Loading...
03-101142 and 02-102628CITY OF gr CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South (253) 661-4000 PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 February 24, 2003 F 0 CA* Fi 'o Mr. Mike Luna Mr. Gian Singh Sadler/Barnard & Associates 330 Avery Place East 12714 Valley Avenue East Chehalis, WA 98532 Sumner, WA 98390 Re: Identification of Geologically Hazardous Area and Notice of Incomplete Application File No: 02-102628-000-00-SU; Singh Short Plat Dear Messers Luna and Singh: On February 12, 2003, the City received revised short plat drawings for the proposed three -lot short plat, prepared by Dale Oaks of Sadler/Barnard & Associates. Based on the topography indicated on the plat drawing, the slope at the eastern edge of the property meets the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) definition of a Geologically Hazardous Area (GHA). FWCC Section 22-1 (enclosed), defines a GHA as, among other things, a steep slope which is an area with a slope of 40 percent or greater and with a vertical relief of 10 or more feet, a vertical rise of 10 feet or more for every 25 feet of horizontal distance. A slope is delineated by establishing its toe and top, and measured by averaging the inclination over at least 10 feet of vertical relief. Based on the resubmitted plat drawing, it appears that the original plat drawing, prepared by Azeltine and Associates and submitted on October 10, 2002, was technically deficient and did not accurately identify the topography of the lot. The submitted Geotechnical Report, prepared by Geotechnical Testing Laboratory, March 7, 2001, appears to have been likewise deficient. Given this new information related to the presumably accurate representation of the topography of the site, the City has determined that the proposed short plat application is subject to review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the GHA provisions of FWCC Section 22- 1286 (enclosed). Unfortunately, the October 7, 2002, GHA analysis prepared by William Evans of Landau Associates (enclosed), which stated that a critical areas review is unnecessary, did not have the benefit of an accurate topographic survey. In the absence of accurate information related to the topography of the slope, Landau Associates could not ascertain with a sufficient degree of accuracy the applicability of SEPA regulations. We apologize for the delay in identifying the need for SEPA review; however, in the absence of an accurate topographic survey, this determination could not be made with the necessary certitude. Please note, if the applicant has additional information that can verify to the City's satisfaction that the project does not, in fact, contain nor is in within 25 feet of a GHA, we are prepared to reevaluate the need for SEPA and GHA review. Mr. Mike Luna Mr. Gian Singh Page 2 February 24, 2003 In the absence of such information, and in order for the City to continue review of the proposed short plat application, please submit a completed Environmental Checklist (enclosed), and submit the required SEPA review fee of $680.50. Also, please provide stamped mailing envelops addressed to all owners and occupants of properties within 300 feet of the subject site. The envelopes should bear the City's return address of PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718. A handout on obtaining mailing labels is enclosed. For your information, the Director of Community Development Services will issue a decision on the environmental application. There is a 14-day comment period followed by a 14-day appeal period. The comment and appeal periods must conclude before the short plat approval can be granted. Upon receipt of the requested information, the City shall make a determination of completeness and notify you whether the application is complete or whether additional is necessary. In the meantime, based on the resubmitted plat drawing, the City's preliminary review will continue; a technical letter will be forthcoming. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please feel free to call me at 253-661-4120. Sincerely, Jane Gamble Associate Planner enclosures c: Sarady Long, Traffic Analyst Kim Scattarella, Senior Engineering Plans Reviewer File 902-102628-000-00-SU Doc. LD. 22016 JT�YO� CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 September 10, 2002 Mr. Bill Evans Landau Associates 4210 20th Street East, Suite F Tacoma, WA 98424-1823 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Re: File No: 02-102628-00-SU; Request for Assessment of Proposed Two -Lot Short Plat Singh Short Plat; 181h Avenue South, Federal Way Dear Mr. Evans: The purpose of this letter is to request your services in assessing the above referenced project relative to Federal Wiry City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article XIV, Division 4, "Geologically Hazardous Areas" (GHA). The applicant has applied for a two -lot short plat, and in order to determine whether the subdivision is subject to review under the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA), the City must determine if the subject site contains or is within 25 feet of a GHA. There is a steep slope at the eastern property line, and the CiLy's Environmentally Sensitive Areas map indicates that the eastern half of the lot lines within an erosion hazard zone. The applicant has provided a March 7, 2001, Geotechnical Report prepared by J. Frank Spear, P.E. of Geotechnical Testing Laboratory. There is an apparent discrepancy between the contour lines and elevations shown on the submitted plat drawing and those shown on the geotechnical drawings provided in the geotechnical report. The report states that the site contains slopes not in excess of 30 percent, and yet the plat drawings show contour lines indicating slopes of approximately 40 percent. Additionally, the submitted geotechnical report apparently uses King County standards to classify the erosion hazard area, rather than the FWCC. The City requests that Landau Associates prepare a scope of work addressing the following items: 1) Review of the enclosed geotechnical report and associated data for consistency with requirements of FWCC Section 22-1286. 2) Provide written response that determines if the conclusions and recommendations proposed in the report are accurate for the project. 3) Review the report to ensure that all suspected GHA's are addressed. Mr. Bill Evans Page 2 September 10, 2002 I have enclosed a copy of the following submitted data: ■ Geotechnical Report, Jeannette Sound View Tracts, Lot 10, prepared by Geotechnical Testing Laboratory, Olympia, Washington, with J. Frank Spears, P.E., March 7, 2001 • Survey of Lot 10, Block 2, Jeanette Sound View Tracts, prepared by Azeltine and Associates, Olympic, Washington, by Steven L. Azeltine, May 28, 2002 • Preapp4pation Letter, November 21, 2001 • Noticb of Incomplete Application, July 11, 2002 e Also, please find a copy of FWCC Section 22-1286, "Geologically Hazardous Areas Development, Limitations." For your information, if it is determined that SEPA review is required for this project, the applicant will be requested to submit an environmental checklist and potentially a request for GHA intrusion, which may also require your review and comment. A supplemental scope of work will be requested for this additional review. As you may recall, City authorization must be approved prior to beginning the work outlined in items 1 and 2, above. I can be reached at 253-661-4120 if you have any questions. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, OoVV, (ZZ #A b� Jane Gamble Associate Planner enclosures c: Gian and Inderjit Singh, 330 Avery Road Place East, Chehalis, WA 98532 File File #02-10262MO-SU Doc. I.D. 20277 LM October 7, 2002 RESUBMI17ED City of Federal Way 33530 151 Way South P.O. Box 971.8 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Attn: Ms. Jane Gamble, Associate Planner RE: SINGH SHORT PLAT CRITICAL AREAS REVIEW CITY FILE NO. 02-102628-00-SU Dear Ms. Gamble: OCT 1 0 2002 LANDAU ASSOCIATES The City of Federal Way's (City) September 10, 2002 letter requested that Landau Associates provide the City with a proposal for geotechnical/critical areas review of the above -referenced short plat. During review of the materials provided with the City's letter, inconsistencies in some of the technical data made it difficult to prepare a specific scope of services and budget. Accordingly, on October 4, 2002 Mr. William Evans of Landau Associates visited the site; a summary of observed conditions follows: 0 Blackberry vines and brush on the property have recently been knocked down. • There is evidence that a home or other structure once occupied the site. The evidence includes concrete fragments, remnants of carpet and other building materials, and slightly irregular topography suggesting some past grading activity. The past grading activity appears to have resulted in cuts and fills of less than two feet. • Visual evidence does not indicate if the former structure(s) had a basement. • The majority of the property slopes gently upward from west to east. The extrem:, eastern end of the site rises at a steeper angle than the rest of the property, in part due to fill placed on the slope from the property further east. The eastern slope is variable, ranging from an estimated 10 to 25 percent. The overall slope height of the eastern slope is modest (10 to 15 ft estimated). • No evidence of unstable slopes was observed on this site, or nearby properties. No evidence of springs or seeps was observed, and we did not note the presence of wetland - type vegetation. • Geologic maps of the area show glacial till as the predominant soil type. The till is described in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotechnical Testing Laboratory of Olympia, Washington, dated March 7, 2001. Glacial till is a competent soil unit, not typically prone to landsliding or erosion unless undercut by waves, streams, man-made cuts, etc. ENVIRONMENTAL I GEOTECHNICAL I NATURAL RESOURCES 4210 20th Street East, Suite F • Tacoma, WA 98424 • (253) 926-2493 • fax (253) 926-2531 • www.landauinc,com SEATTLE • SPOKANE • TACOMA • PORTLAND Based on the above, and our experience in the area, it is our opinion that neither slope instability or erosion are major concerns at the site, especially since no development is planned along the eastern slope. Therefore, it is also our opinion that a critical areas review to address steep slopes and/or landslide hazards is not necessary. City staff should review the project plans and specifications for consistency with the project geotechnical report, and best management practices for temporary erosion control should be used during construction. If you have information that indicates this evaluation of the property is incorrect, please contact the undersigned and we will promptly reinvestigate. Also, if conditions are revealed during construction that differ substantially than those described above, or those identified in the project geotechnical report, it may be necessary to readdress the City's original concerns. We trust that this letter provides you with the information that you require at this time. The materials you provided for our review are being returned with this letter. LANDAU ASSOCIATES, INC. William D. Evans, P.G. Associate WDE/j as 10/07/02 I:\PROPOSAL\238\Singh Short Plat Itr.doc 2 LANDAU ASSOCIATES CITY OF Federal Way DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33530 First Way South PO Box 9718 Federal Way WA 98063-9718 253-661-4000; Fax 253-661-4129 www.,Qif offederalwa .corn DECLARATION OF DISTRIBUTION I hereby declare, under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington, that a--8----� ❑ Notice of Land Use Application/Action ❑ Notice of Determination of Significance (DS) and Scoping Notice Notice of Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, DNS) ❑ Notice of Mitigated Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (SEPA, MDNS) ❑ Notice of Land Use Application & Anticipated DNS/MDNS ❑ FWCC Interpretation ❑ Other was mailed ❑ faxed 2003. Project Name ❑ Land Use Decision Letter ❑ Notice of Public Hearing before the Hearing Examiner ❑ Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing ❑ Notice of LUTC/CC Public Hearing ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Adoption of Existing Environmental Document ❑ e-mailed and/or [:]posted to or at each of the attached addresses on File Number(s) -- D -.S F= ' Signature _ e - Date KACD Administrat on Files\Declaration of D1sMVlfpn.db0R6s1 printed 01 /31 /2003 08:52 AM DEPT OF ECOLOGY GIAN SINGH ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SEC 330 AVERY RD E PO BOX 47703 CHEHALIS WA 98352 OLYMPIA WA 98504-7703 CITY OF `_ `' Fed a ra l 'Allay ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE SINGH THREE -LOT SHORT PLAT File Number: 03-101142-00-SE Related File Number: 02-102628-00-SU Description of Proposal: The applicant proposes to subdivide a 36,000 square -foot lot into three single-family lots, with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. A steep slope hazard area is located at the eastern perimeter of the property. The tax parcel number for the property is 367440-0150 Proponent: Gian Singh, 330 Avery Road East, Chehalis, WA 98532 Location: Lot 10, Block 2, Jeanette Soundview Tracts, 298xx 18th Avenue South near the intersection of 18`h Avenue South and Pacific Highway South. Lead Agency: City of Federal Way Contact: Jane Gamble, Associate Planner, 253-661-4120 The responsible Official of the City of Federal Way hereby makes the following decision based upon impacts identified in the environmental checklist, Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, Final Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist, and other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations designated as a basis for exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act Rules pursuant to RCW 43.31 C.060. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.032(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued after using the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period. This decision may be appealed by filing a written appeal within 14 days of issuance. Details of the appeal procedures maybe obtained at the Department of Community Development Services. Responsible Official: Kathy McClung Position/Title: Director of Community Development Services Address: 33530 First Way South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Date Issued: April 22,2003 Signature: Doc. I D 22383 Vincity Map Singh Three -Lot Short Plat 0 700 1400 Feet File No. 02-102628-00-SU 03-101142-00-SE 4-4-03 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Singh Three -Lot Short Plat Federal Way File No: 03-101142-00-SE (Related Short Plat File No: 02-102628-00-SU) NOTE: The purpose of this staff evaluation is to provide technical staff evaluation of the proposed action; supplement information contained in the environmental checklist and expanded studies; provide technical information unavailable to the applicant; correct inaccurate information; and recommend measures to the responsible official to mitigate identified environmental impacts. Technical reports and attachments referenced herein and in the environmental checklist may not be attached to all copies of this evaluation. Copies of reports, attachments, or other documents may be reviewed and/or obtained by contacting the Department of Community Development Services (33530 First Way South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718, 253-661-4000). SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION . The proposal is to subdivide a 36,000 square -foot lot into three single-family lots, with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. The steep slope hazard area is located at the eastern perimeter of the property. The tax parcel number for the property is 367440-0150 LIST OF TECHNICAL REPORTS The following technical information was submitted as part of the development application: • SEPA Checklist, prepared by Gian Singh, 3/12/03 • Plat drawing, prepared by Dale E. Oaks of Sadler/Barnard & Associates, Inc., 2/11/03 • Preliminary Site and Civil Plan, prepared by Hal Hagenson of Hagenson Consultants, LLC, 1/28/03 • Technical Information Report, prepared by Hal Hagenson of Hagenson Consultants, LLC, 1/21/03 • Geotechnical Report, Jeannet Sound View Tracts, Lot 10, prepared by J. Frank Spears, P.E., of Geotechnical Testing Laboratory, 3/7/02 ATTACHMENTS Vicinity Map Plat Drawings SEPA Checklist GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION Project Name: Singh Three -Lot Short Plat Applicant: Gian Singh 330 Avery Road East Chehalis, WA 98532 Location: Lot 10, Block 2, Jeanette Soundview Tracts, 298XX 18th Avenue South near the intersection of 18`h Avenue South and Pacific Highway South Zoning: Single -Family (RS7200) Comp. Plan Designation: Single -Family High Density ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Following are staff responses to the elements of the environmental checklist (enclosed) indicating whether or not City staff concurs with the applicant's response to the checklist item, or staff clarification or amendment of the response. A. BACKGROUND 1-7. Concur with the checklist. A geotechnical report, prepared by J. Frank Spear, P.E., of Geotechnical Testing Laboratory of Olympia, Washington, and TIR prepared by Hal Hagenson, of Hagenson Consultants, LLC 9-12. Concur with the checklist. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS Earth a. Concur with the checklist. The property is entirely vacant pastureland. Existing grades slope down from the east to the west of the property where the property fronts on 18`h Avenue South. b. The steepest slope exceeds 40 percent at the extreme east end of the site. Concur with the checklist. Site soils are classified as Alderwood Series per SCS mapping. Existing soils consist of gravely sandy loam till, firm to a depth of approximately 42 inches, with cemented glacial till underneath. The soil borings indicated dampness, but no obvious shallow groundwater levels. There are no indications of closed depressions on the property. d. Concur with the checklist. Singh Three -Lot Short Plat File #03-101142-00-SE / nog. I.D. 22389 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 2 Concur with the checklist. f. The applicant must submit a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) consistent with provisions of the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) to prevent and/or minimize erosion impacts during the construction phase of the project. No land surface modification shall take place within 25 feet of the toe of the steep slope hazard area. g. Concur with the checklist. h. A TESC Plan must be approved and implemented in accordance with the City's engineering standards, in conjunction with filling and grading activities. FWCC Chapter 22 and the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), with the addendum as adopted by the City of Federal Way, regulate land surface modifications. Compliance with code provisions will prevent and/or minimize erosion impacts; thus no additional mitigation measures are necessary. 2. Air a. Short-term effects to air quality will occur during construction and paving operations. Construction activity contributes to carbon monoxide levels through the operation of construction machinery, delivery equipment and materials, and worker access to the site by automobile. These activities also include the emissions of hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen, potentially elevating the level of photochemical oxidants, such as ozone, in the ambient air. Long-term impacts, due to vehicle and maintenance equipment such as lawn mowers and emissions from homeowners and visitors' vehicles, will vary in level according to the amount of traffic generated in the future by the proposal. b. Concur with the checklist. C. Compliance with local, state, and federal air quality standards provides sufficient mitigation of these potential impacts. Water a. Surface 1) The subject property is within the Star Lake subdivision basin of the Lower Puget Sound basin. Drainage along the Redondo Way South portions of the basin is predominately contained in the Star Lake outlet stream. Portions of the study area are susceptible to groundwater contamination and geologic hazards as defined in the comprehensive plan mapping. 2) The project does not require any work over, in, or adjacent to any surface water bodies. 3-5) Concur with the checklist. 6) Yes, proposed stormwater infiltration for individual lots and additional paved surfaced. Singh Three -Lot Short Plat File #03-101142-00-SE / D.,. I.D. 22389 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 3 b. Ground 1) Water Quality treatment is not required if this development adds less than 5,000 square feet of paved surface. However, if water quality treatment is required, it must meet Basic Water Quality menu requirements of 1998 KCSWDM. 2) Concur with the checklist. There are no proposed groundwater withdrawals or discharges. C. Water Runoff (including stormwater) 1) All stormwater on site and road frontage will be collected, treated, and infiltrated on site. 2) As with all paved, developed areas, the site will contribute some pollutants to ground and surface waters, as these will be washed off the site by stormwater into the drainage system. Potential stormwater impacts will be adequately mitigated by compliance with the requirements of all applicable City, state, and federal regulations. d. During construction, temporary measures will be employed to control run-off and water quality, including silt fence and riprap across drainage ways and construction of temporary erosion and sedimentation control facilities. Compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations will ensure that surface water impacts are appropriately mitigated. No further mitigation measures are necessary. 4. Plants a. Concur with checklist. Alder trees are also present on the site. There are no significant trees located on the property. b. Concur with the checklist. Small Alderwood trees would likewise be removed. It appears that the site has undergone clearing activity in the past. c-d. Concur with the checklist. The applicant is required to locate street trees in the planter strip of the required frontage improvements. Animals a-d. The site is located within the Pacific Flyway, a significant route for migratory waterfowl. There are no priority, threatened, or endangered species associated with the subject property. No impacts to animals are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. Therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a-c. Concur with the checklist. Singh Three -Lot Short Plat File #03-101142-00-SE / Doc. I.D. 22389 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 4 7. Environmental Health a. Environmental Health Hazards 1-2) Normal emergency services are anticipated. The site has access to 18th Avenue South and is one block from Pacific Highway South. Both streets are suitable for emergency vehicle access. No further mitigation measures are necessary. b. Noise 1-3) Noise levels will increase with the construction activity. Control measures include required conformance with local noise ordinances regulating hours of construction. An increase in noise levels due to traffic generated by this project is expected on a long-term basis. The majority of noise will be generated by vehicle traffic and will occur during the major commuter times, during the week. Compliance with the FWCC and implementation of the measures outlined in the checklist will sufficiently mitigate noise levels. No further mitigation measures are necessary. Land and Shoreline Use a. The subject site is currently undeveloped open field. There is evidence that a home or other structure once occupied the site. The evidence includes concrete fragments, remnants of carpet and other building materials, and slightly irregular topography suggesting some past grading activity. The past grading activity appears to have resulted in cuts and fills of less than two feet. Neighboring uses and zones are as follows: East: Single-family residential zone (RS7.2) developed with single- family homes West: Multi -family residential zone (RM1800) developed with the Kingsbridge Apartments North: Single-family residential zone (RS7.2) undeveloped South: Single-family residential zone (RS7.2), developed with a single- family residence b. Concur with the checklist. C. There is evidence that a home or other structure once occupied the site. The evidence includes concrete fragments, remnants of carpet and other building materials, and slightly irregular topography suggesting some past grading activity. d-e. Concur with checklist f, The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) designation for the subject site is Single -Family High Density. g. Concur with the checklist. h. The eastern portion of the site contains slopes in excess of 40 percent that are defined as geologically hazardous areas under the FWCC. Singh Three -Lot Short Plat File #03-101142-00-SE / Doc. I.D. 22389 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 5 9. Housing a-c. Concur with checklist. 10. Aesthetics a-c. The zoned height limitation for single-family structures in the single-family zoning district is 30 feet. No views in the immediate vicinity will be obstructed; however, views onto the site will be changed from a presently vacant lot to that of a ground -oriented residential development that is urban in character. No adverse aesthetic impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. Therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary. 11. Light and Glare a-c. FWCC Sections 22-950 and 22-954 prohibit lighting levels from spilling over onto adjacent properties. No further light and glare related mitigation measures are necessary. 12. Recreation a-c. Concur with the checklist. Sacajawea City Park is approximately 500 feet away, located to the west of Pacific Highway South (State Route 99). 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a-c. Concur with the checklist. 14. Transportation a. Concur with checklist. The site is accessed via 18I' Avenue South, and is approximately 200 feet east of Pacific Highway South (State Route 99). b. Concur with the checklist. The nearest bus stop is one block to the west of the site on Pacific Highway South (State Route 99). C. Concur with checklist. d. 18"' Avenue South is a minor collector street that corresponds to Federal Way roadway section "R" in the latest FWCP. This roadway section requires a 40-foot wide paved surface with vertical curbs, a four -foot planter strip for street trees, a six-foot wide sidewalk, and a three-foot utility strip, all within a 66-foot right-of-way. Required improvements include widening the existing street with additional of curb, gutter, planter strip, and sidewalk to a street section that consists of a 31-foot wide paved street with five-foot gravel shoulder within an existing 60-foot wide right-of-way. However, a minimal taper of pavement at both ends of the frontage of 5:1 (extended 45 feet at both ends) is allowed. The applicant is also required to execute a Statutory Warranty Deed to dedicate an additional three feet of right-of-way to accommodate the required right-of- way width of 66 feet. Singh Three -Lot Short Plat File #03-101142-00-SE / Doc. t.n- 22389 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 6 e-g. Concur with the checklist. 15. Public Services a-b. Concur with the checklist 16. Utilities a-b. The Lakehaven Utility District reviews sanitary sewer and water system connections. The Public Works Department reviews connection to the City's existing storm sewer system. No adverse utility related impacts are anticipated. Thus, no mitigation measures are necessary. Power, telecommunications, and gas are available in the project vicinity and will be connected accordingly. CONCLUSION Based on staff analysis of the application, the completed SEPA checklist, and applicable City and county regulations and policies, the proposal can be found to not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. The City reserves the right to review any further revisions or alterations to the site or the proposal in order to determine the environmental significance or nonsignificance of the project at that point in time. Prepared by: Jane Gamble, Associate Planner, 253-661-4120 Date: April 8, 2003 Singh Three -Lot Short Plat File #03-101142-00-SE / Doc. I.D. 22389 Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist Page 7 CITY OF e-_ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 33530 First Way South Federal Way WA 98003 (253) 661-4000 Fax (253) 661-4129 RECENE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST z003 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST BUILDIN�� DEPT. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this'checklist-is io provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about our proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not or "does not a ply." Complete answers to questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NON -PROJECT PROPOSALS Complete this checklist for non -project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for Non -Project Actions. For non -project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. 2 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 5), CA H :SHORT PLOT FILE ` op;^ I �6�-� oCq©-ov SU 2. Name of applicant: 6IAAf SfAfa H 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: WY s ltfO , 330 AJERy POA:l EFh 57 "EyA L 1 5 , WA. 9,553 �1, 360-�)L697ol 4. Date checklist prepared: 3- P,- ° 3 5. Agency requesting checklist: CITY of FEa)ERAL' 'JAY 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): �14 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal?_ If yes, explain. 00 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared,- or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. °JD 90T KOtd J VJIl.L 8O �)OAIC PER CITY G031� ip 3 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. �O 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. 01- K do �9 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. J-OT SIZE -- go-533Y, 104.73 : 366H1- y�- ST FT SHoRT Pi�TldiG To THREF �-oTS ZoO — R5 7fl- Ore Aou.SF pFR �-oT 01TN �L C-AR CPAFA4E 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal' Would; occur over a range of area "provid ',the range or boundaries of the sites). Provide a legal description,, site plan,. vicinity. Map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you, should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. �oT Io, 8!-Dc_K °�- , 5 EA NE TTE souij'J v,>=,a1 TR,9c-rs� A.c.c o,M11Ja-., -ra P�6T RE(-OP,3>'-3 � Vol -LAMS q4 o� PI-AT5 L} AT phc,,Fi C HWY %1$t,� AVE SoLA TH I�TE'RSE�T���✓ S B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one). flat rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 10 To �L, fERC-61vT f T F.A5T Eni',D c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, mulch)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. at-AcIflL, 711-1- d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading pro- posed. Indicate source of fill. MINIMAL 4RAD1d4 MAY PEROE.D Nd 1-1LL1NG 0EF�'O� f.; Could erosion. occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Mlg1MhL_. j 4650GIRATE-� wrrP THE CVPJ.TTRLAXINVA of 3 sjWr4L>r FAM) Ly )�VK5E_S 5 g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. F-Rv5104 [,otJ"fRoL MliA5ugEs �EK Cl-f� G03E 2. Ant a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial, wood smoke...) during construction and when the project is com- pleted? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. M191MAL E M1 5510 15 FRO/A f'QLurm6NT PM44 4V.45?9uc.TiPA' d0 PPRMAPEWT . f-mi 55iv^ oTtXR -0 THAA1 A 14TVA40011-ES b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. 1J 0 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. �JogE 3 - WATER a. Surface. 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. rvC9 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. NO 3)• ...Estimate the amount of 611 grid dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water Or ketlands and indicate'tYie area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. 4lA 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 0 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. ` f ID 1 7 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. YES� �Ro�p56� � sToRM+,;�iER i/�F�LTR�Tion� b. Ground. 1) W. groundwater be withdrawn, or will. water be discharged to,groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and. approximate quantities if known. y'Fs) FROPOSM STo RMtaATE& i,#F' 1-T R6'T¢P 10f/ L� (Tkl PRV nEAT M E I 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. 00 vfASTE MATMAL OiSc-NARA53 c. Water Runoff (including storm water) 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known), Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. ALL STo?tM OATPR og SITE An/3 ROA9 FRt TA4F OrLL BE Go1.L6CM TREATED A45 11J FI L'T'FRET one SITE M 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. nfo. OA57EMA7FR���.; �.15.41�.9RG�5 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. 570 RM Oh-rE R T R EAT M E-.117 pFp GI T y GO3£ PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site. ❑ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other IN evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ;1 shrubs It grass ❑ pasture ❑ crop or grain ❑ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other ❑ water plant: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ❑ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? EX1571tJG F#5TkRE GRASSES TO $E RFMovC3) c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. M. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. yE I_OfmCArT -To I� cLu9 E oar S (TC TREES 5TRFC'r 5. ANu,- a s a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other 900E 0133fiR E'J b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. �O d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. O1J srr E )_0i DScAPI/4 A/JZ\) TREES 10 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project}s=energy needs? Describe whether. it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. � L LT�Ic AA) 1J�}T RAL Gas g 4tJ3 �OD� S�oVE IF PERM" TT F'D SY C-' "y b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generrally describe. !v 0 c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included -in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. ` NOLk5Fs To GOMPI-y OATH (_0_'DF5 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Jv Lg 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. �jq�E 11 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. pfi6 b. Noise. 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. tAu\ AN1- 9015 ' A55ocIATEl tZiTN .511J4LE FAMiLy RE51TE/f cE 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any- 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? 01-f VALAnJT L���� 51gckLE FAM1LY Rr513)EIVC-E MD AA 5T 12 b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. /'JO c. Describe any structures on the site. NOjjE d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? nf0 5T 1 LC C,`f L4 p ,15 o Al Sr'f IF e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R S T d-- f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? 6I1JCLF FAM I Li RE51"D�ffc-E7 g. .If applicable, :what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? qA 13 h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. GHA ,Eo-rFcHNtc-AL- R�QoRT S s�$rl►7r�� t�1TN ? Lpf I. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 3 _51 p(, L E Fdlv► l LX R E 5, 5)FIVC-E .s j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? 1JOAft�7 k. Proposed measures to avoid -,.or reduce displacement impacts, if any.' 91A 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. pAo posE�D u 5E MA-r �S(TH ATV c-E/✓T pROPFRTIES 9. HousiNG a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 3 S IptGLE FAM►LJ 140tA5E-5 L0W — M►'Dj)trE 1.IJC-191 14 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control_ housing impacts, if any. 91A 10. AmTIETics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? c- i T Y G0�p E b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. 15 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? �oN� b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? 0 c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? qO N C d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. 91A 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? � S H Pv1IJ"r QARK ABOWT 16 b. Would the proposed displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. qA 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, nation, :state., or local preser- vation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. 10 b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. � 0 � e c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. l� lA 17 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. 5/7'E FR0trT IF $r ;15:' AVIV 5D4TN AT PA6WI C— Hla��Sl� b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? ,� lA 5 SERVr GLr ��AILA 6LE OIJ P� �1 Fl L !�T 4t4��4y AT fjBOk7 c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? �6/JEE d. Will the proposal Tequire any new roads or streets, or. improvements to existing roads or streets, not inclriding driveways•? It-so",generally describe (indicate whether public or private}. �s EnfT5 VAI ,�F11� �,npElz ?� PRovtJE HALF 57REET iAlPRp � I$ t. AVE 5om-N An�T� PRDvt�s` pRtVATE R°AI TO •e M uc -NO I-oT5 e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transporta- tion? If so, generally describe. N0 18 f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Ih11Jl Ml} L VE�{� G. u�A � TRIES ASSo��RTF.� c�ITH 3. N�cJ 5IPSGWF' FANULY HDuSES g. Proposed raeasures.to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. ," IA 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Mi,4IMA1- XF01 FoR A33)-rIoN1qL Pt4$1-Ic- 5'6P-v►cE R560c"9T&' vJIiN 3 wvt4 sid4j-f F)qM'wy pFSI �DFffC-ES b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. �/4 19 16. UTILITIES a. septic system, b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. SEVEF ---, 1-AK6HAV6X Wrl J.1TY TiSTR"C-7 4PrTER ---- rf 11 11 E1-EG7$ILITY - PL.L49T 50uXa RAWS4Y a p I( 1/ C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. SIGNATURE: DATE SuBMrr a 51�� D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON -PROJECT ACTIONS Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. . When answering these questions, be aware of the proposal, of the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, and if they are likely to affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? MWIMAL, ASSDCIATE1 WiTtl 3 tJ5W S)WALF FAMILY h'OkSES Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases: 0 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine_life? J'ro)E Proposed measures to protect. or conserve: plants,. animals, fisY�, or marine life: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy of natural resources?, IUD AFI~ E c�T a od W'A1' RA I- RE 5ou� 5 Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts: 9rA 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans. 9/A Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public service and utilities? AY D wgtTr u 'Tj L i T[ C S MINIMAL N� EO FOR FUIB.'C' 5EF'\r<«A A550 G�A'�E� �1 N ,3 �jFW 51941.E FAM]LY N19u5E5 Proposed measures to reduce of respond to such demands: 1'©nr C- 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal. may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 0CWJFLILT� �PRVPoSA L TO �s�TH LOc.�9L ST,9Tt FJO£RA t- AN0 r=XV1RVXM9NT 1-flws• ENVIkON.CHK REVISED 8/28/97 CITY OF fjr.- M , April 22, 2003 CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Mr. Gian Singh Fil' 330 Avery Place East Chehalis, WA 98532 Re: File No: 03-101142-000-00-SE; ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Singh Short Plat; 298xx 18th Avenue South, Federal Way Dear Mr. Singh: This office and other City staff reviewed the environmental checklist you submitted. We determined that the proposal would not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. As a result, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required to comply with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). A copy of the Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is enclosed. There is no comment period on the final DNS per the SEPA Rules (WAC 197-11-355). All final determinations may be appealed within 14 days following the comment deadline. No licenses, permits, or approvals will be issued until completion of the appeal period. Our decision not to require an EIS does not mean that the license, permit, or approval you are seeking from the City has been granted. The appropriate administrative or legislative body vested with that authority will approve or deny the proposal. The environmental record is considered by the decision maker(s) and conditions will be imposed to reduce identified environmental impacts as long as the conditions are based on adopted and designated City policy. After a final decision has been made on your proposal (i.e., after a permit has been issued), you may, but are not required to, publish a Notice of Action as set forth in RCW 43.21 C.075. The Notice of Action sets forth a time period after which no legal challenges regarding the proposal's compliance with SEPA can be made. A copy of the Notice of Mr. Gian Singh Page 2 April 22, 2003 Action form and copies of RCW 43.21C.080 and WAC 197-11-680 providing instructions for giving this notice are available from the Department of Community Development Services. The City is not responsible for publishing the Notice of Action. However, the City is responsible for giving a notice (to parties of record) stating the date for commencing a judicial appeal -(including., the SEPA portion of that appeal) if your proposal is one for which the City's action obi it has a specified time period within which any court appeals must be made. If you need further assistance, please call Associate Planner Jane Gamble at 253-661-4120. Sincerely, KO-t, Lt Kathy McClung, Director Community Development Services enclosure c: Jane Gamble, Associate Planner File #03-101142-000-00-SE Doc. I.D. 22569 Z CRy of feral Wa), M0 istway so&. PO 97t8 Federa; Neay. WA 98013.1111 RECEIVED BY OCCUPANT -rnr�*� 29645 18 TH A Rf R"�*v F)EVEI r IT OF-? COAgn. APT A-10 2 APR 0 7 zO FEDERAL WAY nnX-g718 ar VVay, WA 38063-9716 CO�yWIJA(RY 1C7 al VED BY -°4Rr APR 0 7 2003 A y of Federal Way 530 1st Way South ) Box 9718 decal Way, WA 98063-9718 3 63 41�04 5, k-l�-A3 i�;:.!?.4i il4ii!!!44fi?l,Si,liii nl4,4s••!?!4_.s �8�%��_423a $C3 �fl �il�Ifl.'FI!l3i�lSIIf �IEi1Fi11114II1�!!l�f l!lFl�Efl{11!�IEf! �n RECEIVED BY 3c U F�- 1FMENT DEPARTMENT APR 0 0 2003 American Drug Stores Inc PO Box 85602 1WA v'I ;derai w ` stWay South - y Way,WA�9718 � 4 sy 200,7 Thomas & Virgina Pigott 29808 18Th Ave S Federal Way, WA 98003 c)rit�c73,:?cli.y 7.,-.?/3i i.17 17`•5/1>'!fC}3 5] 3'l.'fY'fC} RETURN TO SENDER PIGOTTMOVEDLEFT NO ADDRESS RETURN TO SENDERD 1 It ,381.3 j+r3-! r��y;_ 1111k11i]1l1�41111i11t11111k!141klk1111111k114ST.11111f1k1�SS'.1 1 • E STAJi � ��lrlrajwuul '4,� ox 9718 ral Way, WA ggo-9718 °r r� ;p C Myron & Mickey K.n PO Box 8023 'N Federal Way, WA 98003 `'k g , �oMMUN17yDE �'EIVED 8Y - — — - WA 98063-9718 �ELDply1F l+T h APARTMENT APR 0 8 2003 —...�r. .aka--.,• ��.c� !c.-r ._ OCCUPANT 29667 20TH AVE. S FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 �$`��'"•����#`3�-�����'�' lll�ii�i1�l�l14i?fliii4�F!�i1!iliif�iilF�iiElillil��i!�ill!!ei - -- .. -1 —7, Sox 9718 Way, WA 98063-9716 cf P M 4 APR --------- acn 13 ky of Foderal Way s30 1 st Way South Bo x 97 16 i�`t% gao63-971 8 of FWed Way 30 1st Way South 9718 Afay, WA 98063-9718 RECEIVED BY I DEVELOPMENT DF�,Ap7iEN7 APR 0 8 2003 4' 29801 20TIT-AVE. S FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 CO&4f APR 0 U%l OCCUPAN R29650 18TH AV9':""�- '91 FEDERAL WAY, WA 9 db3 s ek rj fj 7:s — A s cl I & ra F.- COMMUIV RECEIVED BYrTYDEVELOPm,,lMTDEPARTMENT" 'o APR 0 8 2003 OCCUPANT 29808 18TH AVE. S FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 Lan Feder" ity of Federal Way 3630 . `St !AIRY SOO, '0 B;x 97 ; 8 ederal Way, WA 98063-9718 0 3530 1 st Way South ;. 0 7 9710 sdeial VVay, = 98063-9716 .9718 ii 1I+)a>, WA 98063=y71 b RECEIVED BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ra't� APR 0 8 2003 7,tq,;s OCCUPNT 29805 PACIFIC�7 W98003 FEDERAL WAY, 7� co - RECEIVED BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APR 0 8 2003 w RF1UR^'Ep �;ut 1 MAIL UI. lotAILER 'I. AODRF ;S 4; i•,�s t OCCUPANT 29918 PACIFIC W S -1p UL 0o` i1� �aiti1L1' WAY.WA 98003 ,v,�.i�`'� I,�t �,•�:, L FEDERA top D krt>� - APB 0pQ3 . s OCCUPANT 29868 18TH AVE.S FEDERAL WAY, WA 98, A *A A C, ct '7k j- A> C, ', a 4-. 11 1 1 1 if I I i t I i I art 1." st Way $oukt`f !718 Ufa,, WA 98063-9718 OCCUPANT 29645 18TH AVE S APT =202 FE RAL WAY, WA 98003 �_S�'��--•n.--'vim•'•-�Y"+2i � 3Ity of Fri Way 33530 1 st Way South '0 Eoz 9716 =ederal Way, WA 98063-9716 i :J 0 Box 9716 feral Way, WA 98063-9718 OCCUPANT 29600 PACIFIC FEDERAL WA , ChMMflNIIY RECEIVEPI-OPMDENBTrTPAPTAAFNT APR 112003 ��£iiES•Fil£Il!£iFlliFF£;if].319£1F£t�Fil1�li£�ltF£li�itltl�tlf� RECEIVED EY -"-"'A 4TAA��i1. PR 1 0 2003 tiilIs i�iilF£��iti Fi!£�f�lf�llf�iillii!t�llill llf'!-, 't. OCCUP T 2985 PACIFIC HW S FED RAL WAY, WA 98003 r?q>s#/r • 41,h��e�IL� Qp� „0.� ��FIff1££1£!1£=.lifltlifl�£li�£F11£i�ilt�E�filliF[�li!£1£i�i£il �'�lwy• 4 of FEderal Way t.530 1st Way South 1Pox 971& -zte 8'. Way, WA 98063-9718 30 1st Way soum Rox 9710 aral Way, WA 98063-9718 iJA(%USED ��. Of vvay, %IVA 98063 JORESSEO :£ TO F1Pre b,io 1flP4 TO SE1y(i € OCCUPANT 29700 PACI FEDERAL Wei F cy ?'C HW S , WA 98003 '' ffjj I'1 { { 1j II jj II rn,..,,• R�CPVFD BY '-\IT DEPARTMENT A [y Herbert & Rendel Family Anita 29700 Pacific Hwy S ,WA IS �y = 1a! � ■T7 pm lVI1)6V O4 BY RPR 10 3 nt� i� TRf ]FlEiii:ii�l!i??if!!!iili!?i3?13i41!lilll!!�3l331]1i31illiii] 11,1-1"6,1;....11 1] I I I I _TI '