Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA16-000981_Final NoticeDenis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator August 28, 2017 Mark Travers Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 SUBJECT: "Final" Notice Renton Subdivision/ LUAlG-000981, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Travers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the above subject application is expired. According to RMC 4-8-lOOC.4 -Expiration of Complete Land Use Applications, the application submitted on March 30, 2017 has been inactive for ninety (90) days or more and an administrative decision has not been made and/or has not been reviewed by the Hearing Examiner in a public hearing. According to our records, an "On-Hold" notification (enclosed) was mailed on May 2, 2017, stating additional information was necessary in order to continue processing the submitted application. As of the date of this letter, the requested information has not been received. Therefore, this is your final notice, if the City of Renton Planning Division does not receive a written request to continue processing the application and the requested information within six (6) months of the date of this letter the application shall be null and void. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 430-6598. Sincerely, ~11'.;Jlu Jill Ding Senior Planner Enclosed: "On-Hold" Letter-dated: May 2, 2017 cc: George and Frances Subic / Owner(s) Party(ies) of Record 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor May 2, 2017 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Mark Travers Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice Renton Subdivision/ LUA16-000981,PP, ECF Dear Mr. Travers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on March 30, 2016. After completion of our first round of review, it has been determined that additional information is required before we can continue processing your application. Please revise the proposed dead end street to a through street with an emergency access turnaround as shown in the attached layout. Once the preliminary plat layout has been revised, please submit 5 copies, 1 reduced {8 Y," x 11") copy, and one CD with an electronic version of a revised Technical Information Report, Density Worksheet, Drainage Plans, Preliminary Plat Map, Street Profiles, Generalized Utility Plans, conceptual landscape plan. Pending the receipt of these additional items, we are putting the review of your project "on hold". The public hearing scheduled for June 13th, 2017 has been cancelled and will be reschedule upon receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 or via email at iding@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner cc: George and Frances Subic / Owner(s) Party(ies) of Record Enclosure 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov ,-.,. .,.·~ "' ,~~ 6 0 • ij ~ ~ f • • ii ~ ~ ! ! ; • I • l a • • i ' • I I i I l ;;o -. i. ~ • •• ~ s ~ • n re -~ :::1 0 ii :!]OZ . ·~lil ...... i. i;:; ., u, C z ;;o co 0 r'l 0 .. ~s 0 l/1 zc5 z ,. lg~ "< ::I; ... 11; i3 "\""z :3a ; i en ~\f~ i I I I ~ I ' ' I { I I I • • ;;o -:; C'l z s ---, ~ ' 0 r~ z . -~ ',;:-(/) '..,~ !ol C .. " OJ ~~ ~ 0 ~ z s; -~ (/) 0 • z C • ' Mark Travers, Mark Travers Architects AIA Applicant Myloan Nguyen, Mark Travers Architects AIA Contact George and Francis Subic Owners Jay Newton Party of Record (Signature ofSender):_4l l;U a~/\-"'J:"::c.A--4--.-,>,L...., ' ,/ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Gillian Syverson signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hisf@'t-Aett' free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: IJ'n~ ;:2 2Q(::C 1 Renton Subdivision LUA16-000981, PP, ECF ~ ... . Denis Law Mayor May 2, 2017 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Mark Travers Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice Renton Subdivision/ LUAlG-000981,PP, ECF Dear Mr. Travers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on March 30, 2016. After completion of our first round of review, it has been determined that additional information is required before we can continue processing your application. Please revise the proposed dead end street to a through street with an emergency access turnaround as shown in the attached layout. Once the preliminary plat layout has been revised, please submit 5 copies, 1 reduced (8 y,'' x 11") copy, and one CD with an electronic version of a revised Technical Information Report, Density Worksheet, Drainage Plans, Preliminary Plat Map, Street Profiles, Generalized Utility Plans, conceptual landscape plan. Pending the receipt of these additional items, we are putting the review of your project "on hold". The public hearing scheduled for June 13'h, 2017 has been cancelled and will be reschedule upon receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 or via email at jding@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner cc: George and Frances Subic / Owner(s) Party(ies) of Record Enclosure 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov • I 11'5 I -a o ~1; ~-~1 § ~ ~;E"'"' ~· ~ 1'~ ~ I I • I i I I :' ,I I ,, ~I 1~ • i '. I ' ' •'\ ij ~ii; ;i ii~ 1 \ • l" j iK ·' ._j ~ 0 !i;!;Q 1f ' ;! § • it I i~ ~ ' §~ ~ I ' '~ ' .l ' ! 1: ! .~ I u ,1 -· '' -~ I I r~-, I ~ 11 I ! jl ,;!~!ii~ -~d ~ I fjle 8 ' ~ • ; i : ! i':~ '0 i1 l ~ I I g i! ~R 1-., i ~I-! ~ 11 I~ ,i'i~ 1. i ' , ,1 I' ; :<'lii': ! • ! ~ ~i ~ ! ' 11!1, 1· ' ~. 1 • I ! I: I ?l!<j ~ I i '1,'<"1i5: ! t !~ !:2 ! i ,11~' , ··~s ~ ' !~ ' .. 1. ijl;::;;.: ~ ~~ !i ~ '0 1:i I ~ ~ ij..,§1,. <>;~.s ~ ~~i ., ;;s! ~ r i I !ii i ' ,•11 ~ ~ .i:r:ll .., i!, ~r· ' ' 1,:1 • ! ';i ' - I I j ! ~ Iii l!I 1;1 ~ ;~i ;~; ri ~-$ ii; -.. .. VI -i • i o, " 11 0 & . :,. {?' ,t.;; 4 ,.( n ' p ij • 0 I ' ii I ' I i I I f I ' ' 0 • ! ! ' • I 1' • 1 (IZ _ I I I I I ~L~ I I .!001LJ.lL..c I \ I I I I I __J_~ I r I I I I i C ,.. + !, "' n ,.,, _z ::;/---< :::!:] ~ r;;~ l/J C z"' w Ql"'lO " z -..,< o-z!i'.! ~ i n • I ' • I ~ ~ I , ' . ! : i ~ I ! r I i I I L\n ;~ ... 1 Jl_ /1/111i~!/'I~ .....!....c.._ -1.=c:::::c=I = ~ ~ } a • -. ,;: ~ ' •• ~ § ~ • ' 1 I ;: ,:. <· 4 [~ ,~--, @ 0 I a ijj I I I I ! i ij i • • • I ~ I I i ! I ' • I " ! 11 r ! ! ! ! ~ ' ! ' I ; i ' ' ; I . l l I I I!· . ' I I l I I ' . . ,o, ....... i~ ····-s.~~-. ""' ······· ':-.;:·· .:>,.,.-, • .('?i ?';.; ;,. ~ ,'J O,v • ~C r I~ ........... / \~ -,I":--~--,'----' F 411765 ...,.__ - ,I " I I I I I I 1. I PLEASE SEE ATTACHED PAGE FOR POSTING OF NOA DNS LUA16-000981 / AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING 1, ---..1...J....c.1...LL_.=___..!::\------' hereby certify that _ _L__ copies of the above document were posted in ----+-'..L conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: (_/ / L, / !J STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) ) ss ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ~ ['j_,?,.,~; signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/th 7r free and volun~ry act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. lie in and for the State of Washington RentoI19 NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: LANO USE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: March 30, 2017 LUA16-000981, ECF, PP Renton Subdivision PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of an existing 84,263 square foot (1.93 acre) parcel into 11 parcels and one Storm Water tract for the eventual construction of single family residences. The subject property is located within the Residential-8 (R-8) zoning designation. The proposed lots would range in area from 5,100 square feet to7,200 square feet. Access to the site is proposed via a new 47- foot wide public street, which would terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. Storm Water facilities, proposed to store and treat additional Storm Water runoff generated, would be located within Tract A. Two existing single family residences and associated detached accessory structures would be removed. No critical areas are mapped on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION; 17018 106th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98055-5431 OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts a re unlikelyto result from the proposed project Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21(.110, the City of Renton i;, u;,ing the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance ( DNS). This may be the only opportunityto comment on the environmental impactsofthe proposal. A 14 ·day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: March 23, 2017 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 30, 2017 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON; Myloan Nguyen, Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St.Seattle, WA 98122 Permits/Review Requested; Environmental {SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Approval Building Other Permits which may be required: Building Permit, Construction Permit Requested Studies: Geote,hnical Report,Arborist Report, Drainage Report Location where application may be reviewed: Dep.:irtmentofCommunity & Economic Development (C[D) ·-Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 9805 7 Public Hearing: Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for June 13 2017 before the Re_nton Hearin__g Examin_e,r in,,_Renton Co.uncil Chambe_rs.at 11:00 am on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: The subject site is designated Comprehensive Residential Medium Density (COMP-RMD) and Residential 8 (R-8). Environmental Document:, that Evaluate the Proposed ProJect: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Proposed Mitigation Measure::.: None are recommended at this time. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, CED -Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on April 13, 2017. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on June 13, 2017, at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. lfyou are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to Pnsure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at \425) 430-6578. Following the issuance of the SEPA Determination, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments regarding the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6598; Email: jding@rentonwa.gov I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I George & Frances Subic Owners Sanders Subic Owner Mark Travers/Mark Travers Architects, AJA Applicant MyJoan Nguyen/Mark Travers Architects, AJA Contact :::·::·::::~::ocf ~/fr=~ ------. __ __,/ ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) Renton Subdivision LUA16-000971, ECF, PP F!l E C''l_'f'•\ I ... 1\,/' • f ------Renton® Plan Review Routing Slip Plan Number: Site Address: LUA16-000981 17018 106TH AVE SE Name: Renton Subdivision Description: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of an existing 84,263 square foot (1.93 acre) parcel into 11 parcels and one stormwater tract for the eventual construction of single family residences. The subject property is located within the Residential-8 (R-8) zoning designation. The proposed lots would range in area from 5,100 square feet to 7,200 square feet. Access to the site is proposed via a new 47-foot wide public street, which would terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. Stormwater facilities, proposed to store and treat additional stormwater runoff generated, would be located within Tract A. Two existing single family residences and associated detached accessory structures would be removed . No critical areas an mapped on the project site. Review Type: Date Assigned: Community Services Review-Version 1 03/27/2017 Date Due: 04/10/2017 Project Manager: Jill Ding Environmental Impact Earth Animals ' Air Environmental Health Water Energy/Natural Resources Pia nts Housing Land/Shore! i ne Use Aesthetics Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Light/Glare Historic/Cultural Preservation Recreation Airport Envi ronmenta I Utilities 10,000 Feet Transportation 14,000 Feet Public Service Recommendation -Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmental Impacts above. Correction -Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and /or requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed -I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments -I have reviewed the project and and I have comments entered in Recommendations. Correction/Resubmit -I have reviewed the project and the applicant needs to submit and/or resubmit documentation and I have added ft,//J~(Jm~T-r"" ()n;,&,na,-n?Z_, :?8'0-/ ~~ f-3/-17 Datr -I Please see attached for complete mailing list 300 sq. ft. surrounding property ,J (Signature of Sender): /}rw' --4: -<l ,s::.C";)-,.------. -- . I /~ V STATE OF WASHINGT~ ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Gillian Syverson signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: /fYJ11 ;l"i,) 5 0 ,W1:1 j Renton Subdivision LUA16-000971, ECF, PP S p+ARLES D BERG GENET PITIS GARFIELD W LK 1J111LDERNESS DR SE P.O. BOX 946 17013 -106TH SE MAPLE VALLEY,WA,98038 ORANGE,CA,92666 RENTON, WA 98055 BLUMENTHAL G H MILLER BARBARA L SWEANEY DARREN+BOBBIE 16830-105TH AVE SE P.O. BOX 75 17004 -105TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 KAIMAKIS II LLC MCMULLIN WALLACE C+ KIMMIE RENTON SPECIAL CARE COMMUN I P.O. BOX 34 17030 -106TH AVE SE 2731 -77TH AVE SE, #203 SEATILE,WA 98199 RENTON, WA 98055 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 TEUNG YAOTA MARVIN GARDENS TOWNHOMES CHRISTIANSON DAVID B P. 0. BOX 59252 10034 SE 218TH PL 16815 -106TH AV SE RENTON, WA 98058 KENT, WA 98031 RENTON, WA,98055 CRAMPTON BARRY+DAWN L TRAN CAM V+PHILLIP TRAN+ ET TEKESTE SIMON 16820-lOSTH AVE SE 459 FERNDALE AVE NE 13765 -56TH AVE 5 RENTON,WA,98055 RENTON, WA 98056 TUKWILA.WA.98168 NGUYEN TOAN T+THIEN T MIDGETI ROBERT L JR ALVARADO ALEXANDER+FLORENCE 16839 -106TH AVE SE 17012 -105TH ST SE 17016 -105TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 SUBIC GEORGE & FRANCES PHU LEEWOOD NGY MORANY P.O. BOX 89 2462 SCHADT DR 24203 -36TH AVES RENTON, WA 98057 MAPLE WOOD, MN 55119 KENT, WA 98032 PHU LEEWOOD KINOSHITA KYM LEE JAMES K & DU KIET 3311 -112TH PL SE 17022-105TH AV SE P.O. BOX 358 EVERETI, WA,98208 RENTON,WA,98055 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 LANZ VANN+JAMIE NGUYEN HYV NEWTON JEFFRY M+JAY H 4118-96TH AVE SE 16824 -106TH AVE SE P.O. BOX 58213 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON,WA 98058 NGUYEN SON T+MAI P NEWTON JAY N+BARBARA B SUBIC FRANCES SANDERS 16836 -106TH AVE SE 28938 -218TH AVE SE P.O. BOX 89 RENTON, WA 98055 BLACK DIAMOND, WA 98010 RENTON, WA 98057 . . BER(. ,1\1 ~ T- P.O. 6~X 946 ORANGE,CA,92666 MEYER DAVID 16839 -108TH AV SE RENTON,WA,980SS RADTKE MICHAEL T+JULIANNE 17024 -106TH AVE SE RENTON,WA,9805S MILLER JERALD S+ANA L 10622 SE 172ND ST RENTON,WA,98055 DEPARTMENT OF coiv IMTY . --------RentoCtTVnOF I:\ AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPM£NT ~ \;I MA~ 3 ll1Q? 'p1anning Division LAND USE'P'ERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION I PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: GEORGE W. and FRANCES M. SUBIC RENTON SUBDIVISION PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: ADDRESS: 17022 1061h AVE SE 17018 & 17022 106TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 CITY: ZIP: RENTON _98055 ~· TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425-255-9923 ' KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S}: LOT 10: 008700-0265 APPLICANT (if other than owner) LOT 11: 008700-0270 I NAME: MARK TRAVERS EXISTING LAND USE(S): RESIDENTIAL . .. COMPANY (if applicable): MARK TRAVERS PROPOSED LAND USE(S): RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECT ···-·-----·------··-·--- EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: . 2315 E. PIKE ST·-· . I PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CITY: ZIP: (if applicable) SEATILE 98122 --- TELEPHONE NUMBER: EXISTING ZONING: R-8 206-763-8496 CONT ACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): R-8 SITE AREA (in square feet): 84.360 SF (COMBINED NAME: LOTS) MYLOAN NGUYEN SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (if applicable): MARK TRAVERS DEDICATED: 10,530 I ARCHITECT . SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: ADDRESS: 2315 E PIKE ST 580 SF . CITY: ZIP: 1 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) 6.54 SEATILE 98122 -· . . TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) 11 206-763-8496 ext 105 NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): myloan@marktraversarchitect.com 11 1 C:\Users\Skattu m\AppData\Local\M icrosoft\ Windows\ Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\QV71XWAl/\l _ LU-Application_SL1BtC.docRev: 08/20l5 • . PROJECT INFORMATION ( ___ ,tinued) r-'--'-----"-===---'-----------~ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 2 (ONE/EA LOT) SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): TBD AT BUILDING PERMIT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 0 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 0 -· ·------·---·-·-·-- SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 0 NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 0 ·- NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): 0 -----------------· --·-----·-·· PROJECT VALUE: $ IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): 0 AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE 0 AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO D FLOOD HAZARD AREA D GEOLOGIC HAZARD D HABITAT CONSERVATION D SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES D WETLANDS --sq.ft. --sq.ft. --sq.ft. --sq.ft. --sq.ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach leaal descriotion on seoarate sheet with the followina information included) SITUATE IN THE SW QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23, RANGE 2, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) GEORGE and FRANCES, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) 0 the current owner of the property involved in this application or D the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date Signature of Owner/Representative STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that <:i"EOR.§e Sf FfZA~CfS ;s:Q SIC.signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. I -:.20 -2017 Dated wnl1crm k-Yu Notary (Print): My appointment expires: ,-19-20}1 2 C:\Users\Skattum\AppData\Local\Microsoft\ Windows\ Temporary Internet files\Content.Outlook\QV71XWA V\l_LU-Application_SUBIC.docRev: 08/2015 • Mark Travers Architect MAG; 3 0 Z017 Project Narrative Project Title: Renton Subdivision 17018 & 17022 1061" Avenue SE, Renton WA 98055 Project Information: . Addresses: 17018 106'"Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Lot 10, Tax ID# 0087000265 17022 1061" Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Lot 11, Tax ID # 0087000270 Permit Requirement: . The proposal would require Preliminary Plat approval in accordance with RMC 4-7-070C.2, which states "No application for a subdivision shall be approved if the land being divided is help in common ownership with a contiguous parcel that has been subdivided in a short subdivision within the preceding five (5) years. Such applications shall be processed as preliminary plat, rather than a short plat". SEPA review is required. Zoning: . Properties are currently zoned R-8 (Residential Medium Density) . Adjacent properties zoning are Residential zones unless specified in the attached Vicinity/zoning map Current use: . The subject sites are currently occupied by two existing single family residences and associated outbuilding proposed for removal. Special Site Features: . No wetland or stream were identified on or immediately adjacent the site. This determination is based on the wetland report and investigation, no hydrophytic plant communities, hydric soils, or evidence of wetland hydrology were observed . . Consultant's field investigation taken throughout the site revealed high chroma, dry, non-hydric soils and there was no evidence pf ponding or prolonged soil saturation anywhere of the property (Wetland report dated 5/21/2016) Proposed Use: . To subdivide the project site into a total of 11 lots for future construction of Single Family Residence. Lot 1 O: subdivided into (6) lots. Lot 11: subdivided into (5) lots and a tract for storm drainage. Density: (RMC 4-2-110Al: Minimum Net Density for proposed shot plats or subdivision: 4 units/acre . Maximum Net Density for proposed shot plats or subdivision: 8 units/acre . Proposed: 6.54 units/acre (lot area(s) varies from 5100 SF to 7203 SF Site Improvements: . A public limited access residential street of Right-Of-Way proposed with 20 feet wide pavement driveway, 6 inches wide cubs, 8 feet wide landscape planters, 5 feet wide sidewalk, drainage improvements, and street lighting to be provide on public . . Proposed driveway with hammerhead turnaround to serving 1 o interior lots. One lot in the North-West corner will be accessed from 1061" Ave SE . . Construction cost, market value, materials will be determined at the time construction phase and building permit. Landscaping: Approximately (8) landmark trees to be removed (72. 73% of 11 landmark trees total) and (34) significant trees to be removed (58.62% of 58 significant trees total) Development Standards: . The project is subject to RMC 4-2-110A . Lot Dimension: Minimum lot size: 5,000 sq.ft Minimum lot width: 50 ft Minimum lot depth: 80 ft . Set Back: Minimum Front Yard: 20 ft. except when all vehicle access is taken from an alley. Minimum Side Yard: 5 ft Minimum Rear Yard: 20 ft Min. Side Yard along street: 15'-0" . Building height: max. 24'-0" and two stories. 206 I 763-8496 P 206 I 328-3238 F Why Too Que Building 2315 E. Pike Street Seattle, WA 98122 marktraversarchitect.corn • ; ,r-i ,,. I L_ L_J -· 0 ,~ l.___c D I~ I I c L-'" .~ L __J l.__-,_ =1 ,-i R-8 -_i-1 R-8 CJ - R-8 ,-- !_ i L, u R-8 ' -1 ' r ,:~ I ' i i i i I i i i i wl CJ)' "I >, <>:I £, gi1 ~· I 8R-~ ~ ]'I I I.~ 0 -~ LOT 10 PROJECT R-8 SITES 1-1 LJ LOT 11 R-8 l.-1 ,----i R-8 c______J ,'Ji R-8 R-~' d'~-8 ~J ,--~ R-r44-Plex _I~ Rl1\-Plexl D R-14 ,1 [__J R-14 D R-14 I' 1,. __ _J R-14 R-14 i ! --I I i L_J c~ R-14 -~ L __ I i i i i i I i i I wf "'I "' <i: I .C' ool o, ! I j L___J r-'-, 1·· 1 , __ __ , Lil '---' /1 L._~~-' i ! ~ j _r ----. -; -~ ---______ J ____________ SE 172nd St. ___________ _ ~ j ,1,;· LJL'~~I / l st;I 0· ,;;. I ~"/ <§''i' /// ' Scale: 1 "::200' VICINITY/ZONING MAP e N .-..... Mark Travers •-•.Arctiitect;.A.111. .• •---.· www:marktraversarchitectcom.· - I I I I 0 ··1 r-~ L~] D ,-, I__J rt L__1 L l D I ~ ,-, L, l .~ u - I Condomini~m __ ,._,, ~\ C ~D D _J D ;\ D~ 1-, u "\ c--\ D n D";/ [J \_\~\ [l 0 /() 1.----- D n n CJ/ e__ D {) 111 --_<-->>>•1n15sastP11es,;..,t >tr;i: 20!H63'll496. _ ---_-_-Seaitfo,WA -oom --fFax:-2M-322'323S - . . . . . . . . . ..... ' Mark Travers Architect Project : Renton Subdivision -Pre Plat #Pre 16-000550 17018 & 17022 1061h Avenue SE, Renton WA 98055 Construction Mitigation Description Proposed construction dates (begin and end dates): . Approximate June 2017 . Construction duration typical is 120 days, subject to change at the time of construction and bid process. Hour and days of operation: . Typical 7:00 am -3:30 pm Proposed hauling / transportation routes: . To be determined by General Contractor at the time of construction, per City of Renton transportation ordinance. Measure to be implemented to minimize dust, traffic and transportation impacts. erosion. mud, noise. and other noxious characteristics: . Site fence. plastic cover, catch basin inserts, construction access. Any special hours proposed for construction or hauling (i.e weekend. late night): . As necessary, to be determine by General Contractor at the time of construction. Preliminary traffic control plan: . Flag. construction entrance, route typical. Plan and details to be determined at the time of construction. 2061763-8496 P 2061328-3238 F Why Too Que Building 2315 E. Pike Street Seaffie, WA 98122 marktraversarchitect.com Mark Travers Architect T: 206.763.8496 F: 206.328.3238 2315 E Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 TO: Jill Ding Senior Planner City of Renton -Planning Division Hi Jill, TRANSMITTAL NOTICE DATE: March 20, 2017 PROJECT: Renton Subdivision LUA 16-000981 Please have the enclosed the revised Landscape plan (full size and reduced size) for the Renton Subdivision project. Thanks, Myloan Nguyen Mark Travers Architect AIA TRANSMITTED VIA: U.S. Mail NO. OF COPIES 1 5 1 DATED 3-20-2017 3-20-2017 3-20-2017 DESCRIPTION Reduced Landscape plan Revised Landscape plan Digital copy of the plans ,, Denis Law Mayor January 10, 2017 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Myloan Nguyen Mark Travers Architect 2315 E Pike Street Seattle, WA 98122 Subject: Notice of Incomplete Application Renton Subdivision LUAlG-000981, ECF, PP Dear Ms. Nguyen: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is incomplete according to submittal requirements and, the following items will need to be submitted by April 10, 2017, in order to continue processing your application: • Title Report for parcel 008700-0265: A title report was submitted with the project application for parcel 008700-0270, however no title report was submitted for parcel 008700-0265. Please submit 3 copies of a complete title (2) report of 008700-0265. • Affidavit of Ownership: The Affidavit of Ownership on the Master Application was signed by Stein Skattum, however the submitted title report for parcel 008700-0270 identifies George Subic and Frances Subic as the vested owners of the property. Please submit either 12 copies of a Master Application signed by ® George and Frances Subic or 3 copies of a revised title report identifying Stein Skattum as the vested property owner. As the subject application was not deemed a complete preliminary plat application, as was required to be submitted prior to January 2, 2017 to vest to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual, the subject application will be required to comply with the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. Please submit 5 copies of a @) revised Drainage Report and Drainage Plans in compliance with the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. . Based on an initial review of the propose~i,;Fn~:layout, it appears that the proposal does not include legal access to Lots 5 and 8. Per RMC 4-6-060J.1.b shared 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov • • driveway access is not permitted for lots created by a subdivision of ten (10) or more lots. In addition, in accordance with RMC 4-7-170G, pipestem lots are not permitted for new plats, unless needed to achieve minimum density. Therefore, the proposed preliminary plat layout will need to be revised to provide public street frontage access for all lots within the proposed preliminary plat. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner cc: Stein Skattum / Owner{s) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor January 10, 2017 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Myloan Nguyen Mark Travers Architect 2315 E Pike Street Seattle, WA 98122 Subject: Notice of Incomplete Application Renton Subdivision LUAlG-000981, ECF, PP Dear Ms. Nguyen: ,, i " 1vu:. r< .-{ ( '' ,,, -< The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is incomplete according to submittal requirements and, the following items will need to be submitted by April 10, 2017, in order to continue processing your application: • Title Report for parcel 008700-0265: A title report was submitted with the project application for parcel 008700-0270, however no title report was submitted for parcel 008700-0265. Please submit 3 copies of a complete title report of 008700-0265. • Affidavit of Ownership: The Affidavit of Ownership on the Master Application was signed by Stein Skattum, however the submitted title report for parcel 008700-0270 identifies George Subic and Frances Subic as the vested owners of the property. Please submit either 12 copies of a Master Application signed by George and Frances Subic or 3 copies of a revised title report identifying Stein Skattum as the vested property owner. As the subject application was not deemed a complete preliminary plat application, as was required to be submitted prior to January 2, 2017 to vest to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual, the subject application will be required to comply with the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. Please submit 5 copies of a revised Drainage Report and Drainage Plans in compliance with the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. Based on an initial review of the proposed preliminary plat layout, it appears that the proposal does not include legal access to Lots 5 and 8. Per RMC 4-6-060J.1.b shared 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov driveway access is not permitted for lots created by a subdivision of ten (10) or more lots. In addition, in accordance with RMC 4-7-170G, pipestem lots are not permitted for new plats, unless needed to achieve minimum density. Therefore, the proposed preliminary plat layout will need to be revised to provide public street frontage access for all lots within the proposed preliminary plat. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner cc: Stein Skattum / Owner(s) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov • PREAPPLICATION MEE I ING FOR Renton Subdivision 17018 & 17022 106th Avenue SE •' ; •, ;\i PRE 16-000550 CITY OF RENTON -, I \. ;, :1--,\ Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division September 15, 2016 Contact Information: Planner: Jill Ding, 425.430.6598 Public Works Plan Reviewer: Rohini Nair, 425.430.7298 Fire Prevention Reviewer: Corey Thomas, 425.430.7024 Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell, 425.430.7290 Please retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving copies of it to any engineers, architects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submittal, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager to have it pre-screened before making all of the required copies. The pre-application meeting is informal and non-binding. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and policies in effect at the time of review. The applicant is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations in effect at the time of project submittal. The information contained in this summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). Fire & Emergency Services Department DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM 8/24/2016 12:00:00AM Jill Ding, Senior Planner Corey Thomas, Plan Review/Inspector (Renton subdivision) PRE16-000SSO 1. The fire flow requirement for a single family home is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to 3,600 square feet (including garage and basements). If the dwelling exceeds 3,600 square feet, a minimum of 1,500 gpm fire flow would be required. A minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 300-feet of the proposed buildings and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. There is one existing hydrant within 300-feet of the some of the proposed homes, but not all. A water main extension and at least one new fire hydrant will be required. A water availability certificate is required from Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per single family unit. This fee is paid at building permit issuance. Credit will be granted for the removal of two existing homes. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20-feet wide fully paved, with 25-feet inside and 45-feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 -ton vehicle with 75-psi point loading. Access is required within 150-feet of all points on the buildings. An approved turnaround is required for all dead end streets exceeding 150-feet in length. Proposed hammerhead turnaround is acceptable. Page 1 of 1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVEL...,PMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: Jill Ding, Senior Planner Rohini Nair, Plan Reviewer SUBJECT: (Renton subdivision) PRElG-000550 NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non-binding and may not subject to modification and/or concurrence by official city decision·makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. I have completed a preliminary review for the above-referenced proposal. The following comments are based on the pre-application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. I have completed a preliminary review for the above-referenced proposal. The following comments are based on the pre-application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. WATER • The subject development is within the water service area of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. • The applicant shall obtain a water availability certificate from the District and submit a copy of the certificate to the City with the land use application. • A copy of the water main improvements plans, approved by the District, shall be submitted to the City as part of the City's Utility Construction permit. • The number and location of fire hydrants shall be determined by the City of Renton Fire Department as part of the review of the project plans. SANITARY SEWER • The subject development is within the sewer service area of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. • The applicant shall obtain a sewer availability certificate from the District and submit a copy of the certificate to the City with the land use application. • A copy of the sewer main improvements plans, approved by the District, shall be submitted to the City as part of the City's Utility Construction permit. SURFACE WATER 1. A drainage report complying with the City of Renton adopted 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Amendment to the 2009 King County Surface Water manual will be required. Based on the City's flow control map, the site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard {Forested Site Conditions). The project is required to use the Flow Control Duration Standard (forested conditions) as the existing pre-developed condition. Refer to Figure 1.1.2.A-Flow chart, for determining the type of drainage review required in the City of Renton 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Amendment. Stormwater BMPs applicable to the individual lots must be provided and information should be included in the drainage report provided with the land use Page 1 of 3 application. The drainage report must account for all the improvements provided by the project. Stormwater improvements based on the drainage report st 1ill be required to be provided by the develo 2. The requirements of the new stormwater manual based on the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual will be applicable from January 2, 2017. 3. A geotechnical report based on RMC 4-8-120.D.7 containing information shown in Table 18, separated into sections is required. Information on the water table and soil permeability, with recommendations of appropriate flow control BMP options with typical designs for the site from the geotechnical engineer, shall be submitted with the application. The geotech report must include information whether the soil is suitable for infiltration. 4. The current surface water system development (SDC) fee is $1,485.00 (2016 rate) for each lot. The rate that will be applicable on the issuance day of the utility construction permit will be applicable on this project. 5. Construction Storm Water General Permit from the Department of Ecology is required if clearin~ and grading of the site exceeds one acre. TRANSPORTATION 1. Existing right-of-way width in 106th Ave SE fronting the site is 60 feet. Street frontage improvements including paved travel roadway width of 26 feet or paved width to match existing paved width along the corridor (the larger number is required), 0.5 feet wide curbs, 8 feet wide landscaped planters, 5 feet wide sidewalks, drainage improvements, and streetlights are required to be provided on 106th Ave SE. Right of way of the public streets should extend to the back of the sidewalk. Depending on the location of existing paved street within the right of way, right of way dedication may or may not be applicable -subject to survey information. As per RMC 4-6-060, half street frontage improvements will be required to be built on 106th Ave SE frontage by the developer. Final determination of specific right-of-way dedication will be confirmed when the survey and preliminary engineering design is complete. 2. Internal site access. Looking at the project elements, the project will have to be developed as one plat. A public limited access residential street of ROW width 47 feet and pavement width of 20 feet is required as the internal access. 0.5 feet wide curbs, 8 feet wide landscaped planters, 5 feet wide sidewalks, drainage improvements, and street lighting are required to be provided on public streets. Streets and driveways shall be designed as per RMC 4.6.060, RMC 4.4.080, and RMC 4.7.150. 4. Payment of the transportation impact fee is applicable at the time of building permit issuance. The current transportation impact fee rate for single family house is $2,951.17 per home. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied, payable at issuance of building permit. 5. Traffic impact study is required for projects that generate 20 or more new peak hour trips. A development of 11 single family houses is not expected to generate 20 new peak hour trips. Therefore, a traffic study may not be required. 6. Street lighting on the frontage and internal public streets is required to be provided by the development. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. All construction or service utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittal,. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. When utility plans are complete, please submit four (4) copies of the drawings, two (2) copies of the Page 2 of 3 drainage report, the permit a ·cation, an itemized cost of construction estir--~0 , and the application fee at the counter on the sixth floo . 3. All utilities serving the site are required to be undergrounded. 4. Any proposed rockeries or retaining walls greater than four feet in height will be require a separate building permit, structural plans, and special inspection. Page 3 of 3 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ----Renton® MEMORANDUM DATE: September 8, 2016 TO: Pre-Application File No. 16-000550 FROM: Jill Ding, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Renton Subdivision, 17018 & 17022 10611, Avenue SE General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above- referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or online at www.rentonwa.gov Project Proposal: The subject property is located on the east side of 106'" Avenue SE and north of SE 172'd Street and is addressed as 17018 & 17022 106'" Avenue SE. The proposal is to subdivide the project site (comprised of two lots) into a total of 11 lots for the future construction of single family residences. The subject property totals 84,360 square feet (1.94 acres) in area, and is zoned Residential-8 (R-8). Access to the new lots would be provided via two shared driveways off of 106'" Avenue SE, which terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. No critical areas are mapped on the project site. Current Use: The site is currently occupied by two existing single family residences and associated outbuildings proposed for removal. Zoning/Density Requirements: The subject property is zoned Residential-8 (R-8), the density range allowed in the R-8 zone is a minimum of 4.0 to a maximum of 8.0 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). The area located within dedicated right-of-way, private access easements/tracts, and critical areas would be deducted from the gross site area to determine the "net" site area prior to calculating density. After the deduction of the 9,822 square foot shared driveways, the proposal would have a net site area of 74,538 square feet (1.71 acres). The proposal for 11 lots on the 1. 71 net acre site would result in a net density of 6.43 dwelling units per acre (11 lots/ 1. 71 acres= 6.43 du/ac), which is within the density range permitted in the R-8 zone. Development Standards: The project would be subject to RMC 4-2-llOA, "Development Standards for Single Family Zoning Designations" effective at the time of complete application (noted as "R-8 standards" herein). h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\2016 preapps\pre16-000550.jill\16-000550 (r-8 11 lot plat).doc Renton Subdivision, Page 2 of 6 September 8, 2016 6-000550 Minimum Lot Size. Width and Depth -The minimum lot size permitted in the R-8 zone, is 5,000 square feet for parcels being subdivided. Minimum lot width is 50 feet for interior lots and 60 feet for corner lots; minimum lot depth is 80 feet. All lots appear to comply with the minimum lot size requirements. No dimensions were included for the proposed lots; therefore staff was unable to verify compliance with the minimum width, and depth requirements. Building Standards -The R-8 standards allow a maximum building coverage of 50% of the lot area. Accessory structures are also included in building lot coverage calculations. The proposal's compliance with the building standards would be verified at the time of building permit review. Building Height -The maximum wall plate height is 24 feet and 2 stories. Roofs with a pitd equal to or greater than 4:12 may project an additional six (6) vertical feet from the maximurr wall plate height; common rooftop features, such as chimneys, may project an additional fou, (4) vertical feet from the roof surface. Non-exempt vertical projections (e.g., decks, railings, etc. shall not extend above the maximum wall plate height unless the projection is stepped bad one-and-a-half (1.5) horizontal feet from each fa~ade for each one (1) vertical foot above the maximum wall plate height. Building height would be verified at the time of building permit review. Setbacks -Setbacks are the minimum required distance between the building footprint and the property line. The required setbacks for the R-8 zone are: Front yard: 20 feet for the primary structure. Rear yard: 20 feet. Side yards: 5 feet. Side yards along streets: 15 feet Setbacks would be verified at the time af building permit review. Lot Configuration -One of the following is required in lots created through the Preliminary Plat process: 1. Lot width variation of 10 feet (10') minimum of one per four (4) abutting street-fronting lots, or 2. Minimum of four (4) lot sizes (minimum of 400 gross square feet size difference), or 3. A front yard setback variation of at least five feet (5') minimum for at least every four (4) abutting street fronting lots. It appears that the proposed plat would comply with Option 2 above. Building Design Standards -The proposed structure would be subject to the Residential Design Standards outlined in RMC 4-2-115. The proposal's compliance with the residential design standards would be verified at the time of building permit review. Access/Parking: Access to the lots is proposed via two 20-foot wide shared driveways, which abut each other off of 106'" Avenue SE. Shared driveways may be allowed for access to four (4) or fewer residential lots, provided: a. At least one of the four (4) lots abuts a public right-of-way with at least fifty (SO) linear feet of property; and h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\2016 preapps\pre16-000550.jill\16-000550 (r-811 lot plat).doc Renton Subdivision, PRElG-000550 Page 3 of 6 September 8, 2016 b. The subject lots are not created by a subdivision of ten (10) or more lots; and c. A public street is not anticipated by the City of Renton to be necessary for existing or future traffic and/or pedestrian circulation through the short subdivision or to serve adjacent property; and d. The shared driveway would not adversely affect future circulation to neighboring properties; and e. The shared driveway is no more than two hundred feet (200') in length; and f. The shared driveway poses no safety risk and provides sufficient access for emergency vehicles and personnel. Shared driveways shall be within a tract; the width of the tract and paved surface shall be a minimum of sixteen feet (16'); the Fire Department may require the tract and paved surface to be up to twenty feet (20') wide. The shared driveway may be required to provide a turnaround per RMC 4-6-060H. No sidewalks are required for shared driveways; however, drainage improvements pursuant to City Code are required (i.e., collection and treatment of stormwater), as well as an approved pavement thickness (minimum of four inches (4") asphalt over six inches (6") crushed rock). The maximum grade for the shared driveway shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%), except for within approved hillside subdivisions. It appears that the proposal would exceed the maximum of 4 lots accessing off of the shared driveway; therefore dedication of a pub/le street may be required. Alley Access: Alley access is the preferred street pattern for all new residential development except in the Residential Low Density land use designation (RC, R-1, and R-4 zones). All new residential development in an area that has existing alleys shall utilize alley access. New residential development in areas without existing alleys shall utilize alley access for interior lots. If the developer or property owner demonstrates that alley access is not practical, the use of alleys may not be required. The City will consider the following factors in determining whether the use of alleys is not practical: a. Size: The new development is a short plat. b. Topography: The topography of the site proposed for development is not conducive for an alley configuration. c. Environmental Impacts: The use of alleys would have more of a negative impact on the environment than a street pattern without alleys. d. If site characteristics allow for the effective use of alleys. Driveways: The maximum driveway slopes cannot exceed 15%, provided that driveways exceeding 8% are to provide slotted drains at the lower end of the driveway. If the grade exceeds 15%, a variance is required. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveways shall not exceed nine feet (9') and double loaded garage driveways shall not exceed sixteen feet (16'). Landscaping -Except for critical areas, all portions of the development area not covered by structures, required parking, access, circulation or service areas, must be landscaped with native, drought-resistant vegetative cover. The minimum on-site landscape width required along street frontages is 10 feet. Where there is insufficient right-of-way space or no public frontage, street trees are required in the front yard subject to approval of the Administrator. A minimum of two (2) trees are to be located in the front yard prior to final inspection. Please refer to h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\2016 preapps\pre16-000550.jill\16-000550 (r-811 lot plat).doc Renton Subdivision, Page 4of6 September 8, 2016 6-000550 landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) for further general and specific landscape requirements. A conceptual landscape plan shall be submitted at the time of formal land use application and prepared by a registered Landscape Architect, a certified nurseryman or other certified professional. Storm drainage facilities are required to comply with the minimum 15-foot perimeter landscaping strip on the outside of the fence unless otherwise determined through the site plan review or subdivision review process. Please refer to landscape regulations RMC 4-4-070 for further general and specific landscape requirements. Significant Tree Retention: If significant trees (greater than 6-inch caliper or 8-caliper inches for alders and cottonwoods) are proposed to be removed, a tree inventory and a tree retention plan along with an arborist report, tree retention plan and tree retention worksheet shall be provided with the formal land use application as defined in RMC 4-8-120. The tree retention plan must show preservation of at least 30% of significant trees, and indicate how proposed building footprints would be sited to accommodate preservation of significant trees that would be retained (RMC 4-4-130Hl.a). When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, replacement trees, with at least a two-inch (2") caliper or an evergreen at least six feet (6') tall, shall be planted at a rate of twelve (12) caliper inches of new trees to replace each protected tree removed. The Administrator may authorize the planting of replacement trees on the site if it can be demonstrated to the Administrator's satisfaction that an insufficient number of trees can be retained. In addition to retaining 30 percent of existing significant trees, each new lot would be required to provide a minimum tree density of 2 trees per 5,000 square feet of lot area onsite. Protected trees that do not contribute to a lot's required minimum tree density shall be held in perpetuity within a tree protection tract. Significant trees shall be retained in the following priority order: Priority One: Landmark trees; significant trees that form a continuous canopy; significant trees on slopes greater than twenty percent (20%); Significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and Significant trees over sixty feet (60') in height or greater than eighteen inches ( 18") caliper. Priority Two: Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and other significant non-native trees. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained, unless the alders and/ or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a critical area or its buffer. The Administrator may require independent review of any land use application that involves tree removal and land clearing at the City's discretion. A formal tree retention pion would be reviewed at the time of formal land use application. Fences/Retaining Walls: If the applicant intends to install any fences as part of this project, the location must be designated on the landscape plan. A fence taller than six feet (6') requires a building permit. A fence shall not be constructed on top of a retaining wall unless the total combined height of the retaining wall and the fence does not exceed the allowed height of a standalone fence. New or existing fencing would need to comply with the fence requirements of the code (RMC 4-4-040). h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\2016 preapps\prel6-000SSO.jill\16-000SSO (r-8 11 lot plat).doc Renton Subdivision, PRE16-000550 Page S of6 September 8, 2016 Retaining walls shall be composed of brick, rock, textured or patterned concrete, or other masonry product that complements the proposed building and site development. There shall be a minimum three-foot (3') landscaped setback at the base of retaining walls abutting public rights-of-way. Please refer to retaining wall standards (RMC 4-4-040) for additional information about fences and retaining walls. Environmental Review: Environmental (SEPA) Review would be required due to the proposal to subdivide the site into more than 9 lots. Permit Requirements: The proposal would require Preliminary Plat approval in accordance with RMC 4-7-070C.2, which states "No application for a short subdivision shall be approved if the land being divided is held in common ownership with a contiguous parcel that has been subdivided in a short subdivision within the preceding five (5) years. Such applications shall be processed as preliminary plat, rather than a short plat." Environmental (SEPA) Review would also be required. All land use permits would be processed within an estimated time frame of 10- 12 weeks. The 2016 Preliminary Plat Review application fee is $4,500. The 2016 application fee for SEPA Review (Environmental Checklist) is $1,000. A 3% technology fee would also be assessed at the time of land use application for a total application fee of $5,665. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal is provided in the attached handouts. Construction of residential structures would follow installation of infrastructure and recording of the Final Plat. Public Information/Public Outreach Signs: The applicant is required to install a public outreach sign and a proposed land use action sign on the subject property per the specifications provided in the accompanied sign handouts. The applicant is solely responsible for the construction, installation, maintenance, removal, and any costs associated with the signs. Public Meeting: Please note a neighborhood meeting, according to RMC 4-8-090, is required for: a. Preliminary plot applications; b. Planned urban development applications; and c. Projects estimated by the City to have a monetary value equal to or greater than ten million dollars ($10,000,000), unless waived by the Administrator. The intent of this meeting is to facilitate an informal discussion between the project developer and the neighbors regarding the project. The neighborhood meeting shall occur after a pre- application meeting and before submittal of applicable permit applications. The public meeting shall be held within Renton city limits, at a location no further than two (2) miles from the project site Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction fees, impact fees would be required. Such fees would apply to all projects and would be calculated at the time of building permit application and payable prior to building permit issuance. The fees for 2016 are as follows: • Transportation Impact Fee -$2,951.17 per new single-family house; • Park Impact Fee -$1,887.94 per new single-family house; and • Fire Impact Fee -$495.10 per new single-family house. h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\2016 preapps\pre16-000550.jill\16-000550 (r-811 lot plat).doc ' Renton Subdivision, Page 6 of 6 September 8, 2016 6-000550 A handout listing the impact fees is attached. A Renton School District Impact Fee, which is currently $5,643.00 per new home, would be payable prior to building permit issuance. A handout listing all of the City's Development related fees is available on the City's website. Note: When the formal application materials are complete, the applicant is strongly encouraged to have one copy of the application materials pre-screened at the 6th floor front counter prior to submitting the complete application package. Please call or email Jill Ding, Senior Planner at 425-430-6598 or jding@rentonwa.gov for an appointment. Expiration: Upon approval, preliminary plat approval is valid for five years with a possible one- year extension if requested in writing prior to the expiration of the preliminary plat. h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\2016 preapps\pre16-000SSO.jill\16-000SSO (r-8 11 lot platl.doc DEflARTM B\JT OF uJv1 M UNl1Y AND EmNOM IC DE\/8...0Avl B\JT --------Renton® WAIVER OF SJBM ITTAL REQUIRBVl ENTS FOR LAND UEEAPPLICATIONS Ranning Division 1055 8Juth Qady Way-Fenton, WA 98057 Ftlone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov LAND US:PEH'v1 IT SJBMITTALFB:lUIA:MENTS WAIi/ID MODIFIED BY: BY: Arborist Rlport • Biological Assessment 4 JR O!lculations 1 Cblored Maps for Display 4 Cbnstruction Mitigation Description 2AND4 Deed of Rght-of-Way Dedication 1 Censity Worksheet • Drainage O:introl Ran 2 Drainage Rlport 2 Elevations, Architectural 3ANo• 8wironmental Olecklist • Existing Cbvenants (Rloorded Cbpy) 1 AND4 Existing Easements (Rloorded Cbpy) 1 ANO• Rood Hazard Data 4 c) Q, I I Floor Rans3AND4 j'f)... Geotechnical Rlport 2AND3 Q-ading Elevations & Ran, Cbnoeptual 2 Q-ading Elevations& Ran, Cetailed 2 Habitat Data !'€port • JR Improvement Ceferral 2 Irrigation Ran• AUECl"NAME cnvlMENTS ------------------ DATE H:\ CHJ. Data\Rlrms-Templates\ Self-Help Handouts\ Aanningl Waiversubmittalreqs docx Rav: 08/ 2015 LAND US:: F£Rv1 IT SJBM ITTAL R:QUI Ftiv1 B'JTS WAIVBJ MODIRBJ OJ!V1M8'JTS BY: BY KingO:>unty Assessor's Map Indicating Ste 4 Landscape Aan, O:>nceptual 4 Landscape Aan, Detailed 4 Legal Description 4 Letter of Understanding of Geological Rsk 4 \R Map of B<isting Ste Conditions 4 Master Application Form. Monument cards(one per monument} 1 Neighborhood Detail Map• CNerall Aat Aan • Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analyss. Aan Raductions (Rv1Ts} • Fbst Office Approval 2 Aat Name R3servation • Aat Aan 4 Preapplication Meeting 8.Jmmary • R.iblic WorksApproval Letter 2 R3habilitation Aan 4 s:reening Detail • Sioreline Tracking Worksheet 4 Ste Aan 2AN0• S:ream or l.akeS:udy, S:andard 4 S:ream or Lake S:udy, $.Jpplemental • S:ream or Lake Mitigation Aan 4 S:reet Profiles 2 lit le R3port or Aat Oartificale 1 ANo• Topography Main Traffic S: udy 2 ___)'D-.__ p-~ -.?...,......,,~\.• I " '~' ;r"r"'.. oe.·"-, Tree Qrtting/L.and Oearing Aan • Urban Design R3gulationsAnalysis 4 utilities Aan, GeneraliZEd 2 Wetlands Mitigation Aan, Rnal 4 Wetlands Mitigation Aan, Preliminary• 2 H:I CID Data\ Forms-Templates\ S,lf-Hel p Handouts\ Ranningl Waiversubmittal reqs.docx Rav: 08/2015 • LAND USE~ IT SJBM ITTAL REQUlft!'v18'lTS Wetlands Raport/Delineation • Wireless: Applicant Agreement Sat ement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Stes2AND3 Lease ,Ageement, Draft 2AND3 Map of Existing Ste O:mditions 2AN03 Map of View Area 2ANos Fhotosimulations zAND 3 This R3quirement may be waived by: 1. A"operty Slrvices 2 Development 81gineering Aan Raview 3 Building 4 Aanning WAIVED MODIFIBJ BY: BY: 3 H:I an Data\ Forms-Templates\ Sall-Help Handouts\ Ranni ng\ Waiversubmittalreqs.docx mMMENTS Rav: 0812015 March 30, 2017 Randy Matheson Department of Transportation Renton School District 420 Park Avenue N Renton, WA 98055 Subject: New Project/ "Renton Subdivision" LUA16-000981, ECF, PP rs City of I r ~~ s I l [ CJ I l The City of Renton's Department of Community and Economic Development (CED) has received an application for a Preliminary Plat Approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of an existing 84,263 square foot (1.93 acre) parcel into 11 parcels and 1 stormwater tract for the eventual construction of single family residences. Location address is 17018 1061h Ave SE, Renton WA 98055-5431. Please see the enclosed Notice of Application for further details. In order to process this application, CED needs to know which Renton schools would be attended by children living in residences at the location indicated above. Would you please complete the list below and return this letter to my attention, City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057 or fax to (425) 430-7300, no later than April 10, 2017, Elementary School: ___________________________ _ Middle School:---------------------------- High School:----------------------------- Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the impact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed development? Yes No __ _ Extra Comments: ---------------------------- Thank you for providing this important and helpful information. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me at (425) 430-6598. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner Denis Law Mayor March 30, 2017 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Mark Travers Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 Subject: Notice of Complete Application Renton Subdivision, LUA16-000981, ECF, PP Dear Mr. Travers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on May 1, 2017. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. In addition, this matter is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing on June 13, 2017 at 11:00 AM, in the Council Chambers, 7th Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. The applicant, or representative(s) of the applicant, are required to be present at the Public Hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you one week before the hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 if you have any questions. Sincerely, a::.~· Senior Planner cc: George & Frances Subic/ Owner(s) Sanders Subic/Owner Stein Skattum/Applicant Myloan Nguyen/Mark Travers Architect AIA/Contact Mark Travers/ Mark Travers Architect AIA/Contact 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov NOTICE ct APPLICATION AND PRuPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)-Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 30, 2017 LAND USE NUMBER: LUAlG-000981, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: Renton Subdivision PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of an existing 84,263 square foot (1.93 acre) parcel into 11 parcels and one Storm Water tract for the eventual construction of single family residences. The subject property is located within the Residential-8 (R-8) zoning designation. The proposed lots would range in area from 5,100 square feet to7,200 square feet. Access to the site is proposed via a new 47-foot wide public street, which would terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. Storm Water facilities, proposed to store and treat additional Storm Water runoff generated, would be located within Tract A. Two existing single family residences and associated detached accessory structures would be removed. No critical areas are mapped on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 17018 106'" Ave SE, Renton, WA 98055-5431 OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non~Significance {DNS). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: December 30, 2017 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 30, 2017 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Myloan Nguyen, Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St, Seattle, WA 98122 Permits/Review Reciuested: Other Permits which may be required: Reciuested Studies: location where application may be reviewed: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Approval Building Permit, Construction Permit Geotechnical Report, Arborist Report, Drainage Report Department of Community & Economic Development {CED)-Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for June 13, 2017 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers at 11:00 am on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. The subject site is designated Comprehensive Residential Medium Density (COMP-RMD} and Residential-8 (R-8). EnvirClnmental Documents that • Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2·110A, 4·4·070, 4-4-130, 4-6-060, 4-7-080 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. None are recommended at this time. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, CED -Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on April 13, 2017. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on June 13, 2017, at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-6578. Following the issuance of the SEPA Determination, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments regarding the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (42S) 430-6598; Email: jding@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION RECEIPT EG000632 BILLING CONTACT Stein Skattum REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME LUA16-000981 PLAN -Environmental Review PLAN -Preliminary Plat Fee Technology Fee Printed On: December 30, 2016 Prepared By: Mona Davis ----------Renton e 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 TRANSACTION TYPE Fee Payment Fee Payment Fee Payment Transaction Date: December 30, 2016 PAYMENT METHOD Check #16483 Check #16483 Check #16483 SUB TOTAL TOTAL AMOUNT PAID $1,000.00 $4,500.00 $165.00 $5,665.00 $5,665.0o Page 1 of 1 Mark Travers Architect M!-\r; 3 u I w ~ , ._ L ' I November 1, 2016 Re: Neighborhood Meeting Notice Project Title: Renton Subdivision 17018 & 17022106'" Avenue SE, Renton WA 98055 Meeting to be held at: Library room in Benson Hill Elementary School 18665116th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98058 Time: November 17, from 3:30pm -5:30pm City of Renton Contact: . Jill Ding, Senior Planner . Email: JDing@Rentonwa.gov Applicant Information: . Owner: Stein Skattum 10350 Rainier Ave S, Seattle WA 98178 Email: Skattum@comcast.net . Architect: Mark Travers Architect 2315 E. Pike St -Seattle, WA 98122 Phone: 206.763.8496 Email: mark@marktraversarchitect.com Project Information: . Addresses: 17018 106th Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Lot 10, Tax ID# 0087000265 17022 106th Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Lot 11, Tax ID# 0087000270 . Scope of Work: Lot 10: Short Subdivision of one parcel into (6) lots. Lot 11: Short Subdivision of one parcel into (5) lots and a tract for storm drainage. Lot Area(s): varies, from 5031 SF to 6855 SF, for both parcels. A public limited access residential street of Right-Of-Way proposed with 20 feet wide pavement driveway, 6 inches wide cubs, 8 feet wide landscape planters, 5 feet wide sidewalk, drainage improvements, and street lighting to be provide on public. Proposed driveway with hammerhead turnaround to serving 5 interior lots of each lot and one lot in North-West corner as proposed will be accessed from 106th Ave SE. Zoning Analysis: . Properties are currently zoned R-8 (Residential Medium Density) . Density: (RMC 4-2-110A): Minimum Net Density for proposed shot plats or subdivision: 4 units/acre Maximum Net Density for proposed shot plats or subdivision: 8 units/acre Proposed: 6.98 units/acre . Lot Dimension: Minimum lot size: 5,000 sq.ft Minimum lot width: 50 ft Minimum lot depth: 80 ft . Set Back: Minimum Front Yard: 20 ft. except when all vehicle access is taken from an alley. Minimum Side Yard: 5 ft Minimum Rear Yard: 20 ft Side Yard along a Street: 15 ft Minimum Design Standards For Public Street and Alleys: (RMC 4-6-060F) . Average Daily Vehicle Trips: 0-250 . Right-of-Way: 1 lane -45' . Sidewalks: 5' both sides . Planting Strips: 8' between curb & walk both sides . Curbs: both sides . Parking lane: 6' one side . Paved Roadway Width, not including parking: 1 lane 12' . Intersection Radii: 25' turning radius Sincerely, Mark Travers AIA 206 1763-84 96 P 106 I 318-3238 F Why Too Que Building 2315 E. Pike Street Seattle, WA 98122 marktraversarchitect.com ' . ' ' Project Title: Renton Subdivision (of combined lots) Addresses: 17018106'h Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Parcel number 0087000265 17022106'h Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Parcel number 0087000270 Neighborhood Meeting -Mailing List: 1. Parcel number: 0087000260 Address: 17006 106TH AVE SE, RENTON 98055 2. Parcel number: 0087000302 Address: 10708 SE 170TH ST RENTON 98055 3. Parcel number: 0087000301 Address: 10707 SE 170TH ST RENTON 98055 4. Parcel number: 0087000300 Address: 17015 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 5. Parcel number: 0087000298 Address: 17019108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 6. Parcel number: 0087000295 Address: 17023 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 7. Parcel number: 0087000296 Address: 17025 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 8. Parcel number: 0087000291 Address: 17029 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 9. Parcel number: 0087000293 Address: 17033 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 10. Parcel number: 0087000275 Address: 17024 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 11. Parcel number: 0087000281 Address: 10622 SE 172ND ST RENTON 98055 12. Parcel number: 0087000282 Address: 10618 SE 172ND ST RENTON 98055 13. Parcel number: 0087000283 Address: 17030 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 14. Parcel number: 0087000213 Address: 17029 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 • 15. Parcel number: 0087000203 Address: 17023 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 16. Parcel number: 0087000198 Address: 17019 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 17. Parcel number: 0087000194 Address: 17013 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 DEPARTMEN ---------Renton e AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING FCOMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov ss '-~~-' --rvi. ...... ,,,:. /J r --~~~~-~~-"-Y_"f<.1_ 1.->~~----------' certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct, and duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: ,.,.. 1. On the / C. \ day of f4 f) "'12::W\ l'h*n..., 20JL, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing a neighborhood meeting notice, pursuant to Renton Municipal Code section 4-8-090A Neighborhood Meetings to property owners within three hundred feet (300') of the property for the following project: Renton Subdivision -106th Ave SE Project Name Stein Skatttum Owner Name 2. This notice was sent to the addresses in the attached list, which was created based on the most recent property tax asseBsment r 1/~s of King County Department of Assessments. ~ ~ 1 I~ ..._~=-...... , =-·_., ..,_.I \-~--:::::----'~ _ _,;;, __ ., --- ' Sender Signature SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this NOTARY PUBLIC in/ nd for the State ngton, Printed name: C1A.Jr!l111 J ,]c1flit:rS_ My com mission expires on: --'-/...::2;..,/.....::~'"'"""~-l-t-'z=---={"-!'-/f..,~--/ I H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Se!f-Help Handouts\Planning\Neighborhood Meeting Posting and Mailing Affidavit.docx Rev. 08/2016 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY -------Renton® AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING MEETING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT LOCATION SIGN FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov ) ) 55 ) _____,W!'-'-kl,.-----'=]l-. __ ~-4-'-'--'-----'-'--~"'-----------~' certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct, and duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: L On the X Meeting location t' sign(s) on the main entrance of the building located ________________ for the following project: Renton Subdivision -106th Ave SE Project Name Stein Skatttum Owner Name 2. I have attached a copy of the meeting location sign(s). at 3. This/these meeting location sgn(s) was_ /ffitmstructed and installed in locations in conformance with the require ent ~~p er. ·tie 4 of Renton Municipal Code. ~ I U! -_(2/1'-/ Signature of person posting SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this !-f/t---day of AiJiit ht/ H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Ne1ghborhood Meeting Posting and Mailing Affidavit.docx Rev. 08/2016 Neighborhood Detail MaQ Scale: 1"=100' · Mark Travers Architect, AIA www.rnarktraversarchitect.com e N 1 2315 East Pike Street SeatUe, WA 98122 ' Tel: Fax: 206-763-8496 206-328-3238 106th Ave. SE. Subdivision RENTON WA 98006 ,c -o· : l'.'.r 1 ___ _!'l 85.00' __ ~-Ps fiO=r.00' _ Pl 60.~ _ 1 _____ P1 ~-o_O'_ _ 1 ciRB-CJr-..;_'-....... l 1 ----i , , ~ l : . I ·:1i:c: TJ LOT B ' ' --1 r ----' ' / l'j • '-"-, SF . I I ' I I 0 I e ;;, r so 31 I g 'I LOTD f... LOTE :"' 0 o 7200 SF ~ 1 /--' 5'-()" <0 I ~ 1 1 I 1 1 £ 6680 SF a. SIDC.VALK'-l. I ;;:' I ----;;:'' ' I ! ' (6729SF) it I -______ ..+ --=-PL85.0(C-c.t r LOT C ' I ' I 41\f·, .-,--, / e -CJ L.l.t,OS::.APl~.G I b:l : 1 1 6864 SF I , -· f ~I ,'Jt)')_;;J-.--,,.,_ ;,~ ' ~ f/t o ·0'-----,:,:., -,1· ,, ~ __ ,::;(_'\UU 1 / 0 LOTA ( ' '"'' I"·"" 5' U93 ~t ...... I d I~ .;~-;\\7 /;f :·' -------=---I c.o sos1 SF I I rg 'fti\\,s-:_}; r -ct I ·-;(~':'1 --I..-~;\)k<>f : ! ;f,... 1~ :g ,__, ADJ, c,_li?P I -/--~f-~ , / / ~- LOTF 6674 SF I a. I I U.J ' :z I ~I I' ~\ ~I I I _J __ :_-:_--~T~soo·+ I LOTF 6680 SF r-PL...s5,00' - ! . ~O. I f.,. I_, r'""· -1~ , 10 ·, I ·. I <r,:r::~:·.<·-;,. -~ l Io , ci : LOT A I I I I ~):_\'.tt,:f:L, ' ............ "---I :: II"' 5031SF '' I --fi\'Xr1_"1:10 -~_ ·!'t./0-1-3. 1·0. I, ~ i ) LOTC •. , -·-: 1~i~~i;_'·-.,-,·~-"·J t --------_,,__ ! 6855 SF ~ ! 1 T ' I "'4j;_ji;;_'c' ·-------""'-. I ::_-_: _:_-=-_:_-_::-_: --i f i 6~~5 iF 1 :t 1 ~-LOT E -, ---+ ; ~ r TRACT ; : ;rl ! (639osFJ ,g 66sosF I-I r" 1 (LOT B) / : 1 ! 1 :_J a lfll I : 'Cl... I q ii~ I (STORM DRAJNAGE I -_J I L ---· ---.J I I I g L TRACT PER CIVIL) J J I ' ! ! _J ----p: ~~~o~ ---LPL 60.00'--~ --Pl60.o5·-L-:=-,,c~;o:--_j a. -----........ v -----:-:::- SE 172ND ST _ _J ____ _ sit, N f'RO,ff! A/))0[,S ",""1l! .-,i: S[_ RE1<T!Jti. w,i. ;ll(l,S OWNEP 11tm Sl<ATTUu PO !JO> lO~ REMY' ..... ,,;, ~&!1 (Z06'.~l!l fXJNT>CT·~1E!N-TTUw lff.:HIIECT/A/'.[>lf_ ~ TRA~ MQ!ntCT 1J·,•, E f'I([ ',T S!:.IT!U. ""6f112 (<%: f!}-lli!, \XJNTCIIM!<n,.,.,ms lDNlfG R-8 LOT <;CE· iDl.l,lN[') LOT Ulf. • iii.loll WFT (1;4,(REOl es~ (:£;CRJ-'TIO~ 9-illf~OE A (01<[:jM[O WT :r !/J P•Rell.> rJ , s(Y, (5) >!NIU r,,,._, PM';';[LS Mt, • o,ro~, Tll.lCT £ACH. Pro~ct lr!_formatlon 0 11lCEI i"l/:'OC"15' >.Xii!. ·,)QI~ !%lit •l'E £ LOT SIZE• ~2.,A:) s:FT. ;o~: ..C"£5) l£W_ 1:o;RPll:JH ,..n,s rlJOw<; f~ l'L',I OUXl< 1 "tAT lCT I) •AfN;l or,wo...rpo ,:,.)II· l'/.)1 1(16TH AYE; 'l wr 5IZ£ -11.,aJ ,on :r,o' .c,e,'. L[.l:Alt:cr;RP'OCJ, Al'E'l'i f<R~'., #5 '11<1 ~LOCK l PL•T LOT l l _b_egal Descrlpt!g_n Vicinity e N ~ -,.or"'°"'!'!_ !~Ii J~J~ ~~ ! I ~ l ~ I ~ f-l -le rn • " ! --- ii ! ., " l 1§ a. c rn C 1~ a.~ 0 C UJ "',.,., Cf) ~ :g ~ fil! <( ··1~ £ :i ~ (D ~ C W ~ ~& zij -·- A1 w, ,.,1;.~~~~~~~~--,~"'~""•"•"~""~"''•'•<I i>J!!Nri/""l-1'11Ql'UN()/1mi(} ~41&1'~L!'AJl'.\IO;,it:,'.!1 ! QI i iO ! C, ~ . ~, .. -··!--- ' l i ' ' i ! ! ~1 fi5 ,! ' h, ,, i ~' ~~- ti! ·, ! ~Ii ~~ i' ' ·! ~. ~~ • ~· Q, L,.i ~ it ~ -J"' ;3~yns :JIHd~YeOd01 ! i :~ I . :~ ! ' ' I' I"' ' • : I~ l ; J, 1r ·i I~ . . J ): ~-·' ' ' l ' ) ' ' ! ' I 90°: -~-'L:;, .. , ",,, inAii'iiiaoi "-,--- ' • ~ -~.~-,..,,,,.,,, ",,."'""''"""'·'"""'"·~-·'·"''_,.,,, . • .,,.,,.,.,-...... ,....,.,,,0,To,.~"-'""'""'~ ~ ,r i !: 0 ~ I ,_ .: '· I <'.,. ' '1 ---~ I l Renton Subdivision· Pre 16-000550 Preliminary Plat · Neighborhood Meeting Meeting Date: November 17, 2016 Meeting Time: 3:30 pm -5:30pm Location: Library room· Benson Hill Elementary School 18665 11611' Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 Attendee Address Signature 17006 106TH AVE SE 2 10708 SE 170TH ST ·-'----- 3 10707 SE 170TH ST 4 17015 108TH AVE SE --------------------------- 5 6 7 8 9 10 -~--....-~ 12 13 14 17019 108TH AVE SE 17023 108TH AVE SE 17025 108TH AVE SE 17029 108TH AVE SE 17033 108TH AVE SE 17024 106TH AVE SE µ~ \;it~2 SE 172ND ST 10618 SE 172ND ST 17030 106TH AVE SE L// V /7 17029 106TH A}E~_E_··--+'7'' ·-----·------__ _ 1· 15 Jt'f''\D N 'fe/~'eSf{'.)7023 1061 HAVE SE __ /)\J,,/fa{.,,t/(_ / ~ 16 17019 106TH AVE SE '---~ ---------------- _11__.,AJ"'"r,.,Cl!y'-'" ... ,6.::__wB.:.:m=-__ l?_o_n_10_6T_H_A_v_E_sE __ --"L,..l...,,f-,_,,,_._,_/;.,,~'--.:--.. ~fefttetZ- Meeting Minutes Renton Subdivision -Pre 16-000550 Preliminary Plat -Neighborhood Meeting Meeting Date: Meeting Time: November 17, 2016 3:30 pm -5:30pm Location: Library room -Benson Hill Elementary School 18665 116'h Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 Presenters in attendance: Development and Project Contact: Stein Skattum 10350 Rainier Ave. S Seattle, WA 98178 Architect: Mark Travers Architect 2315 E. Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 Public Attendees: Wayne P. Pitts 10517 SE 166'h St Renton, WA 98055 Simon Tekeste 17023 106'h Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Meeting Synopsis: Dustin Hoffman 2315 E. Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 Jerry Miller 10622 SE 172'' St Renton, WA 98055 Dan Palmer 16638 106'h SE Renton, WA 98055 11/18/2016 Stein Skattum discussed his goals with the subdivision. As the representative for his in-laws, whom currently live on the site, it is the goal to subdivide the property into (12) separate lots and provide initial site work, sidewalk improvements and street improvements, preparing for future sale within 5 years. The subdivision of 12 lots over 1.94 acres, and composing 11 houses with one lot for storm drainage, is consistent with current zoning (R-8). Public Concerns: 1. There was considerable concern about traffic impacts on the existing streets and surrounding area. Recent projects were discussed and there is doubt whether the prior traffic impact studies were sufficient to address added vehicles and needed infrastructure. The attendees voiced concern about additional traffic from this subdivision and whether it will be significantly detrimental to traffic loads. Overall . . Meeting Minutes 11/18/2016 relevant points of discussion were the need for stoplights and other measures to slow traffic and the need for the city to address dangerous access points. While not intimately familiar with traffic studies on other projects, the design team's opinion is that additional traffic from this subdivision will be small. 2. There was a concern about street and sidewalk improvements and specific requirements were discussed, including improvements to roads and in the Right of Way affecting the development of sidewalks and planting strips. The attendees were told that these improvements are only required from lot line to lot line and don't extend across neighboring properties. For context, it was discussed that the improvements to Right of Way will occur over the existing, road side ditch. The attendees' concerns included the need for sidewalks along the entire block to better provide a safe environment for pedestrians and in particular neighborhood children and the dangerous conditions that are developing with added traffic load. Hazards to children was a recurring theme throughout the afternoon's discussion. 3. The attendees were concerned about the feasibility of 11 houses on these 12 lots. Zoning was extensively discussed and relative to the R-8 zoning designation, the planning for 11 houses on this 1.94 acre subdivision is well under the allowable maximum. 4. There is a concern for changes to the rural character of the neighborhood. These included the desire to see future development that is "traditional and inviting" and integrative to the rest ofthe area. This included aesthetic concerns and building character, as well as consideration of building orientation resulting in frontal views of buildings from the street and direct pedestrian access from the sidewalk. 5. There is a concern about displacement of wildlife and changes to landscape and habitat. The understanding is the existing wildlife in the area contributes to the well-being for residents and care should be given for future development and design. 6. Lighting levels from the subdivision and road improvements were discussed. The attendees' concerns is that undesirable light pollution will grow with too much light, affecting their perception of privacy at darker lighting levels. These Meeting Minutes prepared by Dustin Hoffman I DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --------Renton® AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION Q6 3 n zop PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.eov ss being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: 1. On the cl. tf/!_ day of IJJVt!,fl't&;t , zol..fa_, I installed _j_ infotmation ~) ~f;;:_ the property located f 7otu ~ /]OJ..J,_ /d,,~ (t~ 1 for the following project: Renton Subdivision -106th Ave SE Project Name Stein Skatttum Owner Name public at 2. I have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an "X" to indicate the location of the installed sign. 3. This/these public information sign(s) was/were constructed and installed in locations in conformance with the requirements hapter 8 Title of Renton Municipal Code and the City's "Public Information Sign In llatio 'ha_.n·,.-,·r Ins lier Signature SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 1i_ day of 1J Ov' e,rnbuv 20 / U7. ,, .......... -........... -....................... ..., Notary Public Slate ot Washington NICOLE M SILVER My Appoinlment Expires Nov 16, 2017 ---- I My commission expires on ~f.c.f,1-f.__Jl/=-it'-'~'-~/_7_,_ __ 7 H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Plc1nnlng\Pub Info Sign Handout.docx Rev. 04/2016 ' DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -------Renton® AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC OUTREACH SIGN Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov lv11-H? ,1 0 2U/? STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) J: l}:,(3 {U71fl?/F being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: - -~ pf}_ ,J_ ,,L) _J_ 1. On the d .,--day of wi/tlft(k.f'--, 20-11.L., I installed public outreach sign(sl on Jhe property located at /7018 J 1 zo& I d,if!.f}{e >fl. RbJto for the following project: Renton Subdivision -106 th Ave SE Project Name Stein Skattum Owner Name 2. I have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an "X" to indicate the location of the installed sign. 3. This/these public information sign(s) was/were constructed and installed in locations in - conformance with the requirements of pter 7 Title 4 of Renton Municipal Code and the City's "Public Information Signs sta tion" ando ck ---- • NO ARY PUBLIC in and for the St!1::hington, residing at Zoon if I & Notary Public Slate ot Washington NICOLE M SILVER My Appointment Expires Nov 16, 2017 My commission expires on / / /; U /:Jd}/ 7 ~1 --- 3 H:\CED\Data\Forms-remplates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Pub Outreach Sign Handout.docx Rev, 02/2016 .. ~- Filed for Record at the request of SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 14616 SE 192nd St PO Box 58039 Renton, Washington 98058-1039 Document T1tle(s) WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE #112 Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released Ni A Additional reference numbers on page _ of document( s) Grantor(s) NIA Additional names on page ·-of document Grantee(s) SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT Additional names on page _ of document Legal Descnptmn NIA Add1tJonal legal 1s on page _1_ of document Assessor's Property Tax ParceVAccount Number(s) See Exb1b1t "B'' • SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 1887 -W A RESOLUTION of the Board of Comm1ss1oners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer D1stnct, King County, Washington, establishing Special Connection Charge #112 due Soos Creek Water and Sewer District for Contract 17 -96W WHEREAS, water mains and fac1ht1es have heretofore been installed as part of the proJect commonly known as Contract 17-96W, and WHEREAS, said water facilities will provide benefits and services to the properties described 1n Exh1b1t "A" attached hereto, which 1s made a part hereof by this reference thereto, and WHEREAS, 1t 1s the policy of Soos Creek Water and Sewer D1stnct to require reimbursement for any fac1ht1es built by the D1stnct and/or by an ind1v1dual when said fac1ht1es provide benefit and ,-, service to other properties, and WHEREAS, the D1stnct engineer has determined the properties benef1tted and computed = the value of said benefrt as apphed to said properties, and WHEREAS, the Board of Comm1ss1oners finds said benefits and the cost thereof to be reasonable, and the Special Connection Charge Rate based thereupon to be a fair allocation of such benefits and costs, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Comm1ss1oners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer D1stnct as follows SECTION 1: That Water Special Connection Charge No 112 1s hereby established for the properties and in the amounts shown m Exh1b1t "A", which 1s incorporated herein by this reference Said rate does not include cost of connecting, stub service, permits or 1nspect1ons, general fac1ht1es charges, or other latecomers that may be due on the properties RESOLUTION N0.1887-W SUBJECT: Estabhshmg Water Special Connection Charge #112 Due SCWSD Pertaining to Contract 17 -96W PAGE-1 ' . SECTION 2: That no service shall be proVlded to any of the property descnbed in Exh1b1t "A" pnor to payment to the D1stnct of the above estabhshed charges for all property held by the applicant which hes within the area descnbed in Exh1b1t "A" SECTION 3: That a Notice of the adoption of this Resolution as Special Connection Charge shall be recorded wtth the King County D1v1s1on of Records and Elections ADOPTED by the Board of Comm1ss1oners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, King County, Washington, at a regular open pubhc meeting th I RESOLUTION NO. 1887-W SUBJECT: Estabhsh1ng Water Special Connection Charge #112 Due SCWSD Pertaining to Contract 17-96W PAGE-2 SIZE 8" 8" 8" 8" 8" ,- EXHIBIT A Exhibit n A" SOOS CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE NO. 112 Contract 17-96W, Aker's Farm No. 5 Water Main Replacement Base Maps B-2, 3 & C-2 ON FROM TO Benson Road Intersection of Benson Intersection of Benson Road Road and S. 27th Street and S.E. 31st Avenue 106th Avenue S.E. Intersection of 106th Intersection of 106th Avenue S.E. and Benson Avenue S.E. and S.E. 1 66th Road Street S.E. 166th Street Intersection of S.E. 166th Intersection of S.E. 166th Street and 106th Avenue Street and 104th Avenue S.E. S.E. 105th Avenue S.E. Intersection of 105th 200 +/·feet North of the Avenue S.E. and S.E intersection of 105th 166th Street Avenue and S.E. 172nd Street 106th Avenue S.E Intersection of 106th 1 00 + /· feet North of the Avenue S.E. and S.E. intersection of 1 O 6th 1 6 6th Street Avenue and S.E. 172nd Street F \ 121014103\SCC112a doc . 03/26/99 c..:;- <.o ,-' C •< Exhibit "B" SOOS CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE NO 112 Contract 17-96W, Aker' s Farm No 5 Water Main Replacement Base Maps 8-2, 3 & C-2 Air properties benefited by new water service connections and/or meters, and wh1cll lie within 150 feet of the ex,stmg water mains as described in Exl11b1t "A". and which he w1th1n the following described parcels of land Base Map B-2 Those ponoons of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter ot Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W M , ,n King County, Wasl1111gton described as follows Lot 14, Olympic View Terrace, accordmu to the plat thereof as recorded m Vo!wnn 64 of Plats, Page 69, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the Southwesterly 150 feet of Lots 6 through 9, Block 1, Akers Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recordetl 111 Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington as measurecj parallel with the Southwesterly !111e thereof, TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 and 2, Block B, Aker's Faun No S, according lo !lie plat thereof as recorded m Volume 40 of Plats, Pri!Jf~ 27 records of Kmg County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the North 10 0 feet of the East ; 00 feet of !lie Southwest quarter ol said Northwest quarter of Section 29 and also lhe North 200 feet of 1tiat portion of the Southeast quarter of said Northwest quarter of Section 29 lying Westerly uf Benson Road, TOGETHER WITH the Northeasterly 150 feet of Lots 1, o <, 5. Block/\, /Iker'•, F,111n No 5. accord111g to t11c plat thereof as rnLorded 1n Volume JO of r.1dt~. P.1~1e 27, records of Kmg County, Wosl11ngton as rnea'>ured pcnaUPI with tile Nrntl1et1st1·rly lmt> 1/\e,eof, TOGETHER WITH the Soull,erly 150 feet of Lots 2. 4 dnd 5, Block A, Aker's Fann No 5, according lo the plat thereof as recorded 111 Volume 40 of Pl;its, Page 27, recu,cis of King County, Washington as measured palallel vvrth the Suutherly lme thereof TOGETHER WITH Loi 3, Block A. Aker's Fann No 5, occrnd111u to !110 plat t11e1cof ,is 1acorded 1n Volume 40 of PIDls, Page 27, records of K111u County, W.1s/l,nt11u11. TOGETHER WITH lot 1, Block 2, Akcr's Farm No 5, dccord111g to the plat tlwreuf <ls recorded rn Volume 40 ol PIDts, Page 27, records of K1rig County, VYa!::<h1ngton, TOGETHER WITH t11e East half of Lots 2 through 5, Block 2. Akcr's Fann No 5, accru-dmg to the plat thereof as recorded 1n Vofume 40 of Plats, Paue 27. ret.,ords of Kong County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 through 5, Block 3, Aker'-; F,mn No 5, uccord111g to tho plat thereof as recorded 1n Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of K111g County, Wastungton, TOGETHER WITH the West 150 leet of Lots 1, 3, 4 and 5, Block 4, Akcr's Farm Nu 5. according to the plat thereof as recorded 111 Volume 40 of Plats, Paqe 27, records of Kmg County, Wasl11ngton, Page 1 of 2 r 121014IOJ\":CC112h t~ir 04/06/::19 TOGETHER WITH the Northeasterly and Easterly 150 feel of Lois 2, 23,24 and 25, Block 4, Aker's Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats. Page 27. records of King County, Washington as measured parallel with the Northeasterly and Easterly lme thereof, Base Map 8-3 Those portions of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Sect1011 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, WM • 1n Kmg County, Waslungton described as follows The Westerly 150 feet of Lot 8, Block 8, Aker's Farrn No 6, accord111g to lhe plat thereof as recorded m Volume 42 of Plals, Page 15, records of Kmg County. Washington, TOGETHER WITH the Westerly 125 feet of the Nortl, 104 4 7 feel ul Lot 7. Block 8, Aker's Farm No 6, according lo the plat thereof as recorded 111 Volume 42 of Plats, Page 15, records of Kmg County, Washington. Base Map C-2 Those portions of the Northeast quarter of the S0utl1west quarter of Sect1011 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 E<lst, WM, 1n King County, Wa6h111gto11 uescrobPd Js follows The East half of Lots 5 throughl 2, Block 2. Aker's F,llm No 5, acrrndrll!/ 10 the plat the1eof as recorded 111 Volume 40 of Plats, Pdge 27, 1ccords of K111u County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH lots 5 through 12. Block 3, and the Nor th 7 5 feet of the East 140 feet of Lot 13, Block 3, Aker's Fa,111 No 5. ,1ccord111g to the plat thereof as recorded in Volu,ne 40 of Plats. Page 27, recmds of K111rr Cm,nty, Wosfm1qto11, TOGETHER WITH the Wost 150 lent of Lots 5 tlirouLJh 12, Block 4, JIHI tlv, North 60 feet of the West 130 feet of Lot 13, Bio, k 4, AkPr ·, Far 11, No 5 according ta the plat thereof c1s recorded m Volume 40 of Pl.its, P.1gc 27. 18-corcJ.:, m Kmg County, Wasl11ngto11, SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE $37 79 per Front Foot Page 2 of 2 f\121014\0J\SC'r'll:Zbdni" 04/1)6/99 r----r--1 r ----·-· 1-+ --_j;; --~ f ---i I I I !--iE 11 ___,., ·-1 I--i-I I + L d-: ,1 1 I i 1 :_--1-· 1 -i~ ·T r· J L_. 1--1 I-_J_ t-)U) "" ., 1--i 11· . I i I r r~-·,__,. ~--%-1-.:=====h-.::::_iJ I · 1 ·1·-\-' +·-· . ~ I··· 1· ~t 1 1 1· :;;R.~ F H'is NO s -: 1 > 1--1 J 1 1 i l I . C ,, •. ---, -~ I I --1 r ----L--I 1----._J_ _J gr--r T ----1 : I I * 1· t: 'i:t--' --j ! f----!-_j : I ! I I ,., • I 1§~--l \-I 1--i ~ I . I, 1-··- ~ I_ /·--- L_--J-1--1- I I ._i i I I ~i (t,l . () i LU, '"I---~ i I I \. ___ _ L L _ _I_L _____ J.... __ _;_...;. ..... ----sE 1 :r2rit1 sr----;-----------....,-1 _,. --~ ... / ' I I . )- i / / / ' .-1 ... \. I \ • , / r !---{; i KELSE\,A ' / r I [,/ ' ~ r ;-1,,,nl, I, --~· ~J ---- , ·-1, ----l(LIFFdsuc . l,sT- ' ' Th,s map/plat is being furnished as an aid in locating the herein described land in relation to adjoinino streets, natural boundaries and other land, and 1s not a survey of the lar.d depicted. Except to the extent a policy of title insurance ,s expressly modified by endorsement, 1f any, the company does not insure dimensions, distanc,;s, location of easements, acreage or other matters shown thereon. geoAdvantage ' . SUBDIVISION Guarantee/Certificate Number: Issued By: 4,1,Fidelity Nat~?.~.~c~ l!!!~· 611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation, herein called the Company GUARANTEES Stein Skattum herein called the Assured, against actual loss not exceeding the liability amount stated in Schedule A which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. 2. The Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amount of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall the Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth in Schedule A. Please note carefully the liability exclusions and limitations and the specific assurances afforded by this guarantee. If you wish additional liability, or assurances other than as contained herein, please contact the Company for further information as to the availability and cost. Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Countersigned By: Authorized Officer or Agent Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 1 Fidelity National Title Insurance Company By: Attest: President Secretary Printed: 12.27.16@ 09:27 AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL 'TIT --INSURANCE COMPANY Gv~RANTEE/CERTIFICATE NO. 611148918 . . Liability $1,000.00 ISSUING OFFICE: Title Officer: Bill Fisher/ Mike McCarthy/ Terry Sarver Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500 188th St SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Phone: (425)771-3031 Main Phone: (425)771-3031 Email: Unit2(cJ)fnf.com SCHEDULE A Premium $350.00 Effective Date: December 21, 2016 at 08:00 AM The assurances referred to on the face page are: Tax $34.30 That, according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matter relative to the following described property: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Title to said real property is vested in: George W. Subic and Frances M. Subic, husband and wife subject to the matters shown below under Exceptions, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority. END OF SCHEDULE A Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 2 Printed: 12.27.16 @09:27 AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 For APN/Parcel ID(s): 008700-0270-09 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description LOT 11, BLOCK 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 40 OF PLATS, AGE 27, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 3 Printed: 12.27.16@09:27 AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL Tll INSURANCE COMPANY ( RANTEE/CERTIFICATE NO. 611148918 SCHEDULE B GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: H. Reservations and exceptions in United States Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. Covenants, conditions, restrictions, recitals, reservations, easements, easement provisions, dedications, building setback lines, notes, statements, and other matters, if any, but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, or source of income, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law, as set forth on the Plat of Ake~s Farms No. 5. Recording Number: 3436169 2. Notice of Water Special Connection Charge #112, and the terms and conditions thereof: Recording Date:November 14, 2000 Recording No.: 20001114000732 3. Rights of the public to make necessary slopes for cuts or fills upon the Land in the reasonable original grading of streets, avenues, alleys and roads, as disclosed in the Plat. 4. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year (amounts do not include interest and penalties): Year: 2016 Tax Account Number: 008700-0270-09 Levy Code: 2128 Assessed Value-Land: $190,000.00 Assessed Value-Improvements: $123,000.00 General and Special Taxes: Billed: $4,247.89 Paid: $4,247.89 Unpaid: $0.00 5. The search did not disclose any open mortgages or deeds of trust of record, therefore the Company reserves the right to require further evidence to confirm that the property is unencumbered, and further reserves the right to make additional requirements or add additional items or exceptions upon receipt of the requested evidence. END OF EXCEPTIONS Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page4 Printed: 12.27.16@09:27 AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANC -OMPANY GUARANTEE/C ___ IFICATE NO. 611148918 SCHEDULE B (continued) NOTES The following matters will not be listed as Special Exceptions in Schedule B of the policy. There will be no coverage for loss arising by reason of the matters listed below because these matters are either excepted or excluded from coverage or are not matters covered under the insuring provisions of the policy. Note A: Note B: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per Amended RCW 65.04.045. Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description within the body of the document: LT. 11, BLK. 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5 Tax Account No.: 008700-0270-09 The Public Records indicate that the address of the improvement located on said Land is as follows: 17022 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 END OF NOTES END OF SCHEDULE B Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.27.16@09:27 AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 Page 5 I ER'S FARMS NO. .-~. / iN THEN£ V4 or TH[ SW 1/4 AND TH( sti:Of THEN w 1/41 s:.c 29,1 nN A 5E.w y < , ••• .. , ... ,. ~, ,,,~, < ".f"H r,~,,,.. OCTvBEA, ;944 . · .... ~ IU .. IJi(~ .... ~.,,._lQ TMrJ_{!. o,o., or.~.-!!-A ~ .... --~.Q.l!~HQ._ ---.,,,,,,~,,u~,,'"•11• tuil11'i(D.lJ!OA,.,~ T>OII.{~ D>Tor6 '1,~ A !1 "°'4 _.!JA!Wt.il..lJIOO ---- '"'''"'•', _...,, ¢1' tt.-cf(O,...lT ~IIOlt•t '"'"' "'""''CJ..!!!lf~ --------lill!J~, .. ,u ... ~dr..:(O.,..rr <-l'lllol•I t "'ll•IP"Hl'flHT .... l?~[.,T~,t, JUT OI ---- ei {X,~UH~fOII' 'J><I UtG«-J>HT •U"INlia. (,JYVi,\. ~1lll,_¥'.'-" t,,,, ~•-t\S: • 0 ''"" .Q~,.!1;.!!rJ:t:l SJ..'i!.~l.1..N_ J;91..J 'OnNo;:.lt itl'll(l,lft ~, (IU/f,.,. 1.rt, ..... #~T~ra- " " SCAlE 2oon:£T TO i INCH ,, • " " " _I•! i ' • ' ' AO'/ J S10R:P ::iv,,. £~,:;1~HR T. ! .... , .... ".~ fH .. J .. Q j ~t·,tJJ u,Q 1..c...,cH .. l, -~ r,;t "Olr•!-"I' ~.11,ttll ~ I"( 1s,,·~wri~ ,;,.;..,n[J-l'H~T,c~ 11~ , ,, >o1·•-•AA•I ~U!l,,O' ij ,UtV' '•! )(>,.Jl'J" c:i.,n A'.,;;,~,,~ "'rsr Vi.JlM(.u• :,...i,~(• :,, r.r ~°"'"""~J"' a,..,.n• ~S.O.oJl:l•O'< ~. n11• n~ •U,w ,., uur ,_,,°'" ,,,.r.-.i: Wt,: ... ,w,,. -.i•o-•w tt:!n n.r.1 ..:«:,~ l~ -.;..U1 CIN.!1.131'1-0 _,.~-~~ .. Ullo'! 11\0ic,~tu;<'IIQl,f T~twtJl'UII( <;0" !"1;\· .... i:,,~,,,o.., i«: rt 11(1.1'>< 11,r•t .. o,;r,.,.ur,;.o,,"'l~ T•l•l-c.o,Mo•.-u..1~.1,111!.1,T o..uu TO l,l,•O*Ul" <'~ v, 1. 1:,:00 •· ·.i •t~lt-. te ,,. ,.,::~ u.1 rt t-.:l"filtO ,~ · N "'! .,. ~ it,. ;,q .;n., «NOW -'l.c..-t~ I• '•CH HU[ ~11 ,..,., wt, l>,I 1Jlftfl~l!.NC~. ~•.-,t• ;: •~e. •~, (~.o;H Mtl,1'~ 1f rt.w.1,r,,,,. N:u,i;.t M 'll-l L•~~ wt•tt, '••"€~. ~Ol1P :,u.1.•lf: !>o!'!; ••• , •>oC!Et•,i•1 •c Tl<( i,.c ,._,.,.. -vt..·c •lllt"t• •~1.r•H'I i.wo ,v,,.~u l'<-"""' ><:,ot~><. ""0 "\,E J!(,..[,W: 11;,o>•L\ ll\;4La, •·J·.P~I~ ~ ,.tat;J':JT~~t·M:~,.'£ ~ ~"'ll!tl 1()0 ,..,.._..: .. ,~ ...... ~,111,~rs. ,,.,¢ fr<t .,. .... , "l!lW!l.t .... '4~UtAA"I ~(~,U ro• (UU 0-l" r,,~1 ~'°°"' -:t,.,t .C"s. &;;. ,~~, •uc1i. ¢• ~••.au 1;1C ,•~nw!Ww ;,; ™'' PL•!. '-,j ·~1,:,0,~,,..~ •tl..!l~ij~.._, ~,..c,,.._ ~, 'I.. Tl,( '"•rt,~ AAO "'t~uu ~"" "r•te~ "" .... ~ .. [H'IIVIM!I' •[ .... ,1 ~[Ho~":'ll !f> c,• ...... ~(}! M<ll Y .. t.'l ~1$_lo2~ c.o.• .:ir _ \2~-. ;, ,,.. -~ ~ , .• -.·.•!f.. ·~f)i",{~1 ~··•er••~~ ,... .. ,., ''°'·"'" ~· ~,,.; . . ), .. f...~ ;'!.•~;J.t•. :..u,,r~ .. ~,l?.i;'. Li"'!!. .f~.;.~£. .. ~IIJ~S-_ ~·v~~,t~:1L' ;z:;;:,,/;,/.WJ..~c·c.~-r~. ·~ 0 .~1i~ .... ~·,~ ~i -1~1 t~~ ,\".\t • OIi" ""~N 1:1 Kr"( I'(~ ll!oCtllCt~"'(O f~( fllltCD!\ll;O(D<CAUCN,,1,l<O 1t"'3 ~· L!U[D "tlWl "llt•~!hEl -D <lloll!£.a..[~'!"l<[SOJ,lf-',1r~[,~ 'JI(( ... , ,a,,,.,u, CT ..... : tH *I»,,, ~,u ... ~ ~J ~ •o~~ 1Mt"'C ~ ,.,i .. 1.au~ ""··~tu,.,~•~: •11eor• ~. :t•l n;r ~.ll ,.u, ~·, u.,1t.,. t,.(.iA.~CW~[ OCEMEN1 ,...., ,,.~tiilt.11 ti< •• ,,., .. ~ 1 U ~.e, ~· •C.1tU.H<~ll(,n,[~lU.:.>IIO, •lo:'1•1r ""*'-'!, OUl~,.~,nnllt, l ;,"1<).1( .... Q; T. e~•~,H. T') I<( '"0•~ t,:.M !><E. Hts1DIS' ».oe•~[· ~!1•(1'.t,,llT C,l>lt'-IH:C>IH -~ M'" ~,ro~ IIK/UtciJ•te 1-t I l,<l>j .... , fe,,,f ~0"1~ :~~n~M[I! '• ... D [11,;.,t J()<~C:W,EQl-1:D 1'1>T "<l WC,"'lfl•JWtNT ••! "l nu •~Q ~-ij~ ,u, •• • uc. ;cto ,~• '><I: ~It r •,.} ·~~ •c.11 ~ ••C"1•• wti.1.;,.(,. •,c, '"'' ... , µ,~ :,!Ti~[•$ or :i.,,o ..,OUQ~1 D4 c,,. c,,.r,. i• .. ?O l!o•: '"" WO( ~:;l,-,CA,UD ,:i u !.t.i"t r1tt.11n,~JT .. _..E~1 ... .,.~ T'I'-~ 1,< Wl .,,,,t, ,, n.i ~ -cuit H~, r;, µ1 o ~-i,;,u.,,,:,i. ,~ w:hW »fi~C« l IUVt ~,•ow~,:,,n v, .. ~ .. ~ A>,;D ~r,.ItD 1.1, ~· "". )t•J.,'Ml c.,., -"""'"'""''""""" ~ >i/JGO C DCUt,1 ...,,~•, 0-.:11.,{ 11•1to1o•"'I n••t"' ,n, ..... .r;TQ,o ~S ~,..: ~~...?1~- R£SlRJCl iONS .lSt l.:lflfljtl!',J'V' .,._t,c1u;'lt~ ilO ,.,. /'tl'f.>l..,_¥ v\tJ 1cu,r 1.0-a, lCt~ • • U.fS, l':l J{, ,,w, , ·~· ,. ].-~:, \U. 11.• , I.Of I, ... ~:Iii 1.l'IIJ ~, ~. kJI I, ww,,•Ut MJH(;rtb 'II) I-t (JIO•M'<4l l ;,11( l;,C ,.:if 1)11 l'l;:lllt(t~ ~· u:f':lfl•1.t ll(O WIU:OAMUOI.O, OIi flf10l¢, OIi; Dil'IOIH< t iAA~GIO OJI 1Uo,4rtUO .... [~IJ.~ Tio( ,;M~U~t /'JI ~wr ,-Olt'!"iOII ~ ltli~ •1.11.rwu. tc ,Usnu,'i »~:-t. U I'! lga 1·1~H ,IO!i.!fl"Trl~ ~~!C r'f.oM)S(Jlt.,Nl'•tt'<ll::ll l•IUK, ~ ~·.Alic, ,1,;,1rMfl TO ")IC.,.,..,, ;Oki Cl' .... ~ ;;Q\; .. "11 t(J."" "" .. A'<Of'.;flWJ(..,. ~!N~- Vt'<l'II TW~ t,,r~ ,00•1:.,ot<•T Tl<l~~or,-.,1,....:. =~n ,.~"'""' ~";'.'~~~~\~~.,;.,? :.i•~ :5~':t,~~~,~u l\COIII)'. y,,.,.;CJ!l!\?t.'°"'"'"""'l{':ij-•••• lntJ • ~ 1..1t11S HN1'(~-"I" •;'°'>:• This map·'plat is being furnished as an aid in locating the herein described Land i11 relation to adjoining streets, natural boundaries and other hmd, and is not a survey of the land depicted. Except to the extent a policy of title insurance is expressly modified by endorsem..:nt if any, thic: Company does not insure dimcnsions, distances, location of ea~ements, acreage or other matters shown thereon. Order: 611148918 Page 1 of 1 Requested By: fidna3692, Printed: 12/21/2016 4:04 AM Doc: KC:MPLT 40-00027 ,,;, ,. ,.<. 'j • •. ' ' V <"'' ;,-.,, .-:!.·· ' i I 1 ·l 4 ~ .... 0 CX) r- ~ B ! (!] ~ IY) First American Title INSURANCE COMPANY FIN to, R-II ROl\l&I Ii Filed f<ir Record at Request afflRST AMERICAN TITLE U)DQ. 2tl0 AVENUE -TI\.£. w-lNGTON $8104 i 1978 JAN 12 AM 8 30 OIR£CTOR RECORDS !. ElECTIO'-· KIP'lG \,<:' .,.;r,.,i!'Y, W!, : I G CCUNTY EXCISE TAX PAID j ______ -------"AN 1 11978 ..... . ,;:-; E451.353 Statutory Wananty Deed THEGRANTOR DONALD O TEETER .AND BErr'Y J. TEETER,. h.nsband and wife for and tn coMidera.twtl of . ttN DOLLARS AND OTHER VALUABLE CONSIDERATIONS in hand paid, eonvey.s and •~ts t.o GEORGE W. SU.BIG AND FRANCES M S~IC, husband and wife KING , State of LOT ll, BLOCK 4, AKEj\ 1 S FARMS NO. 5, ./IC CORDING TO THE eLA'r T!!EREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 40 OF PLA'IS, PAGE 27 , RECORDS OF UNG COUNT'i; l>ASlllllGTbl<. SI'tuATE: IN THE CITY OF Rl::N'l'ON, COUNTY OF KING. ST.ATE Of' WASHINGTON•· Subject to easem.e~ts, -ref.ttictim1.s al\d resen·atioas of record., i.f any. /7 day of STATE.· '. OF WASHINGTON, C.,. eo.,,,, ..i k .1 w c. I ,·, ,.J9 l 7 __ bi P .. ,i&.,_U.:._ 4<:;,, .: ... E!e<'L .. cu.u.) ~--Jl·---:::-:,.1,q~ ... (5EAL) • 1.·· •17 ,.. :r 7er1r7.-e 0n !hi, d,,y penooally •ppeared belore me /)ON{/<t:) /J rtEtrfl.-C /7A 'P ~.) to me bmwn to be lbe. individual S. described in and who ex-ecttted. the wilhiD aod loregoiD.g fmtrurnmt, and acluao1'1edged. tlut -r,Jc'r signed the same as r11e-1R free and -vohmtar1 a ud deed_, !ot' the mes and purp,a,cl therein mentioned. ~lVBN under my hand and oBlcbl ,uJ ~b / 7!x::d 2!?";;:~~_('-L-, 19 77 ~ .. ~!~ P11blk; in: a.flld Jc,,-,ifS1a1e. oJ' Wa.t,\i,tglo,,1 reddhit Ill .,k" t'7v ;t;:, ,lJ FAT COW --... ~ ·--·_, . .,..,, --. . '-~.-,....--.... -·_~,,. .. --..., . ··--.. -~.... . .,_...... -- •· ,, '.: I.~. ' SUBDIVISION Guarantee/Certificate Number: Issued By: 4,tFidelity Nat~?,~.~c~l!!!~· 611148917 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation, herein called the Company GUARANTEES Stein Skattum herein called the Assured, against actual loss not exceeding the liability amount stated in Schedule A which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. 2. The Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amounl of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall lhe Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth in Schedule A. Please note carefully the liability exclusions and limitations and the specific assurances afforded by this guarantee. If you wish additional liability, or assurances other than as contained herein, please contact the Company for further information as to the availability and cost. Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Countersigned By: Authorized Officer or Agent Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 1 Fidelity National Title Insurance Company By: Attest: President Secretary Printed: 12.23.16 @04:12 PM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148917 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY GUARANTEE/CERTIFICATE NO. 611148917 Liability $1,000.00 ISSUING OFFICE: Title Officer: Bill Fisher I Mike McCarthy I Terry Sarver Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Phone: (425)771-3031 Main Phone: (425)771-3031 Email: Unit2""fnf.com SCHEDULE A Premium $350.00 Effective Date: December 14, 2016 at 08:00 AM The assurances referred to on the face page are: Tax $34.30 That, according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matter relative to the following described property: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Title to said real property is vested in: Frances M. Subic, who acquired title as Frances M. Sanders, as her separate estate subject to the matters shown below under Exceptions, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority. END OF SCHEDULE A Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page2 Printed: 12.23.16@04:12 PM WA-FT-FTMA--01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148917 For APN/Parcel ID(s): 008700-0265-06 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description LOT 10, BLOCK 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 40 OF PLATS, PAGE 27, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page3 Printed: 12.23.16 @04:12 PM WA-FT -FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148917 FIDELITY NATIONAL Tl, Le INSURANCE COMPANY uuARANTEE/CERTIFICATE NO. 611148917 SCHEDULE B ( continued) 5. Soos Creek Water and Sewer District-King County, Washington -Resolution No. 1887-W and the terms and conditions thereof: Recording Date: Recording No.: November 14, 2000 20001114000732 A resolution of the Board of Commissioners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, King County, Washington, establishing Special Connection Charge #112 due Soos Creek Water and Sewer District for Contract 17-96W. Affects: West 150 feet of said premises and portions of other property END OF EXCEPTIONS NOTES The following matters will not be listed as Special Exceptions in Schedule B of the policy. There will be no coverage for loss arising by reason of the matters listed below because these matters are either excepted or excluded from coverage or are not matters covered under the insuring provisions of the policy. Note A: Note B: Note: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per Amended RCW 65.04.045. Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description within the body of the document: LT 10, BLK4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5 Tax Account No.: 008700-0265-06 Note: The Public Records indicate that the address of the improvement located on said Land is as follows: 17018 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 END OF NOTES END OF SCHEDULE B Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.23.16@04:12PM WA-FT -FTMA--01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148917 Pages SUBDIVISION Guarantee/Certificate Number: Issued By: • Fidelity National Title' Insurance Company 611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation, herein called the Company GUARANTEES fA/'111 ,j O ?1' I} -,JI/ Stein Skattum herein called the Assured, against actual loss not exceeding the liability amount stated in Schedule A which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. 2. The Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amount of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall the Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth in Schedule A. Please note carefully the liability exclusions and limitations and the specific assurances afforded by this guarantee. If you wish additional liability, or assurances other than as contained herein, please contact the Company for further information as to the availability and cost. Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Countersigned By: AuthOrized Officer or Agent Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 1 Fidelity National Title Insurance Company By: Attest: President Secretary Printed: 12.27.16@09:27AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY GUARANTEE/CERilFICATE NO. 611148918 Liability $1.000.00 ISSUING OFFICE: Title Officer: Bill Fisher/ Mike McCarthy/ Terry Sarver Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Phone: (425)771-3031 Main Phone (425)771-3031 Email: Unit2tn>fnf.com SCHEDULE A Premium $350.00 Effective Date: December 21, 2016 at 08:00 AM The assurances referred to on the face page are: . . T<111. " . . : . . . . $34.30 That, according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matter relative to the following described property: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Title to said real property is vested in: George W. Subic and Frances M. Subic, husband and wife subject to the matters shown below under Exceptions, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority. END OF SCHEDULE A Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page2 Printed: 12.27.16@ 09:27 AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 For APN/Parcel ID(s): 008700-0270-09 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description LOT 11, BLOCK 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 40 OF PLATS, AGE 27, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page 3 Printed: 12.27.16@09:27 AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCI: vJMPANY GUARANTEE/CE . FICATE NO. 611148918 SCHEDULE B GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: H. Reservations and exceptions in United States Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. Covenants, conditions, restrictions, recitals, reservations, easements, easement provisions, dedications, building setback lines, notes, statements, and other matters, if any, but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, or source of income, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law, as set forth on the Plat of Aker's Farms No. 5. Recording Number: 3436169 2. Notice of Water Special Connection Charge #112, and the terms and conditions thereof: Recording Date: November 14, 2000 Recording No.: 20001114000732 3. Rights of the public to make necessary slopes for cuts or fills upon the Land in the reasonable original grading of streets, avenues, alleys and roads, as disclosed in the Plat. 4. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year (amounts do not include interest and penalties): Year: 2016 Tax Account Number: 008700-0270-09 Levy Code: 2128 Assessed Value-Land: $190,000.00 Assessed Value-Improvements: $123,000.00 General and Special Taxes: Billed: $4,247.89 Paid: $4,247.89 Unpaid: $0.00 5. The search did not disclose any open mortgages or deeds of trust of record, therefore the Company reserves the right to require further evidence to confirm that the property is unencumbered, and further reserves the right to make additional requirements or add additional items or exceptions upon receipt of the requested evidence. END OF EXCEPTIONS Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Page4 Printed: 12.27.16@09:27 AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL E INSURANCE COMPANY JARANTEE/CERTIFICATE NO. 611148918 SCHEDULE B (continued) NOTES The following matters will not be listed as Special Exceptions in Schedule B of the policy. There will be no coverage for loss arising by reason of the matters listed below because these matters are either excepted or excluded from coverage or are not matters covered under the insuring provisions of the policy. Note A: Note B: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per Amended RCW 65.04.045. Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description within the body of the document: LT. 11, BLK. 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5 Tax Account No.: 008700-0270-09 The Public Records indicate that the address of the improvement located on said Land is as follows: 17022 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 END OF NOTES END OF SCHEDULE B Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.27.16@09:27 AM WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 Page 5 .- c.:; c:, ,. , r ,, Filed for Record at the request of SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 14616 SE 192nd St PO Box 58039 Renton, Washington 98058-1039 Document T1tle(s) WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE #112 Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released N/ A Addthonal reference numbers on page_ of document(s) Grantor(s) NIA Additional names on page __ of document Grantee(s) SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT Add1tional names on page_ of document Legal Descnptton N/ A Additional legal ts on page -1...... of document Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number(s) See Exh1b1t "B" SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 1887-W A RESOLUTION of the Board of Comm1ss1oners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer D1stnct, King County, Washington, establishing Special Connection Charge #112 due Soos Creek Water and Sewer D1stnct for Contract 17 -96W WHEREAS, water mains and fac1ht1es have heretofore been installed as part of the proJect commonly known as Contract 17-96W, and WHEREAS, said water facilrttes will provide benefrts and services to the properties described 1n Exh1b1t "A" attached hereto, which 1s made a part hereof by this reference thereto, and WHEREAS, It 1s the pohcy of Soos Creek Water and Sewer Dtstnct to require reimbursement for any fac1ht1es built by the D1stnct and/or by an 1nd1v1dual when said fac1ht1es provide benefit and •"' service to other properties, and ,c,-, WHEREAS, the District engineer has determined the properties benef1tted and computed = the value of said benefit as applied to said properties, and WHEREAS, the Board of Comm1ss1oners finds said benefits and the cost thereof to be reasonable, and the Special Connection Charge Rate based thereupon to be a fair allocation of such benefits and costs, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Comm1ss1oners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District as follows SECTION 1: That Water Special Connection Charge No 112 1s hereby established for the properties and in the amounts shown 1n Exh1b1t "A", which 1s incorporated herein by this reference Said rate does not include cost of connecting, stub service, permits or 1nspecttons, general facrl1t1es charges, or other latecomers that may be due on the properties RESOLUTION NO. 1887 -W SUBJECT: Establishing Water Special Connection Charge #112 Due SCWSD Pertaining to Contract 17 -96W PAGE-1 SECTION 2: That no SE!IVJce shall be proVJded to any of the property descnbed 1n Exh1b1t "A" pnor to payment to the D1stnct of the above established charges for all property held by the applicant which hes within the area described m Exh1b1t "A" SECTION 3: That a Notice of the adoption of this Resolution as Special Connection Charge shall be recorded with the King County D1v1s1on of Records and Elections ADOPTED by the Board of Comm1ss1oners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, Kmg County, Washington, at a regular open pubhc meeting th I RESOLUTION N0.1887-W SUBJECT: Estabhshmg Water Special Connection Charge #112 Due SCWSD Pertaining to Contract 17-96W PAGE-2 i st day of April, 1999 = _,. ,_ SIZE 8" 8" 8" 8" 8" EXHIBIT A Exhibit UA" SOOS CREEK WATER & SEWER DISlRICT WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE NO. 112 Comract 17-96W, Aker's Fann No. 5 Water Main Replacement Base Maps B-2, 3 & C-2 ON FROM TO Benson Road Intersection of Benson Intersection of Benson Road Road and S. 27th Street and S.E. 31st Avenue 106th Avenue S.E. Intersection of 1 06th Intersection of 106th Avenue S.E. and Benson Avenue S.E. and S.E. 166th Road Street S.E. 166th Street Intersection of S.E. 166th Intersection of S.E. 166th Street and 106th Avenue Street and 104th Avenue S.E. S.E. 105th Avenue S.E. Intersection of 1 O 5th 200 + /· feet North of the Avenue S.E. and S.E intersection of 105th 1 6 6th Street Avenue and S.E. 172nd Street 106th Avenue S.E Intersection of 106th 1 00 + /· feet North of the Avenue S.E. and S.E. intersection of 1 0 6th 166th Street Avenue and S.E. 172nd Street F \121014\03\SCC112a doc· 03/25/99 ,,, CT> c--= \.-.:, '~ _.,. ~ •.. •.. c_~ <., ,· ' ( ,, Exhibit ·s· SOOS CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE NO 112 Contract 17-96W, Aker's Fann No S Water Main Replacement Base Maps B-2, 3 & C-2 All properties benefited by new water service connectrons and/or 111eters, and winch l1e w1th1n 150 feet of the ex1st1r,g water mains as described on Exlub1t "A", and which he w1th1n the following described parcels of land Base Map B-2 Those po,t1ons of the Southeast 11uaner of the Northwest quarter of Section 29, Townslup 23 North, Range 5 East, W M , 1n King County, Waslungton described as follows Lot 14, Olympic View Terrace, accordmo lo the plat thereof as recorded 1n Volurno 64 of Plats, Page 69, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the Southwesterly 150 feet of Lots 6 through 9, Block 1, Aker's Farm No S. according to the plat thereof as rec(J(ded 111 Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County1 Washmgton as measured parallel with lho Southwesterty lme thereof, TOGETHER WITH Lois 1 and 2, Block B. Aker's Faun No S, according to tho plat thereof as recorded 1n Volume 40 of Plats, Pago 27 records of K111g County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the North 100 feet of Iha East 100 feet of the Southwest qudrtcr of said Northwest quarter of Section 29 and also the North 200 feet of t11at portion of the Southeast quarter of satd Northwest quarter or Section 29 ly1nu Westerly of Benson Road, TOGETHER WITH the Northeasterly 150 feet of Lots 1, 0 4, 5. Block/\, Aker\ F,11111 No 5, according to ll1C· plat thereof as re1...ordod 111 Voiu111e 40 or r1f11~. P.1~Je 27, records of King County, Wosh1ngton as rnea">ured pnrallPJ with the Northe.istPrly lmP thereof. TOGETHER WITH the Southerly 150 feet of Lois 2, 4 ancl 5, Block A, Aker's Fann No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded 111 Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, rew,ds of King County, Washington as measured parnllel with lhe Suutherly hrm thereof TOGETHER WITH Lot 3, Block A, Aker's Fan11 No 5, ,1,,1.,rnd111u lo 1hr. plat the1cor ,1-s iecorded m Volume 40 of Pints, Page 27, recor<ls or K1rig County, Wt1slung1or1, TOGETHER WITH Lot 1, Block 2, Aker's Farm No 5, <1ccord1ng to tho plat thereof <1s recorded m Volume 40 of Pia ls, Page 27, records of Kmy County, Wa&htngto11, TOGETHER WITH t11e EJsl half of Lots 2 through 5, Block 2, Aker's Faun No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded 111 Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of Kmg County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 through 5, Block 3, Akcr's Fann No 5, acco1d111g to t11c pl,11 thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of K111y County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the West 150 feet of Lots 1, 3, 4 and 5, Block 4, Akcr's Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded 1n Vofwm" 40 of PIJts, Paqe 27, rec.orcls of Kmg County, Washington, Page 1 of 2 r 121014IO:J\<;CC'l 121i du.-0-4/06/99 TOGETHER WITH the Northeasterly and Easterly 150 feet of lots 2, 23,24 and 25, Block 4, Aker's Fam, No 5, according to the plat thereof as rec0<ded m Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington as measured parallel with the Northeasterly and Easterly line thereof, Base Map B-3 Those portmns of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Sect1011 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W M , 1n King County, Washington descnbed as follows The Westerly 150 feet of Lot 8, Block 8, Aker's Fann No 6, according to the plat thereof as recorded III Volume 42 of Plats, Page 15, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the Westerly 125 feet of the Norll1 104 4 7 feet of Lot 7, Block 8, Aker 1s Farm No 6, according to the plat thereof as recorded m Volume 42 of Pl;its, Page 15, records of King County, Washmgton, Base Map C-2 Those portions of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest ~uarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East. W M . 1n King County, Wa,h111gto11 uesc11bPd as follows The East half of Lots 5 tiJroughl 2, Block 2, Akers F,mn No 5, acrn1d111e1 to tl1c plat the1eor as recorded 1n Volume 40 of Plats, Puge 27, rccorrls of K111u County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH Lois 5 through 12, Block 3, and the Nrnth 75 feet of the East 140 feet of Lot 13, Block 3, Aker's Fa1111 No 5, -1ccord111g 10 the plat tl1urcof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plilts, Page 27, records or 1<.,nq County, Wa,:;.lm1qto11. TOGETHER WITH tl1e Wost 150 feet of Lots 5 tiiro1,qi, 12, Block 4, JIHI tlv, North 60 feet of the West 130 feet of Lot 13, Bio, k 4, Ak1•1's fmm No , according to the plat thereof ns recorded 111 VollJme 40 of flJ.its, P..i9c 27. 1ecord~ or Kmg County. Washmgton, SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE $37 79 per Front Foot Page 2 of 2 f 11 ;t\O 14\03\Sffl 12b dnr D4/U6/9!1 This map/plo,t 1s being furnished as an aid in locating the herein desaibed land in relation to adjoining streets, natural boundaries and other land, and is not a survey of the land depicted. Except to the extent a policy of title insurance 1s expressly modified by endorsement, if any, the company does not insure dimensrons, distances, location of easements, acreage or other matters shown thereon. geoAdvantag KER'S FARMS N< 5 , N THE N £ t/4 or "'."'.-i[ SW •/4 AND 1HE S c:-:i;or TH t ''.\ W l/ 4, S.£(, 29 .1 23N R H. WY OC.":;CBE.R, ii:J44 tuu1-lD ~J.-1.C f~tt_U OAT Ot."?,!."' Q ,,.u --J..0.Jt~..!!U _ ---.,,,,.r~r-tt"'~ .. tr• t11&1i1,N1'0AM~•"f411"1 f'Hll.~l, PY Of~\~-A ~.'1oiC _MS.U.i,!i.r.JJlQ!T ____ _ f_.., • ..,.,.-o"'"llfii~Q~Ur~11-•1 11 .. ,p,ur,.~~ ·~n,~t'*l, .. , .. ,,_,.,!If __ -~ _ ,t DIILT JOJ0¥f0 Ir t)olf Mllll. W\lijf> •lJ'l\~I .... C°'1\I"'" (ji'ff<U_:t:,.\" 1)11 Df.t~-A.0 I~ A' ,, ,<>-,.,.) ~ SC.ALE 200FEET TO, 11-;(.H ~ I ROY J S10R:[Y (Iv:._ (O.Gl~f!P '"-<·l ,_,. :• ~·n·J ••-"'o 1 ,-0~1•t -1=oa11•u.u I'!;( .. u,~1.q.r fl.L.UlH• ~, ~ K~rawu~~~-• :,,n,,,a,. "~"'' 11 '<*'•.i,..:t ~ca1,11,w 11, !1e1n ·~i llllJ'O~ Uli1f1Y R';,H,AAO•.: ,;I r~t put~c~, :,,..,\O'I{• Y'll<( 1'C*h~ ""'~~(~C,1,t,,;:,n;1"",c .. i~, t,,;, 1\w.•~t.w ,.., 11qr ~ f¢iln.t lt'i,:"°' a:~~"'"Y"'~~~ . .i.e !'Ya",,._.,"=""'"" c• ..C.IO'(j'i C,&f)IS~r, '"D~;!l ... !,~~QU.!Jlt! 'l'l"ot.l!IWNICIO IIIC*tllL•!Ol:a:fJ•o, Wi• :,,.-,1,0" i~en ,O.,T>< O•I~[ ,1":r .. 1,U.r~,· !Mt•te,t, ...,,,:, Jlmd U.H,AI IILMl ,...c.;.f! 10 :l.010 ... UT .·NI:. 1..., i,,,x.< 11.s.1 •t,l~lc 10• ..::cell ro•..:i"'(lU,:>\.01' N'>lt ,,. c,, H~ l'l-n-~ ~ .. o .. ..,,_L.,,t • 11, •<[1[ PO~!( ... a 1...,., •I, T,,,j ~lfeUiH;N(~. ••'l'f'I· ,: ·~~ .... , ~~""•( Mt•.~~ Ir rt. (M'"lllil~ "f(tlllll\.[ 0, TM( a11t "(Au·, , •• , •t:,. ~w .. X~L•l'lii n-1 •c.i •'4N~·:•·E ,;:,wt A! '7"'( 0\11~'{. ,:;,oc,.i:• •cLJ'~H·J•~o ., ["¥1~ i,q•~ ><1•1 ,, ... ~p ""E .~ ... E,U,C>Qls,,__, ... n:: ··-··~Cl~t ,,,,00;1,ttt'<I' .. 1 .. -,,,, '61~tt:U ·o~ •"91.·'. ~,~~»• 11J,,iJ!ifl.•i.J.O II,(' 1".tiT 1!,W•C ,,, '<C'.Of.Aitt i;o,u tO•{C~l:) O••· ,CJ '"'<l!< :1r1: ._,J.8\H•i, ,u;:,i. OP O,ti<;.[~;f' (&~;1->ow~ CW 'M\ ~-•• ,. -.•"t~'~'"'L~t~ .... , ,;.....,;,.,_a, .... i-t~•u ,, ..,._-:, ML~~u '"'~•,. ,., t,.!e\ .. •,",.tli,..'tm! •f -·~ H!~(!J'l'!'(l~f t,Jsl "•r;c-s ..... oy1,,Jr,.,,~_1'J.1: ~ (I'-\~._ .l C -tu -~ ~ II_RC',1!. Ptfi•~/•r .Cl (~A';C-J.t.~. (o.fl(Jf• ::.~;; ~~,: ;:;:.,:/,,.Jtil~'.c/ ~~:: t~_~c.:!:!~~~~~~~~~ lit! t,tt)JCll';T -(&Jl,,:U ~uort1,ou, QI! l'>t( 1<n1~ .. L -~ ~ Jiillllllt(.fm,; liiOt;l tHi;.tJ1U '""''lWlf'I ,r,,o rOs11£,oj6j, ,dTil~M{ltl,.ll!OD L'-Q,I-N1711'~U>;;U1*T"" , .... o,"IFllll,llil(Ht •~I IIJ~(A.\li>>'llcU!,liUl.l,T},,1(1 :,uo ~p~ l.'Jll &..-0 •Wl.,,.,tt T>,J"ll~-NT0:,,,10• ~',Qf1M.T!l,t 'j.a.1~ Off'1<:-t-$ (II S.011' t40~U.1.C,1! C,,, 00.N ~W''((l'l'll.of '•!f 1¥01 ,o;,;Tit~R,JU> TC U(C,;U 'HU,\lQoUTJr ... flolT,,&,'11~ 111"TT•ltll!IC ~'PHP w;Ti!{ .... P(IU1tU"-~gtA1, i;o1"¢Mt·~~ -~ w,twl.l,l _,..~t(',I I , .. H ~fotu11to _,, ,.., ,.,,~ ,..,, """'~on cn1c,A:. !>I,,~, Ill( l:IA1 "'"" """ "''' ..... ,~,, €) ..vc.o ~ :}~Lil'.' >'l'lf~•• ~JI< t °*~~Q 10, Tl,1 ~Al( ,:i ••J;>-,.-< tQ,,o ~i,o,..-~,~~L-"'i . c RES1R·,Cli0~S 1 AU l':oTl <Wl'>a'$ ,1,,1, .U.( "4',ti:"lt/t IO O, I. t~L'f....'l!IWI ~}1; l !H('1' .O'l'-3 I I',¢• •• 2 ,01'3: ~ n., ,a, •ijC!, ., t<,~ l. c¢Jt H~. I,• ~. cCT, ac~.a, t,<ll~ • U, k• ,. orw,t11~,l,t ~T11,;fl(I "C •-, \ll(J1llt~~11 JH o,;: l~T oa ~N~~· IDl'!il<~lLI~,~IO!~»c:90U.(lllJ:UOIAl,OII w .. 1~tH,> ,~•ijGU Cill r,uo.src oq1~ . ..-..u1tv n.c ~ij(~# :,1.._," l'Ot-T~ o, '!Iii! ,urw1,:, n i.tU TIU.'l "'» ,:.. n •ll• l• I U! , 'l)O t.i.111"~~ 1-lt(>Jl;i n !"" 1,0lf _,, •·IT• IOI; ... , ~t!- .,.,.,,, ~JI.JC"' ·~n~ r• tt,f,c 1~1!,Gld l)f <!,Iv,, Wl.'<'t •u ... f-,IH h¢1'1.tf1[Qlj("' Nf-"'· ll(H',Tl<[O!:Tll ,,.t,. 1,;,, •t;,,; •~•T no, .,.o.o;r,:., """"fl. ©llli""' 1<..•"•-,;' ,~"~:: -~~!M._~\~;~w::lo ~I~::-~-~.:·/~~ ~If '/i{totiot (llf1'f,;(~f/,Ml,.llll"'-t'llii. ••·" ,.,.r.,J_l lO,Li,•111.~. --••• Hl'NffOJl'•r ,co,i't)~ IUURl' "' wo~i.,s 11.w. ,;,oru •~lr(HI -·- This map/plat is being furnished as an aid in Ioc;iting the herein de.\.cribed Land in relation to .1djoining street:=;, natural boundaries and other land, and is not a survey of the land depicted. Except to the extent a policy of title insurance is expn:ssly modified by endorsement, if any, the Company does not insure Jimi:nsiom, distances, location of easements, acreage or other ma11ers shown thereon. Order: 611148918 Page 1 of 1 Requested By: fidna3692, Printed: 12/21/2016 4:04 AM Doc: KC:MPLT 40-00027 -, ..... '- , .·,:.':- ,. ,Cf . - .. " 0 ._,e, n, ,, .J. .. , ... 'I • 6 4 i j i ' I ' 1 . ' ·::l;/·. ~. C (j) N 0 ,, C) N .--0 co ,- First American Title ll'ISURANCE COMPANY _ filolllorR-1\R-d Flied fclr· Record al Reqllfll "'FIRST AMERIC~ TITLl 1000..•~ AVENUE . u.affl.£, w-TON S,104 c;,y and StaOc .. --------· · -.. --·-·---------- 1978 JAi-i 12 w. 8 30 DIRI;:~TOF! l'l~COROS ~ cLECTlO' ,. KIN¢ \,t:.,..i.H!Y", W.t, 13 CO HTY EXCISE TAX !'AID ·-------------~AIU 11918 ..... . .• E.451.353 Statutory Warranty Deed 1-:- THEGRANTOR OONALD O TEETeR AND BE-"f'I'Y J. TEETER~ hnsba.nd and wife ·for and .l'n consideration oi. , TltN DOLLARS AND OTHER VALUABLE CONSIDERATIONS GEORGE w. SUBlC AND F.R/.INCES M SUBIC,-husband and wife the .to~ described real estate,. sitwtted in lb(. County_. of Washingloa: LOT l.1, Jl,LOCK 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. KING , -State of 5, ACCORDING TO TaE PLA'r THEREOF RECORllED Ill VOLUME 40 OF PLATS, PAGE 2 7 , RECORDS OF KtNG COUNTY, IMSll:WG TbN. SITUATE Ill THE CIT( OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF IIAS1lING'!0N' :Subject to E'"..a,gcnnrnts, r~sttictions and reservations of. recordi if any • 17 day of ,-19 l 7 ~ ti.l&.~.c.L } .:...c~L.( .... 1 ~'---~.1~ .. (, .... ) STAff; ?F WASHINGTO!'J, {_ u. Cou:,l:/..i k' I WC, \ l."'d-lTt' :r 7.,.,,.7.,e 0. !bl, day penoaally appearod be!o« me /Jo NfNO I) 7't:a-?<--,, fl,.,,:, '.J •· ' .. ~,. '',· ·:>. .. , ,.~ ,, TO: MARK TRAVERS 2315 E PIKE ST SEATTKE, WA 98122 PLAT NAME RESERVATION CERTIFICATE PLAT RESERVATION EFFECTIVE DATE: December 27, 2016 The plat name, RENTON SUBDIVISION has been reserved for future use by MARK TRAVERS ARCHITECT. I certify that I have checked the records of previously issued and reserved plat names. The requested name has not been previously used in King County nor is it currently reserved by any party. This reservation will expire December 27, 2017, one year from today. It may be renewed one year at a time. If the plat has not been recorded or the reservation renewed by the above date it will be deleted. Deputy Auditor J .. t. MAH S O 2017 LITCHFIELD ENGI~~ERING Civil Engineering & Development Services PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE REPORT for the Prepared By: Renton Subdivision Prepared for: Stein Skattum P.O. Box 769 Renton, WA 98057 Keith A. Litchfield, P.E. Date Issued: December 20, 2016 12840 8JST A VENUE NE + KIRKLAND, WA 98034 PH 425-821-5038 FAX 425-821-5739 KING COUNTY, WASH TON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN I UAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT {TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner Stein Skat tum Phone ( 2 0 6 ) 3 0 0 -6 2 3 1 Address 10350 Rainier Avenue S Seattle, WA 98178 Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name Renton Subdivision DOES Permit# _________ _ Location Township 23N Range SE Section ___ 2_9 __ _ • Project Engineer Keith Litchfield, PE Company Litchfield Engineering Phone 425-821-5038 SiteAddress 17018 & 17022 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION []I Landuse Services Subdivison / Short Subd. / UPD D Building Services M/F / Commerical / SFR 0 Clearing and Grading D Right-of-Way Use D Other Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Type of Drainage Review Full I Targeted I (circle): Large Site Date (include revision 12-20-16 dates): Date of Final: Part 6 ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS D DFWHPA 0 COE404 D DOE Dam Safety D FEMA Floodplain D COE Wetlands D Other __ _ D Shoreline Management ~ Structural RockeryNault/ __ D ESA Section 7 Site Improvement Plan (Engr, Plans) Type (circle one): Full I Modified I Small Site Date (include revision 12-20-16 dates): Date of Final: Type (circle one): Standard / Complex / Preapplication / Experimental/ Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) Date of Aooroval: 2009 Surface \Vater Design Manual 1/9/2009 KING UNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE \-ER DESIGN MANU,\L TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: Yes I No Describe: Start Date: Completion Date: Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan : ~S_o_o_s_C_r_e_e_k: _______ _ Special District Overlays: _______________________ _ Drainage Basin: Black: River Stormwater Requirements: _______________________ _ Part 9 ONSITE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS D River/Stream _________ _ D Steep Slope ________ _ D Lake D Erosion Hazard _______ _ D Wetlands __________ _ D Landslide Hazard _______ _ D Closed Depression _______ _ D Coal Mine Hazard _______ _ D Floodplain -----------D Seismic Hazard _______ _ 0 Other -------------D Habitat Protection _______ _ D __________ _ Part 10 SOILS Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential AgC, Alderwood 0-15% Minimal D High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet) D Sole Source Aquifer D Other D Seeps/Springs D Additional Sheets Attached 2009 Surface \Vater Design Manual 1/9/2009 2 KING COUNTY, WASH.TON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN~ 'UAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE LIMITATION/ SITE CONSTRAINT D Core 2 -Offsite Analysis D Sensitive/Critical Areas D SEPA D Other D D Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET tnrovide one TIR Summarv Sheet oer Threshold Oischarae Area) Threshold Discharge Area: Project Site (name or description) Core Requirements (all 8 apply) Discharqe at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharqe Locations: l Offsite Analysis Level: 1 / 2 / 3 dated: 1-27-15 Flow Control Level: 1 I 2 I 3 or Exemption Number (incl. facility summary sheet) Small Site BMPs Conveyance System Spill containment located at: Erosion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor: Contact Phone: TED After Hours Phone: Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: Private / Public If Private, Maintenance Loq Required: Yes / No Financial Guarantees and Provided: Yes I No Liability Water Quality Type: Basic / Sens. Lake / Enhanced Basicm / Bog (include facility summary sheet) or Exemption No. Landscape Management Plan: Yes / No Special Requirements (as aoolicable) Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA / SDO / MOP/ BP/ LMP / Shared Fae. / None Requirements Name: Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type: Major / Minor / Exemption I None 100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range): Datum: Flood Protection Facilities Describe: N/A Source Control Describe landuse: (comm./industrial landuse) Describe any structural controls: N/A 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 3 I /9/2009 KING ,UKTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE fER DESIGN MAKUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Oil Control High-use Site: Yes I No Treatment BMP: Maintenance Agreement: Yes / No with whom? Other Drainaae Structures Describe: Part 13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION [I Clearing Limits ii Stabilize Exposed Surfaces [I Cover Measures IE! Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities [I Perimeter Protection D Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris, Ensure D Traffic Area Stabilization Operation of Permanent Facilities D Sediment Retention D Flag Limits of SAO and open space D Surface Water Collection preservation areas D Other D Dewatering Control D Dust Control [I Flow Control Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS !Note: Include Facilitv Summarv and Sketchl Flow Control Tvpe/Description Water Quality Type/Description [I Detention Vault D Biofiltration D Infiltration D Wetpool D Regional Facility D Media Filtration D Shared Facility D Oil Control D Flow Control D Spill Control BMPs D Flow Control BMPs D Other [I Other Wetvault 2009 Surface \\later Design Manual 4 I 1912009 KING COUNTY, WASH . TON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN~ UAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS !ill Drainage Easement D Cast in Place Vault D Covenant D Retaining Wall D Native Growth Protection Covenant D Rockery > 4' High D Tract D Structural on Steep Slope [I Other D Other Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attached Technical Information Report To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. 12-20-16 Sianed!Date 2009 Surface \Vater Design Manual 5 l/9/2009 Contents SECTION 1: Project Overview ......................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 2: Core and Special Requirements Summary .................................................................. 3 SECTION 3: Offsite Analysis ............................................................................................................. 4 SECTION 4: Flow Control and water quality Facility Analysis and Design ...................................... 6 SECTION 5: Conveyance System Analysis and Design .................................................................. 10 SECTION 6: Special Reports and Studies ....................................................................................... 12 SECTION 7: Other Permits ............................................................................................................. 12 SECTION 8: CSWPP Analysis and Design ....................................................................................... 12 SECTION 9: Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant ......................... 12 SECTION 10: Operations and Maintenance Manual. .................................................................... 12 FIGURES APPENDICIES Figure 1-Vicinity Map Figure 2 -Soils Map Figure 3A & 3B -Downstream Mapping Appendix A-KCRTS Analysis Appendix B -Operations & Maintenance Manual Appendix C -Geotechnical Report Appendix D -Arborist Report Appendix E -Wetland & Stream Reconnaissance SECTION 1: Project Overview This Technical Information Report is submitted in support of the Renton Subdivision Preliminary Plat. The project site consists of 2 parcels; KC Parcel #'s 0087000265 and 0087000270. The properties are rectangular in shape and are located on the east side of 105th Avenue SE (See Figure 1 -Vicinity Map below). The property is bordered along the north, south, and east by single family residences. The project area is approximately 1.94 acres and is presently developed with 2 single-family residences. The existing buildings and driveways will be removed. Project site improvements will consist of on & off-site infrastructure improvements to support the future construction of 11 single family residential building lots and new public road. Frontage improvements will include the installation of an 8' wide planter strip and a 5' wide sidewalk along 105th Avenue SE. Figure 1-Vicnity Map • 101111 , ..... I .. H 17••• 11or• ' ~~ 1 ''"' SI 101117 •~1,. t1IOII 10!1 IIIUI IOIIH !:'1101 171111 ll'llll 1roo, 17(111 Hll~ 17iul 1:00, !Ol\7 SITE 11,n 11fl,lO 17007 1701l 1702) '"" t?lll2 1:'!11: ,,o,r, !l'IIOO """ HOll '(, C'll'.t <t ~,,. INXI ·, ~~ '( ( ,.,,.,._,f • S I ,;1''1 $C ~< •cJ,., ·\I 1 So i ls: The SCS Soils map i nd i cates the site is u nderl ain w ith AgC (A l derwood) so ils . Fi gure 2 -Soi l s Map 1<.Jng C ounty Area1 Was h ington (WA633) ® 2 Map Unit N ame ·. ,1.,,~ o t •Jr,3 .. ,,;,,Jv :11, 1. 11 .. ,:j\ll, ! 'u l':i :.,.-1 .-·1t. ;lcp~;; Acres Percent in ot AO I AOI 16.9 100 0% SECTION 2: Core and Special Requirements Summary To obtain preliminary approval with the City of Renton, the relevan cy of the 8 core and 6 special requirement s per Section 4-6-030 of the Renton Munic ipal Code (RMC), KCSWDM are required to be addressed : 1. Core Req . #1 -Discharge at natural location A field review of the site-specific topography indicates that the developed drainage will discharge to the natural location situated downstream to the west of the project site. 2. Core Req. #2 -Offsite Analysis An off-s ite analysis has been prepared for approval by the City of Renton , See Section 3. 3. Core Req. #3 -Flow Control Flow control will be provi d e d for the development via a detention vault. See Section 4. 4. Core Req. #4 -Conveyance System The proposed on -site conveyance and tightline system will route runoff to the existing conveyance system within 106th AVE SE. 5. Core Req. #5 -Erosion & Sediment Control. An erosion and sediment control plan, which w ill serve to min 1m1ze soil erosion/sedimentation during the proposed site construction, will be prepared for approval by the City of Renton. 6. Core Req . #6 -Maintenance and Operations The on-site stormwater system will be maintained by the homeowners. The off-site conveyance sys t e m s will be maintained by the City of Renton. See Appendix B. 7. Core Req . #7 -Financial Guarantees & Liability Financial Guarantee & Liability commitments between the property developer and the City of Renton will be established at the time of permit issuance. 8. Core Req . #8 -Water Quality The proposed pollution generating impervious surfaces are greater than the 5,000 SF threshold, therefore water quality treatment is required. The project proposes a combined detention and wetvault system to meet the water quality requirement. 9. Special Req . #1 -Other Adopted Requirements The Renton SWDM was reviewed and there are no additional requirements. 10. Special Req. #2 -Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Per City of Renton mapping the site does not lie within a floodp lain or floodway 11. Special Req. #3 -Flood Protection Facilities Not applicable to this project. 12. Special Req. #4 -Source Control Not applicable to this project 13. Special Req. #5 -Oil Control This project is not considered high-use therefore oil control is not applicable to thi s project. 14. Special Req . #6 -Aquifer Protection Area Not applicable to this project. 3 SECTION 3 : Offs ite Analys is A f ie ld r evi ew of the downst rea m co n d it io ns was performed on Janua r y 27, 2015. The wea th er was su nn y and wet ; the tem perature was ap p roximate ly 5 5 deg r ees. A v i sua l reco nn aissance was pe r fo r med utili zin g in fo rm atio n obt ain ed from th e City of Ren t on GI S Mapp i ng. Pl ease r ef er to sto rm dra in age m ap pi ng ex hibits th at fo ll ow for a d epi ct ion of t he downstream dra in age co nd itions . Ups tream: A det e ntio n va ult co nstruct ed for the M arv in Gard en T own ho m es project is located east of t h e Ska t tum p ro pert ies and prese ntly di sc harges t o a d itch east located nea r t he no rth eas t p ro perty co rn e r . Dra i nage fr om t hi s sys t e m w i ll be co llected an d conveyed along t he east and south p ro pe rty l in es t o bypass t he Ska t tu m Plat 's d etent ion va ul t. Please r ef e r t o Fi gure 3A fo r t he l oca t ion of t he Ma r v i n Gar d en Tow nhom es vault. Downstream: T he r unoff is tri butar y t o t he exis tin g ditch t o the west of t he si t e . The d itc h co nveys r u n off to t he sout h for ap p r oxi m at e ly 320 f ee t b efo re crossing SE 172 nd Street v ia an ex isti ng closed pipe co nveyance sys t em for 68 fee t. Run off th en ap pea r s t o sheet flow down t he h i ll t o an existi ng ditch a l o ng the north sid e of Benson Dri ve So u t h befor e e nte rin g an ex isti ng close d pi pe co nveyance sys t em. T he co nveya nc e sys t em di rec t s ru no ff t o t he west fo r 80 feet w h e r e r u noff th en en t ers a d itch an d con tinu es west for ap p rox imat ely 400 feet. Run off i s then di r ect ed to the so u t hwest fo r approxi mate ly 5 8 0 f ee t via a closed p i pe system wit hin So uth 35th Street. T he fi e l d r eco nn aiss an ce was t ermi nated as t he i nvesti ga tio n exceeded the r eq u ired X m ile po i nt analys i s. Downstream Concerns & Effects of Proposed Project: Dis cha r ge from the deve l oped si t e will shee t fl ow across th e p ro perty in a si mi l ar fashion as it presently exists. Th e downstr eam drain age sys t em consis t s o f a se ri es of ca t ch bas in s, d itches, an d closed pi pe sys t em s. No adve r se i m pact s to th e dow nst rea m syste m are anticipated or ex p ect ed . 4 (l) C _, ..c u ...., ro ~ Figure 3 A -Downstream Mapping (City of Renton GIS) . ••t:l• < , ... ~ 1 1'1 1 ) 1~0 ~ ,, .. , 17tll 1101-1 ..... 11Nl 11NS ' "' "' . I rozt 17N7 < u ., . ~ j tl'III SITE ~ "' ... ,. ..... 1111 , ,,.,s ~· Marvin Ga i;.dens Townhorry~~ vaj ~t ' H 111n ~ 111)) IH11 Sl l 21'V1 51 • Figure 3B -Downstream Mapping (Cit y o f Renton GIS) H it "<i, ( 1 41 ,.,, J s JSth $l U l t 1 .. , .. 111 'J, H i t 1111 ,,., tt1J IOl f 11 0 1 1107 ,.., ,, .. "" 0 , .. , ,,.. ,,., C: "' '11501 n u )O Ii ,, .. ,,., 11 10 ,,.. u .. :l "" : •••2 1n, !!I' "" ,.., 111 1 112'3 112 1 All '"" ... ,..,. ttOJ I Ht I OU 110S 111 1 1121 11-44 ,io, 1112 "" 1121 1112 1012 IH4 ,. ... 111'1 5 s: O.l ~ n ::, C ::i (1) SECTION 4: Flow Control and water quality Facility Analysis and Design A formal flow control facility is required for the project site based on Section 1.2.3 of the City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM). According to the Flow Control Application Map in the City of Renton SWDM the project site is located within the Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Conditions). This flow control standard is equivalent to the Conservation Flow Control Area in the King County SWDM which utilizes historic site conditions for the predeveloped flow rates. A combined detention and wetvault is proposed to meet the Flow Control and Water Quality Requirements. Flow control BMPS will be analyzed and sized in the preparation of the Engineering Drawings. A hydrologic analysis of the site was completed in order to size the required on site detention and water quality treatment necessary to account for the increase in the peak storm water release rate for the developed site. The site was analyzed for the pre-developed and developed conditions under the King County Continuous Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) hydrograph model using the KCRTS software developed and provided by the King County Surface Water Management Division. Below are the historic and developed KCRTS flow rates output. Please refer to Appendix A for the complete KCRTS analysis. Due to topographic constraints a portion of the project area cannot be intercepted therefore an area swap is proposed. The area swap is summarized below (see Developed Conditions Map): Impervious Area Swap Summary (See map below) Project Swap Area = 1,673 SF Off-Site Trade Area = 1,600 SF Historic Site Conditions: :f) land Use Summary _:,\~.........._\,_""" ___ .. ,. 21 Till Forest 2.10 ac:res Till P8sture 0.00 acres Till Grass 0.00 acres !, Outwash Forest 0.00 acres ' ,, I !, Outwash Pasture 0.00 acres I I 0.00 acres I ii Outwash Grass Wetland 0.00 acres. i 11 Impervious 0.00 acres j I 111 Total I 2.10 acres Scale Factor : 1.00 Hourly A.educed Time Series: lskattum2Ex 1»1 Compute Time Serles I i Modify User Input I File for computed Time Series (.TSF] : .., 6 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:skattum2ex.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Analysis------- Flow Rate Rank ':'ime of Peak --Peaks Rank Return Prob (CFS) (CFS) 0.132 2 2/09/01 18:00 0.170 0.036 7 l/06/02 3:00 0.132 0.098 4 2/28/03 3:00 0.102 0.004 8 3/24/04 20:00 0.098 0.058 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.085 0.102 3 1/18/06 21: 00 0.058 0.086 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.036 0.170 '-l/09/08 9: 80 0.004 Computed Peaks 0.157 Developed Conditions (without flow control): Till Forest 0.00 acres Till Pasture' 0.00 acres TIU Grass 0.76 acres Outwash Forest 0.00 acres Outwash Pasture 0.00 acres Outwash Grass 0.00 acres Wetland 0.00 acrcsj Impervious 1.34 aaes! Total---- 2.10aaes Scale Factor : 1.00 Hourly Reduced Time Series: IS1cattum2Del '---~---- Compute Time Series Modify User Input File for computed Time Series (.TSFJ Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:skattum2de.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ---Anni..:.al Peak Flow Rates--------Flow F_:"equency Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak --Peaks Rank (CFS) (CFS) 0.393 5 2/09/01 2:00 0. 7 94 1 0.321 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.506 2 0. 472 3 2/27/03 7:00 0. 472 3 0.348 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.419 ~ 0.419 4 10/28/04 16:00 0.417 5 0.417 5 1/18/06 16:00 0.393 6 C.506 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.348 7 0.794 l 1/09/08 6:00 0.321 8 Computed Peaks 0.698 7 Period 100.00 0.990 25.00 0. 960 10.00 0.900 5.00 0.800 3.00 0.667 2.00 0.500 1. 30 0.231 1. 10 0.091 50.00 0.980 Analysis------- Return Prob Period 100.00 0. 990 25.00 0. 960 10.0C 0.900 5.0C D.800 3.00 0.657 2.00 a.soc 1. 30 0.231 l. 10 0.091 50.00 0.980 Outlet Riser: The outlet riser for the combined facility was sized per Section 5.3.4.2 of the KCSWDM. A 12- inch diameter riser, with 0.50 feet of head, can convey 2.67 CFS. The 100-Year developed peak flows for the drainage basin tributary to the detention vault is 0. 740 CFS. where: QoRIFICE = C X AX (2 X g X H)1i 2 D = diameter (ft) -1.0' H = head (ft) -0.50' Existing Conditions Map • I in:------:-----.....;.... ... ' I ' I ' :,: I ... ;.; I :' :; I C, ' .. I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' ONSITE BASIN AREA 1,94AC /-r--1 _________ _, I 8 Developed Conditions Map ·"" ..... 9 r I '" .... . .. ~:,, .--, "'""" :a::: .. ,. ' 1/ . .... ······.·~ -,:tt-- Water Quality: The proposed pollution generating impervious surfaces are greater than the 5,000 SF threshold, therefore water quality treatment is required for this project. The area-specific water quality treatment was determined to be Basic. The project proposes a combined detention and wetvault system to meet the water quality requirement. The storm water facility incorporates and provides a two-cell basic wet vault (i.e. Vs/VR = 3.0) into the design of the storm water control and treatment facility by providing additional storage volume below the detention vault volume. The wet vault was designed as detailed in the 2009 KCSWDM utilizing the following equation: Vb = N, = f (0.90A; + 0.25At) x (R/12)} where; Vb = wetpool volume (cu. ft.) f = volume factor= 3.0 v, = volume of runoff from the mean annual storm (cu. ft.) A; = area of impervious surface (sf) At = area of till soil covered with grass or forest (sf) R/12 = rainfall from mean annual storm (feet)= 0.47/12 Impervious Areas (A;) = 58,370 sf Pervious Areas (Ao) = 33,106 sf Vb = 3.0V,= 3.0(0.90 X A;+ 0.25 X At) X (0.47/12) = 7,145 c.f. (required volume) The proposed vault provides 28,000 CF of live storage and 7,200 CF of dead storage. SECTION 5: Conveyance System Analysis and Design The on-site drainage conveyance system is planned to be constructed of a series of catch basins interconnected with 12" PVC pipe. The conveyance calculations were performed using Manning's Equation. The conveyance system was checked to ensure that during the 100-year storm event, the system would function adequately. The 100-year peak flow using KCRTS 15-minute time steps from the developed site was compared to the maximum capacity of the pipe. Using the Manning's Equation, the maximum capacity of a 12" pipe sloped at 0.50% is 2.98 cfs, which is greater than the actual 100-year flow of 1.83 cfs (see output below). Since all pipes within the proposed conveyance system are sloped at grades equal to or steeper than 0.50%, the system will have adequate capacity to convey the generated runoff. 10 Till Forestl 0.00 acres Till Pasture 0.00 acresi TIii Grassi 0.68 acres Outwash Forest 0.00 acres! Outwash Pasture! 0.00 acres Outwash Grass 0.00 acres ' WeUand! 0.00 acres Impervious: 1.26 acres , Total 1.94 acres Scale Factor: 1.00 15-Mln Reduced Edit Flow Paths Time Series: ~k:a.tt2CON\'1 --·1 »I Compute Time Series I Modify User Input I File for computed Time Serles (.TSF] Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:skatt2conv.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates--------Flow Frequency Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak --Peaks Rank (CFS) (CFS) 0.601 6 8/27/0l 18:00 1. 83 1 0.425 8 1/05/02 15:00 1. 2 9 2 1. 2 9 2 12/08/02 17:15 0.837 3 0.484 7 8/23/04 14:30 0. 727 4 0. 727 4 ll/17/04 5:00 0. 716 5 0. 716 5 10/27/05 10:45 0.601 6 0.837 3 10/25/06 22: 45 0.484 7 1. 83 1 1/09/08 6:30 0. 425 8 Computed Peaks 1.65 11 Analysis------- Return Prob Period 100.00 0.990 25.00 0. 960 10.00 0.900 5.00 0.800 3.00 0.667 2.00 0.500 1. 30 0.231 1.10 0.091 50.00 0.980 SECTION 6: Special Reports and Studies • Geotechnical Engineering Study; Earth Solutions NW; December 20, 2016 • Arborist Report; American Forest Management; December 13, 2016 • Wetland & Stream Reconnaissance; Altmann Oliver Associates; May 21, 2016 SECTION 7: Other Permits Single-Family Residential Building Permits and a Right-of-Way Use Permit from the City of Renton will be required. Utility permits to construct the water and sewer system will be required from Soos Creek Water and Sewer Distict. SECTION 8: CSWPP Analysis and Design Several standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be utilized by the contractor to minimize the amount of erosion and sedimentation that may be perpetuated by the construction site. Some of the measures might include filter fence, catch basin protection, and standard ground cover practices. A general stormwater permit will be required from the Washington Department of Ecology and will be obtained prior to construction. SECTION 9: Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant These documents will be provided at the time of Single-Family Building Permit application. SECTION 10: Operations and Maintenance Manual A draft Operations & Maintenance Manual is provided in Appendix B. 12 APPENDIX A KCRTS HYDROLOGIC ANALYSES Retenticn/Dete~tio~ Facility Type of ?acility: Cetentio~ Vault Facilcty Length: 80.00 ft Faci-._i::.y Vhdth: ?ac.:...lity Area: Ef&ective Storage ~epth: Stage O ~levation: S::.orage Volume: Riser Head: Riser Diameter: N·..1mber of orifices: 50.00 400C. 7.00 0.00 28000. 7.00 12.00 3 "t sq. ft "t "t cu. ft ft inc1-:es Full Head Pipe Orif.:..ce # Height Diame~er Discha~ge Dianeter 2 3 (ft) (:~) {CFS) (en) 0.00 0.69 C.034 4.70 1.25 0.064 4.0 6.00 1.00 0.027 4.0 Top Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None S::.age Eleva'.":.ion Storage Disc:1a.rge (ft) I ft! (cu. :: t I (ac~ft) (cfs) 0 . C 0 0. :10 0. 0.000 0.000 O.Cl o.n 40. 0.001 0.002 0.02 0. :12 8 I) . 0.002 C.002 0. 03 0.03 120. 0.003 C.002 0.04 0.04 16C. C.004 C.003 0.05 0.05 20C. C.005 C.003 0.06 0. 06 240. C.006 0.003 0.7C 0. 2 0 800. 0.018 0.006 0. 3,; C.34 1360. 0.031 0.007 0.48 C.45 1920. 0.044 0.009 0. El 0. 61 2440. 0.056 0.010 o. 10 CJ • "7 5 :i:rno. O.C69 o.c1:_ 0.89 0.89 3560. O.C82 0. Cl2 1. 03 1. ()j 4PO. 0.095 0.0;3 l. lE 1. 1. 6 4640. 0.107 O.Cl4 1. 30 1. 30 52 :)0. 0. ll 9 0.015 · .. 4 4 1. 4 4 576J. 0.132 0.015 :_. 5 7 1.57 628 J. 0.144 :J.016 : . 71 1 . 71 6840. 0.157 J.017 l. 8 5 1. 85 7400. 0.17C 0. 011 1. 99 1. 99 7960. 0. 18.~ 0.018 2.12 2.12 8480. 0.195 0.01 9 2.26 2.26 9040. 0.208 0.019 2.40 2 . .;c 9600. 11.220 0. 070 2.54 2.54 10160. 0.233 0. 020 2. 6) 2. 6"/ 10680. 0. 2 45 0. :)21 2.81 2.81 112 110. 0.258 0. 021 2.95 2.9~ 11800. D. 2 71 IJ. :122 3 . 0 8 3. 08 12320. 0.283 0.023 3.22 3.22 12880. 0. 296 0.023 3.36 3.36 13'40. D. :309 0. ()73 3.50 3.50 11000. 0. 321 0.024 Percolation (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 . 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. J :J 0.00 0. 0:1 0.00 0.00 O.OJ 0.00 0. 0 J C. 00 C. OD C.00 0.00 0 . II 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.co o.cc o.cc o.cc o.cc 0.00 3.63 3.63 14520. 0.333 0. 024 0.00 3. 77 3. 77 15080. 0.346 0. 025 0.00 3.91 3.91 15640. 0.359 0. 025 0.00 4.04 4.04 16160. 0. 371 0.026 0.00 4.18 4.18 16720. 0.384 0.026 0.00 4.32 4.32 17280. 0.397 0. 027 0.00 4.46 4.46 17840. 0.410 0. 027 0.00 4.59 4.59 18360. 0. 421 0. 027 0.00 4.70 4.70 18800. 0. 4 32 0.028 0.00 4. 71 4.71 18840. 0.433 0.028 0.00 4.73 4.73 18 92 0. 0.434 0.029 0.00 4.74 4.74 18960. 0.435 0.031 0.00 4.75 4.75 19000. 0.436 0.033 0.00 4. 77 4. 77 19080. 0.438 0.036 0.00 4.78 4.78 1912 0. 0.439 0.040 0.00 4.79 4.79 19160. 0.440 0.041 0.00 4.80 4.80 19200. 0.441 0.042 0.00 4.94 4.94 l 97 6 0. 0.454 0.049 0.00 5.08 5.08 2 0 32 0 . 0. 4 66 0.055 0.00 5. 22 5.22 20880. 0.479 0.060 0.00 5.35 5.35 21400. 0.491 0.064 0.00 5.49 5.49 21960. 0.504 0.068 0.00 5.63 5.63 22520. 0.517 0.071 0.00 5.76 5.76 23040. 0.529 0.075 0.00 5.90 5.90 23600. 0.542 0.078 0.00 6.00 6.00 24000. 0.551 0.080 0.00 6.01 6.01 24040. 0. 552 0.080 0.00 6.02 6.02 24080. 0.553 0.081 0.00 6.03 6.03 24120. 0.554 0.082 0.00 6.04 6.04 24160. 0.555 0.084 0.00 6.05 6.05 24200. 0.556 0.086 0.00 6. 0 6 6.06 24240. 0.556 0.088 0.00 6.07 6.07 24280. 0.557 0.089 0.00 6.08 6.08 24320. 0.558 0.089 0.00 6.09 6.09 24360. 0.559 0.090 0.00 6.23 6.23 24920. 0.572 0.097 0.00 6.37 6.37 25480. 0.585 0.104 0.00 6.51 6.51 26040. 0.598 0 .109 0.00 6.64 6. 64 26560. 0.610 0 .114 0.00 6.78 6.78 27120. 0. 62 3 0 .118 0.00 6. 92 6.92 27680. 0.635 0.123 0.00 7.00 7.00 28000. 0.643 0.125 0.00 7.10 7.10 28400. 0. 652 0.436 0.00 7.20 7.20 28800. 0.661 1.000 0.00 7.30 7.30 29200. 0.670 1.730 0.00 7.40 7.40 29600. 0.680 2.530 0.00 7.50 7.50 30000. 0.689 2.810 0.00 7.60 7.60 30400. 0.698 3.070 0.00 7.70 7.70 30800. 0. 70'1 3.310 0.00 7.80 7.80 31200. 0. 716 3.530 0.00 7.90 7.90 31600. 0. 725 3.740 0.00 8.00 8.00 32 0 0 0. C. 735 3.930 0.00 8.10 8.cO 32400. C.744 4.120 0.00 8. 2 0 8.20 32800. 0.753 4.300 0.00 8.30 8.30 33200. 0. 7 62 4.470 0.00 8.40 8.40 33600. 0. 771 4.640 0.00 8.50 8.50 34000. 0.781 4.790 0.00 8.60 8. 60 34400. 0.790 4.950 0.00 8.70 8.70 31800. 0.799 8.80 8.80 3520C. 0.808 Hye Inflm-.J OutL_ow Pea:<. Target Cale S::.age Elev 1 0.79 0.17 0.42 7.09 /.09 2 J. 3 9 ***"*** 0. 12 E . 7 .3 6. 7 3 3 0.47 ***"'*** 0. 10 6. 2 9 6. 2 9 4 0.40 ***""'*** O.CB 5.91 5.91 5 0.42 ***""*** O.C4 4.8C 4.80 6 0.25 ***"'*** O.C3 4.32 4.32 7 0.32 ·k****** 0.03 4.16 4.16 8 0.35 ******* 0.02 2.E4 2.64 ~oute T~me Series through Facility Inflow Time Series F~le:skatlum2de.ls~ Outflow Time Series File:rdout =~flow/C~tflow Analysis Peak :nflow Discharge: Pea~ Outflow Discharge: Peak ~eservoir Stage: ?cak Rcservo~r ~lev: Peak Reservoir Storage: 0.794 0.419 7.09 7.09 28378. CJ. 65: CFS at Cl?S at. Ft Ft. Cu-?t Ac-Ft 5 .100 o.oc 5. 2 40 o.oc S"'.""".orage (Cc-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 2 8 37 8. 0.651 26936. 0.618 25159. 0.578 23636. 0. 5.4 3 19184. 0.440 17275. 0. 3 97 16645. 0. 381 10548. 0.242 6:00 on Jan 9 in 1 :J: 0 C ~n ,Jan 'l 1n Fl OW Du::::-a.tion f::::-om T i:ne Seri.es File:rdcu:=.. Lsf Cutoff Count Frequeccy CCF Exceedence ~robability CFS ' 0 0.002 27075 11.151 44.154 55.846 0.558Et00 0.005 8 57 8 13.989 "8.:4:l 41.857 0.41.9F:+00 0.009 6853 11.176 69.318 30.682 0.307Et00 0.012 6421 l:J. 4 71 19. no 21). 210 0.707F.+JO 0.016 4863 7.931 87.720 :..2. 2 80 0.123E+OO IJ • ll 1 9 ]217 5.2~G 97.. 966 7.034 0.703c-Ol C.023 l'"'"l •U 2.808 95.775 1.225 0.423E-Ol C.026 1789 2. 91/ 98.692 " . :rn s CJ. LJlF.-Cll C.030 4 67 0. 7 .53 99.446 0.554 0.551E-02 0.033 :3 0. 021 99.467 0.533 0.'.>33E-02 o .o:n 2 0 CJ • CH 3 99.499 C.50\ 0.50lc-02 0.040 5 0.008 99.507 0. 492 0.492E-02 0.044 37 0.060 CJ9.568 C.437 0.432E-02 0.047 35 0.057 99.625 C.375 0.375E-02 0.050 34 0.055 99.680 C.J20 0.37DE-0? O.C54 78 0.046 99.726 0.271 0.271E-02 0.057 7.6 0.042 99.768 0.232 0.232E-02 0. 0 61 16 0.026 99. 795 0.205 0.205E-02 0.064 11 0. OlS 99.812 0.188 0._88E-02 J.068 12 0.020 99.832 0.168 C.: 63£-02 :i. 07: __ LS C.024 99.856 0. I 4 4 0.:44E-02 J.075 18 C. 029 99.886 0. 114 0. ll4E-02 0.0/8 18 C.029 9~.915 II. 08 5 C.848F-03 J.082 6 0.010 99.925 0.073 C.750E-C3 0.085 1 0.002 99.927 0. 0/3 C."/34E-C3 0.089 2 0. 003 99.930 0.070 0.70:E-83 0. 092 7 0.0~1 99.941 0.059 0.587E-C3 Year 8 Yeu.r 8 0. 096 5 0.008 99.949 0.051 0.506E-03 0.099 7 0.011 99.961 0.039 0.391E-03 0.103 6 0.010 99.971 0.029 0.294E-03 0.106 2 0.003 99.974 0.026 0.261E-03 0.109 2 0.003 99.977 0.023 0. 228E-03 0 .113 3 0.005 99.982 0.018 0.179E-03 0.116 3 0.005 99.987 0.013 0.130E-03 0.120 3 0.005 99.992 0.008 0.815E-04 0.123 3 0.005 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 Duration Comparison Anaylsis Base File: skattum2ex.tsf New File: rdout.tsf Cut.off Units: Discharge in C?S -----Fraction of Time--------------Check of Cutoff Base New %Change Probability Base 0.029 0.95E-02 0.57E-02 -40.5 I 0.95E-02 0.029 C.037 0.63E-02 0.50E-02 -20. 5 0.63E-02 0.037 0.045 O.SOE-02 0.41E-02 -18.0 O.SOE-02 0.045 0.053 0.37E-02 0.29E-02 -21. 8 0.37E-02 0.053 C.061 0.29E-02 0.21E-02 -28.4 0.29E-02 0.061 C.069 0.22E-02 0.16E-02 -26. 5 0.22E-02 0.069 0. 077 0.15E-02 O.lOE-02 -30.4 0.15E-02 0. 077 C.085 O.lOE-02 0.73E-03 -27.4 0.lOE-02 0.085 C.093 0.62E-03 0.57E-03 -7.9 0.62~-03 0.093 0.100 0.34E-03 0.31E-03 -9.5 0.34E-03 0.100 0.108 0.21E-03 0.23E-03 7.7 0.21E-03 0.108 0 .116 0.16E-03 0.13E-03 -20.0 0.16E-03 0 .116 0.124 0.98E-04 O.OOE+OO -100.0 I 0.98E-04 0.124 0.132 0.16£-04 O.OOE+OO -100.0 0.16E-04 0.132 Maximum positive excursion= 0.004 cfs ( 3.4%) occurring at 0.108 cfs on the Base Data:siattum2ex.tsf and at 0.112 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf Maximum negative excursion= 0.012 cfs (-29.1%) occurring at 0.040 cfs on the Base Data:skattum2ex.tsf and at 0.029 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf Tolerance------- New ~~change 0. 027 -6.5 0.028 -24.3 0.039 -13.9 0.047 -10.7 0.053 -12.5 0.059 -14.6 0.070 -8. 6 0.077 -9.2 0.092 -0.8 0.099 -1. 0 0. 112 3.2 0.115 -0.9 0.120 -3.8 0.124 -6.2 e, .. ~-0....~·~K,~ ! !---------------------- R ;;+--------------------------- ~+-------------------------------------------------- ! ~000 __________________________________ _ ~ +------------------------ 3_ w N ~1------------------------------------------- 0 0 0 r-0'---------,,----,---,---,----,---,.-,---,-,:--~----,--,-----,---,-TTT:----,-----,-----,----,--TTT,---,-----,--,---,--TTT; 10; 10·" 10 1'0-1 10 _, I -''] APPENDIX B MAINTENANCE and OPERATIONS MANUAL APPE'.'-JDI\: A. :i..lAI>JTE>JA!\CE REQLIREi\1ENTS FOR FLOW ( 'ONTROL, C'O>l"VF'l:' A\JCE_ Ar\D \VQ FACILIT[ES NO. 3 -DETENTION TANKS AND VAULTS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Sile Trash and debris Any trash and debris which exceed 1 cubic foot Trash and debris cleared from site. per 1.000 square feel (this is about equal to the amount of trash it would take to fill up one standard size office garbage can). In general there stiould be no visual evidence of dumping. Noxious weeds Any noxious Of nuisance vegetation which may Noxious and nuisance vegetation constitute a hazard to County personnel Of the removed acca-ding to applicable public regulations No danger of noxious vegetation \.\'here County personnel a-the public might na-mally be Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollutron such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil. gasoline. concrete slurries a-paint. acca-ding to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Grass/grou ndcover Grass Of groundcover exceeds 18 inches 1n Grass or groundcover mowed to a height. height no greater than 6 inches Tank or Vault Trash and debris Any trash and debris accumulated in vault a-tank No trash a-debris in vault. StOfage Area (includes floatables and non-fioatables) Sediment Accumulated sediment depth exceeds 10% of the ,AJI sediment removed from storage accumulation diameter of the storage area for Yi length of area storage vault or any pcint depth exceeds 15% of diameter. Example: 72-inch storage tank would require cleaning when sediment reaches depth of 7 inches for more than Yi length of tank Tank Structure Plugged arr vent Any blockage of the vent Tank or vault freely vents. Tank bent out of Any part of tank/pipe is bent out of shape ma-e Tank repaired or replaced to design shape than 10% of its design shape Gaps between A gap wider than Y,-.1nch at the jcint of any tank No water a-soil entering tank sections, damaged sectioos or any evidence of soil particles entering through joints a-walls. jcints or cracKs or the tank at a jcint or through a wall tears 1n wall Vault Structure Damage to wall, Cracks wider than Y,-inch. any evidence of soil Vault is sealed and structurally frame. bottom. and/or entering the structure through cracks or qualified sound. top slab inspect100 personnel determines that the vault is not structurally sound. Inlet/Outlet Pipes Sediment Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet No trash or debris in pipes. pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables). Damaged Cracks wider than Vi-inch at the joint of the No cracKs more than Y.-mch wide at inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of sal entering the jant of the inlet/outlet pipe at the jants of the inlet/outlet pipes 200:) Surfo.:~ Wakr D~sign \lJnual App~mlix :\ L'<l. ::!009 :\-5 APPE:\lrnX A lv1AINTF.J\'.ANCE REQU[REMENTS FLO\V CONTROL, CONVEYANCE. AND \VQ FAC:ILITrns NO. 3 -DETENTION TANKS AND VAULTS Maintenance Defecl or Problem Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expecl8d Wh8n Component Maintenance is Perfonned Access Manhole Cover/lid not in place Cover/lid is missing or only partially in place. Manhole access covered Any open manhole requires Immediate maintenance. Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools not wcrking maintenance person with proper tools Bolts cannot be sealed. Self-locking cover/lid does not WOO<. Cover/lid difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove Cover/lid can be removed and remove cover/lid after applying 80 lbs of lift reinstalled by one maintenance person. Ladder rungs unsafe Missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks. Ladder meets design standards. AIIO'Ns maintenance person safe access Large access Damaged or difficult Large access doors cr plates cannot be Replace cr repair access door so it doors/plate to open opened/removed using normal equipment. can opened as designed. Gaps, doesn't cover Large access doors not flat and/or access Doors close flat and covers access completely opening not completely covered. opening completely. Lifting Rings missing. Lifting rings not capable of tilting weight of door Lifting rings sufficient to lift or rusted or plate. remove docr or plate. l ;9:2009 2009 Surfac~ \Vakr Ot:!sig:n tvhmual Ap~mlix A A-ti APPE:"JDIX A t>.l:\INTENANCE REQUIRD.IENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL. CON\"EY:\I\CE, Al'<D WQ FAl'lUTLES NO. 4 -CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Oefect or Problem Condition When Maintenance ls Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Structure Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than Y, cubic foot which No Trash or debris blocking or is located immediately in front of the structure potentially blocking entrance to opening or is blocKing capacity of the structure by structure more than 10% Trash or debris in the structure that exceeds 1 /, No trash or debris in the structure. the depth from the bottom of basin lo invert the lowest pipe into or out of the basin Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot m No condition present which would vciume. attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Sediment Sediment exceeds 60% of the depth frorn the Sump of structure contains no botlorn of the structure to the invert of the lowest sediment pipe into or out of the structure or the bottom of the FROP-T section or is within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the structure or the bcitom of the FROP-T section Damage to frame Corner of frame extends more than ·V. inch past Frame is even with curb and/or top slab curb face into the street (If applicable) Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or Top slab is free of hcies and cracks. crado;s wider than Xi inch. Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top slab. separation of mcre than :X inch of the frame from the top slab Cracks 1n walls or Cracks wider than Y, inch and longer than 3 feet. Structure is sealed and structurally bottom any evidence of soil particles entering structure sound through cracks. or maintenance person judges that structure is unsound Cracks wider than Y.. inch and longer than 1 fact No cracks more than °( inch v.ide at at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence the jcint of inlet/outlet pipe of soil particles entering structure through cracks. Settlement/ Structure has settled more than 1 inch cr has Basin replaced or repaired to design misalignment rotated mcre than 2 inches out of alignment. standards. Damaged pipe joints Cracks wider than Y,-inch at the Joint of the No cracks more than Y.-inch wide al inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of sal entenng the joint of ml el/outlet pipes the structure at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed or pollution as oil. gasciine. concrete slurries or paint. acccrding to applicable regulations. Source cootrci BMPs implemented if appropnate. No contaminants present other th an a surface oil film Ladder rungs missing Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs Ladder meets design standards and or unsafe misalignment. rust. cracks. or sharp edges. allows maintenance person safe access FROP-T Sectioo Damage T section is not secure(y attached to structure T section securely attached to wall wall and outlet pipe structure should support at and outlet pipe least 1,000 lbs of up or down pressure Structure 1s not in upright pos1tioo (allow up to Structure tn correct posrt1on 10% from plumb). Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight or Connections to outlet pipe are water show signs of deteriorated grout tight: structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Any holes---0ther th an designed hOles---,n the Structure has no holes other than structure designed hcies. Cleanout Gate Damaged or missing Cleanout gate is missing Replace cleanout gate [ c). ~009 :\-- APPF.'.'JDJX A MAINTENA>JCE REQUlRElv[E:JTS FLO\V CO'NTROL CONVEYA'.'JCE, AKD WQ FACILITIES NO. 4 -CONTROL STRUCTURE/FLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance ls Performed Clean out gate is not watertight Gate is watertight and won<s as designed. Gate cannot be moved up and dovm by one Gate moves up and down easily and maintenance person is watertight. Chain/rod leading to gate is missing or damaged. Chain is in place and works as designed. Orifice Plate Damaged or missing Control device is not working properly due to Plate is in place and wocks as missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate designed Obstructions Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation Plate is free of all obstructions and blocking the plate. works as designed Overflow Pipe Obstructions Any trash or debris blocking (or having the Pipe is free of all obstructions and potential of blocking) the overflow pipe works as designed Deformed or damaged Lip of overflow pipe 1s bent or deformed Overflow pipe does not allow lip overflow at an elevation IO'Ner than design lnleUOutlet Pipe Sediment Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe Inlet/outlet pipes clear of sediment accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet No trash or debris 1n pipes pipes (includes floatables and non-floatables) Damaged Cracks wider than 14-inch at the joint of the No cracks more than Y".-inch wide at inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. at the jcints of the inlet/outlet pipes. Metal Grates Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than ';~ inch Grate opening meets design (If Applicable) standards. Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% Grate free of trash and debris of grate surface. footnote to guidelines for disposal Damaged or missing Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. Grate is in place and meets design standards. Manhole Cover/Lid CoverAid not in place Cover,1id is missing or only partially in place Cover/lid protects opening to Any open structure requires urgent structure. maintenance. Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools. Not Working maintenance person with proper tools. Bolls cannot be seated. Self-locking coverAid does not work. CoverAid difficult lo One maintenance person cannot remove Cover/lid can be removed and Remove coverA1d after applying 80 lbs. oflifl. reinstalled by one maintenance person 1,():2009 2009 Surface Water Design c\-'hmual Appendix A A-8 APPE~DIX A :\1AINTENA.,U::. RE()UREMENTS FOR FLov.: CO.';TROL. co,\l:YA'.\Cl:. x ... o \\'() FAULITlES. NO. 5-CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES 11.aintaonance Defect or Protilem Condition When Maintenance is NMded Result& EJl:pectad When Component Maintenance t& Performed Sb"uclu<e Sedime,nt Sediment exceeds 60% of !he depth from the Sump of cati::h bagn contains no bot1om of the catch basin to the in..,.ert of the seo::timent. lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin or is within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe iota or out of the catdi basin. Trash and detiris Trash or debris of more than Yi cubic foot whch No Trash or debri& t:4oclung or is k>cated invnediatefy in front of the catch basin potentielty blod;ing an1rance to openi')Q or is blocking capacity of the calch basin ca,ch ba.sin. by more than 10%. Trash or debns m the catch b8Slf'I ,hat exceed& No trash oc debris in the catch basin. 1 11 the depth from the bottom of ba&.in to in,..ert 1he lowest pipe into or out of the basin. Dead animals or vegetation 1hat could ge,nerate No dead animals or ,..egetat:ion odora thal could cause complaints oc dan!J0roos po3'Sent within catdi basin. gases (e.g., methane). Deposits of garbage e:l{[:eeding 1 cubtc foot in No condibon present 'M"'lich WOUkl ,olume. attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Damage to frame Comer of frame extends more than '1• inch past Frame t5 9\'e!'I ·Nfth curb. anc:Yor top slab curb face into the street (tf apphcable). Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or Top slab 1s free of holes a!"ld aack.s. cracks wider than ·,.~ inch. Frame not sitting flush on top slab. i.e .. Frame is sittrig flush on top slab. sapara6on of more than Y, inch of lhe frame from the top slab. Crack.s in walls or Cracks wider than •.,; inch and longer than 3 feel. Catch ba51n is sea'ed and bottom any Etvidence of soil parbdes entering catch structuraty sound. basa'I through aack.s. Of rruwrtenance PE("SOn judges that catch basin is unsound. Crad<s Wider than ',"t inch and longef than 1 foo, No cracks mora than 1f, ind"I wide at at the pint of any inletJoutlet pipe or any evidence the joint of iniet/ootlet pipe. of soil part.des entering catch basin through crad<s. Settlement/ Catch basin has settled more than ~ ind'! or has BaS1n reptaced or repaired to design misallgnment rotated more than 2 ilches out of alignment. standards Damaged pipe joints Cracks wider than '/i-inGh al the joint of the No cracks more than ' .. ·;-flCh Wide at inlet/outlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of inlet/outle1 pipes the catdl basin at the joint of the inlet/outlet """'5- Contaminants and Any evidence of contamilents DI" potlution such Materials relTlO"ved and disposed of pc,lution as oil, gaSOiline, concrete -slurries or painl according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs imptemen1E!'d if appropnata. No contaminants po3'sent other than a !Wrface oil film. lnlet,IOutlet Pipe Sedirrent Sediment filling 20% or more of the plp8. lnletloutlet P4)0s deer of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in iNet/outiet No trash Of debris in papas. pipes {includes floatab6es and noo-floata~). Damageo Cracks wider than • .. •:i-fnch at the joint of the No cracks more than '!,-inch IMde a1 in4etloutlet pipes or Bil)' evidence of soil entering the joint of the i"'8t/outlet pipe. a.1 the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes. ~009 Surface \11i;itcr Dcs..ign ~lanual -A, ppcndn A APPl::ND1X A MA.1:'.'ll"TENA..,cE REQUREMENTS FLO\\.' c..:rn,TROL. CONVEYANCE. . .\...,D WQ FACIUTIES NO. 5 -CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES .... .........,. Deliact or Pmblam Condfflon 'iYhen Maintenance ia NNdad R111&1.1b Eipected "M,,an Component Maintenance m Perlonned Metal Gratea Unsafe g,al9 -Grate 'Mlh opening wider tnan '1, inch. Grate opening meets design (Ca1ch Bai.ins) standanls. Trash and debris Trash end d&Oria thal is blodting more tnan 20%, Grate tree of trash and debris,_ of grate surface. footnote to guidelines ror disposal Damaged or missa,g Grate missing or broken member(s) of lhe grata. Grate is n place snd meetB design My open strudun! requinla wgant standanls. maintenance. Manhole Cover/Lid Cover~ not in P'aoe Coven'lid is missing or orly partially in place. Co...erllid protects ope,,ing to My open atructt.e requlnte urgent slructure. maintenance. l..ocxng mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by ane Med\anism opens with pn::iper tools. Not Wo,king maintenanoa person with proper bJds. Bolls camoc be seet&d. Seff-locking cover/lid does not won<. C~ difficult IO One maintenance person cannot remove Coverllid can be removed end Remow cover/lid after appty;ng 80 lbs.. of Wt. reinstalled by one maiotenance ""™'"· l/9C009 2009 Surface Water Design !i.-tanual -Appendix A A-10 APPESOL\ A \iAJ~TENA~CE REQLIRl::MENTS FOR FLOW LU'.'.iTROL. CO\ Vl:YA~CE. A'.'.iD W(J r"At'JLITJES NO. 6 -CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES Maintenance Daf9ct or PrabhHn CoOOition11 When Maintenance is Meeded Rssult& Ezpectad When Component Maintenance fa Performed ,,., .. Sediment & debns Accumulated sediment or-debris that exceeds Water l'IOWii freely through pipes. accumulation 20% of the diatTBtef of the pipe_ Vegetation/mots Vegetation/roots 1hat reduce fr99 movement of Watef l'IOWii freely through ~- water through pipes. Contaminants and My ENidence of corrlamalants oc pollution such Mateoals ramO\led and diaposed of po1..-as oil. gasoline, coocrate slurries°' paint. according to applicable regulations. Source oontrol BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants prasent other than a surface oil film. Damage to pmteciNe Protective coatng is damaged; ru-st or OOO"O&ion --o,,eplaced. coating OJ" corrosion is weakening the structural integnty of any part of pope. Damaged My dent that decreases the aoss section area of __ ,,,_ pipe by more than 20% o,: rs detennined to ha..-e weakened structural iltegrity of the pipe. Ditches Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic wt~ 1,CXX> Trash and debris deared from square feet of ditch and siapes. ditches. Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the Ditch deaned/flushed of ail sedment accumulation design depth. and debris so that it matches design. Noxious ·M:!eds Any noXK>US or nuisance "8getabon which may Noxious and nur5all08 '"'8CJ9labon constitute a hazard to County pef50n~ 0t the reirnoved according to applicable public. regulabons. No dang« of noJOOUS vegetation where County personnel or the public might normaly be. Contaminants and Any evidence of contamilants or pollutioo sud, Materiats removed and disposed of pollution as oil, gasoine, concrele slurries or paint according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs impemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Vegetation Vegetatiofl that reduces free movement of \lilater Water-flaws freely through d4tches. through ditches. Erosion damage to Any e,roe,ion obseNed on a ditch Sk>pe. Sklpes are nm ercding. ~-· Rock lining ou1 of One layer or less of rock exists above nati...a soil Replace rocks to design standards. ptaca or miS&ing ( If area 5 squ.are fee, or f'T'IOf'E!'. any exposed na'!Ne Ao~ icabie I soil. 2009 Surtai.:r \li.'.:1tcr Dcs.1gn \imual -Appcndn A 1/9/201.N :\-1 l APPENDIX C GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Earth Solutions NWLLC Geotechnical Engineering Geology Environmental Scientists Construction Monitoring , GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SHORT PLAT 17018 & 17022 -106th AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON ES-4948 • PREPARED FOR MR. STEIN SKATTUM December 20, 2016 (LLL Brett J. Priebe, E.I.T. Staff Engineer Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SHORT PLAT 17018 & 17022-1061h AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON ES-4948 Earth Solutions NW, LLC 1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711 Important Information About Your 1 ~ Geotechnical Engineering Report Geotechnical Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their sen1ir.es lo meet the speciiic needs of their clients. A geotechnicai engineering study conducted lur a civil er,gi- neer may not fulfill the 1ee,Js of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechn:cal engineericg study is unique, each geotechr,ical engineerng reporc is unique, pmpared so:elyfor the client. Nu one except you should rely or1 your geutechnicai engineering report without iirst ccrfcrring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared t And no one -not even you -should apply tr.e report ior any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full Report Seiiuus problems have occurred because those relying 01 a geolnchnical engineering report d d not read ii all. Do not rely on an exacutive summary On not read selected elements ~r1ly A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors Geote,:hnical engineers consi:ler a number of unique, pro1ect-specific fac- tors when establisning the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the cPe1t's go,ls, objectives. and risk managcmerit preferences the gener2I llature of the structure i:1vnlver1, its size. and configuration: the location a, tte srructure on Ire s'te. and other planned or existing site improvements, suet, as access roads, parkir1y lots, and undergrcund utilit:e, Unless the geotectnical eny:rteer woo conducted the study specifically inL1icates Jth- erwrse, do not rely 0,1 a oeotechn cal engineering report that was: • not prepared for you, • not prepared for youc prJJect. • not prepared for lr.e ,pec1tic site explored, er • cornple,ed before important pro1ect cranges were rnade Typical cha,,ges that can ernde the reliability uf an existing geotech,1ical e11gineeri1g report include those 1!1at affect • the luncti:11° of ll1e prop:1sed structu'.e. as wt1e11 l's changed from a park'r1g garage to an oft ice iluiilliflg, or lrom a light inrJuslr'al ola1t to a refrigerated warehouse, elevation, configuration, location, orientation. or weight of the proposed structure, • composition of the des gn learn, or • project ownership As a general rule, always inform your gectechnical engineer of project changes--tven minor ones and request an assessment of their impact Geotechnical engmeers cannot accept respons1/J:lity or lrabi/ity for problems that occur because their repoJ/s du nut consider deye/opments ui which they were no/ informed Subsurface Conditions Can Change A gr.oteclrnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was pertormed Uo not rely on a geotechnica/ engineer iny report whose adequacy may l1ave been attected by the passage of time: by man-ma,Je events, such as co1stcuction on or adjacent to the site: or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes. or groundwater fluctua- ti,ins. Always contact ,he geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if ii ,s stil! reliable. A minor amount ot additional testing er analysis could prevRnt major proolems. Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional Opinions Site exploration ,dentifies subsurtace conditions only al ti1use poi1ts where subsurface tests am conducted or samples are iaken Geotechnical engi- neers re•1iew field and laboratory data ana then apply their professional judgment :o render an opinion about subswface conditions throughout Ire site. Actual sutsurlacc ,:omlilions ;nay diier-sometimes signif'cantly- from those indicated ir, your report Retaining the geotechnical engineer who deve,loped your :epor: to provi,Je construction observa('on is the must effective method of ma1aging the risks associated with unant;cipated conditions. A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final Do nol overre1y un the construction reco1rn11ernlations included in your ,sport fhose rECommendat!ons are not Imai. because geutechn'cal engi- neers llevel,ip therr principal,y l,om judgr1ent ,nd opinion. Geotechnical engineers ;an tinali1e I heir recommendations oniy by observing actual ---------··---- ( ,,------ subsurtace conditions reve2led during construction. The geu,Dchmcai engineer who developed your report cannot assume resµoos1bifity or /1ability for the repotl's recommendations ii that engineer does not perform construction observation. A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotecrnical engineering repo,ts has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geo- tecrnical engineer confer witn appropriate mecibers ol lhe design team aller scbmitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti- nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can also misinterpret a geoteclinical engineer'ng report. Reduce that risk by raving your geotechnical engineer participate in prehid and preconstructiin :onlerences, and by providing construction Jbservation. Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final bwing and testing loss basen upon the:r interpretation of fieid logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or om·ssions, tr,e legs included ir; a geotect1rlicai engineering report snou,d ne,erbe red·awn for inclusion in architectural or other design lirav@gs. Only photographic er electrJnic reoroduction is accepra~le, but recognize that separa/lng fogs from the report can eleva/P. risk. Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professior1als rnistake11ly lielieve they can make contractors liable tor unanticipated SLbsuiace conditions by limitir1g what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give ccn- tractors the co11plete geotechnical engineering report, bu/preface 't with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In tnat letter, adv'se contractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's accuracy 1s limited; encourage tr.ecr to confer with tae geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest lee may ,e reqLwed) an,1/or ;o conduct addit 1.onal study to obtairr the specific types of information they oeed er prefer A precid con(erence can also be valuable. Be sure contrac- tors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only tr,en might you be in a position to give contractors the best information available tu you, while requiring them to a; leasl share some of the iinancial responsibilities stemr:i:ng from unar,ticipated cond;tio1s. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize 1hat geotechnical engineering is tar less exact than other engineering disci- plines. This lac, of understandir,g has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, ,;laims, alsputes. To relp reduce the risk \, of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include J variety of explanatory provis,ons in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations" many of '.hese pmvisions indicate where geo'echnical e11gi11eers' responsi- bilities begir. and eJd, to heip others recognize iheir own responsibilities and :isks. Read these proviswns closely Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should responc fully and frankly. Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered fhe eq1Jipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenv1ron- mentai study differ significantly from those used ro pertorm a geotechmcal study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually re!ate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommenoations; e.g., about the likelir.ood of encountering underground storagP. tanks or regulated cmtaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous pro1ect failures. II you have not yet obtained your own gooon- vironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk man- agemeni guidance Do nor rsiy on ,n environmenrai report prepared for someone else. Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing 01 indoor surtaces. To be eHective, all such strategies should be devised for the exoress pu(oose of moid irnven;ion, in:egrated inlu a com prehensive Qian, arrJ executed with diliger1t oversight by a orolessional mold prevention consultant. 5ecause 1ust a small amount of water or moisture ~an lead to tlie development of severe mold infestations, a num- ber ot mold prnvenlion strate,Jies focus on keeping building surtaces dry. Whlle grourrdwater, water ,nlillraticn, arid similar issues may have been addressed as part of the geotechnical ,rr~ineering study whose iindings are conveyed iitthis report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention corrsultant: none of the services per- formed in connection with the geotechnica/ engineer's study were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven- tion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the structure involved. Rely, on Your ASFE-Member Geotechncial Engineer lor Additional Assistance Membership i,1 ASFE/lte Best Peoole on Earth exposes gectechnical engineers to a wide array oi risk managemenl techni~11es that can be of genuine oenetit 'or everyone involved with a construction pro1ect. Confer with you ASFE-member geotecrnical eng'neer for cnore information. I \, .. J / -------------- ASFE Tha lnsl Paopl11 tn Earlh 82-11 Co,eslf:lle P.oad/Suitc G10B Sil·ver Spriny, MU 2ov·o leleprone 3011565-2733 Facs,m1le 3011539-2017 e-mail.info@3.st8.urq 'tJWw.aslR.o·q Cupyngi1t 2U04 by AS![ Inc Oup/icat1on, reproduction. or copying uf (his dccument. in whole or in part, by Jny m9;,ns w11;1t.,oevl!r, is strictiy prot11b1tud. '1xcept w/fh ASFE'5 specifi,: v·1rilterr permission. Exc'Jrp/ong, ~uu(i119. 01 otherwise extracting wore!inq from thr; document is permitted only with rne exoress written permlssinn nf ASFE, nmJ oniv i'ur purposes of .<;chof:.rly re!searcn or book review. Only members oi ASFE ,nay us& /his documrmt JS a complement to or ih c1n elemN1f of .1 georechr,ica/ 2ngineerimJ rnporr. Any other tirm, inaivitJ11JI, or ot.~er entity tflJt so uses this documem without bemg an ASFE member rnuld trn committing neg!ir;ent or intention;,/ (frau,J,1/errt) misr,:p1ese'ltatior> 1.3tHO'iG1:i 0,\.1 December 20, 2016 ES-4948 Mr. Stein Skattum P.O. Box 769 Renton, Washington 98057 Dear Mr. Skattum: Earth Solutions NW LLC • Ccotcch11ic.1I E11gi11cc'i11g • Cnnstructinn .i'vlo:1ilnring • F:1:vi1ur'.rrn;11ldi Scic11u .. ';; Earth Solutions NW, LLC (ESNW) is pleased to present this report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Residential Short Plat, 17018 & 17022 -105th Avenue Southeast, Renton, Washington". Based on the results of our investigation, the proposed residential development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Our study indicates the site is underlain primarily by glacial till. During our subsurface exploration completed on December 7, 2016, perched groundwater seepage was encountered at depths of approximately one to three feet below existing grades at the test pit locations. In our opinion, the proposed residential structures may be constructed on conventional continuous and spread footing foundations bearing upon competent native soil, recompacted native soil, or new structural fill. In general, competent native soil, suitable for support of new foundations, will likely be encountered within the upper three to four feet of existing grades. Where loose or unsuitable soil conditions are exposed at foundation subgrade elevations, compaction of soils to the specifications of structural fill, or overexcavation and replacement with a suitable structural fill material, will be necessary. Construction of a stormwater detention vault is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. We anticipate medium dense to dense, undisturbed deposits will be encountered within excavations at depth for the foundation subgrade elevation. With respect to infiltration, it is our opinion native soils will not accommodate large-scale or full infiltration facility design; however, native soils may be feasible for limited infiltration and/or bioretention applications, provided overflow provisions are incorporated into final designs. Recommendations for foundation design, site preparation, drainage, preliminary detention vault design, and other pertinent development aspects are provided in this study. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have questions regarding the content of this geotechnical engineering study, please call. Sincerely, EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC '?({;,tf_ Brett J. Priebe, E.I.T. Staff Engineer 180.S -1·;r)th Place N.E.1 Stiih-' 2.fl I • lh•llevuc\ \/l./1\ CJ8llD.S • (42"i) ·l·l 1J-17(l-'I • Fi\X (42."i) 449-C:.7 I 1 Table of Contents ES-4948 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. . General ................................................................................... .. Project Description ................................................................ . SITE CONDITIONS ............................................................................. . Surface .................................................................................... . Subsurface .............................................................................. . Topsoil and Fill ........................................................... . Native Soil .................................................................... . Geologic Setting ......................................................... .. Groundwater .......................................................................... .. Critical Areas .......................................................................... . DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................... . General .................................................................................... . Site Preparation and Earthwork ............................................ . Temporary Erosion Control ........................................ . Stripping ....................................................................... . In-situ and Imported Soils ........................................... . Subgrade Preparation ................................................. . Structural Fill ............................................................... . Foundations ............................................................................ . Seismic Design ....................................................................... . Slab-on-Grade Floors ............................................................. . Retaining Walls ....................................................................... . Drainage ................................................................................. .. Infiltration Feasibility .................................................. .. Preliminary Detention Vault Design .......................... .. Excavations and Slopes ........................................................ . Preliminary Pavement Sections ........................................... .. Utility Support and Trench Backfill ....................................... . LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................... . Additional Services ................................................................ . Earth Solutions NW, LLC PAGE 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 9 9 9 10 11 12 12 12 GRAPHICS Plate 1 Plate 2 Plate 3 Plate 4 APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Table of Contents Cont'd ES-4948 Vicinity Map Test Pit Location Plan Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Footing Drain Detail Subsurface Exploration Laboratory Test Results Earth Solutions NW, LLC General GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SHORT PLAT 17018 & 17022-1061h AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON ES-4948 INTRODUCTION This geotechnical engineering study (study) was prepared for the proposed residential development to be completed at 17018 and 17022 -1061h Avenue Southeast in Renton, Washington. The purpose of this study was to provide geotechnical recommendations for currently proposed development plans. Our scope of services for completing this study included the following: • Subsurface test pits for purposes of characterizing site soils; • Laboratory testing of soil samples collected at the test pit locations; • Engineering analyses, and; • Preparation of this report. The following documents and maps were reviewed as part of our study preparation: • Preliminary Site Plan, prepared by Mark Travers Architect, AIA, dated November 11, 2016; • Topographic Survey, prepared by Informed Land Survey, dated October 13, 2016; • Liquefaction Susceptibility for King County (Map 11-5), incorporating data from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, May 2010; • Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington, by D.R. Mullineaux, 1965, and; • Online Web Soil Survey (WSS) resource provided by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 Project Description ES-4948 Page 2 The preliminary site layout indicates the site will be developed into a residential short plat comprised of 11 single-family lots, access roads, open space and/or stormwater management areas, and related infrastructure improvements. At the time of report submission, specific grading and building loading plans were not available for review; however, based on our experience with similar projects, the proposed residential structures will likely be two to three stories in height and constructed utilizing relatively lightly loaded wood framing supported on conventional foundations. Perimeter footing loads will likely be 1 to 2 kips per lineal foot (kif). Slab-on-grade loading is anticipated to be approximately 150 pounds per square foot (psf). Based on existing topographic relief across the site, we estimate grade cuts and fills of about 5 feet may be necessary to establish finish grades for the proposed improvements. We anticipate stormwater runoff will likely be managed by a detention vault (vault) located in the southwest corner as well as by a series of shallow infiltration facilities and/or dispersion techniques (to the extent feasible). If the above design assumptions are incorrect or change, ESNW should be contacted to review the recommendations provided in this report. ESNW should review final designs to confirm that our geotechnical recommendations been incorporated into the plans. SITE CONDITIONS Surface The subject site is located on the east side of 105th Avenue Southeast, approximately 300 feet north of the intersection with Southeast 172nd Street, in Renton, Washington. The approximate location of the property is illustrated on Plate 1 (Vicinity Map). The site is comprised of two adjoining tax parcels (King County Parcel Nos. 008700-0265 and -0270) totaling approximately 1.96 acres. The site is bordered to the north, east, and south by single-family residences and associated open space, and to the west by 105th Avenue Southeast. Two single-family residences and associated improvements currently occupy the site and are expected to be removed as part of the project redevelopment plans. Site topography generally descends gently from northeast to southwest across the property; elevation change across the site is about 1 O to 15 feet, with a gradient of about 5 percent. A drainage ditch is located on the west, south, and east margins of the site. Vegetation consists primarily of grass and light to moderate tree cover. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 Subsurface ES-4948 Page 3 An ESNW representative observed, logged, and sampled five test pits, excavated at accessible locations within the property boundaries, on December 7, 2016 using a mini trackhoe and operator retained by our firm. The test pits were completed for purposes of assessment and classification of site soils as well as characterization of groundwater conditions within areas proposed for new development. The approximate locations of the test pits are depicted on Plate 2 (Test Pit Location Plan). Please refer to the test pit logs provided in Appendix A for a more detailed description of subsurface conditions. Soil samples collected at the test pit locations were evaluated in accordance with both Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) methods and procedures. Topsoil and Fill Topsoil was encountered generally within the upper 3 to 12 inches of existing grades at the test pit locations. The topsoil was characterized by dark brown color, the presence of fine organic material, and small root intrusions. Based on our field observations, we estimate topsoil will be encountered across the site with an average thickness of 10 inches. Deeper pockets of topsoil, however, may be encountered locally throughout the site. Fill was encountered to depths of approximately one to two-and-one-half feet below the existing ground surface (bgs) at TP-1 and TP-2. Where encountered during construction, fill may be suitable for re-use as structural fill, but should be evaluated at the appropriate time of construction by ESNW. Approximately 10 to 12 inches of topsoil was encountered underlying areas of fill. Where encountered in structural areas of the site, the underlying topsoil and organic rich soil must be removed and replaced with suitable structural fill. Native Soil Underlying topsoil and fill, native soils were encountered consisting primarily of medium dense to dense, silty sand with gravel (USCS: SM). The native soils were observed primarily in a moist to wet condition. The maximum exploration depth was approximately seven-and-one-half feet bgs. Geologic Setting The referenced geologic map resource identifies ground moraine deposits (Qgt), known as glacial till, across the site and surrounding areas. Glacial till typically consists of a nonsorted mixture of clay, silt, sand, pebbles, cobbles, and boulders in variable amounts. The till was deposited directly by ice advanced over previously deposited sediment and rocks. The referenced WSS resource identifies Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (Map Unit Symbols: AgC) as the primary soil unit underlying the subject site. The Alderwood series were formed in ridges and hills. Based on our field observations, native soils on the subject site are generally consistent with the geologic setting outlined in this section. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 Groundwater ES-4948 Page 4 During our subsurface exploration completed on December 7, 2016, light to heavy perched groundwater seepage was encountered depths of approximately one to three feet bgs at the test pit locations. Soil mottling was observed generally below the areas of seepage at the test pit locations. In our opinion, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater seepage will likely be encountered within site excavations, particularly within deeper excavations for new utilities and the vault. The contractor should anticipate, and be prepared to respond to, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater during construction. Temporary measures to control surface water runoff and groundwater during construction would likely involve interceptor trenches and sumps. 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. If the proposed project starts in the winter, spring, or early summer, an interceptor drain should be considered on the uphill gradient of the site. Critical Areas Based on our review of the Sensitive Area maps provided by the City of Renton and the King County GIS online database, the subject site does not lie within a critical area. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on the results of our investigation, construction of the proposed residential development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The primary geotechnical considerations associated with the proposed development include site drainage, foundation support, slab-on-grade subgrade support, the suitability of using native soils as structural fill, installation of site utilities, and construction of the vault. In our opinion, the proposed residential structures may be constructed on conventional continuous and spread footing foundations bearing upon competent native soil, recompacted native soil, or new structural fill. In general, competent native soil, suitable for support of new foundations, will likely be encountered within the upper three to four feet of existing grades. Where loose or unsuitable soil conditions are exposed at foundation subgrade elevations, compaction of soils to the specifications of structural fill, or overexcavation and replacement with a suitable structural fill material, will be necessary. In our opinion, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater seepage will likely be encountered within site excavations, particularly within deeper excavations for new utilities and the vault. The contractor should anticipate, and be prepared to respond to, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater during construction. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 ES-4948 Page 5 Construction of the vault is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. We anticipate medium dense to dense, undisturbed deposits will be encountered within excavations at depth for the vault subgrade elevation. With respect to infiltration, it is our opinion native soils will not accommodate large-scale or full infiltration facility design; however, native soils may be feasible for limited infiltration and/or bioretention applications, provided overflow provisions are incorporated into final designs. This study has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Stein Skattum and his representatives. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This study has been prepared in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. Site Preparation and Earthwork Initial site preparation activities will consist of installing temporary erosion control measures, establishing grading limits, performing site clearing and site stripping (as necessary), and removing existing structural improvements. Subsequent earthwork procedures will involve mass grading and related infrastructure improvements. Temporary Erosion Control Prior to the installation of either initial or final pavement sections, temporary construction entrances and drive lanes, consisting of at least 12 inches of quarry spalls, should be considered in order to both minimize off-site soil tracking and provide a stable access surface for construction vehicles. Geotextile fabric may also be considered underlying the quarry spalls for greater stability of the temporary construction entrance. Erosion control measures should consist of silt fencing placed around appropriate portions of the site perimeter. Where generated, soil stockpiles should be covered or otherwise protected to reduce the potential for soil erosion during periods of wet weather. Temporary approaches for controlling surface water runoff should be established prior to beginning earthwork activities. Additional Best Management Practices (BMPs), as specified by the project civil engineer and indicated on the plans, should be incorporated into construction activities, as necessary. Stripping Topsoil was encountered generally within the upper 3 to 12 inches of existing grades at the test pit locations. ESNW should be retained to observe site stripping activities at the time of construction in order to assess the required degree of stripping. Over-stripping may result in increased project development costs and should be avoided. Topsoil and organic-rich soil is neither suitable for foundation support nor for use as structural fill. Topsoil and organic-rich soil may be used in non-structural areas, if desired. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 In-situ and Imported Soils ES-4948 Page 6 From a geotechnical standpoint, native soils may not be suitable for use as structural fill unless the soils are near the optimum moisture content at the time of placement and compaction. Based on relatively appreciable fines contents, native soils should be considered moisture sensitive. Successful use of native soils as structural fill will largely be dictated by the moisture content at the time of placement and compaction. In general, on-site soils that are at (or slightly above) the optimum moisture content at the time of placement and compaction may be used as structural fill. If the on-site soils cannot be successfully compacted, the use of an imported soil may be necessary. In our opinion, if grading activities take place during months of heavy rainfall activity, a contingency should be provided in the project budget for export of soil that cannot be successfully compacted as structural fill and subsequent import of granular structural fill. Soils with fines contents greater than 5 percent typically degrade rapidly when exposed to periods of rainfall. Imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a well-graded, granular soil with a moisture content that is at (or slightly above) the optimum level. During wet weather conditions, imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a well-graded, granular soil with a fines content of 5 percent or less (where the fines content is defined as the percent passing the Number 200 sieve, based on the minus three-quarter-inch fraction). Subgrade Preparation Following site stripping (where necessary) and removal of the existing structures, cuts and fills will be necessary to establish the proposed subgrade elevation(s) across the site. ESNW should observe the subgrades during initial site preparation activities to confirm soil conditions and to provide supplementary recommendations for subgrade preparation. The process of removing the existing structures may produce voids where old foundations and/or crawl space areas may have been present. Complete restoration of voids (caused by the removal of existing structural improvements) must be executed as part of overall subgrade and building pad preparation activities. The following guidelines for preparing building subgrade areas should be incorporated into the final design: • Where voids and related demolition disturbances extend below planned subgrade elevations, restoration of these areas should be completed. Structural fill should be used to restore voids or unstable areas resulting from the removal of existing structural improvements. • Recompact, or overexcavate and replace, areas of existing fill (if present) exposed at building subgrade elevations. ESNW should confirm subgrade conditions and the required level of recompaction, or overexcavation and replacement, during site preparation activities. Overexcavations should extend into competent native soils, and structural fill should be utilized to restore subgrade as necessary. • ESNW should confirm the overall suitability of prepared subgrade areas following site preparation activities. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 Structural Fill ES-4948 Page 7 Structural fill is defined as compacted soil placed in foundation, slab-on-grade, and roadway areas. Fill placed to construct permanent slopes and throughout retaining wall and utility trench backfill areas is also considered structural fill. Soils placed in structural areas should be placed in loose lifts of 12 inches or less and compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent, based on the laboratory maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor Method (ASTM 01557). Additionally, more stringent compaction specifications may be required for utility trench backfill zones depending on the responsible utility district or jurisdiction. Foundations In our opinion, the proposed residential structures may be constructed on conventional continuous and spread footing foundations bearing upon competent native soil, recompacted native soil, or new structural fill. In general, competent native soil, suitable for support of new foundations, should be encountered within the upper three to four feet of existing grades. Where necessary, loose or unsuitable soil conditions exposed at foundation subgrade elevations should be compacted to the specifications of structural fill or overexcavation and replaced with a suitable structural fill. Organic material encountered at structural subgrade elevations, such as the topsoil underlying the fill encountered at TP-1 and TP-2, should be removed, and grades should be restored with structural fill as necessary. Provided the foundations will be supported as described above, the following parameters may be used for design: • Allowable soil bearing capacity • Passive earth pressure • Coefficient of friction 2,500 psf 300 pcf (equivalent fluid) 0.40 A one-third increase in the allowable soil bearing capacity may be assumed for short-term wind and seismic loading conditions. The above passive pressure and friction values include a factor-of-safety of 1.5. With structural loading as expected, total settlement in the range of one inch and differential settlement of about one-half inch is anticipated. The majority of the settlements should occur during construction, as dead loads are applied. Seismic Design The 2015 International Building Code recognizes the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) for seismic site class definitions. In accordance with Table 20.3-1 of the ASCE Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures manual, Site Class D should be used for design. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 ES-4948 Page 8 The referenced liquefaction susceptibility map indicates the site and surrounding areas maintain very low to low liquefaction susceptibility. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where saturated or loose soils suddenly lose internal strength and behave as a fluid. This behavior is in response to soil grain contraction and increased pore water pressures resulting from an earthquake or other intense ground shaking. In our opinion, site susceptibility to liquefaction may be considered negligible. The relatively consistent and compact density of the native soils and the absence of a uniformly established, shallow groundwater table were the primary bases for this consideration. Slab-on-Grade Floors Slab-on-grade floors for the proposed residential structures should be supported on a well- compacted, firm and unyielding subgrade. Where feasible, native soils exposed at the slab-on- grade subgrade level can likely be compacted in situ to the specifications of structural fill. Unstable or yielding areas of the subgrade should be recompacted, or overexcavated and replaced with suitable structural fill, prior to construction of the slab. A capillary break consisting of a minimum of four inches of free-draining crushed rock or gravel should be placed below the slab. The free-draining crushed rock or gravel should have a fines content of 5 percent or less (where the fines content is defined as the percent passing the Number 200 sieve, based on the minus three-quarter-inch fraction). In areas where slab moisture is undesirable, installation of a vapor barrier below the slab should be considered. If a vapor barrier is to be utilized, it should be a material specifically designed for use as a vapor barrier and should be installed in accordance with the specifications of the manufacturer. Retaining Walls Retaining walls must be designed to resist earth pressures and applicable surcharge loads. The following parameters may be used for design: • Active earth pressure (yielding condition) • At-rest earth pressure (restrained condition) • Traffic surcharge• (passenger vehicles) • Passive earth pressure • Coefficient of friction • Seismic surcharge 'Where applicable, and where H equals the retained height (in feet) Earth Solutions NW, LLC 35 pcf (equivalent fluid) 55 pcf 70 psi (rectangular distribution) 300 pcf (equivalent fluid) 0.40 6H* Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 ES-4948 Page 9 The above design parameters are based on a level backfill condition and level grade at the wall toe. Revised design values will be necessary if sloping grades are to be used above or below retaining walls. Additional surcharge loading from adjacent foundations, sloped backfill, or other loads should be included in the retaining wall design, where applicable. Retaining walls should be backfilled with free-draining material that extends along the height of the wall and a distance of at least 18 inches behind the wall. The upper 12 inches of the wall backfill can consist of a less permeable soil, if desired. A perforated drainpipe should be placed along the base of the wall and connected to an approved discharge location. A typical retaining wall drainage detail is provided on Plate 3. If drainage is not provided, hydrostatic pressures should be included in the wall design. Drainage Discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater seepage should be anticipated within site excavations, particularly in excavations at depth for utilities and the vault. The contractor should anticipate, and be prepared to respond to, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater during construction. Temporary measures to control surface water runoff and groundwater during construction would likely involve interceptor trenches and sumps. ESNW should be consulted during preliminary grading to identify areas of seepage and to provide recommendations to reduce the potential for instability related to seepage effects. Finish grades must be designed to direct surface drain water away from structures, slopes and walls. Water must not be allowed to pond adjacent to structures, slopes or walls. In our opinion, foundation drains should be installed along building perimeter footings. A typical foundation drain detail is provided on Plate 4. Infiltration Feasibility As indicated in the Subsurface section of this report, native soils encountered during our fieldwork were characterized primarily as medium dense to dense glacial till. From a geotechnical standpoint, glacial till is not considered an ideal geologic feature for accommodation of infiltration facilities, especially when encountered in a dense, compact state. In general, the infiltration capacity of glacial till should be considered minimal. It may be possible to accommodate construction of rain gardens (bioretention) and other limited- infiltration facilities, provided overflow provisions are successfully incorporated into final designs. ESNW can provide further evaluation of, and recommendations for, stormwater flow control BMPs upon request. Preliminary Detention Vault Design Stormwater is expected to be managed by a detention vault located within the southwest area of the site. We anticipate cuts of approximately 10 to 15 feet may be necessary to achieve the vault foundation subgrade elevation. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 ES-4948 Page 10 The vault foundations should be supported directly on competent, native, undisturbed soil at depth. Final vault designs must incorporate adequate buffer space from property boundaries or sensitive areas such that temporary excavations to construct the vault structure can be successfully completed. Perimeter drains should be installed around the vault and conveyed to an approved discharge point. Perched groundwater seepage should be expected within excavations for the vault. In our opinion, the contractor should be prepared to respond to the presence of perched groundwater during construction of the vault. Provided the vault will be supported as described above, the following parameters may be used for preliminary design: • Allowable soil bearing capacity • Active earth pressure (unrestrained) • At-rest earth pressure (restrained) • Coefficient of friction • Passive earth pressure • Seismic surcharge • Where applicable, and where H equals the retained height (in feet) 5,000 psf (dense glacial till) 35 pcf 55 pcf 0.40 300 pcf 6H* Vault walls should be backfilled with free-draining material or suitable sheet drainage that extends along the height of the walls. The upper one foot of the wall backfill may consist of a less permeable soil, if desired. A perforated drainpipe should be placed along the base of the wall and connected to an approved discharge location. If the elevation of the vault bottom is such that gravity flow to an outlet is not possible, the portion of the vault below the drain should be designed to include hydrostatic pressure. ESNW should observe grading operations for the vault, as well as subgrade conditions prior to concrete forming and pouring, in order to confirm conditions are as anticipated and to provide supplementary recommendations as necessary. Excavations and Slopes The Federal Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA) provide soil classification in terms of temporary slope inclinations. Soils that exhibit high compressive strengths are allowed steeper temporary slope inclinations than are soils that exhibit lower strength characteristics. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 ES-4948 Page 11 Based on the soil conditions encountered at the test pit locations, upper weathered soils, fill soils, and any area where groundwater seepage is exposed would be classified as Type C by OSHA and WISHA. Temporary slopes over four feet in height in Type C soils must be sloped no steeper than one-and-one-half horizontal to one vertical (1.5H:1V). Very dense native deposits encountered without the presence of groundwater may be classified as Type A by OSHA and WISHA. Temporary slopes over four feet in height in Type A soils must be sloped no steeper than 0.75H:1V. Type A soils that are fissured, subjected to vibrations from heavy traffic, or have been otherwise previously disturbed must be classified as Type B by OSHA and WISHA. Temporary slopes over four feet in height in Type B soils must be sloped no steeper than 1 H:1V. ESNW can provide supplementary recommendations, including field observations of excavations for the vault, during the appropriate phase of construction. The presence of perched groundwater may cause localized sloughing of the temporary slopes due to excess seepage forces. ESNW should observe site excavations to confirm soil types and allowable slope inclinations. If the recommended temporary slope inclinations cannot be achieved, temporary shoring may be necessary to support excavations. Given the groundwater encountered during our subsurface exploration, temporary slopes for the vault excavation may need to be flatter than 1 H: 1 V, if conditions warrant. Permanent slopes should be planted with vegetation to enhance stability and to m1nim1ze erosion, and should maintain a gradient of 2H:1V or flatter. An ESNW representative should observe temporary and permanent slopes to confirm the slope inclinations are suitable for the exposed soil conditions. Supplementary excavation and slope recommendations may be provided at the time of construction, as necessary. Preliminary Pavement Sections The performance of site pavements is largely related to the condition of the underlying subgrade. To ensure adequate pavement performance, the subgrade should be in a firm and unyielding condition when subjected to proofrolling with a loaded dump truck. Structural fill in pavement areas should be compacted to the specifications previously detailed in this report. Soft, wet, or otherwise unsuitable subgrade areas may still exist after base grading activities. Areas containing unsuitable or yielding subgrade conditions will require remedial measures, such as overexcavation and/or placement of thicker crushed rock or structural fill sections, prior to pavement. We anticipate new pavement sections will be subjected primarily to passenger vehicle traffic. For lightly loaded pavement areas subjected primarily to passenger vehicles, the following preliminary pavement sections may be considered: • A minimum of two inches of hot mix asphalt (HMA) placed over four inches of crushed surfacing top course (CSTC), or; • A minimum of two inches of HMA placed over three inches of asphalt treated base (ATB). Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 ES-4948 Page 12 The HMA, ATB and CSTC materials should conform to WSDOT specifications. All soil base material should be compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent, based on the laboratory maximum dry density as determined by ASTM 01557. Final pavement design recommendations, including recommendations for heavy traffic areas, main access roads, and frontage improvement areas, can be provided once final traffic loading has been determined. Road standards utilized by the City of Renton may supersede the recommendations provided in this report. Utility Support and Trench Backfill In our opinion, native soils may not be suitable for support of utilities unless the soils are near the optimum moisture content at the time of placement. Organic-rich soils are not considered suitable for direct support of utilities and may require removal at utility grades if encountered. Remedial measures, such as overexcavation and replacement with structural fill and/or installation of geotextile fabric, may be necessary in some areas in order to provide support for utilities. Groundwater seepage will likely be encountered within utility excavations, and caving of trench walls may occur where groundwater is encountered. Temporary construction dewatering, as well as temporary trench shoring, may be necessary during utility excavation and installation as conditions warrant. In general, native soils may be suitable for use as structural backfill throughout utility trench excavations, provided the soils are at (or slightly above) the optimum moisture content at the time of placement and compaction. Structural trench backfill should not be placed dry of the optimum moisture content. Each section of the site utility lines must be adequately supported in appropriate bedding material. Utility trench backfill should be placed and compacted to the specifications of structural fill as previously detailed in this report, or to the applicable specifications of the City of Renton or other responsible jurisdiction or agency. LIMITATIONS The recommendations and conclusions provided in this study 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 pit locations may exist and may not become evident until construction. ESNW should reevaluate the conclusions provided in this study if variations are encountered. Additional Services ESNW should have an opportunity to review final project plans with respect to the geotechnical recommendations provided in this study. ESNW should also be retained to provide testing and consultation services during construction. Earth Solutions NW, LLC l. ' ' I "' Reference: King County, Washington Map 656 By The Thomas Guide Rand McNally 32nd Edition I , . NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ESNW cannot be responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate _,.::_· • Drwn. MRS Checked BJP Vicinity Map Skattum Short Plat Renton, Washington Date12/19/2016 Proj. No. 4948 Date Dec. 2016 Plate 1 :·;.,1 \ ITP-1 -·-I Stqrm·Drainage LEGEND TP-1 I Approximate Location of -• -ESNW Test Pit, Proj. No. ES-4948, Dec. 2016 Subject Site 1-----] Existing Building --------I D Proposed Building NOTE: The graphics shown on this plate are not intended for design purposes or precise scale measurements, but only to illustrate the approximate test locations relative to the approximate locations of existing and/ or proposed site features. The information illustrated is largely based on data provided by the client at the time of our study. ESNW cannot be responsible for subsequent design changes or interpretation of the data by others. NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color ESNW cannot be responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. r--~-, I .---1 I c----1 "---· I I~ TP-$ f I 1.;o /- 0 30 60 120 1"=60' a_j .J Scale in Feet • Solutions NWLLc ln!lneering, Construction Monitoring !'f,Environmental Sciences Drwn. MRS Checked BJP Test Pit Location Plan Skattum Short Plat Renton, Washington Date 12/19/2016 Proj. No. 4948 Date Dec. 2016 Plate 2 18" Min . .. 000000000 QoooQ"' <()of'\ "'oO ooO Oo..J 0° 0 o() o"'o O O 006)000 (J 0 0 ° o O o o O o 0 O 0 0 0 0 o"' 0 ao "'0 0 o "o o 0 0 o"' o 0 oo(J 0 ~:: 0 60 "'O o o o o O "' f:) 0 0 ="' 0 " oQ O 0 0 Qoo O Q 0 o oa o o o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 Oo oQ o o () o o o 0 Q 0 00Q,o;] 000°0 oOoOoo0° o o"' o "' o 0 o 0 00 0 o 0 o "' "' o "' 0 0 "O 0 oO O ,-q, 0 a 000°0 Ou o O O 0 o o o °a "' "' ""' o"' "' "' "'o "' "' 5 " o o o O o o O o O "'o o oc o 0 a0 0°000 "'ng o 0 o O o!r' O"'"'o " "' o "' o <>ooQ Oo o O oQ o o O Q,, o O o O O o 00 Q O O Oo O o Q 6' 'b"' B o O Oa% ~ 0 0 0 0 Structural Fill NOTES: ' Perforated Drain Pipe (Surround In Drain Rock) • Free Draining Backfill should consist of soil having less than 5 percent fines. Percent passing #4 should be 25 to 75 percent. • Sheet Drain may be feasible in lieu of Free Draining Backfill, per ESNW recommendations. SCHEMATIC ONLY -NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING • Drain Pipe should consist of perforated, rigid PVC Pipe surrounded with 1" Drain Rock. LEGEND: Free Draining Structural Backfill 1 inch Drain Rock • RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL Skattum Short Plat Renton, Washington Drwn. MRS Date 12/19/2016 Proj. No. 4948 Checked BJP Date Dec. 2016 Plate 3 Slope .... :18:' (ri,Jiii') . . ' . . Perforated Rigid Drain Pipe (Surround with 1" Rock) NOTES: • Do NOT tie roof downspouts to Footing Drain. • Surface Seal to consist of ... .,. ....... .. .............. .............. .............. .............. ............. 12" of less permeable, suitable soil. Slope away from building. LEGEND: Surface Seal; native soil or other low permeability material. 1" Drain Rock SCHEMATIC ONLY-NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING • h Solutions NWLLc 0 Jcal Engineering, Construction Monitoring / and Environmental Sciences Drwn. MRS Checked BJP FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL Skattum Short Plat Renton, Washington Date 12/19/2016 Proj. No. 4948 Date Dec. 2016 Plate 4 Appendix A Subsurface Exploration ES-4948 Subsurface conditions at the subject site were explored on December 7, 2016 by excavating five test pits using a mini trackhoe and operator provided by our firm. The approximate locations of the test pits are illustrated on Plate 2 of this study. The test pit logs are provided in this Appendix. The test pits were advanced to a maximum depth of approximately seven-and- one-half feet bgs. The final logs represent the interpretations of the field logs and the results of laboratory analyses. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Earth Solutions NWLLc SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS GRAPH LEITER TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS COARSE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS LARGER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE FINE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN SD% OF tw\TERIAL IS SMALLER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE GRAVEL AND GRAVELLY SOILS MORE THAN 50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE SAND AND SANDY SOILS CLEAN GRAVELS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) GRAVELS WITH FINES (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) CLEAN SANDS (UTILE OR NO FINES) SANDS WITH MORE THAN 50% FINES OF COARSE FRACTION PASSING ON NO. 4 SIEVE {APPRECIABLE SILTS AND CLAYS SILTS AND CLAYS AMOUNT OF FINES) LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 LIQUID LIMIT GREATER THAN 50 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PT WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL- SAND MIXTURES, UTILE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND MIXTURES, UTILE OR NO FINES Sil rt GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND- S\L T MIXTURES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND. CLAY MIXTURES WELL-GRADED SANDS. GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY-GRADED SANOS, GRAVELLY SANO, UTILE OR NO FINES SILTY SANOS. SAND-S!LT MIXTURES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND. CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SIL TS AND VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SIL TY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDI UM PU\STICITY, GRAVELLY Cl.A YS, SANDY Cl.A YS, SIL TY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SIL TS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY INORGANIC SIL TS, MICACEOUS OR OIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY SOILS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SIL TS PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS 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. ~ w z w L I- • Earth Solutions NW 1B05-136th Place N.E., Suite-... 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-449-4704 T r PIT NUMBER TP-1 Fax: 425-449-4711 CLIENT Nlr Stein Skattum PROJECT NAME Skattum Short Plat PROJECT NUMBER 4948 __ _ -~======-=-~-===~-!'~~JEC:T LOCATION Renton Washingon DATE STARTED 1217/16 ______ COMPLETED _t,2=:/7~/:_1,~6 __ _ EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating____ _ ___ _ EXCAVATION METHOD _____________ _ LOGGED BY _E!Jf' _ . ______ _ CHECKED BY -'B"'J'-'P ____ _ GROUND ELEVATION _:j_90 ft____ TEST PIT SIZE GROUND WATER LEVELS: AT TIME OF EXCAVATION AT ENO OF EXCAVATION - PAGE 1 OF 1 ---------- 0 w "->-"' f--W wm -' :!1 "-:, :!!z ;% TESTS MC= 19.00% MC= 25.80% Fines= 27.84% "! (J :i: CJ (J "-o en ~-' :, CJ ~ SM TPSL, ,,,, ------~-~~5 AFTER EXCAVATION __ - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Brown silty SAND, loose, moist to wet (Fill) -----------~~~--- Dark brown TOPSOIL -roots, moderate to heavy groundwater seepage, slight caving to 4' Tan silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist to wet [USDA Classification: gravelly sandy LOAM] ________ ___]_§_§_._~ e----.§ __ -mottled texture SM - MC =21.30% 75 Test pit terni"iri8ted at 7.5 feet below existing grade. GrOulldwater-seepige encountered at 2.5 feet during excavation. Caving observed from 2.5 to 4 feet. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. "'---'-----'--------'---'---'----------------------------------1 t w z w • Eart tions NW 1805 -, -6th Place N.E., Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-449-4704 TEST PIT NUMBER TP-2 PAGE 1 OF 1 Fax: 425-449-4711 CLIENT _Mr._ Stein_ Skattum ____ _ PROJECT NAME Skattum Short _Plat ___________ _ PROJECT NUMBER 4948 PROJECT LOCATION Renton, Wai:;:_hing9~n'--c-c===========~- DATE STARTED 1217116 COMPLETED 1217116 __ EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR _fiVI' Excavating GROUND ELEVATION 396 ft GROUND WATER LEVELS, TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION METHOD ___ ·-· _ ·-----------------AT TIME OF EXCAVATION -::: __ LOGGEDBY ~B~JP, ______ _ CHECKED BY Jl,!!'_ __ NOTES O_epth ot:rqp_soil & j:iod 3\ 9.G:l~S AT END OF EXCAVATION - AFTER EXCAVATION --- TESTS 0 ui ci VJ ::, MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Brown silty SAND, loose, moist to wet SM C -1 0 -caving to 3' ---,, ' ,,'' -Dark ~b,'--o_w_n_T_O_P_S_O_IL-,-,o-o-ts------·---------__ -----395.0 -- MC= 18.40% MC =2720% ' 5 MC=21.10% MC::: 23.80% ,e,c 'r ,. =::=~==~-=· ... -_________ _2!!1Jl SM 7.§__ - -becomes wet -becomes medium dense to dense, moist -mottled texture ------ Test pit terminated at 7.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 1.0 foot during excavation. Caving observed from TOH to 3 feet. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. 388.5 '-'L _ _L __ _L _______ _J_ _ _L_---'-------------------------------------' ~ :l' w L • Earth Solutions NW 1805 -136th Place N.E., Suite ,..,1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-449-4704 T r PIT NUMBER TP-3 PAGE 1 OF 1 Fax: 425-449-4711 PROJECT NAME Skattum Short Plat CLIENT Mr. Stein Skattum PROJECT NUMBER 4948 PROJECT LOCATION Renton_. ~~~,,h,"'_in,i,ge,o~n========= ______ _ DATE STARTED 1217/16 __ _ COMPLETED _.1""217,-'-'-'/1_,,6 _____ _ GROUND ELEVATION _1QQ_f!___ _ TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating ___________ _ GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD ___ _ __ _ AT TIME OF EXCAVATION _-____________ _ LOGGED BY ~B~J~P _________ _ CHECKED BY _BJP ______ _ AT ENO OF EXCAVATION _-,------------------_ NOTES __ D~l?th_ qf.Jopsoil & Sod t0"-12": grass AFTER EXCAVATION 0 TESTS MC= 15.60% Fines= 36.00% .. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION L':: ·-Dar1( brown TOPSOIL and roots TPSLr, ,,_,, l--+~-1'1"'-0'---~~-~~=~ Brown silty SAND, loose, moist SM [USDA Classification: slightly gravelly sandy LOAM] -becomes moist to wet, slight caving from 3' to 5' -moderate groundwater seepage 399.0 ~--~ -MC= 34.50% ·---r ~~9 --__ ---395.0 ML 6.5 -. MC =20.00% SM L_O_ ---- --~--~=~--~-~ ----------------------- Tan sandy SILT, medium dense to dense, moist - -mottled texture Gray silty SAND. medium dense, wet f6St-pil temiinated at 7.0 feet below existing grade. GroU-lldwaterse-epage encountered at 3.0 feet during excavation. Caving obsen,ed from 3' to 5'. Bottom of test pit at 7 .0 feet. _ 3~3.5 3~3.:_0 "'L...--'-----'--------...1..-...J.. _ __._ ___________________________________ .J ~ w z w L • Eart tions NW 1805 -.-6th Place N.E., Suite 201 Bellevue. Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-449-4704 TEST PIT NUMBER TP-4 Fax: 425-449-4711 PROJECT NAME Skatturn_lihort Plat CLIENT _M_r,_ S___!!'in Skattum PROJECT NUMBER 4jl48 _ ____ -:: _______ " ==-~--=~-~=-P_R_O_J~E! L_£)CATION _c.cR_-~_D_JQ!2L_w __ a_.thJ11~_n ___ _ DATE STARTED1 0 2~/7~/~16~-----COMPLETED 121711'3_ GROUND ELEVATION 404_ft_ _ TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR N_W.~.x~v~a~t~in.~g~-- EXCAVATION METHOD GROUND WATER LEVELS: AT TIME OF EXCAVATION -- AT END OF EXCAVATION -- AFTER EXCAVATION LOGGED BY BJP CHECKED BY _!lJ_P_ _ ____ _ NOTES Depth of T9.PS0il & ~od _10'.' _g_r~ss _ TESTS 0 MC= 20.90% MC= 18.70% ui (.) (/) ::i TPSL MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ,''. Dari< brown TOPSOIL ----=-1~:'·-~~----------- Brown silty SAND. loose, moist -light groundwater seepage, light caving to 3' -becomes tan, medium dense -mottled texture SM -becomes gray, medium dense to dense PAGE 1 OF 1 1_Q3,o -- MC= 11-70% Fines = 37.25% ---7 5 -weakly cemented ----\{USDA Classification: slightly gravelly sandy LOAMJ_ ___ .. _ _ ___ ; Test pit tern1irla"ted at75 feet below existing grade. Groundwate/seepage encountel"ed at 2.0 feet during excavation_ Light caving observed from 2 to 3 feet. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. J91)_~ ~'---'-----'---------'----'----'-------------------------------------' ~ w z w • Earth Solutions NW 1805-136th Place N.E., Suite .t::u1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711 T r PIT NUMBER TP-5 PAGE 1 OF 1 CLIENT Mr. Stein Skattum _ ---------------PROJECT NAME Skattum Short Plat 1_P_R_O_J_EC_T_N_U_M_B_E_R~4=9=48=·===== =c---~,=====--'-P.:.:R:.:O:=J=E.=C..:.T..:L:.:O:.:C.:.:A:..:T:..:10:..:N~Re:_:nl~o,,rcc, W,.,,,a~she,il1!le,,_.,,o~n'========~-=-=cl L DATE STARTED _1,_.2/7""/·1"'6'------COMPLETED _1217/16 __ -~ GROUND ELEVATION 402_1!_ TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Ex~v_a,,te,in,,g.__ __________ _ GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD __ _ AT TIME OF EXCAVATION --------_________ _ LOGGED BY ~B~J-~P _____ _ CHECKED BY _ElJP AT END OF EXCAVATION -___________ __ NOTES Dt!!lth of Topsoil & Sod 10"-12": grass 0 - TESTS MC= 10.30% Fines= 17.06% MC= 15.90% ,,., ITPSL, ;,_,, SM AFTER EXCAVATION - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Dark brown TOPSOIL 1,_Q ________ ~=~------------ Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist -------------_4~~ -becomes medium dense [USDA Classification: very gravelly sandy LOAM] -becomes tan, medium dense to dense -mottled texture C - --MC= 9.10% -becomes gray, dense 7.0_, _______ _ ----------·--·-----_____ 395.0 Test pit terminated at 7.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. No caving observed. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. "L---'-----'--------'---'----'------------------------------------' Appendix B Laboratory Test Results ES-4948 Earth Solutions NW, LLC • Earth Solutions NW, LLC GRA.IZE DISTRIBUTION 1805 136th PL NE Bellevue WA 98005 Telephone: 4252843300 CLIENT Mr. Stein Skattum PROJECT NAME Skattum Short Plat PROJECT NUMBER ES-4948 PROJECT LOCATION Renton U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1 5 1 1" 1/23/B 3 ' B 810 1416 20 30 40 50 60 100 140200 100 1 I\ "" I I I I I I " . '---95 -,____ .___"= ~ ' 90 \ 85 I\ 80 75 \ • I 70 " 65 ~ I I-'ti ' :i: " C) 60 ' w s: ""->-55 ID "' ' w 50 :\ z '\ u: \ I-45 \ z \ " w 0 40 "' w \ Cl. 35 '\ " 30 25 \ '\ 20 15 10 5 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium I fine Specimen Identification Classification Cc Cu • TP-1 4.00ft. USDA: Tan Gravelly Sandy Loam. uses: SM with Gravel. = TP-3 3.00ft. USDA: Brown Slightly Gravelly Sandy Loam. uses: SM. ... TP-4 7.50ft . USDA: Gray Slightly Gravelly Sandy Loam. uses: SM. * TP-5 2.50ft. USDA: Brown Very Gravelly Sandy Loam. ues: SM with Gravel. Specimen Identification 0100 060 030 010 LL PL Pl %Silt %Clay • TP-1 4.0ft. 19 0.911 0.093 27.84 = TP-3 3.0ft. 19 0.217 36.00 ... TP-4 7.5ft. 19 0.216 37.25 * TP-5 2.5ft. 37.5 2.523 0.2 17.06 EMAIL ONLY EMAIL ONLY Report Distribution ES-4948 Mr. Stein Skattum P.O. Box 769 Renton, Washington 98057 Litchfield Engineering 12840-81°1 Avenue Northeast Kirkland, Washington 98034 Attention: Mr. Keith Litchfield, P.E. Earth Solutions NW, LLC APPENDIX D ARBORIST REPORT AF~ \mLTil.·an I on .. ·st ,1anai!_e11u·111 11+15 ;s;E 128th St Suite 110 Kirkland WA 9803+ • (+25)820-3+20 • FA,'\: (+25)820-H37 ·w,v,v.americanforestmanagement.com Arborist Report Skattum Plat 17018 & 17022 1061h Ave SE Renton, WA December 13'", 2016 ,.,, Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 2. Description ............................................................................................................... 1 3. Methodology ............................................................................................................ 1 4. Observations ........................................................................................................... 2 5. Discussion ............................................................................................................... 3 6. Tree Retention ......................................................................................................... 3 7. Tree Replacement ............................................................................................. 3 8. Tree Protection Measures................ . ........ .4 Appendix Site/Tree Photos -pages 7 -12 Tree Summary Table -attached Tree Locator Map -attached Tree Plan Map -attached City of Renton Tree Protection Measures -page 6 American Forest Management 12/13/2016 Skattum Plat -Arborist Report 1. Introduction American Forest Management, Inc. \Vas contacted by Keith Litchfield of Litchfield Engineering and \Vas asked to compile an 'Arborist Report' for t\VO parcels located within the City of Renton. The proposed subdivision encompasses the properties at I 7018 & 17022 I 061h Ave SE. Our assignment is to prepare a written repott on present tree conditions, which is to be filed with the preliminary permit application. This report encompasses all of the criteria set forth under City of Renton code section 4-4-130. The tree retention requirement is 30% of significant trees. Date of Field Examination: December 61h, 2016 2. Description 70 significant trees were identified and assessed on the rroperty. According to City of Renton code, a significant tree is a tree with a caliper (trunk diameter measured 4-1/2' above the ground) of at least 6" or an alder or cottonwood tree \Vith a caliper of at least 8". Trees planted within the most recent IO years qualit}· as significant trees, regardless of the actual caliper. A numbered aluminum tag was placed on the lower trunks of the subject trees. These numbers \Vere used for this assessment. Tree tag numbers correspond with the numbers on the Tree Summary Tables and copy of the attached site survey. There are eight neighboring trees \Vith a drip lines that extend over the property line. 3. Methodology Each tree in this report \Vas visited. Tree diameters were measured by tape. The tree heights \Vere measured using a Spiegel Relaskop. Each tree was visually examined for defects and vigor. The tree assessment procedure involves the examination of many factors: • The crown of the tree is examined for current vigor. This is comprised of inspecting the crovm (foliage, buds and branches) for color. density, form, and annual shoot growth. I imb di eback and disease. The percentage of live crown is estimated for coniferous species only and scored approrriately. • The bole or main stem of the tree is inspected for decay. v .. 'hich includes cavities, wounds, fruiting bodies of decay (conks or mushrooms), seams. insects, bleeding. callus development, broken or dead tops, structural defects and unnatural leans. Structural defects include crooks, forks with V-shaped crotches, multiple attachments, and excessive S\veep. • The root collar and roots arc inspected for the presence of decay, insects andior damage, as \veil as if they have been injured. undermined or exposed, or original grade has been altered. l3ased on these factors a determination of condition is made. The four condition categories are described belmv based on the species traits assessed: Excellent -free of structural defects. no disease or pest problems, no root issues. excellent structure/form with uniform crown or canopy. foliage of normal color and density, above average vigor. it will be wind firm if isolated, suitable for its location Good -free of significant structural defects, no disease concerns. minor pest issues, no significant root issues, good structure/form with uniform crown or canopy. foliage of normal color and density, average or normal vigor, will be wind firm if isolated or left as part ofa grouping or grove of trees, suitable for its location Page 1 American Forest Management 12113/2016 Skattum Plat -Arborist Report fair -minor structural defects not expected to contribute to a failure in near future. no disease concerns, moderate pest issues, no significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, average or normal vigor, foliage of normal color, moderate foliage density. will be wind firm if left as part ofa grouping or grove of trees, cannot be isolated, suitable for its location Poor -major structural <lefects expected to fail in near future, disease or significant pest concerns, <lcclinc due to old age, significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, sparse or abnormally small foliage, poor vigor, not suitable for its location A 'viable' tree is "A significant tree that a qual!fied prq/Cssional has determined to be in good health, with u lmv ri;sk offuilure due to strucf11ral defCcts. is ivind.firm if isolated or remains as part ufa grove, and is a species that is suitable }Or its location. "Trees considered 'non-viable' are trees that are in poor condition due to disease. age related decline. have .significant decay issues and/or cumulative structural defects. which exacerbate failure potential. The attached tree map indicates the 'condition' of the subject trees found at the site. 4. Observations The subject trees are primarily native. mature conifers. Specific tree information for individual trees can be found on the attached tree table. The Douglas-fir trees on the property are generally healthy and mature, estimated at 60 -70 years of age. Most were planted in rows or clusters. The row of Douglas-fir trees on the west property line, !--f.150 -#156. are growing very closely together and should not be isolated. One incident of fungal disease was observed. A Phaeolus schiveinitzii conk was found I' from the trunk of tree #132. The vigor of tree #132 is good and the infection is suspected to be incipient. Foliage color is good. All of the Douglas-fir trees on the site are viable. The western red cedar trees on the property are generally mature. Most of the western red cedar trees on the property are in groupings. Decay was observed in multiple trees. The decay is suspected to be brmvn cubical rot, but no fungal fruiting bodies were found. Some of the western red cedar trees were topped in the past. Co- dominant trunks with included bark wer commonly observed and arc the most concerning defect. The western red cedar trees on the property range in ondition and all but one are viable. Tree #165 -#l67 are black cottonwood recs on the v,rest side of the property. Tree #165 and #166 are mature black cottonwoods growing closely toge her. Tree# 165 has a DBH of 54" and a height of 167'. Tree #166 has a DBH of 45" and a height of 154 ', Large limbs on both tree have failed but no other concerning defects \Vere observed. Tree #167 is younger. The top of this tree broke off and there is decay in the trunk. All three trees are viable. Tree #149 is an English oak on the west property line. This tree has a forked trunk. The attachment between the t\vo trunks is good. The crown is full and no other defects were observed. This tree is in good condition and is viable. Tree #125, #130 and #131 are European larch trees on the west side of the property. Tree #130 and #131 have poor trunk taper. All three trees arc viable. Neighboring Trees Tree #201 -#206 are mature big leaf maple trees north and cast of the property lines. Big leaf maple trees often have large lateral branches. Co-<lominant trunks with included bark were the most common defects observed. All six trees are in fair to good condition and are viable. Tree #207 is a mature Douglas-fir south of the property line. This tree has no concerning defects, is in good condition and is viable. Page 2 American Forest Management 1211312016 Skattum Plat -Arborist Report 5. Discussion The extent of drip-lines (farthest reaching branches) for the subject trees can be found on the tree summary tables at the back of this report. These have also been delineated on a copy of the site survey for viable/healthy trees proposed for retention. The information plotted on the attached survey plan may need to be transfen-ed to a final tree retention/protection plan to meet City submittal requirements. The trees that are to be removed shall be shmvn "X'd" out on the final plan. The Limits of Disturbance (LOO) measurements can also be found on the tree summary table. This is the recommended distance of the closest impact {soil excavation) to the trunk face. These should be referenced \Vhen determining tree retention feasibility. The LOD measurements are based on species, age. condition, drip- linc. prior improvements, proposed impacts and the anticipated cumulative impacts to the entire root ?one. Tree Protection fencing shall be located beyond the drip-line edge of retained trees. and only moved back to the LOD when \1,;ork is authorized. Trees on the property grmving closely together are recommended for retention as groupings. One example is the row of Douglas-fir trees,# 150 -# 156 are growing in a row with only a few feet between each trunk.. When trees are grmving closely together, they often develop small trunk taper and live crown ratios. As long as the trees are retained as groupings and not isolated, the risk of failure is lessened. ;\ Phaeolus sc!H\'ei11it:::ii conk was found I' from the trunk of tree /--/-132. The vigor of tree # I 32 is good and the infection is suspected to be incipient. A!! conifers are susceptible to Phaeolus schweini!zii and it is likely present in multiple trees on the property. Trees in advanced stages of the disease often have thin crowns and/or branch dieback, and swollen lower trunks. No trees ,vith advam:ed or significant internal decay \Vere identified. The western red cedar trees on the property are mature and some concerning defects were observed. Brmvn cubical rot is suspected to be in multiple western red cedar trees on the property. The development of internal decay columns within mature l'.edar is common. As long as trees are vigorous and actively growing, the risk of failure remains low. Western red cedars are good at compartmentalizing decay radially and the presence of rot is not necessarily an indication that the tree is declining. The largest concern with the \Vcstern red cedar trees on the site is co-dominant sterns with included bark. Tree H-115 is a \Veskm red cedar with co-dominant stems that have split apart. Failure of this tree is extremely likely. Tree #115 is a high risk tree and should be removed before work commences on the site. The tree density on the site is currently low and mainly concentrated in the soutlnvest region of the property. Most of the trees are in the center and west side of the property. Sidewalk improvements, ,vater utilites and the construction ofne\v homes \Vill prevent retention of the majority of the existing trees. The site will fall 8 1% short of meeting the required 30(!"(1 significant tree retention requirement. New trees will be planted to mitigate for the tree removal and to enhance the landscape. There arc no concerns with neighboring trees. The tree protection measures below· \vill serve to protect these trees. 6. Tree Retention A total of70 significant trees \Vere identified on the subject property. One of the significant trees is in poor condition. This tree was not included in the tree calculation. Landmark trees and tree groves were prioritized \vhen selecting trees for retention, per the City of Renton tree code 4-4-130. Tree Calculation based on 69, healthy, viable, significant trees Viable Trees proposed for removal -54 (78%) Viable Trees proposed for rekntion -15 (22 1XJ) Page 3 American Forest Management 12/13/2016 Skattum Plat -Arborist Report Tree Type Removal Retained Total Landmark# 11 0 11 Landmark% 100% 0% 100% Significant# 43 15 58 Significant % 74% 26% 100% Total# 54 15 69 Total% 78% 22% 100% 7. Tree Replacement Replacements trees may be required. Consult your city planner for tree replacement requirements. All replacement trees are to be planted on site. For planting and maintenance specifications, refer to Section 4-4- 130 of the Renton Tree Ordinances. 8. Tree Protection Measures The following guidelines are recommended to ensure that the designated space set aside for the preserved trees arc protected and construction impacts arc kept to a minimum. Refer to the City of Renton Code 4-4-130-9. Protection Measures During Construction for more information. • Tree protection barriers shall be initially erected at 5' outside of the drip-line prior to moving any heavy equipment on site. • Tree protection fencing shall only be moved where necessary to install improvements, but only as close as the Limits of Disturbance, as indicated on the attached plan. • Excavation limits should be laid out in paint on the ground to avoid over excavating. • Excavations within the drip-lines shall be monitored by a qualified tree professional so necessary precautions can be taken to decrease impacts to tree parts. A qualified tree professional shall monitor excavations when work is required and allO\ved up to the "Limits of Disturbance". • To establish sub grade for foundations, curbs and pavement sections near the trees, soil should be removed parallel to the roots and not at 90 degree angles to a void breaking and tearing roots that lead back to the trunk within the drip-line. Any roots damaged during these excavations should be exposed to sound tissue and cut cleanly with a savl. Cutting tools should be sterilized with alcohol. • Areas excavated within the drip-line of retained trees should be thoroughly irrigated weekly during dry periods. • Preparations for final landscaping shall be accomplished by hand within the drip-lines of retained trees. Plantings within the drip lines shall be limited. Large equipment shall be kept outside of the tree protection zones. Page 4 American Forest Management t 211312016 Skattum Plat -Arborist Report There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man-caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Over time, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Kelly Wilkinson kel 1 y. wi lkinson@afmforest.com ISA Certified Arborist #PN-7673A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Page 5 American Forest Management 12/13/2016 Skattum Plat -Arborist Report City of Renton Code 4-4-130-9. Protection Measures During Construction a. Construction Storage Prohibited: The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment. dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. b. Fenced Protection Area Required: Prior to development activities. the applicant shall erect and maintain six-foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees or at a distance surrounding the tree equal to one and one-quarter feet (1.25') for every one inch (1") of trunk caliper. whichever is greater, or along the perimeter of a tree protection tract. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING -Protected Trees," or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. c. Protection from Grade Changes: If the grade level adjoining to a tree to be retained is to be raised, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or rock well around the tree. The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the tree's drip llne. d. Impervious Surfaces Prohibited within the Drip Line: The applicant may not install impervious surface material within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. e. Restrictions on Grading within the Drip Lines of Retained Trees: The grade level around any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the greater of the following areas: (i) the area defined by the drip line of the tree, or (ii) an area around the tree equal to one and one-half feet (1-1/2') in diameter for each one inch (1") of tree caliper. A larger tree protection zone based on tree size, species, soil, or other conditions may be required. (Ord. 5676. 12-3-2012) f. Mulch Layer Required: All areas within the required fencing shall be covered completely and evenly with a minimum of three inches (3") of bark mulch prior to installation of the protective fencing. Exceptions may be approved if the mulch will adversely affect protected ground cover plants. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) g. Monitoring Required during Construction: The applicant shall retain a certified arborist or licensed landscape architect to ensure trees are protected from development activities and/or to prune branches and roots, fertilize, and water as appropriate for any trees and ground cover that are to be retained. h. Alternative Protection: Alternative safeguards may be used if determined to provide equal or greater tree protection. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) Page 6 American Forest Management 12/13/2016 Skattum Plat -A r bo ri st Report Photos Northeast corner of the subject pro C l uster of yves tern red cedar trees (#106 -#108 '-.. Page 7 American Forest Management 12/13/20 16 Skattum Pla t -A r borist Report Page 8 American Forest Management 12/13/20 16 Skatt um Plat -Arborist Report Tree #11. 3 -western red cedar with col umn of decay I Page 9 Am erican Forest Management 12/13/2016 Skattum Plat -Arborist Report Tree #115 -western red cedar with forked trunk and severe deca Page 10 American Forest Management 12 /1312016 Skattum Plat -Arboris t Report T ree #133 -European w hite birch with a large burl Page 11 American Forest Management 12/13/2016 Skattum Pl at -Arbor ist Report East side of sub ·ect propert Page 12 American Forest Management 12/13/2016 Tree/ Tag# 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 Sp_ecies Douglas-fir Douglas-fir big leaf maple Douglas-fir western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir European larch Douglas-fir western red cedar quaking aspen quaking aspen European larch European larch Tree Summary Table For: Skattum Plat City of Renton DBH Height (inches) (feet) Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) N S E W 22 96 13110 17 110 28 103 14112 11 112 16112 8112 29 85 12112 21 112 19112 18112 12 42 916 1416 1716 20 81 13 10 17 4 28 52 4 17 16 6 24 78 10 8 4 6 34 72 18 21 11 23 37 45 10 17 15 10 32 103 17 9 12 11 20 76 4 13 6 6 28. 24 (37) 96 17 19 8 9 25 77 18 6 5 17 32 68 2 17 7 14 24 46 28 79 16 10 20 33 89 17 116 17 116 14116 161 16 27 109 8113 10 113 12113 9113 26 120 4112 15112 9112 4112 21 91 12110 9110 16110 16 81 518 918 1218 618 31 118 9 18 6 16 28 111 13 8 9 11 29 118 7 112 11 112 11 I 12 10 30 10 9 2 9 38 110 20 25 24 18 35 78 19 18 21 11 55 9 6 5 11 7 27 0 11 8 2 14 76 10 6 7 9 15 74 6 8 6 11 American Forest Mana_9_ement, Inc. Date: 12/7/2016 Inspector: Wilkinson Condition Viability good viable good viable good viable fair viable good viable fair viable good viable good viable good viable fair viable good viable fair viable fair viable fair viable poor non-viable fair viable good viable good viable good viable good viable fair viable good viable good viable good viable fair viable good viable good viable good viable fair viable fair viable fair viable Comments Slight lean E Topped landmark tree landmark tree Top broke off, landmark tree Forks at 2', landmark tree Decay uecay, 1orr.eu lOP, s11g11l 1ean 0, landmark tree 1 run!\ sp,1,.ing, hazardous -non-significant Connected at base to tree 115 1 runt\ 1orr.s 3l -,.,,., , some 1nc1uueu bark, landmark tree flat trunk on north side landmark tree some old lower trunk bleeding landmark tree ,anumarr. lree, in 106th Ave SE right-of-way poor trunk taper poor trunk taper Proposal retain retain retain retain remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove retain retain retain retain remove remove retain remove remove remove remove remove remove remove I Tree/ Tag# 2 3 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 "48 9 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 Species Douglas-fir European white birch grand fir western red cedar Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir western red cedar western red cedar Douglas-fir Douglas-fir English oak Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir Douglas-fir western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar western red cedar Willow Douglas-fir Tree Summary Table For: Skattum Plat City of Renton DBH Height (inches) (feet) Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) N S E W 20 74 10 13 6 15 16 64 13 12 7 16 28 77 12 16 14 15 26 84 15 12 19 12 13 81 7 10 9 5 25 115 11 10 8 12 16 95 10 7 6 12 24 111 11 17 12 23 16 100 3 7 6 10 17 98 11 10 6 12 22 109 11 14 8 10 28 110 8 / 13 18 / 13 6 / 13 14 / 13 33 101 15 / 15 16 / 15 18 / 15 8 / 15 22 83 6 / 12 12 / 12 16 / 12 5 / 12 27 85 8 / 14 11 / 14 9 / 14 11 / 14 29 118 15 8 11 13 19 100 7 7 9 14 25 91 4 19 11 17 17 45 13 11 17 20 95 10 11 19 91 16 15 11 63 11 8 18 85 12 14 19 83 6 14 12 52 8 7 7 23 38 15 12 11 13 23 10 9 9 18 39 14 / 15 7 / 15 12 / 15 14 45 13 / 12 9 / 12 7 / 12 19 55 12 / 10 9 / 10 10 / 10 23 61 12 / 16 10 / 16 6 / 16 6, 5, 4 (9) 39 14 / 6 13 / 6 9/6 12 51 14 / 6 15/6 American Forest Management, Inc. Date: 12/7/2016 Inspector: Wilkinson Condition Viability fair viable fair viable good viable fair viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable aood viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable good viable -fair viable fair viable good viable good viable fair viable good viable Comments ae61us scnwe1nllz11 coITT found 1' from trunk on east side Burl on trunk Forked top Forked trunk, minor included bark landmark tree in aroucina with tree #146 in grouping with tree #145 Forked trunk Slight lean N Topped Topped Proposal remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove remove retain retain retain retain retain retain Tree/ Tag# 165 166 167 168 169 170 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 Species black cottonwood black cottonwood black cottonwood western red cedar Douglas-fir western red cedar big leaf maple big leaf maple big leaf maple big leaf maple big leaf maple big leaf maple Douglas-fir western red cedar Tree Summary Table For: Skattum Plat City of Renton DBH Height (inches) (feet) Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) N S E W 54 167 18 15 19 45 154 18 17 11 12, 13 (17) 55 17 19 16 17 23 54 16 13 14 14 23 94 10 17 15 15 25 85 8 9 11 11 Neighboring Trees 8. 7 111 I 54 6/0 16 71 6/2 10, 10, 15 (27) 78 9/5 ,u, ,u, 13 (27) 70 12 / 14 29, 32 (43) 111 5 / 14 16 / 14 19 / 14 28 73 18 / 12 28 94 10 / 2 29, 16 (33) 49 8/5 Drip-Line and Limits of Disturbance measurements from face of trunk American Forest Management, Inc. Date: 121712016 Inspector: Wilkinson Condition Viability fair viable fair viable fair viable good viable good viable good viable good viable fair viable fair viable fair viable good viable good viable good viable good viable Comments landmark tree Large limbs have failed, landmark tret decay, top broke off Leans W, 10' east of property line 5' from property line 1 run11. 1orr.s at uase, goou attachment. landmark tree 8' S of property line 10' S of property line, landmark tree Trees on neighboring properties -Drip-line and Limits of Disturbance measurements from property lines Proposal remove remove remove remove remove remove protect protect protect protect protect protect protect protect Calculated DBH: the DBH is parenthesis is the square root of the sum of the dbh for each individual stem squared (example with 3 stems: dbh ~ square root [(stem1 )2 +(stem2)2 +(stem3)2 ]. / / \.__ ---\----~ ' --J86-:::. ::: :::. :::. -J8I --------;., --- s 01·45'2e· w I I I I \ \ \ \ ' "' ' S 01"45'28" W --- ~-ioS • wv.. 0 • 6. _ .:. 1fk '1-L.\ • , PL 60.00' _ -__ P!, ~5_,Q_ N I .. : >-~ ~ 85.00'_"'~"20 Pl,,_ §_0.00 i ~ =-,m -T ,--------------- ' 0" • ._ _____ \.L' ~ I i· Tl1' g o~---"-·-'"Y 1 • • 1 cu1 t:bT 8 11 • <I: --------1 r------------.--1 I i . i , 5:5 I -I 5031-SF , : i : : j LOT D i t, j _ LOT E j I 5'.tio\ ,'-0" NALK PING iTRIP 6" :URS :URS lAMP ~ WI Cl) w ~ I r,;I g i I ~ I ! : 7200 SF j I g i , 6680 SF : 0 : j I I ! (6729 SF) : 1 ....1 ...J L. --J !1. . : co I : \, I ' I I la. a. __ __:_-~·=:_·_.-_----' LOT C I i I I ! I : I ,PLB5.00' __ l 1 : 6864 SF. j ,_L ____ --.. -1---:.J r ' :_ ~ • ,1it1..0"1- -I . , 1 . , a L/:</_....,.-I ~ i;, ! LOT A -! I i • ! :~ --( -i I:;; ~ : 5031S.F.: ' cPL586;'J ~ i -LOTF ~! • ,;~'ZD~ ' eL-as:mr--~ J 6674 SF _ 'l_":::i --==-------·- 0 0 0 co ...J PLr-85.00'--t-=-11 j : ! LOTA 5031 SF i m~------:-=_-:__---==--:~-PL~s.oo· I I LOTF 6680 SF ~---+-------I ! . ... --i : ~ j . : I l --I ~ I I PL 60.0' I ' I I ', : I 0 I ' : " ·-t;;,, I O'l ~JOI -V'1A-BL:E Tc2E'"E A1' f' (2. O'X l M Pri E s CA-LE: 1 ";; ?>.,. I I I 1,-----< c--,_,., ' I ...J : LOT C . : ! f'--~~V'k... i I a. I '"' . -" -~·.:13' , : 6855 SF-N I I • . I I . --------~----.:::.. ----J --11 ...: I I: . LOT D : : I ,·· -----------------' "1 , ' I •• --.. I 1 j--ti: 6855SF ! ~ : ""'l ', I : j rt ! (6390 SF) I jci ! LOT E : 1 I T I • : j : m I 6680 SF I _ . . I...J , . a -L>'.::.., I . .· ~a ( . --~-·-~--~·-;__J --c:i j • --ILO . ii ~ '"o i-1, • ...J ---. a. PL so.oo·· --· PL so oo· ----::: =::__ ~ · ~~ , . ,i!;JL 95.00' , , i - ---·-· i--· j ' • '\_ 1· --Tzi" i-?101,-l I: I' I,(,,/., f-'i /'" DENSITY WORKSHEET City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 1. Gross area of property: ( comprised of Lot 10 & 11) 1 . _ _,8""4"'3,,.,6,.,,0'--_.sq uare feet 2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public streets** Private access easements** Critical Areas* Total excluded area: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area: 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned: 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 1 O 530 square feet ------'5""'8""'0.___ square feet _ __,o'---square feet 2. 11 110 square feet 3. 73 250 square feet 4. 1.68 acres 5. 11 units/lots 6. 6.54 = dwelling units/acre *Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways." Critical areas buffers are not deducted/excluded. •• Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded. (Applicant note: . public access including driveway, walkway and landscaping . private access easement between lot D & lot E, lot I & lot K) DEPARTMENT OF CC /!UNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Renton& 1. 2. 3. TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov Total number of trees over 6" diameter', or alder or cottonwood trees at least 8" in diameter on project site Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dangerous' Trees in proposed public streets Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts Trees in critical areas 3 and buffers Total number of excluded trees: Subtract line 2 from line 1: 69 trees trees 11 trees 31 trees trees 42 trees 27 trees 4. Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained 4 , multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, R-4, R-6 or R-8 0.2 in all other residential zones 0.1 in all commercial and industrial zones 9 trees -----=--- 5. List the number of 6" in diameter, or alder or cottonwood trees over 8" in diameter that you are proposing 5 to retain 4 : 27 trees 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: (if line 6 is zero or less, stop here. No replacement trees are required) 0 trees 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 0 inches 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: (Minimum 211 caliper trees required) 0 inches per tree 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees 6: (If remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 0 trees 1 Measured at 4.5' above grade. 2 A tree certified, in a written report, as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property by a licensed landscape architect, or certified arborist, and approved by the City. 3 Critical areas, such as wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined in RMC 4-3-050. 4 Count only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers. 5 The City may require modification of the tree retention plan to ensure retention of the maximum number of trees per RMC 4-4-130H7a. 6 When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, replacement trees, with at least a two-inch (2") caliper or an evergreen at least six feet {6'} tall, shall be planted. See RMC 4-4-130.H.1.e.(ii) for prohibited types of replacement trees. 1 Z:\Stein\106th-Ave-SE_Short-Plats\PRE-PLAT_D0C5\23-Tree-Retention-Worksheet\TreeRetentionWorksheet.doc Rev: 08/2015 Minimum Tree Density A minimum tree density shall be maintained on each residentially zoned lot (exempting single-family dwellings in R-10 and R-14). The tree density may consist of existing trees, replacement trees, or a combination. Detached single-family development': Two (2) significant trees8 for every five thousand (5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. For example, a lot with 9,600 square feet and a detached single-family house is required to have four (4) significant trees or their equivalent in caliper inches (one or more trees with a combined diameter of 24"). This is determined with the following formula: ( LotArea ) . . b ,J x 2 = Mm,mum Num er o Trees 5,000 sq.ft. Multi-family development (attached dwellings): Four (4) significant trees8 for every five thousand (5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. (_ Lot Area ) \s,OOOsq.ft. x 4 Minimum NumberofTrees Example Tree Density Table: Lot Lot size Min significant New Trees Retained Trees Compliant trees required 1 5,000 2 2 @ 2" caliper 0 Yes 2 10,000 4 0 1 tree (24 caliper Yes inches) 3 15,000 6 2 @ 2" caliper 1 Maple-15 Yes caliper inches 1 Fir -9 caliper inches. 7 lots developed with detached dwellings in the R-10 and R-14 zoned are exempt from maintaining a minimum number of significant trees onsite, however they are not exempt from the annual tree removal limits. 8 Or the gross equivalent of caliper inches provided by one (1) or more trees. ' Z: \Stein \106th-Ave-SE_ Short-Plats \PRE· PLAT_ DOCS \2 3-Tree-Rete n ti on -Worksheet\ T reeRete nti o nW orkshe et. doc Rev: 08/2015 Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC AOA I'!) l~o~ ;,7~ CnH.1lior1, \\'\ ~!KO! I i.-.1, 1. r:.-,J :i:n-i.-inq F11Yiro11rne11L.1! May 21, 2016 Stein Skattum skattum@comcast.net SUBJECT: Wetland and Stream Reconnaissance for: 17018 and 17022 -1061h Ave. SE, Renton, WA Parcels 008700-0265 and -0270 Dear Stein: PL11111i11g & I .. 111d,cap,· . \ rel 1 i 1 en 11 n · AOA-5175 On May 19, 2016 I conducted a wetland and stream reconnaissance on the subject property utilizing the methodology outlined in the May 201 O Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0). No wetlands or streams are mapped on the City of Renton mapping and no wetlands or streams were identified on or adjacent to the property during the field investigation. Each of the two parcels are currently developed with a single-family residence and associated lawn and maintained yard areas. Scattered trees including Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesil), big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), and black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) were observed throughout both lots. An upland forested area is located off-site to the east. This off-site area was dominated by big-leaf maple, Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), vine maple (Acer circinatum), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus), and sword fern (Polystichum munitum). No hydrophytic plant communities were observed on or adjacent to the property. Borings taken throughout the two parcels revealed high chroma, dry, non-hydric, soils and there was no evidence of ponding or prolonged soil saturation anywhere on the property. Stein Skattum May 21, 2016 Page 2 Ditch During the field investigation, a small (-1-foot wide) ditch was observed along the east and south property lines of the site (Figure 1 ). Stormwater runoff from an off- site development to the northeast is collected in a vault and the overflow is discharged from a pipe at the NE corner of the 17018 residence. Intermittent runoff within the ditch then drains south and west before entering the roadside ditch adjacent the east side of 1061h Ave. SE. A slight flow was observed discharging from the off-site vault at the time of the site visit. This runoff was observed infiltrating within the ditch near the southeast corner of the 17018 residence and the remainder of the ditch was dry. Since the ditch: 1) conveys entirely artificially collected stormwater runoff and 2) was cut through an upland where no stream previously existed, the ditch should not be considered a stream by the City of Renton or any other regulatory jurisdiction. Conclusion No wetlands or streams were identified on or immediately adjacent the site. This determination is based on a field investigation during which no hydrophytic plant communities, hydric soils, or evidence of wetland hydrology were observed. If you have any questions regarding the reconnaissance, please give me a call. Sincerely, ALTMANN OLIVER ASSOCIATES, LLC John Altmann Ecologist Figure 1 The nformation 1n cllded on this map has been com pied by King Coonty staff from a variety a scu-ces and is sut:ject to change witho.it notice. King Colflty makes no rei:resentatioos or v.errarties, express or implied , as to accuracy, compl~eness, tmeiness, or rghts to the use cf such irtormat100 This document s I'd intended for use as a scrvey product King Co.inty shal not be iable for any general, special , hclrect. ircidertal or conse"-'ential damages 1rclud1ng, b ut I'd lmited to, lost revenues or est profits resiJting from the use or misuse cf the irtorrnaton contained or, this map. lVty sale cf this map or informabon on this map 1s prohbited except by written perm1ss100 cf King Co.inly. Date : 5/21/2016 Notes: -1¥ -.-cc-2 -1~s-,,,-Ar.-_J I N A tQ King County GISCENT ER • DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -------Renton 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 I www.rentonwa.gov PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision-making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. INSTRUCTIONS FOR LEAD AGENCIES: Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: For non project proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPI.EMENTAL SHEET FOR NON PROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic 1 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements-that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Renton Subdivision 2. Name of applicant: Stein Skattum 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Stein Skattum (Contact & Applicant) 103SO Rainier Avenue S Seattle, WA 98178 (206) 300-6231 4. Date checklist prepared: 12-20-16 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Summer2017 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The project will ultimately include construction of 11 single family homes. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Geotechnica/ Report Arborist Report Wetland and Stream Reconnaissance 2 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 • 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Renton Preliminary and Final Plat City of Renton Construction Permits Department of Ecology NPDES Soos Creek Water and Sewer District 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project is on 11 lot plat ofTPs 008700-0265 and-0270 located at 17018 and 17022 106'h Avenue SE. Each parcel contains a house and an access to 106'h Avenue SE. The short plat will create 11 lots, Drainage Tract and a new public road. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Quarter-Section-Township-Range SW-29-23-5 Legal Description TRACT 10, BLK 4 AKE R'S FARMS N0.5 LOT 11, BLOCK 4, AKER'S FARMS N0.5, ACCORDING TO THR PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 40 OF PLATS, PAGE 27, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON 3 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (check or circle one): Flats illy, steep slopes, mountainous, other _____ _ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 15% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None known e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Trenching and excavation associated with utilities installation, road improvements, starm water vault, etc. Estimated earthwork quantities: 1,200 CY cut/fill f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, some erosion could occur during construction, erosion will be controlled. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not to exceed max per zoning (65%). h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Re-vegetate exposed soils or cover with impervious surfaces. During construction - construction access, plastic cover, catch basin inserts. 4 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Dust, auto emissions b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None at this time 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No s \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Stormwater from roofs, driveways, landscaping ond the new road will be collected and tightlined to a combined detention/water quality treatment vault. Detained and treated storm water will then be discharged to the conveyance system in 106'h Avenue NE. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No 6 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev,08/2016 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: Stormwoter vault outflows will be detained to the duration control standard and provided with basic water quality treatment. 4. PLANTS a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: Ldeciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other Levergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _Lshrubs _Lgrass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Grass, trees and brush c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Grass and landscaping with trees and shrubs. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None known 5. ANIMALS a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. 7 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 Examples include: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle,~other: ----------- Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:------------- Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other _________ _ b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not that is known. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None known 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not that is known c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Standard energy conservation measures that are required by the Uniform Building Code for the construction of the houses. 8 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No environmental hazards are expected. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None that is known 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None known 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. None. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None beyond standard life safety services. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None at this time. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? No significant noise impacts. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction per City of Renton noise ordinance. 9 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev,08/2016 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Observe City of Renton noise ordinance. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. Single-Family Residential, not anticipated b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or non-forest use? Not known 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: Not known c. Describe any structures on the site. Two single family residences d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Both residences and associated outbuildings will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is zoned R-8. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Residential Medium Density. 10 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev:08/2016 g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 11 residences/families J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? 2 single family homes will be removed as part of the project development k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Meets land use code and comprehensive plan designation. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long- term commercial significance, if any: N/A 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 11 middle income homes b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 2 middle income homes 11 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx RevcOS/2016 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Buildings will not exceed the allowable maximum building height as defined by the land use code. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None know c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Houses will be constructed to meet City of Renton codes, Zoning and Comprehensive Plan. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Porch lights at night b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No significant impact expected. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None known d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None 12 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev,08/2016 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Fred Nelson Middle School b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None at this time 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically describe. Not that is known. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. Not that is known. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. N/A d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. None 13 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site is currently accessed via 1061h Avenue SE, as will the developed site. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? There are 2 transit staps approximately 0.5 miles from the site at the following locations: 108th Avenue SE & SE Carr Road SE Petrovitsky Road & 108th Avenue SE c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Completed project will provide 24 parking spaces. Approximately 2 parking spaces will be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes, a new road will be constructed off of 106'h Avenue SE. Frontage improvements along 106'h Ave SE will include curb, gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, and widening the rood to 26'. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Not that is known. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non-passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Using /TE Trip Generation rates, the proposed 11 lot plat will generate 11 PM peak haur trips and 8 AM peak hour trips. 14 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. Not that is known. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. General public services to accommodate {11) single family residences. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Payment of property taxes and other support fees. 16. UTILITIES septic system, b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Water & Sewer -Soos Creek Water & Sewer District (sewer extension required) 15 \\LE"PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev, 08/2016 C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Proponent Signature: _· ... l_",_"'"'zA_,___,('--_A_~=-1'---... )""--------- Name of Signee (printed): ,..,Ke,,,it"'h.,..,A,_,.,_,u"'·t,,,ch,..fi"'e..,ld.,. • ...,P""'.E"'.'------------ Position and Agency/Organization: Owner of Litchfield Engineering Date Submitted: I 2.. -2 I -\ \Ll 16 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016