2022-04-20 Planning Commission Agenda Packet - Canceled (lack of quorum)Commissioners City Staff
Lawson Bronson, Chair Wayne Carlson, Vice-Chair Keith Niven, Planning Manager
Tim O’Neil Hope Elder Kari Cimmer, Admin & Permit Center Supervisor
Diana Noble-Gulliford Tom Medhurst 253-835-2629
Jae So Anna Patrick, Alternate www.cityoffederalway.com
Vickie Chynoweth, Alternate Vacant, Alternate
K:\01 - Document Review\Planning\Planning Commission Documents\2022 04 April 20\Agenda 04-20-2022.docx
City of Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 20, 2022
6:30 p.m. City Hall / Hybrid
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. Planning Commission Meeting of March 16, 2022
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
5. COMMISSION BUSINESS
a. Review of Staff response memorandum
b. Review of policies for the Natural Environment Chapter of the Comprehensive
Plan
6. STAFF BUSINESS
a. Manager’s Report
7. NEXT MEETING
a. May 4, 2022, Regular Meeting
8. ADJOURNMENT
Notice: Pursuant to Governor Inslee’s Proclamation 20-28, the Mayor and City Council encourage you to use
one of the following ways to participate in the meeting remotely if you are unable to attend in person.
• Join here https://cityoffederalway.zoom.us/j/92039948345?pwd=b3RBOGdQeUw5ZEFQSi8rblhlZ0hRQT09;
• Zoom meeting code 920 3994 8345 and passcode 431768
• Call in and listen to the live meeting 888-788-0099 or 253-215-8782
• Public Comment may be submitted via email here, or sign up to provide live comments here
Page 1 of 30
Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 March 16, 2022
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 16, 2022
6:30 p.m. City Hall / Hybrid
MEETING MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Bronson called the meeting to order at 6:34p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Commissioners present: Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Hope Elder, Tim O’Neil, Tom Medhurst, Diana
Noble-Gulliford, Jae So, Anna Patrick, Eric Olson, and Vickie Chynoweth.
City Staff present: Planning Manager Keith Niven, City Attorney Kent van Alstyne, and Admin & Permit
Center Supervisor Kari Cimmer.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Medhurst moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Commissioner O’Neil seconded.
Wayne Carlson abstained. The motion to approved the minutes passed 6-0.
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
Helen Kubik is concerned with the proposed project on 1st Ave South at the former Bally’s location, the
RM-1800 zoning, and potential lack of greenspace. Committee Chair Bronson thanked Ms. Kubik for her
comment.
5. COMMISSION BUSINESS
Planning Manager Niven asked that per Committee Chair Bronson, all questions should be held until after
the presentation.
In response to Commissioner inquiries, Mr. Niven will provide the Commissioners with the referenced maps
at the next meeting.
Planning Manager Niven provided a list of staff proposed changes to the Natural Environment Chapter of
the Comprehensive Plan Goals which can be found in the staff memo to the Planning Commission dated
March 7, 2022. The discussion items can be found in the 3/16/22 Agenda Packet, pages 5 of 33 through 33
of 33. The following changes were proposed:
NEG4
Proposal to delete this section.
Updated proposal to insert with Maintain instead of Implement the wellhead protection program.
Page 2 of 30
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 March 16, 2022
NEG35
Proposal to change the verbiage of this goal from “City’s lakes and streams” to “city’s surface waters”.
Updated proposal to include “wetlands and other natural surface water features” to the goal.
NEG8
Proposed to add goal to “Maintain a minimum tree canopy of 35%”
Updated proposal to change the goal to include “Managing and protecting the City’s tree canopy to benefit
current and future residents, employees, and visitors” instead of a tree canopy percentage.
Mr. Niven provided an explanation about the process of how to make changes to the Comprehensive Plan
and city zoning and maps. If Commissioners want more “teeth” in the Comp Plan, the policy is the way to
work towards a change, which can be discussed at the next meeting.
Public Comment: Suzanne Vargo would like the City to add a watershed characterization assessment,
hydrological map layer. Would like City staff to look into the Hylebos plan and how to protect the wildlife
during development. She would like the City to keep from development during the rainy season, per the
Hylebos plan. Losing the old growth trees on the Weyerhaeuser property concerns her. No current
biohazard testing is happening on our water. Chair Bronson ended her public comment and asked her to put
her comments in writing and send them us.
6. MANAGER REPORT
Planning Manager Niven noted that May 18, 2022 we will be having a refresher course on the Planning
Commission Meetings, like Roberts’ Rules, Appearance of Fairness, etc. Commissioner Medford ask that
perhaps the hybrid meeting protocols could also be addressed.
Suggested for getting through the comp plan update, subcommittee(s) could be put together to move through
the process more quickly. Specifically, the visioning section. Chair Lawson and Planning Manager Niven
will be part of this process and are inviting others to join and help with this month-long process.
Mr. Niven asked who would like a hard copy of the minutes when we meet in person. The Commission
requested five hard copies.
Mr. Niven invited the Commissioners to the Open House for the Comp Plan update which will be held on
March 24 at 4:00 p.m. The event will be held at the Performing Arts and Events Center.
7. NEXT MEETING
Planning Manager Niven announced the next meeting of the Planning Commission will be held on April 20,
2022 in person at City Hall Council Chambers. The April 6, 2022 meeting is cancelled.
8. ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made to adjourn the meeting by Commissioner O’Neil. Commissioner Elder seconded.
The meeting adjourned at 8:07 p.m.
Page 3 of 30
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003-6325
253-835-7000
www.cityoffederalway.com
Jim Ferrell, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 13 April 2022
TO: Federal Way Planning Commission
FROM: Keith Niven, AICP, CEcD, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Natural Environment Chapter update
The planning commission received a briefing on the proposed amendments to the Natural Environment
Chapter on March 16, 2022. The discussion focused on proposed edits to the Chapter and the Goals. The
discussion for the April 20 meeting will focus on the Chapter Policies.
Prior to the initial Chapter review, Commissioner Noble-Gulliford raised a number of questions that were
not addressed. Please allow this memo to capture questions raised as well as revisions to the proposed Goals
based on Commission discussion. In addition, the critical area maps had not returned from GIS and were
not part of the packet materials. Those maps are attached to this memo and will be part of Chapter 8.
1. Is the Hylebos Initiative still alive and being considered?
This particular Hylebos Watershed Plan concluded in 2017. This initiative highlighted efforts that include:
• Conserve and restore high priority parcels for connectivity
• Promote sustainable development
• Implement GSI management
• Remove barriers to fish passage throughout the watershed
• Establish native plant communities and evergreen canopies on public and private land
• Identify and control invasive plants on public and private land using Integrated Pest Management
• Restore broad-scale sediment delivery and hydrologic processes
• Restore local-scale sediment delivery and hydrologic processes in high gradient streams
• Restore local-scale sediment delivery and hydrologic processes in moderate and low gradient streams
• Re-connect floodplains to creeks
• Reduce stormwater flows
• Restore habitat for an abundance and diversity of salmon prey
• Centralize a database for updated water quality data
• Restore vegetative riparian buffers
• Enforce compliance with point source pollution regulations
• Improve plasticity and resilience of natural systems.
The City’s current Surface Water Programs focus on requirements established by the NPDES permit issued
by Ecology, and elements of prior Hylebos planning efforts continue to be incorporated into this focus.
These elements include BMP enforcement requirements, conservation land acquisitions, stormwater
planning, illicit discharge detection and elimination, pollution source control, controlling runoff from
construction sites, public education and outreach/ public involvement efforts, operation and maintenance of
the City’s stormwater and Green Stormwater Infrastructure and invasive plant species, mapping of all
stormwater structures, and water and macroinvertebrate sampling.
Page 4 of 30
2. What is the current state of our forests and trees? Is there an assessment done on an annual basis?
I am unaware of any work currently being conducted by the City to assess our urban forests or trees.
3. What is the current state of our watersheds? Is there an assessment done on an annual basis?
The NPDES permit requires that the City of Federal Way complete a Stormwater Management Action Plan
(SMAP) by the end of 2023. The first step, which was submitted to WA-DOE on March 31, 2022, required
the completion of a “watershed inventory.” This inventory quantitatively considers social and ecological
parameters in all of the watersheds in the City. The next step is to prioritize the watersheds based on that
“watershed inventory”. This is a technical task that involves assigning point values to each parameter to rank
each watershed. Once each watershed has been scored, a complete SMAP for one prioritized watershed will
be developed. Based on the generic parameters, all indications point to a continued focus on the Hylebos.
Regarding the current state of the City’s watersheds: sampling data indicates that none of our watersheds
exceed Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) as assigned by the Department of Ecology. An annual series
of sampling and testing assessments performed by the Department of Ecology sets the basis for making this
determination. The City participates in the statewide sampling program called Stormwater Action Monitoring
(SAM). The City of Federal Way has also begun the process of developing a separate and extensive water
sampling program to complement the efforts of the SAM by monitoring all the watersheds within city limits,
and hopes to begin sampling in June 2022.
4. How is the City educating residents and property owners to understand the value of our forests and
watersheds?
All inspections (IDDE, Source Control, pre, and post-construction, etc.) are treated as educational
opportunities. Additionally, our Education and Outreach team focuses on this effort specifically, too. They
manage a number of programs to educate citizens, including Storming the Sound with Salmon, ECOSS
contract which provides high pollution generating probability businesses with IDDE and source control
education and spill clean-up kits in multiple languages, newsletters, and printed materials, Green Living
workshops, etc.
5. How is erosion assessed and controlled? i.e. Lakota Creek
In general, erosion is assessed through residential and commercial site inspections, and routine infrastructure
inspections, staff gauges, complaint investigation, etc. It is controlled by requiring residents and business
owners to implement BMPs (silt fences, waddles, catch basin pump-outs, etc.) on their sites.
FWRC Title 16 Surface Water Management
16.20.010 Manuals and addendum adopted.
The current version of the King County, Washington Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), the current
accompanying version of the Federal Way Addendum to the King County, Washington Surface Water Design
Manual, the King County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Manual, and the latest edition of the LID
Technical Guidance Manual for Puget Sound, as they exist on the effective date of the ordinance codified in
this chapter or as hereafter amended, are hereby adopted by this reference. They are referred to in this title
respectively as the KCSWDM, Federal Way Addendum, the KCSPPM and the LID Manual.
6. Where are the aquifer recharge areas in FW? Map please. Protected?
Maps provided. Protections are found in FWRC 19.145.490, 19.145.500, and 19.145.510.
7. How is the City protecting our wetlands and aquifers from the pollution and human waste from homeless
encampments?
The City handles littering, dumping and human waste issues as a Civil Enforcement of Code issue and is
handled by the City’s Code Compliance Officers. The following code sections would be applicable:
Page 5 of 30
1.15.140 Findings.
It is found that there exist, in the city of Federal Way, dwellings and other buildings, structures, and premises
which are unfit for human habitation and which are unfit for other uses due to dilapidation, disrepair,
structural defects, defects increasing the hazards of fire, accidents, or other calamities, inadequate drainage,
overcrowding, or due to other conditions which are detrimental to the health and welfare of the residents of
the city. Dangerous or unfit buildings or structures as defined by FWRC 1.15.170 and dangerous or unfit
premises as defined by FWRC 1.15.175 are declared to be public nuisances.
1.15.175 Dangerous or unfit premises.
Premises which have any of the following conditions shall be deemed dangerous or unfit:
(1) Premises that contain trash, garbage, junk, old wood, building materials, appliances, brush, tree limbs, or
other items that may attract rats or other vermin due to a food source or rodent harborage;
(2) Premises that have any number of unsecured vehicles, cars, trucks, bikes, farm equipment, construction
equipment, boats, trailers, snowmobiles, jet skis or other machinery or implements that are unused and
apparently inoperable that are an attractive nuisance and dangerous;
(3) Premises that are unsecured and unsafe due to conditions that pose a hazard or attractive nuisance such as
but not limited to sink holes; exposed underground vaults, pipes or wires; trenches; unstable slopes; or
hazardous materials;
(4) Premises that have dilapidated fences, sheds, carports or other such structures that pose a hazard or
attractive nuisance; or
(5) Developed premises that have over 50 percent of the area covered in blackberries or other noxious weeds.
RCW 9.66.010
Public nuisance.
A public nuisance is a crime against the order and economy of the state. Every place
(1) Wherein any fighting between people or animals or birds shall be conducted; or,
(2) Wherein any intoxicating liquors are kept for unlawful use, sale or distribution; or,
(3) Where vagrants resort; and
Every act unlawfully done and every omission to perform a duty, which act or omission
(1) Shall annoy, injure or endanger the safety, health, comfort, or repose of any considerable number of
persons; or,
(2) Shall offend public decency; or,
(3) Shall unlawfully interfere with, befoul, obstruct, or tend to obstruct, or render dangerous for passage, a
lake, navigable river, bay, stream, canal or basin, or a public park, square, street, alley, highway, or municipal
transit vehicle or station; or,
(4) Shall in any way render a considerable number of persons insecure in life or the use of property;
Shall be a public nuisance.
8. Please explain the term "Best Known Science" and how it applies to this topic as well as explaining if this
term's definition can change without any code changes.
Although “Best Known Science” is not a typically used term, “Best Available Science” is a defined term in
Title 19:
“Best available science” means current scientific information used in the process to
designate, protect, or restore critical areas, that is derived from a valid scientific process as
defined by WAC 365-195-900 through 365-195-925.
Page 6 of 30
Public Comment: The Commission should review the Watershed Characterization Report. Information
related to that comment is provided by the WA Department of Ecology and can be found here:
https://ecology.wa.gov/Water-Shorelines/Puget-Sound/Watershed-characterization-project
Conversation regarding proposed Goals:
Proposed:
NEG4 Implement a local wellhead protection program to ensure a safe source of drinking water and to
avoid the large financial impact of contaminated well
Updated proposal:
NEG4 Implement Maintain a local wellhead protection program to ensure a safe source of drinking
water and to avoid the large financial impact of contaminated well
Proposed:
NEG 35 Protect, restore, and enhance the City’s city’s lakes and streamssurface waters.
FWRC 16.05.190 “Surface water” means water originating from rainfall and other precipitation that
ultimately flows into drainage facilities, rivers, streams, springs, seeps, ponds, lakes, and wetlands as well as
shallow groundwater.
Updated proposal:
NEG 35 Protect, restore, and enhance the City’s city’s wetlands, lakes and streams and other natural
surface water features.
Proposed:
NEG 8 Maintain a minimum tree canopy of 35%.
Updated proposal:
NEG 8 Maintain a minimum tree canopy of 35%Manage and protect the City’s tree canopy as a City
asset for the benefit of the current and future residents, employees and visitors.
There was also a discussion that it may make sense for the Seismic Hazard information to be migrated to the
Climate & Resiliency Chapter. That decision will be made after that chapter is drafted.
Page 7 of 30
Page 8 of 30
Page 9 of 30
Page 10 of 30
Page 11 of 30
Page 12 of 30
Page 13 of 30
Page 14 of 30
EN-1
CHAPTER EIGHT – NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
8.0 INTRODUCTION
Federal Way, located along the coast of Puget Sound and part of the Green/Duwamish
River Watershed, is home to special, environmentally-sensitive wetlands, Hylebos,
Redondo, Lakota, and Joes Creeks, numerous lakes, and urban forests that provide
amenities for residents and key habitat corridors for wildlife. Federal Way is also part of an
urbanizing King County. Protecting and enhancing the urban ecosystem while the city
continues its growth requires coordinated efforts by the city, local businesses, and
residents. The city serves as the primary steward of the city’s natural environment and
assumes responsibility for the implementation of many federal and state environmental
regulations. Through regulations, programs, and incentives, the city encourages the
preservation, restoration, and improvement of the natural environment of Federal Way.
The Natural Environment Chapter provides goals and policies dedicated to maintaining a
healthy balance between the natural and built environments in the city and identifying the
city’s role in stewarding the natural environment. The city strives for sustainability in its
growth considering the environment, the economy of the city, and the people of Federal
Way. Over the next twenty years, the natural resources of the city must be protected and,
where possible, improved for the current and future residents of the city.
8.1 CRITICAL AREAS
Wetlands
There are several types of
wetlands in the city and each
plays a valuable role in the
local hydrological system.
The various types of
wetlands found in the city
include marshes, bogs,
ponds, forested, estuarine
and marine, and scrub-
shrub. By storing
floodwaters, wetlands
reduce flooding and erosion;
trap and absorb sediments;
and, improve water quality
by filtering pollutants.
Wetlands also discharge
water to aquifers and
streams which helps to
replenish groundwater and maintain base flows of streams. Wetlands are productive
biological systems providing diverse habitat for wildlife, and important storage capacity
for the hydrologic system.
Page 15 of 30
EN-2
Federal Way has several regionally significant wetland areas. The largest can be found in
and adjacent to the West Hylebos Park, Dash Point State Park, Dumas Bay, and throughout
Spring Valley. Other smaller wetlands also have been mapped in the city. The City has
completed a general inventory of wetlands within the City limits and the Potential
Annexation Areas (PAA). The inventory was used to help the City create policies and
regulations that reflect local and regional conditions and best practices.
Streams & Lakes
The City of Federal Way is
located within the
Green/Duwamish River
Watershed and the Hylebos
Creek, Lower Puget Sound,
Lower Green River, and Mill
Creek drainage basins. These
basins contain an integrated
system of lakes and streams
that provide a natural drainage
system for over 36 square
miles of southwest King
County and northeast Pierce
County.
Studies show that access to “blue space” (those
areas with water such as streams and lakes),
especially in urban areas, add to a sense of
wellbeing and health. Due to urbanization, this
natural system has been altered, and in many areas,
no longer provides many of its original functions or
habitats. The primary focus of the goals and
policies in this Chapter is to restore the historic
natural functions of the city’s lakes and streams, to
the extent practicable.
Critical Aquifer Recharge Area
Urban development involves replacement of some forests, grasslands, or wetlands with
impervious surfaces such as buildings, roads, and parking lots that do not allow rainwater
to pass directly through to the ground as it historically did. Federal Way is dependent on
groundwater as one source for municipal drinking water. If unimpeded by development,
water from rainfall, snowmelt, lakes, streams, and wetlands seeps into the ground and
collects in porous areas of rock, sand, and gravel called aquifers.
Aquifers hold varying amounts of groundwater that can be extracted or pumped for
municipal use. Groundwater pumped from Lakehaven Water and Sewer District (primary
water supplier in the city) wells originates from three aquifer systems that underlie the
city: the Redondo-Milton Channel Aquifer, the Intermediate Aquifer System (Mirror
Page 16 of 30
EN-3
Lake and Eastern Upland Aquifers), and the Deep Aquifer.
Protection of the aquifer is needed to keep pollutants, such as accidental spills or
intentional dumping, from reaching this resource. Typical activities associated with land
development, such as clearing and grading, affects the natural hydrologic cycle.
Historically, stormwater was managed in a way that conveyed it to natural water bodies
as expediently as possible. This type of management circumvents the land’s ability to
absorb and retain water and increases the possibility of contamination.
Consequently, the city has included policies, goals and regulations aimed at aquifer
protection, including restricting or prohibiting land uses or activities that could
potentially contaminate the aquifer recharge areas in the event of an accidental spill or
dumping.
Geologically Hazardous Areas
Geologically hazardous areas include steep slope hazards, landslide hazards, erosion
hazards, and seismic hazards (liquefaction-prone) areas.
Although engineering may offer some solutions to mitigating the environmental
constraints associated with geologic hazards, the most effective method of preserving
slope stability is the preservation of native vegetation and retention of forested conditions
within geologic hazard areas. Any alteration or development of areas with geological
limitations will require additional technical review of soils and slope stability.
In addition to steep slope, landslide and erosion hazards, western Washington is also
prone to seismic activity. Aside from potentially being impacted by the Seattle fault,
Federal Way is in the influence area of the Tacoma fault zone.
Also, western Washington is at risk due to plate tectonics. A special type of shallow
fault, called a subduction zone or ‘megathrust’, occurs where an oceanic plate moves
beneath a continental plate. The boundary between the two plates covers a large area and
can lock together. Like other faults, when enough stress builds up, the ‘megathrust’ will
Page 17 of 30
EN-4
rupture. What makes these faults ‘mega’ is that the amount of energy released is
hundreds to thousands of times more than almost any other type of fault. The ground
shaking from these earthquakes can last for several minutes. The 2011 Tohoku
earthquake in Japan occurred on this type of fault and released enough energy to slightly
change the Earth’s axis of rotation. Additionally, because the continent moves up and
over the ocean plate, large amounts of sea water are displaced and result in damaging
tsunamis. The Cascadia subduction zone just off the Washington coast is this kind of
fault and is one of the largest geologic hazards to our state.
Soil liquefaction could occur during an earthquake in certain areas – such as on non-
engineered fills, peat soils, and recent alluvial deposits. Catastrophic risks could
include ground openings and localized subsidence. Subsidence that occurs over a large
area can cause non-catastrophic problems such as foundation cracks, roadway failures,
and separation of utility pipes.
Frequently Flooded Areas
Flooding is caused by excess surface water runoff and is exacerbated when eroded soil
from cleared land or unstable slopes reduces a waterway’s natural capacity to carry water.
Flooding causes significant public safety problems, extensive property damage, and
habitat destruction. Due to the topography of Federal Way, the only portions of the city
are located along the Puget Sound shoreline and regulated by the Federal Way Shoreline
Master Program (SMP).
8.2 FISH & WILDLIFE HABITAT
Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas are necessary for both resident and seasonal
migratory animal species. Federal Way is home to many species including spawning
chinook and coho salmon, squirrels, rabbits, coyotes, foxes, skunks, deer, diving ducks,
western grebes, cormorants, coots, great blue heron, and Canada geese. The primary way
Page 18 of 30
EN-5
in which wildlife and habitat is sustained in urban environments is through preservation
and restoration of both site-specific and interconnected habitat corridors.
The open spaces that provide habitat for these species and others include:
Areas which endangered, threatened, sensitive, and candidate species have a
primary association;
Habitats and species with
local importance;
Kelp and eelgrass beds;
Herring, surf smelt, and sand
lance spawning areas;
Naturally occurring ponds
under 20 acres and their
submerged aquatic beds that
provide fish or wildlife
habitat;
Waters of the state; and,
Forested open spaces.
Significant habitat exists in wetland, riparian corridors, and on steep slopes that are
privately owned, but protected by development regulations. Linking public and private
habitat areas can provide food, shelter, and migration corridors for a healthy and
sustainable population of salmon, songbirds, and other species.
Urban landscaping, parks, and managed open spaces are valuable complements to natural
areas in terms of providing habitat for a wide variety of wildlife. The loss of natural
wildlife habitat to urban development can be partially offset by landscaping that includes
a variety of native plants, which could provide some habitat value.
The Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife has mapped sensitive habitat areas
in Federal Way (see map to the left). This
map can be viewed on the DFW website:
https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/
Chinook salmon are an integral part of our
regional identity. Federal Way is also a
member city of WRIA (Water Resource
Inventory Area) 9. The partners support the
implementation of the Salmon Habitat Plan.
The Salmon Habitat Plan lists science-based
projects, programs, and policies to protect
and restore aquatic ecosystem health and
salmon habitat in the Green/Duwamish and
Central Puget Sound Watershed. Plan implementation supports more than just salmon
recovery; it supports tribal treaty rights, community flood hazard reduction, water quality
improvement, open space protection, and outdoor recreation.
Page 19 of 30
EN-6
8.3 URBAN FORESTRY
Urban forests provide
valuable ecosystem
services including air
pollution removal, carbon
storage, oxygen production,
and runoff prevention.
Urban forests come in
many different shapes and
sizes and includes all of the
trees including those on
private and publicly-owned
properties. They include
trees in single-family yards,
urban parks, street trees,
gardens, stream corridors,
wetlands, and preserved open spaces.
Urban forests face many challenges including: difficult growing conditions; limited
resources for care; and, encroachments from development. The city benefits in
maintaining its urban tree canopy by:
Mitigating the heat island effect by reducing temperatures through shading and
evapotranspiration
Reducing impacts from stormwater by absorbing and filtering urban runoff.
Calming traffic and reducing driver speeds when properly incorporated along
roads and rights-of-way
Improving air quality by removing harmful pollutants, like particulate matter,
ozone, and smog, in certain contexts
Improving scenic quality and aesthetic appeal
Enhancing community cohesion by fostering social interaction, building
environmental consciousness, and establishing a shared sense of place
Sequestering carbon
Increasing residents’ connection to nature during resident engagement activities
such as tree plantings, which may promote other pro-environmental behavior
Increasing equity, as benefits from urban greening can be most impactful for
disadvantaged groups
According to a canopy assessment conducted by Washington Department of Natural
Resources, Federal Way has approximately 5,484 acres of canopy, or 38% of the city.
Map NE-1 illustrates canopy density across the city.
8.4 GOALS AND POLICIES
NEG 1 To preserve the City’s natural systems in order to protect public health, safety,
and welfare, and to maintain the integrity of the natural environment.Ensure
Page 20 of 30
EN-7
development activities, infrastructure investments, and municipal operations
maintain and enhance natural resources and habitats to the extent practicable
and feasible.
NEG2 Balance the protection of environmentally critical areas with the rights of
property owners.
NEG3 To pProtect and enhance aquifer recharge areas.
NEG4 Implement a local wellhead protection program to ensure a safe source of
drinking water and to avoid the large financial impact of contaminated wells.
NEG 35 Protect, restore, and enhance the City’s city’s lakes and streamssurface
waters.
NEG 64 To pPrevent the loss of life, property, and habitat in frequently flooded areas
and geologically sensitive areas.
NEG 75 Protect and enhance the functions and values of the City’s wetlands.Conserve
and protect environmentally critical areas from loss or degradation and seek
opportunities for protection and enhancement.
NEG 86 Explore ways of mitigating wetland lossSupport Goals of WRIA 9 Salmon
Habitat Plan.
NEG9 Implement applicable development regulations to ensure against the loss of
both public and private property in geologically hazardous areas.
NEG10 Preserve, protect, and enhance fish and wildlife habitat.
NEG 117 To pPreserve and enhance the City’s city’s natural resources, including urban
forests, physical and aesthetic character by incentivizing the
protectingeservation of mature trees and preventing untimely and
indiscriminate grading of property and removal or destruction of trees.
NEG 8 Maintain a minimum tree canopy of 35%.
NEG 149 Develop a contiguousIdentify and preserve open space networks throughout the
Citycity and connections with adjacent jurisdictions.
Policies
The city’s natural environment is composed of a wide variety of landforms, soils,
watercourses, and vegetation. Federal Way’s terrain ranges from steep hills and
ridgelines to plateaus and lakes. Soil types vary from loam in the lowlands to sand,
gravel, and till in the uplands. Land use and development practices need to be compatible
with this variety of environmental conditions. As a general rule, the city intends to protect
the natural environment rather than try to overcome its limitations for development.
Page 21 of 30
EN-8
NEP 1 Protect and restore environmental quality through implementation of land use
plans, surface water management plans and programs, comprehensive park
plans, and development review.
NEP 2 Preserve and restore ecological functions, and enhance natural beauty, by
encouraging community development patterns and site planning that maintains
and complements natural landforms.
NEP 3 Plant suitable native trees and vegetation within degraded stream, wetlands,
lake buffers, and steep slopes.
NEP 4 The City city will continue to work with internal departments, state and
regional agencies, neighboring jurisdictions, and tribes to protect
environmentally critical areas and the City’s city’s natural environment.
NEP 5 To assist in evaluating existing and proposed environmental policy, the City
should continue to update Update inventories for each type of environmentally
critical area to keep data current and to augment data received from other
information sources.
NEP6 Mitigation sequencing steps, which begin with avoiding impacts altogether by
not taking certain action or parts of an action, should be applied to all projects
where impacts to environmentally critical areas are proposed.
NEP 76 Implement and periodically update Update environmentally critical area
regulations to be consistent with Best Available Science while also taking into
consideration the City’s obligation to meet urban-level densities and other
requirements under the GMA.
NEP 78 Where appropriate, the City city encourages private donations of land or
conservation easements for environmentally critical areas and their associated
buffers.
NEP 98 The City city will continue to encourage utilization of the soil safety program
and Model Remedies Guidance for properties impacted by the Tacoma Smelter
Plume.
NEP 109 The City city may continue to require environmental studies by qualified
professionals to assess the impact and recommend appropriate mitigation of
proposed development on environmentally critical areas, and areas that may be
contaminated, or development that may potentially cause contamination.
NEP11 Environmentally critical area regulations will be based on Best Available
Science.
NEP12 The City should review future amendments to the environmentally critical
areas regulations to ensure that new provisions do not unreasonably hinder
private property rights.
Page 22 of 30
EN-9
NEP13 The City will strive to enforce regulations and procedures on a consistent and
equitable basis.
NEP14 Environmentally critical area regulations should provide clear direction to
property owners and applicants.
NEP15 The repercussions of unauthorized alterations to environmentally critical areas
should be clearly stated and consistently enforced.
NEP 160 The City city should will help identify potential environmental constraints to
property owners and applicants early in the permit application process and
provide guidance for permitting, best management practices, and effective
environmental stewardship.
NEP 171 Continue the practice of providing a process for reasonable use exception when
the implementation of environmentally critical areas regulations deprives a
property owner of all reasonable use of their property.
NEP 182 The Citycity, in cooperation with Lakehaven Water and Sewer District, should
identify and map aquifer recharge areas within the Citycity and its potential
annexation area. Such areas shall be subject to additional regulations to protect
the integrity of identified aquifer recharge areas.
NEP 193 The City city should will encourage the retention of surface water runoff in
wetlands, regional retention facilities, and low impact development stormwater
facilities, or use other similar stormwater management techniques to promote
aquifer recharge.
NEP20 The City should establish land use and building controls to use stormwater
infiltration such as low impact development and green stormwater
infrastructure techniques wherever feasible, and to minimize the amount of
impervious surface created by development.
NEP21 Encourage water reuse and reclamation for irrigation and other non-potable
water needs.
NEP 2214 While offering a contribution to groundwater recharge, the City
recognizes that septic tank and drain field systems have a potentially adverse
impact on groundwater quality within the aquifers. If adequate engineering
solutions are available, the City city may will require connection to sanitary
sewer service where poor soil conditions persist and/or sewer service is
available.
NEP23 The City will protect the quality and quantity of groundwater supplies by
supporting water use conservation programs and adopting regulations to
minimize water pollution. The effect of groundwater withdrawals and artificial
recharge on streams, lakes, and wetlands within the Hylebos Creek and Lower
Puget Sound drainage basins will be evaluated through coordination with the
Lakehaven Utility District.
Page 23 of 30
EN-10
NEP 2415 The City city will continue to work in conjunction with Lakehaven
Water and Sewer District to delineate Wellhead Protection Areas for each well
and wellfield as required and outlined by the state’s Wellhead Protection
program.
NEP25 The City will continue to work with water purveyors to model and map Wellhead
Protection Areas, as funds are budgeted for such modeling and mapping.
NEP26 The City will continue to work with Lakehaven Water and Sewer District,
through a process developed by a joint City/District Wellhead Protection
Committee, to conduct an inventory of all potential sources of groundwater
contamination within the Wellhead Protection Areas and assess the potential
for contamination.
NEP27 The City should establish an interagency Wellhead Protection Committee to
coordinate and implement a Wellhead Protection Plan, as is required by current
state regulations.
NEP 2168 The City city will work with water purveyors, through a process
developed by a joint Citycity/District Wellhead Protection Committee, to
develop a contingency plan for the provisions of alternate drinking water
supplies in the event of well or wellfield contamination, as funds are budgeted
for such purpose.
NEP29 The City should establish buffer zones of sufficient size to protect wellhead areas.
NEP 3017 The City city will seek to work cooperatively with affected regional and
state agencies and tribes to implement water quality management strategies to
comply with Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
regulations to address non-point pollution.
NEP 3118 Surface water management facilities that use natural streams and lakes
for storage should will ensure that those natural features are not adversely
impacted by their inclusion in the City’s city’s surface water management
system.
NEP 3219 The City city may regulate private development and public actions to
protect water quality and to ensure adequate in-stream flow to protect fisheries,
wildlife habitat, and recreation resources.
NEP 3203 The City city will seek to retain native vegetation within riparian
corridors. New planting of vegetation with the approval from the City may be
required where such revegetation will enhance the corridor’s function.
Consideration should be given to the removal of non-native invasive species.
NEP 3214 Lakes should be protected and enhanced by proper management of
surface waters and shorelines, by improvements in water quality, removal of
invasive plant species, encouraging native planting, limiting the use of
Page 24 of 30
EN-11
fertilizers/pesticides or other chemicals, and by restoration of fish and wildlife
habitat.
NEP 3225 The City city should adopt stream definitions and water typing that are
reflective of stream function and habitat. The water typing system should
provide greater protections for streams that are known to be used by salmon
and streams that provide suitable habitat for salmon. In addition, the definitions
should make a distinction between manmade conveyance systems and natural
streams.
NEP 3236 The City city should continue to limit stream relocation projects, the
placing of streams in culverts, and the crossing of streams for both public and
private projects. Where applicable in stream corridors, the City city should
consider structures that are designed to promote fish migration and the
propagation of wildlife habitat.
NEP37 Continue to enforce erosion control measures for work in or adjacent to stream
or lake buffers.
NEP38 Appropriate mitigation for detrimental impacts may be required for
construction work within the buffer area associated with a stream or a lake. The
City will continue to work in cooperation with the Department of Fish and
Wildlife through the Hydraulic Project Approval permit process, as applicable,
for development proposals that involve streams and lakes.
NEP 3924 Public facilities and utilities may cross lakes or streams where no other
feasible alternative exists. Impacts to the resources should be the minimum
necessary to complete the project and compensatory mitigation should be
required for unavoidable impacts.
NEP 4025 For public access lakes, the City city will take a lead role to develop and
implement proactive comprehensive watershed and lake management plans and
policies that are needed to identify and anticipate problems and prevent further
deterioration, which could lead to costly lake restoration efforts in the future.
Lake management plans identify problems, recommend solutions, and outline
plans for implementation. The City city will take an administrative role in
assisting residents on private lakes to setup and run Lake Management Districts
for the implementation of lake management plans.
NEP 4126 New improvements should not be located in floodplains unless fully
mitigated via best building practices within areas of special flood hazard,
shallow flooding, coastal high hazard, and floodways.
NEP42 Any approved construction in a wetland, stream or lake critical area or buffer
should will follow the mitigation recommendations of a Habitat Assessment
report.
NEP 4327 In frequently flooded areas, the City city should restrict the rate and
quantity of surface water runoff to pre-development levels for all new
Page 25 of 30
EN-12
development and redevelopment, in accordance with the current adopted
technical design manual requirements.
NEP 4428 Where feasible, the City city shall protect and enhance natural flood
storage and conveyance function of streams, lakes, and wetlands.
NEP 4529 The City city will protect its wetlands with an objective of no overall net-
loss of functions or values.
NEP 4630 Impacts to wetlands critical areas should be limited. All efforts should be
made to use the following mitigation sequencing approach: avoid, minimize,
rectify, reduce over time, compensate, and monitor.
NEP 4731 Require buffers adjacent to wetlands to protect wetland function and
values integral to healthy wetland ecosystems. Critical Area Buffer buffer
requirements should will be predictable and where allowances for buffer
alterations are warranted, provide clear direction for mitigation, enhancement,
and restoration.
NEP48 Preserve wetland systems by maintaining native vegetation between nearby
wetlands and between wetlands and nearby streams and other wildlife habitat
areas.
NEP49 The City will utilize the approved federal wetland delineation manual and
applicable regional supplements as set forth in WAC 173-22-035 for
identification and delineation of wetlands.
NEP50 The City’s wetland inventory will be updated when new delineations and
ratings are approved by the City.
NEP51 To meet Best Available Science requirements and for consistency with state
guidelines, the City’s wetland rating system should be based on the current
Department of Ecology rating system.
NEP52 The City will work with other jurisdictions, tribes, and citizen groups to
establish wetland policies and a classification system for wetlands that allows
for the designation of both regionally and locally unique wetlands.
NEP 3253 The City city will work with the Lakehaven Water and Sewer District to
evaluate pumping rates within the Hylebos Creek and Lower Puget Sound
drainage basin to establish the effect of groundwater withdrawal on streams,
lakes, and wetlands.
NEP 5433 The City city will avoid the use of natural wetlands for use as public
stormwater facilities whenever possible. If the use of a natural wetland is
unavoidable, the functions/values of that wetland should shall be replaced to
the extent that they are lost.
Page 26 of 30
EN-13
NEP 5534 The City should shall consider a partnership with the King County
Mitigation Reserves In-Lieu Fee program to provide additional options for
offsite mitigation.
NEP56 Mitigation sites should replace or augment the wetland values to be lost as a
result of a development proposal. Sites should be chosen that would contribute
to an existing wetland system or, if feasible, restore an area that was
historically a wetland.
NEP57 All wetland functions should be considered in evaluating wetland mitigation
proposals, including but not limited to fish and wildlife habitat, flood storage,
water quality, recreation, and educational opportunities.
NEP58 The City will protect wetlands by promoting the conservation of forest cover
and native vegetation.
NEP 5935 Wetlands created as a result of a surface or stormwater detention facility
will not be considered wetlands for regulatory purposes.
NEP 6136 Land uses in geologically hazardous areas should be designed to prevent
property damage and environmental degradation, and to enhance open space
and wildlife habitat.
NEP 6237 Require appropriate levels of professional study and analysis for
proposed construction within geologically hazardous areas.
NEP63 As slope increases, development intensity, site coverage, and vegetation removal
should decrease and thereby minimize drainage problems, soil erosion, siltation,
and landslides. Slopes of 40 percent or more should be retained in a natural
state, free of structures and other land surface modifications.
NEP64 Limit disturbances in landslide hazard areas. Establish setbacks beyond the
landslide hazard areas to avoid risks to life safety and property damage.
NEP65 Utilize erosion control best practices in erosion hazard areas during
construction and the site’s ultimate use.
NEP66 Maintain soil stability by retaining vegetation in geologically hazardous areas.
NEP 6738 Prior to development in severe seismic hazard areas, the Citycity may
require special studies to evaluate seismic risks and to identify appropriate
measures to reduce these risks. In areas with severe seismic hazards, special
building design and construction measures should be used to minimize the risk
of structural damage, fire, and injury to occupants, and to prevent post-seismic
collapse.
NEP 6839 Development along marine bluffs should take into consideration the
unique habitat these areas provide by leaving as much native vegetation intact
as possible, especially snags and mature trees.
Page 27 of 30
EN-14
NEP69 As feasible, tThe City will, as resources are made available, conduct studies
needed to identify and map critical fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas
and may re-evaluate existing regulations for the protection of these areas.
NEP70 The City should manage aquatic and riparian (stream side) habitat in a way that
minimizes its alteration in order to preserve and enhance its ability to sustain
fish and wildlife.
NEP 7140 The City city should preserve and enhance native vegetation in riparian
habitat wherever possible.
NEP 7241 The City city should encourage residents and businesses to use native
plants in residential and commercial landscaping.
NEP73 The City should protect wildlife corridors in City owned open space. These
areas should use native plants that support native species of birds and animals.
NEP 7442 Support community and non-profit efforts to restore fish and wildlife
conservation areas with native vegetation.
NEP 7543 As feasible, continue the property acquisition program in Spring Valley,
which not only provides natural flood storage but also preserves wildlife
habitat and provides corridors for their movement.
NEP76 As feasible, the City will adopt and implement fish habitat conservation plans
in support of WRIA 9. for the salmon runs in the Hylebos drainage, Lakota
Creek, Joe’s Creek, and any other identified salmon streams. These plans will
include recommendations for improvements to the riparian corridor and
provisions for adequate buffers adjacent to all proposed development.
NEP 7744 The City should encourage informational and educational programs and
activities dealing with the protection of wildlife. An example of such a program
is the Backyard Wildlife Sanctuary program established by the state’s
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
NEP78 Minimize overhead lighting that would shine on the water surface of the City’s
streams, lakes, and marine waters.
NEP79 Minimize and manage ambient light levels to protect the integrity of ecological
systems and public health without compromising public safety.
NEP 8045 Continue to implement the tree density standards within the Clearing,
Grading, and Tree and Vegetation Retention code.
NEP81 Provide greater tree density credits for retained mature trees.
NEP82 Encourage minimal modification of trees within environmentally critical areas
and their buffers.
Page 28 of 30
EN-15
NEP 8346 Encourage preserving forested areas within tracts and Native Growth
Protection Easements when subdividing land.
NEP84 Support voluntary tree planting programs.
NEP85 Discourage the topping of healthy trees. Instead, encourage the benefits of
sustainable pruning practices and “window pruning” in view corridors.
NEP 10547 Open space provides important wildlife habitat corridors and should be linked
with other designated regional and state open space systems.
NEP106 Preserve and restore habitat connections and tree canopy to link stream
corridors, geologically hazardous areas, floodplains, wetlands, and critical
habitat sites into a system of habitat corridors. This provides connections for
wildlife, supports biodiversity, improves water quality, reduces risks due to
flooding and landslides, and supports the City’s adaptation to climate change.
NEP107 The City should develop a procedure to acquire or accept donations of high
value areas for preservation.
NEP108 The City should consider innovative ways of acquiring property for open space
such as transfer of development rights and development incentives for set asides.
NEP 10948 Incorporate crime prevention through environmental design into the
design process for parks, open space, and trails.
NEP 11049 Create methods and opportunities that encourage residents to monitor and
report vandalism or criminal activity in open space areas, parks, and trails.
NEP 50 Monitor tree canopy and consider changes to regulations should a reduction in
overall canopy cover fall below 35%.
8.5 MAPS
NE-1 Tree Canopy Density
Page 29 of 30
EN-16
Page 30 of 30