The URL can be used to link to this page

15-105178DrrAi V AY March 27,2016 Amy Jo Pearsall City Attorney 33325 8th Ave S. Federal Way, WA 98003 Dear Ms Pearsall It is my understanding that a building permit is being sought for the property located at 29604 23rd Ave SW, Federal Way. I have three concerns with such a project. First, The 10 feet wide cement path, on an existing easement, leading to the above address was constructed as a driveway, not a commercial street. When a Federal Way firetruck drove down the path to extinguish a home fire in February 2014, it did significant damage to the roadway in a single trip. One can only imagine the damage resulting from commercial vehicles heavily laden with building materials. Second, any potential house would have to connect to the recently installed sewer line on 23rd Ave SW. Trenching into a steep (60%+ grade), inherently unstable, moisture laden hillside is obviously fraught with risks (Oso comes to mind). Third, the court, in Jones vs. Heisell clearly stated that the easement at the northern end of 23rd Ave shall never for any reason be intentionally blocked. It is quite obvious that the installation of 350+ feet of sewer line in the easement would cause prolonged blockage, and thus deny me access to my property (tax parcel 012103-9090-03). It is my hope that serious considerations will be given to the above. Sin a Yours John Rosholm MD, FACS 29641 23rd Ave SW Federal Way, WA 980231 March 27,2016 Michael Morales Director Community Development 33325 8th Ave S. Federal Way, WA 98003 Dear Mr Morales 4tECElv& ECa�yON}tC It Is my understanding that a building permit is being sought for the property located at 29604 23rd Ave SW, Federal Way. I have three concerns with such a project. First, The 10 feet wide cement path, on an existing easement, leading to the above address was constructed as a driveway, not a commercial street. When a Federal Way firetruck drove down the path to extinguish a home fire in February 2014, it did significant damage to the roadway in a single trip. One can only imagine the damage resulting from commercial vehicles heavily laden with building materials. Second, any potential house would have to connect to the recently installed sewer line on 23rd Ave SW. Trenching into a steep (60%+ grade), inherently unstable, moisture laden hillside is obviously fraught with risks (Oso comes to mind). Third, the court, in Jones vs. Heisell clearly stated that the easement at the northern end of 23rd Ave shall never for any reason be intentionally blocked. It is quite obvious that the installation of 350+ feet of sewer line in the easement would cause prolonged blockage, and thus deny me access to my property (tax parcel 012103-9090-03). It is my hope that serious considerations will be given to the above. Sin r ours John Rosholm MD, FACS 29641 23rd Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 March 27,2016 Michael Morales Director Community Development 33325 8th Ave S. Federal Way, WA 98003 Dear Mr Morales �GGC 4�& ��;"�OME�.T GpMMU MIEN nFPAR�M pEVE� nP it is my understanding that a building permit is being sought for the property located at 29604 23rd Ave SW, Federal Way. I have three concerns with such a project. First, The 10 feet wide cement path, on an existing easement, leading to the above address was constructed as a driveway, not a commercial street. When a Federal Way firetruck drove down the path to extinguish a home fire in February 2014, it did significant damage to the roadway in a single trip. One can only imagine the damage resulting from commercial vehicles heavily laden with building materials. Second, any potential house would have to connect to the recently installed sewer line on 23rd Ave SW. Trenching into a steep (60%+ grade), inherently unstable, moisture laden hillside is obviously fraught with risks (nso comes to mind). Third, the court, in Jones vs. Fleisell clearly stated that the easement at the northern end of 23rd Ave shall never for any reason be intentionally blocked. It is quite obvious that the installation of 350f feet of sewer line in the easement would cause prolonged blockage, and thus deny me access to my property (tax parcel 012103-9090-03). It is my hope that serious considerations will be given to the above. Sin er ours John Rosholm MD, FACS 29641 23rd Ave SW Federal Way, WA 98023 March 27,2016 Amy Jo Pearsall City Attorney 33325 8th Ave S. Federal Way, WA 98003 Dear Ms Pearsall - 20i6 FED R AL VIAY It is my understanding that a building permit is being sought for the property located at 29604 23rd Ave SW, Federal Way. I have three concerns with such a project. First, The 10 feet wide cement path, on an existing easement, leading to the above address was constructed as a driveway, not a commercial street. When a Federal Way firetruck drove down the path to extinguish a home fire in February 2014, it did significant damage to the roadway in a single trip. One can only imagine the damage resulting from commercial vehicles heavily laden with building materials. Second, any potential house would have to connect to the recently installed sewer line on 23rd Ave SW. Trenching into a steep (60%+ grade), inherently unstable, moisture laden hillside is obviously fraught with risks (Oso comes to mind). Third, the court, in Jones vs. Heisell clearly stated that the easement at the northern end of 23rd Ave shall never for any reason be intentionally blocked. It is quite obvious that the installation of 350+ feet of sewer line in the easement would cause prolonged blockage, and thus deny me access to my property (tax parcel 012103-9090-03). It is my hope that serious considerations will be given to the above. /AghnR2o3srholm ours MD, FACS d Ave SW Federal Way, WA 980231 Leila Willoughby -Oakes From: Brian Asbury <BAsbury@lakehaven.org> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 8:47 AM To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes Subject: RE: Sommerville SF/Shoreline (Preapplication Letter) Thanks for the info Leila. FYI/FWIW — The protest letter submitted by Dr. Rosholm indicates new sewer service line/construction via a steep ("60%+ grade") slope. It's Lakehaven's anticipation that the route of the new sewer service line for the subject SFR/parcel would be via the access roadway/driveway, and we don't necessarily anticipate too many (if any) non -typical installation methods necessary. I believe the slope of that roadway/driveway is closer to 20+/- % (not confirming, just basing from Lakehaven's GIS topo info), but regardless of the location of the new sewer service line &/or the ground slope &/or the pipe slope (save for maybe a cliff) Lakehaven has sewer service/pipe installation standards that should cover the situation (e.g., pipe anchor blocks, slope retaining devices, etc., if/as needed). Brian Asbury Development Engineering Supervisor Lakehaven Utility District Lakehaven DE Website From: Leila Willoughby -Oakes fmaiito:Leila.Willoughby-Oakes@cityo deralway.com] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 5:24 PM To: 'gary.cooper@scgalliance.com' Cc: Kevin Peterson; 'Carlo Evangelisti'; 'Julie Brannberg'; Brian Asbury Subject: Sommerville SF/Shoreline (Preapplication Letter) Greetings Gary, Thank you for your call today. Please find attached. If you find you are retained by the applicant (Ms. Sommerville/Martin) please do give us a heads up who the main point of contact is for permitting. Any planning or land development guidance for this project might be quite beneficial for expediting the permitting process and shoreline exemption or SSDP (if applicable). I know you mentioned stairs leading to the beach. As mentioned there is a complex servicing and access easement to the property (also attached) as there is not public road access. This is related to a recent testamentary subdivision (Brunell) to the south of the subject property. I've cced Carlo from Landau on here, as he is quite informed on the project and Julie from Prime NW, the current project coordinator. Some of the main elements we need include, confirmation of the final scope of work on the shoreline and obtaining a stamped letter/report from the geotechnical engineer retained stating that the final approved building plan set has been reviewed/signed off by a geotechnical engineer per our CAO code. As mentioned to Julie and the engineer new rip rap on the beach or hardening has quite difficult land use approval criteria to meet and is not an out -right permitted use. If there is future bulkhead work, you may considering applying for those shoreline permits at a later date as several other permits are in process. If you have any questions do not hesitate to call. With thanks, Leila W-Oakes The contents of this email may be determined to be a public record and subject to disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56 regardless of any expectations or claims of confidentiality or privilege asserted. Leila Willoughby -Oakes From: Arber, Laura M (DFW) <Laura.Arber@dfw.wa.gov> Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 9:00 AM To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes Subject: RE: HPA- New SFR Hello Leila, If they plan to place any structure along or waterward of the bulkhead they will need an HPA. Additionally, Im not sure the gabion baskets will be permitable without further review. If they place a structure (such as gabion baskets) on the shoreline they typically need to mitigate by removing a similar footprint of something like debris (old tires, broken concrete sections, bricks, non-native angular rocks, etc.). Thanks for checking and let me know if you have additional questions. Regards, La.t,wa.ArbQr Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife I Marine Habitat Biologist 1 16o18 Mill Creek Blvd, Mill Creek, WA 98012 I P. (425)379-23o6 I Laura.Arber@dfw.3Ya.22 I Hours M-F. 8:30 - 3:00 From: Leila Willoughby -Oakes [mailto:Leila.Willou hb -Oakes ci offederalwa .com] Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 3:14 PM To: Arber, Laura M (DFW) Cc: Kevin Peterson Subject: HPA- New SFR Greetings Laura, The attached site plan represents a new single family residence replacing a smaller residence partially destroyed by fire. The new residence is significantly larger than the previous seaside home. Due to the storm conveyance system and gabion basket will an HPA be required? The city is still determining if SEPA will be required. Thanks for your technical assistance. We'll add this to the file. Best, Leila L. Willoughby -Oakes Associate Planner Please resubmit all applications via the Permit Center, 33325 8ch Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2644 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cityoffedera IwaV.com Ref: KCC21 a.12.030 Max Impervious Surface Allowed Max. Bldg. Height Allowed Ref: KCC21 a.12.170 Min Bldg setback from Street Min Garage setback from Street — Min. Bldg. Setback from interior Permit Center Validations: o Zoning o Site Review Not Applicable Validated Signature Login Initials Date: Notice: Historical Landmark • Notice: Farmland Preservation • Notice: Fire Sprinklers Required • Notice: Served by Septic and/or well • Notice: Special Site Conditions • Notice: Flood Elevation Certificate Require • Notice: Critical Areas Notice on Title Required ■ Notice: Drainage Covenant Required. • Other Notice — _--____— PSS Submittal Approvals General Critical Areas Initials — Date _ Wetland/Aquatic Areas Initials _ Date______ Grading/Clearing Initials Date-- Geotechnical Initials Date______ Site Engineering Initials Date______ Shorelines Initials Date______ Fire Initials Date Sprinklers Required? Yes No ___ Zoning SEPA Required? Yes ___ No Initials Date I NOTE: ALL DISTURBED AREAS ARE TO BE AMENDED PER DETAIL 4 ON SHEET 3 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 2009 KCS W DM. I FF -5 20 7 GABION BASKET C-3 ENERGY DISSIPATER g 5 APPROX. LOCATION OF ROCK 1D SHORELINE PROTECTION -- - APPROX. LOCATION OF UNPROTECTED SHORELINE 20 rr 35- 0 40-� 50' SHORELINE BUILDING SETBACK 50. - - _ -:7r- ee DOWNSPOUTS AND C-3 C-3 FOOTING DRAINS - EXISTING CB, TYPE 1 I DISCHARGE POINT - UNKNOWN - / - RAILING TO BE INSTALLED q�SBACtCF - •"� - BETWEEN DRIVEWAY _ OFSW''C+• J AND PROPOSED PORCH ' pTLO DRIVEWAY AREA TO BE REMOVED 833 SF EXISTING LANDSCAPING WALLS LESS THAN 4' TALL, TO REMAIN EXISTING DRIVEWAY AREA TO REMAIN 1635 SF \ L C-3/ RIM RIM EL = 76.5' EXISTING CONCRETE WALL, TO REMAIN EXISTING AREAS OF DRIVEWAY TO BE RESURFACED L4. Site and Drainage Plan King County 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual I � ~r y� � f � :a jfrrrrjjjJJJJ 90 95 � y s5 Permit Number: TBD r r� 135' 106 105 110, 115 120 Applicant Name: Prime NW Construction 76 35 !40 �1 di ;fit. - BSBL \� GRAPHIC SCALE Inch = 60 R J v G/ Iu — APPROX. LOCATION OF EXISTING �+ TIMBER LAGGING BULKHEAD - UPPER LIMITS OF THE FEMA 100- & 500-YEAR FLOODPLAIN - 6" O HOPE CDR 32.E STORt�- CONVEYANCE 8E C_g ABOVE INSLOPE THAT EXCEED AREAS THAT IXCEED 40% 45 Tx 3' CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE ANCHOR ' EXISTING WOOD DECK, UNDAMAGED PORTIONS TO REMAIN (APPROX. 468 SF) (271 SF TO BE REMOVED) 55 • � �l ' ' - L R]M FEL - 63 RIM -` FODTPFUNr OF EXISTING FOUNDATION f J 1728 SF 'fCJ..Ir Cj.f 75 U �0 EXTRUDED CONCRETE CURS TO PREVENT SURFACE FLOW FROM ENTERING BUILDING ENVELOP. 1 PROPOSED RETAINING WALL, DESIGN BY OTHERS DJ_ APPROXIMATE WALL i HEIGHTS SHOWN PROPOSED NEW CONCRETE DRIVEWAY S425FTOTAL ' f� 3111 y iN t � • -tom �• tos RECEIVED i" tto 115 OCT 12 2015 Ip E MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT AREA CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS --- EXISTING CONCRETE WALL, TO BE REMOVED Parcel Number: 0121039108 Site Address:29604 — 23RD AVE SW Sheet 2 of Sheet 5 Fol Leila Willoughby -Oakes From: Leila Willoughby -Oakes Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 4:43 PM To: 'Julie Brannberg' Cc: 'Brian Asbury'; Peter Lawrence Subject: Pre -application Request (SOMMERVILLE SFR) Hello Julie, Unfortunately I have not been notified of the pre -application receipt by the Permit Center, typically timing is determined by the planning manager. Time is allocated for the application to be circulated and for technical staff to review the application (2-3 weeks for a Development Review Meeting with you, the applicant and the other reviewers [including Lakehaven Utility District -as this site does not have typical servicing -you are cutting through the Brunell Testamentary subdivision to the south but check with Brian Asbury on the particulars or easements], Department of Ecology [for the gabion basket on the beach/bulkhead, at times if available due to staffing levels] and South King County Fire and Rescue. Your main compliance issues are land use (shoreline, vegetation, zoning), critical areas (GHAs-slope stability, instituting the recommendations a geotechnical engineer provides in the end product) and engineering/drainage on the slope (Planning and Development Services Divisions). Scheduling will be done on the availability of staff. The direct services request for a new geotechnical study is in process. The length of time to complete the direct services will depend on the availability of the third party consultant on our roster. However, this means a peer review is not required by the city, which may streamline the project. Your civil/designers may still be requested to change the project scope on their recommendations. The direct services engineer will tell the applicant if they need to amend the proposal or not based on their tests/evaluation. As mentioned previously, direct services for geotechnical services are not common place in Federal Way. In terms of your time, there have been instances where our on -call consultants have declined steep slope contracts, as they do not take on single family project in GHAs. Landau, GeoEngineers and Amec are not available for Direct Services on single family projects. However, I am waiting to hear back on AES. As a precaution for your planning, in the event the previous consultant is not used, and direct services is not available through the city, you may explore options for another privately retained consultant familiar with our codes and review. On this project, staff advise seeking out a shoreline technical planning consultant or sometimes this might be a wildlife biologist, if the applicant looks to modify the beach/install a new bulkhead. Development past the ordinary high water mark are often a no go if you are revising plans at the moment. All development is regulated by FWRC 15- Shoreline Regulations found attached to this email (PDF). By the way you are in the Shoreline Residential Designation (see in the PDF the regulations that correspond with this designation). Apologies I could not provide more help at this point. Regards, Leila L. Willoughby -Oakes Associate Planner 33325 8ch Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2644 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cituodfede ra Iway.com For general "planning inquiries please call: 253-835-2655. The on -call planner will assist you. 1 The subject property is identified as a Geologically Hazardous Area on City's critical area inventory, and specifically designated: • Erosions hazard area + Landslide hazard areas During a site visit in October 2015, planning staff noted a severe slope/drop-off on the northern side of the existing home. Please note a building permit, a shoreline exemption, and an administrative decision [AD] file are active on this property. Administrative Decisions are files used to track technical peer reviews in Federal Way. Documents + Geotechnical Engineering Report, `Proposed Single -Family Residence 29604 23"' Provided: Ave SW, prepared by GeoResourccs (Sept. 20, 2014, revised plan forthcoming)) ■ Plan -set and Reduced Site Plan prepared by Precise Engineering Inc. (June 6, 2015) + Planning & Public Works Technical Comment Letter (October 2015) • Email from EJ Walsh, Development Services Manager to Leila Willoughby -Oakes, Associate Planner, Geotechnical Report comments (October 15, 2015) Task Scope: 1. Review submitted documents for conformance with, but not limited to: a) FWRC 15.10.010-15.10.160 Article I - Generally, Article 11- Administration, Article III- General Site Design Requirements, and; Article IV -Geologically Hazardous Areas Development. 2. Conduct a site visit. 3. Provide a memo identifying additional information or revisions as necessary. 4. Meetings on site with the applicant's Geotechnical Engineer or City of Federal Way staff if necessary. 5. Provide a written response as to whether or not Landau concurs with Georesources' findings, conclusions and recommendations. Task Schedule: Provide task cost estimate by November t0, 2015. Not to exceed S 1 0 o without a prior written amendment to this Task Authorization. The total task amount completed by city staff after the third party consultant returns this form. All spaces are to be completed including the total work estimate, on the grounds that the estimate has been approved by the Project Planner. AcceplancD third -Party Consultant _ az�ae55it t'r y of Federal V4'ay Staff :DjApplicant I S�InSgIVU-AU - --Date &I J>6 Date -11-1, 1 — 1c), — .1 Date DATE: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL October 14, 2015 TO: E.J. Walsh, Development Services Manager Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Utility District Gordy Goodsell, South King Fire & Rescue Rick Perez, City Traffic Engineer FROM: Leila W-Oakes x 2644 (Tues. PM & Fridays AM X 2655) Review only FILE NUMBER (s): 15-105178-00-SH RELATED FILE NOS.: 15-105180-SF PROJECT NAME: SOMMERVILLE REBUILD PROJECT ADDRESS: 29604 23RD AVE SW ZONING DISTRICT: RS 15.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of a new SFR to replace a home destroyed by fire. The new residence will be 6,793 square foot 2-story w/basement single family residence with 1,200 square foot deck and 672 square foot attached garage. Original footprint changed. LAND USE PERMITS: Shoreline Exemption Administrative Decision- Landslide Hazard Area/GHAs, geotechnical subject to peer review- TBD on review of report and site visit PROJECT CONTACT: PAMELA MARTIN (SOMMERVILLE)(Owner) 29604 23rd Ave SW MATERIALS SUBMITTED: r Site Plan ■ Exemption Application ■ Geotechnical Report - Development Services could you provide an opinion on completeness of report/any engineering concerns re: drainage proposed in GHA/Landslide Area? Leila Willoughby -Oakes Subject: FW: Sommerville Rebuild 15-105178-SH From: Leila Willoughby -Oakes Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 8:21 AM To: Edward Walsh Cc: Kevin Peterson; Isaac Conlen Subject: RE: Sommerville Rebuild 15-105178-SH H i EJ, Thank you for your time on the pre -review of the Sommerville Rebuild. I concur with your technical comments and will arrange a peer review. I suspected the original beach cottage was smaller than the proposed single family as the valuation is $1, 000, 000 and is +6,000 square feet. I will incorporate your comments in the review letter before the starting the peer review. Leila From: Edward Walsh Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 4:29 PM To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes Cc: Kevin Peterson Subject: Sommerville Rebuild 15-105178 Leila - I'll bring over the marked up copy of the report I grabbed out of the SF review stack. I flagged a number of pages with discrepancies that should be resolved by the applicant. From what I see, both in the inconsistencies between the plans and Geo report, and also in the writing of the report, I am fairly sure that Geo Resources did not review the house plans, foundations, etc. I would recommend that something be required from them that they are ok with the plans. The plans do not incorporate a number of concerns they outlined, related to both the foundations, erosion and drainage. Regarding the drainage, we need to determine if it is permissible to discharge via a tightline pipe to the Puget Sound as they are proposing per our standards. Given that is outstanding, the storm design may have to change anyway. Geo Resources recommended that they connect to the tightline in the street, not what is proposed on the plans. I don't see enough elevations on the plan to know if that option is feasible. In the event that they are permitted to go to the Sound, this would involve construction of a drainage outfall pipe, anchors and outfall structure within the GHA and shoreline management area. I am fairly sure that this would be a new disturbance to that area. I don't know what on your end, if anything, needs to happen to permit that, if you are in agreement that it is even permissible. From what I see between the report and the images on the King County GIS info, the existing structure that burned down was a 1 story structure on a combination of stilts and a foundation. Basically it appears it was originally constructed as a small summer home along the water. From the pictures, it appears that it was a fairly light structure and probably contained minimal HVAC, piping, etc. that all add weight to the structure. What they are proposing is essentially a 3 story house within the same +/- footprint using modern construction techniques with all the equipment required to meet building codes. AKA, a substantial increase in structural loading above the top of slope. Geo Resources simplified logic is that the former house was there for a long time and that they are staying in the same footprint therefore it should be ok. They did do several test pits to 6-7 feet to classify soils and said that further supported their logic. They also said the completed a simplified slide analysis and it is acceptable. The report includes no laboratory data, no slide analysis input or output to support their conclusion and the test pits are shallow relative to the depth of the proposed basement and adjacent slope to the OHWM. Given the increase in load alone adjacent to the top of slope I would recommend this be sent to one of the third party Geo companies for their review. While Geo Resources may be completely correct in all their assumptions and recommendations, based on the limited information they submitted and the large increase in loading that doesn't really appear anywhere in their report, I think this one should probably get sent out. Any questions, let me know EJ Walsh, PE Development Services Manager Public Works Department 33325 8th Ave South Federal Way, WA 98003 Office: (253) 835-2730 www.CityofFederalWay.com RECENED CommuNrrY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 2 2015 33325 8`h Avenue South OC1 1 Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 c�rY o� WAY 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 CTfY of CDS� www•citvof%deralway.cam Federal Way SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT EXEMPTION- APPLICATION File # ' z _ S / TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Project Name: aL (JP Project Address: 1 k 11L lrl 1 LIB] 0 k g Applicant: L wyA LUf V Mailing Address: �1�1 Phone Number: t�3� 1�e. b n bP� �.�� E-mail: Description of Project: 1'.� ! l !1 S �L[ K YA Meets the criteria for exemption under which section of * WAC 173-27-040: *Washington Administrative Code online: apps.1eg.wa.gov Appli is Si a Date Bulletin # 143 —March 25, 2013 1 of 2 k:\Handouts\Shoreline Exemption TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF 1) The proposed development is consistent with Section of WAC 173-27-040 and is therefore exempt from the Substantial Development Permit Process. ❑ Yes ❑ No (explanatory narrative attached) 2) Proposal requires: Yes No ❑ ❑ Shoreline Variance ❑ ❑ Shoreline Conditional Use ❑ ❑ Review, Approval or Permit by other State or Federal Agency 3) Proposal complies with applicable provisions of the City's Shoreline Master Program. ❑ Yes ❑ No Condition(s) attached: ❑ Yes ❑ No 4) In accordance with FWRC Section 15.05.130, this application is hereby: ❑ Approved ❑ Denied Director, Community & Economic Development Distribution: ❑ Applicant ❑ Owner ❑ File ❑ Outside Agency Date Bulletin # 143 — March 25, 2013 2 of 2 k:\Handouts\Shoreline Exemption SCJ ALLIANCE CONSULTING SERVICES September 19, 2016 RESUBMIT Ep Nov 072016 crry o� fiE0 COS Rk wAY Leila Willoughby -Oakes, Associate Planner Emailed: Lei la.wiItough b oakes cit ❑ffederalwa .cam Community Development Services 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003. Subject: Sommerville Residential Development, permit #15-105180-SF (15-105178-SH) SCJ Project #2337.01 Dear Ms. Willoughby -Oakes: SCJ Alliance has been retained by Prime Northwest Construction to assist in clarifying the Sommerville residence rebuild application in response to your technical comments, dated November 17, 2015. The purpose of this letter is to provide an accurate description of what is being proposed at the site so they you can better determine what permits are actually required going forward. In particular, we hope to clarify the issues related to shoreline permits that you raise in your November 17 letter. I will follow the format and numerical order of your letter. Attached is a revised site plan, a report from a Certified Forester regarding tree retention, and building plans for the residence that should provide clarification on what is being proposed. 1. Shoreline Exemption/Permits Required: All shoreline armoring depicted on the site plan is existing. The applicant does not propose any new structural modifications to the shoreline. The only work that is proposed to be accomplished within the required shoreline setbacks is the repair of an existing drainpipe. 2. Shoreline Modifications: No armoring is being proposed (i.e. no bulkheads, riprap or gabion baskets). 3. Environmental/SEPA Review: Since no new armoring is being proposed within the shoreline environment, it appears this proposal would be SEPA exempt. 4. Hydraulic Project Approval: No in or over -water work is being proposed. 5. Building Height: The applicant has revised the building plans to ensure that it complies with the City's 30-foot average building height limit. This is depicted on the site plan. Also attached are V1 the building plans. 6. Drainage: The drainage pipe shown on the site plan is an existing pipe. The T-flow dissipater is O existing and located above the Ordinary High Water Mark. The current proposal only involves performing repairs on the existing drain pipe.' 7. Tree and Vegetation Retention: The applicant retained a Certified Forester (Professional0 Forestry Services, Inc.) to evaluate the property for compliance with FWRC 19.120.040(2). The AC 8730 Tallon Lane NE, Suite 200 0 Lacey, WA 98516 • Office 360.352.1465 • Fax 360.352.1509 • www.scjaIlia nce.corn September 19, 2016 Page 2 of 2 City's tree retention standards would require 26.25 tree units for this lot. Currently, the lot has 12 tree units, consisting of 5 red alders and 1 willow. In the opinion of the Forester, this lot is not capable of meeting the required minimum density. The applicant is requesting to meet the City's minimum tree density standard by using the In -lieu fee provisions contained in FWRC 19.120.140. A copy of the Forester's report is attached to this letter. 8. Utility Provisions: The applicant is aware that the Lakehaven Utility District will require will require proof of an existing recorded private water easement from the edge of the public right of way to the owner's property. We will be working with the surveyor to obtain this information. General Items The site plan has been revised to depict or comply with the items requested in the Public Works Development Services list of comments. We hope that the revised site plan will provide the clarification the City of Federal Way needs from the applicant to determine exactly what permits will be required to complete this project, and look forward to getting clarification on the required permits from you so that we can chart a pathway to move forward. Until further notice, Julie Brannberg from Prime Northwest Construction will continue to be the Project Manager and point of contact for this project. At some point, once we have received your feedback on this submittal, the point of contact may change to SO Alliance Consulting, but if that does occur I will notify you. Thanks very much, and we look forward to working with the City of Federal Way to finalize this project. Regards, GaA�Coo r,Senior Planner SO Alliance Consulting 360.352.1465 gary.cooper@scjalliance.com v\ 100 Ruby St. SE, Suite B GJ�J }' Tumwater, WA 98501 W �i�Ji Phone (360) 943-1470 RESUBMITTED Fax (360) 943-1471 August 5, 2016 $Inca 1960 Prime NW Construction Attn: Julie Brannberg Email: iulienprimenwc.corn NOV 0 7 2016 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS Re: Compliance with Regulations Article III. Chapter 19.120.130 City of Federal Way, Washington Dear Ms. Brannberg: As you authorized on July 29, 2016, Professional Forestry Services, Inc. inspected the following property to determine tree and vegetation requirements, as outlined by the City of Federal Way, Washington. Location of Property The property is located at the end of 23rd Ave. SW within a portion of the NW1/ of Section 11, Township 21 North, Range 3 East, W.M., King County Tax Parcel No. 012103-9108. It. Description of Site The property had an existing residence that burned and has been demolished. New construction is planned. The vegetation on the steep bluff has been neglected for a number of years. Very few trees exist on the site. III. Minimum Tree Density R quired The size of the property is estimated at 44,637 square feet or 1.02 acres. Required for Residential Zone is 1-02 acres x 25 Tree Units/Acre. Total Required Tree Density = 25.5 or 26 Tree Units. I� IV. Trees Existing On -Site Currently there are only six trees on the site, five red alders and one willow. In our opinion, none of the trees are a species worth retaining based upon their p location on the site. Even if they were retained it would only equate to 12•Tree t?t Units. O O forests for the future Prime NW Construction Attn: Julie Brannberg August 5, 2016 Page 2 V. Tree Planting Since the required tree density cannot be met with existing trees, it would require trees to be planted. In our opinion, there is not any place to plant trees on the site to obtain the required tree density. VI. Consideration In Lieu of Required Tree Density Since the required tree density cannot be met with existing trees or planted trees the developer would have to consider Chapter 19,120.140, which requires off -site mitigation and fees paid in lieu based upon the required 26 Tree Units. VU. Landscape Plan The landscape plan prepared by a Landscape Architect should determine the species, size and cost to satisfy the regulations for meeting the minimum tree density. If there are other questions related to this site, please let us know, Sincerely, .0, �, f Michadl D. Jacks , CF, ACF / Certified Fores (No. 1244 MDJ:dkd I N 3" GALV OR STAINLESS STEEL PLATE 4) 8"0 GALV. BOLTSii 0= DIA. OF INSID CORRUGATION PLUS 1/4" (4) 6" !a GALV. ALL -THREAD PIPE JOINT CONNECT SCALE: 1" 4" OR 6" CORRUGATED HDPE PIPE HDPE PIPE COUPLING ADAPTER (4) 8" 0 GALV. ALL -THREAD 16" GALV OR STAINLESS STEEL PLATE GALV. WASHER/NUT g w 0 M _ a a M 3" (TYP.) DETAIL PIPE ANCHOR @ 10' OC PER DETAIL (TYP.) 4" OR 6" CORR. HDPE PIPE IPE ANCHOR DETAIL (2) SCALE: 1 /2" = 1' - 0" - #4 REBAR EMBED 24" MIN CONNECT TO PIPE W/ VINYL COATED WIRE @ 10" OC (TYP.) 4-6" HDPE PIPE IPE ANCHOR DETAIL (1) SCALE: 1/2" = 1' - 0" (2) 1/2" THREADED ROD WRAP AROUND TEE ONE EA SIDE COVER ALL SIDES OF DIFFUSER WITH 36" OF 12-18" DIAMETER RIP -RAP TEE DIFFUSER (TYP.) SCALE: 1/2" = 1' - 0" 4" OR 6" DIA CORRUGATED HDPE TO NEXT STRUCTURE (2) #3 REBAR HOOKS @ END C FOR EXPOSED PIPE, EXTEND INTO GROUND T MIN TO PVC CONNECTION 4" OR 6" DIA PVC OR DUCTILE IRON MATCH DIA OF UPPER DRAIN PIPE 3/4" DIA HOLES SPACED @ 6" OC ON FRONT STAGGARED ON FRONT HALF OF TEE AND TEE EXTENSIONS RESUBMITTED Nov 01 2016 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDs Z O __1 O O Lo Cn 00 O E Lu Q V � w J w _O zm w CL O >Q > 'o CL W O p F— co O �1 p M W It M 0 Lu p� * X I L N Q o Q N J J o m O Q Lu 0 C.0 w !� c`��_ c srf_eCVAL cM O O cV o O> to U >Lu J UZ O Z Quj E— Qa. W O H R w Lu W W Z N Y o a � 0-Q 0 00 ()W� Lu ` Q Q W Im LuZ�ZIllU) z ogoW O J _hV c zz 0040 o SHEET 2 OF 2 Z JO � 133HS >i 0 M ITI m c) N (nmZ� m mz-wM0 > a ,coma CL ><_ a°;uO WXC < r m Z -I m ;U Z X S Cl) � � -� m M D Z C CD n -� CD m c m •11nS32! V SV SJNIMVN(3 3S3H1 O1NI 031HavdUO0NI N338 3AVH A`dW HOIHM SNOISSIWO NO S2NOUN3 ANV NO=I HO NOJIVWaOdNI 1VH1 =io AovNn00Y 3H1 NO3 318ISNOdS3H ION SI SI.1Hl ONV AOHHn00'd S1I 3NnSN3 I.ONNVO 011 'Oli '318VI13N 38 0103A3I138 St NOliVWUOlNI SIHl 311HM 'SU3HIO A8 ❑3HSINbnd NOIIVVYNOJN1 NOdn 03SV8 '12iVd NI '03Wd31Jd N338 SVH SJNIMVUO 3S3H1 NO NMOHS VIVO 3IHdV?J0OdO1 ONIISIX3 3Hl :31ON 3IHdVHD0d01 1333 09-/+ :NMHO NOMA NoV8 13S M WHO WOd3 AOb813S `JNIMin8 D AS 000'9 L AINn L -0'9L SN :ONINOZ CnCD to o ONINOZ N .0£ :1HO13H ON uim 30VN3AV w 1HOGH ONI01Ina 19V3AV 'C S380V ZO' L :(80SS3SSV UNn00 ONIA 83d) v3W 101 'C A8NOSVW 3WOS H11M 03W HA DOOM A 3dA1 3d,U NOUnd1SN00 '8 30N301S38 A11WV3 3lONIS 3sn .y 0 � � VIVO ON101ino 'Z r r- 1'- N 0 n f OV SOl C11 10 ❑NZ MOl - 80d1 Ol M L£•--ZO-00 S H1 90d1 d3 3 L.£-ZO-00 (® ® _ N088dVlAll HlZ10OSJONlN011JOZN Hl 3 H1 + W .p rn -U 9*'ZZV N H1 Jj 5£ 1, Z 10 34 NI S (.0 -P N r- m ❑S Mld Al N-1 OlV AIM H1 9Odl 01 1a ON N MOO 3S JO AIM J� 92 W $' 10 CIS Hl 3OHl O 3O W S - NO dWe r JVCI £-1 Z- L 03S JO tr/ L 3 N NI Z 10 30 MOd M C m � NOUNDS30 -IV93� 0 0- O 9016£OLZLo 6 m � nN (S)d38W13MVd '8 (D 'AVM 'MS CD VM IV8303A W 08CZ *096Z n SS3H& 133d1S 'V O °n o vivo ills ' 1, O C 09 0£' 0 Z 1333 00=„ l -31vos N`d" 7d 1:IIVd3H 3dld 39VNIVHCI CINd NH -Id 3jLIS I�lrO) .69' 696L 3„6E, Zb. 88S - ---- -- --�/1— --------------- _ — (0330) ,00'/ ! ---- 1—.B-- ----.-----.------- � I Z 101 1N3WH3A09 H3NHD0 I �ldb0 ��d9� _ � �'-r J — — Z 10� 1N3WH3AOJ H3NH00_ I 3S d0 M.98'Zb9 1NIOd I 3S A M , 00'LL6 1N?0d it � 1380NOD ' 1 ❑J; VJ -v6A ON of o-ndM 9NINIVAH f f'm mz .• ,•• ••' G qQ I o o0 I 901AN3S 2GiVFM „£ :� • Iof oco I 301AN OD PV fie: Bel' ��1Iaa j mm L 5 NNYBO;a a i0d N3M3S , L rN9. ------ 1-Qn;4 (0330) 00'0E Abd11N`dS ,�Z/6-6 � VL M8 aN dL d 3„6E, ay. 98S oZ�� 89 Ml ��fl 1 VL M8 Z6 Ml'. :-o"••' fin' S2GHlO ,l8 ats� o I _ - I ! Z890�8 X3 -- NJIS3(7 T1VM ` ' ... :,�� •... ��,. I 0�8 X3 JNINIb'132! a6.ioLAke" `". >I - �'' '1 J.b'M3ARJ4 d02id I' M, L•a pe • _ k 131383NOOU ! ! ° r I.I. I ............� cc �d + DOE=1H!J13H 3AV i I II 3• �IHM 132i D OTS =13 1d (]NZ + It 0'£L = l3 bd'J se'o 3„6E:Zb. ae5 pt+, O'tL = 13 Id IS l il� i I�=== E9'L9 = NN + :.I'I + I 80 X3 d �g06 r r 0 59 S32� dO�ld I� li .� ..... I _ �... ccla Q 9 ' ~II T - S 3did Vla80 3d7H �NDO .,i�X03NOIHd I if + + 1..;+ I9NIlIVMV AHVNIWI138d SI 3NII SIHl 0 0z m j• 0 MJ, � rNTal38 M ,6 u is l............. I .... '......... j ' l: N3d :' �.............�j p:: :�....- oS 3d1d NNW] ti •YllOad �fa�19 38'i': :n;.:.' ONIISIX3 oe . a ... ,3Nrl a S' .... oZ NlVd3U dtl�EI3A0. f• ' 3dld N1V'dG 3dGH 1NO0 ,,V X3 • (13HOV-LLV N3d I ':... N31Vd1SS1(1 d�� 1.. AJ2i3N3 M03d 331 YqMHD fl I. I H11M l-lddln0 J !� i ....... m - X3 NlVd3N