07-102052 (2)Filed at Request of
And When Recorded Return to:
Deb Barker
City of Federal Way
33530 1st Way South
PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063
00809�12000157 44.00
CITY OF FEDERA
AFFORDABLE HOUSING COVENANT
Grantor: BARKLEY RIDGE PARTNERS, LP, a Washington Limited Partnership.
Grantee: THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, a municipal corporation
Additional Legal Description: See Exhibit `A'
Assessor's Tax Parcel No: 7204800200
RECEIVED
OCT - 9 2m
PUBLIC WORKS
Reference No. of Documents DEPARTMENT
Released or Assigned: N/A
THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING COVENANT (this "Covenant") is made as of May
12 , 2008, by BARKLEY RIDGE PARTNERS, LP a Washington Limited Partnership
("Owner"), for the benefit of THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, a municipal corporation (the
"City"), with reference to the following facts:
A. Grantor is the owner of that certain parcel of real property commonly known as
27830 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, Washington, and legally described on
the attached Exhibit A (the "Property").
B. The City has granted the owner approval to construct a multifamily housing
development consisting of 112 units subject to the following requirement; that a
minimum of five percent (5%) of the units be established as Affordable Housing
units [as defined below].
C. As a condition of the City's approval of the Project, Owner is required to impose
certain covenants on the Property.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and for other valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Owner
agrees as follows:
1. Definitions. For purposes of this Covenant, the following terms shall have the
following meanings:
a. "Affordable Housing" means dwelling units that are offered for rent at a
rate that is affordable to those individuals and families having incomes that
are 80 percent or below the median county income.
2. Affordable Housing Covenant. Owner agrees that six of the one hundred and
twelve units (5%) represent Affordable Housing Units.
3. Duration. The covenant shall terminate and be of no further force and effect at the
end of the useful life of the Project.
4. Governing Law. This Covenant shall be construed under and enforced in
accordance with the laws of the State of Washington without regard to any conflicts
of laws and principals.
5. Successors and Assigns. All of the terms and conditions of this Covenant shall run
with the land and shall be binding upon the assigns, heirs, and successors of Owner.
6. Amendment. No party may amend and/or terminate this covenant without the prior
written consent of the City of Federal Way, which shall not be unreasonably
withheld. If the City of Federal Way does not respond to a written request for an
amendment within sixty days of receipt of the request, the amendment shall be
deemed approved by the City of Federal Way.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner has executed this Covenant as of the
date first set forth above.
BARKLEY RIDGE PARTNERS, LP,
A Washington Limited Partneroiip
-MM
H MCKENNA, Authorized Signatory
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss.
COUNTY OF KING )
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on this j2M day of M A Y Is 2008, before
me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and
sworn, came Authorized Signatory of BARKLEY RIDGE PARTNERS, LP, a
Washington Limited Partnership, the limited partnership that executed the
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and
voluntary act and deed of said limited partnership for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and on oath stated that he is authorized to execute the said instrument
on behalf of said limited Partnership.
WITNESS MY HAND and official seal the day and year in this certificate first
above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC *4064-Nkc W)
STATE OF WASHINGTON Print Name: :6.5
CAROL 1 HAYES Notary Public in and for the
COMMISSION EXPIRES State of Washington, residing
MARCH 23. 201t at klLq T
Expiration Date: 3.23.2A/1
CIT
Federal Way
May 9, 2008
Salone Habibuddin
Farrell -McKenna Const LLC
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
RE: File #07-102052-00-MF; FORWARD COVENANT COMMENTS
Barkley Ridge Apartments Building C (Project "A")
Dear Ms. Habibuddin:
r;j
CITY HALL FILE
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www. cityoffederalway. com
The City's legal department has reviewed the proposed affordable housing covenant required for the
Barkley Ridge Apartment complex. Their comments are enclosed, including a copy of Federal Way City
Code (FWCC) Section 22-976 which includes City affordable housing regulations.
Please revise the covenant to address these comments, and forward the signed and notarized document to
my attention. I will authorize recording upon verification of required revisions. As previously noted, the
document must be recorded against the property.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this letter. Also,
please note that I will be out of the office May 21 through May 26, 2008.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
Enclosures as noted
Doc LD 45362
CITY OF
�. Federal
December 17, 2008
CITY HALL
Way 33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www. cityoffederalway. com
Ms. Salone Habibuddin
Farrell McKenna Construction LLC
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
Re: Permit #07-102056-00-CO; APPROVED LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION
Barkley Ridge Apartments, 27830 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA
Dear Ms. Habibuddin:
During the months of August, September, and October 2008, I inspected landscaping installed at
the site and provided related comments in various Inspection Notices.
Based on my subsequent site inspections that occurred on August 19, September 9, 11, 23, 24,
and October 2, 2008, I determined that planting issues identified in the corrections notices were
satisfactorily addressed. Please accept this letter as formal notification of satisfactory resolution
of outstanding planting related issues for Barkley Ridge apartments. No further items are required
to be submitted for the Barkley Ridge apartment project.
I'd like to commend Tim Cox with Samscapes on an excellent planting job at Barkley Ridge. He
paid careful attention to the plant details using an experienced design eye. His actions helped
move outstanding landscape issues to completion.
Should you have any questions about this letter, please call me at 253-835-2642.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
c: Tim Cox, Samscapes, 6722 106'' Street Court East, Puyallup, WA 98373
Doc. I.D. 48128
�l
bTULIVY DIST�
October 2, 2008
LAKEHAVEN UTILII a DISTRICT
31627 -1 st Avenue South ■ P.O. Box 4249 ■ Federal Way, Washington 98063-4249
Federal Way: 253-941-1516 ■ Tacoma: 253-927-2922
www.lakehaven.org
Greg McKenna
F & M Development Company, L.L.C.
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, Washington 98148
RE: Barkley Apts
Agreement No. 05-637
Mr. McKenna:
The District has received all closing documentation and. has completed a satisfactory final
inspection of the referenced project for compliance with Lakehaven Utility District
standards for materials and construction of water distribution and sanitary sewer systems.
Lakehaven hereby initially accepts this project for ownership, operation and maintenance.
The Maintenance Bond (No. 227 26 19) submitted for the project in the amount of
$47,245.00, shall be maintained in force for a period of two years from this date of initial
acceptance and until the District gives written notice of its release, pending satisfactory
results of a final inspection to ensure the systems remain in compliance with District
standards for materials and construction.
The cash deposit held to guarantee construction under the substantial completion policy is
hereby satisfied and may now be released. The deposit, in the amount of $33,795.00, is in
the process of being refunded. Please allow approximately thirty to forty-five (30-45) days
for completion of this process.
The cash deposit held to guarantee restoration of affected rights -of -way and/or off -site
easements is hereby satisfied and may now be released. The deposit, in the amount of
$4,000.00, is in the process of being refunded. Please allow approximately thirty to forty-
five (30-45) days for completion of this process.
The project account will remain active through the two-year warranty period. At the
termination of the two year warranty, Lakehaven will inspect the improvement for any
defects. Any defects will need to be corrected before the Maintenance Bond can be
released. If the work and materials are determined satisfactory, and if the project account
Charles Gibson Donald L.P. Miller Ronald E. Nowicki Edward C. Stewart Beverly J.Tweddle
Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner
Greg McKenna
F & M Development Company, L.L.C.
October 2, 2008
Page 2
has a positive balance, Lakehaven will authorize release of the Maintenance Bond. In the
event that the account has surplus funds, the surplus will be refunded.
Please do not hesitate to call John Jensen, if you have any questions. John may be
reached by phone at (253) 946-5406, by electronic mail at jjensen@lakehaven.org, or by
fax at (253) 529-4081.
Since ly,
John C Bowman, P.E.
Engine ring Manager
JCB/JAJ
c: SKF&R
City of FW
ec: Inspection
Finance
Field Ops.
IkMFCKENNA
ABELL -
CONSTRUCTION
May 15, 2007
Ms. Deb Barker
Senior Planner
City Hall
City of Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98063
RE.: File #: 07-102052-00-MF; Planning Comments
Barkley Ridge Apartments — Play Ground Equipment
Dear Ms. Barker,
As requested by you in your letter dated July 25, 2007 (Item `C: Other
Comments'), we are submitting the plan sheets for the layout and the features
proposed in the play areas.
We will be installing the play equipment in three locations. The area adjacent to
the pool will have layout number 4099A designed for 2 to 5 year old children.
The area between buildings K and L will have layout number #4099B and the
area between buildings L and N will have layout number 4099C, both designed
for 5 to 12 year olds.
The structures are custom Steel Systems by Pacific Outdoor Products and will
have a combination of colors such as blue, yellow, red and green. Each of the
play area perimeters will have a fence around them.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call us at 206.241.9098
Salone Habibuddin
Attachments
RESUBMITTED
MAY 1 4.2008
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
BUILDING DEPT.
P.O. BOX 66826 ♦ SEATTLE, WA 98166-0826 ♦ PHONE 206-241-2600 ♦ FAX 206-243-0654
a1/2008 13:20 253-9`5 4935
�
p it t, •�
>!NOM °i ilg1Ts17
` ■sue
NN
`" ?
f
�
Ufa
rcAl J. . e
hW '•7i� .rr
A�
C
F
�• !E
.r 3�•s.L'�7
r-�i ��'y � yi4
144
BARKLEY RIDGE,—,
PAGE 01/12
9 �
NOMNII1S7M'.IVM lWaC33i-
Sa.N3PilllVd'd 4OGN J njMUV8
.o.'o
w w 0.
44. 4-Ie41
4
�'
` ` � � fi � J
Y 7
'i •
/�j
! 3
113
! a i
r
e
f
W
a
a a°
N
< 0
{
#gg4Fr,Rp,j,tg
9$3B2f
9 "
0
'\
U-
3 a
a
i ;
�•a
<'
L.L J
05
LLU
\ !
!
>.M
i
� •? a
9
q
a
�
µZjwj
.
i! ■,?l' i.�'4'ti;� ��t f4
kt%
:f����+y y11�i•.
am
#4099A
2-5 years
ADA accessible
10ciooY Ppacucr
Custom Steel System ages 2-5 #4099A —�
Custom Steel System ages 5-12 #409913 • K I. -
Custom Steel System ages 5-12 #4099C a '
Bend
Climber
#409913
5-12 years Poly Triple Rail
ADA accessible Slide
U-Bend
Climber
Drawing #4099
ADA
Access
16'' Peek A Boo
24"
Pipe Wall
Steering Wheel
8' Hand -Over -Hand
Snake 40„ J 32„
Climber
Vertica
Ladder 24" .
Steering
Wheel Access
� � 3
MM
5-12 1
Turning Bar
Snake
Climber
32"
Poly Curved Slide
Dip Station
k2
(0
m
N
a
RESUBMITTED
MAY I � 2008
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
BUILDING DEPT.
6y :U40
t
Positioning of custo Steel Systems structure with peri
for ages 2-5
pouamrpr ADA accessible
I .,e Owe
A�A� � kAgpO
Snoke
climber
Q`y cuNed Slide
RESUBMITTED
MAY 14 2008
CITY OF FEDERAL' AY
BUILDING DEF-T.
■
CA
All of ourwelded
components are {land cut,
Hand sanded and hand
welded to exact tolerances
bvourexpert craftsmen,
o1 irexclLiSl ve collar system
is manufactured outof
A356T-6 aircraftquality
heat treated alurllinurn and
is the strongest in the
playgrolmd industry
Conversion Coating
A"' Clear Polymer
Steel pipe is triple coated with
zinc, chromate and a clear
organic top -coat then coated
with a mininitim 4 mils of
polyester powder:
STEELSYSTEMSt9
Steel play structures provide a
smooth, sleek contemporary look.
Utilizing heavy wall galvanized steel
tubing and custom designed clamps,
our structures meet the needs of all
playground environments. Our steel
tubing is manufactured with cold -
formed steel which provides a high
yield/tensile strength. Triple coated
with zinc, chromate and a clear
organic top -coat, then coated with a
minimum 4 mils of polyester powder.
This level of protection provides
exceptional protection from the
elements, offering enduring beauty
and function.
FEATURES:
• Welded
components are
hand cut, hand
sanded and
hand welded
to exact
r-. tolerances
by our expert
~`. craftsmen.
�T' -• Our exclusive
collar system
is manufactured
out of A356T-6
aircraft quality heat
treated aluminum and Is
the strongest in the
playground industry.
Powder coated support posts
are made of heavy duty 41/2"
galvanized steel (compared to
2" or 3" posts).
• Powder coat colors can be
bold in color or blend in with
the environment.
■ Riveted aluminum pipe
caps provide a safe and
attractive finish.
• Deck frames are welded
together to form a solid
framework.
• Te(pyPde
exce eat s !Ip rests ance.
MAY 1 4.2008
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
BUILDING DEPT.
0
Aftkif 1006
sf 4
Positioning of custom Steel Systems structure with perimeter as shown
for ages 5-12
Pa woADA accessible
WE
EWINIAMMA
ES�ED
2008
ITY OF FEDERAL WAY
BUILDING DEPT.
1;,
Steelsystellis
23
ThR- Iwe',
or,
0
WWW.PdCificoutdoor.com
"*4 too
4
�a�:4ci�aorP�o
Positioning of custom Steel Systems with perimeter as shown
for ages 5-12
Climbing/Fitness I<0000
RESUBMITTED
MAY 1 4 2008
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
BUILDING DEPT.
.y
& Steelsystemse
For over 25 years our professional
designers, fabricators and installers
Steel components
are coated
have been designing and hand -building
a minimum
with a minimum
with
playground structures custom fit to the
of 4 mils of
polyester powder.
needs, the spaces and the budgets of our
customers. This experience can be put
to work for you, creating structures and
equipment unique to your needs, your site
and at a price that will meet or beat that of
the one -size -fits -all competition.
TIMBER PLAYSYSTEMS are warm, natural,
durable and long lasting. These structures
blend beautifully with the environment
tore our un
—
STEELS TEMS re smooth and sleek
with a contemporary look. Our premium
materials combined with hand-crafted
components offer exceptional protection
from the elements, as well as enduring.-rli`!ii!
beauty and function.
Ilot'h otit* tvonce
and steel I7yoducts
CLC]li'1'1. [] 30Iff'.— ,
LVdi'}'d}lt}'
Poly roof gives
protection and
Riveted
>� creates a play-
aluminum pipe Custom aluminum
house effect.
caps provide a
A356T-6 aircraft
;..
safe and
quality heat treated
attractive
finish.
2 ppieee collars —
the strongast in the
mdustryl
U-Bends are
welded — they
--�
At ` '. �
welded ladder rungs
provide a safe and
won't come
J LLL
permanent overhead
loose or move!
activity.
Powder coated
support posts
are made of
heavy duty 41/2"
galvanized steel
(compered to 7
Access
or 3" posts).
rungs are
Deck pieces
Deck frames are
welded together
/
welded for
superior
are easy and
to form a solid
strength.
inexpensive
framework
to replace.
_.
tia_ YY
► QUILD1 G ❑EPT.
LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT
�1ILITY Ellen
31627 -1 st Avenue South • P.O. Box 4249 • Federal Way, Washington 98063-4249
Federal Way: 253-941-1516 • Tacoma: 253-927-2922
www.lakehaven.org
RECEIVED BY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
AUG 0- 8 2008
August 7, 2008
Deb Barker
Community Development Dept.
City of Federal Way
P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, ti"TA 98063-9718
RE: Final Approval Status
Barkely Apts., Agreement No. 05-637
Dear Ms Barker:
This letter serves as a status report to advise the Federal Way City Council on final plat approval for
the referenced project.
The water distribution and sanitary sewer systems for this project are substantially complete.
The developer has entered into a supplemental agreement with Lakehaven Utility District and the
District has accepted a guaranty for completion of construction of the water and sewer facilities for
the project.
Please do not hesitate to call me, if you have any questions. I can be reached by phone at
(253) 946-5406, by electronic mail at jjensen@lakehaven.org, or by fax at (253) 529-4081.
c: F & M Development
ec: Development Services Supervisor
Inspection
Charles Gibson Donald L.P. Miller Ronald E. Nowicki Edward C. Stewart Beverly J.Tweddle
Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner
FILE
CITY OF
A- Federal
October 15, 2007
CITY HALL
Way 33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
Ms. Salone Habibuddin
Farrell -McKenna Construction LLC
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
RE: File #07-102052-00-MF; BARKLEY RIDGE APARTMENTS BUILDING A
Dear Ms. Habibuddin:
In an August 9, 2007 letter, the Planning Department detailed several outstanding issues that required
resolution before the Planning Department could sign off on the project.
Several of those comments involved the wetland plans as follows:
o Peer wetland monitoring estimate, based on final wetland mitigation plans must be received
and outstanding cost estimate funded;
o Performance and maintenance bonds for the wetland and stream buffer intrusions -must be fully
executed and returned to the Planning Department and administrative cash deposit received.
NOTE: The Planning Department will be able to sign off on the building permit when resubmitted
items have been confirmed to address all outstanding comments, when wetland bonds have been
executed and returned to the Planning Department, when any outstanding wetland consultant fees
have been paid, and when wetland mitigation monitoring fees have been paid.
Please be advised that on October 12, 2007, the wetland plans prepared by Talasaea, resubmitted on
September 28, 2007, were determined to satisfactorily address comments made by the City's wetland
consultant. I have forwarded a copy of the approved plans to the City's wetland consultant to obtain an
estimate for wetland monitoring. I will forward that estimate to your attention upon receipt. In addition, I
have forwarded a bond document to the Legal Department for review. I will forward that to your attention
for processing when it is returned.
I can be reached at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this letter.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
c: Jason Walker, via e-mail jwalker@talasaea.com
Doc. CD. 42744
Federal Way
CITY OF
CITY HALLFILE
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www. cityoffederalway. com
Mr. Greg McKenna October 1, 2007
F&M Development
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
RE: FILE #07-102052-00-MF; THIRD ROUND OF WETLAND CONSULTANT REVIEW COMMMENTS
FORWARDED, BARKLEY RIDGE APARTMENTS, BUILDING A
Dear Mr. McKenna:
Otak, Inc., the City's wetland consultant, has reviewed landscape plans resubmitted on August 15, 2007, for the
Barkley Ridge Apartment complex. Their e-mailed comments are incorporated below in italics to provide ease of
reviewing. As previously noted, it is important that this information be provided with the wetland mitigation sheets.
Comments dated September 28, 2007, from Suzanne Bagshaw,_Otak
I reviewed the Landscape Plans for Barkley Ridge dated 15 August, 2007, with a submittal stamp of Aug 15, 2007.
The few unaddressed issues all relate to the Native Growth Area (NGA). The NGA is the 3-foot wide strip located
outside of the buffer between the buffer perimeter fence and the pedestrian path.
1) As required in previous reviews, all details and specifications pertaining to the NGA must be included in the
Final Wetland Mitigation Plan Sheets. This includes the "Native Growth Area" Typical Planting Scheme currently
on Sheet L-2. The Landscape Sheets should continue to include the designated locations for the NGA with a note
stating that the details and specifications for the NGA are included in the Final Wetland Mitigation Plan Sheets.
2) As required in previous reviews, the plant schedules in the Final Wetland Mitigation Plan Sheets must include
specific sizes and quantities for all of the plants that will be installed in the NGA. Saskatoon or serviceberry
(Amelanchier alnifolia), California wax myrtle (Myrica californica), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), tall Oregon grape
(Mahonia aquifolia), and red flowering currant (Ribes sanguineum) should be 2 gallon plants. Salal (Gaultheria
shallop) and kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi) should be I gallon plants as currently specified in the Plant
Materials List on Sheet L-1.
3) The plant layout and spacing in the "Native Growth Area" Typical Planting Scheme (Sheet L-2) are fine. The 2.5
feet on center, triangular spacing for the salal (Gaultheria shallon) and kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
specified in the Plant Materials List (Sheet L-1) are fine. All of these specifications must be included in the Final
Wetland Mitigation Plan Sheets.
When resubmitting, please provide six copies of any revised plans accompanied by the enclosed resubmittal form.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this letter.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
enc: September 28, 2007 e-mail copy from Otak
Resubmittal Form
c: Suzanne Bagshaw, Otak, Inc., 10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400, Kirkland, WA 98033
Jason Walker, Talasaea, Inc_, 15020 Bear Creek Road NE, Woodinville, WA 98077
Kevin Peterson, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer
Scott Sproul, Assistant Building Official
Doc I D 42595
CITY OF
t Federal Way
September 14, 2007
Mr. Greg McKenna
F&M Development
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
CITY HALL
'LE
33325 8th Avenue oath
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
RE: FILE #07-102052-00-MF; SECOND ROUND OF WETLAND CONSULTANT REVIEW
COMMMENTS FORWARDED, BARKLEY RIDGE APARTMENTS, BUILDING A
Dear Mr. McKenna:
Otak, Inc., the City's wetland consultant, has reviewed revised information submitted on August 15 and
21, 2007, for the Barkley Ridge Apartment complex. The enclosed e-mail dated September 12, 2007,
contains their technical comments. It is important that this information be provided with the wetland
mitigation sheets.
When resubmitting, please provide six copies of any revised plans accompanied by the enclosed
resubmittal form. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about
this letter.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
enc: September 12, 2007 e-mail copy from Otak
Resubmittal Form
c: Suzanne Bagshaw, Otak, Inc-, 10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400, Kirkland, WA 98033
Jason Walker, Talasaea, Inc., 15020 Bear Creek Road NE, Woodinville, WA 98077
Kevin Peterson, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer
Scott Sproul, Assistant Building Official
Doc. 1 D. 42404
CITY OF CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South
�. Federal Way 98 Mailing Address: Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
September 19, 2007
Ms. Salone Habibuddin
Farrell -McKenna Construction, LLC
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
Re: File #07-102052-00-MF; PLANNING COMMENTS #2
Barkley Ridge Apartments Building A; 27830 Pacific Highway South, Federal Way
Dear Ms. Habibuddin:
I have continued my review of the August 15, 2007, resubmitted plans, which respond to my comment
letter of July 25, 2007. The following "September 18, 2007, Comments" and NEW ITEMS must be
addressed prior to permit issuance.
1. REPEATED COMMENTS
A. Civil Plans —
1. The wetland and stream buffer plans prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc. for the
development must be incorporated with the civil plans. This includes work proposed in the
southern portion of the site as well as within the wetland and stream buffer.
2. C-2 — Identify the location of significant trees and identify tree protection techniques for
those trees to be retained adjacent to and within the wetland/stream buffer.
3. C-2 — What fencing technique is proposed for the "wetland buffer fence" in order to protect
wetland and stream? Detail #2 is a construction fence detail and is not identified as a fence
for wetland areas.
4. C-2 and 4 — The length of the retaining wall within the wetland buffer is larger on the civil
plans than that depicted on the wetland plan. This discrepancy must be resolved.
5. C-4 — The location of the underground vault must be depicted on these plans.
6. C-4 — Grading depicted in the northwest portion of the developed area exceeds that proposed
with the Process IV wetland application. Please explain this discrepancy and the rationale for
that increased grading activity within the wetland buffer.
7. C-4 — Depict the storm outlet on this plan.
8. Information about the pedestrian trail construction must be included with the civil plans.
September 18, 2007, Comments — The civil plans submitted on August 15, 2007, are not
current and not approvable. Please provide current sets of civil plans for review.
File k07-102052-00-MF Doc. I.D. 42463
Ms. Salone Habibuddin
Page 2
September 19, 2007
B. Architectural Plan —The City granted Process III approval for the 112-unit apartment complex
on August 25, 2006, subject to the following conditions:
L. Prior to issuance of a building permit, final site and landscape plans shall be submitted that
reflect: (1) details to show that the trellis does not detract from the stair entrances of
buildings B, C, D, E, G, H, and J; (2) belly band material that creates a substantial,
permanent effect - vinyl is not supported; (3) private outdoor spaces controlled by individual
households for ground floor units; and (4) trash enclosure screening provides visibility so as
to not create hiding areas.
2. Prior to certificate of occupancy, approved recreation features shall be installed and inspected.
3. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall record at King County a
covenant against the property that reserves the minimum affordable units required under
FWCC for the life of the property.
Proposed entry gates and carports received Process I approval on July 20, 2007, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Construction plans shall be submitted for the new gates, support columns, and carports prior
to issuance of any construction permits for the new apartment complex.
2. Prior to issuance of any construction permits for the new apartment complex, construction
plans shall clarify the color of the two new gates and the five new carports.
3. Prior to the installation of the approved gates, drivers at the Crestview West complex shall be
formally alerted to access point changes. Copies of any correspondence and signage shall be
provided to the City.
The following comments are based upon review of the above noted conditions and the FWCC.
Please revise the architectural plans to address the following comments:
A1.4
1. As noted above, the garbage and recycling gate must include visibility to ensure there are no
hiding places. How does the proposed facility meet this condition?
2. Doors to the garbage/compactor area are 12 feet in width, which_ is not wide enough to
accommodate Waste Management service vehicles. Revise the compactor gate to 15 feet in
width and the recycling gate to 10 feet in width.
3. Identify the color of the unit and materials.
September 18, 2007, Comments — While the size of the enclosure is acceptable, chain link
fencing around the enclosure cannot be approved pursuant to Federal Way City Code
(FWCC) Section 22-1634(f)(1)(d), which states that chain link fencing shall not be used
where visible from public streets, on -site major drive aisles, and/or adjacent to residential
uses or pedestrian areas.
A1.5 — Identify the color of the entry gate metal and stone work.
September 18, 2007, Comments — As these are construction plans, please identify a stone
work color palate.
File N07-102052-00-MF Doc I D. 42463
Ms. Salone Habibuddin
Page 3
September 19, 2007
A1.3 —
1. There is no information on this plan to address the trellis and patio related Process III
conditions of approval. Provide a written response and provide details to demonstrate how
the conditions are met.
2. List the color of the trellis material.
September 18, 2007, Comments — The site plans and landscape plans do not identify how
ground floor units will control private outdoor spaces. Sheet A1.4 does not contain any
information about the trellis. As these are construction plans, please identify the trellis color
palate.
C. Other Comments — Provide details of proposed play equipment and plans sheets for features
proposed in the play equipment areas.
September 18, 2007, Comments — Please note that a certificate of occupancy will not be
granted until the play area is formally established.
D. Wetland Plan Peer Review — On June 12, 2007, the City authorized Otak, Inc. to proceed with
review of the wetland and stream buffer mitigation plan. On July 3, 2007, the City routed revised
Technical Information Plans (TIR) and civil plans to Otak. I will forward their comments as
available.
September 18, 2007. Comments — September 12, 2007, e-mailed comments from Suzanne
Bagshaw are repeated below:
"I have completed my review of the Barkley re -submittals that I received. The
mitigation sheets addressed almost all of the outstanding issues from previous Otak
reviews. The main remaining issue is that the Mitigation Plan Sheets (Sheets W 1.0,
W2.0, W2.1, and W3.0) still do not include the planting plan (typical), plant schedule,
and all of the details and specifications for the Native Growth -Area (the densely planted
area between the pedestrian trail and the buffer perimeter fence). Those requirements
were listed in Otak 8/l/07 memo comments IS and l .g. It is OK if the landscape sheets
continue to include the Native Growth Area specifications, as long as those
specifications are identical to the ones in the mitigation sheets. These corrections must
be made as soon as I review the landscape plans."
2. NEW COMMENTS
Landscape Plans — The following comments are based on review of the landscape plan, revised
August 15, 2007:
1. Shrubs in perimeter planting areas shall be a minimum of 24 inches in height at time of planting.
Revise the plan to show the Photinia located in perimeter planting areas a minimum of 24 inches
File N07-102052-00-MF Doc. I-D. 42463
Ms. Salone Habibuddin
Page 4
September 19, 2007
in height at time of planting. A 24 inch spread does not necessarily meet the code requirement for
shrub height.
2. Add notes to sheet L-2 to read as follows:
Groundcover shall be planted'in all planting areas and shall be planted and spaced using a
triangular plating arrangement to result in total coverage of a landscape area within three
years per the FWCC.
• All planted trees shall be full and balanced.
+ Deciduous trees shall be 1.5 inch caliper measured 4.5 feet above the rootball at the time of
planting, per the FWCC.
3. Revise the landscape plan to eliminate the play equipment area outside of the wetland/stream
buffer southeast of building J, and identify the planting for the play area east of building J.
4. Areas of wetland/stream buffer shall be planted in conformance with the approved wetland
mitigation planting plan. Identify this requirement on the landscape plan.
5. Verify areas of sod with callouts.
6. Parking areas adjacent to residential uses shall provide screening of vehicle lights and shall
receive a three foot tall berm or vegetation three feet in height, or a combination thereof. The at -
grade parking stalls west of the recreation building shall receive this treatment, which shall be
reflected on a revised landscape plan. If you believe that the proposed planting meets the intent of
this requirement, provide a cross section that demonstrates this.
7. Type III perimeter landscaping along the north, south, and west perimeters shall consist of a
mixture of evergreen and deciduous trees, mixed with large shrubs and groundcover. The north
perimeter contains only two deciduous trees along the perimeter and there are no deciduous trees
along the south and west perimeters. Provide. opportunities for additional deciduous trees in or
visually adjacent to perimeter planting areas to meet the FWCC standards.
8. Permanent curbing is required around all -landscape areas within or abutting parking areas per
FWCC Section 22-1567(d).
Please revise the referenced plans and resubmit copies of any revised plans for further review as follows:
six copies of civil, wetland mitigation, and landscape plans and five copies of architectural plans. Please
included the enclosed Resubmittal Information Form with any resubmittals. I can be reached at 253-835-
2.642 if you have any questions about this letter.
Sincerely,
kj'1,- 6d1. �_
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
enc: Resubmittal Information Form
c: Kevin Peterson, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer
Rob Van Orsow, Public Works Solid Waste and Recycling Coordinator
Ms. Holly Sinclair, Ross Deckman Architects, 207 4'h Avenue SE, Puyallup, WA 98372
Suzanne Bagshaw Anderson, Otak, Inc., 10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400, Kirkland, WA 98033
File N07-102052-00-MF Doc. I.D. 42463
CITY OF
� Federal Way
August 21, 2007
Ms. Suzanne Bagshaw
Otak
10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400
Kirkland, WA 98033-7897
ci 1 y HALL FILE
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
RE: File #07-102052-00-MF; BARKLEY RIDGE APARTMENTS, REVISION 92 ROUTED
Dear Ms. Bagshaw:
The purpose of this letter is to route revisions received by the City for the above -referenced proposal. The
following documents were received on August 15 and 21, 2007, in response to the City's request for
additional technical information about construction plans for the new multifamily complex.
Please find the following for your files and review:
o Letter of Transmittal from Talasaea Consultants, dated August 13, 2007, responding to Otak
comments dated August 1;
o Letter from Sound Engineering dated August 13, 2007, responding to City Engineering comments
dated July 19, 2007;
o E-mail from Paul Heller to Deb Barker dated August 21, 2007, responding to Planning comments
dated July 26, 2007;
o Revised C 1 through C7 prepared by Sound Engineering, print dated August 14, 2007; and
o W1.0, W2.0, W2.1 and W3.0 Final Wetlands Mitigation prepared by Talasaea Consultants Inc. dated
August 10, 2007 (attached to civil plans).
At this time, the City is reviewing a proposal for a grade and fill only permit. This would include clearing,
grading, erosion control and vault excavation, and be issued in advance of engineering and construction
plan approval. This would not require Otak review.
Please contact me at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this resubmittal.
Sincerely,
tojil" &JQ"��
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
Enclosures as noted
Doc, f D 42135
I-) FILE
CITY OF
t Federal Way
August 16, 2007
Greg McKenna
Farrell -McKenna Const LLC
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
RE: File #07-102052-00-MF; GRADE AND FILL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
Barkley Ridge Apartments
Dear Mr. McKenna:
As noted in the City's August 9, 2007 letter, a grade and fill permit could be obtained to include
clearing, grubbing, grade to final grades, and excavation of the vault. To obtain a grade and fill permit,
the following information must be submitted for review and approval:
o Construction permit application for grade and fill only;
o Four (4) copies of grade and fill plans to include C-1, C-2, C-3 and C-4 as prepared by SEI, Inc.
and including SEI corrections/responses to the Public Works comment letter dated July 19, 2007,
as well as `Section A' of the Planning Department comment letter dated July 25, 2007;
o Grading and Fill plans shall be prepared per IBC 2006 Appendix J;
o Grade and Fill plans shall include erosion control and site stabilization measures to comply with
the 1998 KCSWDM;
o Grade and fill plans shall include the location of significant trees and the wetland/stream buffer,
and shall depict tree protection techniques including but not limited to secure fencing at the drip
line of retained trees;
o Public Works bonds for the entire multi -family construction project must be fully executed and
returned to the Public Works department;
o Public Works grade and fill inspection fees in the amount of $1,500.00 must be received; and,
o Grade and fill permit fees in the amount of $789.00 must be received.
Please note that the City will commit to review the grade and fill application within five working days. I
can be reached at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this letter.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
c: Kevin Peterson, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer
Will Appleton, Public Works Development Services Manager
Scott Sproul, Assistant Building Official
Kari Cimmer, Lead Development Specialist
Doc I D 42055
FILE
1�kCITY OF
Federal Way
August 9, 2007
Mr. Greg McKenna
Farrell -McKenna Construction, LLC
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www. cityoffederalway. com
Via e-mail: ghm@farrellgroup.net
RE: FILE #07-102052-00-MF; BARKLEY RIDGE APARTMENTS
Dear Mr. McKenna:
The City has been asked to provide response to questions from your bank regarding the status of the
above -referenced building permit application for a new apartment complex. Responses to the bank
questions follow:
1. Confirmation of final total permit fees, including grading, foundation, building, etc.
Response: Fees have been identified as the following:
TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEE
$104,512.00
BUILDING PERMIT FEE'
$ 221,550.00
PW INSPECTION FEE DEPOSIT
$4,500.00
PW ENGINEERING REVIEW
$900.00
WETLAND CONSULTANT REVIEW FEE
$1,225.00
STRUCTURAL REVIEW FEES`
$132,247.92
CLEARING AND GRADING PERMIT
$ 789.00
WETLAND MONITORING
$9,000.00
ADMINISTRATIVE CASH DEPOSIT FOR BONDS
$5,000.00
OUTSTANDING LAND USE REVIEW FEE
$277.00
TOTAL
$480,000.92
' Building permit fee is for 13 buildings that establish 112 multifamily dwelling units, and one recreational building. Fees for five
carports are not included in this estimate. The mechanical permit fees, which are included in the total building pemvt fee listed
above, was estimated using a value of $250 per unit for the multi -family dwelling units and S50,000 for the recreational building.
The actual contractor bid cost was unavailable at the time this letter was prepared.
2 PW Engineering Review fee is approximate and cannot be fully calculated until review of resubmitted plans is concluded and
PW signs off.
3 This amount was identified to complete the first round of technical review of wetland plans. Additional fees may be required if
additional review is required depending on applicant response.
° Structural review for vault under Building G is estimated as based on 12% of the building cost.
5 This fee is estimated; the actual fee cannot be calculated until the final wetland plan is approved.
6 PW performance and maintenance bond administrative fee and wetland performance and maintenance bond administrative fee.
Administrative fees are estimated and cannot be calculated until bond quantity worksheets are submitted by applicant.
8 Outstanding balance due for Use Process I Land Use Review for gate and carport land use approval.
Mr- NICKennu
August 9, 2007
Page 2
2. Confirmation of any outstanding issues that are still subject to further review, and timeframe
for approval.
Response: Outstanding issues and timeframes for approval are the following for:
Planning Department:
o Planning comments dated July 25, 2007 (enclosed), have not been addressed;
o Otak comments dated August 1, 2007 (enclosed), have not been addressed;
o Peer wetland monitoring estimate, based on final wetland mitigation plans must be received and
outstanding cost estimate funded;
o Performance and maintenance bonds for the wetland and stream buffer intrusions must be fully
executed and returned to the Planning department and administrative cash deposit received.
NOTE: The Planning Department will be able to sign off on the building permit when resubmitted
items have been confirmed to address all outstanding comments, when wetland bonds have been
executed and returned to Planning Department, when any outstanding wetland consultant fees have
been paid, and when wetland mitigation monitoring fees have been paid.
Public Works Engineering
o Engineering comments dated July 2, 2007 (enclosed) have not been addressed;
o Performance and maintenance bonding has not been submitted.
NOTE: The Public Works Engineering Review division will be able to sign off on the building
permit when resubmitted items have been confirmed to address all outstanding comments; the
detention/water quality vault structural plans have been approved; and the bond has been fully
executed and returned to the Public Works Department.
Building Department
o Complete all outstanding items noted above, provide new site plans showing new address of
buildings, and submit new cover plan sheet showing all buildings to be sprinkled;
o Address pending comments from Structural Engineer on building G.
3. Timeframe for when final permits will be issued.
Response: Building permits for the 13 new multifamily buildings and one recreation building were
submitted on April 18, 2007, and civil plans were revised and resubmitted on June 22, 2007.
Building permit will be approved for issuance at the conclusion of the building permit review
process, when all bonds have been executed and returned to the City, and all outstanding fees paid.
Upon receipt of resubmitted items, re -review times will range from one to four weeks, depending on
workload.
A grade and fill permit could be obtained to include clearing, grubbing, grade to final grades, and
excavation of the vault. To obtain a grade and fill permit, refer to the enclosed "Foundation Only"
handout.
4. Letter should be signed by a senior building official.
Response: This letter is signed by Lee Bailey, Building Official; Kevin Peterson, Public Works
Engineering Plans Reviewer, and Deb Barker, Senior Planner.
07-10205?
Doc I D 419'0
Mr. McKenna
August 9, 2007
Page 3
We trust that this letter provides you and your bank with relevant information you are seeking. Please do
not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions about this letter.
Sincerely,
Lee Bailey Kevin Peterson Deb Barker
Building Offici 1 PW Engineering Plans Review Senior Planner
253-835-2620 253-835-2734 253-835-2642
enc: copy of July 2, 2007 Public Works letter
copy of July 25, 2007 Planning letter
copy of August 1, 2007 Otak comments
Foundation Only Handout
c: Christopher Moxon, VP, Relationship Underwriter, Bank of America, Community Development Banking, 800 Fifth
Avenue, 374 Floor, WAI -501-37-68, Seattle, WA 98104
William T_ Lynn, via e-mail: WLynn@gth-law.com
Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell, Malanca, Peterson & Daheim, LLP, 1201 Pacific Ave., Suite 2100, PO Box 1157,
Tacoma, WA 98401-1157
Kevin Peterson, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer
Chris Ingham, South King Fire and Rescue
Kari Cimmer, Lead Development Specialist
John Jensen, Lakehaven Utility District
07-102052 Doc LD 41920
UdPY
CITY OF
�. Federal Way
August 6, 2007
Mr. Greg McKenna
F&M Development
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
RE: FILE ##07-102052-00-MF; WETLAND CONSULTANT REVIEW COMMMENTS FORWARDED
BARELEY RIDGE APARTMENTS, BUILDING A
Dear Mr. McKenna:
This letter forwards technical comments from the City's wetland consultant on the new apartment
complex, and also identifies monitoring and bonding tasks that must be addressed before construction
permits can be issued.
Otak Technical Memorandum
Otak, Inc., the City's wetland consultant, has reviewed information submitted by the applicant for the
above -referenced construction permit for the Barkley Ridge Apartment complex. Their technical
memorandum dated August 1, 20071 is enclosed. Otak reviewed technical information prepared by
Talasaea, Inc. and SEI, Inc. submitted in response to the Hearing Examiner conditions of approval for
permitted intrusions into a regulated wetland and stream on the subject property. Comments start on page
2 of the Otak technical memo.
Prior to issuance of any construction, clearing or grading permits for the new apartment complex, the
Technical Information Report (TIR) and civil and wetland plans must be revised to address related
comments.
Five Year Monitoring
As noted on Sheet W2.1 of the Final Wetland Mitigation plan prepared by Talasaea, Inc., improvements
installed within the wetland and stream buffer'areas will be monitored for a period of five years. The
applicant will be responsible for funding an environmental pass -through account for the City's wetland
consultant to conduct peer review of monitoring activities during the five year monitoring period. When
the Final Wetland plan prepared by Talasaea is determined to be approved, the plan will be forwarded to
the City's wetland consultant for preparation of a monitoring estimate. Funding must be received prior to
issuance of any construction, clearing or grading permits for the new apartment complex.
1 Otak e-mailed a draft memorandum dated August 1, 2007, to the City on August 3, 2007. City staff forwarded the draft memo
to Jason Walker at Talasaea. Otak modified the memo at the end of business day on August 3, 2007, and e-mailed the revised
document, which is enclosed with this letter.
Mr. McKenna
August 6, 2007
Page 2
Performance and Maintenance Bonds
In addition, as noted on Sheet W2.1 of the Final Wetland Mitigation plan, a five year performance and
maintenance bond will be posted with the city. The City will prepare bond document based on
information provided by the applicant. Please submit a written cost estimate of the work associated with
the Final Wetland Mitigation Plan, as prepared by your technical team, and include all materials, labor,
and taxes. The City Attorney's office must review and approve this bond prior to issuance of any
construction permits for the subject property. The performance portion of the bond will be released upon
satisfactory installation of the required improvements, and the maintenance bond will be released at the
end of five years when the project is documented to meet goals, objectives and performance standards.
The approved bond must be received prior to issuance of any construction, clearing or grading permits for
the new apartment complex.
When resubmitting, please provide six copies of any revised plans, and four copies of any reports
accompanied by the enclosed resubmittal form.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 253-835-2642 if you have any questions about this letter.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
enc: August 1, 2007 Otak Memo
Resubmittal Form
c: Suzanne Bagshaw, Otak, Inc. 10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400, Kirkland, WA 98033
Jason Walker, Talasaea, Inc., 15020 Bear Creek Road NE, Woodinville, WA 98077
Kevin Peterson, Public Works Engineering Plans Reviewer
Scott Sproul, Assistant Building Official
07-102052 Doc. ID.41917
Technical Memorandum
To:
From:
10230 NE Points Drive
Copies:
Suite 400
Kirkland, VA 98033
Phone (425) 8224446
Date:
Fax (425) 827-9577
Subject:
Project No.:
Deb Barker, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way
Suzanne Bagshaw, Wetland Ecologist
August 1, 2007
Review of Revised Submittals for Barkley
Apartments (Crestview II)
30879C
As requested by the City of Federal Way, I conducted a review of the revised Crestview Phase II
(Barkley Apartments) Final Wetlands Mitigation Plan and other revised documents submitted on
April 26, 2007 and June 22, 2007. This review was conducted to verify compliance with the project
condition specifying that submittals must comply with recommendations in the October 4, 2006
Otak Technical Memorandum. I examined the following documents for this review:
• Sensitive Areas Report and Mitigation Plan, Crestview II Federal Way, Washington, by Talasaea
Consultants, Inc., revision date 16 April 2007, including Detailed Conceptual Wetlands
Mitigation Plan Sheets W1.0, W2.0, W2.1 and W2.2 revision date 17 April, 2007 (referred to in
this memorandum as the Sensitive Areas Report);
• Final Wetlands Mitigation Plan Sheets, Crestview Phase II Federal Way, Washington, by
Talasaea Consultants, Inc., revision date 6 June 2007, including Sheets W1.0, W2.0, W2.1, and
W2.2 (referred to in this memorandum as the Mitigation Plan);
• Sheets C1 through C7 of the Barkley Apartments Civil Engineering Plan Sheets including
Erosion Control Plan, Grading Plan, Storm Drainage Plan, and details, by Sound Engineering,
Inc., 2nd Submittal dated June 19, 2007 (referred to in this memorandum as the Civil Plans);
• Barkley Ridge Apartments Landscape Plan Sheets L-1, through L-5, by Lynn William Horn,
LSA, of Lynn William Horn & Associates, LLC, revision date 13 Aprill, 2007(referred to in this
memorandum as the Landscape Plans);
• Technical Information Report for Barkley Apartments Federal Way, Washington, by Paul F.
Heller, E.I. of Sound Engineering, Inc., dated April 2007, revised June 2007 (referred to in this
memorandum as the TIR);
• Hearing Examiner's Decision: from Mark E. Hurdelbrink, Deputy Hearing Examiner, to Jason
Walker, Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated December 15, 2006, regarding: Crestview II Wedand
and Stream Buffer Intrusions (referred to in this memorandum as the Hearing Examiner's
Decision);
K:\project\30800\30879C\Reports\final 070807 Memo.doc
Deb Barker, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way Page 2
Review of Revised Submittals for Barkley Apartments (Crestview II) August 1, 2007
Technical Memorandum from Suzanne Bagshaw, Otak, to Deb Barker, City of Federal Way,
dated October 4, 2006, regarding: Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application
(referred to in this memorandum as the Otak memo);
Introduction
The Hearing for approval of the Process IV application for proposed intrusions into the wetland
and stream buffers was held on November 21, 2006, and the Hearing Examiner's Decision was
handed down on December 14, 2006. The Decision approved the proposed buffer intrusions for the
Crestview Phase II project with the condition that "...the applicant shall incorporate all recommendations
from the October 4, 2006 OTAK Technical Memorandum into applicable construction related documents for review
and approval by City staff..." In response to the Hearing Examiner's Decision and additional reviews
by the City, the applicant submitted two sets of revised documents on April26, 2007 and June 22,
2007. The revisions included changing the name of the project from Crestview Apartments Phase II
to Barkley Apartments.
The revised project documents adequately address most of the outstanding issues from the October
4, 2006 Otak memo. However, some corrections and additions are required for final approval.
Those items are listed below in Sections 1 through 4 which are referenced to specific plan sheet sets
or the TIR. The numbers in parentheses after the items below refer to specific comments from the
October 4, 2006 Otak memo. The items listed below must be addressed in revised documents which
must be submitted to the City for approval.
I. Mitigation Plan Sheets
As requested in the October 4, 2006 Otak memo, the Final Mitigation Plan Sheet Set (currently
Sheets W1.0, W2.0, W2.1, and W2.2) must be revised to contain all of the specifications for the
mitigation areas —the Final Mitigation Plan Sheet Set will be the single reference document when
future questions arise. The Final Mitigation Plan Sheet Set shall include additional text from the
Sensitive Areas Report, details and specifications for the Native Growth Area, and other items that
are listed below. Please provide the following corrections/additions:
.a. On Sheets W1.0 and W2.0, designate the locations of the split -rail buffer perimeter fence and
the chain -link fence along the southwest edge of the buffer where the split -rail fence stops and
the chain -link fence becomes the buffer perimeter fence. Provide specifications and details for
the section of chain -link fence that will serve as the buffer perimeter fence. On the split -rail
fence detail (#3 Sheet W2.1) and the chain -link fence detail, include specifications that the
buffer perimeter fences shall be constructed from the project side of the buffer to minimize
buffer impacts (Otak 1.c.3, 2.a.6). Fence locations, specifications, and details must be consistent
among all project Plan Sheets.
.b. Provide location and design details for the emergency overflow from the stormwater vault.
Provide location and detail specifications for the splash pad or other device to prevent erosion
K:\project\30800\30879C\Rcports\final 07_0801 Mcmo.doc
Deb Batker, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way Page 3
Review of Revised Submittals for Barkley Apartments (Cresiview 11) August 9, 2007
in the event of overflow (Otak 1.5.b). These locations, specifications, and details must be
consistent with those in the Civil Plan Sheets.
.c. Provide specifications, details, and approximate locations for the wall drains from the retaining
walls located at the northwest corner of the wetland/stream buffer (east of Building N and the
north parking lot) (Otak Lb.5, 2.e.2). The retaining wall (Detail 5, Sheet W2.1) and wall drain
locations, specifications, and details must be consistent with those in the Civil Plan Sheets.
.d. Mitigation Plan Sheets must include specifications for the monitoring schedule, monitoring
report submissions, and report contents: include the entire text from Sections 9.0 (Monitoring
Program) and 9.1 (Reports), as well as Table 4 (Projected Calendar for Performance Monitoring
and Maintenance Events) of the Sensitive Areas Report. The Mitigation Plan Sheets must also
include the entire text from Sections 8.0 (Construction Management) and 8.1 (Post -
Construction Assessment) of the Sensitive Areas Report. Add extra Sheets to the Mitigation
Plan Sheet Set as necessary (Otak 1.g.1, 2.a.1).
.e. Sheet W2.0: Planting Plan: Provide corrections: concentrate the plantings closer to the
pedestrian trail —within approximately 25 feet of the outer buffer edge. Preserve existing
desirable native vegetation and concentrate plantings in disturbed areas and where existing
desirable native vegetation is sparse. Avoid planting FAC or wetter species in sunny upland
locations (Otak 2.b.4).
.f. Sheet W2.0: Plant Schedule: Provide corrections to the plant schedule so that it correctly lists the
quantities of plants designated in the planting plan. There are numerous errors —for example,
while the plant schedule specifies 41 spruces, only 33 are designated in the planting plan; it
appears that the plant schedule specifies more willows and dogwoods than are designated in the
planting plan, etc. Correct the plant schedule to provide sufficient quantities of plants to plant
at the densities listed in the plant schedule for an area at least 25 feet wide along the entire
length of the reduced buffer shown on Sheet W2.0, and include sufficient quantities to plant
areas of known construction -related buffer impacts (e.g. retaining wall, etc.). Correct the plant
schedule to install only 1 and 2 gallon plants, include plants for the Native Growth Area, and to
avoid planting FAC or wetter species in sunny upland locations. (Otak 2.b.7, 2.d.1).
.g. Sheet W2.0: Designate the location of the 3 foot wide "Native Growth Area" between the
pedestrian trail and the outside of the buffer perimeter fence as shown in Landscape Sheet L-1.
On Sheet W2.1 and/or other appropriate Sheets include the "typical' Native Growth Area
planting detail, plant schedule, and other specifications for the proposed plantings in the Native
Growth Area that are currently included in Landscape Sheets L-1 and L-2 (Otak 2.b.1, 2.e.3). As
in the buffer enhancement areas, all plants installed in the Native Growth Area must be native
genotypes — not horticultural cultivars. The native red osier dogwood (Corpus sericea or C.
stolonifera) is a wetland species and is not drought tolerant, so it is unlikely to survive in the
sunny, upland Native Growth Area. Substitute a drought tolerant species such as tall Oregon
grape (Mabonia aquifolia), snowberry (Sympboricarpos albus), thimbleberry (Rubusparvifloms), and/or
snowbrush (Ceanotbus velutinus) (Otak 2.e.3, 3.b.1).
K:\project\30800\30879C\Rcports\ final 07_080I Memo. doc
Deb Barker, Senior Planner, City ofTederal Way Page 4
Review of Revised Submittals for Barkley Apartments (Crestview II) August 1, 2007
.h. Sheet W2.0: General Planting Installation Notes: Add the following note: "All plants shall be
installed in locations so that existing desirable native -species plants are preserved and not
damaged. Concentrate plantings in disturbed areas and where existing vegetation_ia sparse."
(Otak 2.b.6)
U. Sheet W2.1: Goals, Objectives, and Performance Standards section; provide the following
additions underlined and corrections:
• Objective 1B.
• 1B Methods: first paragraph; add the following text before the first sentence: "Include the
locations of the nesting boxes and maior habitat features on the as -built drawines. Monitor..
habitat features for conditions and wildlife use. Items reoui ina, maintenance_ will he noted
to the owner for correction." (Otak 1.e.2).
• Objective 2A: correct the first sentence to: "... and plant the outer edge of the buffer with
thicket forming vegetation (the Native Gro,,vth Area to discourage..." Correct the last
sentence to: "The p ep n-ratl fence shall be located between..." Add the following text after
the last sentence: "The chain -link segment of the buffer Rerimeter fence shall extend to the
southern boundary of the Barkley Parcel." (Otak 1.c.3, 4.f .
• 2A Performance Standard: Correct the first sentence to: "...throughout the five year
monitorin period." Correct the second sentence to: "The entire buffer perimeter fence
shall be maintained throughout the five year monitoring period." Add the following text
after the last sentence: "Plants installed in the Native Growth Area shall meet the same
Performance Standards (14 as the plants installed in the buffer areas." (Otak 1.c.3, 2.e.3).
• 2A Methods: correct the first sentence to: "The entire length of the pedestrian trail, the
Native Growth Area, and buffer perimeter fence..." Correct the third sentence to: "Items
to be noted during the inspection of the Native Growth Area include:... gaps in the thicket,
location and extent of cover by non-native invasive species, trash and debris,..." (Otak
2.e.3)
1.j. Sheet W2.1: Maintenance and Contingency Plan section: provide the following additions
(underlined) to provide irrigation and maintenance for the Native Growth Area (Otak 2.e.3):
• First paragraph; first sentence: "... the success of the mitigations areas including the Native
Growth Area."
• Fifth bulleted point: "Remove/control non-native invasive species throughout the buffer
enhancement area and the Native Growth Area at least two times per year."
• For consistency with the TIR (Otak 1.b.5, 4.)), correct the twelfth bulleted point to:
"Maintain the dispersal trench at least twice a year or after law e storm events according the
methods as outlined in Appendix A..."
.k. Sheet W2.2: Part 1 - Planting Specifications; Contractor to Verify Plant Schedule with Plan
section: correct the entire section to: "Talasaea, not the contractor, shall be responsible to verify
that the plant species, quantities, and sizes shown on the plans are correctly listed in the plant
schedule. In the event of a discrepancy, the plant species, quantities, and sizes listed in the plant
schedule take precedence over those shown on the plans." (Otak 2.d.1).
K:\project\30800\30879C\Reports\ final 07_0801 hlemo.doc
Deb Barker, Senior Planner, City ofFederal Way Page 5
Review of Devised Submittals for Barkley Apartments (Crestviav II) August 1, 2007
.I. Sheet W2.2: Part 3 - Plant Installation; Soil Preparation section: third paragraph, correct the first
sentence to "Contractor shall loosely tie a piece of pink flagging (or other label) to the top
portion of all plants installed in the modified buffer to facilitate post -construction monitoring
and maintenance activities." (Otak 2.d.3).
.m. Sheet W2.2: Part 4 - Irrigation, Fence and Sign Installation; Install Open -Rail Fence and Signs
section: provide the following additions (underlined) and corrections to account for the chain -
link segment of the buffer perimeter fence (Otak 2.6.a):
• Change the section title to: Install Buffer Perimeter Fences and Signs.
• First paragraph; first sentence: "Contractor shall construct open -rail fence per Detail 3 on
Sheet W2.1 and chain -link fence per Detail (insert #) on Sheet (insert #) at locations
depicted..."
.n. Sheet W2.2: Part 7 - Structure and Habitat Feature Specifications; Place Habitat Features
section; first paragraph, correct the first sentence to: "Place habitat features (down logs and
stumps) in the mitigation areas prior to plant installation." (Otak 2.d.7).
.o. Sheet W2.2: Provide the following additions underlined to provide irrigation and maintenance
for the Native Growth Area (Otak 2.e.3):
• Part 4 - Irrigation, Fence and Sign Installation; Temporary Automatic Irrigation System
section; first paragraph: "...prior to installation of plantings within the buffer mitigation
area and the Native Growth Area." Fourth paragraph; second sentence: "Irrigation is
required within the mitigation area and the Native Growth Area for at least two seasons..."
• Part 6 - One -Year Maintenance; Maintenance section; third paragraph; second sentence:
"Irrigation is required within the mitigation area and the Native Growth Area for at least..."
Seventh (last) paragraph; first sentence: "...to confirm that the mitigation area and the
Native Growth Area were properly maintained."
2. Landscape Plan Sheets
Please provide the following corrections/additions:
2.a. As specified in 1.a above, on appropriate Landscape Sheets designate the locations of the split -
rail buffer perimeter fence and the chain -link fence along the southwest edge of the buffer
where the split -rail fence stops and the chain -link fence becomes the buffer perimeter fence
(Otak 1.c.3, 2.a.6, 4.f). Fence locations, specifications, and details must be consistent among all
project Plan Sheets.
2.b. On the Landscape Sheets, continue to designate the location of the Native Growth Area on
Sheet L-1, but refer to the Mitigation Plan Sheets for installation, maintenance, and monitoring
specifics (Otak 3.b.1).
K:\project\30800\30879(.\Reports\ final 07_0801 Memo.doc
AN
Deb .barker, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way Page 6
Review of Raised Submittals for Barkley Apartments (Creshinp II) August 1, 2007
3. Civil Plan Sheets
Please provide the following corrections/additions:
3.a. As specified in 1.a above, on appropriate Civil Sheets designate the locations of the split -rail
buffer perimeter fence and the chain -link fence along the southwest edge of the buffer where
the split -rail fence stops and the chain -link fence becomes the buffer perimeter fence. Include
specifications that the buffer perimeter fences shall be constructed from the project side of the
buffer to minimize buffer impacts (Otak 1.c.3, 2.a.6, 4.�. Fence locations, specifications, and
details must be consistent among all project Plan Sheets.
3.b. As specified in Lb above, on appropriate Civil Sheets provide location and design details for the
emergency overflow from the stormwater vault. Provide location and detail specifications for
the splash pad or other device to prevent erosion in the event of overflow (Otak 1.b.5). These
locations, specifications, and details must be consistent with those in the Mitigation Plan Sheets.
3.c. On appropriate Civil Sheets, provide specifications and details for retaining walls located at the
northwest corner of the Wetland Buffer (east of Building N and the north parking lot). As
specified in 1.c above, also include specifications, details, and approximate locations for the wall
drains (Otak 1.b.5, 2.e.2). The retaining wall and wall drain locations, specifications, and details
must be consistent with those in the Mitigation Plan.
4. TIR Report
Please provide the following corrections/additions:
4.a. TIR Appendix B Maintenance and Operations Manual: correct pages B5 and B14 to be
consistent and require inspection of the dispersal trench at least twice a year or after large storm
events (Otak 1.b.5, 4.j).
K:\projcct\30800\30879C\Reports\ final 07_0801 Memo.doc
FILE
CITY OF CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South
Ak Federal Way Mailing Address: 98 Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www. cityoffederalway. com
Ms. Suzanne Bagshaw June 12, 2007
Otak, Inc.
10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400
Kirkland, WA 98033
RE: File #07-102052-00-MF; AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED & FORWARDING SUBMITTAL
Barkley Ridge Apartments Building A
Dear Ms. Bagshaw:
The purpose of this letter is to authorize the services of Otak, Inc. in a review of the Sensitive Areas Report
and Mitigation Plan prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., revised date April 16, 2007, for construction of the
above -referenced apartment complex (FNA Crestview II).
Authorization to Proceed
In an April 30, 2007 task authorization request, the City requested an estimate from Otak, Inc. for review of the
proposed construction plans and wetland and stream buffer report for conformance with the December 15,
2006, Hearing Examiner Conditions of Process IV approval. Your scope of work, dated May 11, 2007,
indicated that a budget of $7,725.00 would be appropriate for the identified tasks.
As discussed with the applicant, there is a balance of $6,500.00 in the pass -through account established to fund
peer review of the initial wetland and stream buffer intrusion application. While the outstanding balance does
not account for the entire scope of work funding as identified above, the applicant has provided written
authorization for this surplus to be used to fund review of the application until it is depleted. At that time, the
applicant will fund the "gap" and understands that your review will not conclude until fully funded. A copy of
the applicant e-mail is enclosed.
Therefore, please consider this letter as an authorization to proceed with the review as detailed in the City's
April 30, 2007 task authorization, your May 11, 2007 scope of work, and as discussed above.
Resubmittal Pending
As discussed last week, the applicant intends to submit revisions to the Technical Information Report (TIR) and
civil plans to reference a larger underground vault than the one depicted on plans previously forwarded to you
for scope of work estimate. Ideally, these plans would not require additional scope of work funding requests.
Copies of these technical documents will be forwarded to your attention when received.
I can be reached at 253-835-2642. Please be advised that I will be out of the office from June 13, 2007 to July 2,
2007. If you have any questions about this letter, please contact Greg Fewins at 253-835-2611 in my absence.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker, Senior Planner
enc: E-mail dated May 16, 2007 from Greg McKenna
c: F & M Development, Greg McKenna, 17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive, Burien, WA 99148
Tamara Fix, Administrative Assistant
Doc I D 41238
Technical Memorandum
oa
10230 NE Points Drive
Suite 400
Kirkland, WA 98033
Phone (425) 822-4446
Fax (425) 827-9577
To: Deb Barker, Senior Planner, City of Federal Way
From: Suzanne Bagshaw, Wetland Biologist
Copies:
Date: October 4, 2006
Subject: Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application
Project No.: 30879C
L:\CSDC\DOCS\SAVE\27944418052.DOC
Review of revised Crestview H Process IV Application October 4, 2006
As requested by the City of Federal Way, I conducted a review of the revised Crestview II Sensitive
Areas Report and Mitigation Plan, and other revised documents submitted as part of the Process IV
Application. This review was conducted to check for compliance with previous review memoranda from
Sheldon & Associates, Inc. I examined the following documents:
• Sensitive Areas Report and Mitigation Plan, Crestview II Federal Way, Washington, by Talasaea
Consultants, Inc., dated 5 May, 2006, including Sheets W 1.0, W2.0, W2.1 and W2.2 dated 25 May,
2005 revision date 5 May, 2006;
• Cover letter from Jason Walker, ASLA, of Talasaea Consultants, Inc. to Greg McKenna of F&M
Development, Subject: Crestview II Report, dated 5 May, 2006;
• Cover letter from Brett Allen, Sound Engineering, Inc., to Deb Barker, City of Federal Way, RE:
Crestview Phase II File #08-102530, dated July 13, 2006;
• Cover letter from Ross Deckman, Ross Deckman & Associates, Inc., to Deb Barker, City of Federal
Way, Project: Crestview II Apartments, Subject: Response to Review Comments dated June 23,
2006, dated July 19, 2006;
• Preliminary Technical Information Report for Crestview Apartments Phase II Federal Way,
Washington, by Brett M. Allen, P.E. of Sound Engineering, Inc., dated May 2005, revised March
2006, revised July 2006;
• Sheets C I and C2 of the Crestview Phase II Preliminary Utility Plan and Vault Cross Sections, by
Sound Engineering, Inc., 4"' Submittal dated July 13, 2006;
• Crestview Phase II Landscape Plan Sheets L-1, L-2, and L-3, by Lynn William Horn, LSA, of Lynn
William Horn & Associates, LLC, dated July 21, 2006;
• Crestview Phase II Site Plan Sheets Al.1, A1.2, A1.3, and A3.8 by Ross Deckman Architect; Ross
Deckman & Associates, Inc., dated May 19, 2005, revision date July 12, 2006;
• Crestview Phase II Site Plan Sheets A3.0 through A3.7 and A3.9, by Ross Deckman Architect; Ross
Deckman & Associates, Inc., dated May 19, 2005, revision date March 29, 2006;
• Revised Environmental Checklist by Greg McKenna of F&M Development dated July 21, 2006;
• Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Apartment Complex, Crestview II, ES-0134, by Shannon
Petrisor, Geologist and Raymond Coglas, PE, Earth Solutions NW, LLC, dated June 29, 2005;
• Letter from Deb Barker, City of Federal Way, to Greg McKenna of F&M Development, regarding
File #05-102530-00-UP; Additional Information Requested, Crestview II - UP3, dated April 24,
2006;
• Memorandum from Sheldon & Associates, Inc. to Deb Barker, City of Federal Way, dated October
31, 2005, regarding Meeting for Crestview 11 on October 28, 2005;
• Memorandum from Sheldon & Associates, Inc. to Deb Barker, City of Federal Way, dated August 19,
2005, regarding Review of Sensitive Areas Report and Enhancement Plan Proposed Buffer Averaging
and Conceptual Mitigation Plan for Crestview H by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated 25 May 2005;
• Memorandum from Sheldon & Associates, Inc. to Deb Barker, City of Federal Way, dated May 25,
2005, regarding Review of the Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan, Buffer Averaging and
Enhancement, Crestview Phase II and Sheet W1.0 by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated March 17,
2005; and
• Federal Way City Code (FWCC).
Introduction
The applicant extensively revised the designs and layout for the Crestview Phase II project after previous
reviews. The revised project significantly decreases the extent of buffer impacts. Despite improvements to
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application October 4, 2006
the project, many of the issues from the Sheldon & Associates review dated August 19, 2005 have not
been adequately addressed in the current revised mitigation plan documents.
This memorandum is divided into four sections: 1.Required corrections and additions to the Sensitive
Areas Report and Mitigation Plan; 2. Required corrections and additions to the Mitigation Plan Sheets; 3.
Required corrections and additions to the Landscape Plan Sheets; and 4. Recommended Conditions for
approval. Because the resubmitted documents have been extensively revised, the numbering system used
in the two previous Sheldon & Associates reviews is no longer applicable, therefore the numbering
system in this review is new. In the comments below, existing text in the reviewed documents is
designated by italics, and required additions to the text are either designated by quotation marks or are
underlined.
Prior to approval by the City, the Final Mitigation Plan Sheet Set (currently Sheets W 1.0, W2.0, W2.1
and W2.2), shall be revised to contain all the plan specifications for the mitigation areas. That way the
Final Mitigation Plan Sheet Set will be the single reference document when future questions arise. The
Final Mitigation Plan Sheet Set shall include specifications for the pedestrian trail, the buffer perimeter
fence, all habitat features, proposed plantings in the Native Growth Area located, between the pedestrian
trail and the buffer perimeter fence, and all proposed plantings in the buffer. The compilation of all these
specifications on the Final Mitigation Plan Sheets will require inclusion of some specifications that are
currently included in the Landscape Plan Sheet Set (Sheets L-1, L-2, and L-3). The Final Mitigation Plan
Sheet Set shall also include performance standards, the monitoring plan, maintenance plan, contingency
plan, etc.
Summary
• The Final Mitigation Plan Sheet Set (currently Sheets W 1.0, W2.0, W2.1 and W2.2), prior to
approval by the City, shall be revised to contain all the plan specifications for the mitigation areas.
• Numerous corrections and additions to the Sensitive Areas Report and Mitigation Plan are required
including corrections to the Process IV criteria for wetland and stream buffer modification.
• Numerous corrections and additions to the Mitigation Plan Sheets are required including correcting
the layout of the pedestrian trail and providing additional planting information.
• A few corrections and additions to the Landscape Plan Sheets are required including the deletion of
planting specifications for the Natural Growth Areas associated with the mitigation plan.
• Section 4 includes the Recommended Conditions for approval.
1. Provide the following corrections and additions to the Sensitive Areas Report and Mitigation Plan:
I .a. Section 4.2.1 Wetland A:
1.a.1 Provide corrections: the report incorrectly states that Wetland A is located only near the
southeast property corner of the Crestview Phase II project. Wetland A extends along the
stream all the way to the northern property boundary. On Sheet W 1.0, the stippled section
of Wetland A is the wetland section that contains the stream.
La.2 Provide corrections: the report does not include a buffer width for Wetland A. State that
Category II Wetlands require a 100-foot buffer [FWCC 22-1357(b)(2)].
.b. Section 6.3 Buffer Modification Through Process IV:
This section of the report addresses the five criteria required by FWCC 22-1359(f)(1-5) for
Process IV Wetland Buffer Modification. The section does not address the six criteria required by
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application October 4, 2006
FWCC 22-1312(c)(1-6) for Process IV Stream Buffer Modifications. Provide the following
corrections and additions to this section:
1.b.1 Provide a detailed description of the existing wetland and stream buffer. Describe existing
conditions of the sections of the buffer that will be permanently impacted (all areas of
existing buffer located outside of the buffer perimeter fence, and the vicinity of the
proposed dispersal trench). Also describe the existing conditions of the buffer that will be
temporarily impacted by construction activities. Describe the conditions of remaining
reduced buffer, with an emphasis on the locations where plants will be installed. Include
provisions to preserve existing desirable native vegetation in the enhancement areas, and
concentrate plantings in disturbed areas and where existing desirable native vegetation is
sparse.
1.b.2 1) Proposed buffer modification will not adversely affect water quality: Provide a detailed
Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to protect the wetland, stream, and their
buffers during all construction and construction -related activities. Provide the final
Technical Information Report for review.
1.b.3 2) Proposed buffer modification will not adversely affect the existing quality of the
wetland's or buffer's habitat: Reduction of buffer width will have some unavoidable
negative impacts on wildlife habitat. The section of the wetland and stream buffer where
reduction is proposed is currently forested and provides good wildlife habitat. Even though
enhancement is proposed for that area, it will be at least ten years before the proposed
plantings are sufficiently mature to provide significant habitat improvements over existing
conditions. In addition, construction of additional apartments adjacent to the proposed area
of buffer width reduction will result in increased human intrusions into the reduced buffer.
1.bA 3) Proposed buffer modification will not adversely affect drainage or stormwater retention
capabilities: Generally, we agree that the proposed buffer reduction will not adversely
affect drainage or stormwater retention capabilities of the wetland. However, only a
Preliminary Technical Information Report has been reviewed. Provide the final Technical
Information Report for review.
1.b.5 4) Proposed buffer modification will not lead to unstable earth conditions nor create
erosion hazards: The dispersal trench is located within the area of proposed buffer
reduction. It must be constructed and maintained correctly in order to function properly
and avoid erosion damage to the modified wetland and stream buffer. Dispersal trench
maintenance procedures and schedules are outlined in Appendix A, Section 7 of the King
County Surface Water Design Manual, both the 1993 and 2005 versions. The project
includes retaining walls to be constructed adjacent to the modified buffer. Outflow from
retaining wall drains is another potential source of erosion in the modified buffer. Provide
design details (including splash pads or other erosion -limiting devices) and locations for
the retaining wall drains. Also provide design details and location for the secondary
overflow structure of the stormwater vault.
1.b.6 5) Proposed buffer modification will not be materially detrimental to any other property in
the area of the subject property nor to the city as a whole, including the loss of open space:
Unless square footage is added to the buffer as wwhole, the proposal will result in a net
loss of open space. Buffer losses include the proposed buffer reduction adjacent to the
project, and any buffer loss associated with the placement of the buffer perimeter fence
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application October 4, 2006
adjacent to the southeast parking lot of Phase 1 (near the southwest corner of the wetland).
Previous submittals showed square footage to be added to the existing 100-foot buffer at
the southwest and southeast corners of Wetland A. Neither the mitigation report nor the
current Sheets W 1.0 and W2.0 specify any additions to the buffer. It is unclear whether the
hatched areas shown on Sheet A1.1 are buffer additions. To maximize ecological
functions, buffer additions should be made preferentially between the edge of the existing
buffer and the pavement and structures of Crestview Phases 1 and 2. All additional square
footage must be located on the wetland side of the buffer perimeter fence in order to count
as buffer additions. Provide information and correct all appropriate plan sheets to show the
specific locations and square footage of buffer additions.
Lb.7 As required by previous memoranda, address the six criteria required by FWCC 22-
1312(c)(1-6) for approval of Stream Buffer Modification. Because the first five criteria for
stream buffer modification are similar to those required for wetland buffer modification,
those stream buffer criteria can be referenced and addressed in conjunction with the five
criteria for wetland buffer modification. However, the last criterion for stream buffer
modification (6) It is necessary for reasonable development of the subject property
[FWCC 22-1312(c)(6)] must be addressed separately.
Lb.8 The report incorrectly states: The majority of the indicated permanent buffer intrusion
area is, in essence, an impact on paper to accommodate required open space. ...The
majority of existing native vegetation will be retained in this recreation area... The
permanent buffer intrusion area is indeed a permanent impact to the buffer - it is not
merely a "paper impact". Sheet L-1 of the landscape plans shows that the majority of the
proposed recreation areas (the majority of which are currently forested) will be cleared and
planted with grass and ornamental shrubs. The recreation area east of Building J will have
play equipment. Other existing buffer areas located immediately adjacent to the buildings
will be planted with ornamental groundcover and shrubs. It is unclear how much of the
recreation areas will be graded (grading plans were not provided for my review). The only
exception to removal of native vegetation from the entire impacted buffer area is
approximately 900 square feet of existing buffer in the recreation area located southeast of
Building 3 (Crestview Phase I). Separation of the recreation areas proposed in the existing
buffer from the remaining buffer by a permanent trail and fence, as well as the proposed
plantings, potential grading, and the expected uses of those areas will indeed function as
permanent impacts to that section of the existing buffer. Provide corrections so that the
mitigation report and plan sheets are consistent with the landscape plans, and list the
permanent impacts to the existing buffer by the recreation areas.
.c. Section 6.4 Buffer Impacts Synopsis:
1.c.1 Add the permanent impacts of the recreation areas located outside of (towards the
buildings) of the buffer perimeter fence to the list of Actual buffer impacts. (page 10) and
include a buffer impact description (see Lb.8 above) sub -section as the report does for the
other five listed buffer impacts.
1.c.2 Section 6.4.2 discusses the pedestrian trail. The location and extent of the trail shown on
Sheets W 1.0 and W2.0 differs from that shown on Sheet L-1 of the landscape plan and
Sheets Al. 1 and A1.2 of the site plans. Provide corrections so that the location and extent
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview 11 Process IV Application October 4, 2006
of the trail is consistent on all plan sets. Provide corrections to Table 2 for the square
footage of buffer impacts by the trail.
1.c.3 As required in previous memoranda, Section 6.4.5 calls for approximately 2,100 linear
feet of split -rail fence to be constructed along the buffer perimeter. 2,100 linear feet
appears to be a sufficient length to extend the buffer perimeter fence from the northern
parcel boundary all the way to the southern boundary of the Crestview Phase II parcel (to
the southern end of the parking lot adjacent to Building 8 of Crestview Phase 1). Currently
the fence is shown only along the "Buffer Enhancement Area" (Sheet W1.0). The section
of the fence not currently shown (the southern half of the fence) should be located along
the existing 100 foot Wetland Buffer and outside of any buffer addition areas. Where
slopes or paved surfaces comprise the buffer, the fence should be located either 10 feet
east of pavement edges or along the top of the slope - whichever more accurately follows
the buffer edge. Under no circumstances should the fence be located below the top of the
slope. The location of the buffer perimeter fence is subject to approval by the City and the
City's Wetland Biologist. Once approved, the entire buffer perimeter fence shall be shown
on all site plans, landscape plans, Civil Plans, and Mitigation Plans (e.g. Sheets Al.1,
A1.2, Cl, C2, L-1, W1.0, and W2.0). To minimize construction damage to the buffer, the
buffer perimeter fence shall be constructed from the project side of the remaining buffer
and additional buffer areas.
LcA Section 6.4.6 is confusing. It appears to refer to the 5-foot wide band of modified buffer
shown on Sheet A1.2 that is located on the wetland side of the buffer perimeter fence.
Since this area is located inside of the buffer perimeter fence (inside the remaining buffer)
and it will be planted (according to Sheet W2.0), it does not count as a permanent buffer
impact. Provide information and corrections.
I .d. Section 7.0 Buffer Enhancement and Restoration
1.d.1 Provide additions: Indicate that existing desirable native vegetation in the buffer will be
preserved. Indicate that plantings will be located to avoid damage to existing desirable
native vegetation. Indicate that plants will be preferentially installed in disturbed areas and
where existing desirable native vegetation is sparse.
.e. Section 7.1 Goals and Objectives
1.e.1 Section 7.1.1.2 Objective 1A: correct the Performance Standard for Objective lA to
indicate that the monitoring period lasts for five years.
Add the following Performance Standards for Objective IA:
• "All installed plants shall be flagged or otherwise marked at or before installation so
that they can be identified throughout the five year monitoring period."
• "There shall be visual evidence that the installed trees and shrubs are vigorous (e.g.
new growth and no visible signs of stress)."
• "Establish a minimum of 6 installed shrub species and 4 installed tree species in the
buffer enhancement area by Year 3 of the monitoring period. This same range of
species diversity must be present at the end of Year 5. No single installed shrub species
will constitute more than 30% aerial cover of the total aerial cover by installed shrubs
in the buffer enhancement area by the end of Year 5."
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview H Process IV Application October 4, 2006
1.e.2 Section 7.1.1.3 Objective 113: provide design specifications for the brush piles in the plan
sheets; provide maintenance specifics for the swallow nesting boxes in the Maintenance
Section; locate nesting boxes, downed logs, and brush piles in the as-builts.
1.e.3 Section 7.1.1.4 Objective 1C: correct Objective 1C to: "Remove and control non-native
invasive plants to less than 15% cover throughout the entire buffer enhancement area as
that area as designated on Sheet W 1.0."
Substitute the following text for the Performance Standard for Objective 1C: After
construction, non-native invasive plant species shall be controlled and removed throughout
the entire buffer enhancement area to less than 15% aerial cover at least two times per year
during the five year monitoring period. The non-native invasive species include (but are
not limited to): Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius); Himalayan and evergreen blackberries
(Rubus armeniacus and R. laciniatus); purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria); field
morning glory (Convolvulus arvensis); giant morning glory or hedge bindweed
(Calystegia sepium); Japanese knotweed including giant and hybrid knotweeds
(Polygonum cuspidatum, P. sachalinense and Polygonum x bohemicum); English ivy
(Hedera helix); Canada and bull thistles (Cirsium arvense and C. vulgare); and bittersweet
nightshade (Solanum dulcamara).
Add the following Performance Standard to Objective 1 C Performance Standards: "Areas
equal to or greater than 25 square feet where invasive plants are removed from the buffer
enhancement area shall be replanted with appropriate native species at 3 feet on center for
1 gallon shrubs, and 8 feet OC for 2 gallon trees. These re -planted removal areas shall be
monitored and maintained as part of the mitigation plan."
1.e.4 Section 7.1.2.1 Objective 2A: add the following text to Objective 2A: "Install a permanent
fence along the entire perimeter of the modified buffer and buffer additions. The fence
shall be located between the buffer and the thicket -forming vegetation installed adjacent to
the wetland side of the pedestrian trail."
Correct the Performance Standard to include maintenance of the fence.
.f. Section 7.2 Functional Value Assessment of Existing and Predicted Conditions.
The report uses the Semi -Quantitative Modified Reppart Method (SAM) to assess wetland and
buffer functions. Although the methodology is adequate to assess wetland and buffer functions, in
this case, some aspects of the methodology have been misapplied. Wetland and Buffer Function
Semi -Quantitative Assessment Methodology (SAM) Final Working Draft User's Manual (Cooke
Scientific Services, Inc., May 2000) specifies: "Unlike most functional assessments, this method
is not intended to assign an absolute value to a function present in a wetland. It is also not meant
to be used to assign an absolute "value" to an individual wetland for mitigation purposes." (page
2) and "The overall function scores are not meant to be summed for an overall total." (page 6).
1.£1 Provide the following corrections to Table 3 and the explanatory text: the assignment of
functional value categories to function point scores (e.g. very low up to very high)
included in Table 3 are not provided in the SAM. Although these values are useful, they
have been assigned by Talasaea, not by SAM, and must be so acknowledged.
1.£2 Delete the "Aggregate Score" column from Table 3. It is not appropriate as directed by the
SAM user's manual.
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview H Process /V Application October 4, 2006
1.£3 Correct discrepancies between existing and post -mitigation function assessment
worksheets and the explanatory text for: flood/stormwater control; base flow/groundwater
support; water quality improvement (in addition, correct both to slow flow through site);
and correct Table 3 accordingly. Also correct existing cultural/socioeconomic function
from 7/21 to 9/21 (some passive and active recreational opportunities (2); and privately
owned, some public access (2) - residents currently use the buffer for recreation) and
correct Table 3 accordingly.
1.£4 Provide corrections: explanatory text must state that the predicted functions of the
modified buffer are based on predicted conditions some time in the future after the
installed plants are established and have matured sufficiently to begin to function as a
forested community.
1.£5 Provide corrections: the statement "Implementation of the proposed enhancement plan will
result in an improvement in functioning of Wetland A" is not supported by the existing
and post -mitigation functions assessments. As described in the SAM user's manual, SAM
is not an appropriate methodology to assign absolute values to a wetland for mitigation
purposes. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that the proposed mitigation may be
able to offset potential negative impacts of the buffer width reduction and the increase in
the number of adjacent residences associated with the project.
.g. Section 9.1 Monitoring Reports:
1.g.1 Substitute the following text for Section 9.1: "Each monitoring report shall include: a)
photo -documentation from all permanent photo -points; b) percent survival of installed
plants; percent cover by installed species; and general health and vigor of installed plants;
c) condition and wildlife use of installed nesting boxes, downed logs, and brush piles; d)
percent aerial cover by invasive species in the entire enhanced buffer area as well as in the
monitored plots; e) conditions of the pedestrian trail, the thicket -forming planting area
between the trail and the buffer perimeter fence (Native Growth Area), the buffer
perimeter fence, and informational signs; f) whether trash is present in the enhanced buffer
area; g) general site conditions; h) an assessment of whether Performance Standards are
being met; i) recommended maintenance activities to ensure that Performance Standards
are met; and j) whether contingency measures are necessary. The first monitoring report
shall constitute the As -Built Report. The As -Report will list quantities, species and sizes
of plants installed in the mitigation areas. It will include a site map with the locations of -
all installed plants in the enhanced buffer area; all permanent monitoring transects and
plots; all permanent photopoints; all installed nesting boxes, downed logs, and brush piles;
the buffer perimeter fence, informational signs, and the pedestrian trail; retaining walls
and wall drains; and the dispersal trench. Monitoring will be completed after five years if
the City of Federal Way agrees that all Performance Standards have been satisfied. If
Performance Standards have not been satisfied, the City of Federal Way may require the
undertaking of corrective measures and continuation of monitoring as part of the
contingency plan."
I .h. Section 9.2 Methods for Monitoring the Performance Standards
11.1 Section 9.2.1 refers to Objective lA not Objective A -provide corrections.
Provide information and corrections to the Methods section: there must be a sufficient
number and length of permanent sampling transects to accurately sample approximately
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview 11 Process IV Application
October 4, 2006
10% of the installed plants. The plants installed in the less densely planted areas (closer to
the wetland edge) and along the enhanced stormwater channels at the south end of
Wetland A must also be accurately represented by permanent monitoring plots.
11.2 Section 9.2.2 refers to Objective 1C not Objective B - provide corrections.
Substitute the following text for the Methods section: "The species and percent cover of
non-native invasive species shall be measured in the monitoring plots. These non-native
invasive species include (but are not limited to): Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius);
Himalayan and evergreen blackberries (Rubus armeniacus and R. laciniatus); purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria); field morning glory (Convolvulus arvensis); giant morning
glory or hedge bindweed (Calystegia sepium); Japanese knotweed including giant and
hybrid knotweeds (Polygonum cuspidatum, P. sachalinense and Polygonum x
bohemicum); English ivy (Hedera helix); Canada and bull thistles (Cirsium arvense and C.
vulgare); and bittersweet nightshade (Solanum dulcamara). In addition, percent cover and
locations of non-native invasive species within the entire enhanced buffer area will be
noted during monitoring events. Removal of non-native invasive species shall occur at
least two times per year. More frequent control actions may be required to meet the
Performance Standard of less than 15% cover by non-native invasive species throughout
the entire buffer enhancement area. Removal shall occur by hand. Use a Weed WrenchTM
(http://www.weedwrench.com/) to remove blackberry crowns and roots when the soil is
moist. Removal areas greater than or equal to 25 square feet shall be replanted according
to specifications in the mitigation plan."
11.3 Section 9.2.3 Wildlife refers to Objective 1B - provide corrections.
11.4 Section 9.2.4 Hydrology, Soils, Water Quality, and Site Stability: since the report does not
include a Performance Standard for hydrology, soils, or water quality, monitoring of these
elements is not required, although it is encouraged.
11.5 Provide a new section (or sections) to describe monitoring methods for the Performance
Standards for Objectives 2A and 2B: trash and debris in the buffer; the pedestrian trail; the
thicket -forming planting area between the trail and the buffer perimeter fence (Native
Growth Area); the buffer perimeter fence; and the informational signs.
U. Section 9.3 Photo Documentation
111 Substitute the following text for Section 9.3: "Establish a sufficient number of permanent
photopoints during the first monitoring visit to provide accurate panoramic representations
of. the entire buffer enhancement area (including the enhanced stormwater channels at the
south end of Wetland A); the thicket -forming planting area between the pedestrian trail
and the buffer perimeter fence; the buffer perimeter fence; and the informational signs.
Show the locations of the permanent photopoints in the as -built map and subsequent
monitoring report maps. Label monitoring photos with photopoint reference numbers and
cardinal directions."
.j. Section 10.0 Maintenance (M) and Contingency (C)
1 J.1 Provide corrections: Table 4, not Table 2, includes the maintenance review schedule.
1+2 Provide corrections: contingency actions shall not include re -grading in the buffer.
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview 1I Process IV Application
October 4, 2006
1.1.3 Add the following: "Contingency actions may include repair or redesign of the dispersal
trench."
1+4 Correct the first bulleted paragraph to: "In the late fall or early spring after the first
growing season, replace all dead installed plant material according to mitigation plan
specifications. (M)"
1+5 Correct the bulleted paragraph that begins Water all plantings... to: "Water all plantings
(including replacement plantings) at a rate of at least 1 inch per week during the dry
season (approximately June through September) for at least first two years after
installation. Under especially hot and dry conditions, the plantings may require more
water. Irrigation shall continue until installed plants are established. Although this period
is usually two years after installation, a longer period of irrigation may be required. Any
replacement plants installed subsequent to the initial installation, or plants that are
installed as the result of contingency actions, shall require irrigation until they become
established. (C & M)"
1 J.6 Add the following text to the end of the bulleted paragraph that begins Replace dead plant
with the same species... : ... subject to the approval of the wetland biologist "and the City
of Federal Way. (C)"
1 J.7 Add the following text to the end of the bulleted paragraph that begins Re -plant area after
reason for failure... : ... wildlife damage, etc.) "and appropriate corrective measures have
been taken. (C & M)"
1.1.8 Correct the bulleted paragraph that begins Remove/control weedy or exotic ... to:
"Remove/control non-native invasive species throughout the buffer enhancement area at
least two times per year. More frequent control actions may be required to meet the
Performance Standard of less than 15% cover by non-native invasive species. Remove
invasive plants by hand or with hand tools. Use a Weed WrenchTM
(http://www.weedwrench.com/) to remove blackberry crowns and roots when the soil is
moist. Remove all cut non-native vegetation from the buffer and dispose of it properly
offsite. The use of herbicide in buffer areas will be allowed only after other control
measures have failed. Only Rodeo® (a glyphosate herbicide) or other herbicides that are
approved for use in wetland and stream buffers shall be used. Herbicide shall not be
sprayed in buffer areas. Wipe or paint approved herbicide on leaves or cut stems as
appropriate - late summer is usually the most effective season for herbicide use. To control
blackberries, in the late summer, cut re -sprouts to within 6" of the ground and immediately
paint/wipe cut ends with Rodeo®. The non-native invasive species to be
removed/controlled include (but are not limited to): Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius);
Himalayan and evergreen blackberries (Rubus armeniacus and R. lacimatus); purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria); field morning glory (Convolvulus arvensis); giant morning
glory or hedge bindweed (Calystegia sepium); Japanese knotweed including giant and
hybrid knotweeds (Polygonum cuspidatum, P. sachalmense and Polygonum x
bohemicum); English ivy (Hedera helix); Canada and bull thistles (Cirsium arvense and C.
vulgare); and bittersweet nightshade (Solanum dulcamara)."
1.j.9 Add the following text as a separate bulleted paragraph: "Maintain mulch around installed
plants to a minimum of 4inches deep for at least 3 years after installation. Mulch shall not
touch stems or tree trunks. (M)"
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application October 4, 2006
1.00 Delete the bulleted paragraph that begins Selectively prune woody plants...
1 J.11 Add the following bulleted paragraph: "In the enhanced buffer area, re -plant (according
to mitigation plan specifications) all areas equal to or greater than 25 sq. ft where non-
native invasive plants have been removed. Install 1 gallon shrubs at plants at 3 feet on
center; and 2 gallon trees at 8 feet OC. Maintain and monitor these re -planted removal
areas (M)."
1.3.12 Add the following bulleted paragraph: "According to mitigation plan specifications,
repair, replant, and maintain all areas of the buffer damaged by construction -related
activities and outflow from the dispersal trench, retaining wall drains, and the secondary
overflow structure of the stormwater vault. Soil that has been compacted by heavy
machinery will be de -compacted before planting. (C)"
1.).13 Add the following bulleted paragraph: "As necessary, repair, replace, and maintain the
buffer perimeter fence, pedestrian trail, and informational signs. (M)"
1.).14 Add the following bulleted paragraph: "Repair and maintain the nesting boxes. (M)"
1 J.15 Add the following bulleted paragraph: "Maintain the dispersal trench according to the
schedule and methods listed in are outlined in Appendix A, Section 7 of the King County
Surface Water Design Manual, both the 1993 and 2005 versions (C & M)."
Lk. Section 12.0 Summary
11.1 Provide corrections: the report incorrectly states that Wetland A is located only near the
south end of the subject property. Wetland A extends along the stream all the way to the
northern property boundary. On Sheet W 1.0, the stippled section of Wetland A is the
wetland section that contains the stream. Include the statement that Category II Wetlands
require a 100-foot buffer [FWCC 22-1357(b)(2)].
11.2 Include the statement that Major Streams require a 100-foot buffer [FWCC 22-
1306(a)(1)].
2. Provide the following corrections and additions to Wetland Mitigation Plan Sheets W1.0, W2.0 and
W2.1:
Many of the following corrections and additions to the Mitigation Plan Sheets were listed in Section F
of the August 19, 2005 Sheldon & Associates memorandum.
2.a. Provide the following corrections and additions to Sheet W 1.0:
2.a.1 Include the following Sections from the Mitigation Report in their entirety (revised per
Section 1 of this memorandum) on the Mitigation Plan Sheets: 7.0 Buffer Enhancement
and Restoration; 7.1 Goals and Objectives (which include the Performance Standards); 8.0
Construction Management; 8.1 Post -Construction Assessment; 9.0 Monitoring Program;
10.0 Maintenance (M) and Contingency (C); and 11.0 Performance and Maintenance
Bond. Include extra Plan Sheets as necessary.
2.a.2 Show temporary buffer intrusions from construction of the retaining wall adjacent to the
east end of the parking lot northeast of Building G. Calculate the square footage of the
expected intrusions and include it in the Impacts table.
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application October 4, 2006
2.a.3 The locations and square footages of passive recreation areas are different on Mitigation
Plan Sheet W1.0 and Site Plan Sheet A1.2. Provide corrections so that there is accuracy
and consistency in all Plan Sets.
2.a.4 The layout of the pedestrian trail on Mitigation Plan Sheets W1.0 and W2.0 differs from
the layout shown on Site Plan Sheets Al.1 and A1.2 and Landscape Plan Sheet L-1.
Provide corrections so that there is accuracy and consistency in all Plan Sets.
2.a.5 Designate the locations and square footages to be added to the existing buffer so that there
is no net loss of buffer square footage.
2.a.6 Extend the buffer perimeter fence from the northern parcel boundary all the way to the
southern boundary of the Crestview Phase II parcel (to the southern end of the parking lot
adjacent to Building 8 of Crestview Phase I). The section of the fence not currently shown
(the southern half of the fence) should be located along the existing 100 foot Wetland
Buffer and outside of any buffer addition areas. Where slopes or paved surfaces comprise
the buffer, the fence should be located either 10 feet east of pavement edges or along the
top of the slope - whichever more accurately follows the buffer edge. Under no
circumstances should the fence be located below the top of the slope. The location of the
buffer perimeter fence is subject to approval by the City and the City's Wetland Biologist.
Once approved, the entire buffer perimeter fence shall be shown on all site plans,
landscape plans, Civil Plans, and Mitigation Plans (e.g. Sheets Al.1, A1.2, Cl, C2, L-1,
W1.0, and W2.0).
2.b. Provide the following corrections and additions to Sheet W2.0:
2.b.1 Designate a 3 foot wide "Native Growth Area" between the pedestrian trail and the
outside of the buffer perimeter fence as show in Landscape Sheet L-1. This area will be
densely planted with prickly native shrubs to discourage human intrusions into the buffer.
2.b.2 Provide corrections: turn off (or mask) the existing significant tree layer. Those symbols
make it difficult to distinguish between existing and proposed trees.
2.b.3 Realign or redesign sections of the trail south of Building J to avoid cutting down the two
12 inch hemlock trees (significant trees FWCC 22-1). These two trees are within the
existing 100 foot wetland buffer.
2.b.4 With the exception of areas where clumps (greater than or equal to 25 square feet) of non-
native invasive plants are removed from the buffer, concentrate the plantings closer to the
pedestrian trail - within approximately 25 feet of the outer buffer edge. Preserve existing
desirable native vegetation and concentrate plantings in disturbed areas and where existing
desirable native vegetation is sparse. This will make installation, watering, and weeding
easier. Plants installed closer to the wetland edge in small, isolated, and scattered clusters
(as shown in the diagram) will be difficult to locate, water, weed, maintain, and monitor.
Install plants so that existing desirable native species are not damaged. Concentrate
plantings in disturbed areas and where existing vegetation is sparse. Install plants densely
(shrubs 3 feet on center, trees 8 feet OC) in buffer areas where clumps greater than or
equal to 25 square feet of non-native invasive plants are removed. Provide corrections to
the diagram and the plant schedule to avoid planting FAC-, FAC or wetter species in
sunny upland locations.
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application
October 4, 2006
2.b.5 Correct General Note 1. to: ..and at the clearing limits "before implementation of the
Mitigation Plan."
2.b.6 General Planting Installation Notes:
• Delete notes 3 and 4. Only 1 and 2 gallon plants will be installed in the enhanced
buffer area, as a result no trees shall be staked.
• Delete note 6. No fertilizer shall be used in the buffer.
• Add the following note: "All plants shall be installed in locations so that existing
desirable native species plants are preserved and not damaged. Concentrate plantings
in disturbed areas and where existing vegetation is sparse."
• Add the following note: "All installed plants shall be marked or flagged prior to, or
during installation for identification purposes to make monitoring and maintenance
activated easier."
• Add the following note: "Apply 6 inches of arborist mulch to the entire area of dense
plantings, or to a minimum width of 36 inches around installed plants. Mulch shall
not touch stems and trunks - pull mulch back 4 inches away from stems and trucks."
• Add the following note: "Apply 6 inches of arborist mulch to all disturbed/exposed
buffer areas. Do not seed with grass."
2.b.7 Plant Schedule
• Provide corrections: install only 1 and 2 gallon plants.
• Install shrubs at 3 to 5 feet on center; install trees at 8 to 10 feet OC.
• Correct the plant schedule to provide sufficient quantities of plants to plant at the
densities listed above for an area at least 25 feet wide along the entire length of the
reduced buffer shown on Sheet W2.0. Include sufficient quantities to plant areas of
known construction -related buffer impacts. Include sufficient quantities to plant
around the proposed dispersal trench as shown on Sheet W2.0
• Include at least three additional species of upland shrubs. Suggested species include:
thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus); ocean -spray (Holodiscus discolor); mock orange
(Philadelphus lewisi); snowbrush (Ceanothus velutinus); and serviceber y
(Amelanchier alnifolia).
• Include at least two additional species of upland trees. Suggested species include:
Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii); grand fir (Abies grandis); and Garry oak
(Quercus garryana).
• Provide corrections: although mountain ash (Sorbus sitchensis) is native to
Washington State, it rarely occurs at lower elevations. Substitute a more appropriate
species such as Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) or grand fir (Abies grandis).
• Correct the plant schedule to avoid planting FAC-, FAC, or wetter species in sunny
upland locations.
• Delete the Buffer Seed Mix Section. Do not plant grass seeds in the buffer - instead
apply 6 inches of arborist mulch to all disturbed/exposed buffer areas.
2.b.8 Plan Legend: provide information and suggested sources for downed logs and stumps.
2.c. Provide the following corrections and additions to Sheet W2.1:
2.c.1 Extend the buffer perimeter fence to the south property boundary as directed in Section
2.a.6 above.
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application
October 4, 2006
2.c.2 Provide corrections: turn off (or mask) the existing significant tree layer. Those symbols
make it difficult to distinguish between existing and proposed trees.
2.c.3 Provide information and corrections: how will irrigation be provided to the proposed
plantings associated with the stormwater channels at the southeast and southwest corners
of Wetland A? Without irrigation for at least the first two dry seasons after installation,
these proposed plantings will fail. If access or technical problems preclude irrigation of
these areas, do not plant these areas, and delete their square footages from the buffer
enhancement square footage.
2.c.4 Delete the coir log from the mitigation plan for the southeastern stormwater channel. As
specified in previous memoranda, this proposed activity would constitute a wetland
modification [FWCC 22-1358(d)]. Wetland modification must satisfy nine criteria, and
requires approval through Process IV evaluation [FWCC 22-1358(d)(1-9)]. Because the
proposed project does not include any direct impacts to the wetland, FWCC does not
require wetland mitigation (FWCC 22-1358). The proposed coir log would more likely
cause ecological damage than provide an ecological benefit. If it is placed across the steep -
sided section of the channel, during storm events it will back water up the channel and
cause undercutting of the banks. If the coir log is placed in the section where the banks
flatten and the channel broadens, it will redirect water laterally from the channel out of the
wetland into upland areas.
2.c.5 Delete Detail 4 Coir Log Detail.
2.c.6 Detail 2 Soft Surface Trail, Note 2: provide an alternate source for coarse wood mulch.
2.d. Provide the following corrections and additions to Sheet W2.2: in this section, current text is
designated by italics, and additions are underlined.
2.d.1 Part 1 - Planting Specifications:
• General Conditions Section: Correct the first sentence to: In the mitigation area, the
contractor shall remove ...by manual means only prior to plant installation. Add the
following sentence at the end of the paragraph: Existing desirable native species shall
be identified, preserved and protected from damage prior to removal of invasive
s e? Iles.
• General Conditions Section: Add the following text to the end of the third paragraph:
Plants installed in undisturbed areas shall be integrated with existing native
vegetation, and planted in a random, naturalistic pattern as field identified by the
project biologist. Plantings shall be concentrated in disturbed areas and where exiting
desirable native yegetationis sparse.
• Contractor to Verify Plant Schedule with Plan Section: Provide corrections: Talasaea,
not the contractor, shall be responsible to verify that the plant species, quantities, and
sizes shown on the plans are correctly listed in the plant schedule. In the event of a
discrepancy, the plant species, quantities, and sizes listed in the plant schedule take
precedence over those shown on the plans.
• Locate/StakeNerify Planting Areas Section, first paragraph, add the following text
after the first sentence: Planting locations shall be specified so that existing desirable
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application
October 4, 2006
native vegetation is preserved and not damaged. Plantings shall be concentrated in
disturbed areas and where exiting desirable native vegetation is s arse.
Approve Planting Locations and Spacing Section, first paragraph, add the following
text after the second sentence: Plantings shall be located so that existing desirable
native plants are preserved and not damaged. Plantings shall be concentrated in
disturbed areas and where exiting desirable native vegetation is sparse. Correct the last
sentence to: Nevertheless, any variations ... approval by Talasaea Consultants and the
City of Federal Way.
2.d.2 Part 2 - Plant Material Standards
• Plant Materials Section, second paragraph, provide the following correction: Plant
materials shall be locally grown (western WA, western OR, or western B. C.), Puget
Sound genotypes of native species, healthy, in vigorous growing condition, and be
guaranteed true to size and species. Named cultivars of native species are not
acceptable. If replacement....
• Plant Materials Section, fourth paragraph, delete the second sentence (Balled and
burlapped stock...). No B&B plants shall be installed in the mitigation areas.
• Plant Materials Section, seventh paragraph, provide the following correction: Native
plant cuttings shall be grown and collected in the Puget Sound region. Cuttings shall
be...
• Plant Materials Section, delete the eighth and ninth paragraphs (Perennial emergent,
and Rhizomes, tubers, corms,...). No emergents or rhizomes, etc. shall be installed in
the mitigation areas.
• Substitutions Section: first paragraph, provide the following correction: Substitutions
of specified plant species, size or condition will be allowed only if prior written
approval is obtained by Talasaea Consultants and the City of Federal Way prior to
ordering material.
• Substitutions Section: second paragraph, provide the following corrections: Bareroot
stock of equal size to specified container (delete reference to B&B) deciduous
plantings only with prior approval by Talasaea Consultants and the City of Federal
Way. Evergreen plant material shall be container grown (delete reference'to B&Bi.
• Verify Storage Site and Method Section, first paragraph, delete the third sentence
(Balled and burlapped material...). No B&B plants shall be installed in the mitigation
areas.
2.d.3 Part 3 - Plant Installation
Soil Preparation/Amendments Section, first paragraph: add the following sentence
after the first sentence: The soil shall be decozn acted in areas where heavy machine
has been used.
Soil Preparation/Amendments Section, first paragraph: correct the second sentence to:
A soil moisture retention agent (polymer) may be included ..... per the manufacturer's
specification, but its inclusion is not required (see General...
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview H Process IV Application October 4, 2006
• Soil Preparation/Amendments Section, delete the second paragraph (In non -graded
areas... topsoil specifications.) No topsoil amendments shall be made in the
mitigation areas. Plants shall be installed into native soil.
• Soil Preparation/Amendments Section, third paragraph, provide the following
correction: delete "In enhanced existing forested areas only" Correct the first sentence
to Contractor shall loosely tie a 6 inch piece of pink flagging to the top portion of all
plants installed in the modified buffer to facilitate...
• Soil Moisture Retention Agent Section, first paragraph, provide the following
correction: Although not required, Soilmoist, or equivalent, may be added to....
• Delete the Fertilizer Section. No fertilizer shall be used for plantings in the mitigation
areas.
• Mulch Section, first paragraph: substitute the following text for the first sentence:
Apply 6 inches of arborist mulch to the entire area of dense Plantings, or to a
minimum width of 36 inches around installed plants; Mulch should be pulled hack
Uproximately 4 inches from stems - mulch shall not touch stems or trunks of installed
plants.
• Delete the Staking Section. No stakes shall be used for the 1-2 gallon container trees
in the mitigation areas.
2.d.4 Part 4 - Irrigation, Fence and Sign Installation
• Temporary Automatic Irrigation System Section, first paragraph: correct the first
sentence to: Contractor shall provide... prior to installation of plantings in the
mitigation areas. This project does not include any created wetland areas.
Reseed Disturbed Areas Section. Correct the Section title to: Mulch Disturbed Areas.
Substitute the following text for the first paragraph: Contractor shall apply a_minimur I
of 6 inches of mulch to all ex osed soils in the miti Lion area followinglant
installation. No grass or other seed mixtures shall be planted in the mitigation area.
Restore Existing Natural or Landscaped Section. Correct the Section title to: Restore
Construction -Related Damage to Buffer .Areas. Substitute the following text for the
first paragraph. All buffer areas not already specified in this mitigation plan, that are
damaeed during construction shall be restored, replanted, monitored, and maintained
according to specifications provided in Sections XXXXX (insert references) of this
mitigation plan.
■ Install Open -Rail Fence and Signs Section, first paragraph, add the following sentence
after the first sentence: In order to minimize impacts to the buffer, the fence shall be
constructed from the t)roiect side and not from the wetland side of the fence line.
Provide the following corrections to the second sentence: Talasaea Consultants and
the City of Federal Wax shall approve fence location prior to construction.
2.d.5 Part 5 - Final Acceptance
• Plant Warranty Section, second paragraph, provide the following correction: Any
changes or modifications to this plan must receive prior approval from Talasaea
Consultants and the City of Federal Way.
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview H Process IV Application October 4, 2006
2.d.6 Part 6 - One -Year Maintenance
• Provide corrections so that this section specifies and agrees with all provisions in
Section 10.0 Maintenance (M) and Contingency (C) of the Sensitive Areas Report and
Mitigation Plan, including all corrections specified in this memorandum.
Maintenance Section, second paragraph, delete the instruction a) to tighten and repair
tree stakes.
Maintenance Section, third paragraph, correct the first sentence to: Contractor shall be
responsible for watering ..... planting area upon completion of mitigation installation.
Correct the second sentence to: Irrigation is required within the (delete wetland)
mitigation area for at least... Add the following text after the second sentence:
Irrigation shall continue until installed plants are established. Although this period is
usually two years after installation. a Ionger period of irrigation may be required. Any
replacement plants installed subsequent to the initial installation, or plants that are
installed as the result of contingency actions, shall require irrigation until they become
established. A minimum of 1 inch of water per week shall be su lied duringthe
season (approximately June through September). Under especially hot and dry
conditions, the mitigation planting areas may require additional water.
• Maintenance Section, delete the fourth paragraph (Contractor shall remove tree
stakes ... )
• Maintenance Section, fifth paragraph, provide the following correction: Contractor
shall correct erosion and drainage problems as required, after consulting with the
City of Federal Way.
• Maintenance Section, sixth paragraph, provide the following correction to the first
sentence: Contractor shall remove silt fencing upon receiving written permission to do
so by Talasaea Consultants and the City of Federal Way, usually... Correct the second
sentence to: Restore the area with native tree and shrub plantings according to
specifications provided in Sections XXXXX (insert references) of this mitigation plan.
• Maintenance Section, seventh paragraph provide the following correction: Contractor
shall remove the temporary irrigation system only after installed plants are
established. This period is usually two years after installation but a longer irrigation
period may be re uired. AnY Rlants that are installed as replacements subsequent to
the initial installation or plants that are installed as the result of contingency actions
shall require irrigation until they become established.
2.d.7 Part 7 - Place Habitat Features
• Place Habitat Features Section: Provide design specifications for brush piles.
• Place Habitat Features Section, first paragraph, first sentence, provide the following
corrections: Place habitat features (down logs and stumps) in the mitigation area prior
to plant installation. Add the following sentence after the first sentence: To minimize
buffer impacts. all heavy machinery used to place habitat features will remain outside
of the buffer.
• Clear and Grub Section, first paragraph, correct to last sentence to: The non-native
invasive species to be removed/controlled include (but are not limited to): Scotch
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application
October 4, 2006
broom C lisus sco arius ' Himalayan and evergreen blackberries Rubus armeniacus
and R. laciniatus), puEple loosestrife i thrum salicaria • field morning to
Convolvulus arvensisgiant moming gloEyor hedge bindweed Cal ste is se iurn -
Japanese knotweed including giant and hybrid knotweeds Pol ovum cus idatum P.
sachalinense and Polygonum. x bohemicum • English i Hedera helix : Canada and
bull thistles Cirsium arvense and C. vul are • and bittersweet nightshade Solanum
dulcamara).
• Clear and Grub Section, correct the second paragraph to: With approval from the city
of Federal Way, Talasaea Consultants will designate any additional...
2.d.8 Detail 1 Cutting Planting Detail (Typ.)
• Correct the upper left-hand direction to: Use a 36 inch steel bar or marlin... Insert
spike to a minimum of half of the lengthh of the cuttings: to 24 inches for 4 foot
cuttings, and to 18 inches for 3 foot cuttings. Insert cutting...
Correct the lower left-hand direction to: Insert cuttings manually into pilot hole to a
depth of at least half of the length of the cuttings: to 24 inches_ for 4 foot cuttings, and
to 1$ inches for 3 foot cuttings. Leave a minimum of 18 inches of cutting above
ground surface...
2.d.9 Detail 2 Container Shrub Planting Detail (Typ.)
• Correct the title to: Container Shrub and Tree Planting Detail (Typ.)
• Correct mulch direction to: Apply 4-6 inches of mulch to the entire planting area. Pull
mulch 4 inches away from stems - mulch shall NOT touch plant stems or trunks.
Provide corrections to the top two right-hand directions: containerized plants shall be
installed according to directions from Sound Native Plants website:
http://www.soundnativeplants.com/PDF/Planting%20diagram.PDF;
http://www.soundnativeplants.com/PDF/plantingtips.pdf,
and the brochure produced by WSU Cooperative Extension: Plant it Right
http://cru.cahe.wsu.edu/CEPublications/miscO337/miscO337.pdf
specifically:
• The planting hole should be no deeper than the rootball, and the bottom of the rootball
should rest on undisturbed soil. The planting hole should a minimum of 3-4 times the
width of the rootball.
• Spread the roots and straighten circling roots as possible.
• The top of the rootball should be at, or approximately''/z inch above, the soil surface.
• Backfill the hole with native soil - do not use amended or imported topsoil.
2.d.10 Detail 3 Bare -root Planting Detail (Typ.)
• Correct mulch direction to: Apply 4-6 inches of mulch to the entire planting area. Pull
mulch 4 inches away from sterns - mulch shall NOT touch plant stems or tnmks.
Provide corrections to the top two right-hand directions: containerized plants shall be
installed according to directions from Sound Native Plants website:
http://www.soundnativeplants.com/PDF/Planting`/`20diagram.PDF;
http://www.soundnativeplants.com/PDF/plantingtips.pdf,
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview H Process IV Application October 4, 2006
and the brochure produced by WSU Cooperative Extension: Plant it Right
http://cru.cahe.wsu.edu/CEPublications/miscO337/miscO337.pdf
specifically:
• The planting hole should be no deeper than the rootball, and the bottom of the rootball
should rest on undisturbed soil. The planting hole should a minimum of 3-4 times the
width of the rootball.
• Spread the roots and straighten circling roots as possible.
• The top of the rootball should be at, or approximately '/z inch above, the soil surface.
• Backfill the hole with native soil - do not use amended or imported topsoil.
2.d.11 Delete Detail 4 B&B Tree Planting Details (Typ.). B&B trees shall not be installed in the
mitigation area.
2.e. Provide the following additions to the Mitigation Plan Sheet Set
2.e.1 Provide construction sequencing information. The clearing limits shall be flagged and the
silt fence installed before any grading activities on site.
2.e.2 Provide design details of retaining walls adjacent to the buffer (at the east end of the north
parking lot and along Building G) including the retaining wall for the trail at the east end
of the north parking lot (e.g. Sheet Cl). Provide details about locations and designs for
retaining wall drains. The design of the retaining wall drains must protect the modified
buffer from erosion. Show all retaining walls on site plans, landscaping plans and
mitigation plans (e.g. Sheets Al. 1, A1.2, L-1, W1.0, and W2.0).
2.e.3 As required by the Mitigation Plan, in order to discourage intrusions into the modified
buffer, designate a Native Growth Area to be installed between the outside of the buffer
perimeter fence and the pedestrian trail. This 3 foot wide area is shown on Landscape Plan
Sheet L-1. Provide a "Native Growth Area" Typical Planting Scheme to illustrate the 3-
foot wide planting strip. Plant a dense line of predominately prickly and thicket forming
native shrubs adjacent to the split -rail buffer perimeter fence. Suggested species include
tall Oregon grape (Mahonia aquifolia), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), and bald -hip rose
(Rosa gymnocarpa). Include other sun and drought tolerant native shrub species such as:
snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), ocean -spray (Holodiscus discolor), Pacific wax myrtle
(Mynca californica), red -flowering currant (Ribes sanguineum), serviceberry
(Amelanchier alnifolia), thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus), snowbrush (Ceanothus
velutinus), and mock orange (Philadelphus lewisii). Plant 1 gallon shrubs 3 feet on center
in a line along the spilt -rail fence. Plant 1 gallon woody native groundcover species [e.g.
kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-usi)] between the pedestrian trail and the dense line of
shrubs. Plant the woody ground cover plants either at 18-inches on center (square grid
spacing) or at 24 inches on center with triangular spacing. Do not plant trees in the 3-foot
wide planting strip since they will require pruning to keep the trail clear. Provide sufficient
irrigation during the dry months for at least the first two growing seasons after planting, or
until the plants become established.
2.e.4 Provide a Typical Planting Scheme for disturbed/cleared areas to be planted within the
modified buffer. This planting detail will be used to plant construction -related and other
impacts to the buffer that are not included in the mitigation planting plan. This planting
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Process IV Application October 4, 2006
detail will also be used to plant cleared areas greater than or equal to 25 square feet that
are created where blackberries and other invasive species are removed from the buffer.
Space shrubs 3 feet on center, and trees at 8 feet on center.
3. Provide the following corrections and additions to Landscape Plans Sheets L-1 and L-2:
3.a. Provide the following corrections to Sheet L-1:
3.a.1 Realign or redesign sections of the trail south of Building J to avoid cutting down the two
12 inch hemlock trees (significant trees FWCC 22-1). These two trees are within the
existing 100 foot wetland buffer.
3.a.2 Provide corrections so that there is accuracy and consistency of the layout of the pedestrian
trail in all Plan Sets. The layout of the pedestrian trail shown on Site Plan Sheets Al. 1 and
A1.2 and Landscape Plan Sheet L-1 differs from the layout shown on Mitigation Plan
Sheets W 1.0 and W2.0.
3.a.3 Correct landscape plantings in the area shown as Vault Access Lid on Sheets C1 and C2.
3.b. Provide the following additions and corrections to Sheet L-2:
3.b.1 Delete the "Native Growth Area" Typical Planting Scheme. Specifications for all
plantings installed as part of the mitigation plan shall be included in the mitigation plan
sheets. These plantings include disturbed areas inside the buffer (i.e. on the wetland side
of the split -rail buffer perimeter fence) and the 3 foot wide densely planted strip between
the pedestrian trail and the buffer perimeter fence.
3.b.2 Provide the following corrections to the Landscape Construction Notes and Planting
Details:
• The planting hole should be no deeper than the rootball, and the bottom of the
rootball should rest on undisturbed soil. The planting hole should a minimum of 3-4
times the width of the rootball.
• The top of the rootball should be at, or approximately % inch above, the soil surface.
• Apply 4-6 inches of mulch to the entire planting area.
• Pull mulch 4 inches away from stems - mulch shall NOT touch plant stems or trunks.
• Remove ALL burlap from B&B plants before installation.
4. Recommended Conditions
4.a. Address all issues and provide corrections and additions listed in this memorandum.
4.b. Submit a revised mitigation plan and mitigation plan sheet set for approval and conditioning by
the City of Federal Way.
4.c. In order to comply with FWCC 22-1359(f)(5) Process IV Criterion 5 (Proposed buffer
modification will not be materially detrimental to any other property in the area of the subject
property nor to the city as a whole, including the loss of open space), square footage must be
added to the existing buffer equal to the amount of the square footage lost to buffer modification.
Permanent buffer losses include the proposed buffer reduction adjacent to the Crestview Phase 2
project, and any buffer loss associated with the placement of the buffer perimeter fence adjacent
to the southeast parking lot of Phase 1 (near the southwest corner of the wetland). Buffer
Doc. I.D. 38407
Review of revised Crestview II Prat ss IV Application October 4, 2006
additions should be made preferentially between the outer edge of the existing buffer and existing
and proposed pavement and structures of Crestview Phases 1 and 2. All additional square footage
must be located on the wetland side of the buffer perimeter fence in order to count as buffer
additions. Show the specific locations and square footage of buffer additions on all appropriate
plan sheets.
4.d. Provide provisions for perpetual maintenance and repair of the dispersal trench by the owner or
other appropriate entity. Dispersal trench maintenance procedures and schedules are outlined in
Appendix A, Section 7 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual, both the 1993 and
2005 versions. In addition, provide provisions so that all negative impacts to the buffer resulting
from outflow from the dispersal trench, retaining wall drains, and the secondary overflow
structure from the stormwater vault shall be restored, replanted, maintained, and monitored by the
property owner or other appropriate entity as directed by the City and their biologist.
4.e. Realign or redesign sections of the pedestrian trail south of Building J to avoid cutting down the
two 12 inch hemlock trees (significant trees FWCC 22-1). These two trees are within the existing
100 foot wetland buffer.
41. The permanent split -rail buffer perimeter fence shall extend from the northern boundary all the
way to the southern boundary of the Crestview Phase II parcel (to the southern end of the parking
lot adjacent to Building 8 of Crestview Phase I). All additional buffer areas (to compensate for
project -related buffer losses) shall be located on the wetland side of the fence. The location of the
fence is subject to approval by the City and the City's Wetland Biologist. Once approved, the
entire buffer perimeter fence shall be shown on all appropriate Site Plans, Landscape Plans, Civil
Plans, and Mitigation Plans (e.g. Sheets Al.1, A1.2, Cl, C2, L-1, W1.0, W2.0, and W2.1). To
minimize construction damage to the buffer, the buffer perimeter fence shall be constructed from
the project side of the remaining buffer and additional buffer areas.
4.g. In order to comply with Core Requirement 1 of Section 2.0 Conditions and Requirements
Summary of the Preliminary Technical Information Report (page 8), if they are graded, the
recreation areas and landscaped areas behind buildings adjacent to the wetland buffer shall be
graded to direct sheet flow into the buffer to help support wetland/wetland buffer vegetation.
4.h. Submit a revised landscape plan for approval and conditioning by the City of Federal Way.
4J. The City's wetland biologist shall review the Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plans.
4J. The City's wetland biologist shall review the final Technical Information Report (TIR).
If you have any questions regarding this memorandum, please contact Suzanne Bagshaw at 425-739-7977
or at suzanne.bagshaw@otak.com
Doc. I.D. 38407
CITY OF
Federal Way
MEMORANDUM
Community Development Services Department
DATE: October 31, 2005
TO: FILE �]
FROM: Deb Barker
SUBJECT: CRESTVIEW II - UP4 - (05-102533-00-UP) INTERNAL DISCUSSION ONLY
The proposed multi -family development is a 136 unit complex with proposed intrusions into the 100 foot
regulated wetland buffers up to 50 feet.
60 units in proposed Buildings F, G, H and J, as well as 1/3 of building E are located within the 100 foot
wetland setback as follows:
o Building F - 12 units
o Building G - 12 units
o Building H - 12 units
o Building J - 18 units
o Building E — 6 units (18 total units: 12 or 2/3 of the units are located outside of the wetland buffer)
76 units buildings A, B, C and D located outside of the wetland buffer as follows:
o Building A — 18 units
o Building B — 12 units
o Building C - 12 units
o Building D — 12 units
o Building E — 12 units (see above)
o Buildings K, L, M, N and P — 10 total carriage house units
Buildings A, B, C, D and E contain three floor of apartment, as do all buildings located in the wetland buffer.
All buildings appear to meet the required 30 feet above average building elevation required for units in the RM
2400 zoning district, although there are some errors on the submitted elevations.
If a height variance was approved and an additional floor was added to Buildings A, B, C, D and E, 22 units
would be added for a total of 98 units as follows:
o Building A — 18 units + 6 = 24 units
o Building B — 12 units + 4 = 16 units
o Building C - 12 units + 4 = 16 units
o Building D — 12 units + 4 = 16 units
o Building E — 12 units + 4 = 16 units (only building portions that are outside of wetland buffer)
o Buildings K, L, M, N and P — 10 total carriage house units
This does not account for F, G, H and J units that are located OUTSIDE of the wetland, buffer. The unit count
may be estimated at 24 three level units outside of the wetland buffer as follows:
o Building F - 6 estimated
o Building G - 3 estimated
o Building H - 6 estimated
o Building J - 9 estimated
If a height variance for these four buildings was approved, 8 additional units could be estimated as follows for
a total of 32 units:
o Building F - 6 +2 = 8
o Building G- 3+ 1= 4
o Building H - 6 +2 = 8
o Building J - 9 +3 = 12
Summary - If a height variance for a 4th floor for 9 buildings were approved, and all units were located outside
of the 100 foot wetland buffer, the summary of units could be as follows:
o Building A
— 18 units + 6 = 24
o Building B
— 12 units + 4 = 16
o Building C
- 12 units + 4 = 16
o Building D
— 12 units + 4 = 16
o Building E
— 12 units + 4 = 16
o Building F
— 6 estimated units' +2 = 8
o Building G- 3 estimated units + 1= 4
o Building H - 6 estimated units +2 = 8
o Building J - 9 estimated units +3 = 12
Estimated Total: 120 Units (16 fewer units than proposed)
VARIANCE CRITERIA FOR INCREASE IN HEIGHT:
FWCC Section 22-198 Criteria for grant.
The city may grant the variance only if it finds all of the following:
(1) That the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is
located.
Staff Response: This would not grant special priviledge inconsistent with the limitations upon
other uses in the vicinity and zone in that **** ???
(2) That the variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings of the subject property to provide it with use rights and
privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is
located.
Staff Response: The lot size is large, but it is constrained by a large wetland with a 100 foot
buffer. This could be construed as a special circumstances to recommend that the variance be
granted.
(3) That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is
located.
Staff Response: The height variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare as
it provides for low income residential units, and would not be injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity since the undisturbed wetland buffer would provide a 100 vegetative
screen of the tall MF units from the adjacent single family units to the east and the MF units to the
south; residental units to the west are at a higher elevation that the propsoed development and the
undeveloped lots to the north are zoned BC.
(4) That the special circumstances of the subject property are not the result of the actions of the
owner of the subject property.
Staff Response: The applicant has not created or expanded the wetland. However, the applicant is
requesting a high unit count for monitary return on investment. The site can be developed with
units that do not exceed average builidng elevation.
1 Estimated units must be outside of the 100 foot wetland buffer
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
PO Box 47600 a Olympia, WA 98504-7600 0 360-407-6000
711 for Washington Relay Service ® Persons with a speech disability can call 877-833-6341
September 5, 2007
Greg McKenna
F & M Development
17786 Des Moines Memorial Dr
Buiien WA 98148
Dear. Mt-., McKenna:
RE: Constiuction Stormwater General Permit
Permit Number:
WAR-009576
Site Name:
Barkley Apartments
Location:
27822 Pacific Hwy S
Federal Way King County
Disturbed Acres:
4.0
Receiving Water:
Unnamed Wetland
The Washington Department of'Ecology (Ecology) has reviewed your application for coverage
under the Construction Stormwater General Permit, and has decided to issue permit coverage
effective September 5, 2007. PIease retain this permit coverage letter with your, permit
(enclosed), stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), and site log book. It is the
official record of permit coverage for your site.
This letter explains some of the new requirements in the new general permit for construction
sites that disturb from one to less than five acres.. Please take time to read the new permit, and
contact Ecology if you have any questions.
Inspections (Special Condition S4, pages 10-12 for, additional information)
• You must conduct weekly visual inspections of your site to ensure your best management
practices (BMPs) are functioning properly..
• A Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead (CESCL) must inspect your site.. Ecology
maintains a list of training classes to obtain CESCL certification on its website:
http ://www.e!ay.wa.gQy/Trogams/wq/stotmwatei-/cescl.htm.
Sampling and Analysis (Special Condition S4, pages 10-12 for additional information)
• Beginning October- 1, 2008, operators of sites from one to less than five acres must sample
stormwater discharges for• turbidity using a turbidity meter or transparency tube, unless the
discharge goes to an impaired waterbody.. Note that the time frame for this condition is
under, appeal and may change. You will be notified prior to October 2008 if there is a
change.
Mr.. McKenna
Page 2
September 5, 2007
• Permittees must sample stormwater discharges for pH if the project involves any amount of
engineered soils (cement treated base, cement kiln dust, fly ash, etc.) or over 1,000 cubic
,yards of'poured or recycled concrete.
• A discharge monitoring report (DMR) is attached.
■ The permit sets benchmark (target) levels for turbidity, transparency, and pH. When
discharge samples exceed a benchmark, additional permit requirements must be followed..
Discharges to Impaired Waterbodies (Special Condition S9, pages 18-21 for additional
information)
• If' your site discharges into a water body that is on the impaired waterbodies list (i„e., the
"303(d)" list) for turbidity, fine sediment, high pH, or phosphorus, additional sampling is
required_
• EPA recently approved the 2004 303(d) list, which includes water bodies not previously
listed_ Ecology will be reviewing the newly approved list and will notify you if any
additional sampling requirements apply to you..
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Special Condition S9, pages 21-29 for additional
information)
• Each site must have a complete Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (S WPPP) on the site
prior to the start of construction„ This plan describes the erosion and sediment control i
measures used on the site to protect water quality..
• Remember to keep your SWPPP updated.. The permit contains specific timelines for
SWPPP updates based on inspection results by the CECSL or Ecology inspector.. ;
Permit Transfer-
■ When ,you sell or transfer operational control of all, or a portion, of your site to one or more
new operator(s), you must also transfer- permit coverage.
• To transferpetmit coverage, submit a Iransfer• of'Coverage form to Ecology.. You can
download the form off our website listed at the end of this letter.,
Notice of Termination (Special Condition 510, page 29 for' additional information)
• You may request termination (cancel) when the site has undergone final stabilization with
permanent vegetation or equivalent measures that prevent erosion or when all unstabilized
portions of the site have been sold.
• To request termination of permit coverage, submit a Notice ofTermination (NOI) to
Ecology.. If you do not submit an NOT, you will remain responsible for permit compliance
and permit fees„
Appeal of Permit Coverage
You may appeal the terms and conditions of a general permit, as they apply to an individual
discharger, within 30 days of the effective date of coverage of that discharger (see Chapter
43.21B RCW). This appeal is limited to the general permit's applicability or- non -applicability to
a specific discharger..
2
Mr. McKenna
Page 3
September 5, 2007
The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 43.21.,B.310, contains the procedures and requirements
for the appeal process.. Appeals should be directed to:
Pollution Control Hearings Board
PO Box 40903
Olympia, Washington 98504-0903
Department of Ecology
Appeals Coordinator
P.O,. Box 47608
Olympia, Washington 98504-7608
Additional Information
Ecology is committed to providing assistance to you. Please review our web page at
http://�vww.ecy.wa.gov/T)iogiamslw�/stoimwater/constiuctiont. Now available — a stormwater
sampling video that demonstrates appropriate sampling methods!
Questions
For questions about transfers, terminations, and other administrative issues, please contact
Elaine Worthen at 360-407-7229 or ewor461@ecy..wa..gov.
Ecology Regional Assistance
If you have questions regarding stornawater management issues at your construction site, please
contact Megan Wisdom (425-649-4483) of Ecology's Northwest Regional Office in Bellevue.
If you have questions regarding this letter, plewse call Elaine Worthen at 360-407-7229.
Sincerely,
fa,cy L`.'Winters, Section Manager
Program Development Services Section
Water Quality Program
Enclosure: Construction Stormwatet General Permit
cc: Ecology Permit Fee Unit, HQ
Stormwater File, HQ
3
—ti
PERMIT NUMBER WAR-009576
CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER GENERAL PERMIT
DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT (DMR)
PROTECI INFORMATION
Site Name: Barkley Apartments Owner- Name: F & M Development
Disturbed Acreage: 4..0 Permittee/Operator': Greg McKenna
Location: 27822 Pacific Hwy S, Feder al Way Mailing Address: 17786 Des Moines Memorial Dr
County: King Burien WA 98148
MONITORING DOCUMENTATION
Unique Discharge/Monitoring Point: Monitoring Period:
(Use same description each month, (Month/Year)
use one DMR for each monitoring point)
Please send your Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) to Ecology every month, even it there is no discharge Also, read the attached
instructions before completing the DMR.. 1f a section does not apply, please annotate "N/A", leaving no blanks.
_ r r'-
4j,,por
Uisclrar a ir�i�,SEe.";�,..
Yo_
TuThidik
,,
...
(List s'sr-rill41I ftt iplY): '
UiSella rgc
Sassil�lintr.
..
Iransparenr:;:
_ • . a
5erlislrenl.Panillxr pl'I`anhu'Vai lt_
''-This ...
��'eelar
F7atc`'
":
`_'r __:
[..= C:ilestli� rl.Trea(>ISai}d Filtci
u'eeEc`- -
lHolliloring
tN I t .'s:
e ehclurnr.lrir
{(:enlii,iciersl =
Alp iliCablC.-
hilt 1`L'T1CC-......
t, _.,•: '�';
";._,,-
Torf?iclil}-L'oirsj
r�n•.-Wattle3le
{•�11kCiClt
D �•Chevk I-i-taII�I�i"i :• E:-Ll!il.e:.
applicable)
Example
VA
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
p No soil disturbing construction activities have taken place on the site yet Consti uction is expected to begin on
p There was no discharge doting noimal working hoots this month (provide comments or explanation below)
COMMENTS 1 EXPLANATIONS (ATTACH EXTRA SHEET IF NECESSARY):
NAME / PHONE NUMBER OF ON -SITE CONTACT PERSON WEd CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS RELATED TO THIS REPORT-
1 CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF LAW THAT I HAVE PERSONALLY EXAMiNEDAND AM FAMILIAR WITH THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED HEREIN
AND BASED ON MY JUDGEMENT OR my INQUrRY OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS IMMEDIATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING THE INFORMATION: I
BELIEVE THE SURNUTTED INFORMATION IS TRUE, ACCURATT AND COMPLETE. 1 AM AWARE MTTHERE ARE SIGNIFICANT PV NAJ_T1ES FOR
SUBMITTING FALSE E4FORAIATIO. i INCLUDING THE POSS1811 ITY OF FINE AND IMPRISONMENT SEE 18 USC § 340I AhT 33 USC § 1319- {PE!4tLTIES
UNDER TLIESESTATVES MAY INCL UDE FINES UP TO "0,000.00 ANDIOIf AIAXIAIVM lkfPRISON,SIrN7 OF DETWEENSIX Af01V77YS AND FIVE YE" S)
NAMEfrITEE OF PERSONWITII SIGNATORTYAUTHORITY (SEE INSTRUCTIONS) DATE: MONTH DAY YEAR
SIGNATURE OF PERSON WITH SIGNATORY AUTHORITY
PHONE NUMBER OF PERSON WITH SIGNATORY AUTHORITY
MALL YOUR DMR 0 Ma0V77NSTRUCTTONSPAGE) TO.
DEPARTMENT OFEC'OLOGY, WATER OUALLTYPROGRAM— CONSTBUCTION STORMWATER, P.O BOX 47696, 01 YMPLr, WA 98504-7696
Revised Oct 2006 Page 1
PERMIT NUMBER WAR-0095'76
DAILY TURBIDITY/TRANSPARENCY SAMPLING LOG
Note: Daily sampling is triggered by turbidity sampling results over 250 NIU's, or- transparency results less
than 6 cm.
.HAIL YOUR DMR (WITHOUT INSTRUCTIONS PAGE) TO.
DEPARDIENT OFE'C'OLOGY, WATER QUALITYPROGRAM-CONSTRUCTION STORjVWATER, P.0 BOX 47696, OLYMMA, WA 98504-7696
INSIRUCTIONS AND FREQUENILY ASKED QUESIIONS FOR COMPLETING THE DMR FORM
PROJECT INFORMATI.ON
1 How can I update contact information and/or mailing addresses? You can update any project information by submitting
a Notice of Intent (NOI) Application Form and checking the box in the upper right hand corner next to "Change/Update
Permit Information". Complete only the boxes that ate being updated and submit the signed form to the same address as
the DMR
MONITORING DOCUMENTATION
1 How often do I sample? Once you disturb the soil, you must conduct sampling at least once every calendar week when
stormwater• (or authorized non-stormwater) flows off of the site
2.. Where do I sample? You must take samples from all discharge points where stormwater (or authorized non-stormwater
such as de -watering water) flows off -site ,
3. When stormwater leaves my site from more than one location what da Ineed to do?
a. Use a separate DMR sheet for each location whet a stormwater is discharged from the site.
b Enter- a unique name or description of the monitoring location (for example: Pond 1; or West Ditch). You must use
the same monitoring location name each month.
c Identify all sampling point(s) on the map in your Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) You must also
clearly mark each sample point in the field with a flag, tape, stake or other- visible marker..
4. _What if don't have a discha a off site for an entire week? If there was no discharge during a calendar week, you
need not take a sample Mark an X in the "No Discharge" column for that week on the DMR form Ifthere was no
discharge during a calendar month, mark the "No Discharge" box at the bottom of the table.
5 If it rains at 3 AM on my site do I have to et up and sample at that hour? You need not sample outside of normal
working hours or during unsafe conditions If you are unable to sample during a monitoring period, you must include a
brief explanation in the "Comment/Explanation" box ofthe DMR
6. What kind of'stormwater turbidity/transparency sampling do I have to dp? If construction activity disturbs 5 acres or
more, the permit requires you to conduct turbidity sampling, using a turbidity meter.. If construction activity disturbs
greater than or equal to I acre, but less than 5 acres, you may use either a transparency tube or- a turbidity meter You must
enter turbidity or transparency values collected ea& week on the DMR.
1 What if'my turbidity result is nater than 250 NTU or my twsparency is less than 6 ce 'meters (cm)? If•any discharge
is greaten than 250 NTU or less than 6 centimeters (cm) transparency, you must begin daily sampling You must also
record the values in the attached sampling log (on page 2). Wr ite the date, sampling result (value), and unit (NIU or cm)
Continue to sample daily until:
a .Turbidity is 25 NTU (or lower); or
b Iranspar•ency is 31 cm (or greater); or
c. the CESCL has determined compliance with the water- quality standard for turbidity:
1 No more than 5 NTU over background turbidity, if•background is less than 50 NIU, or•
2. No more than 10% over- background turbidity, if background is 50 NTU or greater; or'
d the discharge stops or is eliminated
S. Wlren do I have to sam le for pH? If construction activity will result in the disturbance of I acre or more, and involves
significant concrete work or the use o€engineered soils, and stormwater from the affected area drains to surface waters of
the state or to a storm sewer system, the Permittee must conductpHmonitoring:
a Definitions:
o ,Significant Concrete Work means greater than 1,000 cubic yards poured or recycled concrete.
o For poured concrete, the 1,000 cubic yard threshold is met if a single or- multiple concrete pours on
the site results in greater• than 1,000 cubic yards of concrete truing at the same time. Typical cuffing
time is less than 30 days. If individual concrete pours smaller than 1,000 cubic yards occur more
than 30 days apart, pH sampling is not required unless required by Ecology order
o For recycled concrete, the 1,000 cubic yard threshold is met if'greater than 1,000 cubic yards of
concrete is recycled or crushed on -site
o Engineeted Soils means the use of soil amendments including, but not limited to, Portland cement treated
base (CTB), cement kiln dust (CKD), or fly ash to achieve certain desk able soil characteristics
b. For significant concrete work, pH monitoring begins when the concrete is first exposed to precipitation and continues
weekly until stormwater pH is 8.5 or less prior to discharge.
c For sites with engineered soils, the pH monitoring period commences when the soil amendments are first exposed to
precipitation and continues until the area of engineered soils is fully stabilized
d.. During the pli monitoring period, the Permittee must obtain a representative sample of'stormwater and conduct pH
analysis at least once per week.
e The Permittee must monitor pH in the sediment trap/pond(s) or other- Iocations prior to discharge from the site.
f:. The benchmark value for pH is 8 5 standard units.. Any time sampling indicates that pH is 8 5 or greater, the
Permittee must:
1. Prevent the high pH water (8.5 or above) from entering the storm sewer systems or- surface waters; and
Z. If necessary, adjust or neutralize the high pH.water using an appropriate treatment BMP such as carbon dioxide
(CO2) sparging or dry ice The permittee must obtain written approval from Ecology prioi to using any form of
chemical treatment other than CO2 sparging or dry ice .Information on CO2 sparging / dry ice BMP can be found
on Ecology's web site at: www.ecy.wa.govinrograms/wglstormwater.
g. The Permittee shall perform pH analysis on -site with a calibrated pH meter-, pH test kit, or wide range pH indicator
paper. The Permittee must record pH monitoring results in the site log book
9.. What do the treatment BMP letter codes on the form mean? For any discharge, report the type oftreatment Best
Management Practice(s) (BMPs) applied to the stormwater• (or non-stormwater) prior to discharge from the site. Use the
letter code (e.g., P for- Pond) that corresponds to the type of BMP used for the specific discharge BMP codes are listed on
the DMR. If'multiple treatment BMPs are used, list the letter code for each type of BMP..
9. What iff haven't started clearing or grading my site? If you have not began initial soil distwbing activity yet, mark an
X in the applicable box Indicate estimated construction start date, and continue to submit the DMR each month.
10 Who should sign the report?
A This report must be signed as follows:
1, Corporations, by a responsible corporate officer ofat least the level of'vice president of a cotpotation or a duly
authorized representative;
2 Paitnersh ips, by a general partner of a partnership or a duly, authorized representative;
3 Sole proprietorships, by the proprietor or a duly authorized representative; or
4. Municipal, state, or other- public facility, by either a principal* executive officer, ranking elected official or a duly
authorized representative
A person is a duly authorized representative only if`.
1, The authorization is made in writing by a person described above and submitted to the Ecology.
2. The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having responsibility for- the overall operati6n of the
regulated facility or having overall responsibility for environmental matters
Changes to authorization:
If an authorization is no longet accurate, submit a new authorization to Ecology prior to (or together with) any
reports, information, or applications to be signed by an authorized representative
ADDITIONAL SAMPLING
1 What if I take additional samples or have more information to submit than will fit on the provided forms? You can
submit any additional information on separate sheets of paper. You may also attach lab sheets, if you use a lab fox analysis
Please sign, date, and document the site information on those sheets so that they can be included in your- file.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
1 Mail the DMR to: Department of Ecology, Water Quality Program- Construction Stormwater, P.O. Box 47696, Olympia, WA 985044696
2 Who can I call for assistance? If you have questions or concerns, please contact Ecology's Water Quality Reception
Desk at (360) 407-6600 Please have your- site name, location, and permit number available when calling.
F or, more information, additional forms and/or additional copies of the permit; please visit our web site:
http://wvvw. egy.wa.goylprogmms/wq/stormwater/construction
WAR-009576
Barkley Apartments Issuance Date: November 16, 2005
27822 Pacific Hwy S Effective Date: December 16, 2005
Federal Way King County Expiration Date: December 16, 2010
CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER GENERAL PERMIT
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and State Waste
Discharge General Permit for- Stormwater Discharges Associated With
Construction Activity
State of Washington
Department of Ecology
Olympia, Washington 98504-7600
In compliance with the provisions of
The State of Washington Water Pollution Control Law
Chapter 90.48 Revised Code of Washington
and
The Federal Water Pollution ContrroI Act
(The Clean Water Act)
Title 33 United States Code, Section 1251 et seq.,
Until this permit expires, is modified or revoked, Permittees that have properly obtained
covexage under this general permit are authorized to discharge in accordance with the special and
general conditions which follow.
Rs Water Quality Program
Washington State Department of'Ecology
CIT
Federal Way
May 10, 2007
Mr. Salone Habibuddin
Farrell -McKenna Construction, LLC
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, WA 98148
CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
RE; Permit No. 07-102052-00-MF; BARKLEY RIDGE APARTMENTS
*no site address*
Dear Mr. Habibuddin,
The Public Works Department has had to suspend our review of the above referenced project
for the following reason:
While the City is interested in emerging technologies and low impact development, it is
felt that absent any established City standards for its use, together with the substantial
extents to which it is proposed throughout the site, pervious concrete is not acceptable
for this project. Limited application of pervious concrete (i.e., for sidewalks and
pedestrian pathways) will be allowed.
Because the expected use of pervious concrete had eliminated and/or reduced the need for
additional stormwater facilities, it was felt that further review of the project would not be
prudent due to the expected design revisions required to bring those stormwater facilities (flow
control, conveyance, and water quality) into compliance with current City design requirements.
Please feel free to contact me at (253) 835-2734 if you should have any questions.
Sincerely,
Kevin Peterson
Engineering Plans Reviewer
KP:cb
cc: William Appleton, P.E., Development Services Manager
Deb Barker, Senior Planner
Paul Heller, Sound Engineering, Inc., 1102 Commerce St., Ste 300, Tacoma, WA 98402
Project File / KP
Day File
L:\CSDC\DOCS\SAVE\13075031026. DOC
April 13, 2007
ES-0134.01
Farrell -McKenna Construction, LLC
17786 Des Moines Memorial Drive
Burien, Washington 98148
Attention: Mr. Greg McKenna
Subject: Infiltration Evaluation
Pervious Concrete Pavement
Barkley Apartments
27822 Pacific Highway South
Federal Way, Washington
Reference: Earth Solutions NW
Geotechnical Engineering Study
ES-0134, dated June 29, 2007
Dear Mr. McKenna:
Earth
Solutions
NWLLC
Earth Solutions NW LLC
• Geotechnical Engineering
• Construction Monitoring
• Environmental Sciences
As requested, Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) has prepared this letter summarizing our
infiltration evaluation for the subject project. A representative of ESNW was on -site on March 23,
2007 to observe and log a total of four test pits excavated within the pavement areas using a
backhoe and operator supplied by the client, conducting three EPA falling head infiltration tests and
performing textural analyses of representative soil samples. ESNW previously prepared the
referenced geotechnical engineering study for the subject project.
The following documents or resources were reviewed as part of this infiltration evaluation:
■ Civil Drawing Sheets C1.0, C5.0 and C8.0, prepared by Sound Engineering, Inc., undated;
• Geotechnical Engineering Study for the Proposed Apartment Complex Crest View ll, 27900
Pacific Highway South, Federal Way, WA, dated June 29, 2005;
• City of Federal Way Municipal Code;
• Composite geologic map of King County, Booth, D.B., 2006;
• Natural Approaches to Stormwater Management, Pervious Concrete, Puget Sound Action
Team (PSAT) Low Impact Development (LID) online publication resource database;
• King County Soil Conservation Survey (SCS), and;
• 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), Chapter 5.4.
2881 152nd Avenue NE 0 Redmond, WA 98052 • (425) 284-3300 9 FAX (425) 284-2855 • Toll Free (866) 336-8710
Barkley Apartments
April 13, 2007
Project Description
ES-0134.01
Page 2
The subject site is located on the east side of Pacific Highway South in Federal Way, Washington,
and adjoins the Crest View Apartments to the south and west. We understand development plans
include construction of a series of two to three-story apartment buildings, paved parking areas and
associated improvements. The site is relatively level with less than ten feet of total elevation
change across the development envelope.
We understand as part of the stormwater management plan, the new parking areas will consist of
pervious concrete pavement which will cover an aggregate bed. This system will be designed in
general accordance with the referenced PSAT pervious concrete LID solution. We understand that
the proposed design will reduce concentrated or point source discharge of stormwater and will take
advantage of the otherwise impervious surfaces associated with the drive lanes to pretreat and
reduce runoff that may ultimately reach the stormwater detention system. By using pervious
concrete pavement, the goal of the proposed stormwater management approach is to reduce
changes to the existing or pre -development runoff and groundwater regimes.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface
The subject site is located on the east side of Pacific Highway South in Federal Way, Washington,
with the Crest View Apartments adjoining the site on the south and west as shown on the Vicinity
Map, Plate 1. The subject site is irregular in shape with a gross area of approximately 11.6 acres
and is largely undeveloped and is depicted on Plate 2 of this letter. Based on our observations
during our fieldwork, the site has likely been graded in the past. Grading appears to have been
relatively minimal, with approximately two to three feet of fill placed at various, isolated locations of
the site and a level, grass covered play field surrounded by slightly undulating topography and
forested areas.
Subsurface
We observed and logged a total of four test pits within the permeable concrete pavement areas of
the site and have attached the soil logs to this letter for reference. Please refer to the soil logs
attached to this letter for a more detailed description of soil and groundwater conditions
encountered during our fieldwork.
The test locations revealed surficial deposits of loose soils consisting of medium dense to dense
silty sand with gravel (Unified Soil Classification SM). Underlying the shallow layer of topsoil and
loose weathered soils we encountered medium dense silty sand and silty sand with gravel (SM)
deposits. Interbedded deposits of medium dense sandy silt with gravel and/or silt with sand and
gravel (ML) were encountered at test locations TP-3 and TP-4. Exploration depths were generally
terminated between eight and ten feet below existing grades.
Earth Solutions NK LLC
Barkley Apartments
April 13, 2007
ES-0134.01
Page 3
The geologic map of the area identifies glacially consolidated soil deposits throughout the site and
surrounding areas. The pertinent geologic unit located across the subject site is glacial till (Qvt),
and is described in the referenced geologic map as compact.
The King County Soil Conservation Survey indicates the site is underlain by Alderwood Series
gravelly sandy loam (AgC) soils. The Alderwood series soils are characterized by a matrix of non -
sorted silt, sand and gravel in a compact or dense condition at depth. The Alderwood Series soils
exhibit slow to medium runoff and present a moderate erosion hazard.
The soil conditions observed at our test sites generally correlate with the geologic map and soil
survey designations.
Groundwater
Very light perched groundwater was encountered at test site TP-4 at approximately two feet below
grade at the time of our fieldwork (March 23, 2007). The perched groundwater observed at our test
site TP-4 appears to be associated with the adjacent Crestview apartment complex and in our
opinion the proposed development will likely mitigate the seepage, resulting in little to no
interference with the proposed pervious concrete pavement infiltration characteristics.
Groundwater seepage rates and elevations fluctuate depending on many factors, including
precipitation duration and intensity, the time of year, and soil conditions. In general, groundwater
flow rates are higher during the wetter, winter months.
PRELIMINARY INFILTRATION EVALUATION
We understand the City of Federal Way has adopted the 2005 King County Surface Water Design
Manual (KCSWDM) for stormwater management design (Federal Way Municipal Code, Chapter 21-
9). Per Section 5.4.1, falling head infiltration testing conducted in accordance with the 1980 EPA
test method is required to determine design infiltration rates.
No formal guidelines were available in the current City of Federal Way municipal code for site
infiltration characterization when using pervious pavement. Our infiltration evaluation consisted of
field infiltration testing and textural analyses of representative soils to assist in characterizing the
soils to provide appropriate design infiltration rates conducted in accordance with the 2005 King
County Surface Water Design Manual, Section 5.4. As this test method is generally accepted for
site characterization, in our opinion it is an appropriate method for this project.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Barkley Apartments
April 13, 2007
Infiltration Testing
ES-0134.01
Page 4
We conducted three infiltration tests at a depth ranging from one and one-half to three feet below
existing grades, within the native soil horizon at test sites TP-1 through TP-3 in accordance with
the 2005 King County Surface Water Design Manual, section 5.4. We measured infiltration rates
of 4, 2.7, and 3.3 inches per hour for test sites TP-1, TP-2, and TP-3 respectively. This yields an
average infiltration rate of 3.3 inches per hour. For design infiltration rates, the King County
Surface Water Design Manual provides an equation that accounts for the inherent deficiencies of
various design parameters and testing factors, with a maximum allowed infiltration rate of 20
inches per hour. The equation used is provided below:
I design = Imeasured x Ftesting x Fplugging x Fgeometry
With the following values used:
Imeasured = 3.3 (inches per hour average)
Ftesting = 0.3 (EPA method)
Fplugging = 0.7 (sand)
We understand the pervious pavement infiltration system is being developed. Therefore, our
design infiltration rate allows for the geometric reduction factor to be input by the designer based
on the site restrictions and their professional judgment. In our opinion a design infiltration rate of
0.7 inches per hour should be used. This rate includes the terms Ftesting and Fpl„ gging as listed
above
Based on the results of our textural analyses, the site soils are relatively consistent, and in our
opinion, this infiltration rate is representative of the overall site drainage characteristics. Although,
infiltration characteristics of the glacial deposits are relatively poor, some infiltration in these soils,
as described above, can be achieved. In this respect, previous pavement will provide some benefit
to the overall stormwater management at the site.
Textural Analyses
Textural analyses were performed on representative soil samples collected from the test sites at
variable depths. The textural classifications were performed in accordance with the USDA sieve
method. This classification differs from the USCS classification method in that the sand fraction of
the sample is based on the minus #10 sieve fraction as opposed to the minus #4 sieve fraction used
for USCS classification. Based on the results of our laboratory analyses, the site soils consist of
gravelly sandy loam and gravelly loam based on the USDA textural classification scheme.
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
Barkley Apartments
April 13, 2007
Infiltration Recommendations
ES-0134.01
Page 5
Based on the results of our infiltration testing and textural analyses, an infiltration rate of 0.7 inches
per hour can be used for design. A representative of ESNW should observe the pervious pavement
subgrade and final infiltration elevations to confirm soil conditions are as anticipated. Modifications
to the infiltration design may be necessary depending on the soil conditions exposed during
construction.
LIMITATIONS
The recommendations and conclusions provided in this infiltration evaluation are professional
opinions consistent with the level of care and skill that is typical of other members in the profession
currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. A warranty is not expressed or implied.
Variations in the soil and groundwater conditions observed at the test sites may exist, and may not
become evident until construction. ESNW should reevaluate the conclusions in this infiltration
evaluation if variations are encountered.
Additional Services
ESNW should have an opportunity to review the final design with respect to the geotechnical
recommendations provided in this evaluation.
We trust this letter meets your current needs. If you have any questions or require additional
information, please call.
Sincerely,
EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC
M1 Kk�
Michael W. Mc o an, L.G.
Staff Geologist
C11 A_
Raymond A. Coglas, P.E.
Principal
Attachments: Plate 1 — Vicinity Map
Plate 2 — Test Pit Location Map
Test Pit Logs
q 1[3/07
Earth Solutions NW, LLC
-W Sr
57
S ;51ST P
q�?A'Rr
rn
A: �- 1� . .
ST Q
AMD ST Q- :z - ...2?
ST S ztf FS
-
IIjjI SALTWATER S 253RD�S'T n".j"
STATE S�2.r'=[ST zsap [-!L-V
ESailoha
aw-�w S
A PARK 5 254TH ST 253RO PL -5 gs
I 254TH PL 3 Sr
L
S 257TH Z:- S 25611 z5 TH P, S I-
256TH k
ST 257TH pL� A 257TH ST ST AFT r
- - nevi FAM P,
S 258TH9 e� * - -Z
'57-1 P
-nMI PAN I CT
tpi ST, ST zmu
Si S i!
P�
P
Iff j,
dni 259TV Srsun
IL , 6gtn V. PAW A
REI TH
7 4.� RME
U.j 14 q 0 JI S 2 9TH F
Al P. S 26ISr PL 2500
S
Of z
1 111. PL I 262W1, -1�1 ST
j -PL C-> ---
85
263RD M
S 261ST 00
S S-� S 263RD PCZ
z )" PL
S
df
S 264-M S' ti 28 S ?64Ttr 0 S 263M- PL
ST it I -
T S 265TH >: MW'ET
PARK 7�FS
HMPT014
t
00 WY
CU Z7
e,
ST GLENN 12y
$ 2tPI
PARK LPN "a
ST
r IDWE
zz S, MIN 57 %i NOW ly
270TH 'A-
-z6m;�
�T
S MET ST AM
5 VMD -L,: 272ND S_'
PL'
-
sr PARK d S
S, 226TP --kRIDE NO , 4
TZ S_4 i f ST
snumv P3 )I Pt
STAR
A \0
4 LAKE S' .. -61—
r
S 277rtf 'PC
Fr
277TH PL
,III !A "76rj, Vfin S
4 Pt
PL I 2i7T11
LAKE N sj
�m' " -� -�T
1279SI" Pt < S 279TH ST "��T
18SMI IT 'C5
;'
S
280TH
EDOND01 '113
1P v�t'
1- "'
W, "ho
S -WE-N-D ST
4TH T BING~ 5.
TR— 4--K S 284TIl LN S
S 284TH AL ri
PL
M15,
< PL S 285TH
it -§T S 286T)i 111
5� 287TH! PL Sl THWS WFfiTF9M
4- IT ' .
Sf PAIK & t;
C I& 287T" 'ST Z!
115
-W'.' P'L
ST 1 4.
S s
sy:.' XU - I . - - :."*.A
2 ram.
5 .1, A : IT
jSr Si -S —101 ' I - I
T ST 9 '7015
Pt 4
nisIr s.T A A4
bAff
NORTH
Reference:
King County
Map 715 Vicinity Map
By Thomas Brothers Maps Barkley Apartments
Dated 2007 Federal Way, Washington
NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ESNW cannot be Drwn. GLS Date 04/11/2007 Proj. No. 0134.01
responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information
resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Checked MWM Date April 2007 Plate 1
I
E
Bldg. A
F1 Bldg. K I Bfdg. L
1�
I
I
I I.
I
1
I Crestview Phase I
(Existing)
I
r I
I
I
I
[Bldg. B Bldg. C EBldg. DBldgE
r
TP-4
I
I Rec. BI g.
I
I
� g1s
I� B►a9. N
I
TP-2
Bldg. M
1
Bldg. G
I
iTP-3 t
-i_ I
P I
I
gld9• � I
I
I
— +sting Wet nJArea y y
—.� v —I 1
c
c o
M
NORTH c (D N
o cU
Ao� U CU
a�
_J
�D
Me M
Co
N
0 50 100 200 ILL
1 "=100' Scale in Feet
LEGEND
TP-1—i—Approximate Location of e
ESNW Test Pit, Proj. No. R'r
ES-0134.01, March 2007
1 _
Subject Site
Proposed Building
Existing Building
—"i Wetland Area -
x4, (Delineated by Others)
x
NOTE: The graphics shown on this plate are not intended for design Drwn. By
GLS
purposes or precise scale measurements, but only to illustrate the
approximate test locations relative to the approximate locations of Checked By
existing and/or proposed site features. The information illustrated MWM
is largely based on data provided by the client at the time of our Date
study. ESNW cannot be responsible for subsequent design changes
or interpretation of the data by others. 4/12/2007
NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ESNW cannot be 0134.Proj. No.
responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information
01
resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. Plate
2
Earth Solutions NWLLC
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
SYMBOLS
TYPICAL
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GRAPH
LETTER
DESCRIPTIONS
CLEAN
GW
WELL -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -
SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO
GRAVEL
GRAVELS
6,
41 0,45
FINES
AND
, 0` ° a
POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS,
GRAVELLY
SOILS
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
a pQn d
GP
GRAVEL- SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE
p ❑ n Q
OR NO FINES
COARSE
°
°
�°
°
GRAINED
GRAVELS WITH
o
GM
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND -
SOILS
MORE THAN 50%
FINES
o
SILT MIXTURES
OF COARSE
o
FRACTION
RETAINED ON NO.
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
�+C
CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
AMOUNT OF FINES)
CLAY MIXTURES
CLEAN SANDS
SW
WELL -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY
MORE THAN 50%
SAND
SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
OF MATERIAL IS
AND
SP
POORLY -GRADED SANDS,
GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO
LARGER THAN
NO. 200 SIEVE
SANDY
SOILS
SIZE
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
FINES
SANDS WITH
SM
SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILT
MORE THAN 50%
FINES
MIXTURES
OF COARSE
FRACTION
PASSING ON NO.
4 SIEVE
(APPRECIABLE
SC
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY
AMOUNT OF FINES)
MIXTURES
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE
ML
SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR
CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY
SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
SILTS
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO
FINE
AND LIQUID LIMIT
`►L
MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY
GRAINED
CLAYS LESS THAN 50
S, SILTY
CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS
SOILS
_
OL
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC
— —
SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
MORE THAN 50%
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
OF MATERIAL IS
MH
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR
SMALLER THAN
SILTY SOILS
NO. 200 SIEVE
SIZE
SILTS
AND LIQUID LIMIT
CH
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH
GREATER THAN 50
PLASTICITY
CLAYS
OH
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
PT
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH
HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
�„1 i„
DUAL SYMBOLS are used to indicate borderline soil classifications.
The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature
of the material presented in the attached logs.
Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-1
2881 152nd Avenue N.E.
PAGE 1 OF 1
inEarth
- Redmond, Washington 98052
Telephone: 425-284-3300
Fax: 425-284-2855
CLIENT Farrell - McKenna Construction PROJECT NAME Barkley Apartments
PROJECT NUMBER 0134.01 PROJECT LOCATION Federal Way, Washington
DATE STARTED 3/23/07 COMPLETED 3/23/07 GROUND ELEVATION 350 ft TEST PIT SIZE
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Farrell - McKenna Construction GROUND WATER LEVELS:
EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION —
LOGGED BY MWM CHECKED BY MWM AT END OF EXCAVATION
NOTES Depth of Topsoil & Sod 4": grass AFTER EXCAVATION —
W
_
}W
t-W
U
=V,
w
W
TESTS
0-0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
z
a
c�
0
Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose to medium dense, moist to wet
SM
MC = 21.90%
Fines = 38.60%
:::..
z 5 [USDA Classification: gravelly LOAM] 347.5
Test pit terminated at 2.5 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during
excavation.
Bottom of test pit at 2.5 feet.
Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-2
2881 152nd Avenue N.E.
PAGE 1 OF 1
Redmond, Washington 98052
Telephone: 425-284-3300
Fax: 425-284-2855
CLIENT Farrell - McKenna Construction PROJECT NAME Barkley Apartments
PROJECT NUMBER 0134.01 PROJECT LOCATION Federal Way, Washington
DATE STARTED 3/23/07 COMPLETED 3/23/07 GROUND ELEVATION 350 ft TEST PIT SIZE
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Farrell - McKenna Construction GROUND WATER LEVELS:
EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION ---
LOGGED BY MWM CHECKED BY MWM AT END OF EXCAVATION —
NOTES Depth of Topsoil & Sod 4": grass AFTER EXCAVATION —
w
_
� W
aS
U
n~ :K
W g
TESTS
V
a 0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
0
a=
z
c�
0
Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose to medium dense, moist
MC = 31.50%
MC = 17.00%
Fines = 47.90%
[USDA Classification: gravelly LOAM]
5
SM
[USDA Classification: olive brown very gravelly sandy LOAM]
10
MC = 7.50%
10.0 340.0
Test pit terminated at 10.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered
Fines = 24.50%
during excavation.
Bottom of test pit at 10.0 feet.
Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-3
2881152nd Avenue N.E. PAGE 1 OF 1
Redmond, Washington 98052
Telephone: 425-284-3300
Fax: 425-284-2855
CLIENT Farrell - McKenna Construction PROJECT NAME Barkley Apartments
PROJECT NUMBER D134.01 PROJECT LOCATION Federal Way, Washington
DATE STARTED 3/23/07 COMPLETED 3/23/07 GROUND ELEVATION 350 ft TEST PIT SIZE
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Farrell - McKenna Construction GROUND WATER LEVELS:
EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION --
LOGGED BY MWM CHECKED BY MWM AT END OF EXCAVATION
NOTES Depth of Topsoil & Sod 3": vegetation and forest duff AFTER EXCAVATION
w
w
w
� g
TESTS
C
O
O
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
M Z
(7
U)
0
Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose to medium dense, moist
-
SM
:-
MC = 25.50%
20 348 Q
Light brown SILT with sand, medium dense, moist
MC = 23.60%
Fines = 50.20%
ML
45 [USDA Classification: gravelly LOAM] 345.5
Gray silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist
5
SM
[USDA Classification: gravelly LOAM]
MC = 11.00%
. '::
9•0 341.0
Test pit terminated at 9.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during
Fines = 39.80%
excavation.
Bottom of test pit at 9.0 feet.
Earth Solutions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-4
2881 152nd Avenue N.E.
PAGE 1 OF 1
r Redmond, Washington 98052
Telephone: 425-284-3300
Fax: 425-284-2855
CLIENT Farrell - McKenna Construction PROJECT NAME Barkley Apartments
PROJECT NUMBER 0134.01 PROJECT LOCATION Federal Way, Washington
DATE STARTED 3/23/07 COMPLETED 3/23/07 GROUND ELEVATION 350 ft TEST PIT SIZE
EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Farrell - McKenna Construction GROUND WATER LEVELS:
EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION --
LOGGED BY MWM CHECKED BY MWM AT END OF EXCAVATION --
NOTES Depth of Topsoil & Sod 4": grass landscaping AFTER EXCAVATION
w
}
U
a-
LOU,
g
TESTS
J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
z
c�
0
Brown silty SAND wish gravel, medium dense, moist
MC = 27.50%
MC = 14.40%
-very light perched groundwater at 2'
Fines = 25.70%
SM
[USDA Classification: gravelly sandy LOAM]
5
5.0 345.0
Gray silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist
SM
MC = 10.50%
'.
B'S 341.5
Test pit terminated at 8.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered
at 2.0 feet during excavation.
i
i
i
i
Bottom of test pit at 8.5 feet.
Ills
1
l
IN
111
immil
15?
HIM
RIME
lismil
OEM�1111111111
MINE
illillooll
III
HIRE
millilil§Nli
MEN!
INEII
0111111
11
1!
lllm
1111
IN
1P1Il11M1II1U
MEN!
lmmlli!lllmmllllhillLl
11111111
M01311
111
liiiiiism
lismi1iiiiismililnin
IN
liiiiismillilliniiiiiiismiiiiiiilI
I
MENIIIMUNROE
9111§E
1011111111111
Ills
llillummillillis
Ills
I
NINE
11111111m111
HIM
�is
U
M11111111111110
lismillillim
11111111
IN
llmmlkpllllmm
I
11111
so
UNION
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
coarse
fine
coarse
medium
fine