.
14245 59th Avenue S.
Tukwila, WA 98168
206-571-8794
bruce engr91@comcast.net
yuriymfedwaygeotech01/1915
RECEIVED
JUN 0 7 2019
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
COMMUNITY DEy OPMEriT
AE2017-34
2
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Parcel No.: 797880-0521
Address: 32830 20th Avenue S., Federal Way, WA 98003
Existing Site and Drainage Considerations
The 23,306 square foot lot is located in 328XX block of 20th Avenue S. in Federal Way.
The parcel for this duplex is located on the east side of the street. The property was the
site of a single-family residence, now removed. The site is largely cleared, with a
preserved wooded area along a stream running through the site, to be discussed in more
detail below. The site has no established drainage system, however the stream is the
natural location for all site flows.
The new residence on this parcel will have an estimated 10,000 square feet of new
impervious area comprised of building roof, paved parking area and access driveway into
the site. The final site configuration has not been determined, however the building and
parking area will all be located in the east portion of the site, with a driveway connecting the
developed area with the street, crossing at the location of the previous residential driveway,
with the stream culverted at the crossing.
The stream has been investigated formally and buffer limits established. The report for the
stream is available separately. Buffer mapping is in the report.
The site slopes down from the street to the stream, and then slopes upward to the east rear
portion of the site. As mentioned, the main buildable area is in the east portion of the site.
The typical slopes for both sloped areas about 3 to 8 percent. The site has no steep
slopes, cuts or adjacent rockeries or retaining walls. (Note that some portions of the stream
bank have greater slopes, but will not be disturbed by the proposed site development.)
Earthwork for the duplex construction is roughly estimated at 750 cubic yards of Cut, most
to be removed from site, and 200 cubic yards of Fill, mostly from suitable re -used cut soils.
The Total Earthwork is an estimated 950 cubic yards.
The site is underlain by fairly consistent soils. Typically, site soils were found to consist of
an upper layer of silt loam, underlain at various depths by clay -based soils. The observed
soils are typical Alderwood Association soils, consisting of a surface loam layer, underlain
by till or other clay -based soils. The upper loam layer, if deep enough, is suitable for on -site
infiltration. Per attached soil logs, the upper loam layer is not deep enough for use for
general stormwater infiltration. Use of permeable pavement is possible depending on the
grading design for the site. Soil logs are given below.
AE2017-34
Due to topography and good draining surface soils, there is little or no runoff from
neighboring properties into this site.
The site has the mentioned stream crossing the site. The stream runs northwest to
southeast, transecting the site approximately one-third of its depth from the street. The
necessary access driveway connecting the rear buildable area to the street will likely be
in the same location as the old residence driveway, along the south boundary of the
site. The stream at that location is culverted, likely with a 12" or larger pipe. The final
site design will determine new culvert or re -use of existing culvert. Reference is made
to the formal report documenting the stream and required buffers. Aside from the
stream, there are no other documented sensitive environmental areas or critical aquifer
recharge zones.
The site is served by public water and sewer.
Project Scope of Site Disturbance
Proposed Impervious Areas: Rough estimate only
House, Parking pad and Access Driveway 10,000 sf
Total area of Land Disturbing Activity: Rough estimate only
15,000 square feet (entire parcel to be disturbed, except stream buffer)
Soils Information for Drainage Evaluation
Site soils were investigated with two soil logs on December 29, 2018.
The soils showed some variability over different portions of the site. Generally, the soils
were Alderwood, with surface loams underlain by clay -based soils. The upper loam
layer varied from 36 inches to 66 inches. The underlying clay -soils were not observed
to be mottled, likely due to site slopes which reduce long standing sub -surface water at
the clay -soils interface. See attached soil logs.
Soil mapping labels this soil as Alderwood, AgC, which has slopes of 6 to 15 percent, as
found on this site. Discussion follows:
1. Due to poor deeper site infiltrative soils, the site is not generally suitable for
stormwater infiltration. The shallow 36 inch found loam depth may be removed for the
parking area construction, exposing the clay -based layer. For that reason, most areas
are not projected as feasible for permeable pavement. Site will likely require some
AE2017-34
4
creative design work to accommodate the site runoff into the stream. More drainage
discussion is not within the scope of this report.
Erosion, Site Stability and Building Design Factors
The topography observed during the site visit indicates no evidence of catastrophic
slope failure. No areas of obvious surface erosion or telltale exposed surface soils were
observed on the site or on neighboring sites.
Seismic Hazard:
Seismic hazards for slopes may be comprised of either general non -cohesive silt soil
saturation or classic seismic liquefaction. With general saturation, failure occurs in
either a direct diagonal slippage (shear failure) or at a saturated layer of loose silts
which semi -liquefy and "pour" out of their original higher location. The soils of this area
do not appear susceptible to this mode of failure due to the generally open and pervious
nature of the well -graded loam soils. As noted above, there is no indication of this
mode of failure occurring previously on this site or in the surrounding area. Based on
the above, the possibility of hillside failure by this mode of seismic failure is low.
The second mode of failure is caused by a water saturation of a uniformly graded larger
grained non -cohesive soil (e.g., sand), which in this condition is subject to seismic
movement. For the soils in question, the possibility of full saturation of any layer is not
present (at least in the sense of water surrounding individual soil particles) due to its
free draining characteristics. In addition, the soils as noted are not of the type allowing
this type of movement. The possibility of seismic movement is, of course, always
present, however, the possibility of seismic liquefaction failure for this site is negligible.
Slope Stability Studies and Opinions of Slope Stability:
No previous slope stability studies are known to have been prepared for this site.
As noted above, the site appears stable and not subject to long term erosion or
catastrophic failure.
Proposed Angles of Cut and Fill Slopes and Site Grading Requirements:
Only moderate to light construction affecting the site soils is proposed as part of the
site's proposed future construction. The following are provided for general information
and guidance.
The usual minimum 18 inch depth is recommended for all new building foundations.
AE2017-34 4
During temporary excavations for utilities and foundations, a vertical cut face up to 4
foot high is acceptable. Long term permanent cuts and fills involving native soils should
be at a maximum of 2:1 unless otherwise approved by a licensed engineer familiar with
the site.
Site grading should follow standard practice as regards erosion control as discussed
below, including silt fencing and protecting of stockpiled soils, and the minimizing the
areas to be cleared and disturbed to that necessary for approved construction.
Significant structural fill is not required for the proposed construction of new residence.
Should it be required due to unforeseen circumstances, the following guidelines should
be followed. Cut horizontal steps into the slope (for fills over 3 feet total), place non -clay
materials in maximum 6" lifts, and mechanically compact to 95 percent. Note that for
non-structural fill in yard areas, the 6" lifts and mechanical compaction may be omitted,
although some settling will occur over time. Revegetation of finished slope areas
should follow good landscaping practice.
Structural Foundation Requirements and Estimated Foundation Settlement:
A foundation bearing pressure of 1,500 PSF is recommended for bearing on existing
undisturbed clay -based soils. As mentioned, all foundations should be placed on
undisturbed soils a minimum of 18" below finished grade. All foundations should be
placed at a 2:1 backslope or farther from the toe of any slope.
Based on observed soils, a lateral resistance factor of 0.40 for lateral loading may be
safely used for design of structural retaining walls and basement walls. Note that the
ground level floors may be cast concrete which would provide additional long term
lateral resistance to movement of the walls and their footings. It is recommended that
the outside of the wall footings be backfilled against prior to interior backfilling as a good
general construction practice.
Based on experience with similar soils used for wood frame residential construction, a
settlement of less than 1/4 inch would be expected within a 50 foot length of new
structure. It should be noted that during site visits by this office, existing concrete
foundations of the site's house, in place for over 60 years, showed no significant
cracking or settlement.
Soil Compaction Criteria:
Loam soils on site are suitable for structural backfill, but in all cases would require
mechanical compaction. Note that the deeper clay -based soils are not suitable. For
deep fills, not foreseen for this site, imported select granular pit run is recommended.
AE2017-34
Compaction in foundation and vehicular traffic areas should be to 95%, uniformly and
mechanically compacted. The need for structural backfill for this site, except in utility
trenching, is minimal. Structural backfill should be mechanically compacted in 6-inch
lifts, and that it is done in only damp or dry weather. Questions relating to the adequacy
of compacted material should be evaluated by a licensed engineer inspection on site.
Proposed Surface and Subsurface Drainage:
See Section above.
Geotechnical Engineering Information - Lateral Earth Pressures:
Due to the dense nature of the in place loam soils, a design lateral pressure for
foundation and retaining walls of 35 PCF is suitable (passive and active). All walls over
4 feet in total height must be designed by a licensed engineer and use the 1.5 safety
factor per accepted practice.
Vulnerability of Site to Erosion:
Undisturbed bare loam soils on site are moderately subject to erosion. Disturbed loam
and clay -based soils are subject to significant erosion. Disturbed soils on or near slope
areas are subject to possibly significant erosion. For the above reasons the exposure of
disturbed soils on or near any slope areas should be protected with straw or tarping if
left exposed for more than one week during the wet season. All disturbed areas must
have properly installed silt fencing on their downhill side. A standard stabilized rock
construction entrance will be needed. Note that soil disturbance within the stream
buffer is not permitted except in a controlled way to construct the access driveway
crossing the stream.
With the use of erosion control measures, as mentioned above, the proposed
construction should be able to take place without significant erosion to the site, or the
transporting of silts off site.
Suitability of On -Site Soils for Use as Fill:
The native surface loams on site are suitable for all fill in damp or dry weather, with
mechanical compaction required in structural fill areas, as noted above.
AE2017-34 6
Laboratory Data and Soil Index Properties:
Field testing was done of soil samples encountered. All loam soils were found to be
original silty sandy loams.
Formal laboratory testing of soil samples was not deemed necessary for the evaluation
of site soils for this site and type of construction.
Building Limitations:
General residential construction may take place during wet weather provided the above
specified erosion control measures are strictly employed. Arbitrary wet weather
restrictions based on specific dates for this site and its development are not
recommended.
Providing the above recommendations and construction criteria are adhered to in the
design and placement of the residential structure and related site work, no site related
building limitations are recommended for these sites.
Summery and Conclusion
1. The site is suitable for conventional residential construction.
2. The site is not feasible for general stormwater infiltration, and likely not feasible for
permeable pavement, depending on location and grading cut.
Questions relating to this report and to site related problems which may arise during
construction of the new residences may be directed to this office.
�r
Bruce S. Mac eigh, P.E.
Civil Engineer
yurl ymge o to ch 01 /1915
EXPIRES: 4124II ?
AE2017-34 7
` 8
3. V
Y
SOIL LOG 1
AE2017-34 8
E
aid
�:
•
4�
}ise,
' .
..
A�- ,r
M'
SOIL LOG 2
AE2017-34 9
10
SOIL LOGS DECEMBER 29,2018
Soil Log 1
0 - 36" SANDY MEDIUM LOAM
36 - 54" SANDY CLAYEY LOAM
54 - 60"+ CLAY HARDPAN (NO MOTTLING)
WATER - NONE
Soil Log 2
0 - 66" SANDY MEDIUM LOAM
66 - 72"+ GREY CLAY HARDPAN (NO MOTTLING)
WATER - NONE
SOILS ON SITE DETERMINED TO BE INFEASIBLE FOR GENERAL STORMWATER
INFILTRATION AND LIKELY INFEASIBLE FOR PERMEABLE PAVEMENT,
DEPENDING ON LOCATION AND SOIL GRADING CUT.
AE2017-34 10
5 3`Z`€'jtr
FeL-eral:
VIZI ITY ISAP
If,, = 5—D,01
200m
J
6®®ft
Seminole
Way
Colonial Blvd
u
r' S 328th RI
Ln
ui 1 l� .•,ram
S 3 2 1 "� FLderal
t;
Af,
I
L9
r32830 20th ave s :316tn PI tit 17th
Show search results for 32830 2... St 3trth '
3GEh 3 �D[Iv St J
�.. . _1 5W r S. 321rt St
i
N ; .• r - c5
St ff m Jy
PI Tj
.. y a ftf • - F'
-tip . +n a •, - � .fir ?� - r. � i
.t
u;
Celelsi dtsrn 3zst+ a t
Stih 33Cttn St +^ Paj 5 330th St
p
f c' f` 33vx9 t tyXT 7
V1
S. 33&h St
.,
ray K 1 33 tb :.r
a
r . p'csi�i Riit'i ro {, l.�'i-• �'�t 11 piG'
4 IV-tAt.'a
Federal
t C� Y ry
f 'aril � �l S; 5 344th S[
Mahe 4;I11ul1y a Way
.i'
L y' L t d
lJeIIcV,N
5 348th 5t S .348thSt
[J a
St 349th
^'Itil�{�Pf1
y VvOest Hylebos m ps:c ?ml rl
a �r South r
0 King County
0.4mi
'•r' _ - � -__sue:-,t�.:..�.. _ ..�•�- �1 - _ _
:r.
Show search results for 32834) 2
pp. a 'r dp�,��� ss rliv'JJ � '�i[��''11•��1
� C,X,
� A������r� + - �.,,y ..{ � � + i mil' •L + _ �., ..:-
I fir: • �} k s �' = •4 5!
Asa :� ••� ,'�� _ +'r.- � � .���. -
3R.
L9 Nap
32830 20th ave s
Show search results for 32830 2...
, jtjkr�
L I.1_.I__� �I_J J
King %- Col
urban planners, engineers, a )theis, and then finally evoly. 'reflect
adjust the groups according tv the results of their -soils and their behavior
studies and consultation: Thus; the groups that are use•and management.
GENERAL SOIL MAP
The general soil map at the back of this survey
shows, in color, the -soil associations•in the King
County Area. A soil association,is a•landscape that
has a distinctive proportional pattern of soils.
It normally consists of one or more major soils grid
at least one minor soil, and it is -named for the
major soils. The soils in one association may occur
in another, but in a different pattern.
A map showing soil associations is useful to peo-
ple who want a general idea of the soils in an area,
who want to compare:different partsof an•area or
who want to know the location of large 'tracts that
are suitable for a certain kind of land use. Such a
map is a useful general -guide in managing a water-
shed, a wooded tract, or a wildlife area, or in
planning engineering works, recreational facilities,
and community developments. It is not a suitable
map for planning the management -of a farm or field,
or for selecting the exact location of .a road,
building or similar structure, because the soils in
any one association ordinarily differ in slope,
up-to-date knowledge •of the
under present methods of
depth, stoniness, drainage, and other characteristics
that affect their management.
The seven soil associations in the'King County
Area are described in the following pages_. '
I. AldeYwood Association
Moderately well drained, undulatin to hill soils
that have dense, very s owly. erme le lacial till
at a UVJJtn of 20 to- 40 in es; on u iands an
terraces
This association occurs as large tracts on up-
lands and terraces in both the northern and southern
parts of the - survey area. It is about 85-percent
Aldetwood soils, H percent Everett soil's, and 7 per-
cent less extensive soils (fig. z). This associa-
tion occupies about 52 percent of the survey area.
Figure 2.--Pattern of soils and parent material in soil association 1.
Alderwood soils are moderately well drained grav-
elly .sandy foams that are 24 to 40 inches deep over
consolidated glacial till. They have convex -slopes.
Slopes are dominantly . o to 30 percent, but range to
as much as 70 percent. Slopes of more than is per-
cent are generally no more than 200 feet long.
Everett soils are nearly level and undulating to:
moderately steep. They are on terraces and terrace
fronts.
The less extensive soils.in this association are
in depressions or on terraces along small streams.
These soils, mostly the Norma, Bellingham, Orcas,
Shalcar, and Seattle soils, have impeded drainage
and -are subject to flooding. There are significant
acreages of Kitsap soils, which have a silty sub-
stratum, -in the major valleys and around Lake h1ash-
ington and Puget Sound.
The soils of this association are well suited to
pasture and timber production but are poorly suited
to cultivated crops. Urban development is occurring
rapidly. Limitations for homesites are moderate and
slight on most of this association, but are severe
on Kitsap soils.
2. Oridia-Seattle-Woodinville Association
Somewhat Poorly drained and very poorly drained,
nearly level soils; in major stream valleys
This association is in major stream valleys, or
nearby level areas in both the southern and northern
parts of the survey area. It is about 17 percent
Oridia soils, 13 percent Seattle soils, and 10 per-
cent Woodinville soils. About 60 percent is -soils
of small extent, mainly Briscot, Edgewick, Newberg,
Nooksack, Pilchuck, Puget, Puyallup, Renton, Si,
Sultan, Snohomish, Shalcar, and Tukwila soils. This
association occupies about 11 percent of the survey
area.
Oridia soils are somewhat poorly drained, strati-
fied silt loams.. Briscot, Edgewick, Newberg, Nook -
sack, Puget, Renton, Si, and Sultan soils, which are
similar to Oridia soils, are stratified, well -drain-
ed to poorly drained sandy loams, silt loams, and
silty clay foams. Most are subject to flooding.
Seattle, Shalcar, and Tukwila soils are very poor-
ly drained deposits of peat and muck. Pilchuck soils
are sandy, excessively drained, and subject to
flooding.
Woodinville and Snohomish soils are poorly drain-
ed silt loams that contain layers of peat.
Most soils in this association are well suited to
row crops, but a few are better suited to pasture
and forage crops. In general, these are the most
desirable soils for farming in -the survey area. Site
preparation for urban development is more costly on
this association than on most of the other associa-
tions. Limitations are moderate and severe for
residential and commercial sites.
3. Buckley-Alderwood Association
Poorly drained and moderately well drained, nearl
level to coffin soils t at.have dense, slowly per
-
me le and ve slowly erme le glacial till at a
e t o 20 to znc es; on laclal ti 1 lains,anc
Up -L anas
This association is on glacial till plains and
uplands -in the;.southeastern part of the survey.area,
It is about 60 percent Buckley soils and 35 percent
Alderwood soils (fig. 3). The rest is soils of minc
extent, Thisassociation occupies about 7 percent
of the survey:area.
Buckley soils are nearly level, poorly drained
silt loams and gravelly loams. They have a very
dense substratum. .
Alderwood soils'are undulating to rolling, moder-
ately well drained gravelly sandy loams. .Their
substratum is consolidated glacial till.
Among the -minor soils are level, poorly drained
peat and muck soils of the Seattle, Tukwila, and.
Shalcar series•and moderately steep Beausite soils
that have bedrock at a.depth,of 20 to 40 inches. -
Most of the farms on .this. association are dairy -
farms. Seasonal wetness and gravelly soils are the
main limitations for row 'crops.
Residential development on this association is of
moderate extent and has been mostly on Alderwood
soils. Alderwood soils have moderate limitations
for homesites, and Buckley soils have severe
limitations. Both have severe limitations for
septic tank filter fields. .Seattle, Shalcar, and
Tukwila soils have severe limitations for homesites
and septic,tank.filter fields.
4. Everett Association
Somewhat excessively drained, gravelly, gently undu-
latin sO11s underlain by sand and ravel; on ter-
races
This association is -dominantly on terraces in the
southeastern part of the survey area; smaller areas
are scattered throughout the northern half. The
associationoccupies about 14 percent of the survey
area. It is about 70•percent Everett soils, 1s per-
cent Neilton soils; 7 percent Alderwood soils, and 8
percent less extensive soils (fig. 4).
Everett soils are gravelly sandy loam to a depth
of 18 to 36 inches. They are underlain by very
gravelly sand. Slopes are dominantly 0 to 15 per-
cent, but -are as steep as 30 percent on terrace
fronts.
Neilton soils also are on terraces. They are
gravelly loamy sand to a depth of 18 to 30 inches.
Alderwood soils have consolidated glacial -till in
the substratum. These soils are rolling and hilly.
Slopes range up to 30 percent.
Less extensive in this association are the
Indianola, Seattle, and Norma soils. Indianola soils
are somewhat excessively drained and sandy. Slopes
DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SOILS
1
This section describes the soil series and map-
ping units in the King County Area.-. Each soil
series is described and then each mapping -unit in
that series. Unless it is specifically mentioned
otherwise, it is to be assumed that what is stated
about the soil -series holds true for' the mapping
units in that series. Thus, to get full information
about anyone mapping unit, it •is'necessary to read
both the description of the mapping unit and the
description of -the soil series to which•it belongs.
An important part of the description of each
soil series is the soil profile, that is, the
sequence of layers from the surface downward to
rock or other underlying material.. Each series
contains.two descriptions of this profile. The
first is brief'and in terms. familiar to the layman.
The second, detailed and in technical terms, is for
scientists, engineers,.and others who need to make
thokough and precise studies of soils. Unless• it
is otherwise stated, the colors given in the
descriptions are those of a moist soil.
As mentioned- in •the section "How This Survey Was
Made," not all mapping units are members of a soil
series. Urban land, for example, does not belong
to a soil series, but nevertheless, - is listed in.
alphabetic order'along with the soil series.
Following the name of each mapping unit is'a
symbol in'parentheses. 'This symbol identifies the
mapping unit on the detailed soil -map. Listed at
the end of each description of a mapping unit is the
capability unit and woodland group in which the
mapping unit has been placed. The woodland desig-
nation and -the page for the description of each
capability unit can be found by referring to the
"Guide to Mapping Units" at the back'of this survey,
-The acreage and proportionate extent of each
mapping unit are shown in table 1. Many of the
terms used in describing soils can be found in the
Glossary vat the end of this survey, and more de-
tailed information about the terminology and methods
of soil mapping can be obtained from the Soil Survey
Manual (19).
Alderwood Series
Ald.erwood soils are used for timber, pasture,
berries; row crops., and urban development. They
are -the -most extensive soils in 'the survey area.
-�.)M-- Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent
slopes AgC This soil is rolling. Areas are
irregular in shape and range from 10 to about 600
acres in size. --
Representative profile of Alderwood gravelly
sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, in woodland,
450 feet east and 1,300 feet south of the north
quarter corner of sec. 15, T. 24 N., R. 6 E.:
The Alderwood series is made up of moderately,
well drained soils that have a weakly consolidated
to strongly consolidated substratum at a depth of
24 to 40 inches. These soils are on uplands. They
formed under conifers, in glacial deposits. Slopes
are 0 to 70 percent. The annual precipitation is
35 to 60 inches, most of which is rainfall, between
October and May. The mean-annual.air temperature is
about 50° F. The frost -free season is 150 to 200
days. Elevation ranges from 100 to 800•feet.
In a representative profile, the surface layer
and subsoil are very dark brown, dark -brown, and
grayish -brown gravelly sandy loans about 27 inches
thick. The substratum is grayish -brown, weakly
consolidated to strongly consolidated glacial till
that extends to a depth of 60 inches and more. -
Al--0 to 2'inches, very dark brown (10YR 2/2)
gravelly sandy loam, dark grayish brown
(10YR 4/2) dry; weak, fine, granular struc-
ture; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky,
nonplastic; many roots; strongly acid;
abrupt, wavy boundary. I to 3 inches thick.
B2--2 to 12 inches,.dark-brown (10YR 4/3)- gravelly
sandy loam, brown (10YR 5/3) dry; moderate,
- medium, subangular blocky structure; slightly
hard, friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; many
roots; -Strongly acid; clear, wavy boundary.
9 to 14 inches' thick.
B3--12 to 27 inches, grayish -brown (2.5Y 5/2)
gravelly sandy-1 . oam, light gray (2.5Y 7/2)
dry; many, medium, distinct mottles of light
olive brown (2.5Y 5/6); hard, friable, non -
sticky, nonplastic; many roots; medium acid;
abrupt, wavy boundary. 12 to 23 inches thick.
IIC--27 to.60 inches, grayish -brown (2.SY 5/2),
weakly to strongly consolidated till, light
gray (2.5Y 7/2) dry; common, medium, distinct
mottles of light olive brown and yellowish
brown (2.5Y 5/6 and 10YR 5/6), massive; no
roots; medium acid. Many feet thick.
The A horizon ranges -from very dark brown to
dark brown. The B horizon is dark brown, grayish
brown, and dark yellowish brown. The consolidated
C horizon, at a depth of 24 to 40 inches, is mostly
grayish brown mottled with yellowish brown. Some
layers in the C horizon slake in water. In'a few
areas, there is a thin, gray -or grayish -brown A2
horizon.. In most areas, this horizon has been
destroyed'through logging operations:
Soils included with this soil in mapping make up
no more than 30 percent of the total acreage. Some
areas are up to 3 percent the poorly drained Norma,
Bellingham, Seattle, Tukwila, and Shalcar soils;
some are up to 5 percent the very gravelly Everett
and,Neilton soils; and some are up to 15 percent
Aiderwood soils that have slopes more gentle or
steeper than 6 to 15 percent., Some areas in New-
castle Hills are 25 percent Beausite soils, some
northeast of Duvall are as much ,as 25 percent Ovall
soils, and some in the vicinity of Dash Point are
10 percent Indianola and Kitsap soils. Also
included are small areas of Alderwood soils that
have a gravelly loam surface layer and subsoil.
J. S. Jones &imd Associa,ics, 121C.
Critical Areas Report
Wetlands and Streams
of the
Melnichuk Property
32830 20th Ave. S.
Federal Way, WA 98003
Tax Parcel Number: 416660-0600
NW Quarter Section 16, Township 21 N, Range 04E
Dated:
June 7, 2018
Prepared by.
Jeffery S. Jones, Certified Professional Wetland Scientist
RECEIVED
PO BOY 1 9 0 8
ISSAQtiAH, WASHINGTON 98027 JUN 07 2019
253-905-5736/ jeff.jsjones.comcast.net
CITY 0'F FEDERl WAY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Table of Contents
1.0 Project Description..........................................................................................................1
2.0 Site Address, Identification and Directions....................................................................1
3.0 Methodology...................................................................................................................1
4.0 General Site Description.................................................................................................1
5.0 Vegetation.......................................................................................................................2
5.1 Vegetation Methodology..............................................................................................2
5.2 Vegetation Results........................................................................................................2
6.0 Hydrology.......................................................................................................................3
6.1 Hydrology Methodology...............................................................................................3
6.2 Hydrology Results........................................................................................................3
7.0 Soils.................................................................................................................................3
7.1 Soils Methodology........................................................................................................3
7.2 Soil Series.....................................................................................................................4
7.3 Soils Results..................................................................................................................4
8.0 Wetland Determination, Rating, and Buffer
...................................................................4
9.0 Stream, Rating, and Buffer.............................................................................................4
10.0 Functional Assessment..................................................................................................5
11.0 Impacts ......................................................................................................................5
12.0 Authority.......................................................................................................................
5
13.0 Limitations....................................................................................................................5
14.0 References.....................................................................................................................6
Tables
1.0 Plant Indicator Status......................................................................................................2
Attachments
Vicinity Map
Site Photos
Soils Map
National Wetland Inventory
Field Data Forms
Wetland Assessment Unit
Rating Form
Rating Maps
Wetland Sketch
i J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc.
1.0 Project Description
The applicant proposes to replace a double -wide mobile home and construct a wood framed
single-family residence on the subject property. This study was conducted to determine the type
and extent of wetlands and streams on or near the subject properties.
2.0 Site Address, Identification, and Directions
The property is located at 32830 20th Avenue South, Federal Way, Washington 98003 (see
attached Vicinity Map). The tax parcel number is 797880-0521. The property is in the
southwest quarter of Section 16, Township 21 North, Range 04 East, of the Willamette Meridian.
Directions to the site from Federal Way City Hall are as follows:
Head Southeast on 8th Avenue South;
drive for 0.2 miles;
turn right on 9th Avenue South;
drive for 0.1 miles;
turn left onto South 336th Street;
drive for 0.7 miles; turn right onto 20th Avenue South;
the property is on the right side of the street in 0.4 miles.
3.0 Methodology
The wetland assessment and delineation were performed using the Routine Determination
methodology as described in Part IV, Section D of the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual (COE, 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (COE, 2008), and the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (DOE, 1997). The regional supplement is
designed for use with the current version of the Corps Manual and all subsequent versions."
Where differences in the two documents occur, and there are significant differences, the
Regional Supplement takes precedence over the Corps Manual (COE, 2008).
The wetland was rated using the Washington Department of Ecology, "Wetland Rating System
for Western WA: 2014 Update " (DOE. 2014). The 2014 rating system required in the Federal
Way Municipal Code, Section 19.410(1).
The wetland delineation was completed on May 21, 2015, by Jeffery S. Jones, Professional
Wetland Scientist. The wetland flags are orange, preprinted "Wetland Boundary", and tied on
vegetation. See the attached wetland sketch for wetland flags and sample point locations. A
licensed land surveyor will locate the wetland boundary and stream ordinary high-water mark
(OHWM) and prepare a critical area map. .A site plan has not been prepared as of the date of
this report.
4.0 General Site Description
The site is a 0.53-acre parcel residential property. There is an existing double -wide mobile home
in poor condition and detached garage, see attached photos. A drainage pattern crossing the
property in a north -south direction, between 20th Ave S. and the existing structure. The
unnamed stream is tributary to Hylebos Creek. There is a culvert under the driveway.
5.0 Vegetation
5.1 Vegetation Methodology
Hydrophytic vegetation has adaptations that allow these species to survive in saturated or
inundated environments. These environments are classified according to the Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin, 1979). The probability of
species being found in wetland environments has been determined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service in the National List of Vascular Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National
Summary (Lichvar, 2016). An indicator status was applied to each species according to its
probability of occurring in wetlands (see Table 1.0).
Vegetation data was recorded at three sample locations distributed across the property with at
least one sample location in each plant community. At each sample location, the dominant
species were assessed by indicator status to determine if the plant community was predominantly
hydrophytic. Rules for determining dominant species were established in the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (DOE, 1997).
Table 1.0 Plant Indicator Status
Indicator Category
Symbol
Occurrence in Wetlands
Obligate Wetland
OBL
> 99%
Facultative Wetland
FACW
67-99%
Facultative
FAC
34-67%
Facultative Upland
FACU
1-33%
Upland
UPL
< 1 %
Note: FACW, FAC, and FACU have + and — values to represent species near the wetter end of the spectrum
(+) and the drier end of the spectrum (-) (Lichvar, 2016).
5.2 Vegetation Results
At sample location 1 (SL-1), the plant community is dominated by Western red cedar (Thuja
plicata, FAC), weeping willow (Salix babylonica, NL), red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC) and
English ivy (Hedera helix, FACU). The plant community is hydrophytic because more than 50%
of the dominant species are FAC, FACW, or OBL.
At SL-2, the plant community is dominated by Western red cedar (Thuja plicata, FAC), Laurel
(Laurus nobilis, NL), unidentified grasses (NI), and creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens,
FAC). The plant community is hydrophytic because more than 50% of the dominant species are
FAC, FACW, or OBL.
2
6.0 Hydrology
6.1 Hydrology Methodology
The Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual requires inundation,
flooding, or saturation to the surface for at least 5% of the growing season to satisfy the
hydrology requirements for jurisdictional wetlands (DOE, 1997). Areas that are saturated
between 5% and 12.5% of the growing season may or may not be wetlands. The growing season
can either be defined by the number of frost -free days (temperatures above 280F), or the period
during which the soil temperature at a depth of 19.7 inches is above biological zero (41OF).
The presence of wetland hydrology was determined at each sample location by evaluating a
variety of direct and indirect indicators, consistent with the Washington State Wetlands
Identification and Delineation Manual and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual (DOE, 1997)( COE, 1987). In addition to direct visual observation of
inundation or saturation, secondary hydrologic indicators were used to infer wetland hydrology.
Secondary indicators include oxidized channels (rhizospheres) associated with living roots and
rhizomes, water marks on vegetation or fixed objects, drift lines, water -borne sediment deposits,
water stained leaves, surface scoured areas, wetland drainage patterns, morphological plant
adaptations, and hydric soil characteristics. Another secondary indicator is the FAC-Neutral test,
which is used to determine if the plant community is hydrophytic when all species with FAC
indicator status are disregarded.
6.2 Hydrology Results
SL-1 has wetland hydrology. A water table was present at 6 inches below the surface.
Saturation was present at the soil surface.
SL-2 does not have wetland hydrology. The soil profile is dry to the surface. The water table is
not present within the upper 18 inches from the surface. There are no indicators of wetland
hydrology.
7.0 Soils
7.1 Soils Methodology
Hydric soils are soils that are "saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing
season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (COE, 1987)." They are either organic
soils (peats and mucks) or are mineral soils that are saturated long enough to produce soil
properties associated with a reducing environment. These soils have hydric characteristics such
as a reduced matrix (a matrix that changes color when exposed to air), redox depletions
(gleying), or redox concentrations (mottles).
Soils were visually assessed for hydric characteristics and organic content in an 18-inch soil pit
at each sample location. In Washington State, soil color is the main indicator used to determine
if a soil is considered hydric. Soil color immediately below the "A" horizon or at a depth of 10
inches below ground surface was determined using Munsell Soil Color Charts (MacBeth, 2000).
Soils that had a one-chroma matrix or a two-chroma matrix with mottles were determined to be
hydric.
3
7.2 Soil Series
The on -site soils were mapped by the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) as Alderwood
gravelly sandy loams, see attached Soils Map.
7.3 Soils Results
The soil at SL-1 is a hydric. It most like a Norma silt loam which is a common inclusion in
drainages mapped as Alderwood. From 0 to 18 inches, the soil is a very dark grey (10YR 3/1)
silt loam. The soil has a thick dark surface. The soil is hydric because it has a one-chroma
matrix immediately below the "A" horizon or at ten inches, whichever is shallower (DOE, 1997).
The soil at SL-2 is a non-hydric Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. From 0 to 6 inches, the soil is
a very dark brown (IOYR 2/2) Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. From 6 to 16+ inches, the soil is
a dark yellowish brown (IOYR 4/4) Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. The soil is non-hydric
because it has a four-chroma matrix immediately below the "A" horizon or at ten inches,
whichever is shallower (DOE, 1997).
8.0 Wetland Determination, Rating, and Buffer
The bottom of the drainage, adjacent to the stream, meets all three criteria for wetlands. Soils
have a thick dark surface. A water table is present at 6 inches. The plant community is
dominated by invasive English ivy with an overstory of Western red cedar and red alder.
The remainder of the subject property is upland. The soils are a medium brown dry gravelly
sandy loam.
Its hydrogeomorphic classification is a Riverine wetland, because the stream floods above the
stream channel at least one every year. Sediment on the English ivy leaves is present from prior
flooding. The main source of wetland hydrology is runoff from impervious surface that are
upstream. The wetland is Palustrine forested (PFO) class of vegetation (Cowardin, 1979).
The wetland has a total score of 17 and a habitat score of 4. It rates as a Category III wetland,
FWMC. 19.145.420(1)(c). The wetland buffer requirement for a Category III wetland with a
habitat score of 4 is 60 feet, FWMC. 19.145.420(2).
9.0 Stream, Rating, and Buffer
The stream is 2-4 feet wide, a bare substrate of rocks and sediment.
The stream is seasonal and non -fish bearing. Therefore, the stream is a Type Ns. The stream
buffer requirement is 25 feet FWMC 19.145.270.1(c).
10.0 Functional Assessment
The wetland functions were assessed using the 2014 DOE Wetland Rating System for Western
Washington. The rating system scores the wetland based on characteristics that contribute to
habitat, hydrologic and water quality functions (see attached DOE Wetland Rating Form).
The wetland provides moderate water quality functions. The on -site wetland is small, but the
drainage is important in the overall landscape. It has vegetation that traps sediment and pollutant
from surface runoff. The wetland has an opportunity to improve water quality because untreated
water from residential areas and streets.
The wetland provides moderate hydrologic functions. The drainage is import to the landscape.
However, the site is small and flow -through is rapid. The wetland has little opportunity to
reduce the impact of flooding by moderating downstream flows.
The wetland provides low habitat functions for wildlife. There is extensive development of the
area that impacts wildlife access. Non-native invasive plants dominate the wetland and wetland
buffer, including English ivy and Himalayan blackberry.
11.0 Impacts
The applicant proposes to remove the existing double -wide mobile home and possibly remove
the detached garage. A new single-family residence will be constructed outside of the critical
area buffers. The existing gravel driveway will be used for access. The remaining wetland
buffer could be restored by removing debris, invasive plants, and restoring the buffer to a native
plant community.
12.0 Authority
This wetland determination is in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the
objective of which is to "maintain and restore the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of
the waters of the United States (DOE, 1997)." Wetlands are "areas that are inundated or
saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas
(CFR, 1982.)
13.0 Limitations
Wetland determinations and delineations are not final until approved by regulatory agencies
and/or local jurisdictions. J. S. Jones and Associates, Inc. does not guarantee acceptance or
approval by regulatory agencies, or that any intended use will be achieved.
14.0 References
Cowardin, Lewis M. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United
States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Jamestown, North Dakota.
DOE. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication
No. 96-94. Washington State Department of Ecology. Olympia, WA.
DOE. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington — 2014 Update
(Ecology Publication No. 14-06-029
CFR. 1982. Title 33: Navigation and Navigable Waters; Chapter 11, Regulatory Programs of
the Corps of Engineers. Vol. 47, No. 138, p 31810. US Government Printing Office,
Washington D.C.
MacBeth. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Revised Washable Edition. 617 Little Britain
Road, New Windsor, NY 12553. 10p + 9 Charts.
Lichvar, R.W., D.L Banks, W. N. Kirchner, and N. C. Melvin. 2016. " The National Wetland
Plant List: 2016 Wetland Ratings. Phythoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016.
ISSN 2153 733X.
USACOE. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Environmental Laboratory,
Vicksberg, MS.
USACOE. 2008. Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region. U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center, Environmental Laboratory, ERDC/EL TR-08-13, Vicksberg, MS.
0
Attachments
1 :
�z
elelbraban
Park
Ivielnichuk Vicinity Map
.�•wn7ie lr,.
f+karNal3:+7 y
T L - r
WL,4t. Lu
lI TI
7
K"' :. C<)ilfl!IL
The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and is
suWt to change wltfwut notice. Kng County mains na fepmsentahons or w arantFos•, o/1+reK a[inpl}D7. N King County
as fo accuracy, compbEanasa Simel nesa, of rignis to tAch a tm of suIryormatbn. rhESdoCa l is not intended
4r use as esbrvey product. Kite Coubtyshal nol bo iabp for any ganoral, specia4 indicts. Y¢ldrntal, of
conseq uontialdamages including, but not limited to, lost revenu*zLor lost profts resulting from the use ormisuse GIS CENTER
of the hnrohmalbn aofnlai ned on Nis map. Any sale of this map or Informaion on this map is p-ohibited email by
writlen permission of King County.
Date:6/7/2018 Notes:
Entrance from 20th Ave S
Existing Structure
' •- . '. k`--rd-.
-
3 •'; yc e
� jkK�'T' yy ,.4' `•; '= ,..r_u-' gin.: F=:. ..--
•,
lid �-"
�'•'74..
� ..
- •J: �, ��T_`Ja,�-•'���r_.• � ��` Y
. !r J •
,:ram _ .sue • :... Z� � K . 4
•a
i -
Tv� y :. i
-4Ok
.. 'TES �.-
S
47° 19 26" N
47° 19 23" N
3 Soil Map —King County Area, Washington
GO GO (Soils Map)
552320 55= 552340 552350 552360 552370 5a3 o 552400
3
m Map Scale: 1:655 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet
— Meters
N 0 5 10 20 30
Fk
eet
0 30 60 120 180
Map projection: Web Mercator Comer coordinates: WG584 Edge tics: UTM Zone ION WGS84
ittif).\ Natural Resources Web Soil Survey
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
552410 552420 552430 M440 552450
3
m
47° 18' 26' N
I
47° 18'23'N
552460
3
ti
6/5/2018
Page 1 of 3
MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
® Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
.* Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
0 Perennial Water
�,, Rock Outcrop
+ Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
oa Sodic Spot
Soil Map —King County Area, Washington
(Soils Map)
Spoil Area
(�
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
7
Wet Spot
Other
�.
Special Line Features
Water Features
_
Streams and Canals
Transportation
44-4
Rails
,gyp
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
MAP INFORMATION
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version dates) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: King County Area, Washington
Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 7, 2017
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 8, 2014—Jul 15,
2014
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
V.S Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 6/5/2018
`� Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3
Soil Map —King County Area, Washington
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit symbol Map Unit Name ` Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
Agg Alderwood gravelly sandy 0.3 16.0%
loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes P
AgC v Alderwood gravelly sandy 1.6 84.0%
loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
I Totals for Area of Interest 1.9 100.0%
Soils Map
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey O/A/Lu 18
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
x r ky�
Iw
ol
4 ilC�1 �"".. •2•' -gyp'. _
r' ,
:; 1 , , `" �fsL; y ... ='yam. � •
'�;. �°" Y i .. ! 7 .. �+•ai •rat.
r_ � � �,.. �-�..,..:a • � � , i } �," ,,�j�' � , ." _ilk � .. _ i �ol _ .r "� . a7 !'�'t
i . ," _ _- � _.� -�,.- ...4 ., `�; •,�; � fit_ 1
1,5,927
0.05
1 0.075 E r fir. �aR�T.•- '— ~ .,� .'•Ti'.i• J R .- .l.' .. .••• ! r , ,•
r.
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
3 2 $ 3 U Cii iC❑u��ty Sampling Date:
Project/Site:S L_�
Applicant/Owner: V_y' ``i� � ►► + State: L�..1 � Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): .J o K'AS Section, Township, Range: 5 w 5 li 2 i t
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none)'s-.-r e_Aye Slope (%): Z �fo
l y %, 30(0 n7 Long: — 12 Z. 7 D Datums 8�
Subregion (LRR): N W Fay eS I'r Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name: Aid wooct NWI classification: A) rw e
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ 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
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
within a Wetland? Yes V No
Remarks:
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
S Jme tratum (Plot size: �v �o L Species? status
1. Zz> �—
2. �•-
d
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: /'�_:_ .�,
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total °% Cover of: Multi Div by,,--
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A=
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_L"12 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Woody Vine Stratum(P t size: )
t. �'4 70S Hydrophytic
2 Vegetation
Present?
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
0 �= Total Cover
Remarks: /V IDf �3 / k D>7 n c� (.tJ �'k Gv • �.d
N �-
Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description, (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix. x Fea ur s
(inchesl C f r m % Co t— % Type' Lac'_ —Texture Remarks
:rd Vf< 3" z
'Type: C=Concentration. D=De lelion, RM=Reduced Matrix. CS=Covered or Coated Sand Gr
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
j/fhick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
HYDROLOGY
rLocatiom PL=Pore Lining. M=Mai
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
2 cm Muck (A10)
_ Red Parent Material (TF2)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes _I-- No
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Prima Indicators minimum of one re aired cJ�eck all tha a I 1
Sgcondaa Indicators i2 or more re aired}
_ Surface Water (Al)
Water -Stained Leaves (69) (except
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
4A, and 48)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Sall Crust (1311)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
_ Water Marks (B1)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
_ 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 (132)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Iron Deposits (85) _
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 (137)
T Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): !�
Water Table Present? Yes ✓No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes _�Z No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes / No
i Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous
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: 2 �rv�t y� County: ���gk / � Sampling Date: Z 11 tR
Applicant/Owner: _ y UV: I ' t � � I,,+ e_ �L u- State: S8rr plln Point:
� °e� — Z
Investigator(s): _4-. ' a Y_1 S _ Section. Township, Range: W s `^S F
Landfonn (hillsiope, terrace, etc.): I /�s �� Local relief (concave, convex, none): Ili slopel(%): IS
Subregion (LRR): Lat: 4 7, 30 (oq_ Lang 1 Z Z 7 fDatumN�pgF
Soil Map Unit Name: JA A NW1 classification: Il-nX
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 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 JG No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No ✓
Is the Sampled
within a Wetland?
Area
Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
No ✓
Remarks.
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute
00minant Indicator
Dominance lest worksheets
Tree Stratum (Plot size: b }
°I Covat
Snecies7 Status
Number of Dominant Species
Z
1 L
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2•
Total Number of Dominant
Z
3,
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4•
IO
Percent of Dominant Species / UV
= Total Cover
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
5a tin 1 hru S alum (Plot size: �V'
l
'b
_ L
Prevalence Index worksheet
—
Total %Cover of: Mull�ply by'
OBL species x 1 =
2.
3.
FACW species x 2 =
4.
-
FAC species x 3 =
5.
FACU species x 4 =
erb Sit to (Plot size: V
Total Cover
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
1.
"J
2.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.
/
Hydraphytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.
_✓2 - - Dominance Test is >50%
6.
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
7.
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
$
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
g
_
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10
_
11
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Total Cover
Woady vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
2
Vegetation
Present? Yes
Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks: A 11i - NO-1- /� 574c�
IV Z
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:
Proflto Description: (Dascriba to the depth needed to docurnontthe Indicator arconfirrn the absence of indicators.)
Depth mitlix Redox Eealureso
$ C for moss alor i Tvoe _ Loc exlure Remarks
ID
'T e: C=Concentration, D=De letfon, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. $Location: PL=Pare Lining. M=Matrix.
Hydrlc Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solis
_ Hlstosol (Al) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ 2 cm Muck (Al0)
_ 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 (A11) _ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Redox Dark Surface (F6) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F6) unless disturbed or problematir..
Restrictive Layer (If present):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY _
Primary lndica r minimum of one reouirelk
all that apply)
Seconds Ir dicalars [7. ar mp e re u� ire_dl
Surface Water (Al)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (69) (except
_ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
_ High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)
_ Salt Crust (611)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_
Water Marks (81)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (1313)
_ 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 Mal or Crust (64)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ 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 (B7) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches): _
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
No r✓
Saturation Present? Yes
No ��Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes
Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspections),
b7
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast —Version 2.0
Wetland naive or number
RATING SUMMARY -- Western Washington
Name of wetland (or ID #): J`( c,,.el 0 ! 1 Date of site visit: _.�jLl.' / ( 16
Rated by J P ) 0^e-5 Trained by Ecology? Yes _____No Date of training 1 ! &f
HGM Class used for rating9"N Jtr,^Q Wetland has multiple HGM classes?_Y 41 N
NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined),
Source of base aerial photo/map 12
OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY (based on functions Vor special characteristics_)
1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS
Category I —Total score = 23 - 27
Category 11— Total score = 20 - 22
Category III — Total score = 16 -19
Category IV —Total scare = 9 - 1S
i FUNCTION
Improving Hydrologic
Water Quality
Habitat
Circle the appropriate ratings
Site Potential
H M L
H M U
H M L
Landscape Potential
M L
i M L
H L
Value
M L
H M L
H M L
TOTAL
Score Based an
Ratings
7
G
�
17
2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
CHARACTERISTIC
CATEGORY
Estuarine
I II
Wetland of High Conservation Value
I
Bog
I
Mature Forest
I
Old Growth Forest
I
Coastal Lagoon
I II
Interdunal
I II III IV
None of the above
Wetland Rating System. for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Score for each
function based
on three
rati ngs
(order cf ratings
is nUt
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 = LLL
1
Wetland name or number A
Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for
Western Washington
Depressional 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 hydroperrads)
D 1.1, 0 4.1
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to anotherfrgure)
D 2.2, D 5.2
_
Map of the contributing basin
D 4.3, 0 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) D 3.3
Riverine Wetlands
Map of:
To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes
H 1.11 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 onotherffgure)
R 2.4
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants F
R 1.2, R 4.2
Width of unit vs. width of stream (carp be added to another gw)
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 ma_p 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
Lane 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 Ecology website)
L 3.1, L 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)
L 3.3
Slope Wetlands
Map of:
To answer questions:
flCure #
Cowardin plant classes
H 1.1, H 1.4
Hydroperiods
H 1.2
_
Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
S 1.3
Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
(can be added to figure above)
S 4,1
Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure)
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
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
S 3.1, S 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDI-s for WRIA in which unit is found ifrom web)
S 3.3
Wetland Rating System far Western WA: 201.4 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Wetland name or number A
HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington
For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated.
If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you
probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in
questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8.
1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods?
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)?
NO - Saltwater Tidal Fringe {Estuarine) YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe
ffyour• wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the farms fnr Riverine wetlands. lj'it
is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This n2ethod cannot be used to
score functions for estuarine wetlands.
2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater
and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit.
NO go to 3 YES - The wetland class is Flats
your wetland can be classified as a plats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the entire wetland unitmeet all of the following criteria?
_The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any
plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size;
_At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m).
!vG go to 4 YES - The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
The wetland is on a slope (slope can he verygradual),
The water flows through the wetland in one direction (Unidirectional) and usually comes from
seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks,
lThe water leaves the wetland without being impounded.
NQ -- go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and
shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft
deep).
S. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that
stream or river,
The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Wetland name or number
-A-
NO -- go to 6 YES The wetland class is Riverine
NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not
flooding
b. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the
surface, at sometime during the year? This means that any outlet, cfpresent, is higher than the interior
of the wetland.
goto7
YES - The wetland class is Depressional
7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank
flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches, The unit seems to be
maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural
outlet.
NO go to 8
YES - The wetland class is Depressional
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 rverine 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.
MGM 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
Ifyou are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your- wetland, or ifyou have
more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the
rating.
Wetland stating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating.Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Wetland name or number A
RIVERINE AND FRESHWATER TIDAL FRINGE WETLANDS
Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality
R 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality?
R 1.1, Area of surface depressions within the Riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event:
Depressions cover>3/,, area of wetland
points = 8
Depressions cover > % area of wetland
points = 4
Depressions present but cover < ,z area of wetland
points = 2
No depressions present
points = '
R 1.2. Structure of plants in the wetiand (areas with >4o% cover at person height, not Cowardin classes)
Trees or shrubs > 2/3 area of the wetland
points = 8
Trees or shrubs > 1/3 area of the wetland
2/3
points = 6
Herbaceous plants (> 6 in high) > area of the wetland
points = 6
Herbaceous plants (> 6 in high) > 1/3 area of the wetland
points = 3
Trees, shrubs, and ungrazed herbaceous < `/.3 area of the wetland
points =
Total for R 1 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of site Potential If score is:�12-16 = H _6-11= M 0-5 = L
Record th e rating on the first page
R 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site?
R 2.1. Is the wetland within an incorporated city or within its UGA? Yes = No = 0
R 2.2. Does the contributing basin to the wetland include a UGA or incorporated area? es = 1 No = 0
R 2.3. Does at least 10% of the contributing basin contain tilled fields, pastures, or forests that have been clearcu
within the last 5 years? Yes = i o = 0
R 2.4. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? es = No = 0
R 2.5. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions R 1-R 2.4
Other sources es = No = 0
Total for R 2 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:V3-6 = H —1 or 2 = M , 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
R 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society?
R 3.1. Is the wetland along a stream or river that is on the 303(d) list or on a tributary that drains to one within 1 mi?
Yes= 1 No
R 3.2. Is the wetland along a stream or river that has TMDL limits for nutrients, toxics, or pathogens?
0s=1 a=0
R 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as importantfor maintaining water quali a answer
YES if there is a TMDL for the drainage in which the unit is found) (Les = ? o = 0
Total for R 3 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H —1 = M _0 = L
Welland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form — Effective Jaiivary 1, 2015
Record the rating an the first page
Wetland name or number
RIVERINE AND FRESHWATER TIDAL FRINGE WETLANDS
Functions - Indicators that site functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion
R 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion?
R 4.1. Characteristics of the overbank storage the wetland provides:
Estimate the average width of the wetland perpendicular to the direction of the flow and the width of the
stream or river channel (distance between banks). Calculate the ratio: (average width of wetland)/(average
width of stream between banks).
If the ratio is more than 20 points = 9
If the ratio is 10-20 points = 6
If the ratio is 5-<10 CLMrots =
If the ratio is 1-<5 points = 2
If the ratio is < 1 points = 1
R 4.2. Characteristics of plants that slow down water velocities during floods: Treatlarge woody debris as farest or
shrub. Choose the points appropriate for the best description (polygons need to have>90% cover atperson
height. These ore NOTCH classes).
Forest or shrub for >'/3 area OR emergent plants >'/3 area points = 7
Forest or shrub for >'/ia area OR emergent plants >'/3 area points =
Plants do not meet above criteria points = 0
Total for R 4 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Site Potential if score is:_12-16 = H 6-11= M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page
R 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site?
R 5.1. Is the stream or river adjacent to the wetland downcut? Yes = 0 No = 1
R 5.2. Does the up -gradient watershed include a UGA or incorporated area? es = No = 0
R 5.3. Is the up -gradient stream or river controlled by dams? Yes = 0
Total For R 5 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: y/3 = H —1 or 2 = M ,_ -0 = L Record the rating on the Jirst page
R 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society?
R 6.1. Distance to the nearest areas downstream that have flooding problems?
Choose the description that best fits the site.
The sub -basin immediately down -gradient of the wetland has flooding problems that result in damage to
human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds) points = 2
Surface flooding problems are in a sub -basin farther down -gradient points =1
No flooding problems anywhere downstream points = 0
R 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan?
Q
Yes=2 No=O
Total for R 6 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Value If score is:-2-4 = H -4 1= M _0 = L
Wetland Rating System for Western Wit: 2014 Update
Rating Form — Effective January 1, 2015
Record the rating on tneprsr page
Wetland name or number A
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 maybe 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
E ergent 3 structures: points = 2
crub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1
Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 15 ructure: points =
if the unit has a Forested class, check if..
—The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub -canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover)
that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon
H 1.2. Hydroperiods
Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover
more than 10% of the wetland or % ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
—Peemanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: polnts = 3
easonally flooded or inundated 3 s resent: points =
ccasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: poi
Sat ted only 1 type present: points = 0
rmanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland
_Lake Fringe wetland 2 points
Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points
H 1.3. Richness of plant species
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft'.
Different patches of the some species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name
the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple laosestrife, Canadian thistle
q
If you counted: > 19 species points = 2
l
5 -19 species pints =
<5species pa[
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.
one = 0 paints Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points
All three diagrams
in this row
are HIGH = 3points
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13
Rating Form — Effective January 1, 2015
Wetland name or number A
H 1.5. Special habitat features:
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points.
—Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 In diameter and 6 ft long).
_Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland
_Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m)
over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m)
Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree
slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered
where wood is exposed)
�At least X 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
X ,
M
Total for H 1 / Add the points in the boxes above •s I
Ratine of Site Potential If score is: 15-15 = H 7-14 = M _.►( 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page
H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site?
H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). f
S5=
Calculate: d % undisturbed habitat_ + J(% moderate and low intensity land uses)./21 •� %
If total accessible habitat is:
> 1/3 (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 Dints = 0
H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 I<m Polygon around the wetland. C)
Calculate: ii Z- % undisturbed habitat—+ [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/21L _ V 7 %
Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3
Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2
Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches nts
Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon paints = 0
H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If
> 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2)
s 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity po nts = 0
Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is.,-4-6 = H d 1-3 : M —< 1 = L
1 H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society?
Record the rating on the first page
H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score
that applies to the wetland being rated.
Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2
— It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)
----- It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists)
— It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species
— It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources
--- It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a
Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan
Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next p ge) within 100 m points =1
Site does not meet anv of the criteria above / points - 0
Rating of Value If score is: 2 = H 1= M V 0 : L
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Record the rating on the first page
14
Wetland name or number. A
WDFW Priority Habitats
PrioritLbabitats listed byLWT F"F (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. httpz�v,,, w.�va, a cata1z51407.65 jwclhy{l(}1,..ladf or access the list from here:
tt ; LYd mma.goyiconseryatio, L h. S )
Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE. • This question is
independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat
— Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).
-- Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and
wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PtIS report).
Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
--- Old-growth/Mature forests: OW-grammb west of Cascade - Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a inulti-
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).
Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.
— Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non -forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet
prairie (till descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161. - see web link above).
141 Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide
functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
— Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and
Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report -
see web link on previous page).
— Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock,
ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.
— Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.
Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0,5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite,
and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to
enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of ;> 20 in (51 cm) in western
Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft
(6 m) long.
Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed
elsewhere.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
P
Wetland name or number
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Wetland Type Category
Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle 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 Q Not an estuarine wetland
SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area
A&C 332-30-151?
Preserve, State. Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under V
Cat. I
Yes = Category I No Go to SC 1.2
SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?
—The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less
Cat. I
than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Sportina, see page 25)
—At least % of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
Cat.1l
—The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or
contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I / Nam Category II
SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV)
SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of W ands of High
Conservation Value? Yes - Go to SC 2.2 Go to SC 2.3
Cat, I
SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? ,,rr��
Yes = Category 1 V = Not a WHCV
SC 2.3, Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland?
http:llwwwl.dnr.wa a>JnhP/refdesklda_tasearch/EQ�hpwetIands.Pdf
Yes - Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on
their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV
SC 3.0. Bogs
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key
below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the werland 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 0- Go to SC 3.2
SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep
over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or
pond? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 � 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 5 G❑ 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'Iable 4 are present, the wetland is a bog.
Cat. I
SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar,
western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the
species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover and r the canopy?
Yes = Is a Category I bog No Is not a bog
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
A
Wetiand name or number
SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands
Does the wetland have at least 1 contieuous 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 *= Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I
SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
— The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from
marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks
— The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded waterthat is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt)
during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom)
Cat.
Yes — Go to SC 5.1 (S� Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5_1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less
than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100).
Cat. II
---At least'/ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
—The wetland is larger than'/10 ac (4350 ftz)
Yes = Category I No = Category 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
Cat I
— Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
Yes —Go to SC 6.1 Na not an interdunal wetland for rating
SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M
Cat. II
for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No — Go to SC 6.2
SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it In a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger?
Yes = Category 11 No — Go to SC 6.3
Cat. III
SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0,1 and 1 ac?
Yes = Category III No = Category IV
Cat, 1V
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
{ A
A
If you answered No for all types, enter "Not Applicable" on Summary Form
fV
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17
Rating Form — Effective January 1, 2015
Wetland name or Slumber A
This page left blank intentionally
Wetland Rating System For Western WA; 2014 Update 18
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
la
aw
�' � �� i, �e'� 1 it � -� � �1 ` i� !. •� �f � � 'f7•��� �� Y � f, '
Ak
z wy;
a r + `-rX
,.32918
`3 2926
4.32946
Hydroperiods Map
32820
32820
Wetland A
632844
,32826
`32820
,32820
:casionally Flooded or In
easonally Flowing Strear
,b32830
-Location of Outlet
,.2022
the nformeuron mdudedon tiffs mep has bean ccrrpiled by Krly County staff I'm m avaNOy Of sources and is sugoa to d%m9e
Nnhoul notice XngCosmymakes norepresenwOts orwarrar>tes, express orinpted, as toacctraGy. completeness.timdinass,
or rghts to the use of such irdornetton. This document is nai inlendedfor use as a survey product. King Corny shall rot be liable
for arty generd.4pedat irdrect.Incldental, or consectuenialdamages nctuditig, b ul nod Ilmited to. IDst re venues orlosl profits
n:aritirg from the use or misuse of the information contgned on This map. Arty sale of this map or irforrrmlion on this rrep is
prohibited except by written permission of King County.
Date: 6/6/201 S Notes:
3
s
632825
132829
,b32835
,32841
;32849
{
King County
A" rx ' King County
GIS CENTER
Area within 150 feet of Wetland
: 741
P!, Ah
_ +4'_' 11 I ! ;=r �;.Y�•. r arm
►_ it L 2 L 0
32s2o t ti2Q .32R2O 32�32 _3 zF�..
* _
3ZE?z 32 20
�32820 '1320
-2820
• O is -_ M L �-�8� ,� - L
32525
�lz �3 19Z41$&2 r .� 3zSl
8
WU
* , ��&*G �8�2 •"�'�18zG . * g �3 $3i �r�',�'.I top
• ,�.. n
il/
330U
The nformetlon Included on Ids map has boo ncompiled by King COL" slelffrom a varlaty of sources and is suttecl In change
Wthoulnodue. KingCourttymakesnorepresenletionsorwarranlies.expressarimplied astoacclsacy.cempletenass.timeliness,
or rights to the use of such irdom liion. TN$ documen! is riot intended for use as a survey product- King Counly shall not beliable
Fora ny general, special, u&W. Incidental. or consoqueIS damages incAd-ng, bul not hmlled in, lost fevenue A of lost profits
reslAng from the use or misuse of the ldbrmelion contained on this map Any sale of Ihis map or information on this map is
prohbited except by written permission of King County.
Date: 6/6/2018 Notes:
0
r I'1.. . .f1
N LV King County
A GIS CENTER
Plant Cover
el
sr'�
. ,
r
2946
The nTprrr4on InrLdedon this map has teen compiled by King Douliy staMSrorrl $variety of sources and is subiecl to change
Wthou I nofice, KhgCounymake 9norepfesentatInraorwarrant ".esprassorimplie4astoacwraeg,corpldeness•timeliness,
or 6ahts to the rise of such IMarmelion. This document is notinlend8d for ttsa as asu r4y product King Canty shall rol be Usib1e
Joe any general, special indirect, imdenml, or consequerdid damages hdud•ng, but nol limited to, lost revenues or Iasi profits
inedtirg from the use or misuse or the information confahed on tits map. Arty sale cif Ihis map or irdorrrotion on this reap is
prohbiled except by written permission of King County.
Date: 6/6/2018 Notes:
Jh'r•: ' 4
a�Tf i - '�1'�R� •.t. i.k.cny r
2 83
. If
• �28�1 r
_ Lei
43�8r�9
A" kaKing County
CIS CENTER
Drainage Basin Map
it 1-140�,Ivl
rt, ,�� r •� 'I � z
�A
I � w .��fii�� ] ��'4-*•ter "rti �
f A
acif
•- fir„ r � � + � J• ,I �`'r �'�-•.'�
21�
tclkE+ 7ilrt� 1
King r1hi nt•
The nformationincludedon ttdsmap has heenccnppled by Kno County staff rmrn avarety of sotrcesard is subject to mange N
vMnouI noyce. KngC4Lin ry makes no representations or warrdrdes, express or imp led, as to accurwy.cunVWerless.tirl'ref MSS, n LM King County
or rgI'ds to U-e use of such inforrrelion. 7h&crocumed is no irMndedtor the as asurve'jprodud- King County shall notholiable N
for arty general, speaaL rrd rest, rnclden fat, or Conseq Leftar damages including, but not limited Ia. lost revenues or toll pre) Rts GIS CENTER
resdtirg from the use or misuse of the IriOF"t on curtained on IhLs crap. Arty sale of This map or irderrwfion on Ihis map is
prohibited except by written permission of K n g County.
Date: 6/512018 Notes:
•� N-P x U W-gc. x . IS "C. x M A—' x ,�j W.sl., x ❑ uow: x :, Weanr x p -o2n x WaW, x ., 3 whm, x spots x 3 Wdl x ,6� Wnnbr x p Appl, x Wate. X . Q Co— x -a M—I K l.p —mr- x_ x
s S?71e oc x�asn ,�7trn (U-, hl'.^y'. fortress.ua.gai , : :,.v
4pps M L— j ,'Asp .aa NRCSb,allapptt 4 MP.' p F—I n •-" •FW S K' VIKVV4F .v t:a L'l llabag or" -An -LrF mmi%awaaatl ?, Ir4ncaaftvt- 4L M--Awn ja VAWW-dwr.5v
Lc9enq pour JiS _ dODrlt i4
_ ?nois _
Add or remove neap data
-
_.Assessed Waters! Sediment c
t x I1iL r�
Water
y c.tegary 5 3331
V Gregory 4C
►a/ Category 4D
%% Category 4A
Category 2
40 Category1
.SiV,a5
Sediment
® Category 5 - 3031
® Category 4C
M Category I
IM Category 4A
1.« category 2
M Category I
it VVQ standards o
=
Alp
Oun4o map decor transp—cy
1C%
c YUO 6pIN3
Cily of FeJ—I VII A
I:aln s
i
•7�•a. 3
� nb
A c -
L'
e
I ....-ss:r:ecr SLndards Cui!a'1- •,'1Q1 Proe_G •.�7o>t:4
yen .� s_le3rn
fond FnvWonment , Apaatic LUe Use RecrMtWn Use
Sa Oning L M U Of U fnlMeS
-1
LA Vnir',
Otber Uses
U
]] Flacemap r k
A Y
3. Table Sepplar—t,I Fua
aw 603 Spning Report
Show all x
-T X W,W-V� x -�- V,,1- Qu& 1 4 AWmd ring
OWL x 'l COWAY 7 x A Wmi,1"uto. t x [� ,4-6029.;w X 1306029W X X A—thni- X V, l— FDt*- X M finer revel: X
El StveO- 11 ' D; fcrtreEswajoi v
APPS M c-a" NN',f-uApper ram., -uUk--,.q a
03n. MmAirm
Legend F lite! ZOO, 7-TVs
aft.
Add or relITIOVe map JdLd
aaaaa�
Assessed WatersjSedimeivt
Waiter Fec4rd ViVay e 'n
IV Category 5303d JW Ca egwy 4C
uCategory 40
Category 4
C.tego,y 2 Category
I W Ik
Sediment
93 Category - 333I
EM C tegory 4C
NO C:tcg.ry Is
I I.. tk
�d Category 4A
Category 2
Em Category I nn,a LE •n.v
vp he
Assessment 5t-nd,cl= 4
-,c
Chang. -p data tramp—cy Find ILI.UrK in As—ont Unit TD "'Oog Wy Kdi.., 7u—jor
Dctwlls
1 c %
yr--inj L TE U Of u IN."
Moth D 'aiLdsit-pe,Ccn_eplual7 lv.kr Ytl-d aj-.Plf F-f "-pl-
25'INGRESS/EGRESS AND
UTILITIES EASEMENT, MIN. (TYP)
LOT 4
L _ Il
I SETBACK (TYP)
LL_--..._._---
j I LOT 3
F
/I
LOT 2 1
PAVEMENT, MIN. A
J LOT 1
150' MAXIMUM TO FARTHEST
POINT OF BUILDING ENVELOPE
FROM THE APPROVED FIRE
APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD (TYP)
DRIVEWAY SERVING 3 OR 4 LOTS (MAX. 4 UNITS)
25' EASEMENT, MIN.
20' PAVEMENT, MIN.-{
J
SECTION A -A
RECOMMENDED MINIMUM SECTION:
2" ASPHALT OVER 2" CSTC
OR
4" CEMENT CONCRETE
A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY MAY SERVE UP TO FOUR LOTS (MAX. 4 UNITS)
WHEN ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET:
1. THE INGRESS/EGRESS AND UTILITIES EASEMENT IS PRIVATELY OWNED AND
MAINTAINED BY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITH RIGHTS TO SAID EASEMENT, OR
BY A HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
2. IF THE FARTHEST POINT OF THE BUILDING ENVELOPE IS GREATER THAN 150
FEET IN LENGTH FROM THE APPROVED FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD, THEN
THE SOUTH KING FIRE AND RESCUE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY 10.006 SHALL
APPLY.
3. FIRELANES WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED PER CITY CODE AND THE FIRE
MARSHAL.
4. PROVIDE TURNING RADII AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY FOR
FIRE TRUCKS, GARBAGE TRUCKS, ETC. (NOT LESS THAN A 32-FOOT INSIDE
AND A 40-FOOT OUTSIDE RADIUS.)
5. INSTALL STREET LIGHTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY STANDARDS.
6. IF THE STREET HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BECOME A THROUGH STREET, AS
DETERMINED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, AND MEET CITY STANDARDS FOR PAVEMENT WIDTH,
CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK, LANDSCAPING, AND STREET LIGHTS.
7. THIS DRIVEWAY STANDARD ALSO APPLIES TO: ZERO LOT LINE, SMALL LOTS.
AND COTTAGE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
8. IF THE ACCESS IS OFF A PRINCIPAL COLLECTOR OR ARTERIAL STREET, AN
APPROVED TURN -AROUND SHALL BE PROVIDED.
04/11/2008
am PUBLIC PRIVATE DRIVEWAY SERVING DWG. 3-2DD
o ° MOWay WORKS 3 OR 4 LOTS (MAX. 4 UNITS) NO.
-1 -1-- --------- --- ---------------
p r
445
AGE AT
M CONDO
S. 33ifTi9 ST.
7/11/2019 https://itetripgen.org/PrintGrapb'-'i?code=220&ivlabel=UNITS220&timeperiod=TPSIDF--2&edition=385&IocationCode=General Urba...
Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise)
(220)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies: 50
Avg. Nurn. of Dwelling Units: 187
Directional Distribution: 63% entering, 37% exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
0,56 0.18 - 1.25 0.16
Data Plot and Equation
500
X
400
a
c
w
Q
300
F-
X
X
200
X
X X X
XX
X X
100 X
YX
X X
X
X
X
0
0
200 400 600
X = Number of Dwelling Units
X Study Site
Fitted Curve Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.89 Ln(X) - 0.02 R2= 0.86
t Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition • Institute of Transportation Engineers
hUpsJlitetrip0orgiPrintGraph. htm?code=220&ivlabel=UNITS220&timeperiod =TPSIDE&x=2&edition=385&IocationCod e=Genera l Urban/Suburban&... 1/1
x
0
ZE
rl-
7E) as CEDAR
MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK
UNIT 2 PROPERTY LINE
S 890 21'22" E
271.01' (E) 5-12' ALDERS
saw 4m 9AIM14aws"m 4w 4/ 4w 4w 4610"W "W "p 4"
am "m fop Amm""m am ow somm"m me "m 4000mm
.Qj
��'A A V 59N
oln_ytt
�Nw' ifi
TV r
ROADWAY h"
40
W. 0 ti
5�.. If
�Sx
N
Nt zN
(E) 9-12� ALDERS
ENTRY
A
. Zw
x
wJ N .0
xx
Uj
1\ �x X 'X' X,
24H
N>.
Ild
-N
> MLLOW
x
-fir
7-' 7
00
< z 0
U
<=> 42* qgDA'
U-j
'.R
Uj /ZI
N \X
/> >
X
x Ind
X,
'X 'W
X
Wj
X \X
x
X
Ind
"
ENTRY AV
N
MINIMUM SIDE SETBACK
rj
FENCE LINE
--PRO POIS E_.DSl_T'E.._P_LAN_'*
SCALE: 1/ 16" = 1 '-0"
UNIT I - L
'q m" !�
V41 X
&
X
X
X X
X
\X
X
X
N
W.4r lv.(r
L
06
S 89' 21'22" E
271.01'
PROPERTY LINE
0 4' 8' 12' 16' 32' 48'
APDESIGN.S
ARTHUR PRISTUPA
arch itecture-ldesig n
w*wafturpristupaxom
- 916 *8-8 2.7232
arthurpr,istupa@gmaii.com
LYU8.0V YURY MELMCHUK
32830 20TH AVE S FEDERAL WAY,
WV -A, 98003
Pro.j. No. - 18.017
SITE PLAN
1/16" = T-0"
Principal Architect -
Date 03/19/2019
Drawn by Author
Checked by Checker I
A
3:
I
'D
3:
w_
In
fj)
I x
U)
En
(f)
cn
j 3
-V
_m
_c
X
cn
(n
M11
X
_0
m
'D
m
01CA c 0)
0
LO )
0)
190
SHY -211221 271.01'
ow l
i 14" Wl
WLF Al
I ow
Ag
42 C e\da
WLF
54 C <
ii WLF A3
C�j/ 60" Fir WLF A7 edar
z
z4HD 0i
Cu
Ln (_0
�1� 00
24" Willo
WLF A6
I'D
17" Cherry
Ln
co -- 42Ce7
3
WLF A2
WLF
711
1io
G
G ------------ G 6 __4__ G Z_92/)
2Z' Z, 0
/ -�'��� A 1 der ,
B" Al e er r de 12.0 Alder
/ /
0
7
. . ............ X x --------
48 Fir
U3
S89 02 1�2 2 T 2-1 01' "g, ru
C�;
z //Z V,,e7
VERTICAL DATUM
ASSUMED 100.00 AT NORTH RIM OF MON CASE IN THE
INTERSECTION OF S. 330THE ST. AND 20TH AVE. S.
HORIZONTAL DATUM
ASSUMED
PROCEDURE USED zo)
FIELD TRAVERSE & ELECTRONIC DATA COLLECTION
6
I_c_uF_1,4u
0 FOUND PROPERTY CORNER AS INDICATED
SET REBAR & CAP LS# 6228
POWER POLE
(4 FIRE HYDRANT,
WATER VALVE :1WATER METER
QS MANHOLE -DRAIN OR SEWER
GAS STUB
CONIFER AS DESCRIBED
DECIDUOUS AS DESCRIBED
—P— OVER HEAD ELECTRIC LINES
EDGE OF PAVEMENT
o CHAIN LINK OR WIRE FENCE
WOOD FENCE
G GASLINE
—W— WATERLINE
STREAM
SANITARY SEWER
WETLAND BOUNDARY
CULVERT
EDGE OF PAVING AT FACE OF CURB
WOOD RETAINING WALL
ROCK RETAINING WALL
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THE SOUTH 86.214 FEET OF THE NORTH 172.428 FEET AS MEASURED
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF LOT 87, SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT IN SECTION 16.
TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W. M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 42 OF PLATS,
PAGE 23, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
:z
SCA L E: I " == 10 '
m
R E CIE � V E V); f
JUNO 7 2019
ary OF Frm�Rx, mu,
m ; I 'tw
mmtirrVVE4