No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 01 1 0f 2Denis Law Mayor February 1, .'l012 Vince Gaglia 11410 NE 1241h St, Suite 596 Kirkland, WA 98034 Ed Sewall 27641 Covington Way SE, Suite #2 Covington, WA 98042 City Clerk -Bonnie I. Walton Victoria Andes 15445 53'd Ave South Tukwila, WA 98198 Rob Ward 13256 NE 201h St., Suite #16 Bellevue, WA 98005 Re: Decision for McCormick Plat, LUA-11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Dear Parties of Record: Attached is a copy of the Hearing Examiner's Decision dated January 20, 2012, in the above- referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Enc.: Hearing Examiner's Decision cc: Hearing Examiner Larry Warren, City Attorney Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Neil Watts, Development Service Director Stacy Tucker, Development Services 1055 South Grady Way• Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: McCormick Plat Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development LUA! 1-034, ECF, PP, PPUD ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Summary FINAL DECISION 16 Robert McCormick has applied for approval of an application for a 34 lot preliminary plat and planned urban development ("PUD"). The application also includes a request to reduce portions of 17 a 75 foot buffer to a Class ill stream to 60 feet and an alteration of the buffer to enable a waterline crossing. The project site currently accommodates a 40 unit mobile home park and the applicant will 18 have to vacate the park to develop the subdivision. The application and associated stream buffer 19 modifications are approved subject to conditions. Requested modifications to development standards as authorized by PUD regulations are approved to the extent recommended by staff. 20 The project's compliance with applicable development standards was virtually uncontested. The 21 Muckleshoot Tribe provide some written concerns and many of those concerns were addressed by 22 staff in its recommended conditions of approval. As is evident from the record, all project impacts were thoroughly assessed and mitigated. Most of the staff's analysis and most of its recommended 23 conditions of approval was adopted without any need for modification. Numerous conditions of approval were added to assure compliance with permitting criteria It is likely that staff had already 24 ensured that the project would comply with these conditions, but this was not evident from the administrative record. 25 2 6 There was only one revision to the staff recommended conditions of approval that may require some marginally significant revision to the project, regarding a re-assessment of compliance with the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -I 1 2 3 4 City's tree retention regulations. The staff report provides for an inventory of trees with 6-inch caliper or greater and bases retention and replacement requirements on those numbers. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 9, the City's tree retention ordinance requires protection of all trees with a 2-inch caliper or greater. It may well be that the staff report doesn't mention trees between 2 and 6- inch caliper because none are present at the project site. However, if there are trees in that range the conditions of approval require that they be included in the applicant's tree retention plan. If staff or the applicant have some code basis to argue that tree retention requirements only apply to the 6-inch 5 plus trees, a reconsideration request is highly encouraged. 6 Several persons attended the hearing, but no members of the public expressed any concerns about 7 regulatory compliance. The people at the hearing are mobile home owners living in the park and they were understandably concerned about their relocation. As explained by the Examiner at the 8 hearing, the City has little authority to alleviate the problems this project will introduce into their 9 lives. What help can be provided is mostly available through state law as opposed to City regulations. RCW 59.21.030 requires the applicant to provide twelve months' notice to the mobile Io home owners prior to the termination of their tenancy. The applicant can provide this notice anytime he chooses and mobile home owners should consult with the applicant to determine when he intends 11 to send out the notice. Washington State also provides relocation monies to low income mobile 12 home owners. In Condition 11 of the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA"), Chapter 43.21C RCW Mitigated Determination ofNonsignificance ("MDNS") the applicant has voluntarily agreed to 13 advance the funds provided by the state to those who would qualify for the funds. According to the applicant at the hearing, without the advanced funding qualified owners may not get funds from the 14 state until well after they've incurred relocation expenses. 15 For those who would like more information on the state relocation program, the Washington State 16 Department of Commerce has a website with information at http://www.commerce.wa.gov/site/484/default.aspx. Note that the website provided by the applicant 17 in Ex. 36 is no longer active since the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic development was absorbed into the Washington State Department of Commerce. The 18 Department of Commerce can also be reached if you have questions about the relocation program at 1-800-964-0852. 19 20 21 22 StaffTestimony Testimony 23 Vanessa Dolbee, senior planner for city of Renton, stated the application is for a for a 34-lot 24 subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. She noted exhibit 18, the neighborhood detail map, which demonstrates the site is on the south side of Maple Valley Highway 25 and a portion of the property lies in King County, not Renton. Ms. Dolbee testified that the property is designated residential, single family (R-8) in the city. She said the portion of the site within Renton 26 is 7.32 acres, and the map ( exhibit 18) denotes which sections of the property are in the city and PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -2 1 2 3 4 5 6 which are in King County. The section of the site to be developed is located in Renton, yet the part in King County is still being processed within this application. She noted that across from Maple Valley Highway is King County park property that is zoned RA-5, to the east is property zoned R-A5, to the south there is vacant land zoned RA-lOP and R-1, and to the west is R-8 which is the Summerfield residential development. Ms. Dolbee testified that exhibit 32 is a vested King County plat for the same property (also for a 34- lot subdivision), which is proposal LUA-068 for King County. Due to this vested application, this proposal is unique because the comparison for public benefit improvements needs to be balanced according to both Renton standards and King County standards, Ms. Dolbee noted. The old plat 7 proposal for King County has cul-de-sacs and a !-access easement for the lots, but, according to Ms. Dolbee, in the new plan there is a looped road system, alley-loaded homes, vertical curves/sidewalks, a trail system, and a large vegetative buffer along the Maple Valley Highway. Additionally, she 9 commented that there is an increase in critical. area protection in the lots along the south-side in the new proposal.. 8 10 11 12 13 Ms. Dolbee stated that exhibit 2 is the applicant's proposal. The proposal is for lots ranging from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet, resulting in a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per acre, she said. Ms. Dolbee noted that there are nine tracts proposed including a storm-water tract, aid and growth protection tracts, access and utility tracts, open space, a lopped trail system (1/3 of a mile long), a play area in the center, and a hierarchical road system. According to Ms. Dolbee, there are 3 roads: road A is the main access way, road B loops around the development, and road C goes through 14 the center of the development. 15 16 17 18 19 Ms. Dolbee testified that there are many critical areas within the site. There is a class 3 stream that runs along the north-side of the mobile home park on the property and then turns and heads north to Cedar River, she said. Ms. Dolbee added that there are two category 2 wetlands: wetland A is located on the southwestern comer, while wetland Bis on the northeastern comer of the site. Ms. Dolbee stated that exhibit 2 notes the steep slopes along the south-side of the site which contain severe erosion and landslide hazards. There are also seismic hazards in the entire development area, she noted. Ms. Dolbee remarked that a small portion of the site is also located in the shoreline 20 jurisdiction of the Cedar River (exhibit 19). The very comers of proposed lots 9 and 10 would fall in this shoreline jurisdiction, she said. 21 22 23 According to Ms. Dolbee, an environmental review was completed for the project and a mitigated determination of non-significance was issued with 12-mitigation measures. There was a 14-day appeal period that commenced on August 26th and ended on September 9th of 2011, but there were no appeals of the threshold determination, she noted. Ms. Dolbee mentioned that many of the 12 24 mitigation measures listed in the environmental review addressed the critical areas on the site. 25 26 Ms. Dolbee stated that the applicant has requested two approvals: one for a preliminary plat and one for a planned urban development. She noted that each approval has specific review criteria, but do PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -3 I include much overlap. Ms. Dolbee testified that PUDs requirements are meant to preserve natural features and encourage innovation in residential developments by permitting a variety of structures 2 and improvements. The PUDs are meant to encourage superior design than what is provided for in the city code, she said. Ms. Dolbee commented that the density provisions of title 4 cannot be modified under this PUD application, thus the proposed subdivision does comply with the R-8 designation (4-8 dwelling units per acre). However, she noted, 4.2, 4.4, 4.7, 4.6060 of the title code can all be modified to meet this PUD proposal. 3 4 5 6 According to Ms. Dolbee, in table A of the staff report, the modifications to the title requested by the applicant are listed. The applicant has requested a change in standard lot size from 4,500 to 2,319 sq. 7 feet. She added that Jot width's current standard is 50ft for interior lots and 60ft for corner lots, but the applicant wishes to change to 32ft for interior lot and 42ft for corner Jots. Additionally, she noted that Jot minimum depth is 65ft, but the applicant wishes to change lot 18 to 43ft (a comer lot) and lot 9 26 to 61ft (southeast corner Jot). She stated that all other lots would meet Jot depth standards. According to Ms. Dolbee, the minimum front-yard setback is currently 15ft, but the applicant has 8 JO requested a reduction to 10ft. In addition, she stated, the minimum side-yard along a street is currently 15ft, but the applicant has requested a reduction to 1 Oft and 5ft for Jot 11 because it is along an access easement. She also testified that rear-yard setback is currently 20ft, but the applicant requested it be reduced to 1 Oft. 11 12 I 3 In table A there are three other requested modifications that were not requested by the applicant, but were proposed by staff, according to Ms. Dolbee. Staff feels these modifications are necessary to 14 create a buildable development, she said. Ms. Dolbee stated that the frrst staff-proposed modification is to maximum building coverage. Staff recommends the 50 percent maximum building 15 coverage be eliminated in order for the buildings to fit on the smaller lot sizes, she testified. Instead, 16 Ms. Dolbee stated, staff wishes to utilize impervious coverage and setback standards to regulate mass. 17 Ms. Dolbee testified that a second modification proposed is to remove the requirement of a variety of lot sizes and widths because of the small size of the lots on the site. In order to maintain variation, 18 staff recommends a modification to the residential design scale and bulk character section which 19 would increase the standard of different models of homes from every 10 lots, to every 4 lots, according to Ms. Dolbee. 20 21 Ms. Dolbee stated that the applicant requested two road standard modifications. For Maple Valley Highway, the applicant has requested to not do frontage improvements, but only do curb/gutter and 22 add a 5ft sidewalk, she said. However, Ms. Dolbee commented, staff does not approve this mitigation, but instead asked for 20ft right-of-way dedication, a 5ft sidewalk, an 8ft planting strip, and curb/gutter/streetlights designed to meet city arterial standards. The applicant also requested for a modification from residential access road standards, according to Ms. Dolbee. She remarked that, 23 24 currently, the applicant requested a 33ft pavement from face-of-curb to face-of-curb with parking on one side and a 5ft sidewalk on the inside, which is along lots 18-34. Staff recommends a different modification ( closer to city standards), she commented. According to Ms. Dolbee, staff asked that 26 road A have a 40ft right of way, curb/gutter on both sides, 5ft sidewalk on both sides , 25ft pavement 25 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -4 1 section on both sides, and a 8ft planter strip on the west side. In addition, she noted, staff also asked that road B have a 30ft right of way, 20 ft. of pavement, parking on one side, curb/gutter on both 2 sides, and 'an 8ft planter strip to the interior. 3 Ms. Dolbee testified that the second portion of the PUD criteria is the demonstration of compliance 4 superiority. She stated that the proposed plat layout provides for a significant increase in residential safety from the hlgh landslide hazards, it provides for many recreational amenities beyond code 5 requirements, it increases the quality of the internal circulation system throughout the development, it 6 enhances the critical areas with the addition of open space, and it is a significant improvement from the King County proposal. 7 According to Ms. Dolbee, table B of the staff report identifies the public benefits of thls project. In 8 regards to critical areas, more protection for these areas is provided by the proposal, she stated. 9 Specifically, Ms. Dolbee noted that in wetland A there is a 50ft required buffer, along with the 22,000 sq. ft. tract (tract E). The enhanced landslide protection can be seen in exhibit 5 (stream buffer map), Jo she said. According to Ms. Dolbee, the addition of a 33ft roadway adds an 100ft buffer between the tow of the steep slopes and the potential future home. She noted that there is a debris-flow 11 protection berm proposed that would gather the soils if there was a hlgh-level landslide. Ms. Dolbee stated that the safeguards reduce the chance oflife or property loss in a catastrophlc event. 12 13 In regards to natural features, Ms. Dolbee stated that the existing development does encroach on the wetland and stream buffers in some places, but there is a mitigation plan provided. She remarked that 14 the PUD would re-vegetate those areas where the existing development encroaches upon buffer areas already ( such as the area north of the mobile park) with natural plantings. She concluded that the 15 redevelopment would reduce the current impacts that already exist at the site. There are significant 16 landscape enhancements whlch can be seen in exhibit 16 (the landscape plan). She noted that there is a large landscape buffer screen for Maple Valley Highway whlch exceeds the buffer requirement by 17 I Oft ( dark green on exhibit 16). Tract J is a landscaped area behlnd the steep slopes on the eastern boundary, and it would be vegetated whlch is beyond code standards, she said. Additionally, she 18 noted that tract E would be provided along the west-side of the site, which contributes to the 19 aesthetics of the site. A 4,188 sq. ft. open-space park would be in the northwest comer of the interior of the site, she said. Ms. Dolbee commented that the applicant also proposes increased tree planting. 20 There are currently 27 protected trees on the site, and the r-8 zone requires 30-percent tree protection, she said. According to Ms. Dolbee, the applicant would be retaining 2 trees and replacing 77 trees 21 which exceed the code requirement. 22 In regards to overall design, Ms. Dolbee stated that there is a large amount of open space and 23 recreation which exceeds code requirements by 2,488ft for park area and 6,931ft for open space. She noted that staff recommends lot-34 be swapped with the park lot in order to create a gateway feature 24 and provide a more desirable home-location. She noted that thls recommendation was included in the conditions of approval attached to the staff report. Ms. Dolbee also testified that staff recommended (as a condition of approval) that tracts E and C be combined along above the detention pond in order 26 to create a more cohesive area and the possibility for a pedestrian walkway. 25 PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Ms. Dolbee noted that the proposed plat has a superior pedestrian circulation system with a soft- surface trail which can be seen in exhibit 4 (brown lines). She added that there would be sidewalks along the three roadways. In regards to sidewalks, Ms. Dolbee commented that the applicant proposed a tabletop design at the intersection of roads B and A to increase pedestrian safety. She noted that staff recommends all sidewalks are treated the same for the project, in order to create cohesiveness, avoid confusion, and maintain safety. Ms. Dolbee noted that the site will have superior vehicular circulation with the looped road system by allowing rear access to the internal lots. Additionally, the presence of alleys for vehicle circulation allows for a more pedestrian-safe environment, she said. She noted that fifty percent of the lots are accessed by alleys, in accordance with city code. In regards to landscaping and screening, the topography to the east and south results in a natural screen for the development, according to Ms. Dolbee. She stated that plantings in the west will also provide screening for the development in that area. Ms. Dolbee added that the site is designed to allow for solar access for 27 of the lots, and all homes will be subject to design standards of a R-8 zone. The proposed site plan is superior to Renton standards and the King County vested application. According to Ms. Dolbee, the PUD criterion requires the interior site-design to be coordinated. The proposal achieves this through quality pedestrian and vehicular circulation, critical area protection, safety with buffering, and R-8 design standards, according to Ms. Dolbee. In order to meet the PUD circulation criteria, the proposal gains access from Maple Valley Highway, gives lots 1-8, 11-17 access to road B, lots 9 and 10 gain access through tract d, and road c gives lots 18-34 access, she said. Ms. Dolbee noted that all of these roads are designed to handle emergency vehicles and traffic created by the project. She stated that a traffic impact analysis was completed and demonstrated the proposal meets city and state requirements. Ms. Dolbee noted that planter strips would provide area between pedestrians and vehicles, and a school bus-stop would be located on the west-side of road A. According to Ms. Dolbee, there is no direct commercial development in the area, so the PUD criterion for pedestrian connections is irrelevant at this time. In regards to infrastructure and services criteria, the site would be served by City of Renton fire and Cedar River water and sewer district, she noted. Ms. Dolbee stated that a water line extension would be needed from the west, which would require a connection line through the stream buffer. This extension would be permitted in the code via a stream alteration approval, she commented. In addition, Ms. Dolbee noted that a detention pond is proposed in the northwest comer for storm-water runoff. She testified that the proposed infrastructure and services are sufficient, if the water connection is mitigated and all SEP A conditions are met. In regards to the building orientation criteria, Ms. Dolbee remarked that the proposed layout maximizes the use of topography for views of the Cedar River. She added that parking for two vehicles on each lot is provided. Additionally, she noted that open space and recreation area requirements are exceeded. Private open space is required on each lot (15 ft. in each direction) and would be reviewed during building permit approval, she said. Ms. Dolbee reinforced that the PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -6 2 development does comply with the city's comprehensive plan. She added that staff has recommended that lots 8 and 11 have access to the utilities tract to reduce curb cuts along the comer of road B. 3 Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Dolbee noted that King County has allowed Renton to process the site as one subdivision rather than dividing the property. There is no development 4 occurring in the portion in King County because that portion has the stream area and severe landslide hazards. King County critical area standards have been applied for that portion of the land. She 5 stated she is unaware if there is a better alternative for the water line extension. The King County 6 vested plat application does not meet Renton lot width and depth standards. Ms. Dolbee testified that the minimum open space requirement calculation did not include the King County portion of the site. 7 Ms. Dolbee noted that there is a state program for relocation funds that is not run by the city. Tiris 8 program was mentioned in the mitigation measures. The developer would provide the funding, she 9 noted, and the state requires a I-year notification timetable if the development is moved forward. 1 o Applicant Testimony 11 Courtney Kaylor, applicant's attorney, stated that staff has been very thorough and the applicant agrees with the recommended conditions. She noted that the applicant requests that mitigation 12 measure 2 (page IO of staff report) in regards to relocation agreements be reviewed because of a 13 believed typo. The "and" needs to be removed from the sentence, according to Ms. Kaylor. 14 In regards to the conditions of approval, the applicant wishes to change the 2"d condition (page 35), relating to street standards, according to Ms. Kaylor. She stated that the applicant wants to change 15 the 8ft landscape strip to a 6.5ft strip. Ms. Kaylor submitted exhibits 33-38. 16 Greg Diener, Pacific Engineering Design, testified that to the west of the site is the large Summerfield 17 development, to the east there is no significant development, and to the south there is a large hillside ( 400ft tall slope). Furthermore, he noted there are two streams that drain towards the Cedar River on 18 the site. One stream is unnamed, class 3 and drains in an overflow condition only, he said. Tiris 19 stream flows on the north-side of the mobile home, continues 'westerly to the Summerfield area, and then continues northerly. He stated that there is a wet-pond designed to have two primary overflows. 20 The normal overflow is to go to the west towards the Summerfield Creek bed, and there is also a secondary pipe that drains to a 36-inch culvert that crosses the Maple Valley highway before 21 ultimately reaching the Cedar River. 22 Mr. Diener stated that the area to be subdivided is 7.32 acres, and land currently holds a mobile home 23 park, a maintenance building, and one duplex. He testified that there is an asphalt street that runs through the site, providing access to the mobile homes. Mr. Diener commented that the site is zoned 24 R-12 in King County. He noted that there is a vesting application in King County, pending the resolution of this plat. The vested plat in King County was submitted in April, 2008 and determined complete by the county in May, 2008, added Mr. Diener. The 7.32 acres was annexed into Renton, 26 thus the other vesting application was put on hold, he noted. 25 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -7 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Mr. Diener stated that the PUD criterion in Renton requires the application to demonstrate superior development design and public benefit. He commented that the proposed development is 17-lots in the interior of road B, and 17 lots on the north-side and east-side of the curb-cuts (except in the utility tract). There will be a park in the northwest area, and the applicant is willing to meet the park-lot swap requested by the city. The detention and water-quality facility is located in the northwest area of the site. Mr. Diener noted that the maximum number of lots is 42, but the applicant is only proposing 34. He testified that the modifications recommended by Ms. Dolbee and city staff have been incorporated into exhibits by the applicant. Mr. Diener stated the road-section B would have a I-ft reduced landscape which remains in the 33ft proposed right-of-way, as requested earlier by Ms. Kaylor. In regards to the city's request for a landscape strip along road A, instead of a second sidewalk, the applicant notes that it is not an undesirable proposal, but it would ruin the proposed tabletop sidewalk design to the south of road A. Mr. Diener said that utilities would be provided by the Cedar River water and sewer district. There are two existing wells on the site, he noted. According to Mr. Diener, one well will be abandoned and the other would be retained for landscape and irrigation purposes. He testified that the only water connection for the site is located on the west side. Thus, he testified, the applicant proposes creating a connection across the existing unnamed stream in order to connect to the main water-line. The applicant proposes to do this within city code without causing major impacts to the stream, according to Mr. Diener. He also noted that the sewer runs from the middle of the west of the site and crosses the site at an angle and meets Maple Valley Highway. He concluded that all connections could be made to this existing sewer line. Mr. Diener testified that a water retention pond is proposed for the northwest corner of the site. The level 2 detention pond allows for very small, allowable release rates, he commented. Mr. Diener stated that the pond would drain to a ditch, which would then flow to a 36-inch culvert located at the northwest comer of the site. The proposed pond depth overall would belOft with 5.5ft of detention storage and 4ft of water quality, he said. He added that there is a recommendation to put a fence around the pond in order to meet safety standards. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Mr. Diener noted that there is not another place for a water connection that is feasible. Without the stream-crossing connection, a water connection would have to be run across the site to SR-169 and would still probably cross the stream at some point. Glen Takagi, applicant's landscape architect, stated that the paved circulation system, including a bus stop, along with the soft-paving system provide great linkage throughout the site. The trail system has the potential for benches and descriptive markers, he noted. Mr. Takagi testified that the open space features of the site plan add to the strong residential character of the PUD. The open spaces provide all of the perimeter buffering and give green strips to the Maple Valley Highway, he noted. He also suggested there is potential, additional space for play area beyond just the planned park. Mr. Takagi commented that native plants would be chosen for the space based on hardiness and beauty, along with their potential for establishing wildlife in the area. He added that the retention pond will be secured with a black vinyl fence along the water line. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -8 1 The park would be centrally located for easy access. The park would have a fence enclosure with a play structure, picnic tables, and lawn space, he said. He testified that all of the same amenities 2 could be included if the park was swapped with a lot, as requested by the city staff, but it would be slightly smaller. Mr. Takagi concluded that the space is laid out well and will benefit both the public and residents. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Mr. Takagi noted that in changing the park 4 lot, 800ft of open space would be lost. This space loss is due to it no longer being a corner lot, he 3 noted. 5 6 Vince Geglia, traffic engineer for the project, stated that he is a member of the institute of transportation engineers and has been practicing in the Puget Sound area since 1986. He noted that 7 there would not be a significant increase in traffic with this development because the mobile home traffic would be subtracted from the net increase gathered by the single-family homes. The net 8 increase would be 6-trips in the critical, peak hour, and, during an average 24-hr day, it would be 89 trips. He noted that the access to SR-169 was already improved several years ago and provides 9 excellent access to the site with 5-lanes. Mr. Geglia testified that historical accident data showed no 10 unusual accident activity in the area. He noted that the road-way is fairly flat and level along SR-169. A right-tum pocket would be constructed for vehicles entering the site, and within this deceleration I I lane, there would a bus stop, according to Mr. Geglia. Additionally, Mr. Geglia commented that there would be a transportation mitigation fee paid to the city to support the city's road improvement 12 program. 13 Ed Sewall, applicant's wetland consultant, stated he has worked as a wetland consultant in the state of 14 Washington since 1991. He noted that he was hired in 2008 when the project was within King County. He testified that they completed the critical area study and wetland delineation for the 15 project at that time. Mr. Sewall commented that wetland A is in the southwest corner of the site and is a category 2 wetland. Wetland B is also a category 2 and is in the north of the site. There is a stream that runs in a disturbed condition behind the mobile home park, flowing to the west, toward SR-169. He noted that in 1995-1996, he previously worked with this stream and it was classified as a class 3 stream (intermittent stream with no fish-use) on the north side of the highway which is in King County. Although a King County class-3 stream would normally be a class-4 stream for the city of 16 17 18 19 Renton, Renton has it mapped as class-3. 20 Mr. Sewall testified that the proposed project would maintain the wetlands and their 50-ft buffers, with no impacts. In addition, Mr. Sewall noted that the normal 75-ft stream buffer would be reduced through enhancement to 60-ft. The existing mobile home park abuts the stream, so in the present state there is no buffer along the north-side of the stream, he said. Thus, the addition of any buffer would be an improvement, according to Mr. Sewall. He testified that the proposal would provide a 60-ft enhancement buffer in this area which would result in new plantings and the soil decompacting. Mr. Sewall noted that the criteria for the utility crossing in the stream can be found in code 21 22 23 24 44050L8bi. He stated the applicant feels they can meet the criteria with minimum impact to the stream. The criteria will be dictated by a HP A, and any impacts to the stream will be mitigated and 25 restored, he commented. Mr. Sewall concluded that the overall critical area mitigation plan should 26 mitigate any impacts and improve the water areas on site. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -9 1 Rob Ward, applicant's geotech engineer, stated he has been practicing in the Puget Sound area since 1986. He noted that he completed a study of the site in 2008 and has provided update letters since 2 that period. He testified that, in order to conduct their study, his team first completed geological 3 research of the area by reviewing information collected in 1986 for the Summerfield development, and then they came on-site and did soil work. 4 5 Mr. Ward stated that the slopes to the south and east of the site are very steep until they rise-up and become flat. He commented that the area to be developed is fairly flat. The geology goes from top- 6 to-bottom and near the top is glacial till, according to Mr. Ward. As you move down, all the soils remain glacial, but turn into silt soil, he said. Mr. Ward noted that the very bottom soil is river deposits and the intermediate soil is mass-wastage. Because of the glacial nature of the slopes, they are very dense and the core is very stable, according to Mr. Ward. He testified that the chance of a deep instability is very remote. He added that the basic issues of steep slopes in the Puget Sound 7 8 9 area are skin slides (mud slides). The skin slides are results of large amounts of rain and are a typical problem in the Puget Sound area. There has been no evidence of skin slides in the slopes in this development area, he stated. Mr. Ward remarked that King County's default, required buffer is 50ft and the building setback is 15ft (so the overall setback is 65ft). Based on the geotech findings, Mr. Ward recommended a 25ft buffer and 15ft setback for the eastside and maintenance of the 60ft buffer to the south along with various setbacks (although it could have been smaller) along the development site. Mr. Ward added that the pan-handle section of the site, located in King County, has various issues with potential for debris flow which OT AK will discuss. He concluded that the setbacks are above and beyond what is needed for geotechnical issues. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Russ Gaston, applicant's water resource engineer, stated he manages a water resources group for OTAK. He noted for this project they led the analysis of risk of debris flow and mitigation measures for this debris flow. Mr. Gaston testified that he was supported by Gary Wolf, a senior hydraulics engineer, and Bret Jordan, who specializes in analyzing stream flow and sediment transport. Both of 17 these men are highly qualified in their areas of expertise, according to Mr. Gaston. He noted that his team produced a report which characterized the site's water sediments. He stated they used models to 18 establish if there was enough capacity to transport sediment and quantify the volume in the unnamed 19 tributary stream. 20 21 Mr. Gaston stated that there was concern about the existing retention pond's overflow into this unnamed stream. He noted that this pond, the Woodburn pond was designed by OTAK, and the major outfall from the pond is to Summerfield Creek. However, there is an additional, emergency 22 overflow from the pond into the unnamed stream on McCormick plat. In order to engage this emergency overflow, the Summerfield Creek overflow would have to be completely plugged, he stated. If this did happen, the maximum flow into the unnamed stream would be 12.7cfs, Mr. Gaston commented. He testified that a dam-break analysis was also completed, but the analysis demonstrated that a potential dam-break was not the worst-case scenario. The plugged overflow to Summerfield Creek remained the worst-case scenario. 23 24 25 26 PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -10 1 In addition, Mr. Gaston stated that the stability of the stream/ravine was tested by dividing it into 6 storage reaches. He remarked that two conditions were evaluated: what is there today and what 2 would happen if water flowed from Woodburn pond. According to Mr. Gaston, Reach I would become a source of sediment flow, Reach 2 would create a depositional for sediment, Reach 3 would transport sediment, Reach 4 would be a sediment source, Reach 5 would be a storage facility because of its width, and Reach 6 is a transport reach with sediment being m,oved out. His team concluded that there is a potential for debris flow (as much as 2300 cubic yards), he said. Thus, Mr. Gaston stated, they designed a mitigation berm that would follow the south side of the McCormick plat. The 3 4 5 6 berm would be 5ft high and designed to have traffic on top of it. Under normal storms conditions, only 750 cubic yards of debris flow would be transported there, but if the full 2,300 cubic yards (an unlikely feat) was reached, the berm could be dredged out, he stated. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Mr. Gaston noted that the berm would be composed so that it would not erode and would not be made of natural materials. 7 8 9 Courtney Kaylor, applicant's representative, corrected her earlier statement that the applicant was JO requesting a reduction of the width of the landscape strip to 6.5ft. Instead, the applicant is requesting a reduction to 7ft, she noted. The PUD proposal provides a superior design and public benefit, thus meeting the city's criteria for approval, according to Ms. Kaylor. Furthermore, the current proposal is 12 superior to the previous proposal to King County and provides for greater impact mitigation. She noted some of the features of the new proposal: greater open space than required, more natural vegetation, better circulation, soft-surface trails, a school bus-stop, critical area impact mitigation, and 11 13 14 15 16 more. Public Testimony Herbert Wendland stated he is concerned about the lack of a timetable for the project. He noted he has lived in the mobile home park for 12 years. As a senior citizen, he fears being kicked out of his 17 home and having to find a new place to live. He also voiced concern about whether or not relocation funds will be provided. Mr. Wendland commented that the residents of the mobile home park have been waiting for answers to their concerns for a long time and need these answers in order to prepare for the future. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Sandra Workman stated that there is a stream that goes through several of the mobile home lots. She stated that when the stream freezes it makes the whole entryway of the mobile home park icy and dangerous. Barbara Workman testified that she does not understand the timing of the development. She noted that her mobile home is too old to be moved off the property. She further commented that the procedure for relocation reimbursement has not been made clear to the current residents. Staff Rebuttal PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 \ Kayren Kittrick, development and construction engineer for Renton, stated that the city does not wish to make modifications to the road plans until construction plans are presented to the city. She noted that the city wishes to maintain the street standards dictated for the roads in the current proposal. She reinforced that the city wants to follow what has been laid out in the staff report documents. The city wishes for any additional changes to be handled administratively once construction documents have been provided, according to Ms. Kittrick. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Kittrick noted that the city does not wish to change the 8ft landscape strip standard to 7ft at this time, despite the request made by the applicant. The city does not want to deviate from what has already been discussed, according to Ms. Kittrick. She noted the city will have the ability to make minor conditional changes (such as this landscape strip length) once the preliminary plat has been approved. Vanessa Dolbee, senior planner for city of Renton, stated that both the open space calculation and the density calculation were made based on the 7.32 acres within Renton (excluding the King County portion of the site). In regards to the applicant's request for a word change to mitigation number 2 in the staff report, Ms. Dolbee noted that the word change actually occurs in mitigation number 11 sub 2 of the report. Applicant Rebuttal Courtney Kaylor stated that the applicant is in agreement with staff in regards to the road improvement mitigations. She testified that, for the applicant, the most important point is that the improvements need to be contained in the proposed right-of-ways. The applicant agrees to leave the fmalization oflandscape strip lengths to construction period. Ms. Kaylor further testified that the applicant has no imminent plans to issue the I-year notice of eviction to residents. She noted that the subdivision and PUD approvals are in effect for up to 5-years and can be extended for an additional year upon request. She stated that the owner of the property will have the park manager provide more information to current residents. In regards to relocation costs, the state of Washington's department of co=erce has a program to pay relocation costs to manufactured home-park owners that are living in parks that are being closed, according to Ms. Kaylor. She confirmed that the program provides for reimbursements up to certain amounts depending on the size of mobile home. She noted that the applicant has agreed to provide the relocation payments upfront so the residents do not have to go through the process of requesting the reimbursement from the state. This has been included as a voluntary condition of approval in the staff reco=endation. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Kaylor noted the state provides reimbursement ofup to 7,500 dollars for a single-home and 12,000 for a double-home. There are standards and requirements in the state law as to what types of expenses are reimbursed. She added that the residents must provide proof of income parameters in order to qualify for relocation. Additionally, PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -12 I Ms. Kaylor stated that the property owner has contacted the Wonderland Park which is located nearby the McCormick plat, and the Wonderland Park has mobile-home Jots available. 2 3 Exhibits 4 The December 22, 2010 staff report Exhibits 1-32 identified at pat 3-4 of the staff report were 5 admitted into the record during the hearing. The following additional exhibits were also 6 admitted into the record during the hearing: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Ex. 33: Ex. 34: Ex. 35: Ex. 36: Ex. 37: Ex. 38: Staff power point presentation. CV's of Greg Diener, Vincent Geglia, Edgar Sewall, Robert Ward, and Russ Gaston. December 8, 2010 Jetter from Debora Gilroy to Collin Barrett June 24, 2011 and August 2, 2011 letters from Courtney Kaylor to Vanessa Dolbee. Project's Compliance Statement Road A and B cross sections FINDINGS OF FACT 0.5 Applicant. Robert E. McCormick J 7 Procedural: 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 I. Hearing. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on January 5, 2011 at 9:00 am in the City of Renton Council Chambers. 2. Project Description. The applicant, Robert McCormick, is requesting a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PUD) for a 34-lot, 9-tract subdivision of an 11.59 acre site. The applicant also proposes to reduce portions of a Class III steam buffer from 75 to 60 feet and to alter a stream buffer in order to accommodate the crossing of a water line. The proposed McCormick Plat would be located along the south side of Maple Valley Highway (SR- 169) at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (parcel #2323059029). The site consists of one parcel, the majority of which is located within the City of Renton. However, a long, narrow "dog leg" 25 extends southward off the southeastern side of the rectangular portion of the site; this portion is Z6 within unincorporated King County, which is not proposed to be developed. The site is currently the PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 location of the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which provides space for approximately 40 mobile homes. In addition to the mobile homes and multiple out buildings on site, there are two permanent structures, a duplex and maintenance building. The applicant proposes to remove all existing structures, and mobile homes. The site is bordered to the north by Maple Valley Highway (SR-169), to the west by the Summer View neighborhood, a single-family residential subdivision, and to the south and east by undeveloped forested areas. The proposed subdivision would result in 34 lots ranging in lot size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet, as more specifically described in Table C of the staff report, resulting in a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per acre. Nine tracts are also proposed which include stormwater detention, native growth protection areas, access and utilities, open space, and critical areas. In addition to the traditional subdivision lots and tracts, the applicant has proposed a looped trail around the site which crosses Open Space tracts E and C and. a small tot lot with a play area. The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A". Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots 1 -8, and 11 -17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities tract, identified as Tract D. Proposed Lots 18 - 34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of SR-169. Road improvements including sidewalks on both sides of Road A, and on one side (the inside) of Road B are proposed. Street frontage improvements are not proposed along SR 169. Pursuant to the City ofRenton's critical areas maps, a stream, steep slopes, erosion hazards, landslide hazards, seismic hazards, and wetlands have been identified on the subject property. The geotechnical hazards located on the site are due to the steep slope inclinations, soils generally susceptible to erosion, and history of landslides in the area. The critical areas map indicates that the approximate northerly portion of the rectangular area of the site is within a Seismic Hazard area. In addition, the northeast comer of the site is located within the 200-foot Shoreline Area measured from the Cedar River, which is located across Maple Valley Highway. The shoreline area impacts proposed Lots 9 and 10; Lot 10 would be approximately 170 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and Lot 9 would be approximately 190 feet from the OHWM. The "dog leg" portion of the site, located in King County, would be subject to King County critical areas regulations, KCC 21A.24, whereas the remainder of the site would be subject to City of Renton critical areas regulations. King County Sensitive Areas Maps indicate that the subject site is located in a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area and is an area susceptible to ground water contamination. The City's critical areas maps do not identify this area for Aquifer Protection. The developed portion of the existing mobile home park has an approximate slope of9 to 10 percent sloping in a southeast-to-northwest direction. As this portion of the site remains within the Landslide and Erosion Hazard area, it is the mildest slope on site. The property is bounded to the south and southeast by steep slopes that extend down from the Renton uplands. The steep slope at the southeast comer of the site, ranges from about an elevation of 230 feet down to the toe-of-slope to an elevation PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -14 1 of 160 to 180 feet, and averages about a 100 percent grade. Similarly, the steep slope adjacent to the south side of the mobile home park that extends above the creek is well over 100 feet high and has an 2 average slope of about 100 percent. The applicant has proposed a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm 3 along the base of the steep slope located on the southern border of the site to divert water and/or soil within the stream buffer toward the western side of the site in the event of a landslide or mudslide. In 4 addition, a 25-foot buffer from the southeastern slope is proposed for landslide protection for lots 14 -17. The applicant has indicated that grading the site would be necessary to meet the storm water 5 requirements. The applicant has indicated the total excavation would be 8,248 cubic yards and fill is 6 estimated at 7,924 cubic yards. The soil that is usable from the excavation on site would be utilized on site, other materials such as selected borrow and gravel are expected to be imported to the site. 7 The applicant submitted with the application a Revised Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. dated April 12, 2011. This report indicates there are two wetlands located 9 on site, both identified as Category 2 wetlands, per the City of Renton classification system. Wetland 'A' is located along the west side of the site and Wetland 'B' is located along the northeast edge of 8 1 o the site. Category 2 wetlands typically have 50-foot buffers. The Critical Areas report further identifies a single intermittent stream that flows through the site. The subject stream is a Class 3 stream and was designated as a Type N stream by Bill Kershke, King County Biologist, in his review of the feature. Class 3 streams typically have 75-foot buffers measured from the OHWM. The applicant has proposed to reduce the stream buffer from 75 feet to 60 feet for the majority of the buffer area. In addition, the applicant initially requested a variance to place a water line through the stream buffer to connect to an existing 10-inch water line stub provided by the neighboring Summer 11 12 13 14 View neighborhood. Staff subsequently determined that the applicant's request could be handled by an alteration of stream buffers authorized by RCW 4-3-050(L)(8)(b). 15 16 The area of the site that is currently developed as a mobile home park consists of ornamental plants placed by residents of the mobile home park in addition to a few large conifer trees which are 17 scattered about the site. The steep slopes on site are covered with dense understory vegetation consisting of mostly' sword ferns and an upperstory of scattered big leaf maple trees. The wetland and stream areas of the site consist mainly of reed canary grass, creeping buttercup and a few small alders. 18 19 The modifications requested to development standards under the PUD application are identified in 20 Table A and Table C of the staff report, incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. 21 3. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate 22 infrastructure and public services as follows: 23 24 25 26 A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sanitary sewer service for the development would be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. Water and Sewer availability certificates will be required from the Cedar River Sewer District prior to final plat approval. Based on the submitted Conceptual Site Plan (Sheet P04) (Exhibit 4), there is an existing sewer main located on the west side of the development. The applicant has proposed to connect to this existing main and extend an 8-inch sanitary sewer line to PRELIMJNARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 provide sewer to the development. This plan sheet also identifies a IO-inch water line extension from the Summer View Plat located to the west. This extension would be required to be constructed through the stream buffer. With receipt of the water and sewer availability certificates, the development would provide sufficient service to the lots. B. Fire Protection. Fire protection would be provided by the City of Renton Fire Department. Per the City Fire Chief, all lots are required to be sprinklered. Therefore, as a condition of approval the applicant be required to revise the utility plan to depict a I-inch water meter to all lots. The revised plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Plan Reviewer prior to Final Plat recording. C. Drainage. In conjunction with the City's stormwater regulations, the proposal mitigates all significant drainage impacts. New impervious surfaces would result in surface water runoff increases. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report ("Drainage Report") with the project application (Exhibit 29). The applicant has proposed a detention/wet pond to be located in a separate tract in the northwest corner of the site for stormwater detention and water quality treatment. The Drainage Report indicates that runoff from roof drains, yards, and driveways would be collected and conveyed to a · drainage system under the proposed roads that would convey stormwater to the proposed detention/wet pond. The pond is proposed to be a combined detention and water quality pond, with permanent storage in the bottom of the pond, and live flow control storage above the dead storage. The pond has been designed to provided Level 2 flow control and basic water quality treatment. The proposed design of the detention pond would provide at least 59,500 cubic feet of storage. The detention facility would release the storm water to its natural discharge location at the northwest comer of the site to the south roadside ditch of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169). D. Parks/Open Space. The project provides for more than adequate parks and open space. In addition to private open space provided on each proposed lot, the applicant has proposed to provide a 4,188 square foot park which would include a play structure and two picnic tables, a soft surface looped trail system through the development, and a 21,634 square foot open space tract. The proposed park area exceeds the code standards by 2,488 square feet and the open space standards by 6,931 square feet. The overall passive and active recreation opportunities proposed for the subject development are beyond the standard code requirements. The proposed open space and recreation on the site provide the opportunity for both passive and active recreation. The soft surface trail is proposed to have benches and interpretive signage, which would result in a nature trail type of facility. The looped trail system is approximately 1/3 of a mile long, offering the opportunity for PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 more strenuous exercise such as jogging. The open lawn proposed in the Tract E provides a space for such activities as kick ball or Frisbee, but could also be used as a quiet place to listen to the river and read a book. The park area provides for both passive and active recreation by offering both a play structure and picnic tables. The varieties of recreation opportunities proposed throughout the development create a mix of choices, appealing to a large spectrum of people. However, it should be noted that the benches and interpretive signage mentioned in the applicant's PUD Compliance Statement are not reflected on the· Landscape Plan or the Plat Plan, as such staff recommends a condition of approval that the applicant provide a detail of the proposed final bench and signage design and location as a part of the final detailed landscape plan. These details shall be submitted and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The park is located on the northwest comer of the internal set of lots, aligning just west of the access road A. Proposed Lot 34, which is immediately east of the park, is centrally aligned with Road A. Once a home is constructed on Lot 34, all vehicular trips accessing the development would drive directly at the home on Lot 34, shining headlights into their front windows. The impacts to Lot 34 could be resolved by adjusting the location of the proposed park, to be situated to align with Road A, thus moving Lot 34 to the western comer of the mtemal Road. Furthermore, this location for the park would create a "gateway" to the neighborhood, increasing the overall design of the development. As such, a condition of approval will require that the park be moved east by one lot to align with Road A, and adjusting Lot 34 to be the northwest comer lot of the internal portion of the development. At hearing the applicant did not object to this condition. The Open Space Tract E and Tract C are separated by the detention pond Tract A. The connection between Tract E and C could be stronger and create a higher quality and cohesive open space system by decreasing the grades near the top of the pond, to allow for landscaping and pedestrian access for a portion of the pond area. This in tum could result in moving the fence to a lower section of the pond, removing the visual obstruction created by the fence. The end result would be a high quality open space system, incorporating the detention facility into the design of the overall development. A condition of approval will require that the detention facility be re-designed to become an integral part of the open space system of the development. The design shall meet the City's stormwater requirements and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. E. Pedestrian Circulation. The proposed preliminary plat provides for a superior pedestrian circulation system. In addition to the proposed soft surface pedestrian path, the applicants PRELilvlINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 have proposed sidewalks along Road A, Maple Valley Highway and on the interior of Road B. In addition, the applicant has proposed to provide a tabletop design at the intersection of Road A and Road B with alternative paving to provide for a safe pedestrian crosswalk. This intersection is a key connection to the proposed school bus stop located along Maple Valley Highway. In addition to the aforementioned cross walk, the looped trail includes two additional cross walk locations to connect the loop. These two locations are both located on Road B. Based on the application materials, these two cross walks would not be designed with alternative paving as proposed for the cross walk located at the intersection of Road A and B. A condition of approval will require that all crosswalks in the development are designed with the same alternative paving, to provide consistency in crosswalk design throughout the development ensuring pedestrian safety. F. Interior Vehicle Circulation. In addition to superior pedestrian circulation, the proposed preliminary plat also provides for a superior vehicle circulation system. The looped road system which is made possible by the requested code modifications provides for improved emergency access as well as eliminates a dead end road. The looped road system provides for better onsite traffic circulation and allows for a public alley to access proposed Lots 18 -34. The presence of the alley allows for 50 percent of the development to have alley loaded garages, reducing the number of curb cuts through the sidewalk system, improving the pedestrian circulation system. Furthermore, the presence of an alley provides for screening of the parking facilities/garages for 50 percent of the lots on the site. G. Off-Site Traffic Improvements. No off-site mitigation is necessary except for a right turn pocket, taper or radius per WSDOT design standards on SR 169 at the site access street. The traffic study, Ex. 21, concludes that the proposal will result in an increase of 89 average daily trips over the traffic generated by existing development (which will be removed). As further concluded, no intersections or street segments in the City of Renton would experience an increase in traffic over 5%. The only off-site improvements found necessary in the report are the aforementioned SR 169 improvements to provide for access to the project site. Consequently, off-site impacts are adequately covered by the transportation mitigation fee. The infrastructure improvements recommended in the traffic report are required by the MDNS conditions of approval. 4. Adverse Impacts. Since the project provides for adequate infrastructure and public services, the only remaining impacts to be considered are to critical areas and affordable housing. All impacts to critical areas have been thoroughly assessed and completely mitigated, as identified in the Enviromnental Review Report, Ex. 30, adopted by this reference as if set forth in full. The mitigation measures recommended by staff in the Enviromnental Report are adopted as conditions of approval. Adoption of Ex. 30 encompasses both the findings of fact and the conclusions of law of staff. All PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 other adverse impacts discernible from the record are also fully mitigated. Some of the more significant issues and modifications to the Environmental Report as well as adverse impacts not addressed in the Environmental Report are addressed below: A. Affordable Housing. The proposal will adversely affect affordable housing by forcing the relocation of the mobile homes in the mobile home park. The relocation assistance voluntarily provided by the applicant and adopted as Condition 11 of the SEPA MDNS is the most the City can legally do to mitigate the impacts of the project on affordable housing. As noted by the applicant in Ex. 36, Guimont v. Clark, 121 Wn.2d 34 (1992) stands for the proposition that mobile home park owners cannot be made responsible by state statute (and by extension, permit conditions) to pay for relocation costs because this places a disproportionate burden upon park owners to handle the societal problem of housing affordability. Any permit condition that made the applicant responsible for the entirety of these costs would violate the substantive due process rights of the applicant. B. Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. An extremely significant condition of approval in the SEPA MDNS requires the installation of a debris flow mitigation berm. As discussed in the Environmental Report the steep slopes adjoining the project site have been subject to numerous landslides. In 1990 a landslide resulted in $100,000 damage to the existing mobile home park. The berm condition is the result of a geotechnical report prepared by the applicant, a peer review and then additional study completed in response to the peer review. The SEP A conditions of approval require the berm to be maintained so that its effectiveness is not compromised by the buildup of soils from debris flow events. The conditions of approval require a maintenance plan to be included in the project CC&Rs. This condition will be modified to require that it ( and all other required CC&R conditions) cannot be amended without the consent of the City. C. Stream Mitigation. It is significant to note that even though the applicant requests a decrease in stream buffer width to 60 feet from the required 75 feet for portions of the Class III streams that the project mitigation and enhancement will result in an overall increase in stream/lake/riparian ecological function. The existing uses of the property have significantly degraded existing buffer areas. Project mitigation will enhance these areas and remove invasive species. Mitigation includes the removal of paved and impervious surfaces within the buffer area, the soils disked and then replanted with a mix of native trees and shrubs. D. Tree Retention. As discussed in the Conclusions of Law, below, it is unclear whether the tree retention plan is consistent with the City's tree retention requirements and the PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -19 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 conditions of approval will require further analysis. The site contains a total of 49 trees of 6-inch caliper or larger, 4 are within the proposed public right-of-way, and 18 are located in critical areas and their buffers. The applicant proposes to plant approximately 77 new trees on site. The applicant's conceptnal landscape plan did not include an exact numbers of trees, shrubs, or groundcover and it did not include specific locations for the shrubs and ground cover. As such, a condition of approval will require that the applicant provide a detailed final landscape plan that shall be submitted and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. E. Floodplain. The project is not located within a floodplain, as shown by the FEMA map attached as Exhibit C to the preliminary drainage report, Ex. 29. 1 o 5. Superiority in Design. The proposed PUD design is significantly superior to that which would be allowed under applicable subdivision regulations. The contrast in designed is heightened by the 11 fact that the applicant has a vested subdivision application with King County under King County's rural development standards. 12 The vested King County application, City file number LUA08-068, is also for a 34-lot subdivision. The subject property was annexed into the City of Renton shortly after the applicant vested the 14 subdivision application with King County. Once annexed to the City of Renton, the responsibility of processing the plat application was transferred to the City of Renton. Under the vested application many "non-urban" standards would be permitted as a part of the development, in addition to the 16 applicant's ability to develop to a higher density than permitted under Renton zoning. 13 15 17 The vested subdivision uses cul-de-sacs rather than a looped road system where many homes would be alley loaded. The new application would provide vertical curbs, sidewalks, a trail system, -18 vegetative buffering from Maple Valley Highway, and increased Critical Area protection over the 19 vested application. The subject PUD proposal represents a unique situation, as the comparison for public benefit, in this case, should be balanced by not only the existing City of Renton regulations, 20 but also the vested King County standards. 21 The development of this site as a PUD results in a superior design than would result by the vested King County application for many reasons. First, the proposed plat layout provides for a significant 22 increase in resident safety from the high landslide hazards affiliated with the slopes to the south, due 23 to increased separation from the landslide hazard by the proposed looped road system. Second, the plat would provide for many recreational amenities beyond the code requirements. Third, the plat 24 layout significantly increases the quality of the internal vehicle and pedestrian circulation system throughout the development. Fourth, the additional open space area enhances protection to critical 25 areas. Fifth, the applicant proposes significantly more landscaping than required by City standards. 26 This proposed design can provide for the aforementioned amenities because of the development standard modifications recommended by staff in Ex. 31. PRELlMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -20 I 6. Public Benefit. The proposal provides several public benefits as detailed in Table B of the 2 staff report, adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full, excluding the discussion 3 of tree retention on p. 17 of the staff report. 4 5 6 7 Conclusions of Law 1. Authority. RMC 4-7-020(C) and 4-7-050(0)(5) provide that the Hearing Examiner shall hold a hearing and issue a final decision on preliminary plat applications. RMC 4-9-150(F)(8) authorizes 8 the Examiner to conduct hearings and make final decisions on planned urban development applications. 9 10 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The subject property is zoned Residential 8 dwelling units per net acre (R-8) and the portion located in King County is zoned Rural Area, 1 11 dwelling unit per 5 acres (RA-5). The proposed development would be within the R-8 zone and the 12 King County portion would remain undisturbed. R-8 development standards would be applicable to the subject project. The comprehensive plan map land use designation for the portion of the site 13 within the City of Renton is Residential Single Family. 14 15 3. Review Criteria The Renton Municipal Code does not clearly identify the criteria the Examiner must apply in assessing a subdivision or a PUD. Chapter 4-7 RMC governs the criteria for subdivision review and RMC 4-9-150 governs PUD criteria. Without any more specific code 16 guidance, the Examiner concludes that he must find that all applicable criteria in Chapter 4-7 and 17 RMC 4-9-150 must be satisfied for preliminary plat and PUD approval. Applicable standards are 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. RMC 4-7-0SO(B): A subdivision shall be consistent with the following principles of acceptability: 1. Legal Lots: Create legal building sites which comply with all provisions of the City Zoning Code. 2. Access: Establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel. 3. Physical Characteristics: Have suitable physical characteristics. A proposed plat may be denied because of flood, inundation, or wetland conditions. Construction of protective improvements may be required as a condition of approval, and such improvements shall be noted on the final plat. 4. Drainage: Make adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies and sanitary wastes. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -21 1 4. As modified by the PUD regulations, the lots will comply with all requirements of the Zoning 2 Code. As noted in the project description, Finding of Fact No. 2, and as depicted in Ex. 2, all lots have access to a public street, either to Road B, Road C or Tract D. Tract D as depicted in the 3 preliminary plat map, Ex. 2, is only identified as a utility tract with no mention of access. The 4 conditions of approval will require it to be identified as an access tract as well. The project is not located within a floodplain, as shown by the FEMA map attached as Exhibit C to the preliminary 5 drainage report, Ex. 29. As determined in the Findings of Fact, wetlands are adequately protected and 6 in fact wetland functions will be enhanced as a result of the project. As further discussed in the findings of fact, a debris flow mitigation berm will be required as a protective improvement in order 7 to protect project resident from landslide activity. This requirement will be conditioned to be noted 8 on the final plat. As determined in Finding of Fact 3, the project makes adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies and sanitary wastes. 9 RMC 4-7-080(1)(1): ... The Hearing Examiner shall assure conformance with the general purposes 10 of the Comprehensive Plan and adopted standards ... 11 5. The proposed preliminary play is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan as outlined 12 in Section 6(a) of the staff report, which is incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. 13 RMC 4-7-120(A): No plan for the replatting, subdivision, or dedication of any areas shall be 14 approved by the Hearing Examiner unless the streets shown therein are connected by surfaced road or street (according to City specifications) to an existing street or highway. 15 16 6. The internal circulation system of the subdivision connects to SR 169, an existing highway. 17 RMC 4-7-I20(B): The location of all streets shall conform to any adopted plans for streets in the City. 18 7. The staff report and administrative record do not identify any applicable street plan or grid 19 system that would compel the connection of the interior streets to any other roads beyond SR 169. 20 The aerial photo on page 2 of the staff report shows that there are no other roads in proximity to the project that could be feasibly extended to the project. Given the extreme slopes that adjoin the project it is highly unlikely that any other roads could ever connect to the project from the south. The 22 project is separated from a cul de sac west by residential development. There do not appear to be any 21 . 23 roads to the east that could be extended to the project. 24 RMC 4-7-120(C): If a subdivision is located in the area of an officially designed trail, provisions shall be made for reservation of the right-of way or for easements to the City for trail purposes. 25 8. The staff report and administrative record do not identify any officially designated trail in the 26 vicinity. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -22 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-7-130(C): A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication shall be prepared in conformance with the following provisions: 1. Land Unsuitable for Subdivision: Land which is found to be unsuitable for subdivision includes land with features likely to be harmfal to the safety and general health of the future residents (such as lands adversely affected by flooding, steep slopes, or rock formations). Land which the Department or the Hearing Examiner considers inappropriate for subdivision shall not be subdivided unless adequate safeguards are provided against these adverse conditions. a. Flooding/Inundation: If any portion of the land within the boundary of a preliminary plat is subject to flooding or inundation, that portion of the subdivision must have the approval of the State according to chapter 86.16 RCW before the'Department and the Hearing Examiner shall consider such subdivision. b. Steep Slopes: A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication which would result in the creation of a lot or lots that primarily have slopes forty percent (40%) or greater as measured per RMC 4-3- 050J1 a, without adequate area at lesser slopes upon which development may occur, shall not be approved. 3. Land Clearing and Tree Retention: Shall comply with RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations. 4. Streams: a. Preservation: Every reasonable effort shall be made to preserve existing streams, bodies of water, and wetland areas. b. Method: If a stream passes through any of the subject property, a plan shall be presented which indicates how the stream will be preserved. The methodologies used should include an overflow area, and an attempt to minimize the disturbance of the natural channel and stream bed. c. Culverting: The piping or tunneling of water shall be discouraged and allowed only when going under streets. d. Clean Water: Every effort shall be made to keep all streams and bodies of water clear of debris and pollutants. 9. As determined in the Findings of Fact, significant protective measures and safeguards are proposed and conditioned to ensure that the proposed development is adequately protected from the geologic hazards of the site. As proposed and conditioned the project area is appropriate for PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -23 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 subdivision. As previously discussed there is no evidence in the record that there is any flooding problem, beyond that which could be potentially associated with landslide activity and flooding in that respect is adequately mitigated by the debris flow mitigation berm. In assessing compliance with RMC 4-4-130, the staff report only identifies trees on site that are of 6- inch caliper or larger. There is nothing in RMC 4-4-130 that limits tree retention to trees that of 6- inch caliper or higher. RMC 4-11-200 defines a tree as having a caliper of 2 inches or higher and the tree retention requirements of RMC 4-4-130 do not provide for any exceptions for trees smaller than six inches. It is possible that trees between two and six inches are not present on the site, but that's not clear from the record and it would not be reasonable to make that inference. In addition to the additional information recommended by staff as identified in Finding of Fact No. 4(D), the conditions of approval will also require that tree retention be applied to all trees with a two inch caliper or greater. As noted in the Findings of Fact, the stream functions will actually be enhanced by the extensive amount of mitigation and restoration proposed by the applicant and required in the conditions of approval. No new piping or tunneling of the stream is proposed. It is unclear what is intended by the requirement that projects should provide for an "overflow area" for streams. The extensive amount of open space and buffering adjoining the stream and the separation provided by the debris flow mitigation berm appear to provide overflow capacity. At any rate, the requirement is not mandatory and the stream has otherwise been thoroughly protected and separated from the development. 15 RMC 4-7-140: Approval of all subdivisions located in either single family residential or multi- 16 family residential zones as defined in the Zoning Code shall be contingent upon the subdivider 's dedication of land or providing fees in lieu of dedication to the City, all as necessary to mitigate the 17 18 adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreation service levels. The requirements and procedures for this mitigation shall be per the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Resolution. 19 10. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 3(D), the proposal exceeds both park and open space 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 requirements. RMC 4-7-lSO(A): The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing streets unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. Prior to approving a street system that does not extend or connect, the Reviewing Official shall find that such exception shall meet the requirements of subsection E3 of this Section. The roadway classifications shall be as defined and designated by the Department. 11. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 7, the only street that the project could connect to is SR 169. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -24 1 RMC 4-7-150(B): All proposed street names shall be approved by the City. As conditioned. 2 12. 3 RMC 4-7-lSO(C): Streets intersecting with existing or proposed public highways, major or 4 secondary arterials shall be held to a minimum. 5 13. The project would be landlocked if it could not directly access SR 169. 6 RMC 4-7-lSO(D): The alignment of all streets shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works 7 Department. The street standards set by RMC 4-6-060 shall apply unless otherwise approved Street alignment offsets of less than one hundred twenty five feet (125') are not desirable, but may be 8 approved by the Department upon a showing of need but only after provision of all necessary safety 9 measures. 10 11 12 13 14. The Public Works Department has reviewed and approved the street alignment. The project will be conditioned upon compliance with RMC 4-6-060, which presumably has already been verified by the Public Works department but this is not evident from the record. RMC 4-7-lSO(E): I. Grid: A grid street pattern shall be used to connect existing and new development and shall be the 14 predominant street pattern in any subdivision permitted by this Section. 15 2. Linkages: Linkages, including streets, sidewalks, pedestrian or bike paths, shall be provided within 16 and between neighborhoods when they can create a continuous and interconnected network of roads and pathways. Implementation of this requirement shall comply with Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Objective T-A and Policies T-9 through T-16 and Community Design 17 Element, Objective CD-Mand Policies CD-50 and CD-60. 18 19 3. Exceptions: 20 a. The grid pattern may be adjusted to a "flexible grid" by reducing the number of linkages or the alignment between roads, where the following factors are present on site: 21 22 i. Infeasible due to topographical/environmental constraints; and/or 23 ii. Substantial improvements are existing. 24 4. Connections: Prior to adoption of a complete grid street plan, reasonable connections that link existing portions of the grid system shall be made. At a minimum, stub streets shall be required within subdivisions to allow fature connectivity. 25 26 PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -25 I 5. Alley Access: Alley access is the preferred street pattern except for properties in the Residential Low Density land use designation. The Residential Low Density land use designation includes the 2 RC, R-1, and R-4 zones. Prior to approval of a plat without alley access, the Reviewing Official shall 3 evaluate an alley layout and determine that the use of alley(s) is not feasible ... 4 6. Alternative Configurations: Offeet or loop roads are the preferred alternative configurations. 5 7. Cul-de-Sac Streets: Cul-de-sac streets may only be permitted by the Reviewing Official where due 6 to demonstrable physical constraints no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically possible. 7 8 15. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 7 there are no roads other than SR 169 with which the 9 project could connect. No grid system is reasonably feasible because the steep slopes make any thru streets impractical. The project has an internal looped road system, which is identified as the IO preferred alternative to a grid system in the regulation quoted above. Alley access is also provided for most lots. Topography would make it difficult to configure the plat to allow for alley access of ail lots. 11 12 RMC 4-7-lSO(F): All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat, 13 including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and 14 sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee. 15 16 16. As conditioned. 17 RMC 4-7-lSO(G): Streets that may be extended in the event of fature adjacent platting shall be required to be dedicated to the plat boundary line. Extensions of greater depth than an average lot 18 shall be improved with temporary turnarounds. Dedication of a fall-width boundary street shall be 19 required in certain instances to facilitate fature development. 20 21 17. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 7 there are no feasible street connections to the project other than directly to SR 169 as proposed. 22 4-7-160(A): Blocks shall be deep enough to allow two (2) tiers of lots, except where: 23 I. Abutting principal arterials defined in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 24 2. The location and extent of environmental constraints prevent a standard plat land configuration, including size and shape of the parcel. 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 3. Prior to approval of single-tier lot configuration based on exceptions 1 and 2, the proponent must demonstrate that a different layout or provisions of an alley system is not feasible. 18. The steep slopes and the shape of the parcel could not accommodate two tiers of lots for all lots while still retaining a looped road system unless a significant number of lots were eliminated. Given that the applicant has already proposed open space that significantly exceeds open space requirements such an accommodation would have to be considered not feasible. 4-7-160(B): Where circumstances warrant, the Reviewing Official may require one or more public crosswalks or walkways of not less than six feet (6? in width dedicated to the City to extend entirely across the width of the block at locations deemed necessary. Such crosswalks or walkways shall be paved for their entire width and length with a permanent surface and shall be adequately lighted at the developer's cost. 19. As identified in Finding of Fact 3(E) and depicted in Ex. 4, the proposal includes three paved cross-walks that link the sidewalks of the interior block to the exterior trail and sidewalks along Road A. It is unclear whether the sidewalks shall be at least six feet in width so that will be made a condition of approval. RMC 4-7-170(A): Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at rigM angles to street lines or radial 14 to curved street lines. 15 16 17 20. As depicted in Ex. 2, the side lines are in conformance with the requirement quoted above. RMC 4-7-170(B): Each lot must have access to a public street or road Access may be by private access easement street per the requirements of the street standards. 18 21. Each lot will have access to Road B or the alley, which the staff report states will be public. It 19 20 21 22 23 is not inunediately apparent from the conditions of approval or the plat notes in the exhibits that the plat roads and alley are required to be dedicated so this will be made a condition of approval. The staff report identifies Tract D as an access easement, strongly suggesting that public dedication is not contemplated.' 4-7-170(B) allows for private access easements such as Tract D so long as the easements comply with street standards. Compliance with street standards shall be made a condition of approval. RMC 4-7-170(C): The size, shape, and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width 24 requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated Further subdivision of lots within a plat approved through the 25 provisions of this Chapter must be consistent with the then-current applicable maximum density 26 requirement as measured within the plat as a whole. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -27 1 22. The proposed density of the plat as a whole is 6.33 units per acre, which is less than the 8 2 units per acre authorized by the R-8 zoning district. Lot area and width will not meet the minimum requirements of the R-8 district as outlined in Table A and Table C of the staff report. Any deviations 3 4 5 from minimum lot width authorized by this decision are based upon compliance with PUD criteria of RMC 4-9-150. For purposes ofRMC 4-7-170(C), deviations approved by the PUD standards should be considered to be consistent with the requirements of the applicable zoning classification. RMC 4-7-170(D): Width between side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e., the points where the 6 side lot lines intersect with the street right-of-way line) shall not be less than eighty percent (80%) of 7 the required lot width except in the cases of (1) pipestem lots, which shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20') and (2) lots on a street curve or the turning circle of cul-de-sac (radial lots), which 8 shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). 9 23. The "required lot width" for this project has been reduced by operation of the PUD standards, 10 RMC 4-9-150. As reduced, the lot widths for each lot are fairly consistent from front to rear lot and 11 the foremost lot lines are all at least 80% of lot width. However, there is at least one comer lot located on a street curve that has less than the required 35 foot frontage. Deviation from this 35 foot 12 requirement is authorized under the PUD standards for the same reasons justifying the reduction in lot 13 width. 14 RMC 4-7-170(E): All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have minimum radius of fifteen feet (15 '). 15 24. 16 As conditioned. 17 RMC 4-7-190(A): Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department. 18 25. The Department has requested Tract D to include an easement for utilities as authorized by the 19 regulation quoted above. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-7-190(A): Due regard shall be shown to all natural features such as large trees, watercourses, and similar community assets. Such natural features should be preserved, thereby adding attractiveness and value to the property. 26. Large trees shall be retained or replaced as discussed in Finding of Fact No. 4(D) and Conclusion of Law No. 9. The stream will be protected by buffers, mitigation/restoration and open space as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. RMC 4-7-200(A): Unless septic tanks are specifically approved by the Public Works Department and the King County Health Department, sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -28 1 2 3 4 5 cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8~ into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. 27. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-200(B): An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all natural water flow and shall be of 6 sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. The drainage 7 system shall include detention capacity for the new street areas. Residential plats shall also include 8 detention capacity for fature development of the lots. Water quality features shall also be designed to 9 provide capacity for the new street paving for the plat. 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 28. As noted Finding of Fact 3(C ), the drainage system is designed to maintain Level 2 flows, which requires maintaining the durations of high flows at their predevelopment levels for all flows greater than one-half of the 2-year peak flow up to the 50-year peak flow. This necessarily includes drainage capacity for the new street areas and all other impervious surfaces as demonstrated in the preliminary storm drainage report, Ex. 29. The project will be conditioned for compliance with the other elements of the regulation quoted above. RMC 4-7-200(C): The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire Department requirements. 29. As conditioned. 18 RMC 4-7-200(D): All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground Any 21 utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the I 9 planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department. 20 22 23 30. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-200(E): Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic 24 utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line 25 by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of 26 trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -29 1 bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider 2 shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the 3 subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed 4 31. As conditioned. 5 RMC 4-7-210: 6 7 8 A. MONUMENTS: Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling corner of the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department. All surveys 9 shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards. 10 B. SURVEY: 11 All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards. 12 13 14 15 C. STREET SIGNS: The subdivider shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision. 32. As conditioned. 16 RMC 4-9-150(B)(2): Code Provisions That May Be Modified: 17 18 19 20 a. In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of chapter 4- 2 RMC, chapter 4-4 RMC, RMC 4-6-060 and chapter 4-7 RMC, except as listed in subsection BJ of this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development ... 33. As shown in Table A of the staff report, the requested revisions are limited to the regulations 21 identified in the regulation quoted above. 22 23 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 24 following requirements are met. 25 I. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required: Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of this Section and with the Comprehensive 26 Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which would result without a planned PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -30 1 urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. 2 3 34. The purposes of the PUD regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-150, are to preserve and protect 4 the natural features of the land and to encourage innovation and creativity in development of residential uses. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 3 the natural features of the site are protected by 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 open space, buffers and mitigation that significantly exceeds minimum code standards. The proposal involves innovation and creativity via the staff recommended requirement of a variety of home models, the looped road and trail system, the debris flow mitigation berm and the extensive amount of open space. The project is consistent with the comprehensive plan as determined in Conclusion of Law No. 5, the project is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal is superior in design to what which would occur without a PUD. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3 and 4 the project will not create any significant adverse impacts and so would not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 2. Public Benefit Required: In addition, applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed 16 planned urban development: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 a. Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development; or b. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or ... e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: ... 35. The proposal provides for public benefit by providing amenities related to critical areas, natural features and overall design that significantly exceed code standards as determined in Finding of Fact No. 6. These benefits clearly outweigh any adverse impacts since there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal as determined in Finding of Fact No. 3 and 4. Staff's suggested condition, adopted by this decision, requiring an increase in the variety of house models compensates for the uniformity oflot size. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -31 1 2 3 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 4 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. 36. As mentioned in Finding of Fact No. 6, the proposed landscaping along Maple Valley Highway would not only provide screening of the highway to the homes but would screen the proposed Tract A, detention facility from the road. The topography of the site on the east and south results in a natural screen to adjacent properties and the stream buffer associated with the proposed enhancement plantings would provide a screen to the residential neighborhood to the west. All proposed single family homes would be required to comply with the residential design standards for the R-8 zone resulting in a compatible size, scale, mass, character and architectural design for the overall development. Compliance with these standards would be reviewed at building permit application. 15 RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 16 following requirements are met. 17 18 19 20 21 22 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: ii. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single 23 family, townhouses, flats, etc. 24 25 26 37. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 6, the interior site design promotes quality pedestrian and vehicular circulation, increased critical area protection, promotes safety by buffering the high landslide hazards, and buffers the development from Maple Valley Highway. All homes would be required to comply with the R-8 development design standards which would result in coordinated, yet PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -32 1 varied roof styles and materials, architectural detailing, and a variety of home styles throughout the development. 2 3 RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 4 5 6 7 8 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: 9 i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the IO proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report I I approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 3 8. The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A". Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots 1 -8, and 11 -17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities Tract, identified as "Tract D". Proposed Lots 18 -34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of Maple Valley Highway. Street lighting, sidewalks, and curb and gutter will be required. The PUD would have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access based on the location, size and density of the development, if all conditions of approval are met. See Finding of Fact No. 6, "Public Benefit, subsection: Overall Design 2. Circulation for additional discussion on pedestrian and vehicle circulation. 19 Furthermore, the applicant has indicated that all roads would be designed to accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic generated by the project. In the Environmental Review, staff and the Environmental Review Committee reviewed the prnvided traffic study and proposed mitigation for impacts proposed for the increase in traffic attributed to the development (Exhibit 30). As such, if the applicant complies with all mitigation measures of the SEP A determination; traffic would not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. 20 21 22 23 RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria PRELIMJNARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -33 1 2 b. Circulation: 3 4 5 ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep 6 gradients. 7 8 39. If the proposed conditions of approval are met, the pedestrian separation along Maple Valley Highway would be provided with an 8-foot planter strip. Another 8-foot planter strip would be located along the "inside" of Road B and the west side of Road A. Furthermore, the pedestrian 9 looped trail would provide another means for pedestrian movement throughout the development maintaining sufficient separation from vehicles. 10 11 12 13 A lighting plan was not included in the applicant's submittal packet; therefore, it is not clear how the proposed pedestrian pathways would be illuminated at night. Although, the soft surface trail should not be lit at night as this may cause additional impacts to the stream and its buffer, the remainder of the pedestrian pathway throughout the site should be lit with shielded lighting to reduce increased impacts to the wildlife habitat within the stream. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to 14 utility construction. The lighting plan shall contain pedestrian lighting in addition to building and landscaping lighting if proposed. 15 16 The proposed development would limit driveways on busy streets and 50 percent of the lots would be accessed from a public alley. In addition, only one access point is proposed from Maple Valley 17 Highway to the development, Road A. Based on the traffic analysis the applicant would provide a new right turn deceleration lane for access to Road A and a right turn taper for access to SR-169 from the site eastbound. The applicant has proposed to design Road A with a less than 12 percent slope and Road B would be less than 8 percent slope with landings designed for the intersections for the entrances to the public alley. These design considerations/requirements would result in a circulation system that would avoid difficult turning patterns, minimizes steep gradients and minimize driveways on busy streets. 18 19 20 21 22 Once the applicant has fulfilled the conditions of approval (noted above); the promotion of safety could be accomplished. 23 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 24 following requirements are met. 25 26 PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -34 I 2 3 4 5 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: 6 iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. 7 8 9 40. See Finding of Fact No. 6 "Public Benefit, Subsection: Overall Design I. and 2". The street frontage improvements along Maple Valley Highway and within the internal street system would provide a connection to a school bus stop and potentially public transit. The applicant has Jo proposed to provide two benches along the frontage of Maple Valley Highway for the school bus stop. The site is constrained by natural topographical features and connections to surrounding areas are difficult due to the topography and Maple Valley Highway. However, the internal street system provides sufficient walkways to access the site. The subject site is located on periphery of the City 12 11 boundary, and is relatively isolated from commercial zoned property. There is no existing access to 13 commercial development in or near the subject site and no new access proposed for pedestrians. 14 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 15 following requirements are met. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. 41. The project has been reviewed and by the environmental review committee, which according to RMC 2-14-3 is composed of representatives from the fire department, public works, community services and community and economic development. lfthe roadways are designed per recommended standards (Exhibit 31 ), the development would provide safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. The committee has recommended approval and staff have concluded in the staff report that the PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -35 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 JO proposal provides for safe and efficient access of emergency vehicles and there is no evidence to the contrary. The criterion is satisfied. RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria c. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. 42. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3, the proposal is served by sufficient public infrastructure and services to serve the development. RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 11 following requirements are met. 12 13 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space.' An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. 43. The uniqueness of the site, with a considerable percentage consumed by critical areas, results in a necessity to cluster development. When considering all critical areas on the site (including the portion located in King County) and their buffers or slope setback areas, approximately 60 percent of the site is undevelopable. These natural features create a site that maintains open space in the form of critical area buffers as well as recreation space. The requested lot size and setback modification allow for a clustered R-8 development that provides increase protection of critical areas creating an appearance of openness. See additional discussion Finding of Fact No. 6 "Public Benefit, Subsections: Critical Areas and Natural Features". As noted in the previous sections, the proposed development would have well-designed open space and landscaping. In order to maintain sufficient separation between buildings, the applicant has not requested a modification for the side yard setback, as such all structures will maintain a minimum of IO feet of separation. This spacing allows for emergency access and sufficient fire separation. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -36 1 RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 2 3 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for 4 consistency with all of the following criteria 5 6 7 e. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external 8 privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 44. As mentioned above the proposed subdivision is screened on all four sides from surrounding development, due to the natural topography, stream buffer area and proposed landscape buffer along Maple Valley Highway. Within the subdivision, unit to unit privacy would be provided by the side yard setback requirement. The applicant has indicated in the Project's Compliance Statement, Ex. 37, that wood fences would be used to separate the single family lots to provide both screening and privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Street trees are required either within the required landscape strip or in the front yard of the lot. The required trees would add to the privacy for lots across Road B. As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 6, "Public Benefit, Subsections: Critical Areas and Natural Features", the proposed walkways and landscaping are appropriate for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property. All homes would be required to be designed to meet the residential design standards for the R-8 wne. These standards would require windows on the front of the home, increasing access to light and air for each dwelling unit. Furthermore, each lot would have private front, side and rear yards, enhancing each lot with landscaping and access to light and air. 22 RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 23 following requirements are met. 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -37 1 2 3 f Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. 4 5 45. The lots are arranged in into 3 groups. Group one is located along Maple Valley Highway (Lots 1 -10) aligned east-west. Group two is located along the east side of Road B (Lots 11 -17) 6 aligned north-south and group three is located in the center of Road B (Lots 18 -34) aligned east- west. The site topography slopes down from south to north, resulting in a tiered housing effect after site grading. Based on the proposed grading of the site, the applicant has indicated that all new homes would have a view of the Cedar River, located across Maple Valley Highway. The proposed layout maximizes the use of topography and building location to take advantage of the views to the 7 8 north of the Cedar River. 9 1 o RMC 4-9-150(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 11 12 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for 13 consistency with all of the following criteria 14 15 g. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not 16 designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, 17 and shared parking facilities where appropriate. 18 46. Required parking would be provided within garages attached to each home, of which 50 19 percent would be accessed via a public alley. Additional guest parking would be provided on the driveway aprons for each Jot. On-street parking would be provided along Road B on one side. The 20 proposed parking is designed to provide efficient use of the site and would be appropriately screen by the provided garages. 21 22 RMC 4-9-150(0)(4): Each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the 23 development standards contained in subsection E of this Section, the underlying zone, and any overlay districts; unless a modification for a specific development standard has been requested 24 pursuant to subsection B2 of this Section. 25 47. As discussed below, the proposal complies with all development standards imposed by RMC 26 4-9-150(E). As previously determined the uses and density proposed for the project is consistent with PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -38 I the underlying zone. As depicted in the plat maps, Ex. 2, the lots comply with · the bulk and 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 dimensional requirements of the underlying zone except to the extent modified by the PUD regulations. RMC 4-9-lSO(E)(l): Common Open Space Standard: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for residential, mixed use, commercial, and industrial developments are described below. a. Residential: For residential developments open space must equal at least ten percent (10%) of the development site's gross land area. i. Open space may include, but is not limited to, the following: (a) A trail that allows opportunity for passive recreation within a critical area buffer (only the square footage of the trail shall be included in the open space area calculation), or (b) A sidewalk and its associated landscape strip, when abutting the edge of a critical area buffer and when a part of a new public or private road, or (c) A similar proposal as approved by the reviewing official. ii. Additionally, a minimum area equal to fifty (50) square feet per unit of common space or 14 recreation area shall be provided in a concentrated space as illustrated in Figure 1. 15 16 17 18 48. The proposed development is located on an 11.59 acre site, of which the majority is located in critical areas including the entire portion located within King County. The portion of the site located in the City of Renton is 7.32 acres, based on the 7.32 acre site the required amount of open space would be 31,899 square feet. The applicant has dedicated an Open Space Tract E and C which totals 29,638 square feet and a soft surface trail that equals 9,192 square feet, resulting in a total of 38,830 square feet, resulting in 6,931 square feet of additional open space. The proposed development would 19 have 34 lots, 50 square feet of common space or recreation areas is required per unit, resulting in a requirement of an additional 1,700 square feet. To fulfill the common space requirement the applicant has proposed to provide a 4,188 square foot park, resulting in 2,488 square feet of additional recreation space than required. The park is located on the inside of Road B directly across the street from the Open Space Tract. The overall location and design of the park, open space and trail are located as to create a quality open space/recreation area for the development, specifically if all conditions of approval are met. · 20 21 22 23 24 RMC 4-9-150(E)(2): Private Open Space: Each residential unit in a planned urban development 25 shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors) for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or 26 detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. The private open space shall PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -39 1 be well demarcated and at least fifteen feet (15 ') in every dimension (decks on upper floors can 2 substitute for the required private open space). For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60) square feet in size with no dimension less 3 than five feet (5'). 4 49. Each lot would have a private yard in both the front and the rear of the lot. The requested 5 setback reduction is for a IO-foot front and 10-foot rear, which could result in a private open space yard that is less than 15 feet in every dimension. However, the lots sizes are large enough to 6 accommodate a portion of the yard to meet this standard. As a condition of approval, compliance 7 with this standard shall be reviewed at building permit stage. 8 RMC 4-9-150(E)(3): Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: 9 a. Installation: All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the 10 landscaping plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the City; provided, that common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the 11 issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an 12 amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) 13 years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing 14 maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. b. Maintenance: Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements of RMC 4-4-070. 50. As conditioned. RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: a Installation: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions ofRMC 4-9-060 ... 24 51. As conditioned. 25 RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -40 1 2 3 4 5 b. Maintenance: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, if there is only one owner, or by the property owners' association, or the agent(s) thereof. In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners' association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 6 52. As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to establish a home owners' association for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements, including but not 7 limited to the soft surface trail, landscaping, and park within the PUD prior to Final PUD approval. 8 9 10 11 All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be permanently maintained by the PUD home owners' association. RMC 4-9-150(11)(2): Merger with Other Applications: A preliminary planned urban development may be considered simultaneously with any other land use permit required for a proposal, including but not limited to: preliminary plats, short plats, binding site plans, critical area modifications or variances, shoreline substantial developments permits, shoreline variances, shoreline conditional use 12 permits, grading regulation modifications or variances, or other applications. Where merged, the review criteria for all of the applications shall be considered simultaneously with the planned urban 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 development criteria in subsection C of this Section. Where there are conflicts with review criteria, the criteria of subsection C of this Section shall govern. Where merged, all permits shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. The review authority shall be· determined consistent with RMC 4-8-080C2, Review Authority for Multiple Permit Applications. 53. As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 4, the application includes a request to reduce the stream buffers of the Class III stream and an alteration to the stream buffer for a water line crossing. Both critical area modifications are approved based upon the findings and conclusions adopted by reference in Finding of Fact No. 4. DECISION The proposed preliminary plat, preliminary PUD, stream buffer reduction and stream buffer alteration are all approved. Requested revisions to development standards are approved to the extent recommended by staff in Exhibit 31. The proposal is subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. The applicant shall comply with the 12 mitigation measures issued as part of the 24 Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated August 22, 2011. 25 2. The applicant shall construct street frontage improvements, as modified in Exhibit 31, Staff 26 Recommendation, Approved Modification form Renton Municipal Code (RMC). These PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-41 1 improvements shall be shown on the fmal PUD application, and reviewed and approved by the 2 Engineering Plan Review Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. 3 4 5 3. The applicant shall submit a detailed final landscape plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The detailed final landscape plan shall include, but is not limited to the following: a. Proposed locations and design details of benches and interpretive signage proposed along the 6 soft surface trial. 7 b. Street trees shall be identified in compliance with the City's street tree standards. 8 c. The plan shall indicate either I 00 percent drought tolerant plantings or the applicant shall 9 provide a fmal irrigation plan with the fmal detailed landscape plan. 10 d. The plan shall include exact numbers of trees, shrubs, and groundcover and shall include 11 specific locations for the shrubs and ground cover. 12 e. The plan shall identify the existing location and number of trees with a two inch caliper or greater and the applicant shall protect and/or replace all of these trees as required by the City's tree 13 retention ordinance, RMC 4-4-130. See Conclusion of Law No. 9. 14 4. The park shall be moved east by one lot to align with Road A, and adjusting Lot 34 to be the 15 northwest corner lot of the internal portion of the development. This change shall be reflected on the fmal PUD application materials. 16 17 18 5. The detention facility shall be re-designed to become an integral part of the open space system. The design shall meet the City's stormwater requirements and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager, prior to fmal PUD approval. 19 6. All crosswalks in the development shall be differentiated by material or texture from adjacent 20 paving materials and shall be at least six feet in width. An updated site plan depicting proposed materials or texture for crosswalks shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current 21 Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. 22 7. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning 23 Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. The lighting plan shall contain pedestrian lighting in addition to building and landscaping lighting if proposed. 24 25 8. The applicant shall revise the utility plan to depict a I-inch water meter to all lots. The revised plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Plan Review Project Manager 26 prior to Final Plat recording PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -42 I 9. The applicant shall establish a home owners' association for the development, which would 2 be responsible for any common improvements, including but not limited to the soft surface trail, landscaping, and park within the PUD. The draft CCR's shall be reviewed and approved by the City 3 Attorney, prior to final PUD approval. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be 4 permanently maintained by the PUD home owners' association. The CCR's shall provide that any covenants required by the City may not be amended without City approval. 5 10. The applicant shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable easement on the property 6 title for all critical areas and their buffers prior to Final Plat recording. The protective easement shall 7 be held by current and future property owners; shall run with the land; and shall prohibit development, alteration, and disturbance within the easement except for the purposes of habitat 8 enhancement as a part of an enhancement project, access for the trail users and maintenance, and 9 debris flow mitigation access for landslide events. Furthermore, these areas shall be fenced with split rail fencing, providing designated access points along the trail and necessary access for debris 10 II 12 13 removal in the event of a landslide. In addition, the large portion of the site that is located in King County shall be recorded in a separate critical areas tract that is consistent with King County Code section 21A.24, and shall have an NGPE or similar easement consistent with KKC recorded on this tract I 1. The Park shall be placed in a recreation tract, this designation shall be identified on the final 14 PUD and Plat Plan, prior to Final Plat recording. 15 16 12. A covenant shall be placed on all tracts restricting their separate sale and giving each lot owner within the plat an undivided interest in the tracts. This covenant should be recorded on the face of the plat, and/or concurrent with the plat recording, noting the recording number on the plat. 17 18 19 13. A street lighting plan shall be submitted with the construction permit application for review and approval by the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. 14. A note shall be placed on the face of the plat requiring proposed Lots 8-1 I to gain access from 20 the proposed access easement, Tract D. The note shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 21 15. The applicant shall apply for and successfully obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development 22 Permit, prior to construction permit issuance. 23 16. The applicant shall submit a final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan that complies 24 with the criteria included in RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 3-4-050. The applicant shall provide the final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan for review and approval to the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -43 1 17. The applicant shall provide a trail detail for review and approval by the Current Planning 2 3 Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval, showing compliance with the criteria in RMC 4-3- 050C. 7.a specifically the trail surface materials. 18. The applicant shall submit a detailed wetland buffer enhancement plan, that is compliant with 4 RMC 4-3-050 for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD 5 approval. 6 19. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the utility corridor within the buffer, to isolate the area of disturbance and reduce potential further impacts. Construction fencing shall be 7 shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 construction permit issuance. 20. The applicant shall provide the Current Planning Project Manager, a water line installation plan, which complies with RMC 4-3-050L.8.b.i.(b) for review and approval, prior to final PUD approval. 21. The applicant shall provide the Current Planning Project Manager, an utility installation analysis, prepared by a certified biologist, that addresses criterion 4-3-050L.8.b.i.(d) and is accepted by the Administrator of Community and Economic Development or Designee, prior to final PUD approval. If the report concludes there would be impacts, as identified in this criterion, the installation of the water line would be denied. 22. Construction of the water line shall be limited to June through August when stream flows are anticipated to be low and that City Staff is contacted to verify little to no flow within the stream bed before construction commences. 23. The common boundary between the native growth protection tract and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include a permanent wood split rail fence and 19 metal signs on treated or metal posts. The permanent wood split rail fence and signs shall be installed 20 prior to Final Plat recording. 21 24. The following note shall appear on the face of the Final Plat and shall also be recorded as a 22 23 24 covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created or benefitting from this City action abutting or including a native growth protection tract are responsible for maintenance and protection of the tract Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been 25 received." 26 PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPI\.1ENT -44 1 25. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the edge of the wetlands and stream 2 buffer areas, to clearly identify the edge of the critical areas during the construction phase of the development. This fencing may encroach within the stream buffer, in approved temporary 3 construction locations per the provided Critical Areas report, for the construction of the storm water 4 pond. Construction fencing shall be shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning project manager prior to construction permit issuance. 5 26. Tract D on the preliminary plat map, Ex. 2, shall be identified as an access and utility tract and 6 shaHcomply with City street standards as contemplated in RMC 4-7-170(8). 7 27. All proposed street names shall be submitted to the City and approved by the City prior to 8 final plat approval. 9 28. All subdivision streets shall comply with the street standards of RMC 4-6-060 as 10 contemplated in RMC 4-7-150(D). 11 12 13 29. All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat, including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee. 14 30. Road A, 8 and C as depicted in Ex. 2 shall be dedicated to the public. 15 31. All lot comers at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have a 16 minimum radius of fifteen feet (15') as contemplated by RMC 4-7-170(E). 17 18 19 32. Sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. 33. As contemplated in RMC 4-7-200(8), cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all 20 natural water flow and shall be of sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. 21 22 23 24 The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. 34. The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire Department requirements as contemplated in RMC 4-7-200(C). 25 35. All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the planting of 26 trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -45 1 connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior 2 to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department of Community and Economic Development.. 3 36. Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic utilities are 4 installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line by subdivider 5 as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of trenching, conduit, 6 pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to bring service to the 7 development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider shall be responsible 8 only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the subdivider and shall 9 inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. 10 37. Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling 11 comer of the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department of Community and Economic Development. All surveys shall be per the City of Renton surveying 12 standards. All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards. 13 38. The applicant shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision. 14 39. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the private open space standards ofRMC 4- 15 9-150(E)(2) for each lot prior to and as a requirement for building permit issuance. 16 40. 17 41. Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements ofRMC 4-4-070. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not 18 19 20 21 22 23 limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the applicant or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions ofRMC 4-9-060. 42. Water and sanitary sewer availability certificates will be acquired prior to final plat approval. 43. All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the City; provided, that common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the 24 provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter 25 prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping 26 may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -46 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. DA TED this 20th day of January, 2012. \s\ Phil Olbrechts (Signed original in official file) Phil A. Olbrechts City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-11 O(E)(9) provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(9) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing e examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-1 IO(E)(8) and RMC 4-8-100(0)(4). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th floor, (425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change m valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -47 ---------- ,' i !!: Office of the City Clerk~ ~f ~ ~ ~JJL!~@J]) ~ 1055 South Grady Way-Renton WA 98057-3232 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ', •..._ -.-. , C::_i/• C11;,,-r ·~ . ·-·F li///V/( ,{,_: .\ \c ~ l/~.~ • I ~~ .· . . . ....,_ A . t-JL ~ 1 , , , ,.) .,.. ·' ., \\' 'Y v ' \ 1._,1.' .· \ ~\' I ,-,-: \ \' .·~ {j1J·,·, ¥-\ ,x..,\v-A' 'I}- Vince Gaglia ii,/Ji i J,1 . f 2 '• l'fry /:isc /!-'// . • a_,.. Ct.~ <:fv.,-D . . ~ liir-s Ji). -OF!': f" ·. :";;,~ ICfc. ,4t .,.., •· I ,~---it ;J -~ ~ ?., 1(.'" it~ -':'~\'., , .. ,, n jL\\t, £, ./ ,· _ . .~ uty Clerk 1i~lffi~@IID E) 1055 South Grady Way-Renton WA 98057-3232 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED (\ (7' I} •: ~ \ -./ (~ ., t1 x \ ': .. . -7 _ _..,...------_,../. "' ( ·. _, ,..---_.-/ -,_/ -----/ ~ / ,., .. ,/' // :.///' .///' '/ Vince Gaglia ~ ,·.( .. cC}u \_. ' . (J\* f'i"l \.. :J i'Y\,l\:-\ "'-' . [,.-G~ ~\ , \ \ -G -:,_)--j .. -·-,::~·,,-""'-,, "-~:!i_":/;>T'l_ '>·<·:,i /_·. ····I ,_ -------·.·r "'· lr,it,r=1 .IVE:RABLE AS ADom,sl!?. c,.,..,.. 0.«0l A, <",t, '114b ,,..0,1 '( ..fl . Cr}), ,;,~Q '..( .?:; . C'(S; <'![< .... l?k":s ";; o,,,, ic~, N ci. g2 D ~ a, (!) D ~ .El {i ~ ,Q 0 C "* ·c: ::.:: a. ~ ~ D N ~ "' N C: (\] -, . · crTY OF RENTON LAND USE HEARING SIGN-IN SHEET (McCormick Plat LUAll-034\ . · . JAN 31 20lf PLEASE P,RINT LEGIBLY. RECEIVED .. ; \J)-Fl< .. :t: ADDRESS Phqne # with area code \.,II ... ,w .. NAME {including City & Zip) . .. {optjonal) (optlonol) ·-ii f-1 CJ N,;;. /cJ.._/./-ff.. S-f #-!>-16 ... 1/; /J{, f &Gt14 ·:-,,:_c:· f<1lll<-~D W4-"ft,l)_:J,A-' \~'-\\\!) Si~~k ~ Q,Ob )~, ~l)C\ '1 D -., ldtt c\ ~ ~ V\~ (' j~<}@ VC\U:.l'\,__'3 LO'lil -wL \)J\ \ °' a.. q, . ,J ~ ' .·~ . \J \ L~"Y\ c\ J. { s. \' \\.· '\Jbn,les G1 V:ULt.Vl:")LsS'<". f------. .• 61 r:5e~e. 1 I ~ """"' w~.11,,.A ~ ..... Jt:1 2-it. L/1 C'ovll-:, h,~ W7 ~ 1>2-,.5,~,.\ll:! ~ "'-" // w c. , (." ,-,_ ~-C <N ,v ~ J;..,J w /t-'l &? "'1 ?..... -~ \if M-{':, 13z.,51:, ·t>J:E,~> %~1k_ '!' .c,. • .6\ {) I(:: I -,(j. q JI Qu <:;;: I r lc1t<?J I I J+J,~'t;50r41-MON..? '/JT('' wv~OfA-rd} /c., lfo~ 3 i.. 1/v\,BPt if:. UMfl-,; , -I (ot/OS:-Mc..p('< Ve... I/<' y Hc.....>y #.?.:J :3/1,Jorkv1a.,16J]._,_ ljO, cot, 1 ,:;·a.11Jro.._ CJo,k!l(a./1 ( 'id.SJ /../L./J -t( 1 t8 'P,inton k)tl. qRoS-8 'h 1 {](._,'t"btJLV'i:t... WC'rlr111cv1 //,1/-r;S J?J,.../'/.,,_ //,,/le;, ll"'/#33 A' '2..;, /-.,~ . /µ_a '1 <; "'.s "r . /' 'V,,) S)l,2 7 » ss '7 /Jiu wrw/.:.,,,f'f,. €Vf.l"'"'.c"" ' ' .. ~-- "<"! ) I PARTIES OF RECORD McCormick Plat LUAll-034, PP, PPUD, V-A, ECF Courtney Kaylor Attorney at Law McCullough Hill Leary, ps 701 Fifth Avenue Avenue ste: #7220 Seattle, WA 98104 tel: (206) 812-3379 eml: courtney@mseattle.com (party of record) Jose Rodriguez Montoya 16405 SE Maple Valley Road ste: #9 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 793-0930 (party of record) Monica Crystal Garnice 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #20 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 761-6032 (party of record) Jose R. Cisneros 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy ste: #24 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 442-1353 (party of record) Feliciano Galvez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #27 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 228-8941 (party of record) Hallie Sword PO Box 6314 Federal Way, WA 98063 tel: (253) 740-8205 (party of record) Updated: 08/10/11 Juanita Shields 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #41 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 271-2516 (party of record) Jose Garibay 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #1 Renton, WA 98058 (party of record) Fernandez Alejandre 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #20 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 269-7557 (party of record) Tien Tran 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #25 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 246-8927 (party of record) Doug Peterson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #17 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 228-7702 (party of record) Carl McMurtry 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #32 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 970-3117 eml: otsedom49@comcast.net (party of record) Dan Greggs 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd ste: #3 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 533-1371 (party of record) Ruth Martinez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #1 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 647-3519 (party of record) Sandra Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 442-4968 (party of record) David Serrano 16405 Se Maple Valley Road ste: #28 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 445-5044 (party of record) John Brigham 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #36 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 271-9767 (party of record) Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #16 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 687-6142 (party of record) (Page 1 of 2) PARTIES OF RECORD McCormick Plat LUAll-034, PP, PPUD, V-A, ECF Lauren D. Mclees Allen 16405 Renton Maple Valley Road ste: #53 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 221-1784 (party of record) Bill Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 442-5408 (party of record) Robert McCormick 161 Maple Way Road Selah, WA 98942 (owner/ applicant) Joe Castillo 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd ste: #6 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (509) 840-4917 (party of record) Danh Cao Dinh 411 164th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 tel: ( 425) 644-5637 (party of record) Toni Dinius 1512 6th Street Renton, WA 98057 tel: (425) 204-9324 eml: jdinius501@gmail.com (party of record) Updated: 08/10/11 Clyde Arnold 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #46 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 255-7595 (party of record) Barbara Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 273-0559 (party of record) Greg Diener, P.E. Pacific Engineering Design LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S ste: #100 Seattle, WA 98188 tel: (206) 431-7970 eml: greg@paceng.com (contact) Rita Smith & Robert Barnes 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #38 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (253) 249-8915 (party of record) Edward D. Tharp, Jr. 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #18 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 890-2514 (party of record) Miguel Mendoza 16405 Maple Valley Road SE ste: #29 Renton, WA 98058 eml: yolanda_327@q.com (party of record) Esther Lopez 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #8 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 274-5623 (party of record) Resident 2820 SW 110th Place Seattle, WA 98146 (party of record) Mr. & Mrs. Daniel Desjardins, Jr. 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #44 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 228-3743 (party of record) Maria Concepcion Perez Syala 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #45 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 495-0907 (party of record) Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #16 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 687-6142 (party of record) Myrtle Olson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #23 Renton, WA 98058 (party of record) (Page 2 of 2) RC\1SICJNS, A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 23, TWP. 23j'J., AGE. 5 E., W.M.ANDA PORTIOti_OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 24, TWP. 23 N., AGE. 5 E., W.M. ---~---=---=---=---:-----===-=------=--=------------·--_J__ ---- -----~-=-~ -VSE. RENTON MAPLE ------ALLEY,.,-rna-reo, ------ ,;z.r•w.~i) · -_----;---------------=-------~ - ---:-~---::j_ :'·:·_"':·~~~--f:::,'::"'_ r---cc,.,-:,,;-;:__-~--,,-.;~-;;-,:~.~".;;-~-! -------=-----=--=- : 7, ~m, ,----±------L_ --1 f---r-_L:!t!_51 ,...r1,12,o--_ ..., 1 TRACTD : J '"·,,l)t, : -K:' __ 1=-----rf-· ___ -~---4$.!.2.!!7 __ ----::_------UllUTIES "sew1•n•T I " ',( __,. ljv,~ I ---J --r ------1 ---A•173CisP± """' '""""'" I, / ;;1 1----__ I : ~17,, ----;---,------------__ ----"-------'""---1 """"., I ~'\:· I I \I ,,/11 ':f/ ) <'JI -....L..,"?-,=-,-. -"10'--REMl-Y.IJill__JlSl!_L -------<'--------<i---: : " 1,:) ) ::::-:;:; ~ I I :cz(j~:JfiiZt ~_;:4'1i:6:?/1_,t2?b.1/i~l"!fu1i2~~~ ESM'T "'-~---__ --~-~~---="=~-£--:.':.s~1; -_- ''"''"""""'"""' / 1 I /L.·J ~----"""'"'=""'·l I < ~.f,ll;~)~·,¥v,¢1!0§ §'fft" 01,~1?'~· :•/," "1l!i!tl ' 7,,,,,. -rd~£~~ r ,=-, '" '° , -" ~~ ~· --9 ,'tiL ,..:1 " ':'f_ " ,, .. " " I " " .. • ~ I-' mAcT B : ,' : -::::.::,··" : I ~ ' / '---11 !~11 [-r ,----i ,-I I-=-,, r--• I -1 ,--1 "/";( ',, -----T '1l''".!"''"!~:::I '-----..::..,--___ i I __ ;I,/, /el 2 lol 3 Id 4 lol 5 1.1' /,I 7 1,·1 8 'r''. b,I,, / :'TAAQf:J/ m~1 I : ,, )\ 1V• lRACTA ----~-~-@ ' _ __. j .11mF 111250asr1•/25nsrf•f;519srf•f2s1osrf•f2s12~•IIJ1 2597sr/ fn,ss,/ / HJSFl 1 / ~., A""'3.2f7£SF' ;~ '-,-'" srn=-"-1''' DE1ENT10N --=;,:;,> ,-c '\ :!l =1r 11: ~ Jj If ~I"'""' • Y ', , ~' , ".,...""' : I llUF~R <; A•21,496_Jc_!,_f---------:-.-=::--~;;:ri;rf't,. :,J"~--1 ~ ~-__ J I_ I L _J L _I L _/ L _I L __ J / I J 1\__ --L --/ /<' V! f' I i '"""'""'"'": _µ---~'<::~~~';"--,;;-;'y,/~-'""w "':,,,. ---~ -~ y;_ ~-'~-"'-0,/ I ~ ~'------...1 15'wot.\No \ L J_ ---------I l-::-:i.;;,.----I,'.).-., ;,11<,!,lt.:.;::!/~"" ~"'--~,_:,;.;_~... ~.! .... L~~;\~J~", t-~,:;or f!OJ,DB ~ .._ ,;---'l-, ' '-.....,,.,.,;.~BG~L,TiP/ ; I --------1--r----~,-,".'..-_,,,,_,~"•_:::~ \ ,,>fJ;)~" l=t<aY_!?"~.: ___ -, .!1-l.:o,-!Jos_!!io""" !O:...mGNl'.VAAO-~l,;t,NM"~9-•!l__--r~~"J,,"-J,1 ~-::::" 0' v7t~Q'.\ / -~ ---->--1--' / '~~ ,x;" ,~~:,...--6 ~ "•i ,,· "' LANDSCAl'EANnunuTY 01..-ig ~.6'~),.',~,p-------" /··"""'R"f, f ---;-: I " -,,,,~<_,>,._'1-~-;_;J'<a'*"::J," • -----· J5r-.i,il---_ESM~ -----.,;;.,.J' '<<-n \ ';, ~~, ~ '.< ,\ I 1 , / , "~ -,-~ /Y ,,..._ E-6 r-~ _ --w ----:;;7" ,, " " ,o•-...... \,1,\ \ _.. . .j < .,,,,.,~.,.,: -r-" ""=' ,{ ',\, ~/0\ "h• ,1>(,--~..-~;.: 1 al 34 ,1 rr,r --,11-1 r,-I~-1 1 ,-~~I -1 r, ~..,:*\\ ~ =-=~=--~ ,,\, ,:.x /II 1 1 BwtTER ~ / 1. -~-1 r .. ~ <-rnllsf I •123,9sr 1 33 I f f // / 1 / I I/ I \ I ------7 •' , a,,,~:•;:::','' I ' J-.,, ', ' '{/• "' ~ L I m 2444Sfl \, 32 / t I 31 I 30 I 29 I 28 JI V L t:J.) 12 ! §;,~ '/ : ~-~_:. ',''¥A'lt~;:i•~1'; e----=;;::::::-:---111_2111 =1l'l"m/:J"""l"/"""/"l"m,/>/,""'l"I ,m, I,; I L_l-=-2"',':'_ / ;" ~ ,' I. ·" '~N·!''--,,,~. "'"""'""'"-__j. _ _Jf J_f' I~~~/ f 'Ji: JJ'·""' '--c::--,-1 ', '" Ti'.:,;!.~:;"" ... "';;'.~I I, '·*"v Ore ,Sr~SE 2 ~IUTY ESMi TYP ---l5 ---I __ J -L_---.:. ~-__ ___J • J"J/ ----------r -::-1 .....: 't' I' 1 1 1 I~ j <l)-° ;.,,1,,i;.2"1,63:ritBF,,_.v) I (f-5 SID[YARI) --~ 35 J~ _J~_ l_'.._ ~-" 13 l /, )r:tAO J\ I _1;_"' lJ ./ • ,,,.,,,,~" _c----BSSLTYP -----20ROW I 8 1 --~86Sf A•18,217+-Sf' !;! /.,J ........ ~'--'~· ~ 1.~1a:\ ---------".,..___ --l'loAOc10RE'J!YARD8SBL 5SIOEYAAO SEEOET.o.JLSHEET;;,1<1t;,' Hr-------''' ; :,/! WETLAND-" J;:, ; • " , • 18 --.15 --BSBLTYP P-5 '-.,, --.. .I "> , '°"""/" -!i ,;\ , ' ,, s_:;" .'v' "l,.' ,, , '"'"" l/lr~ ~ 1-i "11" 'l~J' ~ --,--'' -f:,, -/---"''------1/,i: ,'" I ,. --:::,,)~:_:,'> :i"if '"'J' ' I fr. , \.-, \'I<•, '--f C 19 ff/ -+ -f r -I -~ -' r--7 / I,• ' ~ 'm' I I TAACT B ,\:-., ,..' •• "\ .... "'-.... r" 2S70SF 1::! 20 I -1 J 1 I I I I I ~I "', -----2:'~SF / 5~ '~ 'y I I \ y~,·"A"""'"' '>'i <'~ ~9:> ~Jll I• 1""""1 "1,,;:,,/ 1' 22 I I 23 I• 1 24 I I 25 1' I " / 'j ~---..,,::::..___./,) •\ ?'\'":>'.;'~ j t--,-_, '\\ r /' l~'i_-;;_ :,?\-. ,/·' "-JI/ /1 / /1~2566SF"/\?l2015srjF/7677Sflr/2~~6SF tJ .mosr;~ / / 15 7.cli!i,s_~;-/\:< ,-~ /_, I~ ,~,-\~1., , ? , /·,, 1:1~,:~: , ~-., ,J-:-~;-1 I 1 ___ _1~/ ,11·,1 ,1, 1 '[t //l _../,, • ~':,".'::.~; v!,,">/<>:,,:,, 'J' r, >..,~ ._,._____ , , , -l .i, ---~1 L _ __.l -§~., .,-...:..._/J 1 ..... /& _',..:., "5 =-""'-.. ' ~ '--:,,1' ~iW'"" ~ 11o --....;.._-·~ , J5 5-; • ~"-..l r~,,. ..I! ,,,,ti' ,., 16 ------...._, ,, ;. ' ...._,:t_:_ ',":.,,-i --,._ , . < X ~-oEfs,.6~ / ,: 'y __ A.De ' ----.,, •, \''I' ....._nB9Sf ! ,,-/ " -:,i ~ --:::,_I,, ,_,,, ••• ,,.,. N ~---,~-__ 1,;: ;t-. ,.=,1-: ... ~/ __ --n / I 'mACTH _ ,. ~ TAACT F ~i~-1--..:..:.... ,· '~-~J1t1• ~v:; , :::,:,. ~ -"" ,,, ,: ------~---i h, '--. NQPA , ijl N GPA ~---'""' a-n,, ~,, ', ''/ -.?,~ _-:_"\,' ~ .....___ .... ..._ I/ ( A·ll!.15611+9': , ·~· --< ,. , , --.:-~-=~c-...s,:• V/',c s. 17 --.., --......__ ', - A•71B+SF ' --<>"' • ,, ' /33 R6W .. (m-:}-€ -,r,_~=--= , -~"""''-A '-Jll4Sf '/ / ·, -" ~ >, ,: bETAIL 'SHEET p-5". / X 1() FRONT YAfl,O BSBr' .....___ '" / :,o • 10 :,o :,o I EQENP ~ ~ .__ ,/ '. ( '!, 6•0• "lo,.-'y , ' , ~i ), ,' lANOSCAPE M,ID ,UTIIITY -...:~>,-I\ \. ' / \ ~ -.:!e" a o-<.:-'f:RAC /l•-"''"a2,,;.~ , ::>'-. ESMfTYP'-./'-./,"-~:-, . ..___ \ \ ----PROPfRTYBO\Jt!OARY --._! "-'),,,""'-":''05 , TB,,-.._ ' )l!a<ros'Jla"' / '~~/< ,, ," X ,.', ,..' .·~~~f)j" '-, , f-30' j """k.h /, A-M.~!:lf ) ,-, / -'' ~\ ,_1.-0a! 2, 10·, v j !i; A--,--r ~ / )<.. ' ~x' >;.«..'§ ~,} llr \ ---~OTLINE r:::_.::: _.,<a"""f,,_-s'. ,., '' ,,;.-""/--:::~-;";+o' __ ,.,,..,.... "g~ /' '/ ~ /~--,...... ,/ '-,);!><'~::, >':(\ j:..-HI I~ ~ ·-,:;-:"""'"ls.:-'-.',', ,, X ','" ', x. >"-Y "v,..~;JYR1 · ·1~ --~-""'"'"'-• ;( x ,,.. a"'"''' )<TRA.~TB '< 1-;v Ill - ~OAD t.:E~rt:RllNE ~---...:...., , -_,,,,, __ "="-"'""'""_' __ ""'"'='""'"_"~"'""""'t .... """'.. . ..... ,.,. .. ,,.. A•SS.168\SF, ',~v,.<l~\bj, _o~t_i I -fXIST~G EASEMENT --·.....::._:7 ;~.2/ . "}~:7·:\::~'6}1t:~:.:,mf .-, ·-.· ~~~··,_ > :. \ (~;\I' 1 : (:. ·\(\: ', .f;.w. {)f ff~ D SENSITl\lf AREA AND BUffER AREA ~ •• " -~\,~:i.t{~·~·~~ll.645:t._~-,.·;j_:· .. _ _ •·•• •.. ·, ",~~,~~\~i\:~'''."''~rhL. ·. '· ent, ~--~ .. -_., ·>:.---\",ll'il'\fiJ,1!-. I, I.~\ ... :: l ,' -l~'U Di . --:.__; ·. · s:maor £'<\ 2<11~· '>\"8:· ' "'11' 1~ V1sio [] I ~ ""§ I' ' NGPA A~EA I lll--G -~, ~ , a MlTPARr .z _t; " ,;ti';r~-~. i ;'[_)~,.,:.:::_. - '} Li:;;: (G'i'f;;,Jiif !f!: V) -IL ~ ·~ § ,11..i • • • 'l\l ~l ,g ~ ,],_ !l ·1;n11' w.ei,1 ~i u V) ifl·1 LL-,: " ~! li Ii "'."t !o d ~ ti ~ ::; I ~ 5 11;1 111 11.11 l'RO-JlCl ~o, 07093 oo"'" av. o..e ISSIJ£ OATF· 12-U-20KJ srn:.r R[v I a '1=>02' SHEET 02 OF 12 McCORMICK PLAT ' cific Engines. YhJ!J Design, llC ::'nn1~1s f'hcna, (20f5) 431-7970 Fft.1, (206)388-1648 ~53FOAV<!t.8.Se&tllo.WAllBlBR WWWp&e com I ~ ~ I :: ~ I ! ~ -0 0 :1J ::l 0 z 0 "TI :i! ]~ PJ: ,-., m ~~ ~i :o;_, --..::; -0~ 6~ 0~ ,,~ s:~ () ~ 0~ 0~ ~; _m Offi /\~ ~ ~~ )>i -;~ "' c., z ~ ' :1J " () !11 0 0, 2 j1l ~ : ~ ..:5;} r.::<: )> " ~I 0 z 0 11 -i I m rn m ~ --~ rn m 0 "' p ~ "' C,J z ' ' ~ t I D -, . " ' • I ' , , ' I ® ' " I I ' i . ' ' ' a C ~ ~ ill~ ' ~ ' ~ g ~ ' ' ' , ! ! ! I I ' . ~ ! 3 ~ ' ' i ' ' ! i i { ' < l ~ r ~_.,.,,,, . • t) z~~~ ~~i~ ~ i ~ ~ :h! ~ "'fl\!il:g,.. i -.., 5n\26 ~ a @ ~~ag { ~ I a § ' • a 5 McCORMICK PLAT ·~~<i l1 i' 'i'i ~!~; ~8; • l!1, !11, ~ • ! sl -1,j __ J.e:.: ! ·~ •I 'I , Pacific Enginee1h1~ ! "'. Design, LU:: lf]_ ,. 0 a-. CMI Englneerlna £t -c_· _ -·· Planllln9 Cansun;m!,;; Phone, {20g) 431-7970 Fu {206)388-1644 ~ 53FO AM. S.SNll!ct, WA 98188 - I I I I I 1 I I 11 )> "1l "'0 !~ 0 z I 0 I ,I I :i! I m I CD I I m i CD ~ f;l ~ t:l ,z ~ [11 "' m ' ;E ~ )> z 0 )> ~ ~ 0 z 0 ,I :i! m m ~ ..._ ;. CD m 0 "' _.I/,, ~ :0 "' "' z ' lJ 0 [11 ! "' m i ' ;E ~ ~ ~ I ~ 0 "' 0 j ~ I • i i~ !<="'---~·==----"' ~ m 0 ~ 0 I . • !, ' --! l"har,e, (206) 431-7970 FaJO (206)38!1-1643 15445 53FO Ave. 8.Seattie, WA 98lBll www.p4e com :;...-..._ -> !:) .,_: . cc ;')' ,.~~Yo j~'/?'J C. ;:::, \ /11 ! ; ! ~ 0 >- ~ ' I ij ' ='==1 ~ii' 11 l . ! I I • . ------- ' ,1 I' I l J ,,.,-. I ; ( ' ,' & a. •• ~ I- '" 'IP!' UHE~ i 0 l~ f " ' " ; '' 1; ' ' i' ' = "'""""' ' ' '" I Phone, (206) 431-7970 Fax, (205)388-1648 15445 53RD Ave SSMtlle. WA 98188 www.pac com I .J N ~!~ + 8 " ~ ~tj ! ~ r-'-'-11-'--'-• ~1-~----+--'-ci\-+-1\-'---'--'--'--~f----'--c-~ L~J • I ! ; -;- '· ~ + ~8 acitic Engiflee,fo;y Design, i..J..C ClvlJ ~ring =l Plannlbgi c,:msWtuut,:; Phone: (206) 431-7970 Fu (206):J8a-164S MATCH LJNE. SEE ABOYE RJGHT. • -:-• 1· , --• r · ' I ' I I I I ' 1 8 1----c-~-~. i'-! rc---ch-+-cc-"frc-""1---+--rc-~~~ . : :,i J I ' ,.! . . I ~! 'n1 : a r ,~.,: ~! :;:; iii: L....V-C ' ~h I I \:, ...... J _____ j I 1-, -i-l : .. _._. _ I MATCH LIE. SEE ea.ow LEFT. i_· 11 ! , • , McCORMICK PLAT •'•l~eeeeeeee,,ee""'""''==,,ee'=='=='=='==~ acific ~ngill'3'3?fof! Design~ :!.LC • I § i I ! I , <m'OFRENTON c;,,n EffgUIMll1:r,g .a Pbmnlng Cons-.ul' .. zwts- ~ (206) 431-7970 ~ (W6)388-- 1544553RDA,11 5Seatlle, WA98188 -c com • ij 0 )> "1l 0 ~ 0 z 0 11 -, I m CD m "'-J;. CD ~ "' JC" ~ :c "' "' I~ C) rn "' ,m ::E i=- )> z 0 )> "1l 0 :I] :::l 0 z 0 11 It m ' CD m "'-J;. CD m 0 "' .... ~ "1l " '"' ,z ~ rn "' f11 ::E i=- MCCORMICK PLAT a -----:Z--"'-- cific /Bng;naaJ'itJg Design, L.il.C ==~ft!,,~ Pho""" (206) 431-)'970 Fa,:, (206)388-lti4S 15445 53FD A~. S.S..atlle, WA 9Bl8ll WWW com t:l z ' ~ u, m ' "''"S,()N$c A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 23, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. AND A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 24, TWP. 23 N., AGE. 5 E., W.M. C"=e,cQc_F~~;': ·~~ =c~~~~~~c:~1}fc~~~~=·:~.C ·~~~,ce;c· I / h:l --, -~-~-.· ' '\<_ ._·'_)t~.}ri____________ ' ~~01,1;;-:;41::;r;:7µ-.-1------'-" , ' --,-- :_._'. ·• __ -:'·lft_:n_. j ;ify/}»,ji~,;;/"Y(/-''/{? ,Y /:r,'·, ~-~1:::,:-:c,11~~~"[1iI.!.1!.1:J.£..:.-::-:-V-, - ' · ... ·.,,~/ '.,(!f,T""·" •. ,._T 'f " 1 · ... • V p&, ; '·/ -/'.._/,,.·;:_:7.) I : / • • I • -., , )' .,. r / , ., m 1 \./,/-<-.)@/ 1 2 , a , 4 , 5 , n ; 7 J 8 / 9 : ,::, ,._ ·-'! 2~/ -·'·/ ,, ·::-;::~.:1 -----__ .,. ' 2 3 4 5 6 7 I I I ~~ STOPr L I ~ ~JL.~ =~o~~--__ ._ __ ,.._ --zoo·- ~l/11 //~_ LJ~l ~l "l .. 1 LJ~--- -~ T .. .. -0 .. • . • T . . . . ·;, . : :·1 ~·r ,, T ~ T ~ 1 ~ r,, r,. 11 -~/ I I I 1 n 1~ 29 28 27 30 -----.. ~W===-5 ' °""'"'"'"' SCALE, f-40' ~" . ~~, '///r· ,' ("::.' .. ,;/,) . ·;; ,·,1 • '/• . >'._. -, l"/0. C-,~ "0/ •• ~ "141' :~;};. :~~~ <,5 <'<7;,, Or; • .;,, 1/11 ' "I; (j:f';"" ~6) '·- t";) ~ q ' ·mt) .,J ifl ~ :J ri i_ 1 'UI "' t~ 81 .~ 6) lei ~Ill "W ,... ili II:" LL;: ~; d ;, ·-Q ijt •! ~ ,;.~·,:. ~~ .,Q, i:"" Ii j 0.. i ~ § ti ~ 11,,! ~ ,1li1 P!>O.CCl ND., --- OR~-av, CJ8 ISSU~ O~l"E: 12-1:J--.ZOD S11ffT Rf\". ~ l---=:.J [!:9~.] I II ; IJ •' 0, '~~: "; I ' _// I// ( \_ .{ ',~ ' ' ' \ / / "-, McCORMICK PLAT a, -:j > 1~ Phone< (!?O(i) 431-7970 Fu.a (206)3BB-164!1 15445 53fO A•~ S.Seattle. WA 98l88 WWVI ::eog.i::an ----:::z----\ McCORMICK PLAT = ~-""""'"-EWAYIIOAC -....,.,,wA-,.,..,....~-2:1111 " s/ 6 " ! f I ~ ~ "' I i ;;: ~ ~ "' -< " 0 > " '" " ·, I l ' I • ' I ' ! ! ' ' [: ! " ' I § J ' ' .ffi !!I{! 1,~ ~iH~ D ,c"s'°"' ~~: ~~ McCORMICK PLAT ! ------~--·.~•----···-~-CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION PLAN '.:'. =-===-== -------~---l.'cc'-=====.J 1w .... -... -_,,,lf/W¥~ __ "' .. - CONIFEROUS TREE PLANnNG DETAIL wrro&:.JU _ ... __ _,... ..... - SHRUB PlANTING DETAIL Area A ,_.., -11/Tffl_or_ =~~~ --=I 1'1>Tro~E Planting Area 8 PUNnNGl!ST QNTY PLANTIIAME SIZE """" ~,,, 0 " (1/gL,,,,fMapa --- (j) ~ ----0 M -" ---·-- © • ""'"""' -~·-· -,,,, © " ...... --e " -. -© " "'"""'"' --"' " --' ()MrH,i,,~ 0 -" . -0 I 102 ----- .._....._, ..... ..... [1'1 .. .,., m= ... l~boddon.., ""'""""°") , ........... ,,,,,,, .. (,,,....,..) l~ .... .., ... ,.,.(l..l,__) ,,,. .... ,t. .. uo(,,._,,.........,,) !~ ... , • ..,,(, ..... -., Soodln, aoto. ~IO/HIO("'• r .. , ,,. ·""- "" ·-'"' ·-, .. ·- "" ·-,,. ·- "' ·- "" _,,,,_ "" ·-,,., ·""-·''\ .. i ... ~I"'•J ') . .,,_·"'Jr.,.., · ;~!r;,, -_.:·:-·~, ···-.,_ l;/ ',-. 1::.-, C··, ·-;,,,-,_~} Iv,~,. • ',4011 At4j' 2 - /('ii l{c. ' -'.! /.(.::,( ',;:.--)j 1--.. ,, )fl;; . ...._...., .l ,z<,,, .. ·--><r:;/;?/ff,;,;;. ,,. '(·> ;'.I\\ ·-....~(S!J 110rE.&1SEJW'IWOOO!'!>~Y"'"""ENIJlltffRl<G"""1(il(UC j 4 ~ :..."c=!....:~ I "'"'' ,..,, I I~ I~ 5 ~ <J <J <J <J D f--z f--:5 <( Lu 0... .....1 L,J Cl. I "" (,1 z ~ 0 l:) 2-z O:::~~ OClZ Ui=:'5 u-2 2 Q_ ' Job No. _Mcff!L_ OtolpO •• _____M__ "'"""">'~ ~., --··--_!Wsewoll Wetlond Coo..,lting, Inc o,, .. -MU -"'- 1~~"'"""'11.i:,.,,.p..._ .. _1Z1J.-ffl--(1$1l r .. :1SJ.--e>H,., " -"'- ---~~o ~ ~-----------~ B3HS S310N N\lld NOll\181111'1 1\nd >IJll'1dOOOv\ ] }t11 t .. . i ;.9,ifl g j H. I j .! Jl,11:.i! ,!I .8 ~ f I 1 !,l ,hi' 1 • I ·1 i,1 ,,,,, ' i I } lJ! 1!11i • I !1 i • i ;I ll111ill l i l r I i ,: a,1 H!ii l ~ ; l i 1 'j ,'' ........ , ' • ' l, 111111]! t I II f I ! P • •I i• ··• ' • ,, J ' l I '.it 1 •' I ' ' H ! ' . !J , h1 iiHl I ! ti ri H l 1; r Ht i. !h!l I i. t, .i I fl,' .i} r' ! !.l; qi ii] i ' ,l •1 • '! .J ! fH i{_I. ~H i i n Ii f1 h •• tl ., I,, I .... : _ C i 1 :. 1 f l'l •• I , l • !I 1· ·' 1; i·• ' , J,, '"' I ·i ll j• :.• i ,•J l , J I a! 1! • lj• I' ' , I H H l J I~~ U i i i II i, r I ,11 11 • 1 I 11 g,I! !, 1 [•a}! ;l ,3 t • 1 lti ~ 1 ·· .11 ~ ,1 1 11 11 I 111 !11 i · ~ .!l j H j:,, ;a,s 5 h t .!l :i , ... ,, -' 'lil 'l' ' . ~-· jJ. q Ii, J ... ~ 1 11i •i• 1, ,' !1 •il I J I ,•-'1' l' • ! t' l ' -'. l1' j, l .11 · l ':1 ' 'l' ' i ]t ,s~ ~i 8 t=1 ~.; ~ ~ i l j1 ; dt 1 1 i I !I• ; Hl I 1 I ih ji1 U ! I ! JU I Hf t i l 1 : I .11 ,, • · · i : • , ,. :.! ;}, ;i, ;J. I; ,fJJ, ,ll: :l :, t::, .,/;; ~ r· ·-9 /:;-.' ./P x..·,,, (.) ~...,, ·, /l!f:J) '•r· .. :: ... ~-', •:f·;/{/ "" ~ ~._,J7 I~ ·~ e.," .J/~!;j({! -'-. ~· ;_:.;.j/} '.C/< l 1 j • l j ' ! !1 '· ,t •· il ; 1 ·l·i . -lj 1" it e, ;l! ~ j 1! 5 i -ii 'ij'Jl ~ 1 gJl .a 'i_ I l ; !J h Jt}i l j11 jf Jli I! ·i·j1 I' !, 'l ,111 t !• Jl •1' I' ·I l i H l, . !!ii l itl ·-l 11l 1Ji 1}11 , i ,1 ij 1 ,11 1 i 1,1 ,, 11• i 1,1 ,,11 I t ! i 11 'jl l 'j!h 1 1111. U dl i Jl, ij 1l ! ll ,i J H i, •1 1 ,!!'1· l 11, n iii I 1H l11it ·a ii l l l · .11 _;'o -!I ,!!· ; !"' s-a ! I;, Ii ! ,;_ • '. ; i I il. l i l • l. •Ji ' I! ,lti '{ Ji, ' .·h . I . : ! ;• , : ,i ' 1 ' lf 1 ' ;, ll,1 !• 1•f ! ii: 11 'P : i} i t It ii i I !1. ilil J If HH iii 111.1 it I ! 11ttt 1 1, i : i I" l 1 11·: i !' : , , J . 1i i i 1u I i ,Jll : :i : , J :l , , 1.H, , ,1,tu ,,! ,i;, : ,11 , , ,,ll ~1tl I~ il,I; d ~ ~~ iJJ!dol < • • ~ 8 i I i • t ! • ' , • i ! ' . 1 l l li l ! 'l ! ! j, ' I g'j' g ; 1 Pi l i ii, l 1 iil t -j '. 'I l! ; jl· r J ~1I~:I';; llJ ! It I fji!l1il Id! l 1 i!!f1 ::! .. ' 1 ' , I ' 1, <• l ;, j ' l dj • l ' '' · !t 11 l ! i 1 '1 I Jll I! Ill •• I! • ii •!! 11 I 111 11 , I 111 ! ii 11 l I u1.i u 1.·· 1 :.:11!1:.1 1 1.·u , •. } lH1 H ti 111 ii ui 1n ·1;1 hi til,i 1,1t11iH n,t J!l· 1 } ;h !1 '• r ll ' i .. 1 •• 'i•i 11 JI ' .! 11, i11 ' r} , ' ' . l•1 ii., i { ' ;iiii.· il li 1.-i 1111! ! i!:Ji If llH if l n.: 1! !t iU Hi.II il iii ti:.: 11r.1iti lil!li1 nl· i j ~1 ·, :l ·' 1!' ; 1i I• ·•Jl i' ' .1·1 ,, 1· j,l lfl "l J,I li! j Jil jil 1{ 1 l ' Hl ih ii H H1l l, fll i .. ! Hil !! i '11h 1l 1i lll IU i'1·ii.· Ii iii iH ; 1Hl1H !i."lll i!i i i jlt jll 11 1' 1J••1 1• l'· 'i 1l1J I· , 11 -l ! •1·. 1 i1 11 11 •l 1 i ji'lt•I 1··11 !I' J l d! 111· i H I Il lillJ Ii 11l! 1I Hlo ll! ! !1 11 !U IU i!!1 1: HU IL U! Hl 1 1d!i!;.1 lH .. 1il ld I l i1. I.ft I 'H l ,, ''"1i• '·' 'l'i •1. ,,p, 11, l ' l "I! !1· Oil ,lli ··1 ·11 ,111 l ···t1'· ,11,, 11! ! 'i -~ ~! -J ~ . ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ Jl ~-~! ~ J ~ ~i ~1 J ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ J 1 ~~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,, ,,I,,'~. ,1111 .I'' ,i, ,!1,. ,,1' ,, 'l' f ,,.!,.,.,I 'I ,Ill' ,l, .!. ,,.,, ,!, ••• .ii i l jl< ' ' ,H I • .Hi 1 l 1· I•~ ll i .. J!l j h ll 'e. ! n 'I ';H ~ 1-! !,~ "l ';; :g:. _: ~ 11·1. I l! Ji " • • 1· ,:_; ! !.,JI ll •I "·~j11 .i]i • 'l"·' PlJ ! ! l l, .! ' 11 '. ~e:]1!'1~ g·i·q l ' illi i ' I J! r: ~ [.•.! • ~ !i : ~ ~ tf~-j '!:~ E iJ "' :! ~ ~it~ n : : ll·i· ~ ~1.i ~~ ~ :3 ;; i i ' -i I I ' • I ; ! l el ; "' !l 1 !1i· l 'I 1 1 !iiii 111ii :, ~ .~.pf'.!!.j -.. ~ I. i lli!llull 0 (!;-...... -~., ~ j t . -i l ·1 l ' 1 ' ;;! a.-~i-•-S ';;'i' J!!s,al j.il ' •-! !] •fH I .nJ 1J·]• ·l 1111 -1, •i., ' U, l.t I, t· J e,;,~ tr ~~.. 1 •Ii ~ -·1·1 ' fl i•ll ·1 ,1,1-l,h1· 11 • ~ • ·ad . r-... s-.,1 lg ..! s 11 ' l ;! 1,l, ,1, .,1!11 •i· lhj n ;-•1'!·1 B e_n~ ljl ' } Jli l iJ, tH! l iHI 1,il if ~th ! -iq ~11~ i 1~~, 1 t•.S; ~; :fr-·~ l -'ll); f!~ ,d 1-5 !1 lilf:q l~ '"'' !, i•l{ ·li• .• ·'}' ji;!;jl •Jl li!i il l!l! ll11, !l-! 1j!1,I ;iil1il1~.: l·•,11 1i ·11 ,.,JJ I ·j• ·• j•,11,1 t,• . I••, •1! ; j1 f'·1·!11 ;J ,',Hi .l,!il' r,, ~s .! l~a .!! .. ~ ~ ii t-" "'o ,; -~';--1 "~! n!J! ,J, •'i'j. j_,al! 1 , .•1·.,U ,.!;·, ... -!;, i~:.~",; J,' le '! ~~1~ ~ ] ui ~li~~dr p~ i!llli .i'i m iJ,hi h ·lr'" JJi,,;, 11; ;;!HI° ~~ 3 ~~; 1 ~d h!~ Ji ;~ H ;~JHH ~H '-• I,1 iH ! ' ,., i-11 ~ l jJ, s-l. .j_ t ti,J ii! !l i 11! •jl ll ! 1,1 J11l ff f Hi • f •• j ••• .·l·-1' l' 11 ! ''l .~ .. ~ "1 ! ~.,, ! ?:O l· •1. § j " ;,11· P~ !i ·~j~ ;~i J-E'i.!-L ll ~ t'o I;,;-~ ,,,_ . ~.lll>.ll ·1S:..,,li'. ~ .,1, !~ H.~:; l e• -'i • :~~ -i"' ff i !E g'o·jp. --1' J! ~ ~t m:i l. 11 l,1, ~11H p ,, !l.~1-H ~h!-!! -~ ~! :}it ~:og.ll~ !s: ~<-· ,.,_,, { . [ . '' I 'h i u I B l ,u ~ ell• s j -Hl ~ iP tJI 11 n-a s, .fl Hi G, n; • .. .. ,,, 'l ·11 ,, !, I • i, g 5 §lll J l~ l, ,•ii ., ,i vii e, ':;] c: ]:i I ::,:._ !• i,•! (1 :H /: ~i·1 s,$: '' . · 1 ~ :,i • ~,~ I § l i ' ~ ! ' ! ~ .: ' ) ,.it "' . ~ ~· ! t5 ' z z "' > z > g '< "' ' en ! 1,;: ·, ; ?:, . ' ' ' i ' I ' ' I i i ~ ' ! ! I ! ! ' ! I: l "" :s (j " , L z m ~ cl --" s: -· ;; > m "" 8 ~ ; .. -- McCORMIC PLAT 16405 MAPLE VALLEY HWY. R~f.1-:-::JN, WA #F';:,,t l'0 ~ m > "1 m r ' m l; ::I a z . r I I I I iJ ,er: 1t OU<C..~"',c.<f ~~ ~j ~~ I I I !¥,j ;;;, "' < ' ;!, ' ! m " "1 m r m l; '-I i5 z !: I I i* -s McCORMIC PLAT LOT:,:, 16405 MAPLE VALLEY HWY. RE\TON.WA #lw~ ~ii , I /1)") Ck i i I I ,, ---'----ii I ~I- I I '~! 'l y --t Jc'\ ; ; 1 I I I I I ~,-~ I ~tJ N § "' -.\:;, >, ~ .::,, z 0 ~ m hi cl; ::! •O z I I I I 'I It .. l I I! ; I 1. __ :. -I. -_i_ _j : : ; :~: ,2 !l!~-ii, l ! ' . e-,· I ,I ~ I I I I + ,, 1l!t McCORMIC PLAT LOT21 16405 MAP~E VALLEY H'N". R.:':N-ON, WA #f'o~t ~ ;j' ___ l_ _____ l l'\ fl' ~ I: ~ ,c-I ': \ -,, ~i' _k;"':'· I !~: l ' s • ,rb-'' ~w McCORMICK PLAT Ob .~/ i IHI!! nun I HP !![1n''t H ; !i!Hri!lf!H jl1pf:h1 1 i!1U!11!~""11ij'!,t1 I I Ji Ii Ii! Ii 11 I I I ::I1! 1nlun1Hn 11 inJrrnn HJ ~~ iui;.JJJ1.'lJH ii nq,11111111 Ii CITY OF RENTON ii I 1 1 , I I 1.~li \l ~· • , . ~ ::,;, -0 ' ' ,., ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~ ; ' !! ! j ' i! 'I ·:1 . •i ~~ I! I .. , I q -~-1 l~ D>Z'll~n I! ~ZO~zO ~om' g~ 1: fj; ~'ii •e m, '· r 1· 0 ~ ''] a 'I !O ,o !~ a ' i > z 1(1'~ , 0 P' 11 11 !!I i :I !I 11 ii i l! l ! ' i McCORMICK PLAT ' 0 ' FOR, "'°""'-''T,..~ICI( 181........c.ewAV><OAO SE!.AH.WAHN2 PliONE: (!!OIi.i IH .. 2,110 i'" ,i di !'1 ii '!I : ~, Hi "f ,I • ! CITY OF RENTON 11111111111 11!,!ll l!!l!;l 1! ii IH!i!l (jj!li I ':•i1! l : l ' ' ! ' ' I 0 l ' ' ! : ' ' ' ' ' ' -------' ' ' SKYRAE I I -----------~----"\--~,----~~~~--1 -----\ I .,,,/" '-\ '\_ t----------I ,,,..r \ \ -------I ~ ZaE ---...... ,,, I // \ \ TRAC~ --------< UNDEVELOPED '',,,, / 1 1 / CEDAR RIVER P""8-• /' AREA ), I I / PARK ' ' ..... 780l45fflCT ' ' 1 ', { / ' ' / :;,~ ,,..,. _, "" CED~ : ""' / ' , 1 / , •""""-• ~NKNOVflh I '~ CEDAR RIVER --_I ':>;ll!005H'ICR ARCS-•------/ / / ' p•C>V 1----------___/ J ' ......... I --', -\ PARCS-• ----L___ ---------------I \ - I ---"""'"~"'" --------..' '' --CEDAR.,,...,,,,__ --/ ' I --"---I ----ru,~,. \ I -------------.,..,au,~-__/ \ ' VAL"~'"ONMAPt..e --------------------___J_. -I SE"'""---------1----\ --+ _ _ LEY RD (SR-159, ---__ --_ _ ...,.. ...... NI( 1 -- I --I SITE" ------------\ \ r wl T/-/1--+-r-:::-=.:__-__ SERENTONMAPLE --~-- C.t'.• '~ LL j~~4' 1 '~, i(Bflffii~i:1-11 ---~~UA ~~ --i I 1 ~ -••!1om,sr ~ \ ' 110AD B i1l....---!~·. ------___ I , I I SUMME LD \ I • ' I , , ::r-j· I .v ('.--mIH_[_£ . , ----,--- : I \ /~ ll ~\~ ~ 34 a, 82 ~ ao '° ,a ., I ffl. .--~ / I \ Ill \-1 / I ' ij~ ~~ -li5ADcfP_J " · •) \ J I li, IISlJON) 1 ~~ 22 aa Z4 25 29 15 \ I I I j; I -...,1 ; ' ,--I : I'( \IH ZOPE \(/ I ", r;:.:· \ • • IOlfI J-'a/ 14 /. , \,. :·-··':'""' I \ ---"°""" _ I I _ ~.,_ ·-17 1MCrB I l --1- I :::-... _ -10 _,__,-I _'1_ j _ ----_,,, y-'t~ .t,'. ~ \ -• 111 I · \ I--.:::~-----------.,, , ii AQUA BARN \ I --\ .,. I RANCH I \ 1H taE ----,......',,_-,/1'3"~1.CNE P""8-• l I O(IIQOOUffl} I \ -I \ ' I I .... zaE I \ O(IIQOOUffi) I \ I \ NCIT PHIT OP I ZONINO BOUNDARY I , ~ m , \· Pl.AT , UNES -= OF J , I R<tm>N LJl/l1S •". ~., r • ' TRACT t.,l ,y <f-, ' .. , . . . . . ·n , ~ f I , .· 1 .... """ Plannk, .. :· , . , · ··., , , 1 ....,ocuim , · -• ,.,,on M ',, i : \ / ~ ',,, I j I ~AY 2 ,,11 ',, I I / ••• '--, \ I / '~, I j f[ii,r,,,,,.,, ,___ 1 , "\ I /)f,l/,:lc.;;:·r)/: ":i]) '------------,. I /~/ '' . •c·c.;i, ---i I -----------~-------~-J ____ ------- I I I ;W - 50 100 ~ T NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP 0 Q) w (j) 0 C , (") (D "tJ C £ (") ~ 0 , & C -a-: (D (/) (j) '< (/) (0 3 (/) m1 (") :J" ~- (") Q) (j) (D $. '-,-· (") (D (/) ..... (J) (") :J" 0 0 (/) ..... : L, L .. -: :1,w < .;"I' II' .:11111,i:r 1!11 ',1j1ili1 .. •' ~ "Tl , (D (D (J) '< -:s:: 0) -(D o· 9: ::J (") (/) ~ :Joi = ~ !rif[; ::, 'r'il ~ R>-:: d, -t,06/ "' .~\;} "-· .%" "' ~ /11,:7 ·"" ©) .,, 0 0 Q. I aJ N aJ .., Q. I 0 ;,. 0 0 "' 0, 0 0 ::c ll) N ll) .., C. ("') 0 :::s C. -· --· 0 :::s ("') ""I ::.: -· (') QI ·-------~~~11------ 1 ?:. ·"' I k--~---t-----1~E\ AVErE ; I I I (,I:. r. ---.:; I --v f[?"23.,.,..,,··-·· UJV'.a113,1~ ;; ---··r,,.. •• .., V I s:~<tj" r, 1, , I , i ~ ,.. S[ N' SC -~ -~ ZONE X ~ SC 0, r~ JONES MILWAUKEE 24 :;! "' "' ® ROAD """' ~--,-, wlw ID (.D a: a: I ~ I 0 ~ SE 166TH cl}' I SBEET i ==-1 I KING COUNTY UNINCORPORATED AREAS 530071 NOTE: MAP AREA SHOWN ON THIS PANEL IS LOCATED WITHIN TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST AND TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 6 EAST. '{/ ~ I s SJ w " z w " 0 z $2 500 • APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET 0 500 • NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND Ill INCORPORATED AREAS PANEL 1003 OF 1725 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT ::>RiNTEDi CONTAl!~S: COMMUNITY KNG COUNTY. UN1NCOSPORA TED hREl\S NUMBER PANE:L SUFFIX 530071 1003 -''1·t" r.)f n,,,~· i~.-. ~ ~ . ~ ,'-,.·-s-,l.~•1l fJ1;:~nr1in(: l)ii,,:i~,i= .. ·,11 Mi>Y 2 ;j Lull MAP NUMBER __ 53033Cl003 F ,Dj f' 'f'' Ir.'.,''// ·-co ~.·~ 1 ' 1 ,,.;.1,;,ic;;/I, ls~~AP REv1sEo· uj, __..,.,_·'Y~,.-N • .a • \J; MAY 16, 1995 l@.~fh 'iiir~ifi'! ~ Federal Emergency Management Agency This is an official copy ofa portion of the above referenced flood map. It was extracted using F-MITOn-Une This map does not re1ect changes or amendments which may have been made subsequent to the date on the title block. For the latest product information about National Flood Insurance Program flood m~s check the FEMA Flood Map Store at www.m_sc.fema.gov Department of Community & Economic Development __.., 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057-3232 :::: !::! ~ ~# t-- Janlin Diaz 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd Renton, WA 98058 #5 t::: . __ i :1:: G kJri1:iS '? i.¥§.f;§./3 X i-eo NF'E .1 4;1,0C: ()0 0''5;'14/J,1. FORWARI) TIME CXP RTN TO SfO:NO DIAZ L.CRMA' .:lAf,L.:CN 23407 61ST AYES APT ZSOS }<ENT U.lf~ 3'80::J'_~--4~347 Ri;;T\,.ian'N TO :S:CNDE:.~;i 11, J,,J., J,ll,,,, I, I, I,,, I,, I I,,, I, I" JI,,, I, I, I, I,, I, J,,,, I I l ------------~~--.. ,.. Department of Community & Economic Development .._.., 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057-3232 CA ~ ~1: •'i:!~-) '1'4'}r!£ . <{3C' ) V I ~ Hung Van Pham 16405 SE Maple Valley Renton, WA 98058 #12 N:CXIE ' ·'M tie)/ OE: :l .SEND.ER 00 06°/ :t i _/ l ;t llo!~O .i::;ie:·ruRN TO AT'TEMPTED -- UNASL.E TO NOT KNc,wN F OR\iJ-A.}~D EJC ~ $1S0-5'7'-S~~~.;'!,.!, 'kc.'.2-S~~:i-o·;•J0!,8-0--J. l--"·;);$ :--. ,-~ r:._i)::G~~tio~1~iih~~!.3 II, I» l»L JI,,,, I, I ,I,,, !,,JI,,, I, I» I I,,, I ,I, I, I,, I, I,,,, 111 Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057-3232 . ~~esm~-_,,_.~,:,, .. @ml :r..,,, . ,,~~ • f1,'N'\_'<J,') 0#~~ r Cheryl Galer \ \" 01:J '-( 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 A-1 N:t:xre: ,a,so t)E: 1 00 0t3/.11_/,t.t RE"fLIFi'N TO SC:NOEfl ATTEMPTEC NOT MNOWN I...JNA9LE: TO FORWAJ•irO BCt 980~732S2S~ *~589-07882-~1-SS :N,,, .. ,, E. · ... -~=.; __ ~~,id!; 'i' i&siibfiji==~ 11 ,1,,1,, I, 11,,,, I ,LI,,, I, ,11,,, I, I,, 11,,, I, I, I, I,, i, I,,,, 111 >-'" ~ - 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057-3232 t O f Community ., , # Departmen Citv of ,,: '; ,Cmoom"'""''"'.'"' 1 ~r($ffila @: o\>< ~~ \ Qj Martin Schroeder \\C)l\ 16405 Maple Valley Road Renton, WA 98058 bt:i f=:. __ ;:~:: .-:~~Jd5·;iii&&J~:] N ! X :n: SSO DC ;t oo oe</.tI/U RE"fL/FlN TO SE:NOE:H 2NSUFF!CZENT ADDRESS 1...>NA~L.t:; 'TO FOJiW;.../'RD ec: sao.~7:~_zo.2~-!i *23SS-039~'?-1:L--8S l l,L, I,, I, II,,,, I, I, I,,, I, ,l l,,, I, I,, II,,, I, I, I, I,, I, I,,,, 111 munity ~ Department~:~~~pment [) ~n,~,ri) & Econom,c .~~ 1055 South Grady Way WA 98057-3232 Renton " .• ' City or hem on Planning C.1iv.irion rP:i ~~-f) ~ D 11//!C ff! w ti"fr I. I J\;vJ.-p1\J'. Lana Johnson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #7 Renton, WA 98058 N!XJ:F.: ;;;oo r,c .t oo o~;/:l.7/tJ. RE:"TURN TO :sa~.)'H)E~.N No-r OEt..:tve:n:Ae1Le; ~s ~oonr;ss::::o VNAE>L.E TO FORWARO E\C t 'iit-80 .. ~$7:Z~;~~-S-1> -,-1.:~_se,;,.--o.~o~l 7 -·.\ A---4-o C; !;;;i ;::::-.... ,:.C:i~l1~~:; iLinln !1 HnnLl1Ln !n If ·,nLf nHn1 L f i /i /11 /ii' 1 n1 H/ ---- f Community . of .ef', D P artment o t City lO@rru e . Developmen "' & Economic 1055 Sowu~ ;;;i~;_:;; 2 Renton /cY\.\_ .. it} c\ ,, ~\>1 ".: i"'i 1 ~i, . ' . ..... -.,..--·----,~:. ~ <J Carlos Barbo * 3501 NE 8th Street ~ • Renton, WA 98056 _,...~---··-:.:·~2--,.~.,·---·-·~ ... ·'··"'--···- r:._i_'*:c;;f·) -k~(ni:ffii;~ik N::t:X:CE sea Clt ;l 00 C5fil:;,/J_ L FrETLJRN TO SENC)ER NOT l:IEL. '.IVERAE1L..E AS ADfJRE~!-;t:r., UNASLE TO FORWARD EiC: 990.57'3~::J'25-.S *258W-00249-i~-~'l j I, I,~ 1~! L t_J, _,'!I, I, J ! l l J) l J J1 n J_, _I_, _l tJn 'L l ! j) J l ! _l 1 I 1, l ~JI l Department of Community & Economic Development .........ii-. fl < :itv nf ,,_ /.,V 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057-3232 City of Renton Planning Div1s1on p I f2 (C, '§' n \\ 11 r~ ,e5, tn1 Uc., -...:_Y \1 ~ LI W Li;; l.h:V '~ 0~~ \ tA~i, Mark Hoskinson 16405 Renton Maple Valley Hwy #30 Renton, WA 98058 Nl>CIE 980 o.: i 00 05/ 1.:;,/ t :t RETURN TO sa~::t-H)£~K ~lT'TF.:M!"TF.:D -Nc,·r KNCMN UNAEILE' ·ro .F'Of.?1,.)A.i:i't:: EiC i 980.S 7·:.;::;,,·:;i~.S.S *2S89-0210B-LS-43 ~w ~.ir~N•I c~1~c0 -··-· -··· ··· ·· · -900'!$ 7©:a!Z3':li-JJ,l.,l,,J ,II, .,,1,1,1,, ,I, ,JI,, ,I, I» II, ,,J, I ,I, I,, J, I,,,, I II -~--- Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057-3232 ~~L~~ City of Renton Planning Divi~101; Jan Ploegman '51Jc~'.r,(·"·i•~fl';fllt-;n..,.·. 16405 SE Maple Valley Road #1ohl ,-,. ... e:,lf:=LJ Yt ,_s,i)J; R.enton, WA 98058 f::._J/Gt'iJds7i~-:§if3 NIXIE~ ~eo c,i:: 1 oo C~/15/'J.1 RETURN TO SENDER ATTEMPTEO --NOT KNOWN UNAEJL_E ~ro .F'OF~W.1!'.t;-co ec: 990.S7::3'2·.2"~-S-S *~ssg-02io1--1s--4~ II. I,, I,, 1,11,,, ,I.I, I,,, I,, 11, ,,J ,I,, 11,,, I, I ,I, I,, I, i,,,, 111 Department of Community & Economic Development --1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057-3232 ~ 0~ffi~®ml fl '1;~1 SE3 Dionne R. Dunkel ~'\ 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Rd Renton, WA 98058 t:.· ._J 1.· Ci ~J d'5 ~/~sj,~-:8:~:~ DUNKEL. ~so N~~ 1 71cc oo 05/:t1/r1 J'lt:·rURN TO SE:Ni:,i;;;;i MOVED LEFT NO ADDRESS IJNt-)1:~H ... E;. TO roRWARO RE:TURN Tc:, ::S~Nt:tE~ ~C= Q80S?~2·02S5 *2S09··0o&•9--.Li·-40 ll,l,.11,LII,,,, I, I, I,,, I» IL» l,li,11,,,l,J,1,J,, i ,I,,,, I I I -- \. "'- "'-"'- CEDAR RIVER "-"- PARK \ PARCELi= -_J RA-5 zoNE TRACT ~ PARCEL f: II ~ 78Q645TRCT UNDEVELOPED AREA ./ /J\ I I I IVEffl;;=,.~· 1 •·1 / 2323()59188 \ RA-5 ZONE \ _ _/ - - I CEDAR Al\lER PAFI< TRAL ·~ \ "' "'----~--- ,,., ;r""".<1..;;· .-' lfH~;.., ·'::_/·'..': ,: .• -.-~11.11:,11"1 ... i·· . · ·.· ·.·. -,..· -,:"''·'"'" .. -~r·,;:.~·-.-_ ,;,:..f.ri i :/':'"-• • --- CEDAR RIVER PARK TRAL _,/' ./ -----AOOKBARN RA 1561H-S+ 7 /~ L 1· ' 11 TRA.·~···.·./<~· .•. ~i ~-~} l l~fil1~i1'~ll14]'1511611;-11 /~1 I 9 J I~ "¢k .. :· .. ,.,,.~;/·.1\ ' ;~ I ----~I J • >:~/t·L--.-:--J =:-J '.__J I__J I__J I__J I__J L_ l,, L-~~ t/[ . ,'r--f~!u.1 -- --se j'FPTr .' .. ·.•. ,' /.... / -----~ ~~~ -· A>b.~ ' vvn I si; , . < . cc ,,-- 1 / /, .,· / '.,·' j I I . . .. · : ' .. ·· .. ·· ·/·/···.···•.,..'.-oPEN I ~·-111::_J11-:1r>' //1'" ~I""' 11i--1 1: 111 '/ rr \. !·,/··./?~ .. A, SPA' CE I ---=L::::JL L-L UH~/ t-[ PARCEL t: 2423()59011 ---- "' I ~CT~ \ ~Cts"'J/,-::1-J, ROADC_ ~ ,(~ . ~/.-. '\ ' \ ~ 119 I IJ1ol1;il1jiol1:11Gl1, ,'F;t I ', R-8 ZONE \ ~.·., -. "---~ ~HU/b--l'lJ/u~·,1LJ~/ ~;:: ""~ -----~ -. · . · ~ -'.J.: -~~ J / u, I 1 \ ~ __l ---1---~· · .. · " ....... -~. ~ -.-.(~. 17~ 'i,TRACTHzl~ , ,~. '--~ ---I ' NGPA O :, ' -R-1 ZONE "-· . . · -,--· ..,. . . ~ ::::::::::_ . 1 ' ffi O I -.__ ~ -. • . ,· . '">-~/ () I (RENTON) 11 -(KING COUNTY) .. ·· ,c_-'--~\;tc;;,_~ ~ --,--. -c~ .c--c: ~ '-i a: ~ --··-· . ~ ; .c..-JTRACT G -\ \' .· ': ~ ----\-\ \ I.. ( "" " " " " " " " " ·, " 100 0 50 100 ~-• 1 I --GRAPHIC SCALE 1·-100· " '· ', " " ' " " ' NGPA . \ ' \ 200 l CEDAR RIVER 200' BUFFER MAP 1 · .. R-8 ZONE I '{RENTON) ' FIA-5 ZONE I (KING COUNTY) I NOT PART OF, r, -. j ... /""". M.a ~· (. -. 'ir1,, .. ' ' :.IJ!( AOUA BARN RANCH pARCELt: 2423059013 • • • Office of the City Clerk 1055 South Grady Way-Renton WA 98057-3232 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED . . . .e Lity Clerk 1t~rni~@IID e >uth Grady Way-Renton WA 98057-3232 ESS SERVICE REQUESTED Vince Gaglia ~ Conditions of Deve.-pment McCormick Preliminary Plat-,.d PUD LUA11-034 Project Condition Source of When Party Notes Conditio Compliance Responsibl n is Required e The debris flow mitigation berm shall ERC Construction Developer/ be constructed as a part of the plat permit, prior Contractor to final plat infrastructure installation. The berm recording shall be inspected and a letter of approval shall be submitted to the City from Otak verifying compliance with the standards specified within their May 17, 2010 Geomorphic and Deberis Flow Analysis. The construction and certification letter shall be received by the Planning Division prior to final plat recording. A final Debris Flow Mitigation Area ERC Prior to final Developer/ Maintenance Plan including plat recording Contractor engineering details shall be submitted and approved by City of Renton Project Manager prior to Final Plat approval; this plan shall be made available to the new residence of the McCormick Plat and shall be included as part of the neighborhood Code, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R). Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 1 of 16 Conditions of Deve,vpment McCormick Preliminary Plat d PUD LUA11-034 The applicant shall comply with the ERC Construction Developer/ recommendations found in the permit and Contractor building geotechnical report prepared by permit Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, and the recommendations included in the Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, prepared by Otak, dated May 17, 2010. Including but not limited to: a. The installation of a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. b. A 25-foot buffer should be established from the southeastern slope. C. If soil is deposited into the buffer via landslides and/or soil movement, the soil should be removed within a few weeks to keep the buffers free to "catch" more soil in the future. d. All foundations shall be supported on at least 2 feet of structural fill, non individual footings should be used, and foundations should be designed to span 10-feet unsupported. The vehicle storage area/parking ERC Prior to final Developer/ area located on the southern portion plat recording Contractor of the site shall be decommissioned and the area shall be re-vegetated to the minimum amount necessary to prevent erosion; this re-vegetation shall be included in the final mitigation and monitoring plan for stream buffer reduction. The final mitigation and monitoring plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department Project Manager for review and approval prior to final plat recording. Updated: 03129/1212 Page 2 of 16 Conditions of Deve.-pment McCormick Preliminary Plat ~ .. d PUD LUA11-034 The applicant shall comply with the ERC During project Applicant/ recommendations found in the construction Developer/ Revised Critical Areas Report & and 5 years Contractor thereafter for Supplemental Stream Study, maintenance prepared by Sewall Wetland and Consulting, Inc., dated August 12, monitoring 2011. Construction fencing and silt fencing ERC During project Developer/ shall be placed along the buffer (or construction Contractor reduced buffer) of the stream and wetlands during construction. During construction of the debris flow mitigation berm, the fencing may be moved south to provide space to construct the berm within the buffer area. Additional downstream analysis shall ERC Prior to Applicant/ be conducted to analyze the impacts construction Developer/ permit Contractor of storm water runoff on Ron Regis issuance Park and any impacts to the Park shall be mitigated. This analysis can be included in the Drainage Report submitted with the construction permit application. If any Native American grave(s) or ERC During project Developer/ archaeological/cultural resources construction Contractor (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton Planning Division, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. The applicant shall comply with the ERC During project Developer/ recommendations found in the construction, Contractor Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by prior to final plat recording TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010, that was submitted with the project application and provided a right turn pocket along SR-169 for safe access to the subject site. Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 3 of 16 Conditions of Dev~,~pment McCormick Preliminary Plat _,,d PUD LUA11-034 The applicant shall pay the Traffic ERC To be Applicant/ Impact/Mitigation Fee as required at determined. Developer/ Contractor the time of Final Plat recording, Construction Permit, or Building Permit based on the codes in place at that time. The owner of the Valley View Mobile ERC Prior to Applicnat Home Park ("owner") voluntarily agrees commenceme and shall pay the relocation cost of the nt of homeowners within the Valley View construction and prior to Mobile Home Park subject to the final plat following conditions: recording The relocation assistance program currently administered by the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program 11 ) must exist at the time notice of closure of the Park is provided by the Owner; Assistance shall be provided to all homeowners that reside within Valley View Mobile Home Park at the time of park closure notice and meet the State Relocation Assistance Program income requirements for eligibility, however those homeowners whom qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the homeowners qualification; The Owner will pay up to $7,500 for a single-section home and $12,000 for a multi-section home, the funds would be paid only those relocation cost for which the State Relocation Assistance Program provides reimbursement, including but not limited to removal and reattachment of attached awnings, decks, and stairs; prep for transport; moving the home; permits; hook-ups to all utilities; rental of moving equipment; repair of damage caused during transport; or demolition and a down payment for another manufactured home; and The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. Updated 03/29/1212 Page 4 of 16 Conditions of Deve.-pment McCormick Preliminary Plat-.. d PUD LUA11-034 Information shall be posted on site HEX Immediately Applicant visible to the residents notifying them of any land use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. The notice shall be posted prior to submittal to the City or the same day as the submittal. The applicant shall construct street HEX Final PUD Developer/ frontage improvements, as modified in Contractor Exhibit 31, Staff Recommendation, Approved Modification form Renton Municipal Code (RM(). These improvements shall be shown on the final PUD application, and reviewed and approved by the Engineering Plan Review Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 5 of 16 Conditions of Deve,upment McCormick Preliminary Plat a .. d PUD LUA11-034 The applicant shall submit a detailed final HEX Final PUD Applicanu landscape plan for review and approval by Developer/ Contractor the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The detailed final landscape plan shall include, but is not limited to the following: a. Proposed locations and design details of benches and interpretive signage proposed along the soft surface trial. b. Street trees shall be identified in compliance with the City's street tree standards. c. The plan shall indicate either 100 percent drought tolerant plantings or the applicant shall provide a final irrigation plan with the final detailed landscape plan. d. The plan shall include exact numbers of trees, shrubs, and groundcover and shall include specific locations for the shrubs and ground cover. e. The plan shall identify the existing location and number of trees with a two inch caliper or greater and the applicant shall protect and/or replace all of these trees as required by the City's tree retention ordinance, RMC 4-4-130. See Conclusion of Law No. 9. The park shall be moved east by one lot to HEX Final PUD ApplicanU align with Road A, and adjusting Lot 34 to Developer be the northwest corner lot of the internal portion of the development. This change shall be reflected on the final PUD application materials. Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 6 of 16 Conditions of Dev~,vpment McCormick Preliminary Plat u .. d PUD LUA11-034 The detention facility shall be re-designed HEX Final PUD Applicant/ to become an integral part of the open Developer space system. The design shall meet the City's stormwater requirements and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. All crosswalks in the development shall be HEX Final PUD Applicant/ differentiated by material or texture from Developer adjacent paving materials and shall be at least six feet in width. An updated site plan depicting proposed materials or texture for crosswalks shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan HEX Prior to Applicant/ for review and approval by the Current construction Developer permit Planning Project Manager prior to issuance construction permit issuance. The lighting plan shall contain pedestrian lighting in addition to building and landscaping lighting if proposed. The applicant shall revise the utility plan HEX Prior to final Applicant/ to depict a 1-inch water meter to all lots. plat recording Developer The revised plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Plan Review Project Manager prior to Final Plat recording Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 7 of 16 Conditions of Dev~,~pment McCormick Preliminary Plat u .. d PUD LUA11-034 The applicant shall establish a home HEX Prior to final Applicant/ owners' association for the PUD approval Developer development, which would be responsible for any common improvements, including but not limited to the soft surface trail, landscaping, and park within the PUD. The draft CCR's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney, prior to final PUD approval. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be permanently maintained by the PUD home owners' association. The CCR's shall provide that any covenants required by the City may not be amended without City approval. The applicant shall establish and record a HEX Prior to final Applicant/ permanent and irrevocable easement on plat recording Developer and during the property title for all critical areas and project their buffers prior to Final Plat recording. construction The protective easement shall be held by current and future property owners; shall run with the land; and shall prohibit development, alteration, and disturbance within the easement except for the purposes of habitat enhancement as a part of an enhancement project, access for the trail users and maintenance, and debris flow mitigation access for landslide events. Furthermore, these areas shall be fenced with split rail fencing, providing designated access points along the trail and necessary access for debris removal in the event of a landslide. In addition, the large portion of the site that is located in King County shall be recorded in a separate critical areas tract that is consistent with King County Code section 21A.24, and shall have an NGPE or similar easement consistent with KKC recorded on this tract Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 8 of 16 Conditions of Dev~,~pment McCormick Preliminary Plat .... d PUD LUA11-034 The Park shall be placed in a recreation HEX Final PUD Applicant/ tract, this designation shall be identified Developer on the final PUD and Plat Plan, prior to Final Plat recording. A covenant shall be placed on all HEX Prior to final Applicant/ tracts restricting their separate sale plat recording Developer and giving each lot owner within the plat an undivided interest in the tracts. This covenant should be recorded on the face of the plat, and/or concurrent with the plat recording, noting the recording number on the plat. A street lighting plan shall be submitted HEX Prior to Applicant/ with the construction permit application construction Developer for review and approval by the Plan permit issuance Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. A note shall be placed on the face of the HEX Prior to final Applicant plat requiring proposed Lots 8-11 to gain plat recording access from the proposed access easement, Tract D. The note shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. The applicant shall apply for and HEX Prior to Applicant successfully obtain a Shoreline Substantial construction permit Development Permit, prior to issuance construction permit issuance. The applicant shall submit a final stream HEX Prior to final Applicant buffer mitigation and monitoring plan PUD approval that complies with the criteria included in RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 3-4-050. The applicant shall provide the final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan for review and approval to the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. Updated: 0312911212 Page 9 of 16 Conditions of Deve,upment McConnick Preliminary Plat -.. d PUD LUA11-034 The applicant shall provide a trail detail HEX Prior to final Applicant for review and approval by the Current PUD approval Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval, showing compliance with the criteria in RMC 4-3-0SOC.7.a specifically the trail surface materials. The applicant shall submit a detailed HEX Prior to final Applicant wetland buffer enhancement plan that is PUD approval compliant with RMC 4-3-050 for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. Temporary construction fencing shall be HEX Prior to Developer/ installed along the utility corridor within construction Contractor permit the buffer, to isolate the area of issuance disturbance and reduce potential further impacts. Construction fencing shall be shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. The applicant shall provide the Current HEX Prior to final Applicant Planning Project Manager, a water line PUD approval installation plan, which complies with RMC 4-3-0SOL.8.b.i.(b) for review and approval, prior to final PUD approval. The applicant shall provide the Current HEX Prior to final Applicant Planning Project Manager, an utility PUD approval installation analysis, prepared by a certified biologist, that addresses criterion 4-3-0SOL.8.b.i.(d) and is accepted by the Administrator of Community and Economic Development or Designee, prior to final PUD approval. If the report concludes there would be impacts, as identified in this criterion, the installation of the water line would be denied. Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 10 of 16 Conditions of Deve,opment McCormick Preliminary Plat :. .. d PUD LUA11-034 Construction of the water line shall be HEX During project Developer/ limited to June through August when construction Contractor stream flows are anticipated to be low and that City Staff is contacted to verify little to no flow within the stream bed before construction commences. The common boundary between the HEX Prior to final Developer/ native growth protection tract and the plat recording Contractor abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include a permanent wood split rail fence and metal signs on treated or metal posts. The permanent wood split rail fence and signs shall be installed prior to Final Plat recording. The following note shall appear on the HEX Prior to final Applicant face of the Final Plat and shall also be plat recording recorded as a covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created or benefitting from this City action abutting or including a native growth protection tract are responsible for maintenance and protection of the tract. Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been received." Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 11 of 16 Conditions of Deve,opment McCormick Preliminary Plat ~ .. d PUD LUA11-034 Temporary construction fencing shall be HEX Prior to Developer/ installed along the edge of the wetlands construction Contractor permit and stream buffer areas, to clearly issuance identify the edge of the critical areas during the construction phase of the development. This fencing may encroach within the stream buffer, in approved temporary construction locations per the provided Critical Areas report, for the construction of the storm water pond. Construction fencing shall be shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning project manager prior to construction permit issuance. Tract Don the preliminary plat map, Ex. 2, HEX Prior to final Applicant shall be identified as an access and utility PUD tract and shall comply with City street standards as contemplated in RMC 4-7- 170(B). All proposed street names shall be HEX Prior to final Applicant submitted to the City and approved by the plat recording City prior to final plat approval. All subdivision streets shall comply with HEX Prior to final Developer/ the street standards of RMC 4-6-060 as PUD approval Contractor contemplated in RMC 4-7-lSO(D). All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-HEX During project Applicant of-way dedicated as part of the plat, construction including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee. Road A, Band C as depicted in Ex. 2 shall HEX At final plat Applicant be dedicated to the public. recording Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 12 of 16 Conditions of Dev.,,opment McCormick Preliminary Plat u .. d PUD LUA11-034 All lot corners at intersections of HEX Construction Applicant dedicated public rights-of-way, except permit alleys, shall have a minimum radius of application fifteen feet (15') as contemplated by RMC 4-7-170(E). Sanitary sewers shall be provided by the HEX During project Developer/ developer at no cost to the City and construction Contractor designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. As contemplated in RMC 4-7-200(B), cross HEX Construction Developer/ drains shall be provided to accommodate permit Contractor all natural water flow and shall be of application sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. The water distribution system including HEX Construction Developer/ the locations of fire hydrants shall be permit Contractor designed and installed in accordance with app I ication City standards as defined by the Department and Fire Department requirements as contemplated in RMC 4- 7-200((), Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 13 of 16 Conditions of Deve,opment McCormick Preliminary Plat u .. d PUD LUA11-034 All utilities designed to serve the HEX During project Developer/ subdivision shall be placed underground. construction Contractor Any utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department of Community and Economic Development. Any cable TV conduits shall be HEX During project Developer undergrounded at the same time as other construction basic utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. Updated: 03/29/1212 Page 14 of 16 Conditions of Dev ___ pment McCormick Preliminary Plat g .. d PUD LUA11-034 Concrete permanent control monuments HEX During project Applicant/ shall be established at each and every construction Surveyor controlling corner of the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department of Community and Economic Development. All surveys shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards. All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards. The applicant shall install all street name HEX Prior to final Developer/ signs necessary in the subdivision. plat recording, Contractor during project construction The applicant shall demonstrate HEX Prior to Developer/ compliance with the private open space building Home permit Builder standards of RMC 4-9-150(E)(2) for each issuance lot prior to and as a requirement for building permit issuance. Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant HEX For the life of Applicant/ to requirements of RMC 4-4-070. the project Developer Prior to the issuance of any occupancy HEX Prior to any Developer/ permits, all common facilities, including occupancy Contractor but not limited to utilities, storm permits drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the applicant or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9- 060. Water and sanitary sewer availability HEX Prior to final Applicant certificates will be acquired prior to final plat approval plat approval. Updated: 0312911212 Page 15 of 16 Conditions of Dev~.opment McCormick Preliminary Plat u .. d PUD LUA11-034 All common area and open space shall be HEX Within one Applicant landscaped in accordance with the year of the approval of landscaping plan submitted by the the Final applicant and approved by the City; PUD, prior to provided, that common open space final plat recording. containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. Updated: 0312911212 Page 16 of 16 I ' , , If·. Office of the City Clerk -ibJ'. c., ty o~ ,8 ~~Jlllu.@J]l ~ 1055 South Grady Way-Renton WA 98057-3232 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED • W,<,i,, Check Requr 'for Non Vendor Refund or mbursement This form is to be used or,, .1or one time vendors. Please contact Accounts Payable if you have any questions regarding one time vendors. Check will he included in the next scheduled AIP check run and mailed after Council approval. Check Request Info: / DJte of request: 2._ 2 2011.. Requestawartment/division: Requestor 's ext. #: x,z1i1 • Mail address for check: Check amount: Account numberf) to .chart Amount per account #: $ 9££0 .oo OOQ.tJOOOC>O-oo · 8l.J5-j .0{),0/9 Cf Go. OD Ch.eek handling request: fl1ai l , · *A roval Si nature: Requestor 's Department Administrator, Division Director or designee: type name of signer on above line Date: *The person approving this check request must be an authorized signer. Q:\DAT A_ Center\Fonns\Finance\2007 _Check Request for Non Vendor Refund or Reimbur~ement (online typeable).doc Online Typrnble Frn-m, July 2007 Printed: 02-02-2012 Payment Made: CITY OF RENTON 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Land Use Actions RECEIPT Perm it#: LUA 11-034 02/02/2012 03:59 PM Receipt Number: R1200470 Total Payment: -960.00 Payee: Valley View Mobile Home Park Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description Amount 5022 000.000000.007.345 Variance Fees -960.00 Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount Payment RD Pmts REFUND Re-Dist Account Balances Trans Account ~ode 3021 3080 3954 5006 5007 5008 5009 5010 5011 5012 5013 303.000000.020.345 503.000000.004.322 650.000000.000.237 000.000000.007.345 000.000000.011.345 000.000000.007.345 000.000000.007.345 000.000000.007.345 000.000000.007.345 000.000000.007.345 000.000000.007.345 Description Park Mitigation Fee Technology Fee Special Deposits Annexation Fees Appeals/Waivers Binding Site/Short Plat Conditional Use Fees Environmental Review Prelim/Tentative Plat Final Plat PUD 5014 000.000000.007.345 Grading & Filling Fees 5015 000.000000.007.345 Lot Line Adjustment 5016 000.000000.007.345 Mobile Home Parks 5017 000.000000.007.345 Rezone 5018 000.000000.007.345 Routine Vegetation Mgmt 5019 000.000000.007.345 Shoreline Subst Dev 5020 000.000000.007.345 Site Plan Approval 5021 OOO.OOOOD0.007.345 Temp Use, Hobbyk, Fence 5022 OOO.DDDDD0.007.345 Variance Fees 5024 000.000000.007.345 Conditional Approval Fee 5036 000.000000.007.345 Comprehensive Plan Amend 5909 ODD.DDDDDD.002.341 Booklets/EIS/Copies 5941 000.000000.007.341 Maps (Taxable) 5998 OOO.ODDD00.000.231 Tax -960.00 . 00 Balance Due .DO .00 .00 .00 .00 .oo .OD .00 .00 .OD .00 .00 .OD .00 .00 .DO .00 .00 .00 .DO .00 .00 .OD .00 .00 I Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 ' Denis Law -_.:May:.or -------[; . t\ ;__. --- February 1, :2012 Vince Gaglia 11410 NE 1241h St, Suite 596 Kirkland, WA 98034 Ed Sewall 27641 Covington Way SE, Suite #2 Covington, WA 98042 City Clerk -Bonnie I. Walton Victoria Andes 15445 53rd Ave South Tukwila; WA 98198 Rob Ward 13256 NE 201 h St., Suite #16 Bellevue, WA 98005 Re: Decision for McCormick Plat, LUA-11-034, ECF; PP, V-A, PPUD Dear Parties of Record: Attached is a copy of the Hearing Examiner's Decision dated January 20, 2012, in th_e above- referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Enc.: Hearing Examiner's Decision cc: Hearing Examiner Lamy Warren, City Attorney Vanessa Dolbee; Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Neil Watts, Development Service Director Stacy Tucker, Development Services 1055South Grady Way , Renton, Washington 98057 , (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516, rentonwa.gov N ci. ~ a ~ ~ a, <D as "' .l'l ~ .c 0 C ~ ~ C. ~ ".": 0 N ~ ll) N C ro ' . . · · CITY OF RENTON LAND USE HEARING SIGN-IN SHEET (McCormick Plat LUAl!N~~9') . PLEASE P·RINT LEGIBLY . RECEIVED ,DDRES.~ ·,~· . ·-_. ·---Phqne # with are" code _____ N.-'A-'M-'-E_ ~ (inc/udlngC/ty&Zlp) (option.al/ /t11o Ni;: /~.!I-S-f #S--16 ... ~----1· [of'_tlonal) \ ., ' .. -~ (fl'-9'--/f/ I ,s~s"'_~1T~ _r+ "ft,(J:;k. lfil\b )~_·:·_ '· ~ti9·'1·· .D I -r., WvJ\ 'i °' \Mir °' q,~ . \!:"' · ·. ..••.. . . J~CJ,;:: VC\Ltl'\3 LO'll1 ' .·.,, . ' . \(. · · · \JaY\~e s @ y;uc. t.Vl:_) L~ \' ~..,.J/-w~/t....A a.;:;,. .... T~ 2-, t. LI I C'~ v 11,:, 1.,,j w.._,, te.. .ti-2-... /'w,.,,.,jj.,-,_ W.,,._/ 't!fO...., L .. s··~ .. \le & ...__,"' // w c. • c.'""" 13m~~.~%:\ttk . 1 • -vv • ,, ..... I, ~f .... E-,.;-u-:::"-"'--"q{!-'oo""'· . .._<-.;:,,,..-___ ---+-----~ l-----~- •'f'-"'" V v~,-w 'If' Id.JIil,,( ,~ l{o~ 3 L ifiABP{ I}, UM!f <I 4-11 b<?;5 br4i f,11.01.J.t? I I / _(;t/OS-M«p/~ V:: II e y Hwy ¥s2 C r./J.sj lfl./1-t/~ a8 :3/1,vorkwr",16"-J] iJ.f/O,cO h ~nton lJA: C,8CJS 8 /J "' Ir /11 0. .,, II, lf,;S 191,.l'/.P.. J,J,..//r-.Y ll":;'#33 .. A' e.,,1-.,, , w/f "l'i ".s r .... , 1;-r· . l(::x.:r-....v--.>--4.-, v,J..Q ~l ,,,,\ \ ,-· /-~1-.;b1.;l --"'~t \ ?).. .. ; , 1 ,,__---.-, '::.;.,... \.,.c,;>1. J, ,-n:,,..,..,..._---..._ c}tr-...o__r.-J)("-, ,-·\.:---,._....n ,:.,_r<··\. w-e cu-<: .. , .. 1 O..}.t>..D , .. · , · ·-~ · .. A ... ,~ ' .. ·. \ . J' \, .. C. ',i'" I , 1 k-i,,:.,,W , \-C,_i;, • '? clu cu"-,._,I \ . , 4 • . "-..,. •. +- {"{y.., v-.. r-. . ~~ C ,.,...,,\,. • ~,.-",,,,j ;iS),2 73-l;,SSl_ /lit" wad.:"""'"' €V,,,,,.,.c.,., ( 09(8/09fS@ hJ8A\f 88AE 8JQ!lBdWOJ WW L9 X WW So JBWJOJ ap ananb!l3 tfs#W~-J Courtney Kayl~r Attorney at Law McCullough Hill Leary, PS 701 Fifth Avenue #7220 Seattle, WA 98104 Jose Rodriguez Montoya 16405 SE Maple Valley Road #9 Renton, WA 98058 Monica Crystal Garnice 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #20 Renton, WA 98058 Jose R. Cisneros 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy #24 Renton, WA 98058 Feliciano Galvez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #27 Renton, WA 98058 Hallie Sword PO Box 6314 Federal Way, WA 98063 Lauren D. Mclees Allen 16405 Renton Maple Valley Road #53 Renton, WA 98058 Bill Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #33 Renton, WA 98058 Robert McCormick 161 Maple Way Road Selah, WA 98942 Joe Castillo 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd #6 Renton, WA 98058 e-,&;!+1 --'8/09 lS@ hJ8A\f 4JIM 81Q!JEdWOJ "8/S o X ,J 8Z!S 1aqe , i , Juanita Shields 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #41 Renton, WA 98058 . Jose Garibay 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #1 Renton, WA 98058 Fernandez Alejandre 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #20 Renton, WA 98058 Tien Tran 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #25 Renton, WA 98058 Doug Peterson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #17 Renton, WA 98058 Carl McMurtry 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #32 i · j Renton, WA 98058 I . Clyde Arnold 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #46 Renton, WA 98058 ! ! Barbara Workm 16405 Map alley Hwy #33 A98058 Greg Diener, P.E. Pacific Engineeri esign LLC 15445 53rd enue S #100 Seattle, A 98188 Rita Smith & Robert Barnes 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #38 Renton, WA 98058 Dan Greggs 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd #3 Renton, WA 98058 Ruth Martinez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #1 Renton, WA 98058 Sandra Workm 16405 Map alley Hwy #33 Renton A 98058 · ' David Serrano [ 16405 SE Maple Valley Road #28 Renton, WA 98058 i John Brigham · 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #36 Renton, WA 98058 Herb Wendland 16405 SE Ma Valley Hwy #16. Renton, 98058 i ' , ' ' i Esther Lopez ' 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #8 Renton, WA 98058 Resident 2820 SW 110th Place Seattle, WA 98146 Mr. & Mrs. Daniel Desjardins, Jr. 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #44 Renton, WA 98058 Maria Concepcion Perez Syal a 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #45 Renton, WA 98058 label size 1" x 2 5/8" compatible with Avery ®5160/8160 Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery ®5160/8160 ; Danh Cao Dinh 411164th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Toni Dinius 1512 6th Street Renton, WA 98057 09 ,8109 ,s~ AJ8/,\f J81,B a1q11rdWOJ WW L9 X WW Si: )EWJOJ8P 8ij60bl)3 ro,8/091S@liJaA\l 4llM a1qqrdwoJ .. 8/S 6 x ,J ezrs 1eqe · ! 1 Edward D. Tharp, Jr. 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #18 ' Renton, WA 98058 , Miguel Mendoza I 16405 Maple Valley Road SE #29 · Renton, WA 98058 J I I I I Herb Wendi an 16405 SE pie Valley Hwy #16 A 98058 Myrtle Olson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #23 Renton, WA 98058 label size 1" x 2 518" compatible with Avery ®5160/8160 Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Averv ®5160/8160 Denis Law Mayor January 23, 2012 Robert McCormick 161 Maple Way Road Selah, WA 98942 City Clerk -Bonriie I. Walton Greg Diener, P.E., Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 53'd Avenue South, Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98188 Re: Decision for McCormick Plat, LUA-11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Dear Mr. McCormick & Mr. Diener: Attached is your copy of the Hearing Examiner's Decision dated January 20, 2012, in the above- referenced matter. If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Enc.: Hearing Examiner's Decision cc: Hearing Examiner Larry Warren, City Attorney Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Neil Watts, Development Service Director Stacy Tucker, Development Services Parties of Record (34) 10SS South Grady Way• Renton, Washington 98057 , (42S) 43o-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516, rentonwa.gov January 23, 2012 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) ) § ) BONNIE I. WALTON, City Clerk for the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. That on the 23rl:I day of January, 2012, at the hour of 4:30 p.m. your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail to all parties of record a Final Decision from the Hearing Examiner in the McCormick Plat (LUA- 11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD) Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk \ Cynthi R. Moya Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing in Renton My Commission expires: 8/27/2014 09(8/09(S~ AJ8AV J8/,P a1q11edWOJ WW L9 X WW s;; )PWJOjap apanb113 Courtney Kaylor Attorney at Law McCullough Hill Leary, PS 701 Fifth Avenue #7220 Seattle, WA 98104 Jose Rodriguez Montoya 16405 SE Maple Valley Road #9 Renton, WA 98058 Monica Crystal Garnice 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #20 Renton, WA 98058 Jose R. Cisneros 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy #24 Renton, WA 98058 Feliciano Galvez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #27 Renton, WA 98058 Hallie Sword PO Box 6314 Federal Way, WA 98063 Lauren D. Mclees Allen 16405 Renton Maple Valley Road #53 Renton, WA 98058 Bill Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #33 Renton, WA 98058 Robert McCormick 161 Maple Way Road Selah, WA 98942 Joe Castillo 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd #6 Renton, WA 98058 QQ' 8/09 fSc. /uaAv 411M a1q11rctwoJ .. 8/S ;; x ,J azrs 1aqe1 · Juanita Shields 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #41 Renton, WA 98058 Jose Garibay 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #1 Renton, WA 98058 Fernandez Alejandre 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #20 Renton, WA 98058 . Tien Tran 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #25 Renton, WA 98058 Doug Peterson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #17 Renton, WA 98058 Carl McMurtry 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #32 Renton, WA 98058 Clyde Arnold 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #46 Renton, WA 98058 Barbara Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #33 Renton, WA 98058 Greg Diener, P.E. Pacific Engineering Design LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S #100 Seattle, WA 98188 Rita Smith & Robert Barnes 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #38 Renton, WA 98058 Dan Greggs 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd #3 Renton, WA 98058 Ruth Martinez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #1 Renton, WA 98058 Sandra Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #33 Renton, WA 98058 David Serrano 16405 SE Maple Valley Road #28 Renton, WA 98058 John Brigham 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #36 Renton, WA 98058 Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #16 Renton, WA 98058 Esther Lopez 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #8 Renton, WA 98058 Resident 2820 SW 110th Place Seattle, WA 98146 Mr. & Mrs. Daniel Desjardins, Jr. 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #44 Renton, WA 98058 Maria Concepcion Perez Syala 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #45 Renton, WA 98058 label size 1" x 2 5/8" compatible with Avery ®5160/8160 Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery ®5160/8160 Danh Cao Dinh 411164th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Toni Dinius 1512 6th Street Renton, WA 98057 ~i4Nf+1 09 l8i09lSc, 1\Ja,w 88/,B a1q11edW08 WW L9 X WW SC: )BWJOJ ap ananb1;3 lii!MFi oa (8/09 lSrc: AJaA\f 4)11,\ 81Ql)BdW08 ,.g;g C: X .J 8ZIS 1aqe1 , Edward D. Tharp, Jr. 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #18 Renton, WA 98058 Miguel Mendoza 16405 Maple Valley Road SE #29 Renton, WA 98058 Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #16 Renton, WA 98058 Myrtle Olson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #23 Renton, WA 98058 label size 1" x 2 5/8" compatible with Avery ®5160/8160 Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery ®5160/8160 • • Hearing Examiner's Decision ' . , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 JI,,, 2 . ,,i'I 4 2012 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFF/Cc BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: McCormick Plat Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development LUA! 1-034, ECF, PP, PPUD ) ) ) FINAL DECISION ) ) ) ) ) Summary 16 Robert McCormick has applied for approval of an application for a 34 lot preliminary plat and planned urban development ("PUD"). The application also includes a request to reduce portions of 17 a 75 foot buffer to a Class III stream to 60 feet and an alteration of the buffer to enable a waterline crossing. The project site currently accommodates a 40 unit mobile home park and the applicant will 18 have to vacate the park to develop the subdivision. The application and associated stream buffer 19 modifications are approved subject to conditions. Requested modifications to development standards as authorized by PUD regulations are approved to the extent recommended by staff. 20 The project's compliance with applicable development standards was virtually uncontested. The 21 Muckleshoot Tribe provide some written concerns and many of those concerns were addressed by 22 staff in its recommended conditions of approval. As is evident from the record, all project impacts were thoroughly assessed and mitigated. Most of the staffs analysis and most of its recommended 23 conditions of approval was adopted without any need for modification. Numerous conditions of approval were added to assure compliance with permitting criteria. It is likely that staff had already 24 ensured that the project would comply with these conditions, but this was not evident from the administrative record. 25 26 There was only one revision to the staff recommended conditions of approval that may require some marginally significant revision to the project, regarding a re-assessment of compliance with the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -1 t I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 City's tree retention regulations. The staff report provides for an inventory of trees with 6-inch caliper or greater and bases retention and replacement requirements on those numbers. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 9, the City's tree retention ordinance requires protection of all trees with a 2-inch caliper or greater. It may well be that the staff report doesn't mention trees between 2 and 6- inch caliper because none are present at the project site. However, if there are trees in that range the conditions of approval require that they be included in the applicant's tree retention plan. If staff or the applicant have some code basis to argue that tree retention requirements only apply to the 6-inch plus trees, a reconsideration request is highly encouraged. Several persons attended the hearing, but no members of the public expressed any concerns about regulatory compliance. The people at the hearing are mobile home owners living in the park and they were understandably concerned about their relocation. As explained by the Examiner at the hearing, the City has little authority to alleviate the problems this project will introduce into their lives. What help can be provided is mostly available through state law as opposed to City regulations. RCW 59.21.030 requires the applicant to provide twelve months' notice to the mobile home owners prior to the termination of their tenancy. The applicant can provide this notice anytime he chooses and mobile home owners should consult with the applicant to determine when he intends to send out the notice. Washington State also provides relocation monies to low income mobile home owners. In Condition 11 of the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA"), Chapter 43.21C RCW Mitigated Determination ofNonsignificance ("MDNS") the applicant has voluntarily agreed to advance the funds provided by the state to those who would qualify for the funds. According to the applicant at the hearing, without the advanced funding qualified owners may not get funds from the state until well after they've incurred relocation expenses. For those who would like more information on the state relocation program, the Washington State Department of Commerce has a website with information at http://www.cornmerce.wa.gov/site/484/default.aspx. Note that the website provided by the applicant in Ex. 36 is no longer active since the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic development was absorbed into the Washington State Department of Commerce. The Department of Commerce can also be reached if you have questions about the relocation program at 1-800-964-0852. Testimony Staff Testimony Vanessa Dolbee, senior planner for city of Renton, stated the application is for a for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. She noted exhibit 18, the neighborhood detail map, which demonstrates the site is on the south side of Maple Valley Highway and a portion of the property lies in King County, not Renton. Ms. Dolbee testified that the property is designated residential, single family (R-8) in the city. She said the portion of the site within Renton is 7.32 acres, and the map (exhibit 18) denotes which sections of the property are in the city and PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -2 ' I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 which are in King County. The section of the site to be developed is located in Renton, yet the part in King County is still being processed within this application. She noted that across from Maple Valley Highway is King County park property that is zoned RA-5, to the east is property zoned R-A5, to the south there is vacant land zoned RA-lOP and R-1, and to the west is R-8 which is the Summerfield residential development. Ms. Dolbee testified that exhibit 32 is a vested King County plat for the same property (also for a 34- lot subdivision), which is proposal LUA-068 for King County. Due to this vested application, this proposal is unique because the comparison for public benefit improvements needs to be balanced according to both Renton standards and King County standards, Ms. Dolbee noted. The old plat proposal for King County has cul-de-sacs and a t-access easement for the lots, but, according to Ms. Dolbee, in the new plan there is a looped road system, alley-loaded homes, vertical curves/sidewalks, a trail system, and a large vegetative buffer along the Maple Valley Highway. Additionally, she commented that there is an increase in critical area protection in the lots along the south-side in the new proposal. Ms. Dolbee stated that exhibit 2 is the applicant's proposal. The proposal is for lots ranging from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet, resulting in a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per acre, she said. Ms. Dolbee noted that there are nine tracts proposed including a storm-water tract, aid and growth protection tracts, access and utility tracts, open space, a lopped trail system (1/3 of a mile long), a play area in the center, and a hierarchical road system. According to Ms. Dolbee, there are 3 roads: road A is the main access way, road B loops around the development, and road C goes through the center of the development. Ms. Dolbee testified that there are many critical areas within the site. There is a class 3 stream that runs along the north-side of the mobile home park on the property and then turns and heads north to Cedar River, she said. Ms. Dolbee added that there are two category 2 wetlands: wetland A is located on the southwestern comer, while wetland Bis on the northeastern comer of the site. Ms. Dolbee stated that exhibit 2 notes the steep slopes along the south-side of the site which contain severe erosion and landslide hazards. There are also seismic hazards in the entire development area, she noted. Ms. Dolbee remarked that a small portion of the site is also located in the shoreline 20 jurisdiction of the Cedar River ( exhibit 19). The very comers of proposed lots 9 and IO would fall in 21 22 23 24 25 26 this shoreline jurisdiction, she said. According to Ms. Dolbee, an environmental review was completed for the project and a mitigated determination of non-significance was issued with 12-mitigation measures. There was a 14-day appeal period that commenced on August 26th and ended on September 9th of 2011, but there were no appeals of the threshold determination, she noted. Ms. Dolbee mentioned that many of the 12 mitigation measures listed in the environmental review addressed the critical areas on the site. Ms. Dolbee stated that the applicant has requested two approvals: one for a preliminary plat and one for a planned urban development. She noted that each approval has specific review criteria, but do PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -3 ' I 2 3 4 5 include much overlap. Ms. Dolbee testified that PUDs requirements are meant to preserve natural features and encourage innovation in residential developments by permitting a variety of structures and improvements. The PUDs are meant to encourage superior design than what is provided for in the city code, she said. Ms. Dolbee commented that the density provisions of title 4 cannot be modified under this PUD application, thus the proposed subdivision does comply with the R-8 designation (4-8 dwelling units per acre). However, she noted, 4.2, 4.4, 4.7, 4.6060 of the title code can all be modified to meet this PUD proposal. 6 According to Ms. Dolbee, in table A of the staff report, the modifications to the title requested by the applicant are listed. The applicant has requested a change in standard lot size from 4,500 to 2,319 sq. feet. She added that lot width's current standard is 50ft for interior lots and 60ft for comer lots, but the applicant wishes to change to 32ft for interior lot and 42ft for comer lots. Additionally, she noted 8 that lot minimum depth is 65ft, but the applicant wishes to change lot 18 to 43ft (a comer lot) and lot 26 to 61ft (southeast comer lot). She stated that all other lots would meet lot depth standards. According to Ms. Dolbee, the minimum front-yard setback is currently 15ft, but the applicant has 1 o requested a reduction to 1 Oft. In addition, she stated, the minimum side-yard along a street is currently 15ft, but the applicant has requested a reduction to I Oft and 5ft for lot 11 because it is along an access easement. She also testified that rear-yard setback is currently 20ft, but the applicant 12 requested it be reduced to 1 Oft. 7 9 11 13 14 15 16 In table A there are three other requested modifications that were not requested by the applicant, but were proposed by staff, according to Ms. Dolbee. Staff feels these modifications are necessary to create a buildable development, she said. Ms. Dolbee stated that the first staff-proposed modification is to maximum building coverage. Staff recommends the 50 percent maximum building coverage be eliminated in order for the buildings to fit on the smaller lot sizes, she testified. Instead, Ms. Dolbee stated, staff wishes to utilize impervious coverage and setback standards to regulate mass. 17 Ms. Dolbee testified that a second modification proposed is to remove the requirement of a variety of lot sizes and widths because of the small size of the lots on the site. In order to maintain variation, staff recommends a modification to the residential design scale and bulk character section which 19 would increase the standard of different models of homes from every 10 lots, to every 4 lots, according to Ms. Dolbee. 18 20 21 Ms. Dolbee stated that the applicant requested two road standard modifications. For Maple Valley Highway, the applicant has requested to not do frontage improvements, but only do curb/gutter and 22 add a 5ft sidewalk, she said. However, Ms. Dolbee commented, staff does not approve this mitigation, but instead asked for 20ft right-of-way dedication, a 5ft sidewalk, an 8ft planting strip, and curb/gutter/streetlights designed to meet city arterial standards. The applicant also requested for a modification from residential access road standards, according to Ms. Dolbee. She remarked that, currently, the applicant requested a 33ft pavement from face-of-curb to face-of-curb with parking on one side and a 5ft sidewalk on the inside, which is along lots 18-34. Staff recommends a different modification (closer to city standards), she commented. According to Ms. Dolbee, staff asked that 23 24 25 26 road A have a 40ft right of way, curb/gutter on both sides, 5ft sidewalk on both sides , 25ft pavement PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -4 I section on both sides, and a 8ft planter strip on the west side. In addition, she noted, staff also asked that road B have a 30ft right of way, 20 ft. of pavement, parking on one side, curb/gutter on both 2 sides, and an 8ft planter strip to the interior. 3 4 5 Ms. Dolbee testified that the second portion of the PUD criteria is the demonstration of compliance superiority. She stated that the proposed plat layout provides for a significant increase in residential safety from the high landslide hazards, it provides for many recreational amenities beyond code requirements, it increases the quality of the internal circulation system throughout the development, it 6 enhances the critical areas with the addition of open space, and it is a significant improvement from 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 the King County proposal. According to Ms. Dolbee, table B of the staff report identifies the public benefits of this project. In regards to critical areas, more protection for these areas is provided by the proposal, she stated. Specifically, Ms. Dolbee noted that in wetland A there is a 50ft required buffer, along with the 22,000 sq. ft. tract (tract E). The enhanced landslide protection can be seen in exhibit 5 (stream buffer map), she said. According to Ms. Dolbee, the addition of a 33ft roadway adds an I 00ft buffer between the tow of the steep slopes and the potential future home. She noted that there is a debris-flow protection berm proposed that would gather the soils if there was a high-level landslide. Ms. Dolbee stated that the safeguards reduce the chance of life or property loss in a catastrophic event. In regards to natural features, Ms. Dolbee stated that the existing development does encroach on the wetland and stream buffers in some places, but there is a mitigation plan provided. She remarked that 14 the PUD would re-vegetate those areas where the existing development encroaches upon buffer areas already (such as the area north of the mobile park) with natural plantings. She concluded that the redevelopment would reduce the current impacts that already exist at the site. There are significant landscape enhancements which can be seen in exhibit 16 (the landscape plan). She noted that there is a large landscape buffer screen for Maple Valley Highway which exceeds the buffer requirement by !Oft (dark green on exhibit 16). Tract J is a landscaped area behind the steep slopes on the eastern boundary, and it would be vegetated which is beyond code standards, she said. Additionally, she noted that tract E would be provided along the west-side of the site, which contributes to the 15 16 17 18 19 aesthetics of the site. A 4,188 sq. ft. open-space park would be in the northwest corner of the interior of the site, she said. Ms. Dolbee commented that the applicant also proposes increased tree planting. 20 There are currently 27 protected trees on the site, and the r-8 zone requires 30-percent tree protection, she said. According to Ms. Dolbee, the applicant would be retaining 2 trees and replacing 77 trees which exceed the code requirement. 21 22 23 In regards to overall design, Ms. Dolbee stated that there is a large amount of open space and recreation which exceeds code requirements by 2,488ft for park area and 6,931 ft for open space. She noted that staff recommends lot-34 be swapped with the park lot in order to create a gateway feature 25 24 and provide a more desirable home-location. She noted that this recommendation was included in the conditions of approval attached to the staff report. Ms. Dolbee also testified that staff recommended ( as a condition of approval) that tracts E and C be combined along above the detention pond in order 26 to create a more cohesive area and the possibility for a pedestrian walkway. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Ms. Dolbee noted that the proposed plat has a superior pedestrian circulation system with a soft- surface trail which can be seen in exhibit 4 (brown lines). She added that there would be sidewalks along the three roadways. In regards to sidewalks, Ms. Dolbee commented that the applicant proposed a tabletop design at the intersection of roads B and A to increase pedestrian safety. She noted that staff recommends all sidewalks are treated the same for the project, in order to create cohesiveness, avoid confusion, and maintain safety. Ms. Dolbee noted that the site will have superior vehicular circulation with the looped road system by allowing rear access to the internal lots. Additionally, the presence of alleys for vehicle circulation allows for a more pedestrian-safe environment, she said. She noted that fifty percent of the lots are accessed by alleys, in accordance with city code. In regards to landscaping and screening, the topography to the east and south results in a natural screen for the development, according to Ms. Dolbee. She stated that plantings in the west will also provide screening for the development in that area. Ms. Dolbee added that the site is designed to allow for solar access for 27 of the lots, and all homes will be subject to design standards of a R-8 zone. The proposed site plan is superior to Renton standards and the King County vested application. According to Ms. Dolbee, the PUD criterion requires the interior site-design to be coordinated. The proposal achieves this through quality pedestrian and vehicular circulation, critical area protection, safety with buffering, and R-8 design standards, according to Ms. Dolbee. In order to meet the PUD circulation criteria, the proposal gains access from Maple Valley Highway, gives lots 1-8, 11-17 access to road B, lots 9 and 10 gain access through tract d, and road c gives lots 18-34 access, she said. Ms. Dolbee noted that all of these roads are designed to handle emergency vehicles and traffic created by the project. She stated that a traffic impact analysis was completed and demonstrated the proposal meets city and state requirements. Ms. Dolbee noted that planter strips would provide area between pedestrians and vehicles, and a school bus-stop would be located on the west-side of road A. According to Ms. Dolbee, there is no direct commercial development in the area, so the PUD criterion for pedestrian connections is irrelevant at this time. In regards to infrastructure and services criteria, the site would be served by City of Renton fire and Cedar River water and sewer district, she noted. Ms. Dolbee stated that a water line extension would be needed from the west, which would require a connection line through the stream buffer. This extension would be permitted in the code via a stream alteration approval, she commented. In addition, Ms. Dolbee noted that a detention pond is proposed in the northwest comer for storm-water runoff. She testified that the proposed infrastructure and services are sufficient, if the water connection is mitigated and all SEPA conditions are met. In regards to the building orientation criteria, Ms. Dolbee remarked that the proposed layout maximizes the use of topography for views of the Cedar River. She added that parking for two vehicles on each lot is provided. Additionally, she noted that open space and recreation area requirements are exceeded. Private open space is required on each lot (15 ft. in each direction) and would be reviewed during building permit approval, she said. Ms. Dolbee reinforced that the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -6 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 development does comply with the city's comprehensive plan. She added that staff has recommended that lots 8 and 11 have access to the utilities tract to reduce curb cuts along the comer of road B. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Dolbee noted that King County has allowed Renton to process the site as one subdivision rather than dividing the property. There is no development occurring in the portion in King County because that portion has the stream area and severe landslide hazards. King County critical area standards have been applied for that portion of the land. She stated she is unaware if there is a better alternative for the water line extension. The King County vested plat application does not meet Renton lot width and depth standards. Ms. Dolbee testified that the minimum open space requirement calculation did not include the King County portion of the site. Ms. Dolbee noted that there is a state program for relocation funds that is not run by the city. This program was mentioned in the mitigation measures. The developer would provide the funding, she noted, and the state requires a !-year notification timetable if the development is moved forward. Applicant Testimony Courtney Kaylor, applicant's attorney, stated that staff has been very thorough and the applicant agrees with the recommended conditions. She noted that the applicant requests that mitigation measure 2 (page IO of staff report) in regards to relocation agreements be reviewed because of a believed typo. The "and" needs to be removed from the sentence, according to Ms. Kaylor. In regards to the conditions of approval, the applicant wishes to change the 2"d condition (page 35), relating to street standards, according to Ms. Kaylor. She stated that the applicant wants to change the 8ft landscape strip to a 6.5ft strip. Ms. Kaylor submitted exhibits 33-38. Greg Diener, Pacific Engineering Design, testified that to the west of the site is the large Summerfield development, to the east there is no significant development, and to the south there is a large hillside ( 400ft tall slope). Furthermore, he noted there are two streams that drain towards the Cedar River on the site. One stream is unnamed, class 3 and drains in an overflow condition only, he said. This stream flows on the north-side of the mobile home, continues westerly to the Summerfield area, and then continues northerly. He stated that there is a wet-pond designed to have two primary overflows. The normal overflow is to go to the west towards the Summerfield Creek bed, and there is also a secondary pipe that drains to a 36-inch culvert that crosses the Maple Valley highway before ultimately reaching the Cedar River. Mr. Diener stated that the area to be subdivided is 7.32 acres, and land currently holds a mobile home park, a maintenance building, and one duplex. He testified that there is an asphalt street that runs through the site, providing access to the mobile homes. Mr. Diener commented that the site is zoned R-12 in King County. He noted that there is a vesting application in King County, pending the resolution of this plat. The vested plat in King County was submitted in April, 2008 and determined complete by the county in May, 2008, added Mr. Diener. The 7.32 acres was annexed into Renton, thus the other vesting application was put on hold, he noted. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -7 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Mr. Diener stated that the PUD criterion in Renton requires the application to demonstrate superior development design and public benefit. He commented that the proposed development is 17-lots in the interior of road B, and 17 lots on the north-side and east-side of the curb-cuts ( except in the utility tract). There will be a park in the northwest area, and the applicant is willing to meet the park-lot swap requested by the city. The detention and water-quality facility is located in the northwest area of the site. Mr. Diener noted that the maximum number of lots is 42, but the applicant is only proposing 34. He testified that the modifications recommended by Ms. Dolbee and city staff have been incorporated into exhibits by the applicant. Mr. Diener stated the road-section B would have a I-ft reduced landscape which remains in the 33ft proposed right-of-way, as requested earlier by Ms. Kaylor. In regards to the city's request for a landscape strip along road A, instead of a second sidewalk, the applicant notes that it is not an undesirable proposal, but it would ruin the proposed tabletop sidewalk design to the south of road A. Mr. Diener said that utilities would be provided by the Cedar River water and sewer district. There are two existing wells on the site, he noted. According to Mr. Diener, one well will be abandoned and the other would be retained for landscape and irrigation purposes. He testified that the only water connection for the site is located on the west side. Thus, he testified, the applicant proposes creating a connection across the existing unnamed stream in order to connect to the main water-line. The applicant proposes to do this within city code without causing major impacts to the stream, according to Mr. Diener. He also noted that the sewer runs from the middle of the west of the site and crosses the site at an angle and meets Maple Valley Highway. He concluded that all connections could be made to this existing sewer line. Mr. Diener testified that a water retention pond is proposed for the northwest comer of the site. The level 2 detention pond allows for very small, allowable release rates, he commented. Mr. Diener stated that the pond would drain to a ditch, which would then flow to a 36-inch culvert located at the northwest comer of the site. The proposed pond depth overall would be I Oft with 5.5ft of detention storage and 4ft of water quality, he said. He added that there is a recommendation to put a fence around the pond in order to meet safety standards. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Mr. Diener noted that there is not another place for a water connection that is feasible. Without the stream-crossing connection, a water connection would have to be run across the site to SR-169 and would still probably cross the stream at some point. Glen Takagi, applicant's landscape architect, stated that the paved circulation system, including a bus stop, along with the soft-paving system provide great linkage throughout the site. The trail system has the potential for benches and descriptive markers, he noted. Mr. Takagi testified that the open space features of the site plan add to the strong residential character of the PUD. The open spaces provide all of the perimeter buffering and give green strips to the Maple Valley Highway, he noted. He also suggested there is potential, additional space for play area beyond just the planned park. Mr. Takagi commented that native plants would be chosen for the space based on hardiness and beauty, along with their potential for establishing wildlife in the area. He added that the retention pond will be secured with a black vinyl fence along the water line. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -8 1 The park would be centrally located for easy access. The park would have a fence enclosure with a play structure, picnic tables, and lawn space, he said. He testified that all of the same amenities 2 could be included if the park was swapped with a lot, as requested by the city staff, but it would be 3 slightly smaller. Mr. Takagi concluded that the space is laid out well and will benefit both the public and residents. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Mr. Takagi noted that in changing the park 4 lot, 800ft of open space would be lost. This space loss is due to it no longer being a comer lot, he noted. 5 6 Vince Geglia, traffic engineer for the project, stated that he is a member of the institute of transportation engineers and has been practicing in the Puget Sound area since 1986. He noted that 7 there would not be a significant increase in traffic with this development because the mobile home traffic would be subtracted from the net increase gathered by the single-family homes. The net increase would be 6-trips in the critical, peak hour, and, during an average 24-hr day, it would be 89 trips. He noted that the access to SR-169 was already improved several years ago and provides excellent access to the site with 5-lanes. Mr. Geglia testified that historical accident data showed no 8 9 10 unusual accident activity in the area. He noted that the road-way is fairly flat and level along SR-169. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 A right-tum pocket would be constructed for vehicles entering the site, and within this deceleration lane, there would a bus stop, according to Mr. Geglia. Additionally, Mr. Geglia commented that there would be a transportation mitigation fee paid to the city to support the city's road improvement program. Ed Sewall, applicant's wetland consultant, stated he has worked as a wetland consultant in the state of Washington since 1991. He noted that he was hired in 2008 when the project was within King County. He testified that they completed the critical area study and wetland delineation for the project at that time. Mr. Sewall commented that wetland A is in the southwest comer of the site and is a category 2 wetland. Wetland B is also a category 2 and is in the north of the site. There is a stream that runs in a disturbed condition behind the mobile home park, flowing to the west, toward SR-169. He noted that in 1995-1996, he previously worked with this stream and it was classified as a class 3 stream (intermittent stream with no fish-use) on the north side of the highway which is in King County. Although a King County class-3 stream would normally be a class-4 stream for the city of Renton, Renton has it mapped as class-3. Mr. Sewall testified that the proposed project would maintain the wetlands and their 50-ft buffers, with no impacts. In addition, Mr. Sewall noted that the normal 75-ft stream buffer would be reduced through enhancement to 60-ft. The existing mobile home park abuts the stream, so in the present 22 state there is no buffer along the north-side of the stream, he said. Thus, the addition of any buffer would be an improvement, according to Mr. Sewall. He testified that the proposal would provide a 60-ft enhancement buffer in this area which would result in new plantings and the soil decompacting. Mr. Sewall noted that the criteria for the utility crossing in the stream can be found in code 23 25 24 44050L8bi. He stated the applicant feels they can meet the criteria with minimum impact to the stream. The criteria will be dictated by a HP A, and any impacts to the stream will be mitigated and restored, he commented. Mr. Sewall concluded that the overall critical area mitigation plan should 26 mitigate any impacts and improve the water areas on site. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Rob Ward, applicant's geotech engineer, stated he has been practicing in the Puget Sound area since 1986. He noted that he completed a study of the site in 2008 and has provided update letters since that period. He testified that, in order to conduct their study, his team first completed geological research of the area by reviewing information collected in 1986 for the Summerfield development, and then they came on-site and did soil work. Mr. Ward stated that the slopes to the south and east of the site are very steep until they rise-up and become flat. He commented that the area to be developed is fairly flat. The geology goes from top- to-bottom and near the top is glacial till, according to Mr. Ward. As you move down, all the soils remain glacial, but turn into silt soil, he said. Mr. Ward noted that the very bottom soil is river deposits and the intermediate soil is mass-wastage. Because of the glacial nature of the slopes, they are very dense and the core is very stable, according to Mr. Ward. He testified that the chance of a deep instability is very remote. He added that the basic issues of steep slopes in the Puget Sound area are skin slides (mud slides). The skin slides are results of large amounts of rain and are a typical problem in the Puget Sound area. There has been no evidence of skin slides in the slopes in this development area, he stated. Mr. Ward remarked that King County's default, required buffer is 50ft and the building setback is 15ft (so the overall setback is 65ft). Based on the geotech findings, Mr. Ward recommended a 25ft buffer and 15ft setback for the eastside and maintenance of the 60ft buffer to the south along with various setbacks (although it could have been smaller) along the development site. Mr. Ward added that the pan-handle section of the site, located in King County, has various issues with potential for debris flow which OT AK will discuss. He concluded that the setbacks are above and beyond what is needed for geotechnical issues. Russ Gaston, applicant's water resource engineer, stated he manages a water resources group for OTAK. He noted for this project they led the analysis of risk of debris flow and mitigation measures for this debris flow. Mr. Gaston testified that he was supported by Gary Wolf, a senior hydraulics engineer, and Bret Jordan, who specializes in analyzing stream flow and sediment transport. Both of these men are highly qualified in their areas of expertise, according to Mr. Gaston. He noted that his team produced a report which characterized the site's water sediments. He stated they used models to establish if there was enough capacity to transport sediment and quantify the volume in the unnamed tributary stream. Mr. Gaston stated that there was concern about the existing retention pond's overflow into this unnamed stream. He noted that this pond, the Woodburn pond was designed by OTAK, and the major outfall from the pond is to Summerfield Creek. However, there is an additional, emergency overflow from the pond into the unnamed stream on McCormick plat. In order to engage this emergency overflow, the Summerfield Creek overflow would have to be completely plugged, he stated. If this did happen, the maximum flow into the unnamed stream would be 12.7cfs, Mr. Gaston commented. He testified that a dam-break analysis was also completed, but the analysis demonstrated that a potential dam-break was not the worst-case scenario. The plugged overflow to Summerfield Creek remained the worst-case scenario. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 In addition, Mr. Gaston stated that the stability of the stream/ravine was tested by dividing it into 6 storage reaches. He remarked that two conditions were evaluated: what is there today and what would happen if water flowed from Woodburn pond. According to Mr. Gaston, Reach 1 would become a source of sediment flow, Reach 2 would create a depositional for sediment, Reach 3 would transport sediment, Reach 4 would be a sediment source, Reach 5 would be a storage facility because of its width, and Reach 6 is a transport reach with sediment being moved out. His team concluded that there is a potential for debris flow (as much as 2300 cubic yards), he said. Thus, Mr. Gaston stated, they designed a mitigation berm that would follow the south side of the McCormick plat. The berm would be 5ft high and designed to have traffic on top of it. Under normal storms conditions, only 750 cubic yards of debris flow would be transported there, but if the full 2,300 cubic yards (an unlikely feat) was reached, the berm could be dredged out, he stated. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Mr. Gaston noted that the berm would be composed so that it would not erode and would not be made of natural materials. Courtney Kaylor, applicant's representative, corrected her earlier statement that the applicant was requesting a reduction of the width of the landscape strip to 6.5ft. Instead, the applicant is requesting a reduction to 7ft, she noted. The PUD proposal provides a superior design and public benefit, thus meeting the city's criteria for approval, according to Ms. Kaylor. Furthermore, the current proposal is superior to the previous proposal to King County and provides for greater impact mitigation. She noted some of the features of the new proposal: greater open space than required, more natural vegetation, better circulation, soft-surface trails, a school bus-stop, critical area impact mitigation, and more. Public Testimony Herbert Wendland stated he is concerned about the lack of a timetable for the project. He noted he has lived in the mobile home park for 12 years. As a senior citizen, he fears being kicked out of his home and having to find a new place to live. He also voiced concern about whether or not relocation funds will be provided. Mr. Wendland commented that the residents of the mobile home park have been waiting for answers to their concerns for a long time and need these answers in order to prepare for the future. Sandra Workman stated that there is a stream that goes through several of the mobile home lots. She stated that when the stream freezes it makes the whole entryway of the mobile home park icy and dangerous. Barbara Workman testified that she does not understand the timing of the development. She noted that her mobile home is too old to be moved off the property. She further commented that the procedure for relocation reimbursement has not been made clear to the current residents. Staff Rebuttal PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Kayren Kittrick, development and construction engineer for Renton, stated that the city does not wish to make modifications to the road plans until construction plans are presented to the city. She noted that the city wishes to maintain the street standards dictated for the roads in the current proposal. She reinforced that the city wants to follow what has been laid out in the staff report documents. The city wishes for any additional changes to be handled administratively once construction documents have been provided, according to Ms. Kittrick. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Kittrick noted that the city does not wish to change the 8ft landscape strip standard to 7ft at this time, despite the request made by the applicant. The city does not want to deviate from what has already been discussed, according to Ms. Kittrick. She noted the city will have the ability to make minor conditional changes (such as this landscape strip length) once the preliminary plat has been approved. Vanessa Dolbee, senior planner for city of Renton, stated that both the open space calculation and the density calculation were made based on the 7.32 acres within Renton (excluding the King County portion of the site). In regards to the applicant's request for a word change to mitigation number 2 in the staff report, Ms. Dolbee noted that the word change actually occurs in mitigation number 11 sub 2 of the report. Applicant Rebuttal Courtney Kaylor stated that the applicant is in agreement with staff in regards to the road improvement mitigations. She testified that, for the applicant, the most important point is that the improvements need to be contained in the proposed right-of-ways. The applicant agrees to leave the finalization oflandscape strip lengths to construction period. Ms. Kaylor further testified that the applicant has no imminent plans to issue the !-year notice of eviction to residents. She noted that the subdivision and PUD approvals are in effect for up to 5-years and can be extended for an additional year upon request. She stated that the owner of the property will have the park manager provide more information to current residents. In regards to relocation costs, the state of Washington's department of commerce has a program to pay relocation costs to manufactured home-park owners that are living in parks that are being closed, according to Ms. Kaylor. She confirmed that the program provides for reimbursements up to certain amounts depending on the size of mobile home. She noted that the applicant has agreed to provide the relocation payments upfront so the residents do not have to go through the process of requesting the reimbursement from the state. This has been included as a voluntary condition of approval in the staff recommendation. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Kaylor noted the state provides reimbursement ofup to 7,500 dollars for a single-home and 12,000 for a double-home. There are standards and requirements in the state law as to what types of expenses are reimbursed. She added that the residents must provide proof of income parameters in order to qualify for relocation. Additionally, PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -12 1 Ms. Kaylor stated that the property owner has contacted the Wonderland Park which is located nearby the McCormick plat, and the Wonderland Park has mobile-home lots available. 2 3 Exhibits 4 The December 22, 2010 staff report Exhibits 1-32 identified at pat 3-4 of the staff report were 5 admitted into the record during the hearing. The following additional exhibits were also 6 admitted into the record during the hearing: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Ex. 33: Ex. 34: Ex. 35: Ex. 36: Ex. 37: Ex. 38: Staff power point presentation. CV's of Greg Diener, Vincent Geglia, Edgar Sewall, Robert Ward, and Russ Gaston. December 8, 2010 letter from Debora Gilroy to Collin Barrett June 24, 2011 and August 2, 2011 letters from Courtney Kaylor to Vanessa Dolbee. Project's Compliance Statement Road A and B cross sections FINDINGS OF FACT 0.5 Applicant. Robert E. McCormick 17 Procedural: 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 I. Hearing. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on January 5, 2011 at 9:00 am in the City of Renton Council Chambers. 2. Project Description. The applicant, Robert McCormick, is requesting a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PUD) for a 34-lot, 9-tract subdivision of an 11.59 acre site. The applicant also proposes to reduce portions of a Class III steam buffer from 75 to 60 feet and to alter a stream buffer in order to accommodate the crossing of a water line. The proposed McCormick Plat would be located along the south side of Maple Valley Highway (SR- 169) at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (parcel #2323059029). The site consists of one parcel, the majority of which is located within the City of Renton. However, a long, narrow "dog leg" 25 extends southward off the southeastern side of the rectangular portion of the site; this portion is 26 within unincorporated King County, which is not proposed to be developed. The site is currently the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -13 location of the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which provides space for approximately 40 mobile 2 homes. In addition to the mobile homes and multiple out buildings on site, there are two permanent structures, a duplex and maintenance building. The applicant proposes to remove all existing 3 structures, and mobile homes. The site is bordered to the north by Maple Valley Highway (SR-169), 4 to the west by the Summer View neighborhood, a single-family residential subdivision, and to the south and east by undeveloped forested areas. 5 6 7 The proposed subdivision would result in 34 lots ranging in lot size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet, as more specifically described in Table C of the staff report, resulting in a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per acre. Nine tracts are also proposed which include stormwater detention, native growth protection areas, access and utilities, open space, and critical areas. In addition to the 8 traditional subdivision lots and tracts, the applicant has proposed a looped trail around the site which crosses Open Space tracts E and C and a small tot lot with a play area. 9 10 11 12 13 14 The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A". Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B'', which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots 1 -8, and 11 -17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and IO would gain access via an access and utilities tract, identified as Tract D. Proposed Lots 18 - 34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of SR-169. Road improvements including sidewalks on both sides of Road A, and on one side (the inside) of Road B are proposed. Street frontage improvements are not proposed along SR 169. Pursuant to the City of Renton' s critical areas maps, a stream, steep slopes, erosion hazards, landslide hazards, seismic hazards, and wetlands have been identified on the subject property. The geotechnical 16 hazards located on the site are due to the steep slope inclinations, soils generally susceptible to 17 erosion, and history of landslides in the area. The critical areas map indicates that the approximate northerly portion of the rectanh'lllar area of the site is within a Seismic Hazard area. In addition, the northeast comer of the site is located within the 200-foot Shoreline Area measured from the Cedar River, which is located across Maple Valley Highway. The shoreline area impacts proposed Lots 9 15 18 19 and 10; Lot 10 would be approximately 170 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and Lot 9 would be approximately 190 feet from the OHWM. The "dog leg" portion of the site, located in 2° King County, would be subject to King County critical areas regulations, KCC 2 IA.24, whereas the remainder of the site would be subject to City of Renton critical areas regulations. King County Sensitive Areas Maps indicate that the subject site is located in a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area and is an area susceptible to ground water contamination. The City's critical areas maps do not identify this area for Aquifer Protection. 21 22 23 24 The developed portion of the existing mobile home park has an approximate slope of 9 to IO percent sloping in a southeast-to-northwest direction. As this portion of the site remains within the Landslide 25 and Erosion Hazard area, it is the mildest slope on site. The property is bounded to the south and southeast by steep slopes that extend down from the Renton uplands. The steep slope at the southeast 26 corner of the site, ranges from about an elevation of 230 feet down to the toe-of-slope to an elevation PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-14 1 of 160 to 180 feet, and averages about a 100 percent grade. Similarly, the steep slope adjacent to the south side of the mobile home park that extends above the creek is well over 100 feet high and has an 2 average slope of about I 00 percent. The applicant has proposed a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm 3 along the base of the steep slope located on the southern border of the site to divert water and/or soil within the stream buffer toward the western side of the site in the event of a landslide or mudslide. In 4 addition, a 25-foot buffer from the southeastern slope is proposed for landslide protection for lots 14 -17. The applicant has indicated that grading the site would be necessary to meet the stormwater 5 requirements. The applicant has indicated the total excavation would be 8,248 cubic yards and fill is 6 estimated at 7,924 cubic yards. The soil that is usable from the excavation on site would be utilized on site, other materials such as selected borrow and gravel are expected to be imported to the site. 7 8 9 The applicant submitted with the application a Revised Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. dated April 12, 2011. This report indicates there are two wetlands located on site, both identified as Category 2 wetlands, per the City of Renton classification system. Wetland 'A' is located along the west side of the site and Wetland 'B' is located along the northeast edge of 1 o the site. Category 2 wetlands typically have 50-foot buffers. The Critical Areas report further identifies a single intermittent stream that flows through the site. The subject stream is a Class 3 stream and was designated as a Type N stream by Bill Kershke, King County Biologist, in his review 11 12 of the feature. Class 3 streams typically have 75-foot buffers measured from the OHWM. The applicant has proposed to reduce the stream buffer from 75 feet to 60 feet for the majority of the buffer area. In addition, the applicant initially requested a variance to place a water line through the stream buffer to connect to an existing I 0-inch water line stub provided by the neighboring Summer 13 14 View neighborhood. Staff subsequently determined that the applicant's request could be handled by an alteration of stream buffers authorized by RCW 4-3-050(L)(8)(b ). 15 16 The area of the site that is currently developed as a mobile home park consists of ornamental plants placed by residents of the mobile home park in addition to a few large conifer trees which are scattered about the site. The steep slopes on site are covered with dense understory vegetation consisting of mostly sword fems and an upperstory of scattered big leaf maple trees. The wetland and stream areas of the site consist mainly of reed canary grass, creeping buttercup and a few small alders. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 The modifications requested to development standards under the PUD application are identified in Table A and Table C of the staff report, incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. 3. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate infrastructure and public services as follows: A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sanitary sewer service for the development would be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. Water and Sewer availability certificates will be required from the Cedar River Sewer District prior to final plat approval. Based on the submitted Conceptual Site Plan (Sheet P04) (Exhibit 4), there is an existing sewer main located on the west side of the development. The applicant has proposed to connect to this existing main and extend an 8-inch sanitary sewer line to PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 provide sewer to the development. This plan sheet also identifies a IO-inch water line extension from the Summer View Plat located to the west. This extension would be required to be constructed through the stream buffer. With receipt of the water and sewer availability certificates, the development would provide sufficient service to the lots. B. Fire Protection. Fire protection would be provided by the City of Renton Fire Department. Per the City Fire Chief, all lots are required to be sprinklered. Therefore, as a condition of approval the applicant be required to revise the utility plan to depict a I-inch water meter to all lots. The revised plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Plan Reviewer prior to Final Plat recording. C. Drainage. In conjunction with the City's stormwater regulations, the proposal mitigates all significant drainage impacts. New impervious surfaces would result in surface water runoff increases. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report ("Drainage Report") with the project application (Exhibit 29). The applicant has proposed a detention/wet pond to be located in a separate tract in the northwest corner of the site for stormwater detention and water quality treatment. The Drainage Report indicates that runoff from roof drains, yards, and driveways would be collected and conveyed to a drainage system under the proposed roads that would convey stormwater to the proposed detention/wet pond. The pond is proposed to be a combined detention and water quality pond, with permanent storage in the bottom of the pond, and live flow control storage above the dead storage. The pond has been designed to provided Level 2 flow control and basic water quality treatment. The proposed design of the detention pond would provide at least 59,500 cubic feet of storage. The detention facility would release the storm water to its natural discharge location at the northwest corner of the site to the south roadside ditch of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169). D. Parks/Open Space. The project provides for more than adequate parks and open space. In addition to private open space provided on each proposed lot, the applicant has proposed to provide a 4,188 square foot park which would include a play structure and two picnic tables, a soft surface looped trail system through the development, and a 21,634 square foot open space tract. The proposed park area exceeds the code standards by 2,488 square feet and the open space standards by 6,931 square feet. The overall passive and active recreation opportunities proposed for the subject development are beyond the standard code requirements. The proposed open space and recreation on the site provide the opportunity for both passive and active recreation. The soft surface trail is proposed to have benches and interpretive signage, which would result in a nature trail type of facility. The looped trail system is approximately 1 /3 of a mile long, offering the opportunity for PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -16 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 more strenuous exercise such as jogging. The open lawn proposed in the Tract E provides a space for such activities as kick ball or Frisbee, but could also be used as a quiet place to listen to the river and read a book. The park area provides for both passive and active recreation by offering both a play structure and picnic tables. The varieties of recreation opportunities proposed throughout the development create a mix of choices, appealing to a large spectrum of people. However, it should be noted that the benches and interpretive signage mentioned in the applicant's PUD Compliance Statement are not reflected on the Landscape Plan or the Plat Plan, as such staff recommends a condition of approval that the applicant provide a detail of the proposed final bench and signage design and location as a part of the final detailed landscape plan. These details shall be submitted and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The park is located on the northwest comer of the internal set of lots, aligning just west of the access road A. Proposed Lot 34, which is immediately east of the park, is centrally aligned with Road A. Once a home is constructed on Lot 34, all vehicular trips accessing the development would drive directly at the home on Lot 34, shining headlights into their front windows. The impacts to Lot 34 could be resolved by adjusting the location of the proposed park, to be situated to align with Road A, thus moving Lot 34 to the western corner of the internal Road. Furthermore, this location for the park would create a "gateway" to the neighborhood, increasing the overall design of the development. As such, a condition of approval will require that the park be moved east by one lot to align with Road A, and adjusting Lot 34 to be the northwest corner lot of the internal portion of the development. At hearing the applicant did not object to this condition. The Open Space Tract E and Tract C are separated by the detention pond Tract A. The connection between Tract E and C could be stronger and create a higher quality and cohesive open space system by decreasing the grades near the top of the pond, to allow for landscaping and pedestrian access for a portion of the pond area. This in tum could result in moving the fence to a lower section of the pond, removing the visual obstruction created by the fence. The end result would be a high quality open space system, incorporating the detention facility into the design of the overall development. A condition of approval will require that the detention facility be re-designed to become an integral part of the open space system of the development. The design shall meet the City's stormwater requirements and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. E. Pedestrian Circulation. The proposed preliminary plat provides for a superior pedestrian circulation system. In addition to the proposed soft surface pedestrian path, the applicants PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 have proposed sidewalks along Road A, Maple Valley Highway and on the interior of Road B. In addition, the applicant has proposed to provide a tabletop design at the intersection of Road A and Road B with alternative paving to provide for a safe pedestrian crosswalk. This intersection is a key connection to the proposed school bus stop located along Maple Valley Highway. In addition to the aforementioned cross walk, the looped trail includes two additional cross walk locations to connect the loop. These two locations are both located on Road B. Based on the application materials, these two cross walks would not be designed with alternative paving as proposed for the cross walk located at the intersection of Road A and B. A condition of approval will require that all crosswalks in the development are designed with the same alternative paving, to provide consistency in crosswalk design throughout the development ensuring pedestrian safety. F. Interior Vehicle Circulation. In addition to superior pedestrian circulation, the proposed preliminary plat also provides for a superior vehicle circulation system. The looped road system which is made possible by the requested code modifications provides for improved emergency access as well as eliminates a dead end road. The looped road system provides for better onsite traffic circulation and allows for a public alley to access proposed Lots 18 -34. The presence of the alley allows for 50 percent of the development to have alley loaded garages, reducing the number of curb cuts through the sidewalk system, improving the pedestrian circulation system. Furthermore, the presence of an alley provides for screening of the parking facilities/garages for 50 percent of the lots on the site. G. Off-Site Traffic Improvements. No off-site mitigation is necessary except for a right turn pocket, taper or radius per WSDOT design standards on SR 169 at the site access street. The traffic study, Ex. 21, concludes that the proposal will result in an increase of 89 average daily trips over the traffic generated by existing development (which will be removed). As further concluded, no intersections or street segments in the City of Renton would experience an increase in traffic over 5%. The only off-site improvements found necessary in the report are the aforementioned SR 169 improvements to provide for access to the project site. Consequently, off-site impacts are adequately covered by the transportation mitigation fee. The infrastructure improvements recommended in the traffic report are required by the MDNS conditions of approval. 4. Adverse Impacts. Since the project provides for adequate infrastructure and public services, the only remaining impacts to be considered are to critical areas and affordable housing. All impacts to critical areas have been thoroughly assessed and completely mitigated, as identified in the Environmental Review Report, Ex. 30, adopted by this reference as if set forth in full. The mitigation measures recommended by staff in the Environmental Report are adopted as conditions of approval. Adoption of Ex. 30 encompasses both the findings of fact and the conclusions of law of staff. All PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-18 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 other adverse impacts discernible from the record are also fully mitigated. Some of the more significant issues and modifications to the Environmental Report as well as adverse impacts not addressed in the Environmental Report are addressed below: A. Affordable Housing. The proposal will adversely affect affordable housing by forcing the relocation of the mobile homes in the mobile home park. The relocation assistance voluntarily provided by the applicant and adopted as Condition 11 of the SEPA MDNS is the most the City can legally do to mitigate the impacts of the project on affordable housing. As noted by the applicant in Ex. 36, Guimont v. Clark, 121 Wn.2d 34 (1992) stands for the proposition that mobile home park owners cannot be made responsible by state statute ( and by extension, permit conditions) to pay for relocation costs because this places a disproportionate burden upon park owners to handle the societal problem of housing affordability. Any permit condition that made the applicant responsible for the entirety of these costs would violate the substantive due process rights of the applicant. B. Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. An extremely significant condition of approval in the SEPA MDNS requires the installation of a debris flow mitigation berm. As discussed in the Environmental Report the steep slopes adjoining the project site have been subject to numerous landslides. In 1990 a landslide resulted in $100,000 damage to the existing mobile home park. The berm condition is the result of a geotechnical report prepared by the applicant, a peer review and then additional study completed in response to the peer review. The SEPA conditions of approval require the berm to be maintained so that its effectiveness is not compromised by the buildup of soils from debris flow events. The conditions of approval require a maintenance plan to be included in the project CC&Rs. This condition will be modified to require that it ( and all other required CC&R conditions) cannot be amended without the consent of the City. C. Stream Mitigation. It is significant to note that even though the applicant requests a decrease in stream buffer width to 60 feet from the required 75 feet for portions of the Class III streams that the project mitigation and enhancement will result in an overall increase in stream/lake/riparian ecological function. The existing uses of the property have significantly degraded existing buffer areas. Project mitigation will enhance these areas and remove invasive species. Mitigation includes the removal of paved and impervious surfaces within the buffer area., the soils disked and then replanted with a mix of native trees and shrubs. D. Tree Retention. As discussed in the Conclusions of Law, below, it is unclear whether the tree retention plan is consistent with the City's tree retention requirements and the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 conditions of approval will require further analysis. The site contains a total of 49 trees of 6-inch caliper or larger, 4 are within the proposed public right-of-way, and 18 are located in critical areas and their buffers. The applicant proposes to plant approximately 77 new trees on site. The applicant's conceptual landscape plan did not include an exact numbers of trees, shrubs, or groundcover and it did not include specific locations for the shrubs and ground cover. As such, a condition of approval will require that the applicant provide a detailed final landscape plan that shall be submitted and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. E. Floodplain. The project is not located within a floodplain, as shown by the FEMA map attached as Exhibit C to the preliminary drainage report, Ex. 29. 5. Superiority in Design. The proposed PUD design is significantly superior to that which would be allowed under applicable subdivision regulations. The contrast in designed is heightened by the fact that the applicant has a vested subdivision application with King County under King County's rural development standards. The vested King County application, City file number LUA08-068, is also for a 34-lot subdivision. The subject property was annexed into the City of Renton shortly after the applicant vested the subdivision application with King County. Once annexed to the City of Renton, the responsibility of processing the plat application was transferred to the City of Renton. Under the vested application many "non-urban" standards would be permitted as a part of the development, in addition to the 16 applicant's ability to develop to a higher density than permitted under Renton zoning. 17 The vested subdivision uses cul-de-sacs rather than a looped road system where many homes would be alley loaded. The new application would provide vertical curbs, sidewalks, a trail system, 18 vegetative buffering from Maple Valley Highway, and increased Critical Area protection over the 19 vested application. The subject PUD proposal represents a unique situation, as the comparison for public benefit, in this case, should be balanced by not only the existing City of Renton regulations, 20 but also the vested King County standards. 21 22 23 24 25 The development of this site as a PUD results in a superior design than would result by the vested King County application for many reasons. First, the proposed plat layout provides for a significant increase in resident safety from the high landslide hazards affiliated with the slopes to the south, due to increased separation from the landslide hazard by the proposed looped road system. Second, the plat would provide for many recreational amenities beyond the code requirements. Third, the plat layout significantly increases the quality of the internal vehicle and pedestrian circulation system throughout the development. Fourth, the additional open space area enhances protection to critical areas. Fifth, the applicant proposes significantly more landscaping than required by City standards. 26 This proposed design can provide for the aforementioned amenities because of the development standard modifications recommended by staff in Ex. 31. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6. Public Benefit. The proposal provides several public benefits as detailed in Table B of the staff report, adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full, excluding the discussion of tree retention on p. 17 of the staff report. Conclusions of Law 1. Authority. RMC 4-7-020(C) and 4-7-050(D)(5) provide that the Hearing Examiner shall hold a hearing and issue a final decision on preliminary plat applications. RMC 4-9-l 50(F)(8) authorizes 8 the Examiner to conduct hearings and make final decisions 9n planned urban development applications. 9 10 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The subject property is zoned Residential 8 dwelling units per net acre (R-8) and the portion located in King County is zoned Rural Area, I 11 dwelling unit per 5 acres (RA-5). The proposed development would be within the R-8 zone and the 12 King County portion would remain undisturbed. R-8 development standards would be applicable to the subject project. The comprehensive plan map land use designation for the portion of the site 13 within the City of Renton is Residential Single Family. 14 15 16 17 18 19 3. Review Criteria. The Renton Municipal Code does not clearly identify the criteria the Examiner must apply in assessing a subdivision or a PUD. Chapter 4-7 RMC governs the criteria for subdivision review and RMC 4-9-150 governs PUD criteria. Without any more specific code guidance, the Examiner concludes that he must find that all applicable criteria in Chapter 4-7 and RMC 4-9-150 must be satisfied for preliminary plat and PUD approval. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. RMC 4-7-0SO(B): A subdivision shall be consistent with the following principles of acceptability: 2 o 1. Legal Lots: Create legal building sites which comply with all provisions of the City Zoning Code. 21 2. Access: Establish access to a public road/or each segregated parcel. 22 3. Physical Characteristics: Have suitable physical characteristics. A proposed plat may be denied 23 24 25 26 because of flood, inundation, or wetland conditions. Construction of protective improvements may be required as a condition of approval, and such improvements shall be noted on the final plat. 4. Drainage: Make adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies and sanitary wastes. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -21 1 4. As modified by the PUD regulations, the lots will comply with all requirements of the Zoning 2 3 Code. As noted in the project description, Finding of Fact No. 2, and as depicted in Ex. 2, all lots have access to a public street, either to Road B, Road C or Tract D. Tract D as depicted in the preliminary plat map, Ex. 2, is only identified as a utility tract with no mention of access. The 4 conditions of approval will require it to be identified as an access tract as well. The project is not located within a floodplain, as shown by the FEMA map attached as Exhibit C to the preliminary 5 drainage report, Ex. 29. As determined in the Findings of Fact, wetlands are adequately protected and 6 in fact wetland functions will be enhanced as a result of the project. As further discussed in the findings of fact, a debris flow mitigation berm will be required as a protective improvement in order 7 to protect project resident from landslide activity. This requirement will be conditioned to be noted 8 on the final plat. As determined in Finding of Fact 3, the project makes adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies and sanitary wastes. 9 RMC 4-7-080(1)(1): ... The Hearing Examiner shall assure coriformance with the general purposes 10 of the Comprehensive Plan and adopted standards ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 5. The proposed preliminary play is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan as outlined in Section 6(a) of the staff report, which is incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. RMC 4-7-120(A): No plan for the replatting, subdivision, or dedication of any areas shall be approved by the Hearing Examiner unless the streets shown therein are connected by surfaced road or street (according to City specifications) to an existing street or highway. 6. The internal circulation system of the subdivision connects to SR 169, an existing highway. 17 RMC 4-7-120(8): The location of all streets shall conform to any adopted plans for streets in the City. 18 7. The staff report and administrative record do not identify any applicable street plan or grid 19 system that would compel the connection of the interior streets to any other roads beyond SR 169. 20 The aerial photo on page 2 of the staff report shows that there are no other roads in proximity to the project that could be feasibly extended to the project. Given the extreme slopes that adjoin the 21 project it is highly unlikely that any other roads could ever connect to the project from the south. The 22 project is separated from a cul de sac west by residential development. There do not appear to be any 23 24 25 roads to the east that could be extended to the project. RMC 4-7-120(C): If a subdivision is located in the area of an officially designed trail, provisions shall be made for reservation of the right-of-way or for easements to the City for trail purposes. 8. The staff report and administrative record do not identify any officially designated trail in the 26 vicinity. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-7-130(C): A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication shall be prepared in conformance with the following provisions: 1. Land Unsuitable for Subdivision: Land which is found to be unsuitable for subdivision includes land with features likely to be harmful to the safety and general health of the.future residents (such as lands adversely affected by flooding, steep slopes, or rock formations). Land which the Department or the Hearing Examiner considers inappropriate for subdivision shall not be subdivided unless adequate safeguards are provided against these adverse conditions. a. Flooding/Inundation: If any portion of the land within the boundary of a preliminary plat is subject to flooding or inundation, that portion of the subdivision must have the approval of the State according to chapter 86.16 RCW before the Department and the Hearing Examiner shall consider such subdivision. b. Steep Slopes: A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication which would result in the creation of a lot or lots that primarily have slopes forty percent (40%) or greater as measured per RMC 4-3- 050Jl a, without adequate area at lesser slopes upon which development may occur, shall not be approved 3. Land Clearing and Tree Retention: Shall comply with RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations. 4. Streams: a. Preservation: Every reasonable effort shall be made to preserve existing streams, bodies of waler, and wetland areas. b. Method: If a stream passes through any of the subject property, a plan shall be presented which indicates how the stream will be preserved The methodologies used should include an overflow area, and an attempt to minimize the disturbance of the natural channel and stream bed. c. Culverting: The piping or tunneling of waler shall be discouraged and allowed only when going under streets. d. Clean Water: Every effort shall be made to keep all streams and bodies of water clear of debris and pollutants. 9. As determined in the Findings of Fact, significant protective measures and safeguards are proposed and conditioned to ensure that the proposed development is adequately protected from the geologic hazards of the site. As proposed and conditioned the project area is appropriate for PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -23 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 subdivision. As previously discussed there is no evidence in the record that there is any flooding problem, beyond that which could be potentially associated with landslide activity and flooding in that respect is adequately mitigated by the debris flow mitigation berm. In assessing compliance with RMC 4-4-130, the staff report only identifies trees on site that are of 6- inch caliper or larger. There is nothing in RMC 4-4-130 that limits tree retention to trees that of 6- inch caliper or higher. RMC 4-11-200 defines a tree as having a caliper of 2 inches or higher and the tree retention requirements of RMC 4-4-130 do not provide for any exceptions for trees smaller than six inches. It is possible that trees between two and six inches are not present on the site, but that's not clear from the record and it would not be reasonable to make that inference. In addition to the additional information recommended by staff as identified in Finding of Fact No. 4(0), the conditions of approval will also require that tree retention be applied to all trees with a two inch caliper or greater. As noted in the Findings of Fact, the stream functions will actually be enhanced by the extensive amount of mitigation and restoration proposed by the applicant and required in the conditions of approval. No new piping or tunneling of the stream is proposed. It is unclear what is intended by the requirement that projects should provide for an "overflow area" for streams. The extensive amount of open space and buffering adjoining the stream and the separation provided by the debris flow mitigation berm appear to provide overflow capacity. At any rate, the requirement is not mandatory 14 and the stream has otherwise been thoroughly protected and separated from the development. 15 RMC 4-7-140: Approval of all subdivisions located in either single family residential or multi- 16 family residential zones as defined in the Zoning Code shall be contingenl upon the subdivider 's 17 18 dedication of land or providing fees in lieu of dedication to the City, all as necessary to mitigate the adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreation service levels. The requirements and procedures for this mitigation shall be per the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Resolution. 19 10. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 3(0), the proposal exceeds both park and open space 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 requirements. RMC 4-7-lSO(A): The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing streets unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. Prior to approving a street system that does not extend or connect, the Reviewing Official shall find that such exception shall meet the requirements of subsection E3 of this Section. The roadway classifications shall be as defined and designated by the Department. 11. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 7, the only street that the project could connect to is SR 169. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -24 1 RMC 4-7-lSO(B): All proposed street names shall be approved by the City. As conditioned. 2 12. 3 RMC 4-7-lSO(C): Streets intersecting with existing or proposed public highways, major or 4 secondary arterials shall be held to a minimum. 5 13. The project would be landlocked ifit could not directly access SR 169. 6 RMC 4-7-lSO(D): The alignment of all streets shall he reviewed and approved by the Public Works 7 Department. The street standards set by RMC 4-6-060 shall apply unless otherwise approved. Street alignment offsets of less than one hundred twenty five feet (125') are not desirable, hut may he 8 approved by the Department upon a showing of need but only after provision of all necessary safety 9 measures. 10 11 12 13 14. The Public Works Department has reviewed and approved the street aligmnent. The project will be conditioned upon compliance with RMC 4-6-060, which presumably has already been verified by the Public Works department but this is not evident from the record. RMC 4-7-lSO(E): I. Grid: A grid street pattern shall he used to connect existing and new development and shall he the 14 predominant street pattern in any subdivision permitted by this Section. 15 2. Linkages: Linkages, including streets, sidewalks, pedestrian or hike paths, shall he provided within 16 and between neighborhoods when they can create a continuous and interconnected network of roads and pathways. Implementation of this requirement shall comply with Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Objective T-A and Policies T-9 through T-16 and Community Design Element, Objective CD-Mand Policies CD-50 and CD-60. 17 18 19 3. Exceptions: 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 a. The grid pattern may be adjusted to a "flexible grid" by reducing the number of linkages or the alignment between roads, where the following factors are present on site: i. Infeasible due to topographical/environmental constraints; and/or ii. Substantial improvements are existing. 4. Connections: Prior to adoption ofa complete grid street plan, reasonable connections that link existing portions of the grid system shall he made. At a minimum, stub streets shall be required within subdivisions to allow future connectivity. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -25 1 5. Alley Access: Alley access is the preferred street pattern except for properties in the Residential Low Density land use designation. The Residential Low Density land use designation includes the 2 RC, R-1, and R-4 zones. Prior to approval of a plat without alley access, the Reviewing Official shall 3 evaluate an alley layout and determine that the use of alley(s) is not feasible ... 4 6. Alternative Corifigurations: Offset or loop roads are the preferred alternative configurations. 5 7. Cul-de-Sac Streets: Cul-de-sac streets may only be permitted by the Reviewing Official where due 6 to demonstrable physical constraints no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically possible. 7 8 15. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 7 there are no roads other than SR 169 with which the 9 project could connect. No grid system is reasonably feasible because the steep slopes make any thru streets impractical. The project has an internal looped road system, which is identified as the IO preferred alternative to a grid system in the regulation quoted above. Alley access is also provided for most lots. Topography would make it difficult to configure the plat to allow for alley access of all lots. 11 12 13 RMC 4-7-lSO(F): All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat, including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and J 4 sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the 15 16 Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee. 16. As conditioned. 17 RMC 4-7-lSO(G): Streets that may be extended in the event of future adjacent platting shall be required to be dedicated to the plat boundary line. Extensions of greater depth than an average lot 18 shall be improved with temporary turnarounds. Dedication of a full-width boundary street shall be 19 required in certain instances to facilitate future development. 20 21 22 23 17. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 7 there are no feasible street connections to the project other than directly to SR 169 as proposed. 4-7-160(A): Blocks shall be deep enough to allow two (2) tiers of lots, except where: I. Abutting principal arterials defined in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 24 2. The location and extent of environmental constraints prevent a standard plat land configuration, including size and shape of the parcel. 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 3. Prior to approval of single-tier lot configuration based on exceptions 1 and 2, the proponent must demonstrate that a different layout or provisions of an alley system is not feasible. 18. The steep slopes and the shape of the parcel could not accommodate two tiers of lots for all lots while still retaining a looped road system unless a significant number of lots were eliminated. Given that the applicant has already proposed open space that significantly exceeds open space requirements such an accommodation would have to be considered not feasible. 4-7-160(8): Where circumstances warrant, the Reviewing Official may require one or more public crosswalks or walkways of not less than six feet (6') in width dedicated to the City lo extend entirely across the width of the block at locations deemed necessary. Such crosswalks or walkways shall be paved for their entire width and length with a permanent surface and shall be adequately lighted at the developer's cost. 19. As identified in Finding of Fact 3(E) and depicted in Ex. 4, the proposal includes three paved cross-walks that link the sidewalks of the interior block to the exterior trail and sidewalks along Road A. It is unclear whether the sidewalks shall be at least six feet in width so that will be made a condition of approval. RMC 4-7-170(A): Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial 14 to curved street lines. 15 16 17 20. As depicted in Ex. 2, the side lines are in conformance with the requirement quoted above. RMC 4-7-170(8): Each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private access easement street per the requirements of the street standards. 18 21. Each lot will have access to Road B or the alley, which the staff report states will be public. It 19 20 21 22 23 is not immediately apparent from the conditions of approval or the plat notes in the exhibits that the plat roads and alley are required to be dedicated so this will be made a condition of approval. The staff report identifies Tract D as an access easement, strongly suggesting that public dedication is not contemplated. 4-7-170(8) allows for private access easements such as Tract D so long as the easements comply with street standards. Compliance with street standards shall be made a condition of approval. RMC 4-7-170(C): The size, shape, and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width 24 requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated. Further subdivision of lots within a plat approved through the 25 provisions of this Chapter must be consistent with the then-current applicable maximum density 26 requirement as measured within the plat as a whole. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -27 1 22. The proposed density of the plat as a whole is 6.33 units per acre, which is less than the 8 2 3 4 5 units per acre authorized by the R-8 zoning district. Lot area and width will not meet the minimum requirements of the R-8 district as outlined in Table A and Table C of the staff report. Any deviations from minimum lot width authorized by this decision are based upon compliance with PUD criteria of RMC 4-9-150. For purposes of RMC 4-7-l 70(C), deviations approved by the PUD standards should be considered to be consistent with the requirements of the applicable zoning classification. RMC 4-7-170(0): Width between side lot lines at their foremost points (i.e., the points where the 6 side lot lines intersect with the street right-of-way line) shall not be less than eighty percent (80%) of 7 the required lot width except in the cases of (I) pipestem lots, which shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20? and (2) lots on a street curve or the turning circle of cul-de-sac (radial lots), which 8 shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). 9 23. The "required lot width" for this project has been reduced by operation of the PUD standards, 10 RMC 4-9-150. As reduced, the lot widths for each lot are fairly consistent from front to rear lot and 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 the foremost lot lines are all at least 80% of lot width. However, there is at least one comer lot located on a street curve that has less than the required 35 foot frontage. Deviation from this 35 foot requirement is authorized under the PUD standards for the same reasons justifying the reduction in lot width. RMC 4-7-170(E): All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have minimum radius of fifteen feet (15'). 24. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-190(A): Easements may be required/or the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department. 25. The Department has requested Tract D to include an easement for utilities as authorized by the 19 regulation quoted above. 20 21 22 23 24 25 RMC 4-7-190(A): Due regard shall be shown to all natural features such as large trees, watercourses, and similar community assets. Such natural features should be preserved, thereby adding attractiveness and value to the property. 26. Large trees shall be retained or replaced as discussed in Finding of Fact No. 4(D) and Conclusion of Law No. 9. The stream will be protected by buffers, mitigation/restoration and open space as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. RMC 4-7-200(A): Unless septic tanks are specifically approved by the Public Works Department 26 and the King County Health Department, sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each lot /f sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. 27. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-200(B): An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all natural water flow and shall be of sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standard.~. The drainage system shall include detention capacity for the new street areas. Residential plats shall also include detention capacity for fature development of the lots. Water quality features shall also be designed to 9 provide capacity for the new street paving for the plat. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 28. As noted Finding of Fact 3(C ), the drainage system is designed to maintain Level 2 flows, which requires maintaining the durations of high flows at their predevelopment levels for all flows greater than one-half of the 2-year peak flow up to the SO-year peak flow. This necessarily includes drainage capacity for the new street areas and all other impervious surfaces as demonstrated in the preliminary storm drainage report, Ex. 29. The project will be conditioned for compliance with the other elements of the regulation quoted above. RMC 4-7-200(C): The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire Department requirements. 29. As conditioned. 18 RMC 4-7-200(0): All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the l 9 planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all 20 21 22 23 service connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department. 30. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-200(E): Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic 24 utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line 25 by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of 26 trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -29 1 bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider 2 shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the 3 subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. 4 5 6 7 31. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-210: A. MONUMENTS: Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling corner of 8 the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as de/ermined by !he Departmenl. All surveys 9 shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards. 10 B. SURVEY: 11 12 13 14 All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards. C. STREET SIGNS: The subdivider shall install all street name signs necessary in !he subdivision. 15 32. As conditioned. 16 17 RMC 4-9-150(8)(2): Code Provisions That May Be Modified: a. In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of chapter 4- 18 2 RMC, chapter 4-4 RMC, RMC 4-6-060 and chapter 4-7 RMC, except as listed in subsection B3 of this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban 19 development ... 20 33. As shown in Table A of the staff report, the requested revisions are limited to the regulations 21 identified in the regulation quoted above. 22 23 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 24 following requirements are met. 25 I. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required: Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of this Section and with the Comprehensive 26 Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which would result without a planned PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -30 I urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 34. The purposes of the PUD regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-150, are to preserve and protect the natural features of the land and to encourage innovation and creativity in development of residential uses. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 3 the natural features of the site are protected by open space, buffers and mitigation that significantly exceeds minimum code standards. The proposal involves innovation and creativity via the staff recommended requirement of a variety of home models, the looped road and trail system, the debris flow mitigation berm and the extensive amount of open space. The project is consistent with the comprehensive plan as determined in Conclusion of Law No. 5, the project is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal is superior in design to what which would occur without a PUD. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3 and 4 the project will not create any significant adverse impacts and so would not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only ifit finds that the following requirements are met. 2. Public Benefit Required: In addition, applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed 16 planned urban development: 17 18 19 20 21 22 a. Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development; or b. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or ... e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: ... 23 35. The proposal provides for public benefit by providing amenities related to critical areas, 24 25 26 natural features and overall design that significantly exceed code standards as determined in Finding of Fact No. 6. These benefits clearly outweigh any adverse impacts since there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal as determined in Finding of Fact No. 3 and 4. Staffs suggested condition, adopted by this decision, requiring an increase in the variety of house models compensates for the uniformity oflot size. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -31 1 2 3 RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 4 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. 36. As mentioned in Finding of Fact No. 6, the proposed landscaping along Maple Valley Highway would not only provide screening of the highway to the homes but would screen the proposed Tract A, detention facility from the road. The topography of the site on the east and south results in a natural screen to adjacent properties and the stream buffer associated with the proposed enhancement plantings would provide a screen to the residential neighborhood to the west. All proposed single family homes would be required to comply with the residential design standards for the R-8 zone resulting in a compatible size, scale, mass, character and architectural design for the overall development. Compliance with these standards would be reviewed at building permit application. 15 RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 16 following requirements are met. 17 18 19 20 21 22 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: ii. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single 23 family, townhouses, flats, etc. 24 25 26 37. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 6, the interior site design promotes quality pedestrian and vehicular circulation, increased critical area protection, promotes safety by buffering the high landslide hazards, and buffers the development from Maple Valley Highway. All homes would be required to comply with the R-8 development design standards which would result in coordinated, yet PREL!MlNAR Y PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -32 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 varied roof styles and materials, architectural detailing, and a variety of home styles throughout the development. RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the IO proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 38. The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A". Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots I -8, and 11 -17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities Tract, identified as "Tract D". Proposed Lots 18 -34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of Maple Valley Highway. Street lighting, sidewalks, and curb and gutter will be required. The PUD would have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access based on the location, size and density of the development, if all conditions of approval are met. See Finding of Fact No. 6, "Public Benefit, subsection: Overall Design 2. Circulation for additional discussion on pedestrian and vehicle circulation. Furthermore, the applicant has indicated that all roads would be designed to accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic generated by the project. In the Environmental Review, staff and the Environmental Review Committee reviewed the provided traffic study and proposed mitigation for impacts proposed for the increase in traffic attributed to the development (Exhibit 30). As such, if the applicant complies with all mitigation measures of the SEPA determination; traffic would not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -33 1 2 3 4 5 b. Circulation: ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep 6 gradients. 7 8 39. If the proposed conditions of approval are met, the pedestrian separation along Maple Valley Highway would be provided with an 8-foot planter strip. Another 8-foot planter strip would be located along the "inside" of Road B and the west side of Road A. Furthermore, the pedestrian 9 looped trail would provide another means for pedestrian movement throughout the development maintaining sufficient separation from vehicles. 10 11 12 13 A lighting plan was not included in the applicant's submittal packet; therefore, it is not clear how the proposed pedestrian pathways would be illuminated at night. Although, the soft surface trail should not be lit at night as this may cause additional impacts to the stream and its buffer, the remainder of the pedestrian pathway throughout the site should be lit with shielded lighting to reduce increased impacts to the wildlife habitat within the stream. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to 14 utility construction. The lighting plan shall contain pedestrian lighting in addition to building and landscaping lighting if proposed. 15 16 The proposed development would limit driveways on busy streets and 50 percent of the lots would be accessed from a public alley. In addition, only one access point is proposed from Maple Valley 17 Highway to the development, Road A. Based on the traffic analysis the applicant would provide a new right turn deceleration Jane for access to Road A and a right tum taper for access to SR-169 from the site eastbound. The applicant has proposed to design Road A with a less than 12 percent slope 18 19 and Road B would be less than 8 percent slope with landings designed for the intersections for the entrances to the public alley. These design considerations/requirements would result in a circulation system that would avoid difficult turning patterns, minimizes steep gradients and minimize driveways on busy streets. 20 21 22 23 Once the applicant has fulfilled the conditions of approval (noted above); the promotion of safety could be accomplished. RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 24 following requirements are met. 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -34 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 •. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. 40. See Finding of Fact No. 6 "Public Benefit, Subsection: Overall Design I. and 2". The street frontage improvements along Maple Valley Highway and within the internal street system would provide a connection to a school bus stop and potentially public transit. The applicant has proposed to provide two benches along the frontage of Maple Valley Highway for the school bus stop. The site is constrained by natural topographical features and connections to surrounding areas are difficult due to the topography and Maple Valley Highway. However, the internal street system provides sufficient walkways to access the site. The subject site is located on periphery of the City boundary, and is relatively isolated from commercial zoned property. There is no existing access to commercial development in or near the subject site and no new access proposed for pedestrians. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 15 following requirements are met. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. 41. The project has been reviewed and by the environmental review committee, which according to RMC 2-14-3 is composed of representatives from the fire department, public works, community services and community and economic development. If the roadways are designed per recommended standards (Exhibit 31 ), the development would provide safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. The committee has recommended approval and staff have concluded in the staff report that the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -35 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 proposal provides for safe and efficient access of emergency vehicles and there is no evidence to the contrary. The criterion is satisfied. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria c. l,ifrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. 42. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3, the proposal is served by sufficient public infrastructure and services to serve the development. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the I I following requirements are met. 12 13 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consisten,y with all of the following criteria 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. 43. The uniqueness of the site, with a considerable percentage consumed by critical areas, results in a necessity to cluster development. When considering all critical areas on the site (including the portion located in King County) and their buffers or slope setback areas, approximately 60 percent of the site is undevelopable. These natural features create a site that maintains open space in the form of critical area buffers as well as recreation space. The requested lot size and setback modification allow for a clustered R-8 development that provides increase protection of critical areas creating an appearance of openness. See additional discussion Finding of Fact No. 6 "Public Benefit, Subsections: Critical Areas and Natural Features". As noted in the previous sections, the proposed development would have well-designed open space and landscaping. In order to maintain sufficient separation between buildings, the applicant has not requested a modification for the side yard setback, as such all structures will maintain a minimum of 10 feet of separation. This spacing allows for emergency access and sufficient fire separation. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -36 I RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it.finds that the following requirements are met. 2 3 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for 4 consistency with all of the following criteria 5 6 7 e. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external 8 privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 44. As mentioned above the proposed subdivision is screened on all four sides from surrounding development, due to the natural topography, stream buffer area and proposed landscape buffer along Maple Valley Highway. Within the subdivision, unit to unit privacy would be provided by the side yard setback requirement. The applicant has indicated in the Project's Compliance Statement, Ex. 3 7, that wood fences would be used to separate the single family lots to provide both screening and privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Street trees are required either within the required landscape strip or in the front yard of the lot. The required trees would add to the privacy for lots across Road B. As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 6, "Public Benefit, Subsections: Critical Areas and Natural Features", the proposed walkways and landscaping are appropriate for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property. All homes would be required to be designed to meet the residential design standards for the R-8 zone. These standards would require windows on the front of the home, increasing access to light and air for each dwelling unit. Furthermore, each lot would have private front, side and rear yards, enhancing each lot with landscaping and access to light and air. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 23 following requirements are met. 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -37 1 2 3 f Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. 4 5 45. The lots are arranged in into 3 groups. Group one is located along Maple Valley Highway (Lots 1 -10) aligned east-west. Group two is located along the east side of Road B (Lots 11 -17) 6 aligned north-south and group three is located in the center of Road B (Lots 18 -34) aligned east- west. The site topography slopes down from south to north, resulting in a tiered housing effect after site grading. Based on the proposed grading of the site, the applicant has indicated that all new homes would have a view of the Cedar River, located across Maple Valley Highway. The proposed layout maximizes the use of topography and building location to take advantage of the views to the 7 8 9 north of the Cedar River. 1 O RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it find.~ that the following requirements are met. 11 12 13 14 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria 15 g. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not 16 designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, 17 and shared parking facilities where appropriate. 18 46. Required parking would be provided within garages attached to each home, of which 50 19 percent would be accessed via a public alley. Additional guest parking would be provided on the driveway aprons for each lot. On-street parking would be provided along Road B on one side. The 20 proposed parking is designed to provide efficient use of the site and would be appropriately screen by the provided garages. 21 22 23 RMC 4-9-150(D)(4): Each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the development standards contained in subsection E of this Section, the underlying zone, and any overlay districts; unless a modification for a specific development standard has been requested 24 pursuant to subsection B2 of this Section. 25 26 47. As discussed below, the proposal complies with all development standards imposed by RMC 4-9-150(E). As previously determined the uses and density proposed for the project is consistent with PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -38 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 the underlying zone. As depicted in the plat maps, Ex. 2, the lots comply with the bulk and dimensional requirements of the underlying zone except to the extent modified by the PUD regulations. RMC 4-9-150(E)(l): Common Open Space Standard: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for residential, mixed use, commercial, and industrial developments are described below. a. Residential: For residential developments open space must equal at least ten percent (I 0%) of the development site 's gross land area. i. Open space may include, but is not limited to, the following: (a) A trail that allows opportunity for passive recreation within a critical area buffer (only the square footage of the trail shall be included in the open space area calculation), or (b) A sidewalk and its associated landscape strip, when abutting the edge of a critical area buffer and when a part of a new public or private road, or (c) A similar proposal as approved by the reviewing official. ii. Additionally, a minimum area equal to fifty (50) square feet per unit of common space or recreation area shall be provided in a concentrated space as illustrated in Figure I. 48. The proposed development is located on an 11.59 acre site, of which the majority is located in critical areas including the entire portion located within King County. The portion of the site located in the City of Renton is 7.32 acres, based on the 7.32 acre site the required amount of open space would be 31,899 square feet. The applicant has dedicated an Open Space Tract E and C which totals 29,638 square feet and a soft surface trail that equals 9,192 square feet, resulting in a total of 38,830 square feet, resulting in 6,931 square feet of additional open space. The proposed development would have 34 lots, 50 square feet of common space or recreation areas is required per unit, resulting in a requirement of an additional 1,700 square feet. To fulfill the common space requirement the applicant has proposed to provide a 4,188 square foot park, resulting in 2,488 square feet of additional recreation space than required. The park is located on the inside of Road B directly across the street from the Open Space Tract. The overall location and design of the park, open space and trail are located as to create a quality open space/recreation area for the development, specifically if all conditions of approval are met. RMC 4-9-150(E)(2): Private Open Space: Each residential unit in a planned urban development shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors) for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. The private open space shall PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -39 . . ' I be well demarcated and at least fifteen feel (15') in every dimension (decks on upper floors can 2 substitute for the required private open space). For dwelling unils which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling al least sixly (60) square feel in size wilh no dimension less 3 than five feet (5 '). 4 49. Each Jot would have a private yard in both the front and the rear of the lot. The requested 5 setback reduction is for a IO-foot front and IO-foot rear, which could result in a private open space yard that is less than 15 feet in every dimension. However, the lots sizes are large enough to 6 accommodate a portion of the yard to meet this standard. As a condition of approval, compliance 7 with this standard shall be reviewed at building permit stage. 8 RMC 4-9-150(E)(3): Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: 9 a. Installation: All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the 10 landscaping plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the City; provided, thal common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the 11 12 issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall famish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) 13 years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing l 4 maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract wilh a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 b. Maintenance: Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements of RMC 4-4-070. 50. As conditioned. RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: a. Installation: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions ofRMC 4-9-060 ... 51. As conditioned. 25 RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -40 ... . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 b. Maintenance: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, if there is only one owner, or by the property owners' association, or the agent(s) thereof. In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners' association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 52. As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to establish a home owners' association for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements, including but not limited to the soft surface trail, landscaping, and park within the PUD prior to Final PUD approval. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be permanently maintained by the PUD home owners' association. RMC 4-9-150(0)(2): Merger with Other Applications: A preliminary planned urban development may be considered simultaneously with any other land use permit required for a proposal, including but not limited to: preliminary plats, short plats, binding site plans, critical area modifications or variances, shoreline substantial developments permits, shoreline variances, shoreline conditional use 12 permits, grading regulation modifications or variances, or other applications. Where merged, the review criteria for all of the applications shall be considered simultaneously with the planned urban 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 development criteria in subsection C of this Section. Where there are conflicts with review criteria, the criteria of subsection C of this Section shall govern. Where merged, all permits shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. The review authority shall be determined consistent with RMC 4-8-080C2, Review Authority for Multiple Permit Applications. 53. As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 4, the application includes a request to reduce the stream buffers of the Class III stream and an alteration to the stream buffer for a water line crossing. Both critical area modifications are approved based upon the findings and conclusions adopted by reference in Finding of Fact No. 4. DECISION The proposed preliminary plat, preliminary PUD, stream buffer reduction and stream buffer alteration are all approved. Requested revisions to development standards are approved to the extent recommended by staff in Exhibit 31. The proposal is subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. The applicant shall comply with the 12 mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated August 22, 2011. 2. The applicant shall construct street frontage improvements, as modified in Exhibit 31, Staff Recommendation, Approved Modification form Renton Municipal Code (RMC). These PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -41 I 2 3 4 5 improvements shall be shown on the final PUD application, and reviewed and approved by the Engineering Plan Review Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. 3. The applicant shall submit a detailed final landscape plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The detailed final landscape plan shall include, but is not limited to the following: a. Proposed locations and design details of benches and interpretive signage proposed along the 6 soft surface trial. 7 b. Street trees shall be identified in compliance with the City's street tree standards. 8 c. The plan shall indicate either I 00 percent drought tolerant plantings or the applicant shall 9 provide a final irrigation plan with the final detailed landscape plan. 10 d. The plan shall include exact numbers of trees, shrubs, and groundcover and shall include 11 12 13 specific locations for the shrubs and ground cover. e. The plan shall identify the existing location and number of trees with a two inch caliper or greater and the applicant shall protect and/or replace all of these trees as required by the City's tree retention ordinance, RMC 4-4-130. See Conclusion of Law No. 9. 14 4. The park shall be moved east by one lot to align with Road A, and adjusting Lot 34 to be the 15 northwest corner lot of the internal portion of the development. This change shall be reflected on the 16 17 18 final PUD application materials. 5. The detention facility shall be re-designed to become an integral part of the open space system. The design shall meet the City's stormwater requirements and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. 19 6. All crosswalks in the development shall be differentiated by material or texture from adjacent 20 paving materials and shall be at least six feet in width. An updated site plan depicting proposed materials or texture for crosswalks shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current 2 I Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. 22 23 24 7. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. The lighting plan shall contain pedestrian lighting in addition to building and landscaping lighting if proposed. 8. The applicant shall revise the utility plan to depict a I-inch water meter to all lots. The 25 revised plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Plan Review Project Manager 26 prior to Final Plat recording PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -42 ••• 1 9. The applicant shall establish a home owners' association for the development, which would 2 be responsible for any common improvements, including but not limited to the soft surface trail, landscaping, and park within the PUD. The draft CCR's shall be reviewed and approved by the City 3 Attorney, prior to final PUD approval. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be 4 permanently maintained by the PUD home owners' association. The CCR's shall provide that any 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 covenants required by the City may not be amended without City approval. 10. The applicant shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable easement on the property title for all critical areas and their buffers prior to Final Plat recording. The protective easement shall be held by current and future property owners; shall run with the land; and shall prohibit development, alteration, and disturbance within the easement except for the purposes of habitat enhancement as a part of an enhancement project, access for the trail users and maintenance, and debris flow mitigation access for landslide events. Furthermore, these areas shall be fenced with split rail fencing, providing designated access points along the trail and necessary access for debris removal in the event of a landslide. In addition, the large portion of the site that is located in King County shall be recorded in a separate critical areas tract that is consistent with King County Code section 2 lA.24, and shall have an NGPE or similar easement consistent with KKC recorded on this tract 11. The Park shall be placed in a recreation tract, this designation shall be identified on the final 14 PUD and Plat Plan, prior to Final Plat recording. 15 12. A covenant shall be placed on all tracts restricting their separate sale and giving each lot 16 owner within the plat an undivided interest in the tracts. This covenant should be recorded on the 17 18 19 face of the plat, and/or concurrent with the plat recording, noting the recording number on the plat. 13. A street lighting plan shall be submitted with the construction permit application for review and approval by the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. 14. A note shall be placed on the face of the plat requiring proposed Lots 8-11 to gain access from 20 the proposed access easement, Tract D. The note shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 21 15. The applicant shall apply for and successfully obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development 22 Permit, prior to construction permit issuance. 23 16. The applicant shall submit a final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan that complies 24 with the criteria included in RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 3-4-050. The applicant shall provide the final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan for review and approval to the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. 25 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -43 "" ' I 17. The applicant shall provide a trail detail for review and approval by the Current Planning 2 Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval, showing compliance with the criteria in RMC 4-3- 050C. 7.a specifically the trail surface materials. 3 18. The applicant shall submit a detailed wetland buffer enhancement plan, that is compliant with 4 RMC 4-3-050 for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD 5 approval. 6 19. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the utility corridor within the buffer, to isolate the area of disturbance and reduce potential further impacts. Construction fencing shall be 7 shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to 8 construction permit issuance. 9 20. The applicant shall provide the Current Planning Project Manager, a water line installation 10 plan, which complies with RMC 4-3-0501.8.b.i.(b) for review and approval, prior to final PUD approval. 11 21. The applicant shall provide the Current Planning Project Manager, an utility installation 12 analysis, prepared by a certified biologist, that addresses criterion 4-3-0501.8.b.i.(d) and is accepted 13 14 15 by the Administrator of Community and Economic Development or Designee, prior to final PUD approval. If the report concludes there would be impacts, as identified in this criterion, the installation of the water line would be denied. 22. Construction of the water line shall be limited to June through August when stream flows are 16 anticipated to be low and that City Staff is contacted to verify little to no flow within the stream bed 17 18 before construction commences. 23. The common boundary between the native growth protection tract and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include a permanent wood split rail fence and 19 metal signs on treated or metal posts. The permanent wood split rail fence and signs shall be installed 20 prior to Final Plat recording. 21 24. The following note shall appear on the face of the Final Plat and shall also be recorded as a 22 covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created or benefitting from this City 23 action abutting or including a native growth protection tract are responsible for maintenance and 24 protection of the tract. Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been 25 received." 26 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -44 . •; . 1 25. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the edge of the wetlands and stream 2 buffer areas, to clearly identify the edge of the critical areas during the construction phase of the development. This fencing may encroach within the stream buffer, in approved temporary 3 construction locations per the provided Critical Areas report, for the construction of the storm water 4 pond. Construction fencing shall be shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning project manager prior to construction permit issuance. 5 26. Tract D on the preliminary plat map, Ex. 2, shall be identified as an access and utility tract and 6 shall comply with City street standards as contemplated in RMC 4-7-170(B). 7 27. All proposed street names shall be submitted to the City and approved by the City prior to 8 final plat approval. 9 28. All subdivision streets shall comply with the street standards of RMC 4-6-060 as 10 contemplated in RMC 4-7-150(0). 11 29. All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat, including 12 13 streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee. 14 30. Road A, B and C as depicted in Ex. 2 shall be dedicated to the public. 15 31. All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have a 16 minimum radius of fifteen feet (15') as contemplated by RMC 4-7-l 70(E). 17 32. Sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each lot if 18 sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. 19 33. As contemplated in RMC 4-7-200(B), cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all 20 natural water flow and shall be of sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. 21 22 23 The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. 34. The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire Department 24 requirements as contemplated in RMC 4-7-200(C). 25 26 35. All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -45 ' ... I connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior 2 to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department of Community and Economic Development.. 3 36. Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic utilities are 4 installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line by subdivider 5 as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of trenching, conduit, 6 pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to bring service to the 7 development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider shall be responsible 8 9 only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. 10 37. Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling 11 12 13 14 comer of the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department of Community and Economic Development. All surveys shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards. All other lot comers shall be marked per the City surveying standards. 38. 39. The applicant shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the private open space standards of RMC 4- JS 9-l SO(E)(2) for each lot prior to and as a requirement for building permit issuance. 16 40. 17 41. Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements ofRMC 4-4-070. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not 18 limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the applicant or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, 19 assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions ofRMC 4-9-060. 20 21 22 23 42. Water and sanitary sewer availability certificates will be acquired prior to final plat approval. 43. All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the City; provided, that common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the 24 provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter 25 prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping 26 may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -46 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. DATED this 20th day of January, 2012. Phil A. Olbrechts City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-11 O(E)(9) provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-11 O(E)(9) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing e examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-1 lO(E)(S) and RMC 4-8-100(G)(4). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall~ 7th floor, ( 425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -47 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Renton Reporter has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a: Public Notice was published on December 23, 2011. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $77.00. ~ ./:~:;~ h; ;,, ,·c· C ~(,,J,f ~/? _:;-/;, '-' ·:J- unda M. Mills Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter Subscrioed and sworn ffl me this 23rd day of December, 2011. Kathy Dalse~ofary Public fo in Covington, Washington P. 0. Number: e State of Washington, Residing ,OTICI<: OF Pl'BLIC IIEARl'iG RENTON HEARING EXAMl'iER RE,n>~. \\'ASHINGTff'\ A public Hearing will be held by Lhe Renton Hearing Exmninr.!r in the Council Chambers on the scvc-nth 11oor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South (irudy Way, Renton. Washington. on .lanuarv 5, 2012 at 9.00-a.m. to considCr Lhe following petitions Mc('orm1ck Plat LUA 11-034, f'CF. PP. PPUD 1.ocation 16405 SE Renton- Maple Valley Road The request includes Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development for a 34 lot. 9 tract subdivision of a 7.J2 uc lot at 16405 Maple Valley Hwy zone<l R-8 resulting in a density of 6.33 du/ac Legal descriptions of the tiles noted above arc on Ille in the Citv Clerk's Office. Seventh Fll:ir. Citv Hall, Renlon. All in- ierested J)ersons are invited to be present at the Public I fearing to express their opinions. Questions should be directed to the Hearing Examiner at 425-430-6515. Published in Renton Reporter on December 23. 2011 #564266 :\,,\.\\\\\\\\\1,1, ,,,,,,; OAls)..1111, 1 , .,i;" .Ly, .... , .. "''\"111,, ... Q ,,,. 2 ,;.,.,,,;._0,1 ~)1,,, ~ -D--0 A U,,. ~ :: ""~ r,.\ I?;.. -~~ ~ ~ ff~ ~u tP\ ~ ,:: :::a -~ ::::: ~ :: -~ ~ ::: ~() c., : 2" :: ,; 1. /:J \.' -o -~ ~ ua v;:i :J..:..: 1 1, .,'\$,-... : 1, <l\ ,,,,. 7 0-19 ,,<· ,v "' I ,,. '11 :o..' ~<J'<~ -111 ..,~'). hln\Ws';\'. ~'('i."-'" $" 11, "'n-wr."::;, ........ .... ''1 ' ,Jr-· r'"' .......... . IJI\\\\\H\\\"\-.,,..: I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: McCormick Plat Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development ) ) ) ) ) ) ) LUAll-034, ECF, PP, PPUD ) _______________ ,) Summary FINAL DECISION 16 Robert McCormick has applied for approval of an application for a 34 lot preliminary plat and planned urban development ("PUD"), The application also includes a request to reduce portions of 17 a 75 foot buffer to a Class III stream to 60 feet and an alteration of the buffer to enable a waterline crossing. The project site currently accommodates a 40 unit mobile home park and the applicant will 18 have to vacate the park to develop the subdivision. The application and associated stream buffer 19 modifications are approved subject to conditions. Requested modifications to development standards as authorized by PUD regulations are approved to the extent recommended by staff. 20 The project's compliance with applicable development standards was virtually uncontested. The 21 Muckleshoot Tribe provide some written concerns and many of those concerns were addressed by 22 staff in its recommended conditions of approval. As is evident from the record, all project impacts were thoroughly assessed and mitigated. Most of the staff's analysis and most of its recommended 23 conditions of approval was adopted without any need for modification. Numerous conditions of approval were added to assure compliance with permitting criteria. It is likely that staff had already 24 ensured that the project would comply with these conditions, but this was not evident from the administrative record. 25 26 There was only one revision to the staff recommended conditions of approval that may require some marginally significant revision to the project, regarding a re-assessment of compliance with the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 City's tree retention regulations. The staff report provides for an inventory of trees with 6-inch caliper or greater and bases retention and replacement requirements on those numbers. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 9, the City's tree retention ordinance requires protection of all trees with a 2-inch caliper or greater. It may well be that the staff report doesn't mention trees between 2 and 6- inch caliper because none are present at the project site. However, if there are trees in that range the conditions of approval require that they be included in the applicant's tree retention plan. If staff or the applicant have some code basis to argue that tree retention requirements only apply to the 6-inch plus trees, a reconsideration request is highly encouraged. Several persons attended the hearing, but no members of the public expressed any concerns about regulatory compliance. The people at the hearing are mobile home owners living in the park and they were understandably concerned about their relocation. As explained by the Examiner at the hearing, the City has little authority to alleviate the problems this project will introduce into their lives. What help can be provided is mostly available through state law as opposed to City regulations. RCW 59.21.030 requires the applicant to provide twelve months' notice to the mobile home owners prior to the termination of their tenancy. The applicant can provide this notice anytime he chooses and mobile home owners should consult with the applicant to determine when he intends to send out the notice. Washington State also provides relocation monies to low income mobile home owners. In Condition 11 of the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA"), Chapter 43.21 C RCW Mitigated Determination ofNonsignificance ("MDNS") the applicant has voluntarily agreed to advance the funds provided by the state to those who would qualify for the funds. According to the applicant at the hearing, without the advanced funding qualified owners may not get funds from the state until well after they've incurred relocation expenses. For those who would like more information on the state relocation program, the Washington State Department of Commerce has a website with information at http://www.commerce.wa.gov/site/484/default.aspx. Note that the website provided by the applicant in Ex. 36 is no longer active since the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic development was absorbed into the Washington State Department of Commerce. The Department of Commerce can also be reached if you have questions about the relocation program at 1-800-964-0852. Testimony Staff Testimony Vanessa Dolbee, senior planner for city of Renton, stated the application is for a for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. She noted exhibit 18, the neighborhood detail map, which demonstrates the site is on the south side of Maple Valley Highway and a portion of the property lies in King County, not Renton. Ms. Dolbee testified that the property is designated residential, single family (R-8) in the city. She said the portion of the site within Renton is 7.32 acres, and the map (exhibit 18) denotes which sections of the property are in the city and PRELJMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 which are in King County. The section of the site to be developed is located in Renton, yet the part in King County is still being processed within this application. She noted that across from Maple Valley Highway is King County park property that is zoned RA-5, to the east is property zoned R-A5, to the south there is vacant land zoned RA-IOP and R-1, and to the west is R-8 which is the Summerfield residential development. Ms. Dolbee testified that exhibit 32 is a vested King County plat for the same property (also for a 34- lot subdivision), which is proposal LUA-068 for King County. Due to this vested application, this proposal is unique because the comparison for public benefit improvements needs to be balanced according to both Renton standards and King County standards, Ms. Dolbee noted. The old plat proposal for King County has cul-de-sacs and a !-access easement for the lots, but, according to Ms. Dolbee, in the new plan there is a looped road system, alley-loaded homes, vertical curves/sidewalks, a trail system, and a large vegetative buffer along the Maple Valley Highway. Additionally, she commented that there is an increase in critical area protection in the lots along the south-side in the new proposal. Ms. Dolbee stated that exhibit 2 is the applicant's proposal. The proposal is for lots ranging from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet, resulting in a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per acre, she said. Ms. Dolbee noted that there are nine tracts proposed including a storm-water tract, aid and growth protection tracts, access and utility tracts, open space, a lopped trail system (1/3 of a mile long), a play area in the center, and a hierarchical road system. According to Ms. Dolbee, there are 3 roads: road A is the main access way, road B loops around the development, and road C goes through the center of the development. Ms. Dolbee testified that there are many critical areas within the site. There is a class 3 stream that runs along the north-side of the mobile home park on the property and then turns and heads north to Cedar River, she said. Ms. Dolbee added that there are two category 2 wetlands: wetland A is located on the southwestern comer, while wetland Bis on the northeastern comer of the site. Ms. Dolbee stated that exhibit 2 notes the steep slopes along the south-side of the site which contain severe erosion and landslide hazards. There are also seismic hazards in the entire development area, she noted. Ms. Dolbee remarked that a small portion of the site is also located in the shoreline 20 jurisdiction of the Cedar River ( exhibit 19). The very comers of proposed lots 9 and IO would fall in 21 22 23 24 25 26 this shoreline jurisdiction, she said. According to Ms. Dolbee, an environmental review was completed for the project and a mitigated determination of non-significance was issued with 12-mitigation measures. There was a 14-day appeal period that commenced on August 26th and ended on September 9th of 2011, but there were no appeals of the threshold determination, she noted. Ms. Dolbee mentioned that many of the 12 mitigation measures listed in the environmental review addressed the critical areas on the site. Ms. Dolbee stated that the applicant has requested two approvals: one for a preliminary plat and one for a planned urban development. She noted that each approval has specific review criteria, but do PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -3 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 include much overlap. Ms. Dolbee testified that PUDs requirements are meant to preserve natural features and encourage innovation in residential developments by permitting a variety of structures and improvements. The PUDs are meant to encourage superior design than what is provided for in the city code, she said. Ms. Dolbee commented that the density provisions of title 4 cannot be modified under this PUD application, thus the proposed subdivision does comply with the R-8 designation (4-8 dwelling units per acre). However, she noted, 4.2, 4.4, 4.7, 4.6060 of the title code can all be modified to meet this PUD proposal. According to Ms. Dolbee, in table A of the staff report, the modifications to the title requested by the applicant are listed. The applicant has requested a change in standard lot size from 4,500 to 2,319 sq. feet. She added that lot width's current standard is 50ft for interior lots and 60ft for corner lots, but the applicant wishes to change to 32ft for interior lot and 42ft for corner lots. Additionally, she noted that lot minimum depth is 65ft, but the applicant wishes to change lot 18 to 43ft (a corner lot) and lot 26 to 61ft (southeast corner lot). She stated that all other lots would meet lot depth standards. According to Ms. Dolbee, the minimum front-yard setback is currently 15ft, but the applicant has requested a reduction to I Oft. In addition, she stated, the minimum side-yard along a street is currently 15ft, but the applicant has requested a reduction to I Oft and 5ft for lot 11 because it is along an access easement. She also testified that rear-yard setback is currently 20ft, but the applicant 12 requested it be reduced to I Oft. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 In table A there are three other requested modifications that were not requested by the applicant, but were proposed by staff, according to Ms. Dolbee. Staff feels these modifications are necessary to create a buildable development, she said. Ms. Dolbee stated that the first staff-proposed modification is to maximum building coverage. Staff recommends the 50 percent maximum building coverage be eliminated in order for the buildings to fit on the smaller lot sizes, she testified. Instead, Ms. Dolbee stated, staff wishes to utilize impervious coverage and setback standards to regulate mass. Ms. Dolbee testified that a second modification proposed is to remove the requirement of a variety of lot sizes and widths because of the small size of the lots on the site. In order to maintain variation, staff recommends a modification to the residential design scale and bulk character section which would increase the standard of different models of homes from every IO lots, to every 4 lots, according to Ms. Dolbee. Ms. Dolbee stated that the applicant requested two road standard modifications. For Maple Valley Highway, the applicant has requested to not do frontage improvements, but only do curb/gutter and add a 5ft sidewalk, she said. However, Ms. Dolbee commented, staff does not approve this mitigation, but instead asked for 20ft right-of-way dedication, a 5ft sidewalk, an 8ft planting strip, and curb/gutter/streetlights designed to meet city arterial standards. The applicant also requested for a modification from residential access road standards, according to Ms. Dolbee. She remarked that, currently, the applicant requested a 33ft pavement from face-of-curb to face-of-curb with parking on one side and a 5ft sidewalk on the inside, which is along lots 18-34. Staff recommends a different modification ( closer to city standards), she commented. According to Ms. Dolbee, staff asked that road A have a 40ft right of way, curb/gutter on both sides, 5ft sidewalk on both sides , 25ft pavement PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -4 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 JO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 section on both sides, and a 8ft planter strip on the west side. In addition, she noted, staff also asked that road B have a 30ft right of way, 20 ft. of pavement, parking on one side, curb/gutter on both sides, and an 8ft planter strip to the interior. Ms. Dolbee testified that the second portion of the PUD criteria is the demonstration of compliance superiority. She stated that the proposed plat layout provides for a significant increase in residential safety from the high landslide hazards, it provides for many recreational amenities beyond code requirements, it increases the quality of the internal circulation system throughout the development, it enhances the critical areas with the addition of open space, and it is a significant improvement from the King County proposal. According to Ms. Dolbee, table B of the staff report identifies the public benefits of this project. In regards to critical areas, more protection for these areas is provided by the proposal, she stated, Specifically, Ms. Dolbee noted that in wetland A there is a 50ft required buffer, along with the 22,000 sq. ft. tract (tract E). The enhanced landslide protection can be seen in exhibit 5 (stream buffer map), she said. According to Ms. Dolbee, the addition of a 33ft roadway adds an 100ft buffer between the tow of the steep slopes and the potential future home. She noted that there is a debris-flow protection berm proposed that would gather the soils if there was a high-level landslide. Ms. Dolbee stated that the safeguards reduce the chance oflife or property loss in a catastrophic event. In regards to natural features, Ms. Dolbee stated that the existing development does encroach on the wetland and stream buffers in some places, but there is a mitigation plan provided. She remarked that the PUD would re-vegetate those areas where the existing development encroaches upon buffer areas already (such as the area north of the mobile park) with natural plantings. She concluded that the redevelopment would reduce the current impacts that already exist at the site. There are significant landscape enhancements which can be seen in exhibit 16 (the landscape plan). She noted that there is a large landscape buffer screen for Maple Valley Highway which exceeds the buffer requirement by 1 Oft ( dark green on exhibit 16). Tract J is a landscaped area behind the steep slopes on the eastern boundary, and it would be vegetated which is beyond code standards, she said. Additionally, she noted that tract E would be provided along the west-side of the site, which contributes to the aesthetics of the site. A 4,188 sq. ft. open-space park would be in the northwest comer of the interior of the site, she said. Ms. Dolbee commented that the applicant also proposes increased tree planting. There are currently 27 protected trees on the site, and the r-8 zone requires 30-percent tree protection, she said. According to Ms. Dolbee, the applicant would be retaining 2 trees and replacing 77 trees which exceed the code requirement. In regards to overall design, Ms. Dolbee stated that there is a large amount of open space and recreation which exceeds code requirements by 2,488ft for park area and 6,931 ft for open space. She noted that staff recommends lot-34 be swapped with the park lot in order to create a gateway feature and provide a more desirable home-location. She noted that this recommendation was included in the conditions of approval attached to the staff report. Ms. Dolbee also testified that staff recommended ( as a condition of approval) that tracts E and C be combined along above the detention pond in order to create a more cohesive area and the possibility for a pedestrian walkway. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Ms. Dolbee noted that the proposed plat has a superior pedestrian circulation system with a soft- surface trail which can be seen in exhibit 4 (brown lines). She added that there would be sidewalks along the three roadways. In regards to sidewalks, Ms. Dolbee commented that the applicant proposed a tabletop design at the intersection of roads B and A to increase pedestrian safety. She noted that staff recommends all sidewalks are treated the same for the project, in order to create cohesiveness, avoid confusion, and maintain safety. Ms. Dolbee noted that the site will have superior vehicular circulation with the looped road system by allowing rear access to the internal lots. Additionally, the presence of alleys for vehicle circulation allows for a more pedestrian-safe environment, she said. She noted that fifty percent of the lots are accessed by alleys, in accordance with city code. In regards to landscaping and screening, the topography to the east and south results in a natural screen for the development, according to Ms. Dolbee. She stated that plantings in the west will also provide screening for the development in that area. Ms. Dolbee added that the site is designed to allow for solar access for 27 of the lots, and all homes will be subject to design standards of a R-8 zone. The proposed site plan is superior to Renton standards and the King County vested application. According to Ms. Dolbee, the PUD criterion requires the interior site-design to be coordinated. The proposal achieves this through quality pedestrian and vehicular circulation, critical area protection, safety with buffering, and R-8 design standards, according to Ms. Dolbee. In order to meet the PUD circulation criteria, the proposal gains access from Maple Valley Highway, gives lots 1-8, 11-1 7 access to road B, lots 9 and 10 gain access through tract d, and road c gives lots 18-34 access, she said. Ms. Dolbee noted that all of these roads are designed to handle emergency vehicles and traffic created by the project. She stated that a traffic impact analysis was completed and demonstrated the proposal meets city and state requirements. Ms. Dolbee noted that planter strips would provide area between pedestrians and vehicles, and a school bus-stop would be located on the west-side of road A. According to Ms. Dolbee, there is no direct commercial development in the area, so the PUD criterion for pedestrian connections is irrelevant at this time. In regards to infrastructure and services criteria, the site would be served by City of Renton fire and Cedar River water and sewer district, she noted. Ms. Dolbee stated that a water line extension would be needed from the west, which would require a connection line through the stream buffer. This extension would be permitted in the code via a stream alteration approval, she commented. In addition, Ms. Dolbee noted that a detention pond is proposed in the northwest comer for storm-water runoff. She testified that the proposed infrastructure and services are sufficient, if the water connection is mitigated and all SEPA conditions are met. In regards to the building orientation criteria, Ms. Dolbee remarked that the proposed layout maximizes the use of topography for views of the Cedar River. She added that parking for two vehicles on each lot is provided. Additionally, she noted that open space and recreation area requirements are exceeded. Private open space is required on each lot (15 ft. in each direction) and would be reviewed during building permit approval, she said. Ms. Dolbee reinforced that the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -6 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 development does comply with the city's comprehensive plan. She added that staff has recommended that lots 8 and 11 have access to the utilities tract to reduce curb cuts along the comer of road B. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Dolbee noted that King County has allowed Renton to process the site as one subdivision rather than dividing the property. There is no development occurring in the portion in King County because that portion has the stream area and severe landslide hazards. King County critical area standards have been applied for that portion of the land. She stated she is unaware if there is a better alternative for the water line extension. The King County vested plat application does not meet Renton lot width and depth standards. Ms. Dolbee testified that the minimum open space requirement calculation did not include the King County portion of the site. Ms. Dolbee noted that there is a state program for relocation funds that is not run by the city. This program was mentioned in the mitigation measures. The developer would provide the funding, she noted, and the state requires a I-year notification timetable if the development is moved forward. Applicant Testimony Courtney Kaylor, applicant's attorney, stated that staff has been very thorough and the applicant agrees with the recommended conditions. She noted that the applicant requests that mitigation measure 2 (page 10 of staff report) in regards to relocation agreements be reviewed because of a believed typo. The "and" needs to be removed from the sentence, according to Ms. Kaylor. In regards to the conditions of approval, the applicant wishes to change the 2°d condition (page 35), relating to street standards, according to Ms. Kaylor. She stated that the applicant wants to change the 8ft landscape strip to a 6.5ft strip. Ms. Kaylor submitted exhibits 33-38. Greg Diener, Pacific Engineering Design, testified that to the west of the site is the large Summerfield development, to the east there is no significant development, and to the south there is a large hillside ( 400ft tall slope). Furthermore, he noted there are two streams that drain towards the Cedar River on the site. One stream is unnamed, class 3 and drains in an overflow condition only, he said. This stream flows on the north-side of the mobile home, continues westerly to the Summerfield area, and then continues northerly. He stated that there is a wet-pond designed to have two primary overflows. The normal overflow is to go to the west towards the Summerfield Creek bed, and there is also a secondary pipe that drains to a 36-inch culvert that crosses the Maple Valley highway before ultimately reaching the Cedar River. Mr. Diener stated that the area to be subdivided is 7.32 acres, and land currently holds a mobile home park, a maintenance building, and one duplex. He testified that there is an asphalt street that runs through the site, providing access to the mobile homes. Mr. Diener commented that the site is zoned R-12 in King County. He noted that there is a vesting application in King County, pending the resolution of this plat. The vested plat in King County was submitted in April, 2008 and determined complete by the county in May, 2008, added Mr. Diener. The 7.32 acres was annexed into Renton, thus the other vesting application was put on hold, he noted. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -7 1 Mr. Diener stated that the PUD criterion in Renton requires the application to demonstrate superior development design and public benefit. He commented that the proposed development is 17-lots in 2 the interior of road B, and 17 lots on the north-side and east-side of the curb-cuts ( except in the utility tract). There will be a park in the northwest area, and the applicant is willing to meet the park-lot swap requested by the city. The detention and water-quality facility is located in the northwest area of 3 4 the site. Mr. Diener noted that the maximum number of lots is 42, but the applicant is only proposing 34. He testified that the modifications recommended by Ms. Dolbee and city staff have been incorporated into exhibits by the applicant. Mr. Diener stated the road-section B would have a I-ft reduced landscape which remains in the 33ft proposed right-of-way, as requested earlier by Ms. Kaylor. In regards to the city's request for a landscape strip along road A, instead of a second sidewalk, the applicant notes that it is not an undesirable proposal, but it would ruin the proposed tabletop sidewalk design to the south of road A. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Mr. Diener said that utilities would be provided by the Cedar River water and sewer district. There are two existing wells on the site, he noted. According to Mr. Diener, one well will be abandoned and the other would be retained for landscape and irrigation purposes. He testified that the only water connection for the site is located on the west side. Thus, he testified, the applicant proposes creating a connection across the existing unnamed stream in order to connect to the main water-line. The applicant proposes to do this within city code without causing major impacts to the stream, according to Mr. Diener. He also noted that the sewer runs from the middle of the west of the site and crosses the site at an angle and meets Maple Valley Highway. He concluded that all connections could be made to this existing sewer line. Mr. Diener testified that a water retention pond is proposed for the northwest comer of the site. The level 2 detention pond allows for very small, allowable release rates, he commented. Mr. Diener stated that the pond would drain to a ditch, which would then flow to a 36-inch culvert located at the northwest comer of the site. The proposed pond depth overall would be I Oft with 5 .5ft of detention storage and 4ft of water quality, he said. He added that there is a recommendation to put a fence around the pond in order to meet safety standards. 19 Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Mr. Diener noted that there is not another place for a water connection that is feasible. Without the stream-crossing connection, a water connection would 20 have to be run across the site to SR-169 and would still probably cross the stream at some point. 21 22 23 24 25 26 Glen Takagi, applicant's landscape architect, stated that the paved circulation system, including a bus stop, along with the soft-paving system provide great linkage throughout the site. The trail system has the potential for benches and descriptive markers, he noted. Mr. Takagi testified that the open space features of the site plan add to the strong residential character of the PUD. The open spaces provide all of the perimeter buffering and give green strips to the Maple Valley Highway, he noted. He also suggested there is potential, additional space for play area beyond just the planned park. Mr. Takagi commented that native plants would be chosen for the space based on hardiness and beauty, along with their potential for establishing wildlife in the area. He added that the retention pond will be secured with a black vinyl fence along the water line. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 The park would be centrally located for easy access. The park would have a fence enclosure with a play structure, picnic tables, and lawn space, he said. He testified that all of the same amenities could be included if the park was swapped with a lot, as requested by the city staff, but it would be slightly smaller. Mr. Takagi concluded that the space is laid out well and will benefit both the public and residents. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Mr. Takagi noted that in changing the park lot, 800ft of open space would be lost. This space loss is due to it no longer being a corner lot, he noted. Vince Geglia, traffic engineer for the project, stated that he is a member of the institute of transportation engineers and has been practicing in the Puget Sound area since 1986. He noted that there would not be a significant increase in traffic with this development because the mobile home traffic would be subtracted from the net increase gathered by the single-family homes. The net increase would be 6-trips in the critical, peak hour, and, during an average 24-hr day, it would be 89 trips. He noted that the access to SR-169 was already improved several years ago and provides excellent access to the site with 5-lanes. Mr. Geglia testified that historical accident data showed no unusual accident activity in the area. He noted that the road-way is fairly flat and level along SR-169. A right-tum pocket would be constructed for vehicles entering the site, and within this deceleration lane, there would a bus stop, according to Mr. Geglia. Additionally, Mr. Geglia commented that there would be a transportation mitigation fee paid to the city to support the city's road improvement program. Ed Sewall, applicant's wetland consultant, stated he has worked as a wetland consultant in the state of Washington since 1991. He noted that he was hired in 2008 when the project was within King County. He testified that they completed the critical area study and wetland delineation for the project at that time. Mr. Sewall commented that wetland A is in the southwest corner of the site and is a category 2 wetland. Wetland B is also a category 2 and is in the north of the site. There is a stream that runs in a disturbed condition behind the mobile home park, flowing to the west, toward SR-169. He noted that in 1995-1996, he previously worked with this stream and it was classified as a class 3 stream (intermittent stream with no fish-use) on the north side of the highway which is in King County. Although a King County class-3 stream would normally be a class-4 stream for the city of Renton, Renton has it mapped as class-3. Mr. Sewall testified that the proposed project would maintain the wetlands and their 50-ft buffers, with no impacts. In addition, Mr. Sewall noted that the normal 75-ft stream buffer would be reduced through enhancement to 60-ft. The existing mobile home park abuts the stream, so in the present state there is no buffer along the north-side of the stream, he said. Thus, the addition of any buffer would be an improvement, according to Mr. Sewall. He testified that the proposal would provide a 60-ft enhancement buffer in this area which would result in new plantings and the soil decompacting. Mr. Sewall noted that the criteria for the utility crossing in the stream can be found in code 44050L8bi. He stated the applicant feels they can meet the criteria with minimum impact to the stream. The criteria will be dictated by a HP A, and any impacts to the stream will be mitigated and restored, he commented. Mr. Sewall concluded that the overall critical area mitigation plan should mitigate any impacts and improve the water areas on site. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Rob Ward, applicant's geotech engineer, stated he has been practicing in the Puget Sound area since 1986. He noted that he completed a study of the site in 2008 and has provided update letters since that period. He testified that, in order to conduct their study, his team first completed geological research of the area by reviewing information collected in 1986 for the Summerfield development, and then they came on-site and did soil work. Mr. Ward stated that the slopes to the south and east of the site are very steep until they rise-up and become flat. He commented that the area to be developed is fairly flat. The geology goes from top- to-bottom and near the top is glacial till, according to Mr. Ward. As you move down, all the soils remain glacial, but turn into silt soil, he said. Mr. Ward noted that the very bottom soil is river deposits and the intermediate soil is mass-wastage. Because of the glacial nature of the slopes, they are very dense and the core is very stable, according to Mr. Ward. He testified that the chance of a deep instability is very remote. He added that the basic issues of steep slopes in the Puget Sound area are skin slides (mud slides). The skin slides are results oflarge amounts ofrain and are a typical problem in the Puget Sound area. There has been no evidence of skin slides in the slopes in this development area, he stated. Mr. Ward remarked that King County's default, required buffer is 50ft and the building setback is 15ft (so the overall setback is 65ft). Based on the geotech findings, Mr. Ward recommended a 25ft buffer and 15ft setback for the eastside and maintenance of the 60ft buffer to the south along with various setbacks (although it could have been smaller) along the development site. Mr. Ward added that the pan-handle section of the site, located in King County, has various issues with potential for debris flow which OT AK will discuss. He concluded that the setbacks are above and beyond what is needed for geotechnical issues. Russ Gaston, applicant's water resource engineer, stated he manages a water resources group for OT AK. He noted for this project they led the analysis of risk of debris flow and mitigation measures for this debris flow. Mr. Gaston testified that he was supported by Gary Wolf, a senior hydraulics engineer, and Bret Jordan, who specializes in analyzing stream flow and sediment transport. Both of these men are highly qualified in their areas of expertise, according to Mr. Gaston. He noted that his team produced a report which characterized the site's water sediments. He stated they used models to establish if there was enough capacity to transport sediment and quantify the volume in the uunamed tributary stream. Mr. Gaston stated that there was concern about the existing retention pond's overflow into this uunamed stream. He noted that this pond, the Woodburn pond was designed by OTAK, and the major outfall from the pond is to Summerfield Creek. However, there is an additional, emergency overflow from the pond into the unnamed stream on McCormick plat. In order to engage this emergency overflow, the Summerfield Creek overflow would have to be completely plugged, he stated. If this did happen, the maximum flow into the unnamed stream would be 12.7cfs, Mr. Gaston commented. He testified that a dam-break analysis was also completed, but the analysis demonstrated that a potential dam-break was not the worst-case scenario. The plugged overflow to Summerfield Creek remained the worst-case scenario. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-10 I 2 3 4 5 In addition, Mr. Gaston stated that the stability of the stream/ravine was tested by dividing it into 6 storage reaches. He remarked that two conditions were evaluated: what is there today and what would happen if water flowed from Woodburn pond. According to Mr. Gaston, Reach 1 would become a source of sediment flow, Reach 2 would create a depositional for sediment, Reach 3 would transport sediment, Reach 4 would be a sediment source, Reach 5 would be a storage facility because of its width, and Reach 6 is a transport reach with sediment being moved out. His team concluded that there is a potential for debris flow (as much as 2300 cubic yards), he said. Thus, Mr. Gaston stated, they designed a mitigation berm that would follow the south side of the McCormick plat. The 6 berm would be 5ft high and designed to have traffic on top of it. Under normal storms conditions, only 750 cubic yards of debris flow would be transported there, but if the full 2,300 cubic yards (an unlikely feat) was reached, the berm could be dredged out, he stated. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Mr. Gaston noted that the berm would be composed so that it would not erode and would not be made of natural materials. 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Courtney Kaylor, applicant's representative, corrected her earlier statement that the applicant was requesting a reduction of the width of the landscape strip to 6.5ft. Instead, the applicant is requesting a reduction to 7ft, she noted. The PUD proposal provides a superior design and public benefit, thus meeting the city's criteria for approval, according to Ms. Kaylor. Furthermore, the current proposal is superior to the previous proposal to King County and provides for greater impact mitigation. She noted some of the features of the new proposal: greater open space than required, more natural vegetation, better circulation, soft-surface trails, a school bus-stop, critical area impact mitigation, and more. Public Testimony Herbert Wendland stated he is concerned about the lack of a timetable for the project. He noted he has lived in the mobile home park for 12 years. As a senior citizen, he fears being kicked out of his home and having to find a new place to live. He also voiced concern about whether or not relocation funds will be provided. Mr. Wendland commented that the residents of the mobile home park have been waiting for answers to their concerns for a long time and need these answers in order to prepare for the future. Sandra Workman stated that there is a stream that goes through several of the mobile home lots. She stated that when the stream freezes it makes the whole entryway of the mobile home park icy and dangerous. Barbara Workman testified that she does not understand the timing of the development. She noted 23 that her mobile home is too old to be moved off the property. She further commented that the procedure for relocation reimbursement has not been made clear to the current residents. 24 25 26 Staff Rebuttal PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 l Kayren Kittrick, development and construction engineer for Renton, stated that the city does not wish to make modifications to the road plans until construction plans are presented to the city. She noted that the city wishes to maintain the street standards dictated for the roads in the current proposal. She reinforced that the city wants to follow what has been laid out in the staff report documents. The city wishes for any additional changes to be handled administratively once construction documents have been provided, according to Ms. Kittrick. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Kittrick noted that the city does not wish to change the 8ft landscape strip standard to 7ft at this time, despite the request made by the applicant. The city does not want to deviate from what has already been discussed, according to Ms. Kittrick. She noted the city will have the ability to make minor conditional changes (such as this landscape strip length) once the preliminary plat has been approved. Vanessa Dolbee, senior planner for city of Renton, stated that both the open space calculation and the density calculation were made based on the 7.32 acres within Renton (excluding the King County portion of the site). In regards to the applicant's request for a word change to mitigation number 2 in the staff report, Ms. Dolbee noted that the word change actually occurs in mitigation number 11 sub 2 of the report. Applicant Rebuttal Courtney Kaylor stated that the applicant is in agreement with staff in regards to the road improvement mitigations. She testified that, for the applicant, the most important point is that the improvements need to be contained in the proposed right-of-ways. The applicant agrees to leave the finalization of landscape strip lengths to construction period. Ms. Kaylor further testified that the applicant has no imminent plans to issue the 1-year notice of eviction to residents. She noted that the subdivision and PUD approvals are in effect for up to 5-years and can be extended for an additional year upon request. She stated that the owner of the property will have the park manager provide more information to current residents. In regards to relocation costs, the state of Washington's department of commerce has a program to pay relocation costs to manufactured home-park owners that are living in parks that are being closed, according to Ms. Kaylor. She confirmed that the program provides for reimbursements up to certain amounts depending on the size of mobile home. She noted that the applicant has agreed to provide the relocation payments upfront so the residents do not have to go through the process of requesting the reimbursement from the state. This has been included as a voluntary condition of approval in the staff recommendation. Upon questioning by the hearing examiner, Ms. Kaylor noted the state provides reimbursement of up to 7,500 dollars for a single-home and 12,000 for a double-home. There are standards and requirements in the state law as to what types of expenses are reimbursed. She added that the residents must provide proof of income parameters in order to qualify for relocation. Additionally, PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -12 1 Ms. Kaylor stated that the property owner has contacted the Wonderland Park which is located nearby the McCormick plat, and the Wonderland Park has mobile-home lots available. 2 3 Exhibits 4 The December 22, 2010 staff report Exhibits 1-32 identified at pat 3-4 of the staff report were 5 admitted into the record during the hearing. The following additional exhibits were also 6 admitted into the record during the hearing: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Ex. 33: Ex. 34: Ex. 35: Ex. 36: Ex. 37: Ex. 38: Staff power point presentation. CV's of Greg Diener, Vincent Geglia, Edgar Sewall, Robert Ward, and Russ Gaston. December 8, 2010 letter from Debora Gilroy to Collin Barrett June 24, 2011 and August 2, 2011 letters from Courtney Kaylor to Vanessa Dolbee. Project's Compliance Statement Road A and B cross sections FINDINGS OF FACT 0.5 Applicant. Robert E. McCormick 17 Procedural: 18 · 1. Hearing. The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on January 5, 2011 at 19 9:00 am in the City of Renton Council Chambers. 20 2. Project Description. The applicant, Robert McCormick, is requesting a Preliminary Plat and 21 22 23 24 Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PUD) for a 34-lot, 9-tract subdivision of an 11.59 acre site. The applicant also proposes to reduce portions of a Class III steam buffer from 75 to 60 feet and to alter a stream buffer in order to accommodate the crossing of a water line. The proposed McCormick Plat would be located along the south side of Maple Valley Highway (SR- 169) at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (parcel #2323059029). The site consists of one parcel, the majority of which is located within the City of Renton. However, a long, narrow "dog leg" 25 extends southward off the southeastern side of the rectangular portion of the site; this portion is 26 within unincorporated King County, which is not proposed to be developed. The site is currently the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -13 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 location of the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which provides space for approximately 40 mobile homes. In addition to the mobile homes and multiple out buildings on site, there are two permanent structures, a duplex and maintenance building. The applicant proposes to remove all existing structures, and mobile homes. The site is bordered to the north by Maple Valley Highway (SR-169), to the west by the Summer View neighborhood, a single-family residential subdivision, and to the south and east by undeveloped forested areas. The proposed subdivision would result in 34 lots ranging in lot size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet, as more specifically described in Table C of the staff report, resulting in a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per acre. Nine tracts are also proposed which include stormwater detention, native growth protection areas, access and utilities, open space, and critical areas. In addition to the traditional subdivision lots and tracts, the applicant has proposed a looped trail around the site which crosses Open Space tracts E and C and. a small tot lot with a play area. The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A". Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots 1 -8, and 11 -17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities tract, identified as Tract D. Proposed Lots 18 - 34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of SR-169. Road improvements including sidewalks on both sides of Road A, and on one side (the inside) of Road B are proposed. Street frontage improvements are not proposed along SR 169. Pursuant to the City ofRenton's critical areas maps, a stream, steep slopes, erosion hazards, landslide hazards, seismic hazards, and wetlands have been identified on the subject property. The geotechnical hazards located on the site are due to the steep slope inclinations, soils generally susceptible to erosion, and history of landslides in the area. The critical areas map indicates that the approximate northerly portion of the rectangular area of the site is within a Seismic Hazard area. In addition, the northeast comer of the site is located within the 200-foot Shoreline Area measured from the Cedar River, which is located across Maple Valley Highway. The shoreline area impacts proposed Lots 9 and 10; Lot IO would be approximately 170 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and Lot 9 would be approximately 190 feet from the OHWM. The "dog leg" portion of the site, located in IGng County, would be subject to King County critical areas regulations, KCC 21A.24, whereas the remainder of the site would be subject to City of Renton critical areas regulations. King County Sensitive Areas Maps indicate that the subject site is located in a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area and is an area susceptible to ground water contamination. The City's critical areas maps do not identify this area for Aquifer Protection. The developed portion of the existing mobile home park has an approximate slope of 9 to IO percent sloping in a southeast-to-northwest direction. As this portion of the site remains within the Landslide and Erosion Hazard area, it is the mildest slope on site. The property is bounded to the south and southeast by steep slopes that extend down from the Renton uplands. The steep slope at the southeast comer of the site, ranges from about an elevation of 230 feet down to the toe-of-slope to an elevation PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 of 160 to 180 feet, and averages about a 100 percent grade. Similarly, the steep slope adjacent to the south side of the mobile home park that extends above the creek is well over 100 feet high and has an average slope of about 100 percent. The applicant has proposed a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm along the base of the steep slope located on the southern border of the site to divert water and/or soil within the stream buffer toward the western side of the site in the event of a landslide or mudslide. In addition, a 25-foot buffer from the southeastern slope is proposed for landslide protection for lots 14 -17. The applicant has indicated that grading the site would be necessary to meet the storm water requirements. The applicant has indicated the total excavation would be 8,248 cubic yards and fill is estimated at 7,924 cubic yards. The soil that is usable from the excavation on site would be utilized on site, other materials such as selected borrow and gravel are expected to be imported to the site. The applicant submitted with the application a Revised Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. dated April 12, 2011. This report indicates there are two wetlands located on site, both identified as Category 2 wetlands, per the City of Renton classification system. Wetland 'A' is located along the west side of the site and Wetland 'B' is located along the northeast edge of the site. Category 2 wetlands typically have 50-foot buffers. The Critical Areas report further identifies a single intermittent stream that flows through the site. The subject stream is a Class 3 stream and was designated as a Type N stream by Bill Kershke, King County Biologist, in his review of the feature. Class 3 streams typically have 75-foot buffers measured from the OHWM. The applicant has proposed to reduce the stream buffer from 75 feet to 60 feet for the majority of the buffer area. In addition, the applicant initially requested a variance to place a water line through the stream buffer to connect to an existing 10-inch water line stub provided by the neighboring Summer View neighborhood. Staff subsequently determined that the applicant's request could be handled by an alteration of stream buffers authorized by RCW 4-3-050(L )(8)(b ). The area of the site that is currently developed as a mobile home park consists of ornamental plants placed by residents of the mobile home park in addition to a few large conifer trees which are scattered about the site. The steep slopes on site are covered with dense understory vegetation consisting of mostly' sword ferns and an upperstory of scattered big leaf maple trees. The wetland and stream areas of the site consist mainly of reed canary grass, creeping buttercup and a few small alders. The modifications requested to development standards under the PUD application are identified in Table A and Table C of the staff report, incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. 3. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate infrastructure and public services as follows: A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sanitary sewer service for the development would be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. Water and Sewer availability certificates will be required from the Cedar River Sewer District prior to final plat approval. Based on the submitted Conceptual Site Plan (Sheet P04) (Exhibit 4), there is an existing sewer main located on the west side of the development. The applicant has proposed to connect to this existing main and extend an 8-inch sanitary sewer line to PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-15 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 provide sewer to the development. This plan sheet also identifies a IO-inch water line extension from the Summer View Plat located to the west. This extension would be required to be constructed through the stream buffer. With receipt of the water and sewer availability certificates, the development would provide sufficient service to the lots. B. Fire Protection. Fire protection would be provided by the City of Renton Fire Department. Per the City Fire Chief, all lots are required to be sprinklered. Therefore, as a condition of approval the applicant be required to revise the utility plan to depict a I-inch water meter to all lots. The revised plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Plan Reviewer prior to Final Plat recording. C. Drainage. In conjunction with the City's storm water regulations, the proposal mitigates all significant drainage impacts. New impervious surfaces would result in surface water runoff increases. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report ("Drainage Report") with the project application (Exhibit 29). The applicant has proposed a detention/wet pond to be located in a separate tract in the northwest corner of the site for stormwater detention and water quality treatment. The Drainage Report indicates that runoff from roof drains, yards, and driveways would be collected and conveyed to a drainage system under the proposed roads that would convey stormwater to the proposed detention/wet pond. The pond is proposed to be a combined detention and water quality pond, with permanent storage in the bottom of the pond, and live flow control storage above the dead storage. The pond has been designed to provided Level 2 flow control and basic water quality treatment. The proposed design of the detention pond would provide at least 59,500 cubic feet of storage. The detention facility would release the storm water to its natural discharge location at the northwest corner of the site to the south roadside ditch of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169). D. Parks/Open Space. The project provides for more than adequate parks and open space. In addition to private open space provided on each proposed lot, the applicant has proposed to provide a 4,188 square foot park which would include a play structure and two picnic tables, a soft surface looped trail system through the development, and a 21,634 square foot open space tract. The proposed park area exceeds the code standards by 2,488 square feet and the open space standards by 6,931 square feet. The overall passive and active recreation opportunities proposed for the subject development are beyond the standard code requirements. The proposed open space and recreation on the site provide the opportunity for both passive and active recreation. The soft surface trail is proposed to have benches and interpretive signage, which would result in a nature trail type of facility. The looped trail system is approximately 1/3 of a mile long, offering the opportunity for PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 more strenuous exercise such as jogging. The open lawn proposed in the Tract E provides a space for such activities as kick ball or Frisbee, but could also be used as a quiet place to listen to the river and read a book. The park area provides for both passive and active recreation by offering both a play structure and picnic tables. The varieties of recreation opportunities proposed throughout the development create a mix of choices, appealing to a large spectrum of people. However, it should be noted that the benches and interpretive signage mentioned in the applicant's PUD Compliance Statement are not reflected on the Landscape Plan or the Plat Plan, as such staff recommends a condition of approval that the applicant provide a detail of the proposed final bench and signage design and location as a part of the final detailed landscape plan. These details shall be submitted and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The park is located on the northwest comer of the internal set oflots, aligning just west of the access road A. Proposed Lot 34, which is immediately east of the park, is centrally aligned with Road A. Once a home is constructed on Lot 34, all vehicular trips accessing the development would drive directly at the home on Lot 34, shining headlights into their front windows. The impacts to Lot 34 could be resolved by adjusting the location of the proposed park, to be situated to align with Road A, thus moving Lot 34 to the western comer of the internal Road. Furthermore, this location for the park would create a "gateway" to the neighborhood, increasing the overall design of the development. As such, a condition of approval will require that the park be moved east by one lot to align with Road A, and adjusting Lot 34 to be the northwest comer lot of the internal portion of the development. At hearing the applicant did not object to this condition. The Open Space Tract E and Tract Care separated by the detention pond Tract A. The connection between Tract E and C could be stronger and create a higher quality and cohesive open space system by decreasing the grades near the top of the pond, to allow for landscaping and pedestrian access for a portion of the pond area This in turn could result in moving the fence to a lower section of the pond, removing the visual obstruction created by the fence. The end result would be a high quality open space system, incorporating the detention facility into the design of the overall development. A condition of approval will require that the detention facility be re-designed to become an integral part of the open space system of the development. The design shall meet the City's stormwater requirements and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. E. Pedestrian Circulation. The proposed preliminary plat provides for a superior pedestrian circulation system. In addition to the proposed soft surface pedestrian path, the applicants PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -17 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 have proposed sidewalks along Road A, Maple Valley Highway and on the interior of Road B. In addition, the applicant has proposed to provide a tabletop design at the intersection of Road A and Road B with alternative paving to provide for a safe pedestrian crosswalk. This intersection is a key connection to the proposed school bus stop located along Maple Valley Highway. In addition to the aforementioned cross walk, the looped trail includes two additional cross walk locations to connect the loop. These two locations are both located on Road B. Based on the application materials, these two cross walks would not be designed with alternative paving as proposed for the cross walk located at the intersection of Road A and B. A condition of approval will require that all crosswalks in the development are designed with the same alternative paving, to provide consistency in crosswalk design throughout the development ensuring pedestrian safety. F. Interior Vehicle Circulation. In addition to superior pedestrian circulation, the proposed preliminary plat also provides for a superior vehicle circulation system. The looped road system which is made possible by the requested code modifications provides for improved emergency access as well as eliminates a dead end road. The looped road system provides for better onsite traffic circulation and allows for a public alley to access proposed Lots 18 -34. The presence of the alley allows for 50 percent of the development to have alley loaded garages, reducing the number of curb cuts through the sidewalk system, improving the pedestrian circulation system. Furthermore, the presence of an alley provides for screening of the parking facilities/garages for 50 percent of the lots on the site. G. Off-Site Traffic Improvements. No off-site mitigation is necessary except for a right turn pocket, taper or radius per WSDOT design standards on SR 169 at the site access street. The traffic study, Ex. 21, concludes that the proposal will result in an increase of 89 average daily trips over the traffic generated by existing development ( which will be removed). As further concluded, no intersections or street segments in the City of Renton would experience an increase in traffic over 5%. The only off-site improvements found necessary in the report are the aforementioned SR 169 improvements to provide for access to the project site. Consequently, off-site impacts are adequately covered by the transportation mitigation fee. The infrastructure improvements recommended in the traffic report are required by the MDNS conditions of approval. 4. Adverse Impacts. Since the project provides for adequate infrastructure and public services, the only remaining impacts to be considered are to critical areas and affordable housing. All impacts to critical areas have been thoroughly assessed and completely mitigated, as identified in the Environmental Review Report, Ex. 30, adopted by this reference as if set forth in full. The mitigation measures recommended by staff in the Environmental Report are adopted as conditions of approval. Adoption of Ex. 30 encompasses both the findings of fact and the conclusions of law of staff. All PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 other adverse impacts discernible from the record are also fully mitigated. Some of the more significant issues and modifications to the Environmental Report as well as adverse impacts not addressed in the Environmental Report are addressed below: A. Affordable Housing. The proposal will adversely affect affordable housing by forcing the relocation of the mobile homes in the mobile home park. The relocation assistance voluntarily provided by the applicant and adopted as Condition 11 of the SEPA MDNS is the most the City can legally do to mitigate the impacts of the project on affordable housing. As noted by the applicant in Ex. 36, Guimont v. Clark, 121 Wn.2d 34 (1992) stands for the proposition that mobile home park owners cannot be made responsible by state statute (and by extension, permit conditions) to pay for relocation costs because this places a disproportionate burden upon park owners to handle the societal problem of housing affordability. Any permit condition that made the applicant responsible for the entirety of these costs would violate the substantive due process rights of the applicant. B. Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. An extremely significant condition of approval in the SEPA MDNS requires the installation of a debris flow mitigation berm. As discussed in the Environmental Report the steep slopes adjoining the project site have been subject to numerous landslides. In 1990 a landslide resulted in $100,000 damage to the existing mobile home park. The berm condition is the result of a geotechnical report prepared by the applicant, a peer review and then additional study completed in response to the peer review. The SEPA conditions of approval require the berm to be maintained so that its effectiveness is not compromised by the buildup of soils from debris flow events. The conditions of approval require a maintenance plan to be included in the project CC&Rs. This condition will be modified to require that it ( and all other required CC&R conditions) cannot be amended without the consent of the City. C. Stream Mitigation. It is significant to note that even though the applicant requests a decrease in stream buffer width to 60 feet from the required 75 feet for portions of the Class III streams that the project mitigation and enhancement will result in an overall increase in stream/lake/riparian ecological function. The existing uses of the property have significantly degraded existing buffer areas. Project mitigation will enhance these areas and remove invasive species. Mitigation includes the removal of paved and impervious surfaces within the buffer area, the soils disked and then replanted with a mix of native trees and shrubs. D. Tree Retention. As discussed in the Conclusions of Law, below, it is unclear whether the tree retention plan is consistent with the City's tree retention requirements and the PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 conditions of approval will require further analysis. The site contains a total of 49 trees of 6-inch caliper or larger, 4 are within the proposed public right-of-way, and 18 are located in critical areas and their buffers. The applicant proposes to plant approximately 77 new trees on site. The applicant's conceptual landscape plan did not include an exact numbers of trees, shrubs, or groundcover and it did not include specific locations for the shrubs and ground cover. As such, a condition of approval will require that the applicant provide a detailed final landscape plan that shall be submitted and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. E. Floodplain. The project is not located within a floodplain, as shown by the FEMA map attached as Exhibit C to the preliminary drainage report, Ex. 29. IO 5. Superiority in Design. The proposed PUD design is significantly superior to that which would be allowed under applicable subdivision regulations. The contrast in designed is heightened by the 11 fact that the applicant has a vested subdivision application with King County under King County's rural development standards. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 The vested King County application, City file number LUAOS-068, is also for a 34-Iot subdivision. The subject property was annexed into the City of Renton shortly after the applicant vested the subdivision application with King County. Once annexed to the City of Renton, the responsibility of processing the plat application was transferred to the City of Renton. Under the vested application many "non-urban" standards would be permitted as a part of the development, in addition to the applicant's ability to develop to a higher density than permitted under Renton zoning. The vested subdivision uses cul-de-sacs rather than a looped road system where many homes would be alley loaded. The new application would provide vertical curbs, sidewalks, a trail system, vegetative buffering from Maple Valley Highway, and increased Critical Area protection over the vested application. The subject PUD proposal represents a unique situation, as the comparison for public benefit, in this case, should be balanced by not only the existing City of Renton regulations, but also the vested King County standards. The development of this site as a PUD results in a superior design than would result by the vested King County application for many reasons. First, the proposed plat layout provides for a significant increase in resident safety from the high landslide hazards affiliated with the slopes to the south, due to increased separation from the landslide hazard by the proposed looped road system. Second, the plat would provide for many recreational amenities beyond the code requirements. Third, the plat layout significantly increases the quality of the internal vehicle and pedestrian circulation system throughout the development. Fourth, the additional open space area enhances protection to critical areas. Fifth, the applicant proposes significantly more landscaping than required by City standards. This proposed design can provide for the aforementioned amenities because of the development standard modifications recommended by staff in Ex. 31. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 6. Public Benefit. The proposal provides several public benefits as detailed in Table B of the staff report, adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full, excluding the discussion of tree retention on p. 17 of the staff report. Conclusions of Law 1. Authority. RMC 4-7-020(C) and 4-7-050(D)(5) provide that the Hearing Examiner shall hold a hearing and issue a final decision on preliminary plat applications. RMC 4-9-150(F)(8) authorizes the Examiner to conduct hearings and make final decisions on planned urban development applications. 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Designations. The subject property is zoned Residential 8 dwelling units per net acre (R-8) and the portion located in King County is zoned Rural Area, 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (RA-5). The proposed development would be within the R-8 zone and the King County portion would remain undisturbed. R-8 development standards would be applicable to the subject project. The comprehensive plan map land use designation for the portion of the site within the City of Renton is Residential Single Family. 3. Review Criteria. The Renton Municipal Code does not clearly identify the criteria the Examiner must apply in assessing a subdivision or a PUD. Chapter 4-7 RMC governs the criteria for subdivision review and RMC 4-9-150 governs PUD criteria. Without any more specific code guidance, the Examiner concludes that he must find that all applicable criteria in Chapter 4-7 and RMC 4-9-150 must be satisfied for preliminary plat and PUD approval. Applicable standards are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. RMC 4-7-0SO(B): A subdivision shall be consistent with the following principles of acceptability: I. Legal Lots: Create legal building sites which comply with all provisions of the City Zoning Code. 2. Access: Establish access to a public road for each segregated parcel. 3. Physical Characteristics: Have suitable physical characteristics. A proposed plat may be denied because of flood, inundation, or wetland conditions. Construction of protective improvements may be required as a condition of approval, and such improvements shall be noted on the final plat. 4. Drainage: Make adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies and sanitary wastes. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -21 1 4. As modified by the PUD regulations, the lots will comply with all requirements of the Zoning 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Code. As noted in the project description, Finding of Fact No. 2, and as depicted in Ex. 2, all lots have access to a public street, either to Road B, Road C or Tract D. Tract D as depicted in the preliminary plat map, Ex. 2, is only identified as a utility tract with no mention of access. The conditions of approval will require it to be identified as an access tract as well. The project is not located within a floodplain, as shown by the FEMA map attached as Exhibit C to the preliminary drainage report, Ex. 29. As determined in the Findings of Fact, wetlands are adequately protected and in fact wetland functions will be enhanced as a result of the project. As further discussed in the findings of fact, a debris flow mitigation berm will be required as a protective improvement in order to protect project resident from landslide activity. This requirement will be conditioned to be noted on the final plat. As determined in Finding of Fact 3, the project makes adequate provision for drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies and sanitary wastes. RMC 4-7-080(1)(1): ... The Hearing Examiner shall assure conformance with the general purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and adopted standards ... 5. The proposed preliminary play is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan as outlined in Section 6(a) of the staff report, which is incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. RMC 4-7-120(A): No plan for the replatting, subdivision, or dedication of any areas shall be approved by the Hearing Examiner unless the streets shown therein are connected by surfaced road or street (according to City specifications) to an existing street or highway. 6. The internal circulation system of the subdivision connects to SR 169, an existing highway. RMC 4-7-120(B): The location of all streets shall conform to any adopted plans for streets in the City. 7. The staff report and administrative record do not identify any applicable street plan or grid system that would compel the connection of the interior streets to any other roads beyond SR 169. The aerial photo on page 2 of the staff report shows that there are no other roads in proximity to the project that could be feasibly extended to the project. Given the extreme slopes that adjoin the project it is highly unlikely that any other roads could ever connect to the project from the south. The project is separated from a cul de sac west by residential development. There do not appear to be any roads to the east that could be extended to the project. RMC 4-7-120(C): ff a subdivision is located in the area of an officially designed trail, provisions shall be made for reservation oft he right-of-way or for easements to the City for trail purposes. 8. The staff report and administrative record do not identify any officially designated trail in the vicinity. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -22 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 RMC 4-7-130(C): A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication shall be prepared in conformance with the following provisions: I. Land Unsuitable for Subdivision: Land which is found to be unsuitable for subdivision includes land with features likely to be harmful to the safety and general health of the future residents (such as lands adversely affected by flooding, steep slopes, or rock formations). Land which the Department or the Hearing Examiner considers inappropriate for subdivision shall not be subdivided unless adequate safeguards are provided against these adverse conditions. a. Flooding/Inundation: If any portion of the land within the boundary of a preliminary plat is subject to flooding or inundation, that portion of the subdivision must have the approval of the State according to chapter 86.16 RCW before the'Department and the Hearing Examiner shall consider such subdivision. b. Steep Slopes: A plat, short plat, subdivision or dedication which would result in the creation of a lot or lots that primarily have slopes forty percent (40%) or greater as measured per RMC 4-3- 050Jla, without adequate area at lesser slopes upon which development may occur, shall not be approved. 3. Land Clearing and Tree Retention: Shall comply with RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations. 4. Streams: a. Preservation: Every reasonable effort shall be made to preserve existing streams, bodies of water, and wetland areas. b. Method: If a stream passes through any of the subject property, a plan shall be presented which indicates how the stream will be preserved. The methodologies used should include an overflow area, and an attempt to minimize the disturbance of the natural channel and stream bed. c. Culverting: The piping or tunneling of water shall be discouraged and allowed only when going under streets. d. Clean Water: Every effort shall be made to keep all streams and bodies of water clear of debris and pollutants. 9. As determined in the Findings of Fact, significant protective measures and safeguards are proposed and conditioned to ensure that the proposed development is adequately protected from the geologic hazards of the site. As proposed and conditioned the project area is appropriate for PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 subdivision. As previously discussed there is no evidence in the record that there is any flooding problem, beyond that which could be potentially associated with landslide activity and flooding in that respect is adequately mitigated by the debris flow mitigation berm. In assessing compliance with RMC 4-4-130, the staff report only identifies trees on site that are of 6- inch caliper or larger. There is nothing in RMC 4-4-130 that limits tree retention to trees that of 6- inch caliper or higher. RMC 4-11-200 defines a tree as having a caliper of 2 inches or higher and the tree retention requirements of RMC 4-4-130 do not provide for any exceptions for trees smaller than six inches. It is possible that trees between two and six inches are not present on the site, but that's not clear from the record and it would not be reasonable to make that inference. In addition to the additional information recommended by staff as identified in Finding of Fact No. 4(D), the conditions of approval will also require that tree retention be applied to all trees with a two inch caliper or greater. As noted in the Findings of Fact, the stream functions will actually be enhanced by the extensive amount of mitigation and restoration proposed by the applicant and required in the conditions of approval. No new piping or tunneling of the stream is proposed. It is unclear what is intended by the requirement that projects should provide for an "overflow area" for streams. The extensive amount of open space and buffering adjoining the stream and the separation provided by the debris flow mitigation berm appear to provide overflow capacity. At any rate, the requirement is not mandatory and the stream has otherwise been thoroughly protected and separated from the development. 17 15 RMC 4-7-140: Approval of all subdivisions located in either single family residential or multi- 16 family residential zones as defined in the Zoning Code shall be contingent upon the subdivider 's dedication of land or providing fees in lieu of dedication to the City, all as necessary to mitigate the 18 adverse effects of development upon the existing park and recreation service levels. The requirements and procedures for this mitigation shall be per the City of Renton Parks Mitigation Resolution. 19 10. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 3(D), the proposal exceeds both park and open space 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 requirements. RMC 4-7-ISO(A): The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing streets unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. Prior to approving a street system that does not extend or connect, the Reviewing Official shall find that such exception shall meet the requirements of subsection E3 of this Section. The roadway classifications shall be as defined and designated by the Department. 11. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 7, the only street that the project could connect to is SR 169. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -24 I RMC 4-7-150(8): All proposed street names shall be approved by the City. As conditioned. 2 12. 3 RMC 4-7-lSO(C): Streets intersecting with existing or proposed public highways, major or 4 secondary arterials shall be held to a minimum. The project would be landlocked ifit could not directly access SR 169. 5 13. 6 RMC 4-7-lSO(D): The alignment of all streets shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. The street standards set by RMC 4-6-060 shall apply unless otherwise approved. Street alignment offsets of less than one hundred twenty five feet (125 7 are not desirable, but may be approved by the Department upon a showing of need but only after provision of all necessary safety 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 measures. 14. The Public Works Department has reviewed and approved the street alignment. The project will be conditioned upon compliance with RMC 4-6-060, which presumably has already been verified by the Public Works department but this is not evident from the record. RMC 4-7-lSO(E): I. Grid: A grid street pattern shall be used to connect existing and new development and shall be the 14 predominant street pallern in any subdivision permitted by this Section. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2. Linkages: Linkages, including streets, sidewalks, pedestrian or bike paths, shall be provided within and between neighborhoods when they can create a continuous and interconnected network of roads and pathways. Implementation of this requirement shall comply with Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Objective T-A and Policies T-9 through T-16 and Community Design Element, Objective CD-Mand Policies CD-50 and CD-60. 3. Exceptions: a. The grid pattern may be adjusted to a "flexible grid" by reducing the number of linkages or the alignment between roads, where the following factors are present on site: i. Infeasible due to topographical/environmental constraints; and/or ii. Substantial improvements are existing. 4. Connections: Prior to adoption of a complete grid street plan, reasonable connections that link existing portions of the grid system shall be made. At a minimum, stub streets shall be required within subdivisions to allow future connectivity. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -25 1 5. Alley Access: Alley access is the preferred street pattern except for properties in the Residential Low Density land use designation. The Residential Low Density land use designation includes the 2 RC, R-1, and R-4 zones. Prior to approval of a plat without alley access, the Reviewing Official shall 3 evaluate an alley layout and determine that the use of alley(s) is not feasible ... 4 6. Alternative Configurations: Offset or loop roads are the preferred alternative configurations. 5 7. Cul-de-Sac Streets: Cul-de-sac streets may only be permitted by the Reviewing Official where due 6 to demonstrable physical constraints no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically possible. 7 8 15. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 7 there are no roads other than SR 169 with which the 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 project could connect. No grid system is reasonably feasible because the steep slopes make any thru streets impractical. The project has an internal looped road system, which is identified as the preferred alternative to a grid system in the regulation quoted above. Alley access is also provided for most lots. Topography would make it difficult to configure the plat to allow for alley access of all lots. RMC 4-7-lSO(F): All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat, including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee. 16. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-lSO(G): Streets that may be extended in the event of future adjacent platting shall be required to be dedicated to the plat boundary line. Extensions of greater depth than an average lot shall be improved with temporary turnarounds. Dedication of a full-width boundary street shall be required in certain instances to facilitate fature development. 17. As discussed in Conclusion of Law No. 7 there are no feasible street connections to the project other than directly to SR 169 as proposed. 4-7-160(A): Blocks shall be deep enough to allow two (2) tiers oflots, except where: 1. Abutting principal arterials defined in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The location and extent of environmental constraints prevent a standard plat land configuration, including size and shape of the parcel. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -26 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 3. Prior to approval of single-tier lot configuration based on exceptions 1 and 2, the proponent must demonstrate that a different layout or provisions of an alley system is not feasible. 18. The steep slopes and the shape of the parcel could not accommodate two tiers of lots for all lots while still retaining a looped road system unless a significant number of lots were eliminated. Given that the applicant has already proposed open space that significantly exceeds open space requirements such an accommodation would have to be considered not feasible. 4-7-160(8): Where circumstances warrant, the Reviewing Official may require one or more public crosswalks or walkways of not less than six feet (6J in width dedicated to the City to extend entirely across the width of the block at locations deemed necessary. Such crosswalks or walkways shall be paved for their entire width and length with a permanent surface and shall be adequately lighted at the developer's cost. 19. As identified in Finding of Fact 3(E) and depicted in Ex. 4, the proposal includes three paved cross-walks that link the sidewalks of the interior block to the exterior trail and sidewalks along Road A. It is unclear whether the sidewalks shall be at least six feet in width so that will be made a condition of approval. RMC 4-7-170(A): Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial 14 to curved street lines. 15 16 17 20. As depicted in Ex. 2, the side lines are in conformance with the requirement quoted above. RMC 4-7-170(8): Each lot must have access to a public street or road Access may be by private access easement street per the requirements of the street standards. 18 21. Each lot will have access to Road B or the alley, which the staff report states will be public. It 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is not immediately apparent from the conditions of approval or the plat notes in the exhibits that the plat roads and alley are required to be dedicated so this will be made a condition of approval. The staff report identifies Tract D as an access easement, strongly suggesting that public dedication is not contemplated. 4-7-l 70(B) allows for private access easements such as Tract D so long as the easements comply with street standards. Compliance with street standards shall be made a condition of approval. RMC 4-7-170(C): The size, shape, and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated Further subdivision of lots within a plat approved through the provisions of this Chapter must be consistent with the then-current applicable maximum density 26 requirement as measured within the plat as a whole. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -27 1 22. The proposed density of the plat as a whole is 6.33 units per acre, which is less than the 8 2 units per acre authorized by the R-8 zoning district. Lot area and width will not meet the minimum requirements of the R-8 district as outlined in Table A and Table C of the staff report. Any deviations 3 from minimum lot width authorized by this decision are based upon compliance with PUD criteria of 4 RMC 4-9-150. For purposes ofRMC 4-7-l 70(C), deviations approved by the PUD standards should be considered to be consistent with the requirements of the applicable zoning classification. 5 RMC 4-7-170(D): Width between side lat lines at their foremost points (i.e., the points where the 6 side lat lines intersect with the street right-of-way line) shall not be less than eighty percent (80%) of 7 the required lot width except in the cases of (I) pipestem lots, which shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20') and (2) lots on a street curve or the turning circle of cul-de-sac (radial lots), which shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35'). 8 9 23. The "required lot width" for this project has been reduced by operation of the PUD standards, 10 RMC 4-9-150. As reduced, the lot widths for each lot are fairly consistent from front to rear lot and 11 12 13 14 15 the foremost lot lines are all at least 80% of lot width. However, there is at least one comer lot located on a street curve that has less than the required 35 foot frontage. Deviation from this 35 foot requirement is authorized under the PUD standards for the same reasons justifying the reduction in lot width. RMC 4-7-170(E): All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have minimum radius of fifteen feet (15 '}. 24. 16 As conditioned. 17 RMC 4-7-190(A): Easements may be requiredfor the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department. 18 25. The Department has requested Tract D to include an easement for utilities as authorized by the 19 regulation quoted above. 20 RMC 4-7-190(A): Due regard shall be shown to all natural features such as large trees, 21 watercourses, and similar community assets. Such natural features should be preserved, thereby adding attractiveness and value to the property. 22 23 26. Large trees shall be retained or replaced as discussed in Finding of Fact No. 4(D) and Conclusion of Law No. 9. The stream will be protected by buffers, mitigation/restoration and open 24 space as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. 25 RMC 4-7-200(A): Unless septic tanks are specifically approved by the Public Works Department 26 and the King County Health Department, sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -28 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. 27. As conditioned. RMC 4-7-200(B): An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all natural water flow and shall be of sufficient length to permit fall-width roadway and required slopes. The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. The drainage system shall include detention capacity for the new street areas. Residential plats shall also include detention capacity for future development of the lots. Water quality features shall also be designed to 9 provide capacity for the new street paving for the plat. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 28. As noted Finding of Fact 3(C ), the drainage system is designed to maintain Level 2 flows, which requires maintaining the durations of high flows at their predevelopment levels for all flows greater than one-half of the 2-year peak flow up to the 50-year peak flow. This necessarily includes drainage capacity for the new street areas and all other impervious surfaces as demonstrated in the preliminary storm drainage report, Ex. 29. The project will be conditioned for compliance with the other elements of the regulation quoted above. RMC 4-7-200(C): The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Depart.ment and Fire Department requirements. 29. As conditioned. 18 RMC 4-7-200(D): All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any 20 21 utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the 19 planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department. 22 30. As conditioned. 23 RMC 4-7-200(E): Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic 24 utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line 25 by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of 26 trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -29 1 bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider 2 shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the 3 subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. 4 31. As conditioned. 5 RMC 4-7-210: 6 7 8 A. MONUMENTS: Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling corner of the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department. All surveys 9 shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards. IO B. SURVEY: 11 12 13 14 All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards. C. STREET SIGNS: The subdivider shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision. 15 32. As conditioned. 16 RMC 4-9-150(B)(2): Code Provisions That May Be Modified: 17 a. In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of chapter 4- 18 2 RMC, chapter 4-4 RMC, RMC 4-6-060 and chapter 4-7 RMC, except as listed in subsection B3 of this Section. All modifications shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban 19 l deve opment... 20 33. As shown in Table A of the staff report, the requested revisions are limited to the regulations 21 identified in the regulation quoted above. 22 23 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 24 following requirements are met. 25 1. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required: Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of this Section and with the Comprehensive 2 6 Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which would result without a planned PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -30 1 urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 34. The purposes of the PUD regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-9-150, are to preserve and protect the natural features of the land and to encourage innovation and creativity in development of residential uses. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 3 the natural features of the site are protected by open space, buffers and mitigation that significantly exceeds minimum code standards. The proposal involves innovation and creativity via the staff recommended requirement of a variety of home models, the looped road and trail system, the debris flow mitigation berm and the extensive amount of open space. The project is consistent with the comprehensive plan as determined in Conclusion of Law No. 5, the project is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal is superior in design to what which would occur without a PUD. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3 and 4 the project will not create any significant adverse impacts and so would not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only ifit finds that the following requirements are met. 2. Public Benefit Required: In addition, applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed 16 planned urban development: 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 a. Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development; or b. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or ... e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: ... 35. The proposal provides for public benefit by providing amenities related to critical areas, natural features and overall design that significantly exceed code standards as determined in Finding of Fact No. 6. These benefits clearly outweigh any adverse impacts since there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal as determined in Finding of Fact No. 3 and 4. Staff's suggested condition, adopted by this decision, requiring an increase in the variety of house models compensates for the uniformity oflot size. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -31 1 2 3 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 4 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. 36. As mentioned in Finding of Fact No. 6, the proposed landscaping along Maple Valley Highway would not only provide screening of the highway to the homes but would screen the proposed Tract A, detention facility from the road. The topography of the site on the east and south results in a natural screen to adjacent properties and the stream buffer associated with the proposed enhancement plantings would provide a screen to the residential neighborhood to the west. All 12 proposed single family homes would be required to comply with the residential design standards for the R-8 zone resulting in a compatible size, scale, mass, character and architectural design for the overall development. Compliance with these standards would be reviewed at building permit application. 13 14 15 RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 16 following requirements are met. 17 18 19 20 21 22 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: ii. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single 23 family, townhouses, flats, etc. 24 25 26 37. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 6, the interior site design promotes quality pedestrian and vehicular circulation, increased critical area protection, promotes safety by buffering the high landslide hazards, and buffers the development from Maple Valley Highway. All homes would be required to comply with the R-8 development design standards which would result in coordinated, yet PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 varied roof styles and materials, architectural detailing, and a variety of home styles throughout the development. RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the 10 proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 38. The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A". Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots I -8, and 11 -17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities Tract, identified as "Tract D". Proposed Lots 18 -34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of Maple Valley Highway. Street lighting, sidewalks, and curb and gutter will be required. The PUD would have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access based on the location, size and density of the development, if all conditions of approval are met. See Finding of Fact No. 6, "Public Benefit, subsection: Overall Design 2. Circulation for additional discussion on pedestrian and vehicle circulation .. Furthermore, the applicant has indicated that all roads would be designed to accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic generated by the project. In the Environmental Review, staff and the Environmental Review Committee reviewed the provided traffic study and proposed mitigation for impacts proposed for the increase in traffic attributed to the development (Exhibit 30). As such, if the applicant complies with all mitigation measures of the SEPA determination; traffic would not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -33 I 2 b. Circulation: 3 4 5 ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep 6 gradients. 7 8 39. If the proposed conditions of approval are met, the pedestrian separation along Maple Valley Highway would be provided with an 8-foot planter strip. Another 8-foot planter strip would be located along the "inside" of Road B and the west side of Road A. Furthermore, the pedestrian 9 looped trail would provide another means for pedestrian movement throughout the development maintaining sufficient separation from vehicles. IO 11 A lighting plan was not included in the applicant's submittal packet; therefore, it is not clear how the proposed pedestrian pathways would be illuminated at night. Although, the soft surface trail should 12 not be lit at night as this may cause additional impacts to the stream and its buffer, the remainder of the pedestrian pathway throughout the site should be lit with shielded lighting to reduce increased impacts to the wildlife habitat within the stream. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to utility construction. The lighting plan shall contain pedestrian lighting in addition to building and landscaping lighting if proposed. 13 14 15 The proposed development would limit driveways on busy streets and 50 percent of the lots would be accessed from a public alley. In addition, only one access point is proposed from Maple Valley 17 Highway to the development, Road A. Based on the traffic analysis the applicant would provide a new right tum deceleration lane for access to Road A and a right turn taper for access to SR-169 from the site eastbound. The applicant has proposed to design Road A with a Jess than 12 percent slope 16 18 19 and Road B would be less than 8 percent slope with landings designed for the intersections for the entrances to the public alley. These design considerations/requirements would result in a circulation system that would avoid difficult turning patterns, minimizes steep gradients and minimize driveways on busy streets. 20 21 22 23 Once the applicant has fulfilled the conditions of approval (noted above); the promotion of safety could be accomplished. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 24 following requirements are met. 25 26 PRELlMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -34 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. 40. See Finding of Fact No. 6 "Public Benefit, Subsection: Overall Design I. and 2". The street frontage improvements along Maple Valley Highway and within the internal street system would provide a connection to a school bus stop and potentially public transit. The applicant has proposed to provide two benches along the frontage of Maple Valley Highway for the school bus stop. The site is constrained by natural topographical features and connections to surrounding areas are difficult due to the topography and Maple Valley Highway. However, the internal street system provides sufficient walkways to access the site. The subject site is located on periphery of the City boundary, and is relatively isolated from commercial zoned property. There is no existing access to commercial development in or near the subject site and no new access proposed for pedestrians. RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 15 following requirements are met. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria b. Circulation: iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. 41. The project has been reviewed and by the environmental review committee, which according to RMC 2-14-3 is composed of representatives from the fire department, public works, community services and community and economic development. lf the roadways are designed per recommended standards (Exhibit 31 ), the development would provide safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. The committee has recommended approval and staff have concluded in the staff report that the PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 proposal provides for safe and efficient access of emergency vehicles and there is no evidence to the contrary. The criterion is satisfied. RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria c. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. 42. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 3, the proposal is served by sufficient public infrastructure and services to serve the development. RMC 4-9-ISO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 11 following requirements are met. 12 13 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. 43. The uniqueness of the site, with a considerable percentage consumed by critical areas, results in a necessity to cluster development. When considering all critical areas on the site (including the portion located in King County) and their buffers or slope setback areas, approximately 60 percent of the site is undevelopable. These natural features create a site that maintains open space in the form of critical area buffers as well as recreation space. The requested lot size and setback modification allow for a clustered R-8 development that provides increase protection of critical areas creating an appearance of openness. See additional discussion Finding of Fact No. 6 "Public Benefit, Subsections: Critical Areas and Natural Features". As noted in the previous sections, the proposed development would have well-designed open space and landscaping. In order to maintain sufficient separation between buildings, the applicant has not requested a modification for the side yard setback, as such all structures will maintain a minimum of 10 feet of separation. This spacing allows for emergency access and sufficient fire separation. PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -36 1 RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 2 3 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for 4 consistency with all of the following criteria 5 6 7 e. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external 8 privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 44. As mentioned above the proposed subdivision is screened on all four sides from surrounding development, due to the natural topography, stream buffer area and proposed landscape buffer along Maple Valley Highway. Within the subdivision, unit to unit privacy would be provided by the side yard setback requirement. The applicant has indicated in the Project's Compliance Statement, Ex. 37, that wood fences would be used to separate the single family lots to provide both screening and privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Street trees are required either within the required landscape strip or in the front yard of the lot. The required trees would add to the privacy for lots across Road B. As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 6, "Public Benefit, Subsections: Critical Areas and Natural Features", the proposed walkways and landscaping are appropriate for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, All homes would be required to be designed to meet the residential design standards for the R-8 zone. These standards would require windows on the front of the home, increasing access to light and air for each dwelling unit. Furthermore, each lot would have private front, side and rear yards, enhancing each lot with landscaping and access to light and air. RMC 4-9-150(0): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the 23 following requirements are met. 24 25 26 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria PRELlMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -37 1 2 3 f Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. 4 5 45. The lots are arranged in into 3 groups. Group one is located along Maple Valley Highway (Lots 1 -10) aligned east-west. Group two is located along the east side of Road B (Lots 11 -17) 6 aligned north-south and group three is located in the center of Road B (Lots 18 -34) aligned east- west. The site topography slopes down from south to north, resulting in a tiered housing effect after 7 site grading. Based on the proposed grading of the site, the applicant has indicated that all new homes would have a view of the Cedar River, located across Maple Valley Highway. The proposed layout maximizes the use of topography and building location to take advantage of the views to the north of the Cedar River. 8 9 1 O RMC 4-9-lSO(D): The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. 11 12 3. Additional Review Criteria: A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for 13 consistency with all of the following criteria 14 15 g. Parking Area Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not l 6 designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, 17 and shared parking facilities where appropriate. 18 46. Required parking would be provided within garages attached to each home, of which 50 19 percent would be accessed via a public alley. Additional guest parking would be provided on the driveway aprons for each lot. On-street parking would be provided along Road B on one side. The 20 proposed parking is designed to provide efficient use of the site and would be appropriately screen by the provided garages. 21 22 RMC 4-9-150(0)(4): Each planned urban development shall demonstrate compliance with the 23 development standards contained in subsection E of this Section, the underlying zone, and any overlay districts; unless a modification for a specific development standard has been requested 24 pursuant to subsection B2 of this Section. 25 47. As discussed below, the proposal complies with all development standards imposed by RMC 26 4-9-1 SO(E). As previously determined the uses and density proposed for the project is consistent with PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -38 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the underlying zone. As depicted in the plat maps, Ex. 2, the lots comply with the bulk and dimensional requirements of the underlying zone except to the extent modified by the PUD regulations. RMC 4-9-lSO(E)(l): Common Open Space Standard: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for residential, mixed use, commercial, and industrial developments are described below. a. Residential: For residential developments open space must equal at least ten percent (I 0%) of the development site 's gross land area. i. Open space may include, but is not limited to, the following: (a) A trail that allows opportunity for passive recreation within a critical area buffer (only the square footage of the trail shall be included in the open space area calculation), or (b) A sidewalk and its associated landscape strip, when abutting the edge of a critical area buffer and when a part of a new public or private road, or (c) A similar proposal as approved by the reviewing official. ii. Additionally, a minimum area equal to fifty (50) square feet per unit of common space or recreation area shall be provided in a concentrated space as illustrated in Figure 1. 48. The proposed development is located on an 11.59 acre site, of which the majority is located in critical areas including the entire portion located within King County. The portion of the site located in the City of Renton is 7.32 acres, based on the 7.32 acre site the required amount of open space would be 31,899 square feet. The applicant has dedicated an Open Space Tract E and C which totals 29,638 square feet and a soft surface trail that equals 9,192 square feet, resulting in a total of 38,830 square feet, resulting in 6,931 square feet of additional open space. The proposed development would have 34 lots, 50 square feet of common space or recreation areas is required per unit, resulting in a requirement of an additional 1,700 square feet. To fulfill the common space requirement the applicant has proposed to provide a 4,188 square foot park, resulting in 2,488 square feet of additional recreation space than required. The park is located on the inside of Road B directly across the street from the Open Space Tract. The overall location and design of the park, open space and trail are located as to create a quality open space/recreation area for the development, specifically if all conditions of approval are met. RMC 4-9-150(E)(2): Private Open Space: Each residential unit in a planned urban development shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors) for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or 26 detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. The private open space shall PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -39 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II be well demarcated and at least fifteen feet (15') in every dimension (decks on upper floors can substitute for the required private open space). For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60) square feet in size with no dimension less than five feet (5 '). 49. Each lot would have a private yard in both the front and the rear of the lot. The requested setback reduction is for a IO-foot front and IO-foot rear, which could result in a private open space yard that is less than 15 feet in every dimension. However, the lots sizes are large enough to accommodate a portion of the yard to meet this standard. As a condition of approval, compliance with this standard shall be reviewed at building permit stage. RMC 4-9-150(E)(3): Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: a. Installation: All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the City; provided, that common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall famish a security device to the City in an 12 amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) 13 years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. b. Maintenance: Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements of RMC 4-4-070. 50. As conditioned. RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: a. Installation: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the developer or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions ofRMC 4-9-060 ... 24 51. As conditioned. 25 RMC 4-9-150(E)(4): Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: 26 PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -40 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 b. Maintenance: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner, if there is only one owner, or by the property owners' association, or the agent(s) thereof. In the event that such facilities are not maintained in a responsible manner, as determined by the City, the City shall have the right to provide for the maintenance thereof and bill the owner or property owners' association accordingly. Such bill, if unpaid, shall become a lien against each individual property. 52. As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to establish a home owners' association for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements, including but not limited to the soft surface trail, landscaping, and park within the PUD prior to Final PUD approval. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be permanently maintained by the PUD home owners' association. RMC 4-9-150(11)(2): Merger with Other Applications: A preliminary planned urban development may be considered simultaneously with any other land use permit required for a proposal, including but not limited to: preliminary plats, short plats, binding site plans, critical area modifications or variances, shoreline substantial developments permits, shoreline variances, shoreline conditional use 12 permits, grading regulation modifications or variances, or other applications. Where merged, the review criteria for all of the applications shall be considered simultaneously with the planned urban 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 development criteria in subsection C of this Section. Where there are conflicts with review criteria, the criteria of subsection C of this Section shall govern. Where merged, all permits shall be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. The review authority shall be · determined consistent with RMC 4-8-080C2, Review Authority for Multiple Permit Applications. 53. As discussed in Finding of Fact No. 4, the application includes a request to reduce the stream buffers of the Class III stream and an alteration to the stream buffer for a water line crossing. Both critical area modifications are approved based upon the findings and conclusions adopted by reference in Finding of Fact No. 4. DECISION The proposed preliminary plat, preliminary PUD, stream buffer reduction and stream buffer alteration are all approved. Requested revisions to development standards are approved to the extent recommended by staff in Exhibit 31. The proposal is subject to the following conditions of approval: I. The applicant shall comply with the 12 mitigation measures issued as part of the 24 Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated August 22, 2011. 25 2. The applicant shall construct street frontage improvements, as modified in Exhibit 31, Staff 26 Recommendation, Approved Modification form Renton Municipal Code (RMC). These PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT-41 1 2 3 improvements shall be shown on the final PUD application, and reviewed and approved by the Engineering Plan Review Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. 3. The applicant shall submit a detailed final landscape plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The detailed final landscape plan 4 shall include, but is not limited to the following: 5 a. Proposed locations and design details of benches and interpretive signage proposed along the 6 soft surface trial. 7 b. Street trees shall be identified in compliance with the City's street tree standards. 8 c. The plan shall indicate either 100 percent drought tolerant plantings or the applicant shall 9 provide a final irrigation plan with the final detailed landscape plan. 10 d. The plan shall include exact numbers of trees, shrubs, and groundcover and shall include 11 specific locations for the shrubs and ground cover. 12 e. The plan shall identify the existing location and number of trees with a two inch caliper or greater and the applicant shall protect and/or replace all of these trees as required by the City's tree 13 retention ordinance, RMC 4-4-130. See Conclusion of Law No. 9. 14 4. The park shall be moved east by one lot to align with Road A, and adjusting Lot 34 to be the 15 northwest comer lot of the internal portion of the development. This change shall be reflected on the 16 17 18 final PUD application materials. 5. The detention facility shall be re-designed to become an integral part of the open space system. The design shall meet the City's storm water requirements and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. 19 6. All crosswalks in the development shall be differentiated by material or texture from adjacent 20 paving materials and shall be at least six feet in width. An updated site plan depicting proposed materials or texture for crosswalks shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current 21 Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. 22 23 24 25 7. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. The lighting plan shall contain pedestrian lighting in addition to building and landscaping lighting if proposed. 8. The applicant shall revise the utility plan to depict a I-inch water meter to all lots. The revised plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Plan Review Project Manager 26 prior to Final Plat recording PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 9. The applicant shall establish a home owners' association for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements, including but not limited to the soft surface trail, landscaping, and park within the PUD. The draft CCR's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney, prior to final PUD approval. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be permanently maintained by the PUD home owners' association. The CCR's shall provide that any covenants required by the City may not be amended without City approval. 10. The applicant shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable easement on the property title for all critical areas and their buffers prior to Final Plat recording. The protective easement shall be held by current and future property owners; shall run with the land; and shall prohibit development, alteration, and disturbance within the easement except for the purposes of habitat enhancement as a part of an enhancement project, access for the trail users and maintenance, and debris flow mitigation access for landslide events. Furthermore, these areas shall be fenced with split rail fencing, providing designated access points along the trail and necessary access for debris removal in the event of a landslide. In addition, the large portion of the site that is located in King County shall be recorded in a separate critical areas tract that is consistent with King County Code section 2 lA.24, and shall have an NGPE or similar easement consistent with KKC recorded on this tract 11. The Park shall be placed in a recreation tract, this designation shall be identified on the final 14 PUD and Plat Plan, prior to Final Plat recording. 15 16 17 18 19 12. A covenant shall be placed on all tracts restricting their separate sale and giving each lot owner within the plat an undivided interest in the tracts. This covenant should be recorded on the face of the plat, and/or concurrent with the plat recording, noting the recording number on the plat. 13. A street lighting plan shall be submitted with the construction permit application for review and approval by the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. 14. A note shall be placed on the face of the plat requiring proposed Lots 8-11 to gain access from 20 the proposed access easement, Tract D. The note shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 21 22 23 24 25 26 15. The applicant shall apply for and successfully obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, prior to construction permit issuance. 16. The applicant shall submit a final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan that complies with the criteria included in RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 3-4-050. The applicant shall provide the final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan for review and approval to the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -43 1 2 3 4 5 17. The applicant shall provide a trail detail for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval, showing compliance with the criteria in RMC 4-3- 050C. 7.a specifically the trail surface materials. 18. The applicant shall submit a detailed wetland buffer enhancement plan, that is compliant with RMC 4-3-050 for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. 6 19. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the utility corridor within the buffer, 7 8 to isolate the area of disturbance and reduce potential further impacts. Construction fencing shall be shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. 9 20. The applicant shall provide the Current Planning Project Manager, a water line installation 10 plan, which complies with RMC 4-3-050L.8.b.i.(b) for review and approval, prior to final PUD approval. 11 12 13 14 15 21. The applicant shall provide the Current Planning Project Manager, an utility installation analysis, prepared by a certified biologist, that addresses criterion 4-3-050L.8.b.i.(d) and is accepted by the Administrator of Community and Economic Development or Designee, prior to final PUD approval. If the report concludes there would be impacts, as identified in this criterion, the installation of the water line would be denied. 22. Construction of the water line shall be limited to June through August when stream flows are 16 anticipated to be low and that City Staff is contacted to verify little to no flow within the stream bed 17 before construction commences. 18 23. The common boundary between the native growth protection tract and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include a permanent wood split rail fence and 19 metal signs on treated or metal posts. The permanent wood split rail fence and signs shall be installed 20 prior to Final Plat recording. 21 24. The following note shall appear on the face of the Final Plat and shall also be recorded as a 22 23 24 25 26 covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created or benefitting from this City action abutting or including a native growth protection tract are responsible for maintenance and protection of the tract. Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been received." PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -44 I 25. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the edge of the wetlands and stream 2 buffer areas, to clearly identify the edge of the critical areas during the construction phase of the development. This fencing may encroach within the stream buffer, in approved temporary 3 construction locations per the provided Critical Areas report, for the construction of the storm water 4 pond. Construction fencing shall be shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning project manager prior to construction permit issuance. 5 6 7 26. Tract D on the preliminary plat map, Ex. 2, shall be identified as an access and utility tract and shall comply with City street standards as contemplated in RMC 4-7-170(8). 27. All proposed street names shall be submitted to the City and approved by the City prior to 8 final plat approval. 9 10 11 12 13 28. All subdivision streets shall comply with the street standards of RMC 4-6-060 as contemplated in RMC 4-7-l 50(D). 29. All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat, including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee. 14 30. Road A, 8 and C as depicted in Ex. 2 shall be dedicated to the public. 15 16 31. All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have a minimum radius of fifteen feet (15') as contemplated by RMC 4-7-l 70(E). 17 32. Sanitary sewers shall be provided by the developer at no cost to the City and designed in 18 19 accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. 33. As contemplated in RMC 4-7-200(8), cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all 20 natural water flow and shall be of sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. 21 22 The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4-6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. 34. The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be designed and 23 installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire Department 24 requirements as contemplated in RMC 4-7-200(C). 25 35. All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the planting of 26 trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department of Community and Economic Development.. 36. Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic utilities are installed to serve each Jot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. 3 7. Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling comer of the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department of Community and Economic Development. All surveys shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards. All other lot comers shall be marked per the City surveying standards. The applicant shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision. 13 38. 14 39. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the private open space standards ofRMC 4- 15 9-150(E)(2) for each lot prior to and as a requirement for building permit issuance. 16 40. 17 41. Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements ofRMC 4-4-070. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits, all common facilities, including but not 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 limited to utilities, storm drainage, streets, recreation facilities, etc., shall be completed by the applicant or, if deferred by the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee, assured through a security device to the City equal to the provisions ofRMC 4-9-060. 42. Water and sanitary sewer availability certificates will be acquired prior to final plat approval. 43. All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the City; provided, that common open space containing natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do PRELIMINARYPLATAND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -46 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two (2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. DATED this 20lh day of January, 2012. \s\ Phil 0/brechts (Signed original in official file) Phil A. 01 brechts City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-11 O(E)(9) provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-l 10(E)(9) requires appeals of the hearing examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the hearing examiner's decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing e examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-l 10(E)(8) and RMC 4-8-100(0)(4). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7lh floor, ( 425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change m valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT -47 Cynthia Moya From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: To: Monday, January 23, 2012 11 :51 AM 'phil olbrechts' Cc: Cynthia Moya Subject: RE: Subdivision --McCormick Phil, Could you please send us a PDF of the sign in sheet from the McCormick hearing. If my memory is not failing me, you had taken the sheet with you. Thank you, 'Vanessa <Do(6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 10SS South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: phil olbrechts [mailto:olbrechtslaw@gmail.com1 Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 6:48 AM To: Bonnie Walton; Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Subdivision --McCormick Final decision attached. A hard copy will be mailed to Bonnie. 1 CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: December 22, 2011 To: City Clerk's Office From: Stacy M Tucker Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. Project Name: McCormick Plat LUA (file} Number: LUA-11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Cross-References: LUAOS-068 (King Co. File #L08P0003) ~ AKA's: .,-------------------------------------'i i Project Manager: : Acceptance Date: ' i Applicant: Owner: Contact: i PID Number: ; ERC Approval Date: ; ERC Appeal Date: Administrative Denial: Appeal Period Ends: : Public Hearing Date: . Date Appealed to HEX: , By Whom: .• HEX Decision: l Date Appealed to Council: j By Whom: Council Decision: : Mylar Recording Number: Vanessa Dolbee June 6, 2011 Robert E. McCormick same as applicant Greg Deiner, Pacific Engineering Design, Inc. 2323059029 August 22, 2011 September 9, 2011 January 5, 2012 Date: Date: Project Description: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream . buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. · Location: ; Comments: j 16405 Maple Valley Highway I ··-·-·----------------------------.......! JI ' CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 22 day of December, 2011, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Robert E. McCormick Applicant/Owner Greg Deiner Contact Parties of Record See attached A • h ---"''••,,,, ~,,/ l71_ \... ~ //" 12,., (Signature of Sender): ''i ~ ' ) () ,~ ._..., \}\ STATE OF WASHINGTON E . f,.·v..,)0~ ) ss i J: ' ....... ~::: COUNTY OF KING ) ~ " . ~= of, ..... ~,,.'if'./ Oj : .,,, .._,.,;...., ..t,. 'f' ~ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker .,,,,,, .,.,.,.. of ,., ...... ~' signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the ~!~!M~l'\':rposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary Pu lie in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): ____ l_-,_._"1_-__,G'-'-', '-c,e.Jc:.-'.:cC,_i _____________ _ My appointment expires: " · , o ~ · 3 /-\ '-'~f-<, ~ '·" 'I A:' \ ·- McCormick Plat LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD .,; Courtney Kaylor Attorney at Law McCullough Hill Leary, PS 701 Fifth Avenue #7220 Seattle, WA 98104 Jose Rodriguez Montoya 16405 SE Maple Valley Road #9 Renton, WA 98058 Monica Crystal Garnice 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #20 . Renton, WA 98058 Jose R. Cisneros 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy #24 Renton, WA 98058 Feliciano Galvez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #27 Renton, WA 98058 Hallie Sword PO Box 6314 Federal Way, WA 98063 Lauren D. Mclees Allen 16405 Renton Maple Valley Road #53 Renton, WA 98058 Bill Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #33 Renton, WA 98058 Robert McCormick 161 Maple Way Road Selah, WA 98942 Joe Castillo 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd #6 Renton, WA 98058 Juanita Shields 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #41 Renton, WA 98058 Jose Garibay 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #1 Renton, WA 98058 Fernandez Alejandre 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #20 Renton, WA 98058 Tien Tran 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #25 Renton, WA 98058 Doug Peterson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #17 Renton, WA 98058 Carl McMurtry 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #32 Renton, WA 98058 Clyde Arnold 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #46 Renton, WA 98058 Barbara Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #33 Renton, WA 98058 Greg Diener, P.E. Pacific Engineering Design LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S #100 Seattle, WA 98188 Rita Smith & Robert Barnes 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #38 Renton, WA 98058 Dan Greggs 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd #3 Renton, WA 98058 Ruth Martinez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #1 Renton, WA 98058 Sandra Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #33 Renton, WA 98058 David Serrano 16405 SE Maple Valley Road #28 Renton, WA 98058 John Brigham 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #36 Renton, WA 98058 Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #16 Renton, WA 98058 Esther Lopez 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #8 Renton, WA 98058 Resident 2820 SW 110th Place Seattle, WA 98146 Mr. & Mrs. Daniel Desjardins, Jr. 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #44 Renton, WA 98058 Maria Concepcion Perez Syala 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #45 Renton, WA 98058 Danh Cao Dinh 411164th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Toni Dinius 1512 6th Street Renton, WA 98057 Edward D. Tharp, Jr. 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #18 Renton, WA 98058 Miguel Mendoza 16405 Maple Valley Road SE #29 Renton, WA 98058 Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy #16 Renton, WA 98058 Myrtle Olson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy #23 Renton, WA 98058 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING January 5, 2012 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. PROJECT NAME: McCormick Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD) for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres in area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 40 mobile homes and two stick-built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 9 tracts are proposed for critical areas, open space, utilities, stormwater, and a park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of the Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant a minimum of 36 new trees. The deveopment would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. HEX Agenda 1-5-12.doc DEPARTMENT OF COMMl TY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .4 Cityof, Q _r{=:Jl [ (.Jf l 0 REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A, SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: REPORT DA TE: December 22, 2011 Project Name: McCormick Plat Owner/Applicant: Robert E. McCormick, 161 Mapleway Road, Selah, WA 98942 Contact: Greg Diener, P.E., Pacific Engineering Design LLC, 15445 53rd Avenue S, Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98188 File Number: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, PPUD Project Manager: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Project Description: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD) for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7 .32 acres in area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density ofthe site would be 6.33 dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 40 mobile homes and two stick-built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 9 tracts are proposed for critical areas, open space, utilities, stormwater, and a park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of the Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant a minimum of 36 new trees. The deveopment would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. Project Location: 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (Maple Valley Highway) C11y of Ren/on Commum/)' and Economic De M CCORMJCK PLAT P UBLJC HEARJNG DATE Jan uary 5. 2012 11enr Depar1me111 Project Location Map Repor/ to the Hearing Examiner LUAJ 1-034. £CF. l'P, l'l'UD Page 2 of 38 Ci[y of Renton Communiry and f,'conomic De ienl Department Rcpor! to the Hearmg 1:X.ammcr MCCORMJCA PIAT Fl.JBLJC HEARJiVCi DATt; January 5, 2012 U:A 11-034. ECF, PP. PPU!J Page 3 of 38 B. HEARING EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Exhibit 2: Exhibit 3: Exhibit 4: Exhibit 5: Exhibit 6: Exhibit 7: Exhibit 8: Exhibit 9: Exhibit 10: Exhibit 11: Exhibit 12: Exhibit 13: Exhibit 14: Exhibit 15: Exhibit 16: Exhibit 17: Exhibit 18: Exhibit 19: Exhibit 20: Exhibit 21: Exhibit 22: Exhibit 23: Exhibit 24: Exhibit 25: Exhibit 26: Exhibit 27: Exhibit 28: Exhibit 29: Exhibit 30 Cover Sheet -Neighborhood Map Preliminary Plat Map TESC and Tree Removal Plan Conceptual Site Plan Site Stream Buffer Sections Conceptual Road and Site Section Road A and C Profiles Conceptual Road B Profile Conceptual Pond and Berm Section Slope Analysis Existing Conditions McCormick Plat Conceptual Mitigation Plan McCormick Plat Mitigation Plan Planting Sheet McCormick Plat Mitigation Plan Notes Sheet McCormcik Plat Lot 33 Elevation, Sample Conceptual Landscape Plan Conceptual Landscape Plan -Notes and Details Neighborhood Detail Map Cedar River 200-ft. Shoreline Area Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, August 12, 2011, 33 pages McCormick Plat Revised Traffic Impact Analysis, October 14, 2010, 8 pages, 7 figures, 1 Technical Appendix Geotech Consultants, Inc. Response letter, September 9, 2008, 3 pages Geotech Consultants, Inc. Update to Response Letter, October 16, 2008, 2 pages, 1 figure Geotech Consultants, Inc. Geotechnical Report and Review of Updated Plans, 2 page cover letter, 11 page report and one appendix Kleinfelder Technical Peer Review, April 17, 2009, 8 pages Otak, Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, 30 pages and 6 appendices Geotech Consultants, Inc. Slope Stability Related to Existing Converted Stream, 2 pages Otak, Culvert Removal at McCormcik Plat, 2 pages McCormick Plat, Preliminary Drainage Report, 15 pages and 1 Appendix (Level 1 Offsite Drainage Analysis) Environmental Review Report, SEPA Citr of Renton <:ommunily and Econumic De 'len/ Dl'parfml'nf MCCORMICK !'LAT PUBLIC l!EA.Rll·iG DATE Janua!J· 5. 2012 Report to the 1-Jeanng tXammer U!AJ 1-034, ECF, PP, P?UD Page 4 uf38 Exhibit 31 Exhibit 32 Staff Recommendation, Approved Modifications from Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Vested King County Plat C. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: Robert E. McCormick 161 Mapleway Road Selah, WA 98942 2. Zoning Designation: Residential 8 dwelling units per net acre(R-8) 3. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Residential Single Family (RSF) 4. Existing Site Use: Valley View Mobile Home Park 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: Maple Valley Highway and King County Park property (K.C. zone RA-S) East: King County low density single family (K.C zone RA-5) South:King County vacant land (K.C. zone RA-lOP and R-1) West: Single-family residential (R-8 zones) 6. Proposed Orientation: N/ A 7. 8. Site Area: 504,860 square feet (11.59 acres) Project Data: Existing Building Area: 696 square feet D. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Annexation Comprehensive Plan Zoning King County Vested Plat E. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Utilities: Land Use File No. N/A LUA08-145 LUA08-145 LUA08-068 Ordinance No, 5337 5501 5191 N/A Date 06/09/2008 11/25/2009 11/25/2009 N/A Water: This site is located in the Cedar River Water District water service boundary. It is not located in the Aquifer Protection Zone. Sewer: This site is located in the Cedar River Sewer District sanitary sewer service boundary, Surface Water/Storm Water: The City does not have any records of storm drainage facilities in Maple Valley Hwy fronting this parceL 2. Streets: There are no existing street improvements along the frontage of Maple Valley Highway. 3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department City of Renton Commumfy and Ecunom1c De nenl De artment MCCORMICK PLAT P/)BIJC JfEAR!NCi DATE Januwy 5. 2012 4. F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter z Land Use Districts Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts Section 4-2-060: Zoning Use Table Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards Section 4-2-115: Residential Design and Open Space Standards Z. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts Section 4-3-050: Critical Areas Regulations Section 4-3-100: Urban Design Regulations 3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations Section 4-4-060: Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations Section 4-4-070: Landscaping Section 4-4-080: Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations Section 4-4-130: Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards Section 4-6-060: Street Standards 5. Chapter 7 Subdivision Regulations Report to the Hearing Examine,· LUA/1-034. £CF PP. f'f'UD Page 5 of 38 Section 4-7-050: General Outline of Subdivision, Short Plat and Lot Line Adjustment Procedures Section 4-7-080: Detailed Procedures for Subdivision 5. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria Section 4-9-150: Planned Urban Development Regulations Section 4-9-250: Variances, Waivers, Modifications, and Alternates 6. Chapter 11 Definitions G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element -Residential Single Family 2. Community Design Element 3. Environment Element H. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS; 1. Project Description/Background Background It should be noted, that the applicant currently has a vested King County project (City file number LUA08-068) for a 34-lot subdivision at this site. This plat application was submitted to King County, which was shortly followed by the City's annexation of the subject area. Once annexed to the City of Renton, the responsibility of processing the plat application was transferred to the City of Renton. Cin· of Renton Communitv and Economic Dei ="="'=D=',p=a-,t,-ne="-' --------- Af('C'ORMJCK PLAT PUHUC HF.AR!l-iG DATE January 5. 2012 .R.epor! to the Heanng Lwmmer WA/1-031. ffF. PP. PP/JD Page 6 of38 Under the vested application many "non urban" standards would be permitted as a part of the development, in addition to the applicant's ability to develop to a higher density than permitted under Renton zoning. The vested subdivision uses cul-de-sacs rather than a looped road system where many homes would be alley loaded. The new application would provide vertical curbs, sidewalks, a trail system, vegetative buffering from Maple Valley Highway, and increased Critical Area protection over the vested application. The subject PUD proposal represents a unique situation, as the comparison for public benefit, in this case, should be balanced by not only the existing City of Renton regulations, and the improvement of the PUD subdivision design and amenities over the vested King County plat. With the approval ofthe subject Preliminary PUD and Preliminary Plat, the applicant has indicated they would withdrawal the King County Plat application. Correction Note: It should be noted, that with the original application, it was believed by staff that a variance would be required for the water line to cross the stream buffer. However, since the original submittal, this request was re-evaluated against RMC Title IV, and staff identified that utility crossings are a permitted alteration to a stream, subject to specific approval criteria. As such, the following report does not include a variance, but does address the specific criteria for a stream alteration (RMC 4-3- 050L.8.b.). Project Description The applicant, Robert McCormick, is requesting a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PUD) for a 34-lot, 9-tract subdivision of an 11.59 acre site. The proposed McCormick Plat would be located along the south side of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169) at 16405 SE Renton- Maple Valley Road (parcel #2323059029). The site consists of one parcel, the majority of which is located within the City of Renton. However, a long, narrow "dog leg" extends southward off the southeastern side of the rectangular portion of the site; this portion is within unincorporated King County, which is not proposed to be developed. The site is currently the location of the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which provides space for approximately 40 mobile homes. In addition to the mobile homes and multiple out buildings on site, there are two permanent structures, a duplex and maintenance building. The applicant proposes to remove all existing structures, and mobile homes. The site is bordered to the north by Maple Valley Highway (SR-169), to the west by the Summer View neighborhood, a single-family residential subdivision, and to the south and east by undeveloped forested areas. The subject property is zoned Residential 8 dwelling units per net acre (R-8) and the portion located in King County is zoned Rural Area, 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (RA-5) King County zoning. The proposed development would be within the R-8 zone as such, R-8 development standards would be applicable to the subject project. The portion of the site zoned RA-5 remains within King County. The Land Use designation is Residential Single Family (RSF) for the portion located within the City of Renton, and is Rural Residential, 1 du/2.5-lOac for the King County portion. The proposed subdivision would result in 34 lots ranging in lot size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet, resulting in a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per acre. Nine tracts are also proposed which include stormwater detention, native growth protection areas, access and utilities, open space, and critical areas. In addition to the Cit,· of Henton Community and Economic De MCCORMICK PLAT Pl..,'BJJC !{/.~ARI.VG DATE Januwy 5. 2012 nenf l)e artment Repor/ to 1he Heanng EXam111er HUI l-034. ECF. PP. PPl)D Page 7 qf 38 traditional subdivision lots and tracts, the applicant has proposed a looped trail around the site which crosses Open Space tracts E and C and a small tot lot with a play area. The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A", herein. Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots 1-8, and 11-17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities tract, identified as Tract D. Proposed Lots 18 -34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of SR-169. Road improvements including sidewalks on both sides of Road A, and on one side (the inside) of Road Bare proposed. Street frontage improvements are not proposed along SR 169. Pursuant to the City of Renton's critical areas maps, a stream, steep slopes, erosion hazards, landslide hazards, seismic hazards, and wetlands have been identified on the subject property. The geotechnical hazards located on the site are due to the steep slope inclinations, soils generally susceptible to erosion, and history of landslides in the area. The critical areas map indicates that the approximate northerly portion ofthe rectangular area ofthe site is within a Seismic Hazard area. In addition, the northeast corner of the site is located within the 200-foot Shoreline Area measured from the Cedar River, which is located across Maple Valley Highway. The shoreline area impacts proposed Lots 9 and 10; Lot 10 would be approximately 170 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and Lot 9 would be approximately 190 feet from the OHWM. The "dog leg" portion of the site, located in King County, would be subject to King County critical areas regulations, KCC 21A.24, whereas the remainder of the site would be subject to City of Renton critical areas regulations. King County Sensitive Areas Maps indicate that the subject site is located in a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area and is an area susceptible to ground water contamination. The City's critical areas maps do not identify this area for Aquifer Protection. The developed portion of the existing mobile home park has an approximate slope of 9 to 10 percent sloping in a southeast-to-northwest direction. As this portion of the site remains within the Landslide and Erosion Hazard area, it is the mildest slope on site. The property is bounded to the south and southeast by steep slopes that extend down from the Renton uplands. The steep slope at the southeast corner of the site, ranges from about an elevation of 230 feet down to the toe-of-slope to an elevation of 160 to 180 feet, and averages about a 100 percent grade. Similarly, the steep slope adjacent to the south side of the mobile home park that extends above the creek is well over 100 feet high and has an average slope of about 100 percent. The applicant has proposed a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm along the base of the steep slope located on the southern border of the site to divert water and/or soil within the stream buffer toward the western side of the site in the event of a landslide or mudslide. In addition, a 25-foot buffer from the southeastern slope is proposed for landslide protection for lots 14 -17. The applicant has indicated that grading the site would be necessary to meet the stormwater requirements. The applicant has indicated the total excavation would be 8,248 cubic yards and fill is estimated at 7,924 cubic yards. The soil that is usable from the excavation on site would be utilized on site, other materials such as selected borrow and gravel are expected to be imported to the site. The applicant submitted with the application a Revised Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. dated April 12, 2011. This report indicates there are two wetlands located on site, both identified as Category 2 wetlands, per the City of Renton classification system. Wetland 'A' C'itv of Renton Commumtr and Econon11c De nenf Department Report to the Hearinf{ Exammer MCCOR-"cf!CK PLAT PUBLIC HEARLVC DATE January 5. 2012 LUAll-034. ECF PP. PPUD Paxe 8 C!f 38 is located along the west side of the site and Wetland 'B' is located along the northeast edge of the site. Category 2 wetlands typically have SO-foot buffers. The Critical Areas report further indentifies a single intermittent stream that flows through the site. The subject stream is a Class 3 stream and was designated as a Type N stream by Bill Kershke, King County Biologist, in his review of the feature. Class 3 streams typically have 75-foot buffers measured from the OHWM. The applicant has proposed to reduce the stream buffer from 75 feet to 60 feet for the majority of the buffer area. In addition, the applicant has requested a variance to place a water line through the stream buffer to connect to an existing 10-inch water line stub provided by the neighboring Summer View neighborhood. The area of the site that is currently developed as a mobile home park consists of ornamental plants placed by residents of the mobile home park in addition to a few large conifer trees which are scattered about the site. The steep slopes on site are covered with dense understory vegetation consisting of mostly sword ferns and an upperstory of scattered big leaf maple trees. The wetland and stream areas of the site consist mainly of reed canary grass, creeping buttercup and a few small alders. 2. Environmental Review Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), on August 22, 2011, the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) for the McCormick Plat. The DNS-M included 12 mitigation measures. A 14-day appeal period commenced on August 26, 2011 and ended on September 9, 2011. No appeals of the threshold determination have been filed. 3. Compliance with ERC Conditions Based on an analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued the following mitigation measures with the Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated: 1. The debris flow mitigation berm shall be constructed as a part of the plat infrastructure installation. The berm shall be inspected and a letter of approval shall be submitted to the City from Otak verifying compliance with the standards specified within their May 17, 2010 Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis. The construction and certification letter shall be received by the Planning Division prior to final plat recording. 2. A final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan including engineering details shall be submitted and approved by the City of Renton Project Manager prior to Final Plat approval; this plan shall be made available to the new residents of the McCormick Plat and shall be included as part of the neighborhood Code, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R). 3. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, and the recommendations included in the Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, prepared by Otak, dated May 17, 2010. Including but not limited to: 1. The installation of a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. C1ti: of Ren/on Community and Economic De lien! Department Repori to the Iiearmg Lxaminer MCCORMICK PLAT Pf)BUC HE4RJNCi DATF. January 5. 101:l J,l;'A!l-03./. !.:CF PJJ.Ff>UlJ Page 9 1f38 2. A 25-foot buffer should be established from the southeastern slope. 3. If soil is deposited into the buffer via landslides and/or soil movement, the soil should be removed within a few weeks to keep the buffers free to "catch" more soil in the future. 4. All foundations shall be supported on at least 2 feet of structural fill, non individual footings should be used, and foundations should be designed to span 10-feet unsupported. 4. The vehicle storage area/parking area located on the southern portion ofthe site shall be decommissioned and the area shall be re-vegetated to the minimum amount necessary to prevent erosion; this re-vegetation shall be included in the final mitigation and monitoring plan for stream buffer reduction. The final mitigation and monitoring plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department Project Manager for review and approval prior to final plat recording. 5. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated August 12, 2011. 6. Construction fencing and silt fencing shall be placed along the buffer (or reduced buffer) of the stream and wetlands during construction. During construction of the debris flow mitigation berm; the fencing may be moved south to provide space to construct the berm within the buffer area. 7. Additional downstream analysis shall be conducted to analyze the impacts of stormwater runoff on Ron Regis Park and any impacts to the Park shall be mitigated. This analysis can be included in the Drainage Report submitted with the construction permit application. 8. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton Planning Division, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. 9. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010, that was submitted with the project application and provided a right turn pocket along SR-169 for safe access to the subject site. 10. The applicant shall pay the Traffic Impact/Mitigation Fee as required at the time of Final Plat recording, Construction Permit, or Building Permit based on the codes in place at that time. 11. The owner of the Valley View Mobile Home Park ("owner") voluntarily agrees and shall pay the relocation cost of the homeowners within the Valley View Mobile Home Park subject to the following conditions: City of Renton Commumtr and Ecunom1c Dt> rent Department Report lo the Hearing F,xammer MCCORMICK PLAT LUA/ 1-034. ECF PP. PP/JD Page 10 of 38 P/_JBLJC HEARJ/•./G DATE January 5. 2012 4. 1. The relocation assistance program currently administered by the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program") must exist at the time notice of closure of the Park is provided by the Owner; 2. Assistance shall be provided to all homeowners that reside within Valley View Mobile Home Park at the time of park closure notice and meet the State Relocation Assistance Program income requirements for eligibility, however those homeowners whom qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the homeowners qualification; 3. The Owner will pay up to $7,500 for a single-section home and $12,000 for a multi-section home, the funds would be paid only those relocation cost for which the State Relocation Assistance Program provides reimbursement, including but not limited to removal and reattachment of attached awnings, decks, and stairs; prep for transport; moving the home; permits; hook-ups to all utilities; rental of moving equipment; repair of damage caused during transport; or demolition and a down payment for another manufactured home; and 4. The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. 12. Information shall be posted on site visible to the residents notifying them of any land use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. The notice shall be posted prior to submittal to the City or the same day as the submittal. Staff Review Comments Representatives from various City departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of the report. s. Consistency with the Planned Urban Development Regulations a) Compliance with the Underlying Zoning Designation (Code provisions restricted from modification through the PUD process): The subject site is designated R-8 on the City of Renton Zoning Map. The proposed development would allow for a 34-lot, 9-tract subdivision of an 11.59 acre site. i. Use: A planned urban development may not authorize uses that are inconsistent with those allowed by the underlying zone. The applicant is proposing the development of single family homes. The R-8 zone permits detached dwellings. ii. Density: The number of dwellings units shall not exceed the density allowances of the applicable base zone. The R-8 zone allows a density range of 4.0 to 8.0 dwelling units per net acre. The proposed project would have a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per net acre and, therefore, complies with the density requirement. Cir-v of Ren/un Commuml--r and Fconmnic De nenl Department MCCORMICK /'/.AT PUBLIC HEARING DATt:January 5. 2012 b} Code Provisions That May Be Modified: Report to the Hearmg Examiner LUAJ 1-034. £CF PP. PPl)D Page I I of 38 In approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of chapters 4-2 Zoning Districts-uses & Standards, 4-4 City-Wide Property Development Standards, and 4-7 Subdivision Regulations and RMC 4-6-060 Street Standards, except as listed above in subsection a). If all conditions of approval are complied with the proposed McCormick Plat complies with all the City of Renton's development regulations including; chapters 4-2 Zoning Districts-uses & Standards, 4-4 · City-Wide Property Development Standards, and RMC 4-6-060 Street Standards, with the exception of the requested modifications identified in Table A below. Table A . .. .. --. · .. o";"i---· ---. (-=,.)":: ...... REQUESTED MODIFICATIONSFRC>M RENTON MtJNICIPALc:oof{RMC:f · .. . ·· •.. ·· > .. ·· .·· . •••• RMC# Required 12.er RMC Requested Modif1catian RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Lot Size 4,500 sq. ft. for parcels greater 2,319 sq. ft. for parcels greater than 1 acre. than 1 acre. 5,000 sq. ft. for parcels 1 acre or less. RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. for interior lots. 32 ft. for interior lots, including lot 11. 60 ft. for corner lots 42 ft. for corner lots RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Lot Depth 65 ft Lot 18, 43 ft. Lot 26, 61 ft. All other lots 65 ft. RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Front Yard 15 ft. 10 ft. setback Unit with Alley Access Garage: Staff Comment: No change for The front yard setback of the Units with Alley Access primary structure may be reduced to 10 ft. if all parking is provided in the rear yard of the lot with access from a public right-of-way or alley. RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Side Yard 15 ft. for the primary structure 10 ft. for the primary structure. Along a Street setback 5 ft. for Lot 11 along the access easement RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Rear Yard 20 ft. 10 ft. setback .· City of Renton Commwutv and f:conom1c Dei 1enI Depar/men/ MCCORMICK ?LAT f'/..JBLJC HL4RJNG /JATJ..' January 5. 2012 RMC 4-2-120A: Maximum Building Lots 5,000 sq. ft. or less: 50% Coverage Staff Comment: The applicant has not requested a modification from this standard. However, due to the small lot size requested above, staff believes a modification from this standard would be required to maintain o buildable lot. RMC 4-2-llSF.l. Site Design, Lot One of the following is required: Configuration l.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 four hundred (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. RMC 4-2-llSF .3. Residential Design, A variety of elevations and Scale, Bulk, and Character models that demonstrate a variety of floor plans, home sizes, and character shall be used. Additionally, both of the following are required: l.A minimum of three (3) differing home models for each ten (10) contiguous abutting homes, and 2. Abutting houses must have differing architectural elevations. n/a Report to the !fearing Ewminer LUA/ 1-034. ECF PP. PPUD l'age 12 of 38 Staff Comment: Staff recommends amending this standard to result in no standard for minimum building coverage. Maximum building coverage would be restricted by maximum impervious coverage standards and setback requirements. No lot variation requirement Staff Comment: Staff recommends approval of the subject variation subject to a second modification to RMC 4-2- 115F.3. Residential Design, Scale, Bulk, and Character. This modification is described below. A variety of elevations and models that demonstrate a variety of floor plans, home sizes, and character shall be used. Additionally, both of the following are required: l.A minimum of three (3) differing home models for each four (4) contiguous abutting homes, and 2.Abutting houses must have differing architectural elevations. Staff Comment: Staff recommends reducing the Citv of Renton Community and F.crmomic De nenl Department MCCORMICK PLAT PUBLIC HEARJ?v'G DATE .Januar:,· 5. 2012 RMC 4-6-060F.2 Principal Arterial Curb, gutter, 8-foot sidewalks, street lighting, and paving with an 8-foot planter strip, along the full frontage of the parcel. RMC 4-6-060F.2 Residential Access Internal streets A and B, minimum of 20 feet of pavement with parking on one side, hence, a 26-foot pavement section, 5- foot sidewalks and an 8-foot planting strip between curb and sidewalk. Report to the Hearing LXaminer LUA/ 1-034 £CF PP. PPUD Page 13 of38 minimum number of contiguous abutting homes from 10-4 for differing home models to offset the request to not provide lot configuration. This would increase the variety of home models within the neighborhood without required varying lot sizes. Minimal frontage improvements, small section of curb, gutter, and a 5-foot sidewalk along the west side of Road A and the turning radius for Road A along the east side. Staff Comment: Street frontage improvements have been required along Maple Valley for projects within the vicinity of the subject site, including the recent development at New Life Church, just west of the subject site. Due to the high traffic count on Maple Valley Highway, staff recommends the following improvements be required along the frontage of the site: 20 foot right of way dedication, 5 -foot sidewalk, 8 -foot planting strip, curb and gutter, and street lights designed to meet arterial lighting level requirements. 33 feet of pavement from face of curb to face of curb. Parking on one side and 5 -foot sidewalks on the "inside" of the road. Staff Comment: Due to the increased impervious service attributed to the project and the need to buffer pedestrians from vehicular traffic staff Cir, of Renton Community and t:conomrc De nent LJepartnu,nt MCCORMICK PIAT PUBLIC HEARLVG DATE January 5. 2012 b) PUD Decision Criteria: Report to the Hearing tJ:aminer WAI 1-034. ECF. PP. PPUD Puge l-lof38 recommends the following improvement standard be required: Road A: 40 feet of right-of-way, 25-feet pavement section, with no parking on either side, curb and gutter on both sides, 5-foot sidewalk and 8-foot planting strip along the west side only. The 1- foot remaining right-of-way shall be on the east side of the street. Road B: Miminimum of 30 feet of right-of-way, 20-foot pavement section, with parking on one side, curb and gutter on both sides, 5- foot sidewalk and 8-foot planting strip on the "inside" of the loop road. i. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority: Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of the PUD regulations and with the Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed development shall be superior to that which would result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. Comment: If the conditions of approval are met, the applicant will have demonstrated compliance with the PUD regulations and the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant will have demonstrated that the development is superior to that which would result without a PUD and will not be detrimental to surrounding properties. The development of this site as a PUD results in a superior design than would result by the strict application of the Development Standards for many reasons. First, the proposed plat layout provides for a significant increase in residents safety from the high landslide hazards affiliated with the slopes to the south. Second, the plat would provide for many recreational amenities beyond the code requirements. Third, the plat layout significantly increases the quality of the internal circulation system throughout the development. Fourth, the additional open space area enhances protection to critical areas, and finally the proposed subdivision is a significant improvement over the design proposed as a part of the vested King County application. This proposed design can provide for the aforementioned amenities because of the modifications requested in Table A above. Cilr of Ren1on Communitr and Hconomic De A1CCORA1JCK Pl-AT nenl Department Repor/ to the Hearin?, t,Xommer UiA/1-03./. ECF. PP. PPUD Pagf.' I 5 of 3Ji PUBLIC HEARL\iG DA n; January 5, 2012 Table B ii. Public Benefit: The applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts ar undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly thase adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or mare of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed planned urban development: ,-Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development; or ,-Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; ar ,-Public Facilities: Provides public facilities that could not be required by the City for development of the subject property without a planned urban development; or ,-Use af Sustainable Development Techniques: Design which results in a sustainable development; such as LEED certification, energy efficiency, use of alternative energy resources, low impact development techniques, etc.; or ,-Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: • Open Space/Recreation: (a) Provides increased open space or recreational facilities beyond standard code requirements and considered equivalent to features that would offset park mitigation fees in Resolution 3082; and (b} Provides a quality environment through either passive or active recreation facilities and attractive common areas, including accessibility to buildings from parking areas and public walkways; or • Circulation/Screening: Provides superior circulation patterns or location or screening of parking facilities; or • Londscapinq/Screeninq: Provides superior landscaping, buffering, or screening in or around the proposed planned urban development; or • Site and Building Design: Provides superior architectural design, placement, relationship or orientation of structures, or use of so/or energy; or • Alleys: Provides alleys for proposed detached or attached units with individual, private ground related entries. ' ' _.,, _. . . . . ... . ,.· ' ' . _-_,----; . . ... PUBLIC BENEffT PROVIDED:CRITICALAREAS, NATURALF£ATURES& OVERALLDESIGN CRITICAL AREAS: The site contains many critical areas including two wetlands, a stream, and geotechnical hazards. The Cl()' of Renton Community and Econonuc lJe MCCORMICK PL.ff PUBLIC HEARING DATE January 5. 2012 nent Departmenl Report to the Hearing Exammer LUA/ 1-034 £CF PP PPCD Page 16 (?/38 ~-----------------------------------------~ City critical areas regulations provide for many protections to these features, however the proposed development increases these protections. Wetland B, located in the southwestern corner of the site maintains its required SO-foot buffer and the applicant propose to develop a 21,634 square foot Open Space Tract E adjacent to this buffer. This open space tract increases the protection to this wetland and the stream that runs through this portion of the site. In addition to the increased protections provided for such critical assets as wetlands and streams, the proposed plat development provides for increased protection for the future residents from the high landslide hazards associated with the steep slopes on the site. If the standard road sections and lot sizes were required to be met the applicant would not be able to provide for the looped road system. This road system is important to circulation on the site but also provides a critical safety function. By placing a roadway adjacent to the 100 percent slopes located along the south side of the site, an additional 100 feet of protection is provided as a run out area for any catastrophic landslide event that cou Id potentially overtop the debris flow mitigation berm. This additional safeguard provided by the roads placement reduces the possibility of life or property loss that could result in a catastrophic landslide event, if the lots and home were developed abutting the slope. NATURAL FEATURES: The site is currently developed with 40 manufactured/mobile homes. The existing development encroaches upon the wetland and stream buffers. After development of the proposed plat, these buffer areas would be re-vegetated and would be placed back into a natural state. Moreover, the redevelopment of the subject site would reduce the impacts on the critical areas that currently exist today. In addition, to the re-vegetation of critical area buffers the applicant has proposed significant landscaping enhancements at four locations throughout the development. Pursuant to the provided conceptual landscape plan, the applicant has proposed a large landscaped buffer providing screening from Maple Valley Highway to the new development. This landscape buffer exceeds the code required 10 feet in many areas resulting in approximately 30,328 square feet of landscaping along the frontage of the site. Based on the proposed plan this area would include the following type of plantings, Paperbark Maples, Western Red Cedar, Amur Maple, Bishops Cap, Oceanspray, Cinquefoil, Sward Fern, Creeping Mahonia, Pacific Wax Myrtle, Flowering Currant, Snowberry and Evergreen Huckleberry. Similar plantings are proposed in Tract J to landscape the steep slope buffer required behind proposed Lots 14 -17. Landscaping the steep slope buffer was not a requirement of the geotechnical analysis and is proposed above and beyond code requirements. This landscaping not only contributes to the aesthetic values of the development, but also rehabilitates and enhances the natural features of the site, supporting the wildlife habitat that may be present along the steep slopes or in the nearby Wetland B. The Opens Space Tract E, provides for an additional 18,764 square feet of landscaped area. The majority of Tract E is located along the west side of the site adjacent to Wetland A and the Stream. However, the tract continues as a narrow swath along the south side of Road B just north of the stream buffer and expands behind proposed Lot 17. Included in this tract is landscaping such as open lawn, Kinickinnick, Boxwood, Rock Daphne, Day Lilly, Oakleaf Hydrangea, Japan Holly, Mountain Laurel, Maiden Grass, Wax Myrtle, Heavenly Bamboo, Mugho Pine, "Cilpinense", Low Sarcococca, Western Red Cedar and Hedge Maple. In addition to the landscaping in Tract E, the applicant has City of Ren/(m Commumrr and Lconom1c De m.;;;e;;;.nl;,,;D;;;e(e;'";;;'l;;;m;,,;en::aat --------- AK'CORJ,,JJ('K PL4F PUBLIC HEARJ/v'G DATE January 5. 2012 Repor/ /u the Hearing Examiner LUA/ 1-(13./. ECF PP. PI'/!D I'age 17 of38 proposed an Open Space Park which would include similar types of landscaping with the addition of flowering Pear trees. The landscaping proposed in Tract E significantly increases the aesthetic value of the subject site and could contribute to wildlife habitat enhancement, specifically adjacent to Wetland A and the stream as well as the natural feature rehabilitation proposed behind Lot 17. The site contains a total of 49 trees of 6-inch caliper or larger, 4 are within the proposed public right- of-way, and 18 are located in critical areas and their buffers resulting in 27 protected trees on site. The R-8 zone requires 30 percent tree retention of the 27 protected trees on site. At a 30 percent retention rate, 8 trees would be required to be retained. The applicant has identified 2 trees that would be retained. As such, 6 trees would be required to be replaced, which results in a requirement of 36-2-inch caliper trees for replacement. The applicant proposes to plant approximately 77 new trees on site, which would exceed the replacement requirement pursuant to code. The applicant's provided conceptual landscape plan did not include exact numbers of trees, shrubs, or groundcover and it did not include specific locations for the shrubs and ground cover. As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant provide a detailed final landscape plan that shall be submitted and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. OVERALL DESIGN: 1. Open Space/Recreation: In addition to private open space provided on each proposed lot, the applicant has proposed to provide a 4,188 square foot park which would include a play structure and two picnic tables, a soft surface looped trail system through the development, and a 21,634 square foot open space tract. The proposed park area exceeds the code standards by 2,488 square feet and the open space standards by 6,931 square feet. The overall passive and active recreation opportunities proposed for the subject development are beyond the standard code requirements. The proposed open space and recreation on the site provide the opportunity for both passive and active recreation. The soft surface trail is proposed to have benches and interpretive signage, which would result in a nature trail type of facility. The looped trail system is approximately 1/3 of a mile long, offering the opportunity for more strenuous exercise such as jogging. The open lawn proposed in the Tract E provides a space for such activities as kick ball or Frisbee, but could also be used as a quiet place to listen to the river and read a book. The park area provides for both passive and active recreation by offering both a play structure and picnic tables. The varieties of recreation opportunities proposed throughout the development create a mix of choices, appealing to a large spectrum of people. However, it should be noted that the benches and interpretive signage mentioned in the applicant's PUD Compliance Statement are not reflected on the Landscape Plan or the Plat Plan, as such staff recommends a condition of approval that the applicant provide a detail of the proposed final bench and signage design and location as a part of the final detailed landscape plan. These details shall be submitted and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The park is located on the northwest corner of the internal set of lots, aligning just west of the access road A. Proposed Lot 34, which is immediately east of the park, is centrally aligned with Road A. Once a home is constructed on Lot 34, all vehicular trips accessing the development would drive directly at the home on Lot 34, shining headlights into their front windows. The impacts to Lot 34 could be resolved by adjusting the location of the proposed park, to be situated to align with Road A, thus moving Lot 34 to the western corner of the internal Road. Furthermore, this location for the park would create a "gateway" to the neighborhood, Citv o( Renton Comnumity ond r:cnnomic De MCCORMJCK PJ,AT PllBLJC HEARL\'(} lJAFF January 5. 2012 nent Departmen! Report ro the Hearmg Examiner LUA/1-034. £CF. PP. PPUD Page J8of38 increasing the overall design of the development. As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval, that the park be moved east by one lot to align with Road A, and adjusting Lot 34 to be the northwest corner lot of the internal portion of the development. The Open Space Tract E and Tract C are separated by the detention pond Tract A. The connection between Tract E and C could be stronger and create a higher quality and cohesive open space system by decreasing the grades near the top of the pond, to allow for landscaping and pedestrian access for a portion of the pond area. This in turn could result in moving the fence to a lower section of the pond, removing the visual obstruction created by the fence. The end result would be a high quality open space system, incorporating the detention facility into the design of the overall development. As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the detention facility be re-designed to become an integral part of the open space system of the development. The design shall meet the City's stomwater requirements and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. 2, Circulation: The proposed preliminary plat provides for a superior pedestrian circulation system. In addition to the proposed soft surface pedestrian path, discussed above, the applicants have proposed sidewalks along Road A, Maple Valley Highway and on the interior of Road B. In addition, the applicant has proposed to provide a tabletop design at the intersection of Road A and Road B with alternative paving to provide for a safe pedestrian crosswalk. This intersection is a key connection to the proposed school bus stop located along Maple Valley Highway. In addition to the aforementioned cross walk, the looped trail includes two additional cross walk locations to connect the loop. These two locations are both located on Road B. Based on the application materials, these two cross walks would not be designed with alternative paving as proposed for the cross walk located at the intersection of Road A and B. As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval that all crosswalks in the development are designed with the same alternative paving, to provide consistency in crosswalk design throughout the development ensuring pedestrian safety. In addition to superior pedestrian circulation, the proposed preliminary plat also provides for a superior vehicle circulation system. The looped road system which is made possible by the requested code modifications provides for improved emergency access as well as eliminates a dead end road. The looped road system provides for better onsite traffic circulation and allows for a public alley to access proposed Lots 18 -34. The presence of the alley allows for 50 percent of the development to have alley loaded garages, reducing the number of curb cuts through the sidewalk system, improving the pedestrian circulation system. Furthermore, the presence of an alley provides for screening of the parking facilities/garages for 50 percent of the lots on the site. 3. Landscaping/Screening: The proposed landscape plan for the entire site is superior to what would be required by Renton's Municipal Code, as discussed above under "Natural Features". Furthermore, the proposed landscaping along Maple Valley Highway would not only provide screening of the highway to the homes but would screen the proposed Tract A, detention facility from the road. The topography of the site on the east and south results in a natural screen to adjacent properties and the stream buffer associated with the proposed enhancement plantings would provide a screen to the residential neighborhood to the west. 4. Site and Building Design: The qualities of the proposed site design has been addressed above lit\' of Renton C'mmnunitv and Ecunom1c De nent Department Report In the Hearing .Examun:r MCCORMICK PLAT PUBLIC !!EARING DATE Januwy 5. 2012 U_i4J 1-034. ECF. PP. PPUD Pagel9uj38 ------~-------------------------------------~ under, "Critical Areas", "Natural Features", and the subsections of "Overall Design". The above comments address such things as road design and pedestrian circulation, critical areas protection and enhancement, as well as increased landscaping and recreational opportunities. All these amenities contribute to the overall superior site design. In particular, the proposed design's quality should be balanced against the vested King County proposal. Where all 34 lots are accessed off a cul-de-sac, minimal landscaping, critical area protection, and recreational opportunities are proposed. Therefore, not only is the proposed site design superior to City of Renton standards, it also is superior to a vested application. The orientation of the lots allows for access to solar energy, as 27 of the 34 lots are north- south oriented. All homes will be subject to the residential design standards for the R-8 zone. Compliance with these standards will be reviewed at the time of building permit application. The applicant submitted with the application a "Conceptual Elevation for Lot 33". Staff comparison of the provided elevations to the R-8 residential design standards shows partial compliance. Due to the level of detail needed to identify compliance with the residential design standards this review is best left for building permit stage. 5. Alleys: Proposed Lots 18 -34 would be accessed via a public alley. All garages would be accessed from the alley eliminating curb cuts and garage fronts along a large portion of Road B. iii. Building and Site Design: Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. Comment: As mentioned above the proposed landscaping along Maple Valley Highway would not only provide screening of the highway to the homes but would screen the proposed Tract A, detention facility from the road. The topography of the site on the east and south results in a natural screen to adjacent properties and the stream buffer associated with the proposed enhancement plantings would provide a screen to the residential neighborhood to the west. All proposed single family homes would be required to comply with the residential design standards for the R-8 zone resulting in a compatible size, scale, mass, character and architectural design for the overall development. Compliance with these standards would be reviewed at building permit application. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type. Comment: As mentioned above in Table B, the interior site design promotes quality pedestrian and vehicular circulation, increased critical area protection, promotes safety by buffering the high landslide hazards, and buffers the development from Maple Valley Highway. All homes would be required to comply with the R-8 development design standards which would result in coordinated, yet varied roof styles and City of Renton Communif\· and t:conomic De m;;;e;;anta;D;,eee;pa"'rt;;;m~m~t ========= Report ro the Hearing Ernm:ner MCCORMJCI: FIAT PUBLIC HEARl.VG DATJ:.' J,muary 5. 2012 LUA/1-034, ECF, PP PPUD Page 20 of 38 materials, architectural detailing, and a variety of home styles throughout the development_ iv. Circulation: Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities: The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. Comment: The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A". Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots 1-8, and 11-17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities Tract, identified as "Tract D". Proposed Lots 18 -34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of Maple Valley Highway. Street lighting, sidewalks, and curb and gutter will be required. The PUD would have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access based on the location, size and density of the development, if all conditions of approval are met. See Table B, "Public Benefit, subsection: Overall Design 2. Circulation above for additional discussion on pedestrian and vehicle circulation. Furthermore, the applicant has indicated that all roads would be designed to accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic generated by the project. In the Environmental Review, staff and the Environmental Review Committee reviewed the provided traffic study and proposed mitigation for impacts proposed for the increase in traffic attributed to the development (Exhibit 30). As such, if the applicant complies with all mitigation measures of the SEPA determination; traffic would not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. Promotes safety: Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. Comment: Based on the provided Traffic Impact Analysis, stopping sight distance and intersection sight distances are excellent in both directions and meet City of Renton and WSDOT requirements. If the proposed conditions of approval are met, the pedestrian separation along Maple Valley Highway would be provided with an 8-foot planter strip. Another 8-foot planter strip would be located along the "inside" of Road B and the west side of Road A. Furthermore, the pedestrian looped trail would provide another means for pedestrian movement throughout the development maintaining sufficient separation from vehicles. A lighting plan was not included in the applicant's submittal packet; therefore, it is not clear how the proposed pedestrian pathways would be illuminated at night. Although, C'llr of Renton Comm11n11y and Economic De nent Departmenl Rep{)rf 10 1he Hearing fxaminer M('CORA11CK P!AT N.JBLJC HEARING DAT!:' .January 5, 2012 !./ .r.4 J J-034. £CF. PP. PPUD Page 21 o/38 staff does not recommend that the soft surface trail be lit at night as this may cause additional impacts to the stream and its buffer, the remainder of the pedestrian pathway throughout the site should be lit with shielded lighting to reduce increased impacts to the wildlife habitat within the stream. Staff recommends, as a condition of approval, that the applicant submit a lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to utility construction. The lighting plan shall contain pedestrian lighting in addition to building and landscaping lighting if proposed. The proposed development would limit driveways on busy streets and 50 percent of the lots would be accessed from a public alley. In addition, only one access point is proposed from Maple Valley Highway to the development, Road A. Based on the traffic analysis the applicant would provide a new right turn deceleration lane for access to Road A and a right turn taper for access to SR-169 from the site eastbound. The applicant has proposed to design Road A with a less than 12 percent slope and Road B would be less than 8 percent slope with landings designed for the intersections for the entrances to the public alley. These design considerations/requirements would result in a circulation system that would avoid difficult turning patterns, minimizes steep gradients and minimize driveways on busy streets. Once the applicant has fulfilled the conditions of approval (noted above); the promotion of safety could be accomplished. Provision of a system of walkways: Walkways that tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public wolkwoys, schools, and commercial activities. Comment: See Table B "Public Benefit, Subsection: Overall Design 1. and 2"=." above. The street frontage improvements along Maple Valley Highway and within the internal street system would provide a connection to a school bus stop and potentially public transit. The applicant has proposed to provide two benches along the frontage of Maple Valley Highway for the school bus stop. The site is constrained by natural topographical features and connections to surrounding areas are difficult due to the topography and Maple Valley Highway. However, the internal street system provides sufficient walkways to access the site. The subject site is located on periphery of the City boundary, and is relatively isolated from commercial zoned property. There is no existing access to commercial development in or near the subject site and no new access proposed for pedestrians. Provides safe. efficient access for emergency vehicles: Comment: If the roadways are designed per recommended standards (Exhibit 31), the development would provide safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. v. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. Comment: Water and sanitary sewer service for the development would be provided by the Cedar River Water and Sewer District. Water and Sewers availability certificates will be required from the Cedar River Sewer District prior to Construction Permit. Based on the provide Conceptual Site Plan (Sheet P04) (Exhibit 4), there is an existing sewer main located on the west side of the development. The applicant has proposed to connect to Cit)' o( Renton Communil)' and Economic De MCCORMICK PLAT PUBUC HAAR.llv'G DAlT January 5. :}()12 nent Department Report to the I fearing Examiner LL,'.-lll-034. ECF, f'f'. PPUD Page 22 nf38 this existing main and extend an 8-inch sanitary sewer line to provide sewer to the development. This plan sheet also identifies a 10-inch water line extension from the Summer View Plat located to the west. This extension would be required to be constructed through the stream buffer. With receipt of the water and sewer availability certificates, the development could provide sufficient service to the lots. Fire protection would be provided by the City of Renton Fire Department. Per the City Fire Chief, all lots are required to be sprinklered. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant be required to revise the utility plan to depict a 1- inch water meter to all lots. The revised plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Plan Reviewer prior to Final Plat recording. New impervious surfaces would result in surface water runoff increases. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report ("Drainage Report") with the project application (Exhibit 29). The applicant has proposed a detention/wet pond to be located in a separate tract in the northwest corner of the site for stormwater detention and water quality treatment. The Drainage Report indicates that runoff from roof drains, yards, and driveways would be collected and conveyed to a drainage system under the proposed roads that would convey storm water to the proposed detention/wet pond. The pond is proposed to be a combined detention and water quality pond, with permanent storage in the bottom of the pond, and live flow control storage above the dead storage. The pond has been designed to provided Level 2 flow control and basic water quality treatment. The proposed design of the detention pond would provide at least 59,500 cubic feet of storage. The detention facility would release the storm water to its natural discharge location at the northwest corner of the site to the south roadside ditch of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169). The proposed infrastructure and services are sufficient to serve the proposed development, if the water connection is mitigatable and all SEPA mitigation measures are met. vi. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. Comment: The uniqueness of the site, with a considerable percentage consumed by critical areas, results in a necessity to cluster development. When considering all critical areas on the site (including the portion located in King County) and their buffers or slope setback areas, approximately 60 percent of the site is undevelopable. These natural features create a site that maintains open space in the form of critical area buffers as well as recreation space. The requested lot size and setback modification allow for a clustered R-8 development that provides increase protection of critical areas creating an appearance of openness. See additional discussion above in Table B "Public Benefit, Subsections: Critical Areas and Natural Features". As noted in the previous sections, the proposed development would have well-designed open space and landscaping. In order to maintain sufficient separation between buildings, the applicant has not requested a modification for the side yard setback, as such all structures will maintain a minimum of 10 feet of separation. This spacing allows for emergency access and sufficient fire separation. City Q{ Renton Community und Econom1c De MCCORMICK PLAT Pl/BUC !IEAPJNG DATE January· 5. 2012 ment IJeparlmenl Report to lhe Heanng Exuminer LUAJJ-03./-. ECF. PP. PPUD I'af.[e 23 of 38 vii. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided ta each dwelling unit. Comment: As mentioned above the proposed subdivision is screened on all four sides from surrounding development, due to the natural topography, stream buffer area and proposed landscape buffer along Maple Valley Highway. Within the subdivision, unit to unit privacy would be provided by the side yard setback requirement. The applicant has indicated in the Project's Compliance Statement that wood fences would be used to separate the single family lots to provide both screening and privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Street trees are required either within the required landscape strip or in the front yard of the lot. The required trees would add to the privacy for lots across Road B. As discussed above under Table B "Public Benefit, Subsections: Critical Areas and Natural Features", the proposed walkways and landscaping are appropriate for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property. All homes would be required to be designed to meet the residential design standards for the R-8 zone. These standards would require windows on the front of the home, increasing access to light and air for each dwelling unit. Furthermore, each lot would have private front, side and rear yards, enhancing each lot with landscaping and access to light and air. viii. Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. Comment: The lots are arranged in into 3 groups. Group one is located along Maple Valley Highway (Lots 1 -10) aligned east-west. Group two is located along the east side of Road B (Lots 11-17) aligned north-south and group three is located in the center of Road B (Lots 18 -34) aligned east-west. The site topography slopes down from south to north, resulting in a tiered housing effect after site grading. Based on the proposed grading of the site, the applicant has indicated that all new homes would have a view of the Cedar River, located across Maple Valley Highway. The proposed layout maximizes the use of topography and building location to take advantage of the views to the north of the Cedar River. ix. Parking Area Design: Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. Comment: Required parking would be provided within garages attached to each home, of which 50 percent would be accessed via a public alley. Additional guest parking would be C1tr of Ren/on Community and Economic De nent Department Repor/ 10 the Hearing, Exam111er MCCORMICK PLAT PUBLJC HJ-;AH!XG DAT£ Janumy5. 2012 U.:AJ 1-03-1. LCF. PP. PPCD I'uge 24 of 38 provided on the driveway aprons for each lot. On-street parking would be provided along Road B on one side. The proposed parking is designed to provide efficient use of the site and would be appropriately screen by the provided garages. Adequacy: Provides sufficient on-site vehicular parking areas consistent with the parking demand created by the development as documented in a parking analysis approved by the City. Comment: Parking regulations require a minimum of two off-street parking spaces for detached dwellings. As proposed each lot would have adequate area to provide two off- street parking spaces. Additional parking would be available on Road B or in the driveways of each lot. Sufficient on-site vehicular parking would be provided consistent with the demand created by the development. x. Phasing: Each phase of the proposed development contains the required parking spaces, open space, recreation spaces, landscaping and utilities necessary for creating and sustaining a desirable and stable environment, so that each phase, together with previous phases, can stand alone. Comment: The applicant has not proposed to phase the subject development. As such, this criterion does not apply. xi. Development Standards Common Open Space Standard: Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Requirements for residential developments are described below. Residential: For residential developments open space must equal at least ten percent {10%} of the development site's gross land area. i. Open space may include, but is not limited to, the following: (a) A trail that allows opportunity for passive recreation within a critical area buffer (only the square footage of the trail shall be included in the open space area calculation}, or (b) A sidewalk and its associated landscape strip, when abutting the edge of a critical area buffer and when a part of a new public or private road, or (c) A similar proposal as approved by the reviewing official. ii. Additionally, a minimum area equal to fifty {50} square feet per unit of common space or recreation area shall be provided in a concentrated space. Comment: The proposed development is located on an 11.59 acre site, of which the majority is located in critical areas including the entire portion located within King County. The portion of the site located in the City of Renton is 7 .32 acres, based on the 7.32 acre site the required amount of open space would be 31,899 square feet. The applicant has dedicated an Open Space Tract E and C which totals 29,638 square feet and a soft surface trail that equals 9,192 square feet, resulting in a total of 38,830 square feet, resulting in 6,931 square feet of additional open space. The proposed development would have 34 lots, 50 square feet of common space or recreation areas is required per unit, resulting in a requirement of an additional 1,700 square feet. To City of Renton Communitv and Economic Dt men/ Departmen! Report 10 the Hearing Examiner MCCORMICK PLAT PUBLIC HEARJ/v'G DATE .January 5. 2012 WAI 1-034. ECF. PP. PPUD Page 2j (!/ 38 6. fulfill the common space requirement the applicant has proposed to provide a 4,188 square foot park, resulting in 2,488 square feet of additional recreation space than required. The park is located on the inside of Road B directly across the street from the Open Space Tract. The overall location and design of the park, open space and trail are located as to create a quality open space/recreation area for the development, specifically if all conditions of approval are met. Private Open Space: Each residential unit in a planned urban development shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors} for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. The private open space shall be well demarcated and at least fifteen feet (15'} in every dimension (decks on upper floors can substitute for the required private open space}. For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60} square feet in size with no dimension less than five feet (5'}. Comment: Each lot would have a private yard in both the front and the rear of the lot. The requested setback reduction is for a 10-foot front and 10-foot rear, which could result in a private open space yard that is less than 15 feet in every dimension. However, the lots sizes are large enough to accommodate a portion ofthe yard to meet this standard. Compliance with this standard shall be reviewed at building permit stage. Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space: All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the City. Comment: Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval of the planned urban development, and maintained for a period of 2 years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a 2 year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Planning Division. Installation and Maintenance of Common Facilities: All common facilities not dedicated to the City shall be permanently maintained by the planned urban development owner by the property owners' association or the agent(s} thereof. Comment: Staff recommends, as condition of approval, the applicant be required to establish a home owners' association for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements, including but not limited to the soft surface trail, landscaping, and park within the PUD prior to Final PUD approval. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be permanently maintained by the PUD home owners' association. Consistency with Preliminary Plat Criteria City of Renton Commum/1· und Economic De MCCOR..AfJCK PLAJ' PUBLIC HEARJ.l\'G DATEJamwr_v 5. 2012 nenr Department Report lo !he J fearing F.xarnmer WA//-034. £CF l'P. PPL"D Page 26 uf38 Approval of a plat is based upon several factors. The following preliminary plat criteria have been established to assist decision-makers in the review of the plat: a) Compliance with the Comprehensive Designation The site is designated Residential Single Family (RSF) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Land designated Residential Single Family is intended to be used for quality detached residential development organized into neighborhoods at urban densities. It is intended that larger subdivisions, infill development, and rehabilitation of existing housing be carefully designed to enhance and improve the quality of single-family living: Policy LU-158. Net development densities should fall within a range of 4.0 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre in Residential Single Family Neighborhoods. Policy Objective Met D Not Met Policy LU-159. Maximum height of structures should not exceed two (2) stories in single- family residential neighborhoods. Policy Objective Met D Not Met Policy EN-7. Protect buffers along wetlands to facilitate infiltration and maintain stable water temperatures, provide for biological diversity, reduce amount and velocity of run-off, and provide for wildlife habitat. Policy Objective Met D Not Met Policy EN-36. Where appropriate combine environmentally sensitive areas with to provide public access and educational opportunities. Policy Objective Met D Not Met Policy CD-1. Integrate development into natural areas by clustering development and/or adjusting site plans to preserve wetlands, steep slopes, and notable stands of trees or other vegetation. Natural features should function as site amenities. Use incentives such as flexible lot size and configuration to encourage preservation and add amenity value. Policy Objective Met D Not Met Policy CD-3. Site design should maximize public access to and create opportunities for use of shoreline areas in locations contiguous to a lake, river, stream, or wetland where such access would not jeopardize habitats and other environmental attributes of the water body. Policy Objective Met D Not Met Objective CD-C. Promote reinvestment in and upgrade of existing residential neighborhoods through redevelopment of small, underutilized parcels with infill development, modification and alteration of older housing stock, and improvements to streets and sidewalks to increase property values. Policy Objective Met D Not Met b) Complionce with the Underlying Zoning Designation See Consistency with the Planned Urban Development Regulations and Table A. Clf;r of Ren/on C'ommum/y and Economic Dr:. m.;;;e;;;n~I D;;;;<,;;JJa;;'1;;;m;;;en;;I --------~ MCCORMICK ?I.AT PUBLJC HEA.Rl,VG DATE January 5. 2012 Report lo the Nearing Ernm111er LU/1-034. ff:F. PP PPUI) Page 27 of 38 The proposed development would allow for the future construction of 34 new single-family dwelling units. Density: See Consistency with the Planned Urban Development Regulations, subsection a). Lot Dimensions: See Consistency with the Planned Urban Development Regulations, Table A for requested modifications. As demonstrated in Table C below, all lots meet the requirements for the requested minimum lot size, depth, and width as requested through the PUD. Table C As Proposed Lot Size Width Depth Lot 1 3,162 SF SO feet 71 feet Lot 2 2,508 SF 35 feet 72 feet Lot 3 2,522 SF 35 feet 72 feet Lot 4 2,519 SF 35 feet 72 feet Lot S 2,516 SF 35 feet 72 feet Lot 6 2,512 SF 35 feet 72 feet Lot 7 2,597 SF 35 feet 75 feet Lot 8 2,936 SF 35 feet 80.67 feet Lot 9 2,743 SF 37 feet 74.67 feet Lot 10 3,298 SF 44 feet 72 feet Lot 11 3,421 SF 32.67 feet 95.67 feet Lot 12 3,026 SF 34.33 feet 83 feet Lot 13 2,686 SF 33 feet 77.75 feet Lot 14 2,908 SF 32 feet 79.67 feet Lot 1S 2,551 SF 3S feet 73.33 feet Cm: of Renton Communit.· and Economic De m-'-"'-l=)ep=a-,1-m,-·n-l --------~ MCCORMICK PLAJ I'UBLJC HEARJ:VG DATE January 5. 2012 ·--· Lot 16 2,689 SF 35 feet Lot 17 3,124 SF 30 feet Lot 18 2,870 SF 62 feet Lot 19 2,570 SF 40 feet Lot 20 2,489 SF 35 feet Lot 21 2,501 SF 35 feet Lot 22 2,566 SF 35 feet Lot 23 2,618 SF 35 feet Lot 24 2,627 SF 35 feet Lot 26 3,340 SF 48 feet Lot 27 3,335 SF 42 feet Lot 28 2,683 SF 37 feet Lot 29 2,531 SF 35 feet Lot 30 2,525 SF 35 feet Lot 31 2,519 SF 35 feet Lot 32 2,484 SF 35 feet Lot 33 2,444 SF 35 feet Lot 34 2,319 SF 35 feet Report to the Hearing Exammer LUAll-034. ECF PP. PPUD I'a,-:e 28 (~{ 38 77.67 feet 87.33 feet 43.67 feet 65.33 feet 72 feet 72 feet 72.33 feet 75.33 feet 75 feet 61 feet 70 feet 73 feet 72.33 feet 72 feet 72 feet 71 feet 69.33 feet 65.67 feet In addition to the 34 proposed developable lots, the applicant has proposed 9 tracts for utilities, drainage, critical areas, open space, and access. For maintenance of the Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA), staff recommends as a condition of approval that all critical areas and their buffers be placed in a Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE). However, such easement shall be written to provide access for the trail users and necessary debris removal in the event of a landslide. Furthermore, these areas shall be fenced with Cirr of Renton Communitv and Economic D£ MCCORMICK PLAT PURUC' HEAR!A'Ci DATE January 5. 2012 men/ Deparrmenr Report 10 the Heanng Examiner u.:AJ 1~03./-. LCF. PP. PPUD Page 29 of 38 split rail fencing, providing designated access points along the trail. In addition, the large portion of the site that is located in King County shall be recorded in a separate critical areas tract that is consistent with King County Code (KKC) section 21A.24, and shall have an NGPE or similar easement consistent with KCC recorded on this tract. The provided Park is not located in a tract or a lot, as such staff recommends as a condition of approval that the Park be placed in a recreation tract, this change to the preliminary plat and PUD shall be identified on the final Plat and PUD, prior to final plat approval. Also, as a condition of approval staff recommends that a covenant shall be placed on all tracts restricting their separate sale and giving each lot owner within the plat an undivided interest in the tracts. This covenant should be recorded on the face of the plat, and/or concurrent with the plat recording, noting the recording number on the short plat. Setbacks: See Consistency with the Planned Urban Development Regulations, Table A for requested modifications. Building Standards: See Consistency with the Planned Urban Development Regulations, Tobie A for requested modifications. c) Community Assets The site is sloped from the south to north and vegetated primarily with forested conditions, with the exception of the developable area in the center of the property, where the exiting Valley View Mobile Home Park is currently developed and the proposed lots would be located. See Table B Public Benefit, subsection Natural Features and for discussion of tree retention, landscaping and plantings. The City's landscaping regulations require ten feet of on-site landscaping along all public street frontages, with the exception of areas for required walkways and driveways. The landscaping proposed shall either consist of drought resistant vegetation or shall be irrigated appropriately. The conceptual landscape plan submitted with the application, does not include the installation of street tree along the frontages or trees in the front yard where a landscape strip would not be provided, as required by code. As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the street trees are shown on the final detailed landscape plan in compliance with the street tree standards. If the conditions of approval are complied with the development would demonstrate compliance with the landscaping regulations of the code. The applicant is required to submit and have approved a detailed landscape plan prior to final PUD and Final Plat recording. d) Compliance with Subdivision Regulations Streets: See Consistency with the Planned Urban Development Regulations, Table A for requested modifications and staff's recommendation for street development. In addition to the comments in the above Table A, street lighting meeting pedestrian lighting levels, in conformance with the residential street lighting interpretation, will be required for both the internal street sections. As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval, that a City of Renton Community and Economic De MCCOPcWCK PL4T PUTJL!C !!E.4.RJNC DATE January 5. ;}UJ :! nem Department Report lo /he Iieanng Lxami11er UW 1-034. ECF. PP. PPUJ) Page 30 of38 lighting plan be submitted with the construction permit application for review and approval by the Department of Community & Economic Development, Development Services project manager prior to building permit approval. All wire utilities shall be installed underground per the City of Renton UnderGrounding Ordinance. If three or more poles are required to be moved by the development design, all existing overhead utilities shall be placed underground. Construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording of the plat. Blocks: No new blocks will be created as part of the proposed plat. Lots: The shape, orientation, and arrangement of the proposed lots comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations for the R-8 zone, subject to the requested modifications found in Table A above. In addition the proposal allows for reasonable redevelopment of land. All 34 lots are rectangular in shape and would provide sufficient building area. e) Reasonableness of Proposed Boundaries Access: The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A". Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots 1-8, and 11-17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities Tract, identified as Tract D. Proposed Lots 18 -34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C''. In order to limit the number of curb cuts along Road B staff recommends, as a condition of approval, a note be placed on the face of the plat requiring proposed Lots 8-11 gain access from the proposed access easement, Tract D. The note shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. Topography: The site is bounded by steep slopes on the south and southeast sides, these areas have been identified on City of Renton critical areas maps as Landslide Hazard and Erosion Hazard areas. The steep slope at the southeast corner of the site, which represents the south flank of the ravine mouth, ranges from an approximate elevation of 230 feet to the toe-of-slope which has elevations ranging from 160 to 180 feet, with an average grade of about 100 percent. Similarly, the steep slope adjacent to the south side of the mobile home park extends above the creek and is well over 100 feet high and has an average grade of about 100 percent. The developed area is located at the mouth of a ravine, and the overall topography is that of a relatively gentle-to-moderate slope extending to the northwest towards the Cedar River. The Geotechnical report indicates that the site elevations within the developed portions of the mobile home park range from about elevation 180 feet at the southeast corner down to about elevation 120 feet over a southeast-to-northwest diagonal distance of about 550 lineal feet, which is about a grade of 9 to 10 percent. See Exhibit 30, Environmental Review Report, for additional discussion on site topography. Based on the provided project narrative, the applicant has estimated the total excavation to be approximately 8,249 cubic yards and the estimated fill would be approximately 7,924 cubic years. Furthermore, the applicant has indicated that fill material would include native material, selected borrow, and gravel. C1tr of Ren/on Commumty and Economic Dt. MCCORMICK PLAT PUBLIC Jff.ARIA:G DATE January 5. 2012 men/ Deparlmenl Report to the Hear111g Examiner WAJ/-034 ffF PP PPUD Page 31 C?f 38 Relationship to Existing Uses: See PUD criterion iii Building and Site Design. f) Availability and Impact on Public Services {Timeliness) Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicates that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; subject to the condition that the applicant provides Code required improvements and potential impact fees, if applicable at the time of development/recording. Schools: According to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Land Use Element (January 16, 1992), the City of Renton has a student generation factor of 0.44 students per single-family residential dwelling. Based on the student generation factor, the proposed plat would result in 14.96 students (0.44 X 34 new lots = 14.96), however the existing site contains 40 manufactured/mobile homes; overall the proposed plat would reduce the number of students at the local schools. It is anticipated that the Renton School District can accommodate the students generated by this proposal at the following schools: Tiffany Park Elementary, Nelson Middle School and Lindbergh High School. A letter was received from the Transportation Department of the Renton School District, which identified that in the future when the development would required school bus pick up, that the district would need to utilize the internal Road B 'looped road' to turn around. This subject site would be the Districts furthest point on the maple Valley Highway, requiring the bus to make a left turn heading west-bound on Maple Valley Highway exiting the development. The applicant has indicated that Road B would be designed to accommodate a full size school bus. Storm Water: Under current conditions, the stream, a drainage ditch that runs along the south side of Maple Valley Highway, and a 12-inch culvert and catch basin at the Highway entrance are the only storm drainage structures onsite. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report ("Drainage Report") with the project application, prepared by Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, dated March 15, 2011 (Exhibit 29). For storm water detention and water quality treatment, the applicant has proposed a detention/wet pond to be located in a separate tract in the northwest corner of the site. The Drainage Report indicates that runoff from roof drains, yards, and driveways would be collected and conveyed to a drainage system under the proposed roads that would convey stormwater to the proposed detention/wet pond. The pond is proposed to be a combined detention and water quality pond, with permanent storage in the bottom of the pond, and live flow control storage above the dead storage. The pond has been designed to provided Level 2 flow control and basic water quality treatment. The proposed design of the detention pond would provide at least 59,500 cubic feet of storage. The detention facility would release the storm water to its natural discharge location at the northwest corner ofthe site to the south roadside ditch of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169). Two mitigation measures were proposed as a part of the Environmental Review, these mitigation measures shall be met. Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities: See PUD criterion v. Infrastructure and Services. Citv of Re111011 Cummumrr and f.·conmnic De nenl Deparrmenl MCCUR'4JCK PIAT l'UBLJC HEARJ.l',."G LJAU.:January 5. 1011 g) Compliance With Criticol Area Regulations Report lo the Hearing Examiner LUAII-034. £CF PP. I'PUD Page 32 of 3f/ See critical area descriptions and analysis, located in the Environmental Review Report, Exhibit 30. The site is located within 200-feet of the Ordinary High Water Mark of the Cedar River (Exhibit 19). As such, the development of the proposed plat would require a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SSDP). The applicant has not applied for this required permit at this time. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant apply for and be granted a SSDP, prior to construction permit issuance. The applicant has requested a stream buffer reduction from 75 feet to 60 feet and the inclusion of a debris flow mitigation berm within the 60-foot buffer (Exhibit S). Compliance with approval criteria for buffer reduction is included in the Environmental Review Report. Staff recommends approval of the proposed buffer reduction for the area located adjacent to Road B (south) pursuant to the submittal of detailed stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan that complies with the criteria included in RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 3-4-050. As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant shall provide a final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan for review and approval to the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. Included as a part of the proposal, the applicant has provided a pedestrian trail system throughout the development. This trail system creates a loop around the site, utilizing the top of the debris flow mitigation berm located in the stream buffer and a portion of the trail is located in the buffer of both Wetland A and B. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050C.7.a trails are permitted in stream and wetland buffers provided the trail is located in the outer 25% of the buffer, enhancement of the buffer area is provided, the trail width is equal to or less than 12 feet in width, and the trail is constructed of permeable materials. The provided mitigation plan (Exhibits 12 -14) identifies buffer enhancement plantings for Wetland A and Bin addition to enhancement for the stream buffer. However, the material to be used for trail construction was not provided with the application. As such, staff recommends a condition of approval that the applicant provide a trail detail for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval, showing compliance with the criteria in RMC 4-3-050C.7.a specifically the trail surface materials. And another condition of approval that the applicant submit a detailed wetland buffer enhancement plan, that compliant with RMC 4-3-050 for review and approval by the Current Planning Project manager, prior to final PUD approval. In addition, to the above requests analyzed in the Environmental Review Report, the applicant has requested to extend the water line through a portion of the stream buffer to provide water to the development. This would be a temporary buffer impact of approximately 1,000 square feet of stream buffer during the construction of the water line. Based on the existing utilities in the area, the applicant contends there is no other location where this water connection can be made. The applicant has proposed to complete the construction work in the dry season and re-plant the area with native vegetation. This utility work would require a Hydraulic Permit Approval (HPA), and the applicant intends to follow all the requirements anticipated as a part of the HPA. The provided Critical Areas Report (Exhibit 20) concluded that the extension of the water line and the restoration of the buffer would not negatively impact the waterbody in any way. Cily of Renton Communif1' and Economic JJe MCCORMICK PLAT PUBLIC JlEAJWv'C DATE January 5. 2012 nent Department Reporl lo the Heann7, l:..Xum111er- WA 11-034, IXT PP PP[!{) Page 33 of38 RMC 4-3-0SOL.8,b, permits utilities to cross water bodies with an approved supplemental stream/lake study, if it complies with the specific criteria identified with in this section. Table D RMC 4-3-0SOL.8,b.i Criteria for Administrative Approval of Utilities in Stream/Lake Buffer Compliance with Criteria for Approval (a) Fish and wildlife habitat areas shall be The applicant would comply with the avoided to the maximum extent possible; conditions of the anticipated HPA, which and would likely restrict construction seasonally, (b) The utility is designed consistent with one or more of the following methods: (1) Installation shall be accomplished by boring beneath the scour depth and hyporheic zone of the water body and channel migration zone; or (2) The utilities shall cross at an angle greater than sixty (60) degrees to the centerline of the channel in streams or perpendicular to the channel centerline; or (3) Crossings shall be contained within the footprint of an existing road or utility crossing; and and provide mitigation for impacts to fish and wildlife. The provided mitigation plan, identifies the area of temporary disturbance would be re-vegetated and restored after construction. As proposed the applicant has avoided, to the maximum extent possible, fish and wildlife habitat, and where habitat would be disturbed restoration would be provided. In order to further limit the amount of potential impacts to the stream buffer, staff recommends a condition of approval that temporary construction fencing be placed along the utility corridor within the buffer, to isolate the area of disturbance and reduce potential further impacts. Utility installation methods were not provided with the application, as such staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant provide the Current Planning Project Manager, a water line installation plan, which complies with criterion (b) for review and approval, prior to final PUD approval. (c) New utility routes shall avoid paralleling The proposed alignment would not parallel the stream or following a down-valley the stream or follow a down-valley course course near the channel; and near the channel. (d) The utility installation shall not increase The provided supplemental stream study C1tv of Renlon Commumly and c·conomic De MCCORMICK PLAT Pl/BLIC HEARLVG DATE January 5. 2012 nent Department Report lo the Hearing Exammer LU.111-034. £CF PP. Pl'UD Page 34 C?f 38 ~--------------------------------------------~ or decrease the natural rate of shore did not address this criterion, as such staff migration or channel migration; and recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant provide the Current Planning Project Manager, a utility installation analysis, prepared by a certified biologist, that addresses criterion (d) and is accepted by the Administrator of Community and Economic Development or Designee, if the report concludes there would be impacts the installation of the water line would be denied. (e) Seasonal work windows are determined To reduce impacts to the stream staff and made a condition of approval; and (f) Mitigation criteria of subsection RMC 4-3- 050L.3.c.(ii) are met recommends a mitigation measure that construction of the water main be limited to June through August when stream flows are anticipated to be low and that City Staff is contacted to verify little to no flow within the stream bed before construction commences. The applicant has provided a mitigation plan which depicts the buffer enhancement plan, and maintenance and monitoring. Conceptually the mitigation plan appears acceptable; however, many details of the plan are missing to gain compliance with RMC 4-3-050L.3.c.(ii). As such staff recommends a condition of approval that the applicant provide a detailed mitigation and monitoring plan that complies with the criteria included in RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 3- 4-050. This plan shall be submitted for review and approval to the Current Planning Project Manager, prior final PUD approval. The provided information, does not clearly represent compliance with the above criteria, however the provided Critical Areas report did conclude that the insulation of the water line with the proposed mitigation would not negatively impact the waterbody in any way. As such, staff anticipates a more detailed report would conclude compliance with all of the above criteria. Final compliance with the above criteria shall be addressed with the final PUD application, if the water line cannot be extended without mitigatable impacts to the stream, the applicant shall be required to identify how the development could be serviced with water another way. The applicant would be required to comply with RMC 4-3-050 Critical Area regulations in order to mitigate for any impacts permitted to the wetlands and stream and their associated buffers. The applicant would be required to submit and have approved a Final (:ify of Renton Communi!)· and Economic Dt: -"'=""=' D=e"'p=a,·-1m=e=nl==============R='e1-'o-"-'o-tl-,e-l-lea-'-inea~ -Ex-·an-"-·!wr MCCORMICK PUT LUA! 1-034. ECF. PP. PPUD PUBLIC IJEARJA:G DATE January 5. 2012 Page 35 of 38 Stream Mitigation and Monitoring Plan and a wetland enhancement plan prior to approval of the final PUD. The following conditions of approval are recommended by staff: 1. The common boundary between the native growth protection tract and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include a permanent wood split rail fence and metal signs on treated or metal posts. The permanent wood split rail fence and signs shall be installed prior to Final Plat recording. 2. The following note shall appear on the face of the Final Plat and shall also be recorded as a covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created or benefitting from this City action abutting or including a native growth protection tract are responsible for maintenance and protection of the tract. Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been received." 3. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the edge of the wetlands and stream buffer areas, to clearly identify the edge of the critical area during the construction phase of the development. This fencing may encroach within the stream buffer, in approved temporary construction locations per the provided Critical Areas report, for the construction of the storm water pond. I. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the McCormick Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD, Project File No. LUAll-034, ECF,PP, PPUD subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the 12 mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated, dated August 22, 2011. 2. The applicant shall construct street frontage improvements, as modified in Exhibit 31, Staff Recommendation, Approved Modification form Rentan Municipal Code (RMC}. These improvements shall be shown on the final PUD application, and reviewed and approved by the Engineering Plan Review Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. 3. The applicant shall submit a detailed final landscape plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. The detailed final landscape plan shall include, but is not limited to the following: a. Proposed locations and design details of benches and interpretive signage proposed along the soft surface trial. b. Street trees shall be identified in compliance with the City's street tree standards. c. The plan shall indicate either 100 percent drought tolerant plantings or the applicant shall provide a final irrigation plan with the final detailed landscape plan. Clf_l· of Renwn Communitv and Economic De MCCORMICK !'LAT JJU/3UC !!EARING DATE Jumwry 5. 2012 nent Oi!panment Report to the !fearing Examiner LUA/1-034. ECF PP. Pl'UD Page 36 of 38 4. The park shall be moved east by one lot to align with Road A, and adjusting Lot 34 to be the northwest corner lot of the internal portion of the development. This change shall be reflected on the final PUD application materials. 5. The detention facility shall be re-designed to become an integral part of the open space system. The design shall meet the City's stormwater requirements and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. 6. All crosswalks in the development shall be differentiated by material or texture from adjacent paving materials. An updated site plan depicting proposed materials or texture for crosswalks shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to final PUD approval. 7. The applicant shall submit a lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. The lighting plan shall contain pedestrian lighting in addition to building and landscaping lighting if proposed. 8. The applicant shall revise the utility plan to depict a 1-inch water meter to all lots. The revised plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Plan Review Project Manager prior to Final Plat recording 9. The applicant shall establish a home owners' association for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements, including but not limited to the soft surface trail, landscaping, and park within the PUD. The draft CCR's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney, prior to final PUD approval. All common facilities, not dedicated to the City, shall be permanently maintained by the PUD home owners' association. 10. The applicant shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable easement on the property title for all critical areas and their buffers prior to Final Plat recording. The protective easement shall be held by current and future property owners; shall run with the land; and shall prohibit development, alteration, and disturbance within the easement except for the purposes of habitat enhancement as a part of an enhancement project, access for the trail users and maintenance, and debris flow mitigation access for landslide events. Furthermore, these areas shall be fenced with split rail fencing, providing designated access points along the trail and necessary access for debris removal in the event of a landslide. In addition, the large portion of the site that is located in King County shall be recorded in a separate critical areas tract that is consistent with King County Code section 21A.24, and shall have an NGPE or similar easement consistent with KKC recorded on this tract 11. The Park shall be placed in a recreation tract, this designation shall be identified on the final PUD and Plat Plan, prior to Final Plat recording. 12. A covenant shall be placed on all tracts restricting their separate sale and giving each lot owner within the plat an undivided interest in the tracts. This covenant should be recorded on the face of the plat, and/or concurrent with the plat recording, noting the recording number on the plat. City of Renton Commumlr and Economic De MCCORMICK PL4f T'UBLJC HEARLVC DATE January 5. 20/ 2 nen1 nepartment Report to the l!eanng Examiner LU 11-034. ECF. PP. PPUD Page 37 o/38 13. A street lighting plan shall be submitted with the construction permit application for review and approval by the Plan Reviewer prior to construction permit approval. 14. A note shall be placed on the face of the plat requiring proposed Lots 8-11 to gain access from the proposed access easement, Tract D. The note shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 15. The applicant shall apply for and successfully obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, prior to construction permit issuance. 16. The applicant shall submit a final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan that complies with the criteria included in RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 3-4-050. The applicant shall provide the final stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan for review and approval to the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. 17. The applicant shall provide a trail detail for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval, showing compliance with the criteria in RMC 4-3-050C.7.a specifically the trail surface materials. 18. The applicant shall submit a detailed wetland buffer enhancement plan, that is compliant with RMC 4-3-050 for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to final PUD approval. 19. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the utility corridor within the buffer, to isolate the area of disturbance and reduce potential further impacts. Construction fencing shall be shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. 20. The applicant shall provide the Current Planning Project Manager, a water line installation plan, which complies with RMC 4-3-050L.8.b.i.(b) for review and approval, prior to final PUD approval. 21. The applicant shall provide the Current Planning Project Manager, an utility installation analysis, prepared by a certified biologist, that addresses criterion 4-3- 050L.8.b.i.(d) and is accepted by the Administrator of Community and Economic Development or Designee, prior to final PUD approval. If the report concludes there would be impacts, as identified in this criterion, the installation of the water line would be denied. 22. Construction of the water line shall be limited to June through August when stream flows are anticipated to be low and that City Staff is contacted to verify little to no flow within the stream bed before construction commences. 23. The common boundary between the native growth protection tract and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include a permanent wood split rail fence and metal signs on treated or metal posts. The permanent wood split rail fence and signs shall be installed prior to Final Plat recording. 24. The following note shall appear on the face of the Final Plat and shall also be recorded as a covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created or benefitting from this City action abutting or including a native growth protection tract are responsible for maintenance and protection of the tract. Maintenance includes Citr of Renton Commw11fl' and £conmmc D{ bment De,iartnienl Report ro thi? Hearing £xammer --"""=----------------===-------MCCORMICK PLAT LU A I 1-034. ECF. PP. PP/!I) PUBLIC l!tARJNG J)AJEJanuary 5, 2011 JJage 38 of 38 ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been received." 25. Temporary construction fencing shall be installed along the edge of the wetlands and stream buffer areas, to clearly identify the edge of the critical areas during the construction phase of the development. This fencing may encroach within the stream buffer, in approved temporary construction locations per the provided Critical Areas report, for the construction of the storm water pond. Construction fencing shall be shown on construction plans and shall be approved by the Current Planning project manager prior to construction permit issuance. EXPIRATION PERIODS; Preliminary PUD: The developer shall, within two (2) years of the effective date of action by the Hearing Examiner to approve the preliminary plan, submit to the Department of Community and Economic Development a final development plan showing the ultimate design and specific details of the proposed planned urban development or the final phase or phases thereof; provided, however, that for a preliminary plan approved concurrent with a preliminary subdivision, the developer shall submit the final development plan within five (5) years of the effective date of action by the Hearing Examiner to approve the preliminary plan. Upon application by the developer, the Hearing Examiner may grant an extension of the approved preliminary plan for a maximum of twelve (12) months. Application for such extension shall be made at least thirty {30) days prior to the expiration date of preliminary plan approval. Only one such extension may be granted for a planned urban development. If a final development plan is not filed within the identified time limits or within the extended time period, if any, the planned urban development preliminary plan shall be deemed to have expired or been abandoned. To activate an expired or abandoned planned urban development, a new application is required] Preliminary Plat: Preliminary plat approval shall lapse unless a final plat based on the preliminary plat, or any phase thereof, is submitted within five (5) years from the date of preliminary plat approval. One one-year extension shall be granted to an applicant who files a written request with the Administrator at least thirty {30) days before the expiration of this five (5) year period, provided the applicant demonstrates that he/she has attempted in good faith to submit the final plat within the five (5) year period UJO:>'Ew:>9d-.... eae6'1M'"'lll~~·"•'IO::ISSSl1'SJ. i1>91-i10Cl90<:l ·n::1 OL6l-) <>""'Id l. 'lf"ld )IOll"lclOOOl"l ~ ~ I g 3: ~ ui :, Ill 8 ~ ui Cl Cl ~ a: ~ z ~ <'l « ~I- "'-<::( « ~c[ t~ ~o ~~ ~cc ~o so ~ (.) ~~ 0 ~u.. ~o ~g ~Cl. £>-~cc ~~ 0~ w-ro_J !UJ wee ~Cl. ii: I u. 0 z ~ 0 I ~ 0 .. -0: ' I ' i I i I i N I- ""' m t-1 ::c >< w ~ u.i I{) u.i CJ a: -i. li ~ t w [J) ~ IL 0 IMol-iSC(OO.:) ,n.i 0£6L· <;11J04d ~---~I qrr,r~ f;<quueJ -= F ~;;,""'1tl"'3 lfAl:> ~.l -a;-" :"JEE 'uti1saa +< (; 1'.1;£.wee&ff:iU3 O!J/:>E?cf ~ s ' i :0: -, ., ·" I I ' i i ~ ; ··, ~ ' t J ' ; i i m q! I! h! E~ i ! . I ! ' ' i. . t M I- I t-1 a:i 1, t-1 /~ I! ::c t !' >< 1! w .1 ·1 ~I !, I• !, ,' ,' ,i ,i {1) i i i ! ' I " ' ; ' s • ' " ' " 'l ! I !! ;l!!I!! ! ! ' ,, ,,o •, il il i&; ., • !· 1111 ,ii i! id !ii i~ . ,: :lf . ! ,, i i • i ii ;! ::1 ;I' ' w ., uj 0 a: i "' tll .: ~ sf tll ti w 0) sf ..... ~ w 0) w J: I- IL 1" 0 z 0 ~ 0 0.. < 0 z < ::1 ;I' ui "' uj 0 a: i 1l .: ~ ,..; tll ti gj I sf ;:, w 0) w i!: l IL 0 z/ 0 ! I I ~I ol 0.. < I ; ! ~~9<t-811186YM; i!1'91.-81!1:(!il,2J 'l'8a:I Olr if I .. ' !> ' I • ! 3 ~ ~ ! • • I ' I I I I : 3 ~ • . . . ' . - ~ lo ~ i ~ ~ I i 3 ! ! ::,s E! i I I , ; ~ s « lli ~ id~ • • C C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t: ~ Cc;; ~ 13 ~ ~ < it ~ VI O ~ Z I t I '() • of-' I I e • • • I ~ • • e il i ~ . j I ' ' I ' D 'q' !:; ca 1-t :c >< w ~ ~ ' w "' ~ a: z " "' ~ ,f "' (j w rn g w rn w I f- LL 0 z 0 ~ 0 0.. <>: 0 z <>: ~ ~ ! ui ' ! "' ' ui 0 a: z " "' 0.: ~ ~ (j w rn ,f ;:, w rn w ~ LL 0 z 0 ~ ~ <>: ' ! od"""""" 8SIS6 VM "wlll__.-~ -..,._v G!L:S =• 8':'91.-98!:(9re) '""=' Ol6l J "'C'Olld ; : i . ' I • I :! I I " 0 ~ 0 © J. 'vld )IOll"l80001"l !---- I I i • 0 ~ 0 .. I I 0 ~ Ln = ca 1-1 ::c >< LLI =-· A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 23, TWP. 23 N .. RGE. 5 E., W.M.ANDA PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 24, TWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E .. W.M. 1-· . ",.., .~:-, ~ r-- 1 f--I 1-r i I:.::] .,. --. = <=< ' " -•M ,., ,w, D"= ! 11 .. -... I -·~~ 5• UIS{lffi.) , ~ :,.;,(:J•'. .. 1-~f?JtJJLg;s:;z' "''1,h: ,i;;.t{~;.,;'.)11'~,;. _,;;;$j_, ·,~h-~·,. ,;;,,, ROAD A CR088 BECTr0N ( -1=~ IIQIIIIAY•IQff~WArl ""i ™" -~" i ] i I · ,. -.::___ --------1 I o•'--'1---•• :IJ"""' 1:,'NIOEOAN(<<Ht nl') I 1J """'(lflt\OtW,0,(1"') I: \-·-•• ii I "l"'' ' ,. ' - u-----11+---o.s I ~,M,...J ~,M,~, ;-~1i;/i•,'./•\1~'.,r~,fh.1E., ''i)~;;,,, .. ,,,.'\1,'' '\,:-{.' -,,:,;,;i:~:~i:~!~:.,,,·· ROAD B CROSS SECTION ·- PROPOSED l!ESIJENC< ••OP<:lS<O •ESll)f...:C STRU.M BIJfFal: ,_,· 0000 e ""' I BflE SECTION C--C SCALC, 1•-1,r EXHIBIT 6 ,, • ....., ornrns ......,[. R,RM D <il ~ ! -~ \l "." • ~1 n1 ...,.tJ !] ~ a .s ~, ·!! ! ! r 11' 1~ ~. bl ,2' Jf l! .g lll ;;! ~! "" HO '" Q • ''a ~ )I·'\ Jj ROAD C CROSS SECTION f,,o.t.h l -11:1· ·'·. 1 ~ 'i:~i -"' ~J.r {(;J C • ,-.:!, ~ i ~ 5 Ill .... j 0.. >l ~ l!!I a: 0 ~ ,!!ii ::; PRO.JSCT Ml , 07093 onA"" a>· C.J!l """ OAT[, 1Z-10---20\0 ;ity Of f.fe:nt ' ,, ,,,, 'D I) f[' j lvrs101 5 ,,,, PO f'/ti r 2 6 lo IJ SHEET 06 OF '2 c:ONCl':'"11.JAL ROAD AND 6(n;; 8ECTI()N ., 1 ;/.;_;z~Ill llf /t;,!fJ --· A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 23, lWP. 23 N., ROE. 5 E., W.M.ANDA PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 24, lWP. 23 N., RGE. 5 E., W.M. .• - .... ""' 1,:,i,:j~ I .········tr~rm::-T" H~ . PA6F6stti OW,_E_ -:-i _ _ _ ~ !! ! p '" HO ·~~·c-i·~:;i,11.c··_o_:::c··. "' ·~ :.~:~~~2~ ... / luo ~, r ;=·-, I .... I 125~:.;:7:~~!~ .. ---?:::'.:::>_::\ :·. · .... 125 120 1---.-.-~-'J. ... _ ... ,ro 11& ____J 115 0+00 1+00 1+74 PROPOSED ROAD •A• PROFILE V SC<I.C 1·-~· II SC,,11.C !"•:10' m . . m •••• ...,.. $TA( 3+Q:9J'' f"" m:v.-10~e10 · HO f---~--~--~--~---~~-~--1-~-~-~-~--~lff ... ,~;'~% ~H! I lno 18:!,~-----··--'" '" f---~--~--~--........... ··········· ............. · ···· i.:,:A~J, .. 1 1~,., -~·· :· ,i:···· ,,0 !F '" ~.,. ._ __ --. /1 I 1M ,. l ,, .. , ·.:..:..:..:..:.:.:..:~:..:..:..:..:..j_:__:_:_l ,~o C·, l,J,. ()f J:"! -11551' · r·fo ;··\1rii: .. ! o· . 1+00 2+00 J+OO ,1, ,() . . iv,8 ,~L·.·-~--~-~--~-_J--~--'-'-'-'--"-' 0+00 DO HOO PROPOSED ROAD 'C' f'ROFl...E ~ SCALE 1·.5· IIS<><l.£1"•!l<l' EXHIBIT 7 ~4r 2 s 201, -'JP\·, ·-- !/ """' t:~d/Y;'~ ~ .~ g (',-, 11 l!J; •1 "' ' ! ,, 0) ,.,JJ <11 a , I': .s-,pir !.f d f; ! ~' Iii j Q_ 6 ~ 0 ~ :::; i ~ 5 l!!I 11,. I ' ""MCTIIO· 07(19:) = ISS•" OA][ 12-1()-l!()JQ SH(ET •tV.· AOAO A AND C/"AOFILEB 'F06 8HEET 07 Of" 11! J ~M Ii ~ ~ s: ui Ill Iii CJ a: z "' "' 0.: ~ ,f "' (j w U) ,f -;, w U) w i': IL 0 z 0 ~ 0 n_ <( 0 z <( ~ s: ui Ill , Iii CJ a: i "' "' 0.: ~ <? "' (j w U) g w U) w :r I- IL 0 z 0 ~ 0 n_ <( 0 -; ' ! \JJO:>~~-881B6'/M'glll""",S'~h'O'~~ ~HIW.90<:l n::J CLf' .::: ~ ~ • • ! ~ :l .L Vld )IOIV'llc!OOOV'I 8 i I . : : : : : : . : ..... : .. co !::; co 1-1 :::c >< w ~ ui ., ui CJ a: i. "' "' n.: ~ ,f "' hl Cl) t w Cl) w I I- IL 0 z 0 ~ ' ~ -----r 0 a. <( 0 z <( ~ ui ., ui ~ z· "' "' n.: ~ ~ rJ w Cl) ,f ';;:, w Cl) w i!: IL 0 z 0 ~ 0 0. <( \ ' I ... ,, Q ~ ... 1-t al 1-t :::c ' >< ' w ' • l -" " :l " ;;,',-ICI ~ / l .... .... 1- 1-t co 1-t ::c >< w "' RENToN -MAPLE YAITEV RoM) (SR 169 r = I, ~~ ~ 0Wtlflll1ATIOI! --~' EXHIBIT 12 ~I 4 i ~ Pt 30 <5 !II! B! a, -----:-;i $00.f: I'• 30' ra1 -~---·----= -~- ':: ... , ' -i-- ' I Plantlng Area B (Sheet W-2) ~'l!i:, 10 BUIT£R -Romoot -s,,,,..,., ~ IM!«f""""""'-'' = g:;:::f' ... 'f'1~/IAS£JW'}'RO'/f[l(llJrf,OCff;--UI: ~ '.._-~ M4y 2 •gt i~ )-, ............ , ·--'"·· , .. ·'> ' 'l'.'{}J. 11'tl-... l[,,_ ___ ,..,_..,_.,", .. ,.,._.,,_.,,, i~l ii ,, ~I <I <I <I <I ~_] z 4i (L I-7 :"jQ (L ~ '<" Q ot::: ~2 (L 0 </ u :j u f- 2 Q_ l_,_I 0 z 0 0 -~.. ...&10!.... I o...,._.,,__il_ . o,-.,.., •y _ _Al!' °""'Hor __ o,tr ~· SHEET 11'-f Of~ ,$:J. /; ,)-·--. . •C (i':' Js!J' 'l:7, -2/f: JI'~ "' !, 1.r;; ;fJJ OJ 0 Q) L <l'. 01 C +-' C 0 o_ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' I j!~ \ 11-~" I! R,!\ ti ; ~ I ~ ~ ~ I I I I • • • • ! ! ! ! fd t j • ~! HU t I: • • • • 0 ® @) @ I I I I I • • • • • ! ! ! ! I! I ~i ii If' f I f u i I • • • • • 1B © (9 0 o § I I I ' I I ' • I • ! I it l1 ~ 0 ~ ' ' j ! i • t • . ' I i ! M 'l""I I- t-I ca 1-1 ::c >< w ' • ; ' ' 8 ' £ l • I ' • ' I ' -0-~i ~ i I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I !t'fi I I I I I I I I I u "'"'"""""""' _....,_ = -0- ~! ™ f, I i I I I I I -.,~ .. \IM 'NO.w,c:;, AMci A3rw. 31dV\". £;0!>"91 ££Wl lVld :JIV'l'?.10:J:1~ =tt1J1 ! I I .... , t, I Ji I " I I ---.0-UC *! Z-i 21-.:li ' ' I I g..-! >t! §Nni: "'..:: ( /o N 11'1 ..... I- I-I ca 1-1 :::c >< w t . ' . ' ~ I ~ ~ 0 • • < NOJ.N3~ ;:10 A.ii:) ~·~ l>OS: ·~NO>,jd ~-VM"~6 ""'"'"~,,.___,.,...., ,e, ,o,..,..c:,"""'.J.J,[aarn, "'"'' I • i , : I ! , ' ; ! ' ! ; ' . w 0 • i ' I ! ! i < NO.LN3ld :,IQ A.HJ _, ~ w 0 "' " <( [l_ w u -;·"' <( [l_ "' 6•;:a:-laOO I -.No~~ "*'ll~>fM"...-i,,t;- <:NO>IA"o'MT\d>M 1-11, ""''""'C:;»".l.>'~- :ldC,/ • l Id, =· --"--, Yi->+-----\--'s-----1',-,f ' i l ..... ,... I- I-I cc 1-1 ::c X w ' ' .......... . --------' ' ' SKYRAE I //--/---"'----~--:_,---~~~~--! ---\ 1' .,,,. , \ " r ------ ,/ \ \ ------I ...., ZOii! ---------,1 ,/ \, \ TRAC; -----, UNDEVELOPED -'--, / : / CEDAR RIVER PARCEL• ~ AREA ', ; I 1 PARK ' ' ' 78Q6461llCT ' ''' ; ' ' I ' J I l'AflCB..t / ' / .. -""""""' ""' CED~ I "" ' I __ _ / ',~ ~' UNKNOWi'h , 1 ',~ CEDAR RIVER 7 ---------ARCEL•~ -/ I I\ PARK --L -----' ---___/ J \ PARCELfo I ---CBWIR18! --I , ~ --; \ ........., / -__ ~ """ ---_ _ _ _ ~ -.___ _ cEDARlllVER---1 \ I SE RE ------------1 --m,ceu~2/lQ!tl)'Jll\.. -_/ I I V NTONMA -----------------\ -------/--_ ALLEY RD [SR-PLE --__ _ _ -----______ ~ _ 1 _ 169) -----_ _ CBlAA flVBI 'f'AII{ \ -- 1 -SIT£ -------_ ~ I : [iT r/ //----f_--.::.....---SERENTONMAPLE ---- 4 ,,-- / 1 i : 1 1 I 1 --:::-=:::: :::-----_ _ VALLEY AD (SR-169) I ----.---.---~ ---~B PAACEL t: I I I .,..---..._ -a:~ er ~ ,. __., -i'\___.-.l' . "-,.....,.;oo11 I ' r---"°""" ,, . -----I I t. I _____ ,_.,.-.....,. -. '~Effi-~fF---~8 ··" I \ ?I. IHI 1'lNi \ , , . I 14 ,·•, .. -.. - 1 I Ii\-( I yz~_-_ ' .. : 20 21 22 •]",. ze 7/fj" ____ '·' .-.dv.' • : I l'" I ·-~ " . _,. \ I -,;. I \ ______.L--------.,, . ' . -· . . "°"" B -10 • ~-f-' I \ j _ ----F ..... --::;'. -· -------. . --. :; . _-,, ,_,,..,,. ~1!i : --I '""""' I ~'.lJw'.n. . • ~.. . \ ) ~ I !l : \ --~-~-----------.. . . , , 1& AQUA BARN 1 1 --\ zael RANCH I I IHZOII! --,-\' ~-PARCB-• I I ""°owml . ~ I \ I . . . : \ ·, M-<> ZOii! I \ ""°owml I \ ~ I \ , NOT PNIT OP I ZONING BOUNOIRf I ' PLAT I uNEs AND CITY w r \ I 'I RENJO• UMTS • I , TRACT , c,ty cJf n ,. _ , PARCEL• A J -.. on ', -I, I ,_._·. 1 1 -..-Plannm'-' r•,. ', Ji I '-_, '''''"""""' / •• -, l,olO// l'"1 ', I \ I / ~ ', 1 I ',,____ I /· I ,f/AY ~ • i[i)1 ', \ I / . ',,, I I • ,.,_.,, ,• ... ---1' \!,. I ffi{f.,~[:.-,1'"',i\' ?,,_~r-)) -----' / ---~-,.~,u,v,c:•,[i ,oo , so ,oo ,oo -------I / ·' V !-_..I I I I ------I ---I J ----i-------r-1-- NEtoHsoRHooo DETAIL MAP EXHIBIT 18 EXHIBIT 19 "----UNDI Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. MCCORMICK PLAT CITY OF RENTON REVISED CRITICAL AREAS REPORT & SUPPLEMENTAL STREAM STUDY Sewall Wetland Consulting. Inc. 27641 Covington Way SE, #2 Covington, WA 98042 Prepared For. Robert McCormick 16 l Mapl<way Road Selilh, Washington 98942 AUGUST 12, 2011 Job#AS-106 EXHIBIT 20 City cf Renton Phone: 253-859-0515 Fa.x: 253-852-4732 MCCORMICK PLAT REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Robert McCormick McCormick LLC C/0 Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S., Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98188 Prepared by 11:i!lfEx TRAFFIC EXPERTS 11410 NE 124TH St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 October 14, 2010 EXHIBIT 21 S~aev 1 +;'3"-)tB~ , I I e.ch (\\LC\_\ ,C\,p~V'I ECH ANTS, INC. Valley View Mobile Park, LLC 161 Mapleway Road · Selah, Washington 98942 Attention: Robert E. McCormick Subject: Response Letter Proposed Residential Subdivision 16405 Southeast Renton-Maple Valley Road King County, Washington Dear Mr. McCormick: 13256 Northeast 20th Street, Suite 16 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 September 9, 2008 JN 08070 We prepared a preliminary geotechnical engineering report regarding the proposed subdivision project dated April 1, 2008. Since that time, we received a copy of a comment letter prepared by King County dated June 9, 2008 following the initial submittal of plans for the project. Some of the items included in the comment letter were with regards to geotechnical issues. Below in this letter we have included the specific comments that were included in King County's letter, and they are then followed by our response. In preparation of this letter, we also reviewed Sheets P1 through pg of the project, which were prepared by Pacific Engineering, LLC and dated September 9, 2008. Groundwater: Please submit geotechnical recommendations to address groundwater for the construction of the roads and subdivision. Revise the conceptual drainage plan as needed to address groundwater. RESPONSE: Groundwater was revealed in our explorations in the area of the new road and subdivision of about 4 feet or deeper. The grading plans for the new road indicate a cut of up to 4 feet. Thus, some groundwater may be encountered. The use of a French Drain has been included in the new plans if groundwater is encountered .. This will mitigate any impacts of groundwater on project construction. Project impacts to groundwater will be mitigated through compliance with applicable stormwater management requirements. Geotechnical: 1. As proposed, the Jots along the east steep slopes (lot 19-21 and possibly 17 and 18) intrudes into the required 25 foot steep slope buffer. The buffer must be fully contained in a separate tract. Please either revise the plans to show the recommended 25 foot buffer in the critical areas tract or provide supplemental geotechnical engineering information that supports further reduction of the buffer width. In addition, a fencing end buffer restoration plan must be provided for the disturbed portions of the steep slope and landslide hazard area buffers. The planting plan must use native species and shall be designed /0 minimize the infn,oinn nf inv:ci.<:hti=! .on,ar:iA.S EXHIBIT 22 GE Valley View Mobile Park, LLC 161 Mapleway Road . Selah, Washington 98942 Attention: Robert E. McCormick Subject: Update to Response Letter Proposed Residential Subdivision 16405 Southeast Renton-Maple Valley Road King County, Washington Dear Mr. McCormick: 13256 Northeast 20th Street, Suite 16 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 October 16, 2008 JN 08070 We prepared a preliminary geotechnical engineering report regarding the proposed subdivision project dated April 1, 2008. Thereafter, we received a copy of a comment letter prepared by King County dated June 9, 2008 following the initial submittal of plans for the project. We prepared a response Jetter September 9, 2008 .. We understand that the property will be annexed into the City of Renton. A letter was prepared by the city following the response by the project team (including our firm) dated September 19, 2008. They have requested more information be provided to comments raised in the King County letter. · One issue in the City of Renton letter is related to our services: The issue is that "a conceptual debris flow mitigation area maintenance plan is needed if the proposal will require cleaning or repair after debris flow event". In our opinion, cleaning and/or repair will be needed. Therefore, we make the following recommendations: ' 1. Because we understand that a penmit will likely be needed in order to do any cleaning and/or repair, we recommend that such a permit be obtained soon after a debris flow event. 2. Once a pennit is secured, deaning and/or or repair should begin within 60 days. 3. Cleaning and/or repair should include removing all soil and debrls Within the stream buffer area on the southern and western portions on the site. We have included a site plan indicating the location of the "potential clean-up area" on the property where deaning and/or repair should be done. The soil and debris should be removed down to the ground level that existed prior to the debris flow event. In addition, the stormwater system that is located at the northern portion of the stream buffer should also be cleaned of any soil and/or debris. 4. Large equipment will likely be needed for cleaning and/or repair work, and we recommend that this equipment gain access to the potential clean-up area via a utility corridor that will be located between Lot 36 and Tract A (see attached site plan). 5. After the cleaning and/or repair work is completed, vegetation should be placed over disturbed ground; the vegetation should be similar to what existed prior to the debris flow event. EXHIBIT 23 GEOTECH CONSULT ANTS, INC. Valley View Mobile Park, LLC 161 Mapleway Road Selah, Washington 98942 Attention: Robert E. McCormick Subject: Review of Updated Plans Proposed Residential Subdivision 16405 Southeast Renton-Maple Valley Road Renton, Washington Dear Mr. McCormick: 13256 Northeast 20t1 Slreet, Suite 16 Bellevue, Wasl1ington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 City z)f Ren ton "'' . . . . crctober 8, 201 O · an, 111,g 01v1s1on JN 08070 MAY 2 5 1Ul1 We prepared a geotechnical engineering study (Study) regarding the proposed subdivision project dated April 1, 2008. Furthermore, we prepared some response letters in September and October of 2008 based on comments by King County and City of Renton. Finally, we prepared a letter regarding further geotechnical engineering considerations for the project in a letter dated February 19, 2009. We have recently reviewed the updated plans for the project, which include Sheets P01 through P11 that were prepared by Pacific Engineering Design, dated September 8, 2010. In addition to the letters we prepared and a review of the project plans, we also reviewed a "Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis" report prepared by otak, Inc., dated May 17, 2010. When our Study was prepared, the formal layout of the subdivision was not completely determined, although it appeared that a scenario where streets would be more interior and house lots on the exterior would be used. The current scenario is to use a more exterior street and interior lots. Although this is quite different from a land use condition, the grading for the project has not changed greatly since our Study, the scale of the project has not really changed, and a debris barrier is still included at the upslope, southern side of the site. In addition, we understand that the amount of "deb.ris catchment" upslope of the barrier is adequate for the amount of potential debris noted in the Otak report. Thus, it is our professional opinion that the current project plans are in accordance with our Study. EXHIBIT 24 GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 2 ffi· Cover-\e--\tef 12.e?u<..\-\ \ f'CA,.~' ~dic.,e,5 /~ ............ , KL£1f\JF£LD£R \.. ·--Bright People. Right Solutions. ~ April 17, 2009 Kleinfelder Project No. 102149 City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98077 Attention: Subject: Ms. Vanessa Dolbee, Associate Planner Technical Peer Review Geotechnical Aspects of the Proposed McCormick Plat, File #LUAOS-068 King County, Washington Dear Ms. Dolbee: 14710 NE sin Street, Suite 100 Redmond, IJVashington 98052 Pl 425.636.7900 fl 425.636.7901 l<leinfelder.com City of Renton Planning Division JUN -7 LUJJ Kleinfelder is pleased to provide a technical peer review of the geotechnical aspects of the proposed McCormick Plat at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (SR 169) in King County, Washington. This review is based on your letter request to us dated January 14, 2009 and the authorization to proceed with the project on February 19, 2009. We understand that there are concerns about risks associated with a potential debris flow that could originate upslope of the development and the developer's proposal to construct a debris flow mitigation berm to protect the development. SCOPE OF WORK Our scope of work included review the Preliminary Geotechnical Report for the McCormick Plat, review of provided documents relating to the proposed debris flow mitigation, a visit to the site, an evaluation of the proposed debris flow mitigation measures, and development of general debris flow mitigation recommendations. The following documents were reviewed in regards to the debris flow mitigation: Update to Geotechnical Engineering Study -February 19, 2009 by Geotech Consultants, Inc. Page 1 of 8 8 y-\:)e..S April 17, 2009 EXHIBIT 25 McCormick Plat Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis City ot Renton Plannino D . ... IV/S1on EXHIBIT 26 IU'·' ' " -7 LU)/ Prepared by: Otak, Inc. 10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400 Kirkland, WA 98033 And HydroGeo Designs, LLC 1555 FM 517 West Dickinson TX 77539 Otak Project No. 31511 May 17, 2010 GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Valley View Mobile Park, LLC 161 Mapleway Road Selah, Washington 98942 Attention: Robert E. McCormick Subject: Slope Stability Related to Existing Culverted Stream Proposed Residential Subdivision 16405 Southeast Renton-Maple Valley Road King County, Washington Dear Mr. McCormick: 13256 Northeast 20th Street, Suite 16 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 September 21, 2011 JN 08070 City of Renton Planning Oivisior, We prepared a preliminary geotechnical engineering report regarding the proposed subdivision project dated April 1, 2008. Thereafter, we received a copy of a comment letter prepared by King County dated June 9, 2008 following the initial submittal of plans for the project. We subsequently prepared a letter regarding responses to a City of Renton comment letter dated October 16, 2008. We understand the review/permit process for the project is proceeding in the City of Renton Planning Department, and apparently some comments have arisen regarding the stream that is located directly at the base of a steep slope at the southern end of the project site. The stream in this area is lined with a half culvert pipe and the removal of the culvert is being considered. This Jetter provides our position on removing the culvert. As noted in our 2008 report, we did not observe signs of recent shallow or deep-seated landsliding, on the steep southern slope. Several trailers now are located within about 15 feet of the steep southern slope and the stream, and we had reviewed aerial photos that indicated trailers had been in similar locations as far back as at least 1960. Therefore, it does not appear that landslides have occurred on the steep southern slope for at least 50 years. With any steep slope in the Puget Sound region, there is Blways some potential for soil instability, especially shallow in nature. Such events are generally due to excessive rainfall (50 to 100-year rainfall events). However, there have been numerous excessive rainfall events in the last 50 years, and the southern slope apparently has remained stable. Please note that we are well aware there was a debris flow event in approximately 1990 onto the property in which material fiowed down from the southeastern ravine; this was not a landslide of the steep southern slope. Protection against this type of flow event was previously addressed by OTAK in its Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis. It is our professional opinion that the half rnlvert that is in the stream at the base of the southern slope is protecting the streambed from erosion and incising; it apparently has been in-place and providing protection for at least 50 years. Removing the half culvert in the stream would greatly increase the potential for erosion and incising of the streambed; as noted in our report. It is very obvious that incising of the streambed has occurred where no half culvert is in-place (this area is further upstream of the half culvert area). We. believe that erosion or incising of the streambed would greatly increase the potential of instability of the southern slope because it would remove soil at the base of the slope. Again, we reiterate that it appears the half-culvert has been protecting the EXHIBIT 27 l ; l I I I I I I lj September 22, 2011 Robert E. McCormick • 10230 ne points drive, suite 400 , kirkland, washlngton 98033 {425) 822-4446 , fax (425) 827-95n WWN,otak.com Valley View Mobile Par!\, LLC 161 Mapleway Road Selah, WA 98942 Re: Culvert Removal at McConnick Plat-Otak Project No. 31511 Mr. McCormick: City of Renton Planning Division Our initial report dated May 17, 2010 presented a summary of the current geomorphic conditions and debris flow potential for the small, unnamed ravine upstream of the McCormick Plat. In our field reconnaissance for the debris flow evaluation, observations and field measurements were made on the series of culverts, half culve1ts and additional stream bank annoring that exist where the stream enters the vicinity of the existing mobile homes and is diverted to the west around the developed portion of the property. Above the culverted portion of the stream is a steep slope that extends up to the Renton uplands and is classified by King County as a Landslide Hazard Area. In the permitting phase of this project, comments have arisen regarding the possibility of removing these culverts in order to restore the stream to a more natural condition. In this letter, we state the concerns we have with this proposition. Field investigations of the stream were conducted by Otak staff on September 15, 2009 and January 11, 2010. Although the section of the stream containing the culverts was outside our intmediate area of investigation, we continued through this reach to note any indicators that would provide additional information regarding upstream geomorphic conditions. We noted that the channel has been incising in the reaches intmediately upstream of the culverted portion and that the culverts are currently acting to control the grade of the stream and are preventing any incision 0owering of the stream channel) throughout the section containing culverts. We recommend that the culverts are not removed. Removing the culverts would significantly increase the potential for the streru.n to incise down into the native material beneath the culverts. With the culverts in-place, and batting failure of the culverts, there is little to no potential for vertical incision. Incision of the stream would result in a lowering of the toe of the slope that could increase the potential for shallow landslides on the steep slope abm,e. Landslide concerns are covered in greater detail in a letter to you from Geotech Consultants dated September 21, 2011. EXHIBIT 28 creativity, integrity, tind .skill • strengthening our communities • performing exciting w?rk • serving our clients March 15, 2011 McCormick Plat 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Road Renton, Washington Preliminary Drainage Report Prepared for: Robert McCormick 161 Mapleway Road Selah, WA 98942 Prepared By: Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S Seattle, WA 98188 Phone: (206) 431-7970 Fax: (206) 388-1648 Jingsong Feng, P.E. City Of r-, o, riento ' 'Annino o· . n '"' /\/,rsion M,1v 2 5 . • LUi/ PED Job No. 07093 EXHIBIT 29 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUr r City of , r I "~-'[i [f 1 [1 ~1~'.,·:': AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .-_ ·-...-----J --,;.h.-."\0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DA TE: Project Name: Owner/ Applicant: Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Summary: Project Location: Exist. Bldg. Area SF: Site Area: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: August 22, 2011 McCormick Plat Robert E. McCormick, 161 Mapleway Road, Selah, WA 98942 Greg Diener, P.E., Pacific Engineering Design LLC, 15445 53rd Avenue S, Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98188 LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net aGre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion ofthe site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 40 mobile homes and two stick-built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Stormwater, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of the Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The deveopment would requrie approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road 2,232 square feet 11.59 acres Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): Total Building Area GSF: N/A N/A N/A Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated {DNS-M). EXHIBIT 30 ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Departm ent of Communitv & Eco nomic Deve lopment MCCORMICK PLAT Report o f August 22, 2011 Project Lo ca tion Map ERC Reportll -034.doc Environmental Rev iew Committee Report lt.JAH-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 2 of 24 City of Renton Department of Commun MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 conomic Development PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ BACKGROUND 1mental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 3 of 24 The applicant, Robert McCormick, is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34-lot, 8 tract subdivision of an 11.59 acre site. The proposed McCormick Plat would be located along the south side of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169) at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (parcel #2323059029). The site consists of one parcel, the majority of which is located within the City of Renton. However, a long, narrow "dog leg" extends southward off the southeastern side of the rectangular portion of the site; this portion is within unincorporated King County, which is not proposed to be developed. The site is currently the location of the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which provides space for approximately 40 mobile homes. In addition to the mobile homes and multiple out buildings on site, there are two permanent structures, a duplex and maintenance building. The applicant proposes to remove all existing structures, and mobile homes. The site is bordered to the north by Maple Valley Highway (SR-169), to the west the Summer View neighborhood, a single-family residential subdivision, and the south and east by undeveloped forested areas. The subject property is zoned Residential 8 dwelling units per net acre (R-8) and the portion located in King County is zoned Rural Area, 1 dwelling unit per acre (RA-5) King County zoning. The proposed development would be within the R-8 zone as such, R-8 development standards would be applicable to the subject project. The portion of the site zoned RA-5 remains within King County. The Land Use designation is Residential Single Family (RSF) for the portion located within the City of Renton, and is Rural Residential, 1 du/2.5-lOac for the King County portion. The proposed subdivision would result in 34 lots ranging in lot size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet, resulting in a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per acre. In addition to the single family lots, 8 tracts are proposed which included stormwater detention, Native Growth Protection Areas, access and utilities, Open Space, and critical areas. In addition to the traditional subdivision lots and tracts, the applicant has proposed a looped trail around the site which crosses Open Space tract E and C and a small tot lot with a play area. The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A", herein. Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots 1-8, and 11-17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities Tract, identified as Tract D. Proposed Lots 18 -34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of SR-169. Road improvements including sidewalks on both sides on Road A, and on one side of Road Bare proposed. Street frontage improvements are not proposed along SR 169. Pursuant to the City of Renton's critical areas maps, wetlands, a stream, steep slopes, erosion hazards, landslide hazards and seismic hazards have been identified on the subject property. The geotechnical hazards located on the site are due to the steep slope inclinations, soils generally susceptible to erosion, and history of landslides in the area. The critical areas map indicates that the approximate northerly portion of the rectangular area of the site is within a Seismic Hazard area. In addition, the northeast corner of the site is located within the 200--foot Shoreline Area measured from the Cedar River, which is located across Maple Valley Highway. The shoreline area impacts proposed Lots 9 and 10, Lot 10 would be approximately 170 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and Lot 9 would be approximately 190 feet from the OHWM. The "dog leg" portion of the site, located in King County, would be subject to King County critical areas regulations, KCC 21A.24, whereas the remainder of the site would be subject to City of Renton critical areas regulations. King County Sensitive Areas Maps indicated that the subject site is ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Communitv & Economic Development MCCORMICK PlA T Report of August 22, 2011 Environmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 4 of 24 located in a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area and is an area susceptible to ground water contamination. The City's critical areas maps do not identify this area for Aquifer Protection. The developed portion of the Mobile Home Park has an approximate slope of 9 to 10 percent sloping in and southeast-to-northwest direction. As this portion of the site remains within the Landslide and Erosion Hazard area, it is the mildest slope on site. The property is bounded to the south and southeast by steep slopes that extend down from the Renton uplands. The steep slope at the southeast corner of the site, ranges from about an elevation of 230 feet down to the toe-of-slope to an elevation of 160 to 180 feet, and averages about a 100 percent grade. Similarly, the steep slope adjacent to the south side of the mobile home park that extends above the creek is well over 100 feet high and has an average grade of about 100 percent. The applicant has proposed a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm along the base of the steep slope located on the southern border of the site to divert water and/or soil within the stream buffer toward the western side of the site. In addition, a 25-foot buffer from the southeastern slope is proposed for landslide protection for lots 14-17. The applicant has indicated that grading the site would be necessary to modify for stormwater requirements. The applicant has indicated the total excavation would be 8,248 cubic yards and fill is estimated at 7,924 cubic yards. The soil that is usable from the excavation on site would be utilized on site, other materials such as selected borrow and gravel are expected to be imported to the site. The applicant submitted with the application a Revised Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. dated April 12, 2011. This report indicates there are two wetlands located on site, both identified as Category 2 wetlands. Wetland 'A' is located along the west side of the site and Wetland 'B' is located along the northeast edge of the site. Category 2 wetlands typically have SO-foot buffers. The Critical Areas report further indentifies a single intermittent stream that flows through the site. The subject stream is a Class 3 stream and was designated as a Type N stream by Bill Kershke, King County Biologist, in his review of the feature. Class 3 streams typically have 75-foot buffers measured from the ordinary high water mark. The applicant has proposed to reduce the stream buffer from 75 feet to 60 feet for the majority of the buffer area. In addition, the applicant has requested a variance to place a water line through the stream buffer to connect to existing 10-inch water line stub provided by the neighboring Summer View neighborhood. The area of the site that is currently developed as a mobile home park consists of ornamental plants placed by residents of the mobile home park in addition to a few large conifer trees which are scattered about the site. The steep slopes on site are covered with dense understory vegetation consisting of mostly sword ferns and an upperstory of scattered big leaf maple trees. The wetland and stream areas of the site consist mainly of reed canary grass, creeping buttercup and a few small alders. It should be noted, that the applicant currently has a vested King County project for a 34-lot subdivision at this site. A number of the environmental studies submitted with this application are the same studies submitted with the older King County project. As such, many of these studies contain a cover memo and/or letter addressing any changes based on the changes to the project. I PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Environmental Review Committee Report LUAll:_034, ECfo. PP, V-A, PPUD Page 5 of 24 Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period. B. Mitigation Measures 1. The debris flow mitigation berm shall be constructed as a part of the plat infrastructure installation. The berm shall be inspected and a letter of approval shall be submitted to the City from Otak verifying compliance with the standards specified within their May 17, 2010 Geomorphic and Deberis Flow Analysis. The construction and certification letter shall be received by the Planning Division prior to final plat recording. 2. A final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan including engineering details shall be submitted and approved by City of Renton Project Manager prior to Final Plat approval; this plan shall be made available to the new residence of the McCormick Plat and shall be included as part of the neighborhood Code, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R). 3. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, and the recommendations included in the Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, prepared by Otak, dated May 17, 2010. Including but not limited to: a. The installation of a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. b. A 25-foot buffer should be established from the southeastern slope. c. If soil is deposited into the buffer via landslides and/or soil movement, the soil should be removed within a few weeks to keep the buffers free to "catch" more soil in the future. d. All foundations shall be supported on at least 2 feet of structural fill, non individual footings should be used, and foundations should be designed to span 10-feet unsupported. 4. The vehicle storage area/parking area located on the southern portion of the site shall be decommissioned and the area shall be re-vegetated to the minimum amount necessary to prevent erosion; this re-vegetation shall be included in the final mitigation and monitoring plan for stream buffer reduction. The final mitigation and monitoring plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department Project Manager for review and approval prior to final plat recording. 5. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated August 12, 2011. 6. Construction fencing and silt fencing shall be placed along the buffer (or reduced buffer) of the stream and wetlands during construction. During construction of the debris flow mitigation berm, the fencing may be moved south to provide space to construct the berm within the buffer area. 7. Additional downstream analysis shall be conducted to analyze the impacts of stormwater runoff on Ron Regis Park and any impacts to the Park shall be mitigated. This analysis can be included in the Drainage Report submitted with the construction permit application. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commun. MCCORMICK PIA T ~canomic Development nmento/ Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Report of August 22, 2011 Page 6 of 24 C. 8. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton Planning Division, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. 9. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010, that was submitted with the project application and provided a right turn pocket along SR-169 for safe access to the subject site. 10. The applicant shall pay the Traffic Impact/Mitigation Fee as required at the time of Final Plat recording, Construction Permit, or Building Permit based on the codes in place at that time. 11. The owner of the Valley View Mobile Home Park ("owner") voluntarily agrees and shall pay the relocation cost of the homeowners within the Valley View Mobile Home Park subject to the following conditions: a. The relocation assistance program currently administered by the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program") must exist at the time notice of closure ofthe Park is provided by the Owner; b. Assistance shall be provided to all homeowners that reside within Valley View Mobile Home Park at the time of park closure notice and meet the State Relocation Assistance Program income requirements for eligibility, however those homeowners whom qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the homeowners qualification; c. The Owner will pay up to $7,500 for a single-section home and $12,000 for a multi- section home, the funds would be paid only those relocation cost for which the State Relocation Assistance Program provides reimbursement, including but not limited to removal and reattachment of attached awnings, decks, and stairs; prep for transport; moving the home; permits; hook-ups to all utilities; rental of moving equipment; repair of damage caused during transport; or demolition and a down payment for another manufactured home; and d. The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. 12. Information shall be posted on site visible to the residents notifying them of any land use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. The notice shall be posted prior to submittal to the City or the same day as the submittal. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Cover Sheet -Neighborhood Map Preliminary Plat Map TESC and Tree Removal Plan Conceptual Site Plan Site Stream buffer Sections Conceptual Road and Site Section Conceptual Pond and Berm Section ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commun MCCORMICK PLAT :conomic Development Report of August 22, 2011 Slope Analysis Existing Conditions McCormick Plat Conceptual Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan Planting Sheet Mitigation Plan Notes Sheet Conceptual Landscape Plan Conceptual Landscape Plan Notes and Details Property Services Comments nmentaf Review Committee Report LUA11-{)34, ECF, PP, V·A,J~PUD Page 7 of 24 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Comments and City's Response D. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant hos adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the prapasal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: With the project application, the applicant submitted a Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, which was accompanied by a cover letter dated October 8, 2010. The subject property contains four distinct topographic features; the developed existing Mobile Home Park, the south slope, the southeast slope, and the "dog leg" ravine. The developed area is located at the mouth of a ravine, and the overall topography is that of a relatively gentle-to-moderate slope extending to the northwest towards the Cedar River. The Geotechnical report indicates that the site elevations within the developed portions of the mobile home park range from about elevation 180 feet at the southeast corner down to about elevation 120 feet over a southeast-to-northwest diagonal distance of about 550 lineal feet, which is about a grade of 9 to 10 percent. The report further indicates that the grades within the developed portions of the site vary based on past grading completed to develop the interior road, mobile home pads and various facility building sites. According to this report, the Valley View Mobile Home Park has been located at this site nearly 50 years. In this time, grading was done; fill was placed at the top of the slope and some excavation done at the bottom to install an ecology block wall. The site is bounded by steep slopes on the south and southeast sides, these areas have been identified on City of Renton critical areas maps as Landslide Hazard and Erosion Hazard areas. The critical areas maps indicated that the Hazards associated with landslides and erosion cover the entire site including the developed portions of the site with the milder slopes. The steep slope at the southeast corner of the site, which represents the south flank of the ravine mouth, ranges from an approximate elevation of 230 feet to the toe-of-slope which has elevations ranging from 160 to 180 feet, with an average grade of about 100 percent. The Geotechnical report indicates that some grading had been conducted in the past along the southeastern slope because a concrete-block wall is located at the base. Similarly, the steep slope adjacent to the south side of the mobile home park extends above the creek and is well over 100 feet high and has an average grade of about 100 percent. Pursuant to the provided geotechnical report, the "dog leg" portion of the site extends about another 925 feet southwards and upslope of the main mobile home park site. The extension follows an existing ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commur. MCCORMICK PIA T Report of August 22, 2011 ":conomic Development nmental Review Committee Report LUA11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 8 of 24 creek and a portion of this area has been graded to a uniform surface. The "dog leg" slopes gently-to- moderately down to the developed portion of the site with elevations ranging from about 310 feet at the southernmost property line down to an elevation of 180 feet where the "dog leg" meets the existing mobile home park. The Geologic Map of King County indicated that the site and area above the site is underlain by five . basic soils: 1) glacial till, 2) advanced outwash sand and gravel, 3) mostly silt, but some sand soils, deposited thousands of years before the last glacial advance into the Puget Sound, 4) mass wastage deposits that eroded or sloughed from the steep slopes and ravine areas above the site, and, S) soils deposited as alluvium from the Cedar River. Pursuant to the Geotech Consultants, the mass wastage mateTial was derived from erosion and landslides occurring in the ravine. Fourteen test pits were excavated by Geotech Consultants to determine subsurface site conditions. Groundwater seepage was observed in all but four test pits, ranging in depth from 2.5 feet below surface to 11.5 feet below surface. The geotechnical report concluded that groundwater could be encountered in most areas during most of the year. Landslide Hazards The provided Geotechnical report indicated that many landslides were observed within the narrow ravine area above the site. The major area that this occurred is the interface of the outwash sand and gravel and underlying Pre-Fraser soils. This is because groundwater can easily flow through the outwash soil, but cannot continue downward because of the Pre-Fraser soils, which are much less pervious. The landsliding and erosion in the area has left numerous hard silt "benches" sitting about 10 to 20 feet above the base ofthe creek within 150 lineal feet ofthe south "dog leg" property line. Furthermore, the Geotech Consultants observed one such landslide just upslope, to the east of the existing water well, at the south end of the "dog leg" area. The Geotech Consultants indicated this landslide visually appeared to be about 50 feet wide by 100 feet long and about 5 feet deep. The consultants indicated that about half of the total volume of landslide soil and debris remain on the face of the slide as an elongated mound of loose, disturbed material. However, a recent landslide along the bottom of this mound suggests that future sloughing off the mound will occur. Runout of this area would likely extend to the creek bed. Shallow landslides have occurred in the past on the steep south slope. Currently, this slope is scattered with big leaf maple trees that are bowed and appeared to have moved downslope in the past. There was no observation of recent landsliding, or deep-seated landsliding, on the steep southeast and south slopes. In 1990, a landslide event occurred in the ravine during a large rain event that caused some flooding and soil deposition in the mobile home park. During review of the, vested King County McCormick Plat (not a part of the comment period for the subject submittal) a resident of Valley View Mobile Home Park (Clyde Arnold and others) provided public comment indicating that this landslide resulted in flooding and a $100,000 cost to the applicant, Mr. McCormick, for cleanup and removal of the debris. The provided Geotechnical report indicated that at least 200 cubic yards of soil and debris, or more, were trucked to a vacant parcel adjacent to the subject parcel. This debris was identified as a number of elongated piles of loose fill extending north south across this parcel. The provided Geotechnical report concludes that the construction of the proposed development is suitable from a geotechnical engineering standpoint, but several significant issues have to be considered. These issues include the potential for soil movement from adjacent steep slopes, some of ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commun MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 :conomic Development nmenta/ Review Committee Report LUAll-034, £CF, PP, V-~, PPUD Page 9 of 24 which could block the existing creek, the potential for a soil moving onto the slope from the creek area in and above the southeast "dog leg" of the property, and the potential for seismic liquefaction of the upper soils in the area of the proposed development. There are clear indications that landsliding occurs in the ravine that includes the southeastern "dog leg" of the property and the area to the south of the "dog leg". There are indications of soil movement on the steep slope that is south of the creek, on the main portion of the site. The creek that originates south of the "dog leg" could potentially become blocked by a landslide in and south ofthe "dog leg", and to a lesser extent from potential soil movement on the steep southern slope. The Geotech Consultants recommend (based on the 1990 event in the subject area), to protect future residences from landslide hazards, a debris flow mitigation berm would be needed at the northern edge of the stream buffer to divert water and/or soil within the buffer toward the western side of the site in the case of a landslide event. It is possible, although very unlikely, that a similar landslide could block the entire ravine soil, and that the entire soil mass could be transported by the creek to the southeastern side of the proposed development. The Geotech Consultants determined that the likelihood ofthis occurring is remote, although, they believe that the new development needs to be protected against the potential of this event. As such, they recommend that the easternmost 100 feet of the soil berm, that is recommended to be on the northern side ofthe 60-foot stream buffer, be constructed 5 feet tall and because the landslide soil would become less thick as it moved to the west; the Geotech Consultants believe that the berm can be constructed 1 foot shorter for every 50 feet west of the eastern 100-foot area to a minimum of a 2 feet tall. The 2-foot berm should be constructed along the entire northern side of the stream buffer. The 2-foot berm would be needed to divert any water from the creek that may have been rerouted during a landslide event. Furthermore, the Geotech Consultants recommend that a 25-foot buffer be established from the southeastern slope, for protection of the proposed development from landslide hazards. Landslide Hazards -King County Review and Secondary Review Under review of the vested King County McCormick Plat, on June 9, 2008 King County requested additional information from the applicant including but not limited to a specific geotechnical evaluation ofthe debris flow risk associated with an emergency overflow event or embankment breach in the pond at the head of the ravine. King County requested, if appropriate, additional mitigation measures to minimize the hazard from these and other low probability, high hazards events. Geotech Consultants, Inc., provided a response letter dated September 9, 2008, which indicated that the debris flow mitigation berm would provide protection against a debris flow that could begin well upslope of the berm. Their analysis of the proposed berm concluded that the berm would provided adequate life safety for the inhabitants of the proposed subdivision if a 1-in-100 years precipitation event, or higher, were to occur. Although, if a catastrophic event were to occur that included the failure of the upslope detention pond, the berm may be overtaken. The response letter states that the only scenario for the failure of the pond would involve a very significant earthquake during or following and extreme precipitation event and because the likelihood of two significant events occurring together is extremely low they believe that designing the berm for the possibility of the failure of the upper detention pond is not warranted for the project. During review of the vested King County McCormick Plat, staff requested an independent secondary review by a City approved geotechnical consultant be conducted at the applicant's expense. This secondary independent evaluation of the landslide and erosion hazards provided recommendations for ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commun MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 ·conomic Development nmental Review Committee Report WAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 10 of 24 mitigation that would best reduce the potential risk to human life and safety and evaluate the proposed mitigation in the report provided by Geotech Consultants, Inc, dated April 1, 2008 and the responses included in the September 9, 2008 response letter. Kleinfelder conducted a Technical Peer Review of the provided Geotechnical report, dated April 17, 2009 and associated geotechnical drawings and letters. Kleinfelder addressed two main geotechnical issues in their peer review; landslides and the adequacy of the soil berm for life safety and liquefaction potential during an earthquake event. Kleinfelder concluded that landslides and liquefaction are the two main geotechnical hazards at the site. They concur the mitigation measures discussed for each issue appear to be reasonable and within the standard of practice. However, Kleinfelder recommended that more information should be provided on the rational for the size and location of the debris flow mitigation berm. It was Kleinfelder's opinion that the debris flow mitigation berm, as originally designed, was not the best and most effective way to mitigate the potential hazards for future residences of the McCormick Plat. Furthermore, Kleinfelder concluded that additional analysis may be needed to estimate the debris flow volume, type of debris flow, density, kind and size of debris flow material, geometry of the blocked channel area, and velocity of the debris flow. Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis Based on Kleinfelder's recommendations, the applicant conducted a Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, dated May 17, 2010 prepared by Otak. The purpose of the geomorphic investigation was to provide insight into the potential impacts on hillslope and stream channel stability if overtopping and overflow of the detention basin spillway located at the upstream extent of the ravine "dog leg" was to occur. The report included qualitative assessments regarding sediment production, flow dynamics, sediment transport capacity, and channel forming processes. Otak provided conclusions and mitigation considerations within their analysis. Otak concluded that the worst-case event would be the failure of the detention basin (pond} located at the top of the ravine (south end of the "dog leg"} in combination with a 100-year rainfall event, resulting in a flow of 15.8 cfs in the ravine. Furthermore, Otak concluded that future landslide activity will occur in the ravine, that sediment introduced from colluvial processes would likely be metered out over many years, and soil deposition would occur in the area used for overflow parking near the bottom ofthe ravine. Otack's analysis concluded that under the worst-case scenario, 749 to 2,323 cubic yards of sediment could be delivered to the downstream reach during debris flow and active landslide conditions. Finally, Otak provided specific standards to be utilized when development the debris flow berm to ensure the highest safety standards for the new residences of the proposed subdivision. Moreover, the berm should be 5-feet high and armored in the area at the base of the ravine, the berm should be located on the north side of the stream to insure sufficient storage for debris, and the berm can taper in height over a length of 100-feet to a minimum height of 2 feet for the remainder of the distance of the slope to Wetland A. The proposed mitigation berm is vital to the safety of the citizens that would inhabit this development, as such staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the debris flow mitigation berm be constructed and completed as a part of the infrastructure installation. The berm shall be inspected and a letter of approval shall be submitted to the City from Otak verifying compliance with the standards specified within their May 17, 2010 Geomorphic and Deberis Flow Analysis. The construction and certification letter shall be received prior to final plat recording. Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commun. MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 ':conomic Development nmental Review Committee Report LUA11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 11 of 24 King County's letter dated June 9, 2008 also requested a conceptual "debris flow mitigation area maintenance plan" for cleaning or repairs after a debris flow event. The City of Renton received a Conceptual Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan on November 17, 2008, which addresses maintenance, ownership, access, and financial responsibilities. The mitigation plan was originally designed around the old plat layout and should be updated to reflect the new proposed plat plan and the debris volumes identified in the Otak report. Staff recommends as a mitigation measure, that a final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan including engineering details be submitted and approved by City of Renton Project Manager prior to Final Plat approval, this plan shall be made available to the new residence of the McCormick Plat and shall be included as part of the neighborhood CC&Rs. The saturated, alluvial soils consisting of silty sand, sand, and sandy silt have been demonstrated to have a moderate to potentially high potential for liquefaction during a large earthquake event. As such, the April 1, 2008 Geotechnical report also includes recommendations for foundations construction and footings for the proposed structures to be built on the subject site. The report also includes recommendations for excavation and grading, lowest building floors, structural fill, and foundation drains. Due to the potential hazards onsite Staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, and the recommendations included in the Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, prepared by Otak, dated May 17, 2010. Due to the erosion potential of the subject site, staff recommends a mitigation measure that Temporary Erosion Control measures be installed and maintained in accordance with the latest Department of Ecology Standards with reports submitted weekly from a Certified Erosion Control Technician and a construction mitigation plan shall be submitted to the Plan Review Project Manager. Mitigation Measures: 1. The debris flow mitigation berm shall be constructed as a part of the plat infrastructure installation. The berm shall be inspected and a letter of approval shall be submitted to the City from Otak verifying compliance with the standards specified within their May 17, 2010 Geomorphic and Deberis Flow Analysis. The construction and certification letter shall be received by the Planning Division prior to final plat recording. 2. A final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan including engineering details shall be submitted and approved by City of Renton Project Manager prior to Final Plat approval; this plan shall be made available to the new residence of the McCormick Plat and shall be included as part of the neighborhood Code, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R). 3. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, and the recommendations included in the Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, prepared by Otak, dated May 17, 2010. Including but not limited to: a. The installation of a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. b. A 25-foot buffer should be established from the southeastern slope. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commun, MCCORMICK PIA T Report of August 22, 2011 :conomic Development l ,mental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 12 of 24 c. If soil is deposited into the buffer via landslides and/or soil movement, the soil should be removed within a few weeks to keep the buffers free to "catch" more soil in the future. d. All foundations shall be supported on at least 2 feet of structural fill, non individual footings should be used, and foundations should be designed to span 10-feet unsupported. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: The applicant submitted with the application a Critical Areas Report and a Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated April 12, 2011 and August 12, 2011 respectively. This report and the City of Renton critical areas maps indicated that a stream flows through the site. The provided report also indentified two wetlands located on the subject parcel, both identified as Category 2 wetlands. Wetlands The first wetland, identified as "Wetland A" herein, is located at the toe of the slope along the south side of the site and is bisected by the stream. A small portion of the wetland extends north of the stream in an old excavated low point. A foundation was identified along the north edge of the wetland in this area. Wetland A consists of a slope-type wetland where groundwater is discharging onto the surface and is 2,803 square feet in size. The second wetland, identified as "Wetland B" herein, is located along the northeast corner of the site. Wetland B consists of a salmon berry and blackberry dominated scrub-shrub slope type wetland and is 3,955 square feet. Category 2 wetlands require a SO-foot buffer. The SO-foot buffer is shown to be retained on the plat plan, and the only impacts anticipated for both Wetland A and Wetland B, is the construction of a pedestrian trail through their buffers. Stream The submitted Critical Areas Report also identified a single intermittent stream that extends from the uplands areas, through the south "dog leg" and downstream to the developed portion of the site. The stream varies in width but is generally less than 5 feet wide. The creek bed becomes deeply incised as the stream enters the "dog leg" portion of the site. Once the creek reaches the developed portion of the site, the creek is routed into a narrow ditch, then to an existing half-round PVC pipe that extends westward along the toe of the steep south slope. The half-round pipe stops at the westerly edge of the subject parcel and is then carried in a shallow ditch along the west property line. The creek then drains into a culvert under Maple Valley Highway and eventually discharges into the Cedar River. Sewall Wetland Consulting indicated that it does not appear to be feasible for fish to utilize this stream channel. The subject stream was reviewed during Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. study for the Cedar River Trail (a report dated October 15, 1996) and classified as a Class 3 stream. The stream was also designated as a Type N stream by Bill Kershke in his review, and Sewall Wetland consulting concurs with Mr. Kershke's determination. Sewall Wetland Consultant's review has revealed that the subject stream is intermittent and lacking any fish use. The typical buffer required for a Class 3 stream is 75 feet measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). Stream Buffer Reduction ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commur. MCCORMICK Pl.AT Report of August 22, 2011 1=conomic Development nmentaf Review Committee Report WAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 13 of 24 The applicant has proposed to reduce the 75-foot stream buffer to 60 feet as permitted, if compliance with RMC 4-3-0SOL.5.c can be met. Sewall Wetland consultants identified that the area where buffer reduction is proposed, is associated with a current site condition of asphalt mobile home pads. In addition to buffer reduction along the south side of the site where the exiting mobile homes are located, the applicant has proposed buffer reduction adjacent to the proposed storm pond. The provided stream report did not identify the need for this buffer reduction; however an e-mail received from Greg Diener on August 15, 2011 indicated that the buffer reduction was originally proposed because of a 15-foot building setback. Based on the provided e-mail, the buffer reduction is not necessary for this portion of the stream however temporary impact to the outer 15 feet of the buffer are anticipated for the construction of the detention pond. Based on the lack of need for the buffer reduction near the storm pond staff recommends denial of a buffer reduction adjacent to the proposed storm pond, but recommends approval of the temporary construction impacts with a native vegetation re- planting plan. Page 11 of the provided Critical Areas study addressed each criterion for buffer reduction included in RMC 4-3-0SOL.5.c, the following table identifies the findings for the requested stream buffer reduction on the south edge of the site: RMC 4-3-0SOL.5.c Reduction of Buffer Width: April 12, 2011 Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study Conclusions, Sewall Wetland Consulting Inc. (a) (2) The slope is Jess than 15% and the (2) The buffer can be enhanced with native applicant is proposing to plant native trees vegetation and removal of non-native species and shrubs in the reduced buffer area. per criteria in subsection LSc(iv)(c) of this (3) The existing functions of the buffer in the Section, and has less than fifteen percent (15%) reduced area are close to none. The stream is slopes; and located in a Y, culvert. Nearly all the surface next to the stream is impervious pavement, (3) The width reduction will not reduce stream concrete slabs, mobile homes and small or Jake functions, including those of patches of grass. A few trees exist that can anadromous fish or nonfish habitat; and provide some woody debris to the channel, but these are of minimal value as the channel is artificial and provides no habitat in this area. (4) The width reduction will not degrade The function ofthe buffer in the existing state riparian habitat; and have no bearing on its width since it is essentially completely developed. A reduced (S) No direct or indirect, short-term or long-buffer with native plantings including trees term, adverse impacts to regulated water and shrubs would provide shade, keeping bodies, as determined by the City, will result water cool to benefit downstream fish habitat from a regulated activity. The City's and would provide a source of organic debris determination shall be based on specific site to benefit riparian insect life and provide a studies by recognized experts, pursuant to habitat travel corridor. subsection F3 of this section and RMC (4) As described above under subsection (3), ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commun. MCCORMICK PIA T Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development (c) The project includes a buffer enhancement plan using native vegetation and substantiates that the enhanced area will be equal to or improve the functional attributes ofthe buffer; or in the case of existing developed sites where a natural buffer is not possible, the proposal includes on-or off-site riparian/lakeshore or aquatic enhancement proportionate to its project specific or cumulative impact on shoreline ecological functions; and (d) The proposal will result in, at minimum, no net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and ERC Reportll-034.doc 1nmental Review Committee Report WAll-034, £CF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 14 of 24 there is no riparian habitat in this area currently. The restored 60-foot buffer will restore habitat. (5) No impacts to the channel would occur. All development is proposed down slope and draining away from the stream. The only work in and around the stream is the restoration of its buffer. The proposed enhancement and removal of impervious surface would improve the function of the northern buffer area substantially as outlined previously. The applicant has proposed a mitigation plan which includes enhancement of the buffer in the area that has been degraded in the past from use as a mobile home park. The areas where there is existing pavement and other impervious surfaces will be removed and then replanted with a mix of native trees and shrubs. The proposed reduced and enhanced buffer would prnvide better protection to the stream than the current condition. As previously described, the vegetation community would be enhanced within this buffer, increasing the density of woody plants, increasing shade and organic imputes to the buffer, creating habitat for wildlife and macro invertebrates, which in turn improve downstream fish habitat. The mitigation area consist of riparian and wetland buffer degraded from the historic use as well as a vegetation community comprised of a mix of invasive species. This area provides few of the recognized function of riparian buffers. The lack of woody vegetation reduces numerous functions in the riparian area including: lack of shading, source of woody debris recruitment, structure for riparian wildlife for food, denning and shelter, thermal cover for riparian wildlife, and a lack of durable woody plants with root systems that hold, protect and bind the stream bank in place. Comparing qualitatively and functional attributes of this area before, as well as after the enhancement with a mix of woody tree City of Renton Deportment of Commun, MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 ':conomic Development (e) The proposal does not result in increased flood hazard risk; and (f) The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905. nmental Review Committee Report WAH-034, £CF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 15 of 24 ---- and shrub species, reveals all functions would be increased. The proposal would not increase the flood hazard risk on the site, and in fact helps mitigate risk with the debris flow berm. In addition the removal of the impervious surface increases flood area roughness as well as provides and area for storage and infiltration of potential flood waters. The proposed use of enhanced buffers for reduction in width is a standard format that has been backed by many studies and is considered the "best available science". The reduced width has been compensated for through restoration and enhancement to make up for the lost function due to a reduction in width. The applicant has provided a mitigation plan which depicts the buffer enhancement plan, and maintenance and monitoring. Conceptually the mitigation plan appears acceptable; however, many details of the plan are missing to gain compliance with RMC 4-8-120. As such, staff recommends approval of the proposed buffer reduction for the area located adjacent to Road B (south) pursuant to the submittal of a detailed stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan that complies with the criteria included in RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 3-4-050. Debris Flow Berm in Stream Buffer In addition to the stream buffer reduction the applicant has proposed to place the debris flow mitigation berm within the northern boundary of the stream buffer. The provided critical areas report indicates that the existing conditions of the stream buffer is highly degraded and lacks typical buffer functions for a number of reasons, as discussed above. The report concludes that the rocked portion of the buffer would not create any new impacts or degrade the buffer from its existing condition. The reduction in buffer and the placement of the berm are necessary for the proposed plat layout to function with a looped road. Water Line is Stream Buffer Beyond the proposed buffer reduction and berm placement within the buffer the applicant is requesting a variance to construct a water line through the stream buffer. This would be a temporary buffer impact of approximately 1,000 square feet of stream buffer during the construction of the water line. Based on the existing utilities in the area, the applicant contends there is no other location where this water connection can be made. The applicant has proposed to complete the construction work in the dry season and re-plant the area with native vegetation. This subject work would require a Hydraulic Permit Approval (HPA), and the applicant intends to follow all the requirements anticipated as a part of the HPA. The provided ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commun MCCORMICK Pl.AT Report of August 22, 2011 conomic Development 1mental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, £CF, PP, V-A, PPUD_ Page 16 of 24 Critical Areas Report concluded that the extension of the water line and the restoration of the buffer would not negatively impact the waterbody in any way. Pedestrian Trail Included as a part ofthe proposal, the applicant has provided a pedestrian trail system throughout the development. This trail system creates a loop around the site, utilizing the top of the debris flow mitigation berm located in the stream buffer and a portion of the trail is located in the buffer of both Wetland A and B. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-0SOC.7.a trails are permitted in stream and wetland buffers provided the trail is located in the outer 25% of the buffer, enhancement of the buffer area is provided, the trail width is equal to or less than 12 feet in width, and the trail is constructed of permeable materials. The provided mitigation plan identifies buffer enhancement plantings for Wetland A and Bin addition to enhancement for the stream buffer. However, the material to be used for trail construction was not provided with the application. As such, staff recommends approval of the trail within both the stream buffer and the wetland based on the criteria in RMC 4-3-0SOC.7.a subject approval of the trail surface materials. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Comments On July 23, 2011 staff received comments from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division. Many comments requested clarification about project details, however additional concerns were noted. The Muckleshoot's noted the debris flow mitigation berm location within the stream buffer and the potential for this berm to reduce the lateral movements of the stream. Furthermore, a portion of the stream is located within existing half culverts, and the Muckelshoot's recommend the removal of the cu Ivers as a part of the project to restore the stream to a more natural condition. In addition to the half culverts, under current conditions there is a gravel storage/parking lot located in the "dog leg" section of the site. The Muckelshoot's comments recommend this parking area be decommissioned and replanted, as this facility would no longer be needed as a part of the proposed project. Based on the impacts anticipated to the stream through the buffer reduction and the including of a berm in the stream buffer staff concurs with the Muckelshoot's recommendations to decommission the vehicle parking area. As such, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the vehicle storage area/parking area located on the southern portion of the site be decommissioned and e- vegetated to prevent additional erosion impacts. Due to the potential stream impacts on site, Staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated August 12, 2011. Mitigation Measures: 1. The vehicle storage area/parking area located on the southern portion of the site shall be decommissioned and the area shall be re-vegetated to the minimum amount necessary to prevent erosion; this re-vegetation shall be included in the final mitigation and monitoring plan for stream buffer reduction. The final mitigation and monitoring plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department Project Manager for review and approval prior to final plat recording. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commun MCCORMICK PlA T Economic Development nmental Review Committee Report L/JA11-034, ECF, PP, V:A, PPUD . Report of August 22, 2011 Page 17 of 24 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated August 12, 2011. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations b. Storm Water Impacts: The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report ("Drainage Report") with the project application, prepared by Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, dated March 15, 2011. The Drainage Report includes preliminary analysis of existing site conditions and addresses the presence of the stream, wetlands, and steep slopes. Pursuant to the provided report, under current conditions, the stream, a drainage ditch that runs along the south side of SR-169, and a 12- inch culvert and catch basin at the SR-169 entrance are the only storm drainage structures onsite. For storm water detention and water quality treatment, the applicant has proposed a detention/wet pond to be located in a separate tract in the northwest corner of the site. The Drainage Report indicates that runoff from roof drains, yards, and driveways would be collected and conveyed to a drainage system under the proposed roads that would convey stormwater to the proposed detention/wet pond. The pond is proposed to be a combined detention and water quality pond, with permanent storage in the bottom of the pond, and live flow control storage above the dead storage. The pond has been designed to provided Level 2 flow control and Basic water quality treatment. The proposed design of the detention pond would provide at least 59,500 cubic feet of storage. The detention facility would release the storm water to its natural discharge location at the northwest corner of the site to the south roadside ditch of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169). The developed site would have approximately 2.82 acres of impervious surface and 1.66 acres of landscaped and planed area (excluding stream buffers and other critical areas). The Drainage Report identifies that the conveyance system proposed for the development would be designed to convey the 25-year peak flows and checked for flooding conditions at the 100-year event per King County drainage standards. The applicant proposed to provide erosion and sedimentation control by utilizing Best Management Practices (BMPs) from the King County Stormwater Management Manual. BMPs proposed to be utilized included sediment pond(s) and/or trap(s), silt fencing, construction safety fencing, interceptor v-ditches, rock check dams, plastic sheeting of stockpiles, straw mulch, hydro- seeding, catch basin protection, and rocked construction entrances, etc. Furthermore, the applicant has proposed to utilize the detention/wet pond as a temporary erosion and sediment control pond during construction. BMPs should be helpful in mitigating the potential impacts of erosion and sedimentation however; the proposed detention pond and berm are both located within the stream buffer and/or close proximity to the stream buffer. Due to the potential for impacts to the stream and wetlands as a result of construction actives, staff recommends a mitigation measure that construction fencing and silt fencing be placed along the buffer (or reduced buffer) of the stream and wetlands during construction. The Drainage Report addressed both upstream and downstream runoff analysis. Pursuant to the provided report the drainage pattern for the upstream portion would remain the same under the proposed developed condition. Offsite runoff would be conveyed around the site to the roadside ditch along the south side of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169). The outfall of the proposed ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commur, MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 ~canomic Development ,mental Review Committee Report __ LUAll_--034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 18 of 24 detention pond would discharge into the SR-169 south side ditch near the northwest corner of the site. Then near the west property line of the site, where the stream joins SR-169, the discharged stormwater runoff is proposed to enter an existing 36-inch CMP culvert that crosses under the highway and discharges to the wetland area inside the Cedar River Flood plain, located in Cavanaugh Pond Natural Area. Pursuant to the downstream analysis, the 36-inch culvert has a slightly reversed slope and is nearly buried by sediment. However, the Drainage Report concludes that if the 36-inch culvert is under capacity, the SR-169 south ditch would continue to drain to the west and either crosses under SR-169 northerly at the next downstream culverts or continue in the ditch and directly discharged into the Cedar River near the bridge. The Drainage Report concludes the proposed development would not create negative effect to the downstream drainage system and proposes to remove the sediment around the inlet of the 36-inch CMP culvert and provided rip rap around the inlet, to improve the sediment problem. However, once the 36-inch culvert is improved the runoff directly discharges into Cavanaugh Pond, a King County Park, and not directly into the Cedar River, furthermore if runoff bypasses this culvert the drainage report has indicated that stormwater would cross Maple Valley Highway further to the west. To the west is the City of Renton Park, Ron Regis, if stormwater is discharged directly into Ron Regis Park, it could have impacts on the City's Park. Because of this unique situation, there may be additional impact to the City's park as a result of stormwater discharge at this location. As such, staff recommends as a mitigation measure, that additional downstream analysis is conducted to analyze the impacts of stormwater runoff on Ron Regis Park and any impacts to the Park shall be mitigated. This analysis can be included in the Drainage Report submitted with the construction permit application. Mitigation Measures: 1. Construction fencing and silt fencing shall be placed along the buffer (or reduced buffer) of the stream and wetlands during construction. During construction of the debris flow mitigation berm, the fencing may be moved south to provide space to construct the berm within the buffer area. 2. Additional downstream analysis shall be conducted to analyze the impacts of stormwater runoff on Ron Regis Park and any impacts to the Park shall be mitigated. This analysis can be included in the Drainage Report submitted with the construction permit application. Nexus: SEPA Regulations 3. Parks and Recreation Impacts: The proposed development would reduce the number of housing units at the subject site. As such the impacts on parks may also be reduced as a result ofthis change. Based on the exiting number of units the proposed project would not be subject to mitigation fees for Parks. However, the City is currently amending the SEPA based mitigation fee to a GMA based impact fee_ The applicant shall be required to pay any fees in place at the time of Final Plat, Construction Permit, or Building Permit, based on the codes in place at the time. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 4. Historic and Cultural Preservation Impacts: Pursuant to the Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008. The Cedar River historically flowed up against the southern slopes of the site. Since approximately 13,000 years ago, the Cedar River has meandered downstream ERC Repartll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commu, MCCORMICK PIA T Report of August 22, 2011 ':conomic Development nmental Review Committee Report WAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 19 of 24 in the Renton-Maple Valley area across the width of the river valley. Furthermore, developments within the vicinity of the Cedar River are more likely to be sites where significant historic and/or cultural resources would be found, and the subject development has indicated that site grading would be conducted. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure that requires the applicant and/or developer to stop work and immediately notify the City of Renton Planning Division, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation if any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found. Mitigation Measures: If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton Planning Division, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 5. Transportation Impacts: The applicant submitted with the project application packet a Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010. This analysis concludes that the McCormick Plat would result in an estimated net increase of 6 PM peak hour trips, 5 AM peak hour trips and an overall increase in 89 trips. The site is bordered by SR-169 on the north; this road has a posted speed limit of 50 mph. The school bus stop for Tiffany Park Elementary, Nelsen Middle School and/or Lindbergh High School is located in a bus pullout area on the south side of 5R-169 adjacent to the east side of the existing Valley View Mobile Home Park driveway. Furthermore, four accidents were recorded within approximately 1,000 feet ofthe Valley View Mobile Home Park driveway for the 3-year period ending in April 30, 2010. All four accidents were single vehicle accidents, and the TraffEx report concludes that there are no safety issues with the proposed site access to SR 169. The Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) current Design Manual was used to determine if the subject projected traffic volumes at the intersection of the site's access point warrant a right turn Jane or pocket on SR-169. The WSDOT Design Manual recommends a right turn pocket or taper on SR 169 at the site access. Due to the potential traffic impacts of the subject project, staff recommends as a mitigation measures that the applicant be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010, that was submitted with the project application and provided a right turn pocket along SR-169 for safe access to the subject site. Furthermore traffic impacts to City streets are expected due to the additional trips created as a result of the proposed development. As such, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant pay a Traffic Impact/Mitigation Fee in place at the time of Final Plat recording. Current fee structure includes a $75.00 per new trip, based on the proposal this fee would equate to $6,675.00 (89 trips x $75.00 = $6,675.00). Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010, that was submitted with the project application and provided a right turn pocket along SR-169 for safe access to the subject site. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commu1 MCCORMICK PIA T Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development mmental Review Committee Report LUA_ll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUCJ Page 20 of 24 2. The applicant shall pay the Traffic Impact/Mitigation Fee as required at the time of Final Plat recording, Construction Permit, or Building Permit based on the codes in place at that time. Nexus: SEPA, Transportation Mitigation Fee Ordinance No. 3100., GMA 6. Fire & Police Impacts: The proposed development would reduce the number of housing units at the subject site. As such the impacts on Fire and Police may also be reduced as a result ofthis change. Based on the exiting number of units the proposed project would not be subject to mitigation fees for Fire. However, the City is currently amending the SEPA based mitigation fees to a GMA based impact fee. The applicant shall be required to pay any fees in place at the time of Final Plat, Construction Permit, or Building Permit, based on the codes in place at the time. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 7. Housing Impacts: The existing development (Valley View Mobile Home Park) consists of approximately 40 mobile homes and 1 existing duplex, which equals 42 dwelling units that provide housing to the low- income residence of the City of Renton. The applicant has proposed to remove all 42 dwelling units to develop the McCormick Plat. The new residential development proposal would provide 34 single- family residential units, which are anticipated to provide housing for the middle-income housing bracket. This proposed development would result in a potential loss of affordable housing in the Renton community by eliminating approximately 42 existing manufactured homes spaces and replacing them with 34 new single-family residential lots; an actual net loss of 10 dwelling units. City policies in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan ensure that housing exists for all economic segments of Renton's populations. The project impacts existing affordable housing in Renton, including a loss of affordable manufactured and mobile home units and direct impacts to the residents currently living at Valley View Mobile Home Park as such, mitigation should be provided. Currently the State of Washington provides financial assistance to manufactured home owners who must relocate due to redevelopment/park closure. However, this program requires each homeowner to qualify for reimbursement and the residents are required to fund their own relocation and then apply to the State for reimbursement. Finding the available funds to relocate and waiting for approval and reimbursement from the State is a hardship in itself for the low-income residence located at the Valley View Mobile Home Park. Pursuant to a Memorandum issued by the State Relocation Assistance Program, from February of 2010, a large number of park closures are causing delay in reimbursement for relocation expenses to eligib.le applicants. The State proclaims, in this Memo, that they are unable to estimate how long the reimbursement process will take due to the fluctuation of the revenue source. However, the state will reimburse qualified homeowners up to $7,500 for a single-section home and $12,000 for a multi-section home, there is no State reimbursement for owners of recreational vehicles, park models, and travel trailers. During the comment period for the subject project, many phone calls and personal visits from residents or mobile home owners living at the site were fielded by staff. However, these comments are unofficial, as they are not in writing, but the conversations lead staff to believe that re-location assistance is necessary for the residents located in Valley View. On August 2, 2011 a letter was received from Courtney Kaylor with McCullough Hill Leary, PS the legal representation for Mr. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commu, MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 ':conomic Development nmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, £CF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 21 of 24 McCormick. This letter represented the above situation with State reimbursement and the need to provided re-location assistance to the residence at Valley View Mobile Home Park. Included in this letter was Mr. McCormick agreement to a mitigation measure to mitigate for the loss of affordable housing. Mr. McCormick ("owner") voluntary agreed to pay the relocation cost of the homeowners within the Valley View Mobile Home Park subject to the following conditions: 1. The relocation assistance program currently administered by the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program") must exist at the time notice of closure of the Park is provided by the Owner; 2. The Homeowners to whom assistance is provided must qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the Homeowners qualification; 3. The Owner will pay only those relocation cost for which the State Relocation Assistance Program provides reimbursement; and 4. The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. The above mitigation measure would provide the residents of Valley View upfront funds to relocate, prior to State reimbursement. In turn, the property owner would receive the reimbursement from the State. The above mitigation measure would assist any residents that qualify for State relocation assistance; however for those who do not qualify would not receive assistance from the landowner. As such staff recommends a mitigation measure for the loss of affordable housing that is similar to the proposed mitigation by the applicant; however, the assistance shall be provided to all residence residing in Valley View at the time of park closure notice. All the residents of Valley View Mobile Home Park are not property owners, as such, they are not automatically notified regarding land use applications for the subject project or permitted activities on the subject site, although, the residents would be directly affected by any changes to the site. As such, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that information be posted on site visible to the residents notifying them of any land use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. Mitigation Measures: 1. The owner of the Valley View Mobile Home Park ("owner") voluntary agreed and shall pay the relocation cost of the homeowners within the Valley View Mobile Home Park subject to the following conditions: a. The relocation assistance program currently administered by the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program") must exist at the time notice of closure of the Park is provided by the Owner; b. Assistance shall be provided to all homeowners that reside within Valley View Mobile Home Park at the time of park closure notice and meet the State Relocation Assistance Program income requirements for eligibility, however those homeowners who qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the homeowners qualification; c. The Owner will pay up to $7,500 for a single-section home and $12,000 for a multi-section home, the funds would be paid only those relocation cost for which the State Relocation Assistance Program provides reimbursement, including but not limited to removal and ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Com mu, MCCORMICK PIA T Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development nmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 22 of 24 reattachment of attached awnings, decks, and stairs; prep for transport; moving the home; permits; hook-ups to all utilities; rental of moving equipment; repair of damage caused during transport; or demolition and a down payment for another manufactured home; and d. The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. 2. Information shall be posted on site visible to the residents notifying them of any land use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. The notice shall be posted prior to submittal to the City or the same day as the submittal. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, City of Renton Comprehensive Plan E. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant." v' Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, September 9, 2011. Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be filed in writing at the City Clerk's office along with the required fee. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton WA 98057. ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information anly, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Communitv & Economic Development MCCORMICK PLAT ·----··-·--. -----" - Report of August 22, 2011 fnvironmenta/ Review Committee Report LU~ll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 23 of 24 of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. The applicant will be required to submit a Final Stream Mitigation Report and Maintenance and Monitoring proposal. In addition, the applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and signage, and providing the City with a site restoration surety device and, later, a maintenance and monitoring surety device. 5. 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. 6. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. 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. Plan Review -Water: 1. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water District. 2. Per the City Fire Marshal, the preliminary 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). lfthe 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. Lateral spacing of fire hydrants is predicated on hydrants being located at street intersections (also capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 gpm) within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along the travel route. 3. All lots on dead end access roadways that exceed 500 feet require fire sprinklers. This applies to lots 14 through 17, and lots 20 through 26, as proposed. 4. The proposed project needs to show how they intend to serve the new development with water service to all of the lots and fire protection. Plan Review -Sanitary Sewer: 1. A sanitary sewer availability certificate is required from the Cedar River Sewer District. 2. The proposed project needs to show how they intend to serve the new development with sanitary sewer service to all of the lots. Plan Review -Street Improvements: 1. Street improvements including curb, gutter, 5' sidewalks, street lighting, and paving with an 8' planter strip all to City standards will be required to be installed across the full frontage of the parcel being developed. 2. The internal streets shall install a minimum of 20' pavement with parking on one side; hence, a 26' pavement section. The road section shall include 5' sidewalks on both sides (in those areas where there are lots on both sides). 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 20 feet wide, fully paved, with a turning radius of 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside. 4. Residential alleys are 16 feet in width. 5. Street lighting will be required per City of Renton standards along the frontage and on the internal ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development MCCORMICK PLAT fnvfronmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V:A, PPl/0 Report of August 22, 2011 Page 24 of 24 [ streets. Private street lighting, including PSE, is not allowed. I I 6. All new electrical, phone, and cable services and lines must be undergrounded. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording the plat. Plan Review -Storm Drainage: 1. The City does not have any records of existing storm drainage facilities in Maple Valley Hwy fronting this parcel. 2. A conceptual drainage plan and report is required to be submitted with the formal application for the plat. A drainage control plan designed per the City of Renton Amendments to the King County Surface Water Manual 2009 is required. 3. The conceptual storm drainage plan needs to address how the roof runoff from the new lots will be handled. 4. SDC fees are $1,012 per lot. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. Plan Review-General: 1. All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals, prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards, by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two of the City of Renton Horizontal and Vertical Control Network. 3. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. Half of the fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. Fire and Emergency Services: 1. Fire mitigation and/or impact fees shall be paid at the time of final plat recording. 2. 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 building and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. A water availability certificate is required form Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 322-psi point loading exceeding 150-feet require an approved turnaround. Full 90-foot diameter cul-de-sac required is required when dead end streets exceed 300-feet long. City street standards required 20-foot wide streets with a 6-foot wide parking area on one side of the street only. Parking is not allowed on the other side of the street and shall be posted as such. 4. Homes on all proposed lots are required to be fire sprinkled. Park Department: Parks mitigation and/or impact fees shall be paid at the time of final plat recording. Property Services: Property Services Comments are attached to this report as Exhibit 15. King County: King county Code 21A.24 shall be followed for the portion of the site located within King County. ERC Reportll-034.doc ~ ;;; 1 ~ r:: 0 ;:: ~ ~ ui 's g LO 0 ~ ui 0 C, ~ ;; a:: "" z " "' !1- ,f <::( "'-J ~a_ t~ lliO ~~ ~a: ~o so ~ (,) ~~ 0 ~u.. ~o w·a :::) ~a_ w "' lJj CJ a: z ~ i [L ' ' ~-i I ~ : ' ~-j 0) ' :g i w' 0) ' ~/ f-' IL' ~I 0 ~ 0 [L .,: D z .,: ;;! I ,: N I::; cc 1-1 ::c >< w uI I[) u.i C) a: z w I[) u.i C) a: z (') N ~ j 0 w :1 ~/ co w ;!: lL 0 z 0 § "- <,: M 1-.... cc .... ::c >< w ~~= ,I.I! .. ! "7r.·!C"",J"=1C>;)f';«, D 0 '<.' fa,,,.rsa'-'fS~ ti __ .l...!.D " ' ;; 71 iua!sa-a 1,=~i<a<:;;:;.,:;:"°aaa~~1.';'v.~-;;;">io1V'lt:1~~ j i I i i~:::~~l __ "'_r.r~v-:. =_-e-;[;[~f-5_u~3-"_!J.!. "'_:~~:·-::-_· --'====~~~~~= ~;c~ I ~~i ti:t I f-. ~ • ;;: ul "' uj 0 a: z C'l N a.: ~ in st N cJ w OJ .. - ;:, w OJ w ~ lL 0 -i. C'l N a.: ~ o; N cJ w OJ st ;:, w OJ w ~ lL 0 z 0 F/ ~1 o._ I <l: I El ~ I:; co 1-t ::c >< w ::;: ;:: w "' ui Cl a: i "' N CL ~ ,f N 0 w [/) ,f ~ w [/) w I f- 11.. 0 z 0 F a: 0 a.. .,: 0 z .,: ::;: ;:: w Lil ui Cl a: z "' N CL ~ ci N 0 w co "" ~ w [/) w I f- 11.. 0 z 0 F a: 0 a.. .,: I 1------,- 1 . ' I •!;=±/ =l! I • I :! '° "' ;, I 0 '° "' ~ ~ 0 '° ~ v --r· --. . . . . . . . . . "' v ' fl . I!'~ • !, 0 v ,o 0 "' '" in I- I-I ca 1-1 ::c >< LU ~[\'ISl(lff'J, A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 23, TWP. 23 N., ROE. 5 E., W.M.ANDA PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 24, TWP. 23 N., ROE. 5 E., W.M. 1-·-· -.. ,_, .:.~ . .,, ---· I r-, 1---l r'" I ,,. I ~' ,~--------"-""'-""2E..,.,___._ ---11 "0'--1 f-I 1-"' j ~-]-. ___ ,. ! , ___ , .. , I"" I I .. 1-.. '"'~' I ...... , -11--, 11 :i;i,~.~.tt,$$1 :,O'}~~c·· .. ( ~ ![':J~" I .. ,_ IJ" l!II)( ~\'( LAN£ 1,-,P.J j ll" IIIC>C OOII'[ l,>1'( (1!1'.) l:f'U(f:~~~ 1 ·'1·:., , . .. '"'i"" T "-'"' I""!.,.._ =i/111:,,•'"'1'' -1f.l-co· -··''""'''!-"'-\}"1,,·;,",'1:i-;i(:)~~w~·· fW.I\D A CROSS BECTTON ROAD B CROSS 6ECTTON "" """"°''°"E""'""' ll" Ro.\D R mu11rs uw:r c ..-.......!.__-PROPOS{O FIU<OH+Cl': STREAM 8UfHA l'r··=-i· ~ ' . , " 5ll !: .t] ~I m ::1 'i] 1, ·ii~: H !I! ~ ~ " s UI ·~ •W ''• t.) (fl ~-;i § ! · 150 ROAD C Gn08S SE'CTTON = !S.!/1 'l u ~:;i f1l f 11 §, 11\"-'11l¥iJ_'· .. 1 ! , "W~. n.ITT eac"'J'p i -JV' i ~ 5 j o._ "i ~ 0 ~ ::; !hi r!in '---"-I rno.n, ~o., 07 o,~,,,, "" O.JB 11,ut e•m 1~·1J-2010 SHfH PFV. Citv r1' ., () f f,'Jt o;;i;;g;,r:,rl~L 10170 . 1c~r·t· ""Til"ECTIOfl 'nPD·. sen 'v1s10 I,;::':==-:---' ~=================·--================t;'fftt~M:IA~~ I . . ,,y 2 " 20,1 P05 1 ·.· .·. . .. ~ a,amooo•" II " ,>· ((··t ·-V EXHIBIT 6 ., "{{;}11.f/f?;'!QJ "" se<m ,·-ra· ::! ,: ui "' ui CJ [( z " N a.: ~ ,f N c5 w OJ ,f -;:, w OJ w I f- u. 0 z 0 i= [( 0 n. <( 0 z <( ::! ,: ui "' ui CJ [( z " N a.: ~ cj N c5 w OJ ,f -;:, w OJ w ~ u. 0 z 0 ~ 0 n. <( i ~. g "' I- I-I i:a 1-1 ::c >< w \ t -::5:_ ~l.\!I i ~ t,"'c)!!jl J_VkJ ~81~80:P;j ii ii :I Ii ' \ t \ -' .. ' \ .,;. i ~~-- I I -~-~/ -~: ·· " • -•C ( = 1 : c~<;_ o, ..--a O....j , I , 1~~ 1 0 ' I . 0 " o...-0 ~ ' , i i • ~ l L_ __ ~-~ ··-:::~~~::~·)=:~::: .. ---- Plar,ting kea I< (Sheet W-2) EXHIBIT 10 Plootir.9 Area B (S~eet W-21 ! ·, a l I ., ~~<~ D =~iff,:r Flanting Area I'. (Sl>eet W-2) ;:-;fl(¥~: ?,-, I - ,~-... _ :.=..,--------,-1 ;.::::.:-....::-,t:::=., -----, ___ , __ © • 0 " ® • © • ---- ~-------- © .. ,--IC-- ,. ,. ,. 2,.. --! ,. 0'"1--.....__ 1_..l_ _,,,,_,,,,,,,,__J_ _ _J __ ~ EXHIBIT 11 Flontirg Area ~ ' ' ' i!J .. ] ~ ! ' i ,n: ?~1 ' fi~ • i ,j' i ! t i !H ' i ! 11 ~ r '1 ' ,l, ! I i ~ }a 'Pli ' i H; i ' ,-. ' l J!i I . 'j !] t ' Hh i • ' ' ' ! ' t ' i i Ii ., L h ' ' H j :!d ! '" " ' l Hi " .. H l. ~iu ., iL ii . ' ~~! H 'I' I ! ! .; ! f f' ii i'i D,Z; .. t:i ' ' i-' • .i: H '. • JH! l .i:tt .. ljf .. ' I "' .. .I H n f. t,p ]!-; H l'i I! p .li> ! ' Hl 1~ j! ,; if .;: .. .I! i tJ dj ,l .. Hi~ I•• H ., ..... i~l " l! I.;; 1Hi ' t: : ij l' .. ~ Hi ,. ,, i'. !]".; ,, !d. ~H ,. ii l'!! ' ii ,H '.f ., 1ij = §i " . ' .,, ~;: 11 i H !lfil .. ti iil i! u l •• ~ "!.:i1 ii u!.li ff !.t iH! ;..; tH ih H n }!., 1 i ., ,. BJ I " ''' " ~ •j:rjl 11 H !"d 5~l 31! !j { .. ,;; ~ H1{ ~j.1 . " li • "'!~~_;; .:. ' ,: ''l ~ :j ""'•l r i ;;: r :tr~ : E..-,H ;t..; •• E!tH 3l :nd : ~:: ... ::::".: ;::.; ~H ,iH Fff..: "i il i.,; lj•, ?' ~ ! ~ lW i.1 ii i I~~ JJil -t1d 11. ;.s :1 ~i HH iitf • I hJ" S:i" :,o; iUU !Hi! ::iH1! 1 j ' l ' f l ' h ,q. .I H ~ i" I Ii ',l Hf ni Hi fH '"' ;!t gJI ' .. ii~ ,, ·Ht •l!E :: bl 7 =~ 'ia'°'j ,j. ;f ' . iH :.H '"' .. m i... t.g 'l1 ... i '1' ,ipJ!i J .. j: i•· • t -.Ii. ~,ii l ! ~ ~H~nl " ,r r}'~ll? ~u H' .:'.!~~ HD1.::2';' !=1 ~-1:-:tJ! i?!j ~'!iHi~ ill 1:i rut.;' i --"i. !f~ ~ i H iti : .; ~ I H.;:f.:;'"1 :p~ H'-"l!1 fl i ~~u,i.: -::~O '.j =111'!;,j~ ! 1~::~ fi; ~ ~ ~ .11 ~ i l{!in] .. ' i.l!.l'h .. :-]J~ -"'-j ~.,.f ,!l Hti!H ~? ! ! p· .. H:tH~ ~lj.!l 3fH ~hIUh ' i i"" .!1 ~ 'I! j H it J. :-s ... : " ii a1~ HH H i-:o~ E '. ,l:f• q H~l ll .,.if! pp, 0' -i': 1 " H r=1n l!-=~n '. i,HH l' a ,~j ..1fH! Ji! .5_,,::-::1 iHli 1H ' 1 •,s., r i ~5!f H"! i ;Hli H! ' ~ ~uu 2 it ' g f l l i ! • • ' l i ' 1 ' j ! • ' l I • I l ' l i l "i I i ; l l f ! • " ,! 3 .. ~ : • f ! • • ' • i N ,-1 I- I-I IXI '""' ::c >< w rr, ..... I- """ cc """ :::c >< w • ' i ' "j \~ / 1 I ' I I ' I I I le', ' = ti ~ ' \ \ \ \ ·, ~ ' f'> ,'." >1r " '' ··, ' 'I I !! I !, I I I ~ i5 ~ i 5' c I L,-G DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: M E M O R A N D U M June 21, 2011 Vanessa Dolbee Bob Mac Onie~ / McCormick Plat, LUA-11-034-PP, PUD Format and Legal Description Review I have reviewed the above referenced preliminary plat submittal and have the following comments: Comments for Project Manager: Please note that the City of Renton currently has a lien recorded against this property, under recording number 20110215001066. This subdivision should include the segregation of the "panhandle" portion of the property into a separate "Tract." I don't know how only part of a property can be platted, underlying Parcel 'A.' If a separate tract isn't to be created by the plat a lot line adjustment needs to be approved and recorded prior to the recording of the plat. Comments for the Applicant: Correct the indexing information with respect to Section 24 as the site is a portion of the SW quarter. The work 'TRACT' appears in several of the underlying 'Parcel' legal descriptions on the Plat and on the title report when it is apparent that the word should be 'TRACK' vis:a-vis reference to the 'centerline of tract [sic] and right of way.' The title company should also correct their records as well. Remove the Project Data block, including the blocks for the owner, Engineer and Surveyor on page 1 of 2 as these are only preliminary plat approval requirements. Information needed for final plat approval includes the following: h:\file sys\lnd -land subdivision & surveying records\lnd-10 -plats\0486\rvl 10622.doc Addressee 1',;ame Page 2 of3 Date of Memo Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA-11-034-FP and LND-10-0486 respectively, on the final plat submittal (all submittal sheets). The LUA number wili change for when final plat submittal is made. Provide sufficient information to determine how the final plat boundary was established and identify a basis of bearing related to the defining elements, the date existing monuments were visited, note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any, and all the other requirements specified in WAC 332-130-050. List and if possible delineate all easements and other encumbrances of record. Show any encroachments by or on the property at issue. Provide calculations and closures for the Plat and lots and tracts. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC 332-130-100. N-ote the addresses for the platted lots. The address will be available after approval of the preliminary plat. Street names are be assign and will be provided when available. Note what is to be set at all property corners and for right of way monuments. Complete City of Renton Monument Cards, with reference points of all new right of way monuments set as part of the plat. Provide an OWNER'S DECLARATION· statement of dedication of the plat. Required City of Renton signatures on the final plat submittal include the Administrator of Public Works, the Mayor and the City Clerk. An approval block for the city's Finance Director is also required. Note that the title for the Administrator has changed. Also provide the pertinent King County recording an approval blocks. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat need to sign the final plat and the signatures must be accompanied by the appropriate notaries. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, easements or agreements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawing and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) will be cross referenced on the plat in the appropriate locations. With a Homeowner's Association (HOA) planned for this· plat, the following language concerning ownership of the various Tracts (the open space and recreation tracts) applies to this plat and should be noted on the final plat submittal as follows: Upon the recording of this plat, Tract/s) .... is hereby granted and conveyed to the Plat Name Homeowners' Association (HOA) for Purpose of Tracts. All h:\file sys\lnd -land subdivision & surveying records\lnd-10 -plats\0486\rvl 10622.doc Addressee Name Page 3 of3 Date of Memo necessary maintenance activities for said Tract/s) will be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non-payment of property taxes for .a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have , an equal and undivided interest in the Tract previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. NOTE: Use the above noted language for the other tracts associated with this olat, with changes made to said language as needed, .depending on the type of tract noted. Clearly state who is to own the various tract's created if not the HOA. Provide a 'Legend' for the plat drawing identifying the symbols used therein. Include a north arrow with the vicinity map. Note whether the adjoining properties are platted (show plat name and lot numbers) or 'U nplatted'. A Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) statement needs to be include.d for those areas identified as such. An updated Plat Certificate dated within 45 days of final approval by the Hearing Examiner. Fee Review Comments: Please contact Dave Christensen for the fee review. h:\file sys\lnd -land subdivision & surveying records\lnd-10 -plats\0486\rvl 10622.doc Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Karen, Vanessa Dolbee Thursday, August 18, 2011 8:28 AM 'Karen Walter EXHIBIT 16 RE: McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUA11-034, ECF, PP, V-A. PPDU; Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated AS-106 Revised Report 8-12-11 (2).pdf; AS-106 Data Forms.pd!; AB-106 8-8-2011 Base CONCEPT.PDF; AS-106 8-8-2011 Base PLANTING.PDF; AS-106 8-8-2011 Base NOTES.PDF Thank you for your comments on the McCormick Plat and PUD, LUAll-034. Please find responses to your comments below: I. Please clarify the purpose of the "debris flow berm" proposed for this project. This berm will restrict the lateral movement of the Type N stream and likely inte1fere with the transport of spawning gravels and wood from the upstream portions of the st.ream that may otherwise distribute downstream including the Cedar River. The purpose of the debris flow berm is to prevent debris overflow to the McCormick Plat future homes. There is an existing water quality/detention pond (known as Summerfield Creek Wet Pond #1) at the headwaters to the stream that runs along the south side of the site. The pond has a primary and secondary overflow system. In the extremely unlikely event that both systems fail, the debris flow berm will halt overflow of water and soil debris from reaching the development. The stream is located in a half culvert at the toe of the slope located to the south of the site. The stream is topographically higher than land to the north and generally no gravel or sediment enters the stream from the north side of the channel. The berm is located to the north of the stream and is located entirely outside the ordinary high water mark of the stream. Therefore, the berm will actually allow spawning gravels and wood to be maintained within the channel and will not interfere with any transport or recruitment of gravel. 2. We would also like to see the proposed planting plan for the berm and stream riparian areas described in the revised Critical Areas report to ensure that riparian functions will be maximized The detailed mitigation plan and an updated Critical Area Report dated August 12, 2011 provide this information and show the proposed plantings, habitat materials as well as describe functional lift from the proposed enhancement project. Please find this information attached. 3. Please clarify the purpose of the existing half culverts in the stream on site. These culverts should be removed as part of this project if they are not needed to provide access to the southern portion of the site to restore the st.ream to a more natural condition. The gravel road should also be decommissioned and replanted, as well as the vehicle storage area since they are likely not needed for the project and will reduce sediment sources to the st.ream .. As described in the Critical Area Report dated August 12, 2011, the project significantly improves the quality of the stream buffer by removing existing mobile homes and concrete pads located in the buffer area. The half- culvert that the stream flows in is an existing condition. The half-culvert is south of and outside any work :::::::::::p£.Uflu..:il::J.ct~================================::::::==================================================================================== 1 The applicant contends that no . in the channel is required for this p, t. Removal of the culverts would require substantial stream channel relocation and armoring to prevent erosion, which would in turn require state and federal permits. This work is outside the scope of this project. As such, in order to resolve this concern City staff feels a meeting between the tribes, City of Renton, the Applicant and Ed Sewall, project Biologist would facilitate in resolving concerns around this stream. The applicant and City staff would like to keep the project on schedule for the Public Hearing, as many members of the public have been notified of the hearing date. If it all possible a meeting for early next week, Monday or Tuesday would be ideal. The City staff is proposing a mitigation measure that would require the removal of the overflow parking area including the impervious surfaces. This area would be required to be re-landscaped to reduce erosion potential. 4. The existing potable water well should be required to be decommissioned as part of the project since the project will be receiving municipal water from the Cedar Water and Sewer District. The applicant has indicated that they would like to reserve the right to utilize any existing wells and water rights on site for irrigation purposes. Any well not chosen by the applicant for utilization will be decommissioned. 5. Please clarify how the applicant proposes to route stormwater to the Cedar River. This approach would require piping stormwater offset underneath SR 169 and through downstream properties. Since there is no discussion about easements or other agreements with downstream property owners, it is not clear how the stormwater will be routed directly to the Cedar River. Also, what analysis has been completed to evaluate the potential to infiltrate stormwater or use low impact development techniques to treat and manage stormwater. The proposed detention/wet pond will discharge to the public stormwater system. Therefore, no drainage easement is required. The stormwater system for the plat connects to an existing public drainage conveyance adjacent to the western property boundary to an existing 36" CMP culvert crossing underneath SR 169 near the northwest corner of the site. The culvert drains to a stream/open channel that in turn discharges to the Cedar River. A rip-rap erosion control pad at the discharge point is proposed. The detention/wet pond is designed with extensive landscaping to provide wildlife habitat and an amenity to the site. A Geotechnical Report has been prepared by Geotech Consultant, Inc. According to the Geotechnical Report, the site is covered with approximately 10 to 40 feet of relatively loose mass waste soils lying over mostly medium-dense alluvial sand and gravel. Groundwater was encountered at 2.5' to 11.5' below existing ground at test pits and boring locations. Due to the shallow ground water level and hilly site condition, infiltration is not suitable for this site. Small lot sizes are proposed for this site to minimize the footprint for the site. Other low impact improvement BMPs that utilize infiltration or dispersion are not deemed suitable for this site. Please let me know as soon as possible if a meeting next week would be workable. Again, thank you for your comments on the subject project. 'Vanessa <'Do(6ee ~enior Planner 2 Department of Community & Ecor. City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 Development From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 201112:18 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPDU; Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, In today's mail, we received the revised Notice of Application for the McCormick Preliminary Plat. Previously we submitted the comments in the email below to the Notice of Application. Did the City send a response to these comments? I cannot find record of them in our files. If not, please consider these comments applicable to the Revised Notice of Application. We look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 172"'1 Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Karen Walter Sent: Thursday, June 23, 201111:45 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPDU; Notice of Application and Proposed Detenmination of Non-Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Notice of Application including the proposed mitigation measures, the environmental checklist and the revised Critical Areas Report (April 12 2011 ). We offer the following comments in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's treaty protected fisheries resources. 6. Please clarify the purpose of the "debris fiow berm" proposed for this project. This berm will restrict the lateral movement of the Type N stream and likely interfere with the transport of spawning gravels and wood from the upstream portions of the stream that may otherwise distribute downstream including the Cedar River. 7. We would also like to see the proposed planting plan for the berm and stream riparian areas described in the revised Critical Areas report to ensure that riparian functions will be maximized. 8. Please clarify the purpose of the existing half culverts in the stream on site. These culverts should be removed as part of this project if they are not needed to provide access to the southern portion of the site to restore the stream to a more natural condition. The gravel road should also be decommissioned and replanted, as well as the vehicle storage area since they are likely not needed for the project and will reduce sediment sources to the stream .. 3 9. The existing potable water should be required to be decommission. part of the project since the project will be receiving municipal v.. _ _-r from the Cedar Water and Sewer Distric,. 10. Please clarify how the applicant proposes to route stormwater to the Cedar River. This approach would require piping stormwater offset underneath SR 169 and through downstream properties. Since there is no discussion about easements or other agreements with downstream property owners, it is not clear how the stormwater will be routed directly to the Cedar River. Also, what analysis has been completed to evaluate the potential to infiltrate stormwater or use low impact development techniques to treat and manage stormwater. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoot Indian Tribe Fishen'es Division 39015172"d Ave SE Aubum, WA 98092 253-876-3116 4 -·· STAFF RECOMMENDATION, APPROVED MODIFICATIONS FROM RENTON MUNIOPAL CODE (RMC) RMC# Required eer RMC Requested Modifjcation RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Lot Size 4,500 sq. ft. for parcels greater 2,319 sq. ft. for parcels greater ' than 1 acre. than 1 acre. 5,000 sq. ft. for parcels 1 acre or less. RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Lot Width 50 ft. for interior lots. 32 ft. for interior lots, including lot 11. 60 ft. for corner lots 42 ft. for corner lots RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Lot Depth 65 ft Lot 18, 43 ft. Lot 26, 61 ft. All other lots 65 ft. RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Front Yard 15 ft. 10 ft. setback Unit with Alley Access Garage: Unit with Alley Access Garage: The front yard setback of the The front yard setback of the primary structure may be primary structure may be reduced to 10 ft. if all parking is reduced to 10 ft. if all parking is provided in the rear yard of the provided in the rear yard of the lot with access from a public lot with access from a public right-of-way or alley. right-of-way or alley. RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Side Yard 15 ft. for the primary structure 10 ft. for the primary structure. Along a Street setback 5 ft. for Lot 11 along the access easement RMC 4-2-120A: Minimum Rear Yard 20 ft. 10 ft. setback RMC 4-2-120A: Maximum Building Lots 5,000 sq. ft. or less: 50% n/a Coverage RMC 4-2-115F.l. Site Design, Lot One of the following is required: No lot variation requirement Configuration l.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 EXHIBIT 31 (minimum of four hundred (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. RMC 4-2-115F.3. Residential Design, A variety of elevations and A variety of elevations and Scale, Bulk, and Character models that demonstrate a models that demonstrate a variety of floor plans, home sizes, variety of floor plans, home sizes, and character shall be used. and character shall be used. Additionally, both of the Additionally, both of the following are required: following are required: l.A minimum of three (3) 1.A minimum ofthree (3) differing home models for each differing home models for each ten (10) contiguous abutting four (4) contiguous abutting homes, and homes, and 2. Abutting houses must have 2.Abutting houses must have differing architectural elevations. differing architectural elevations. RMC 4-6-0GOF.2 Principal Arterial Curb, gutter, 8-foot sidewalks, Frontage Improvements: 20 foot street lighting, and paving with an right of way dedication, 5 -foot 8-foot planter strip, along the full sidewalk, 8 -foot planting strip, frontage of the parcel. curb and gutter, and street lights designed to meet arterial lighting level requirements. RMC 4-6-0GOF.2 Residential Access Internal streets A and B, Road A: 40 fee of right-of-way, minimum of 20 feet of pavement 25-feet pavement section, with with parking on one side, hence, no parking either side, curb and a 26-foot pavement section. 5-gutter on both sides, 5-foot foot sidewalks and an 8 -foot sidewalk and 8-foot planting strip platter strip between curb and along the west side only. The 1 sidewalk. foot remaining right-of-way shall be on the east side of the street. Road B: Miminimum of 30 feet of right-of-way, 20-foot pavement 2 section, with parking on one side, curb and gutter on both sides, 5- foot sidewalk and 8-foot planting strip on the "inside" of the loop road. RMC 4-9-150E.2 Private Open Space Each residential unit in a planned urban development shall have No change to standard. usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors) for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. The private open space shall be well demarcated and at least fifteen feet (15') in every dimension (decks on upper floors can substitute for the required private open space). 3 EXHIBIT 32 A PORTION OF Th SE 1/4, SEC. 23, TWP. 23 N., f -· 5 E, W.M. AND A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 24, TWP. 23 N, AGE._ 5 E., W.M. nrsllt«l tASEMEITT ocismc; EASO,IEHTS CF P<'.1<110NS Of EASEMENTS TO El( ~Ac.lr.:Il E.X1SflffG GRI\CIE CONTD'.!R September 22, 2011 Robert E. McCormick 10230 ne points drive, suite 400 • kirkland, washington 98033 (425] 822-4446 • fax (425} 827-9577 w·Nw.ofoK.com Valley View Mobile Park, llC 161 Mapleway Road Selah, WA 98942 Re: Culven Removal at McCormick Plat-Otak Project No. 31511 lvir. McCormick: City of Renton Planning Division Our initial report dated May 17,2010 presented a summary of the current geomorphic conditions and debris flow potential for the small, unnamed ravine upstream of the McCormick Plat. In our field reconnaissance for the debris flow evaluation, observations and field measurements were made on the series of culverts, half culverts and additional stream bank armoring that exist where the stream enters the vicinity of the existing mobile homes and is diverted to the west around the developed portion of the property. Above the culverted portion of the stream is a steep slope that extends up to the Renton uplands and is classified by King County as a Landslide Hazard Area. In the permitting phase of this project, comments have arisen regarding the possibility of removing these culverts in order to restore the stream to a more natural condition. In this letter, we state the concerns we have with this proposition. Field investigations of the stream were conducted by Otak staff on September 15, 2009 and January 11, 2010. Although the section of the stream containing the culverts was outside our immediate area of investigation, we continued through this reach to note any indicators that would provide additional information regarding upstream geomorphic conditions. We noted that the channel has been incising in the reaches immediately upstream of the culverted portion and that the culverts are currently acting to control the grade of the stream and are preventing any incision (lowering of the stream channel) throughout the section containing culverts. We recommend that the culverts are not removed. Removing the culverts would significantly increase the potential for the stream to incise down into the native material beneath the culverts. With the culverts in-place, and barring failure of the culverts, there is little to no potential for vertical incision. Incision of the stream would result in a lowering of the toe of the slope that could increase the potential for shallow landslides on the steep slope above. Landslide concerns are covered in greater detail in a letter to you from Geotech Consultants dated September 21, 2011. .creativity, integrity, and skill • strengthenin,g our cornrnunities • performing exciting work • serving ou;· <lie11b Robert E. McCormick McC01111ick Plat Geomo,phic and Debris Flow Analysis Page2 September 22, 2011 In conclusion, to successfully remove the culverts and stabilize the stream with natural 1naterials would require extensive clearing, excavation and additional work within critical areas and riparian buffers. This would nullify any increases to habitat value gained by removing the culverts. The stream does not currently suppmt any known fish species due to the current hydrologic regime and removal of the culverts will not affect this. Sincerely, Otak, Incorporated Q,t~,~ Russ Gaston, PE Principal, Director of Water Resources RG:rh Courtney Kaylor, File ' GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Valley View Mobile Park, LLC 161 Mapleway Road Selah, Washington 98942 Attention: Robert E. McCormick Subject: Slope Stability Related to Existing Culverted Stream Proposed Residential Subdivision 16405 Southeast Renton-Maple Valley Road King County, Washington Dear Mr. McCormick: 13256 Northeast 20th Street, Suite 16 Bellevue, W'1shington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 September 21, 2011 JN 08070 City of Renton Planning Divisiori We prepared a preliminary geotechnical engineering report regarding the proposed subdivision project dated April 1, 2008. Thereafter, we received a copy of a comment letter prepared by King County dated June 9, 2008 following the initial submittal of plans for the project. We subsequently prepared a letter regarding responses to a City of Renton comment letter dated October 16, 2008. We understand. the review/permit process for the project is proceeding in the City of Renton Planning Department, and apparently some comments have arisen regarding the stream that is located directly at the base of a steep slope at the southern end of the project site. The stream in this area is lined with a half culvert pipe and the removal of the culvert is being considered. This letter provides our position on removing the culvert. As noted in our 2008 report, we did not observe signs of recent shallow or deep-seated landsliding, on the steep southern slope. Several trailers now are located within about 15 feet of the steep southern slope and the stream, and we had reviewed aerial photos that indicated trailers had been in similar locations as far back as at least 1960. Therefore, it does not appear that landslides have occurred on the steep southern slope for at least 50 years. With any steep slope in the Puget Sound region, there is always some potential for soil instability, especially shallow in nature. Such events are generally due to excessive rainfall (50 to 100-year rainfall events). However, there have been numerous excessive rainfall events in the last 50 years, and the southern slope apparently has remained stable. Please note that we are well aware there was a debris flow event in approximately 1990 onto the property in which material flowed down from the southeastern ravine; this was not a landslide of the steep southern slope. Protection against this type of flow event was previously addressed by OTAK in its Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis. It is our professional opinion that the half culvert that is in the stream at the base of the southern slope is protecting the streambed from erosion and incising; it apparently has been ln-place and providing protection for at least 50 years. Removing the half culvert in the stream would greatly increase the potential for erosion and incising of the streambed; as noted in our report. It is very obvious that incising of the streambed has occurred where no half culvert is in-place (this area is further upstream of the half culvert area). We. believe that erosion or incising of the streambed would greatly increase the potential of instability of the southern slope because it would remove soil at the base of the slope. Again, we reiterate that it appears the half-culvert has been protecting the GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. i I I I ,! j I i! I ' Valley View Mobile Park, LLC September 21, 2011 JN 08070 •· Page 2 stream bed at the base of the steep southern slope for at least 50 years, and it does not appear that landslides have occurred during that period. We trust that this information is suitable for your needs at this time. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. D. Robert Ward, P.E. Principal cc: Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, -Greg A. Diener, P.E. via email to: greg@paceng.com DRW:jyb GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Vanessa Dolbee From: Neil R. Watts Sent: Friday, December 09, 2011 1 :28 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee; Arneta J. Henninger; Kayren K. Kittrick Subject: McCormick Plat -modifications for street improvement requrrements Vanessa and Arnie The McCormick preliminary plat is proposing to proceed as a PUD to amend development standards for the project. As part of the proposed plat, the applicant is requesting modification of the street improvement requirements for the project. We can support modification to the following either as a separate street modification approval or as part of the PUD approval. The frontage on Maple Valley Hwy will require 20 feet of row dedication as shown. They will need to provide a 5 foot sidewalk, 8 foot planting strip, curb and gutter, and street lights designed to meet arterial lighting level requirements. The only modification from standards here is the sidewalk width, which is acceptable due to the residential R-8 zoning. The proposed roadway A will require a minimum of 40 feet of row, as shown. The pavement section shall be 26 feet in width, with no parking either side. Curb and gutter must be provided along both sides, and a 5 foot sidewalk and 8 foot planting strip must be provided along the west side only. The remaining 1 foot of row shall be on the east side of street. The proposed internal Road B will require a minimum of 30 feet of row, as shown. The pavement shall be 20 feet in width, with parking allowed on one side of the street. Curb and gutter on both sides, with a 5 foot sidewalk and 8 foot planting strip along the "inside" of the loop road. Street lighting meeting pedestrian lighting levels, in conformance to our draft residential street lighting interpretation, will be required for both internal street sections. Neil 1 Denis Law Mayor November 21, 2011 Greg Diener Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S #100 Seattle, WA 98188 SUBJECT: "Off Hold"Notice Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator McCormick Plat/ LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Dear Mr. Diener: Thank you for submitting the additional materials requested in the September 2, 2011 letter from the City. Your project has been taken off hold and the City will continue review of the McCormick Plat project. The Preliminary Plat and PUD is tentatively scheduled to go before the Hearing Examiner on January 5, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 430-7314. Sincerely, 1'~£2fbez Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: Robert McCormick / Owoer(s) Party(ies) of Record -. Re~ton City Hall • 1055 South-Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Karen, Vanessa Dolbee Tuesday, October 11, 2011 11 :52 AM 'Karen Walter' Chip Vincent McCormick Plat LUA11-034-1/2 culvert removal OTAK Letter.pd!; Geotech Consultants Letter.pd/; Hold Ltr_2 11-034.pdf Thank you for your comments and consideration of the McCormick Plat. After our field visit to the McCormick Plat site, the applicant acquired OTAK's services to complete some additional geotechnical analysis based on the relationship between slope stability and the removal of the Y, culvert in the stream. Please find attached the City's hold letter requesting this information and the two letters from OTAK responding to the City's request. This site contains many critical areas all of which result in specific challenges. Balancing these critical areas as a part of the proposed development is important and challenging. The City's primary concern for this site, is life safety issues that result from the high landslide hazards. Due to the need to balance critical areas, the studies were requested. Removal of the culvert would result in a benefit to the stream and fish habitat; however, the habitat benefits are to be balanced with the life safety issues of the landslide hazards. In the September 22, 2011 letter, OTAK concludes, "removing the culverts would significantly increase the potential for the stream to incise down into the native material beneath the culverts. Incision of the stream would result in a lowering of the toe of the slope that could increase the potential for shallow landslides on the steep slope above." Any landside, small or catastrophic, would increase the amount of soil located behind the landslide mitigation berm. This soil shall be required to be removed from the area behind the landslide mitigation berm to maintain the capacity for future landslides, specifically a catastrophic landslide which could impact the lives of the residences. The increase in continued maintenance and removal of soil from the stream bed and riparian area would result in ongoing impacts to the stream. Furthermore, OTAK has indicated that successful removal of the culvert would require the stabilization of the stream with natural materials, which would require extensive clearing, excavation and additional work within critical areas and riparian buffers. OTAK concludes this additional would nullify any increases to habitat value gained by removing the culverts. Therefore, due to the potential for life safety issues and the continued future impacts to the stream as a result of the removal of the Y, culvert, the City will not be requiring the applicant to remove the Y, culverts from the stream. Once again, thank you for your comments and consideration on this project. 'Vanessa (J)o[6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430. 7314 From: Courtney Kaylor [mailto:Courtney@mhseattle.com1 Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 11:30 AM 1 To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: McCormick Plat Vanessa -Following up on our prior conversations, here are two letters about the potential effects of removing the culvert on the McCormick property, by OTAK and Geotech Consultants. Please contact me to discuss next steps after your review. Courtney 2 McCULLOUGH HILL LEARY, rs Vanessa Dolbee Senior Plannct City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 October 7, 2011 RE: McCormick Plat (Ll1AJ 1-034, ECf-, PP, V-1, PPUD) Dear Ms. Dolbee: or, -, 1 I liil/ Here are the originals and two copies of letters from OTAK and Geotech Consultants relating to this project, which were previously sent to you by electronic mail. Sincerely, / (, (1·'z1,l rh--.L,7 K;:,7 /ci, Courtney A. Kaylor 701 Hfth Avenue • Suite 7220 • Seattle, Washington 98104 , 206.812.3388 • Fax 206.812.3389 • www.mhseattle.com , Ru!JL'rt f . \Ic:Corm1ck \":dk\ \"1t:\\ ,\l,,IHk J>:11k.1.1,e· 16 l ~,Ltplc,\ -.t_', R, J:td Sd«h. \\:'.\ %'! I~ -Cl - ORIGINAL Ile: Cufrcrt llenwv:t! :it ,l1t.'Cnrrnh:k P/,1t-()uk Project .1\/0 • .JLiJJ _\Ir. :\Ic(> lrm1ek: U u r mJt1:1l 1·Lrurt dated \ Li y 1:, 21 l I 1) pn.·.,c: 11 vd ,1 ~:urn nu ry 1 > f ii it· <. 1 mT 111 ,L!;t.'1 111 H irpl I ic u 1nd11·1i 'lll' :ind dcLti.~ i1r>'x potc1ttial f( ,r the :-.null. u111un11.·d r:11'!11<' up:.,ln::tt11 uC dh: .\kCl1tllll...:k Pbt. ln nur fi(ld 1\.Tl 1m1ai.~sa11u..: f( >r t lie lldm~ fl,)\\.' i:a\':Lli 1,,; i1 H'. < ib::-tT\ ;;1i( lib :irn.1 field 1m.:a:-.urcn1L·t1t~ \\·ere nude < 1;1 ·he '-t'1·1,-.. nf nth-cr1·s, h;ilf ~'.uh=nt::-; ,111d ,uld1tiu1Ltl :-;tn.:am lia11k :umo1 ing tlu! exi:-.1 \dine tlit; ~uc.u:1 c111cr~: die vici11ii1 of tlh· L~\'.,1inE 111()hik h•)llH.:-~ and 1:-; d1,·1 .. 'l"tul t.n the \.n;st ar()U!ld the dn i..:l,>pcd portion 'if tlw propnry. ·\ i1nrl' rh, cuh-c.rtcd portion of rhc stream is :1 .stCL'P .-;]ope that C\ft"thl', up ~n rlw t{entun upb,1d::: ;1th.I is da:-,:-ifiu..1 h:1 king C:l)ttrn: :is :1 l.:uHbla!c f-b;,:1rd .-\rt·:L ln dw p<.·nnittinf'. J'hi·l~c r1f ihi:-; pr{_),1n·1. t'n111mcnh h;1\·, ;1ri:-.c11 n.);:nding the 1:-u_1ssibilir\' (_,r: 1-cmu,·inv !lw:,;c cukcrts in nrdcr :o [('':lOr(· · .. he strc.1m tu :t mnrc ;1:11m:tl C()!ldi1io11. T11 1his lc1tcr, \\'C: stare the U)IHTm~ \\'t· ha, e \\·1th this prup1.1siuon. held 111n.:si1g,tti( 11:" l >f tl,L. ~r1T:1m ,, UT r1 >nductcd h:: ( )f':tk -..iaff ( Jl1 ~cp!cmhcr 1 S, ~(It)<) and J:1.nu:11·:· l 1, 2r'l10. \lrhnugl1 th,.-::.t:l:tiun uftl11.: :-ttca111 cont:1i11ing rhe c:nh-crr:-w.1s 111ir,idc our im111cdi:1tr ,HCl nf 11n·l·'ir1p,:H1nn, \\'C tJ)\ltillu(.'d d1rL1ugh d11~ reach '.o 11otl' ;:ny indiG!f()l'S r!1:1~ ,nmld prn\·idc :1dd1t1rin:.d i11i!1rt11a1iri11 rcg;1nh1g upstre,1111 ~<.'t>Jll(Hphic cnndit·inns. \\'e n<'d(.'d th,11" the ch:11111el has lwcn :11cisrng m rhc reaches m1rr1cdi:ucl:,· up:-1rc:11n ()f the c11i'\T{:rtcd IH1rlin11 :111d !lut 1he cuh-nis an: currcnr!)-:1ui::g 1(1 c• 111l1Yil tht· gr:nlt:' or tli<.· strl':1111 and ~1r<.· prt·,·t·11ti11,2; :111:,· mci:..;u,n (L,wcri11~ nf rhc qrl':1111 ch:1nnt'l.1 thr(·1u;~h(1ut· 1hv c:vcrinn ci>n1:1tning culnTP: \\·c rccornm(.'nd rh:H 1!w ru:\ nL.; ,ire no: n 1·11n ed. l\em,-·Y!t).L'. ~lw n1in,1-r., w11ul..l "ig111f1cn1rh i11nc:1~c th(' j.l•)l,:ntial i,•r lh1.: sttl':11n ti1 n~ust di1wu 111rn the r1:H1\'c rn,ncri:11 h1·rw:n11 t!w cnh·t·rr;.;. \\ Fli rh(' nth l'l'I '-ir1 pl:1n·. :111d l );1rrn1g i :1tlu r, 1 Jf dw n 1h-~···1 "· ~h l'rt· 1:--lin It• rc1 11, -, pnrt"nti:·1 ! f, ,1· \ en i1::1 I rncb11 ·Hi l nci-.;:i 1:1 1"lt'" t ! 1~· "t rc:tll w: 1uld rc;t!I I :rt :t H )\.\ t·rlll? ,: I!. 1 ht' H w ( -.( 1 !H.' s!: lj'L' r lu 1 1.'( ,uh I Hl(Tc:1:,;c rlH" pi i!c11: 1:1! r()r :~li:iili )\'." LuJd:-:lldl':-1)11 I !le Sleep ~lopl' ;1hi •Yt'. / . ."11hk1~k cnncnn:-: .ll'l' n1Ynnl !!'t i~rt·:\ll·i· dl't:1il u: .1 k!l~T :,, .,,.,u fr,)rn (;c,11,c~1 (-,,ns11irnn::-, r!:l!nl . ...;cplt:111Ln ~I, .. ~Ill I. / /lohcrt [:,'. ,lh·Connick \/:'.".o'I!:,;/·,.( /1,.:!/ ,,,;,,,.;·c, '_! ! ) . :r,' .i lr1 ct·-11cltl:'-t{_•11, r1.1 :·uccv-:d.ull:, tcmo\L th<.: cu~n .. rr:,; :Hld :--.r::-ihilizc tht" ,;-ff;·,n-1 \\'Hh oatuul m.1t1..:rub ,,.-{,uld 1\.'lj1.nrL· <..·,:u:n..;Jq: clc.n1nL'. c·\,_·,1,:111,Hl :ind 1u.ld11i,.,1ul 1,1.1,rk ,,-11li1n critical ·Mt\t:-> and 11p:m:1:1 l)ufft·rc;.. l '.11..; \\',!llld 111L;1it\ :m:,· i11cr('.1sv:-. r1, :,:1hir;n \·:1Lw .:~;1lih'll ·') r\"rn1:\·111;-~ the l·,t\·crr:-:. ·1 lw '-lrc:tlll dr1,,::-. 1111: t:utll.'llli> ::-.up1HJ;·; :in: knu'.\'l1 fr.;h spL"cH:s due ri"1 thL· currcul h:l'dt,.Jluglt l'lt~ltnc ;n1d rcnH1Y·.tl td-the u1h crL'-· .. •.-ili 11nl ,dfiTl tl1is. j{( .. ' I ~cptunhcr 22, 2{, 1 i l\.oGcrt F. \IcC(.1rmick Valle,· Vit:\\· :\lohik J>;u·I,;, I,[.(· l(> l ~lapk\\a:," l\.oad Selah. \\i,·\ ·1:,•J l~ r_::;;;:,~ L_:·t-Tii~ ~,''¥'·!_!ti£'! Ile: Cufrert llet1u,1·al :,t 1lfcCnr11dck Plat-Ot;1k Project .:Vo .. JJSJJ \Ir. ~kCormick: Uur IIHLi~1l rcpurt <la11.:d \by 17, 2010 pt'L'se111cd a ~-unrniar.y of the u,rrcnt ge,1morphic condirion:--: :rnd dcbri~ Ho\\" potc11ti:tl for the small, ll!IU:-lff'1L'd nivinc· 1ip:,tt1..:a111 of thl.' :dcCtitJ11H.:k Plat. in 'JI.It field ru.::ounai:,;sanu: f1 ,r ! lw dr.hri~ fl1 )W e\·:ilw11 i1Jt1, <.•l.1::::l'tv~tti( lllS aud fo .. :kl mcasun.·n1cnl":-; were made < ,n du: :-.ertt':-. of nth ens, half culvert~ ;Hh..l additional sln.:alll bauk annrn ing d1:1t exi:-it wliu t the :-;Ltc<ml cntt.Ts the vici11ii!' of Ilk t~:-.:1:--:ting :nubile hullH..':.: and ls dt\"LTtt:d to the \vest around tht: dcn:lopcd purtion of the prop(rry .. \hnYc die cukerted port.1011 of 1hc stream ts. a :-.tet:p .:.lope d1ar n.kntL up i() the R<.·iJttYl uplan<.b and .is da:-::-itl.l..'d b) King Cou1H; :1:--: :1 I andshdt: Haz:Hd .\n.:a. In die pcrmittini'~ pha:-:c f1f thi:--: prujcc1, co1-ru111..·nts h:1n· arlsen regarding the p{_15sjbilin· of 1·c_1novi.11g t·hc::-.c cnkcrts in i)rdcr IO H"3lon.' i.hc strc.an to a 11101T 11aturnl curn.li1ion. T11 ihis ll'1tcr 1 W(· Sl.'itlc l'l1l' UHlcct11~ \\"e kn e \\"Ith lhi~ prop1.Jsition. held im l'~ligati{.ln~ 1 )f the ~trc:1m were nmductcd h>· ( hnk :-1aff f1t1 ~eptcmber 15, 2009 and Janwu-~· I 1, 2010 .. \ It hnugh tlil' section of the :Htl':tlll t.:llrltaining the culn·rt~ was uuts.idC' our immediate area of inn.·stip_:u1on 1 \\"C' continued thtou.~~h this reach to note any indicators tlrnt \Vm1ld prni:;idc addi11r111:1l ir1!"cmna1ii111 rL·gardint~ ups.trean1 ~L·tnrnnphi(· t)1n({irinns. \\'L' 11ote1..l dut 1·he cllnnnel Ins hecn 111ci~lng 111 rhe l'<'achc~ immcdi:1tcl.y 11p~tn:·atn of thi.· cu1n ... rted pnrtirn1 and that lhe culn .. Tts :tn• currc11rlr :1cring to conlrnl tlic gt:uk or tl1t.· ~trcmn an<l arc pr(·\'i.·nting ,m!· mci:-;ion (_lowering of rhc Hn.-:1111 ch:mnel) J-hrn11ghnu1 the :>cctinn C( ,ntaining cukcrr:-.. \\·c rc.:com111e1lll th:it die c.olrcn:.:: ;H(' nor runo1.-cd. Rcm;ffinv rhe cuh-crt:c; ,nndd ..;1~niticantk ,_. ~-' . increase rhc putcnti:d fur the ::.tre:nn t(_) HKl~c down 1llto the n.itiYc m.ll'c1id hcnc;1th tlw n1h-crr.;. \\"irh rlw 1.:uh L'l"l'"-i11 pbcc, and 1>:trring hilun. qf rlw n1hTi·ts. tlwrc· 1s litrk-rn nn p1}tt·11ti:1l fn1 H'rti1..·:d 111<:is1(·111. Jnci,:11:1 l·;( tlw ~lrcatll W11uJd rcsu]1 tn :t ;ll\\·t:ring <)( l1ll' t<.il· i,f llil' s[s1pv 11ml ,;·;111\d illtT('il~t· rlw pn1vrni:1! f1 ll" ::.li:1llfl\\' land::;]idt·~ un the src<.:p ,..;lop~ ;1h<wv ! .:t111!:-dilk ('( ,nccrn:-;. .tlT ci ,n,n·d in t~n·;t Ll'r di.·t;\J] ii·, .1 kt I er t,, '. ( Hl fr, 1rn ( ·;c:nicch ('_i '!Wmlrnnts I htcd .<cpt1:111h,i· ~ l. :i l 1 I Robert E. Jh·Cortnick l 1;trc .. '. \'./J!<'1.1.1h· r .'.!/, .~)iJ I I 1JJ ci.1 nch1.~:.1u11, :;.i ::u...:cc:-:--;full:,· L-C:W1\c the culYcrrs :utd :-:rahili:.,:l· rhc s:rl\:_rn 1.virh u~lt1.H,d mal"(.'J'l:tb \\"' ,u !d rt_', 1 uirc_· c·s.:-rcn...;1n· c lrnr111(!,, e:-;c1 \ anon :1 rn.i ;H .. kltt i, )\'I :il \\·( Jtk \\· i tlii n critical a re:ts and I ipa1"ian huffrrs;. l"hh \\-"(ittld nn:lit\ :111:.-im:r,>:1.,;c:--1;, h:1hi1:1t \·::il·.1t· ,!-\;1i11t·d h) J"("!!ir·:,·ing the l'.U;Yc1T:-:. '! he :-ltca1n dnl.':> lH1t t:uni:nd~ ~upp1.1rr :-ill) kn1J\Ytl Ji.sh :--pL'i.:ics d.ue tn thL· ....:urrent h~·dtulugic rcgm1o:.: and n.:111< 1Y:il ( 1f rhc cuh·crts wiU llOl affrct ll1is. Ru:-::-; Casion, PC [>rn-1cip:1l. Uireclul ()f \\:'~tlct Rc~;p1.m:.cs ,,_,.,1·1n-•, k,1,':.,, l;i', GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Valley View Mobile Park, LLC 161 Mapleway Road Selah, Washington 98942 Attention: Robert E. McCormick r-1 L-1 DRIG/rJAL Subject: Slope Stability Related to Existing Culverted Stream Proposed Residential Subdivision 16405 Southeast Renton-Maple Valley Road King County, Washington Dear Mr. McCormick: 13256 Northea.:it 20th Street, Suite 16 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (425) 747-5618 FAX (425) 747-8561 September 21, 2011 JN 08070 We prepared a preliminary geotechnical engineering report regarding the proposed subdivision project dated April 1, 2008. Thereafter, we received a copy of a comment letter prepared by King County dated June 9, 2008 following the initial submittal of plans for the project. We subsequently prepared a letter regarding responses to a City of Renton comment letter dated October 16, 2008. We understand the review/permit process for the project is proceeding in the City of Renton Planning Department, and apparently some comments have arisen regarding the stream that is located directly at the base of a steep slope at the southern end of the project site. The stream in this area is lined with a half culvert pipe and the removal of the culvert is being considered. This letter provides our position on removing the culvert. As noted in our 2008 report, we did not observe signs of recent shallow or deep-seated landsliding, on the steep southern slope. Several trailers now are located within about 15 feet of the steep southern slope and the stream, and we had reviewed aerial photos that indicated trailers had been in similar locations as far back as at least 1960. Therefore, it does not appear that landslides have occurred on the steep southern slope for at least 50 years. With any steep slope in the Puget Sound region, there is always some potential for soil instability, especially shallow in nature. Such events are generally due to excessive rainfall (50 to 100-year rainfall events). However, there have been numerous excessive rainfall events in the last 50 years, and the southern slope apparently has remained stable. Please note that we are well aware there was a debris flow event in approximately 1990 onto the property in which material flowed down from the southeastern ravine; this was not a landslide of the steep southern slope. Protection against this type of flow event was previously addressed by OTAK in its Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis. It is our professional opinion that the half culvert that is in the stream at the base of the southern slope is protecting the streambed from erosion and incising; it apparently has been in-place and providing protection for at least 50 years. Removing the half culvert in the stream would greatly increase the potential for erosion and incising of the streambed; as noted In our report. It is very obvious that incising of the streambed has occurred where no half culvert is in-place (this area is further upstream of the half culvert area). We believe that erosion or incising of the streambed would greatly increase the potential of instability of the southern slope because it would remove soil at the base of the slope. Again, we reiterate that it appears the half-culvert has been protecting the GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. i i l I I I Valley View Mobile Park, LLC September 21, 2011 JN 08070 · Page 2 streambed at the base of the steep southern slope for at least 50 years, and it does not appear that landslides have occurred during that period. We trust that this information is suitable for your needs at this time. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. g/2.1/11 D. Robert Ward, P.E. Principal cc: Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, -Greg A. Diener, P.E. via email to: greg@paceng.com DRW: jyb GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Denis Law Mayor September 2, 2011 Greg Diener Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S #100 Seattle, WA 98188 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator McCormick Plat/ LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Dear Mr. Diener: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on June 10, 2011. During our review, staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order to proceed further. The following information will need to be submitted so that we may continue the review of the above subject application: • A risk assessment shall be completed, evaluating the landslide and/or impact to slope stablity if the stream was to be removed from the half culvert. The assessment should also address if there is any risk to slope stability if the stream remains in the half culvert. At this time, your project has been placed "on hold" pending receipt of the requested information. Due to the requirement to provided additional information, the Public Hearing will be re-scheduled and will not be held on September 20, 2011. Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~~J_v{Jfk Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: Robert McCormick/ Owner(s) Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: Courtney Kaylor [Courtney@mhseattle.com] Monday, August 22, 2011 8:51 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Ed Sewall; 'Greg Diener' Subject: FW: Culvert Removal at McCormick Plat Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Vanessa-In anticipation of our meeting tomorrow, here is some information from OTAK about risks to slope stability associated with removal of the culvert. -Courtney ---------------------------------------------------- From: Ryan Hawkins [mailto:ryan.hawkins@otak.com] Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 5:40 PM To: Courtney Kaylor Cc: Russ Gaston Subject: Culvert Removal at McCormick Plat Courtney, In following up with our phone conversation I would like to highlight the following issues regarding removing any culverts at the toe of the slope that lies along the southern boundary of the McCormick Plat • The slope in question is shown by King County as a "Landslide Hazard Area" that is subject to severe landslide risk. • Removal of channel armoring (culverts, ecology blocks, retaining walls, etc.) will expose the toe of the slope to an increased risk of erosion. Toe erosion of a steep slope is one of the fundamental mechanisms instigating landslide motion. • Stabilizing the toe of the slope (after culvert removal) may be possible but would require extensive slope stability modeling and design efforts. • Work inside the Landslide Hazard Area and its buffer is subject to King County Critical Area Ordinance which may or may not preclude any construction activities required for removal of the culvert and re-armoring of the toe of the slope. • A biologist would be more qualified to provide statements regarding the value of the existing stream habitat but in my opinion, the risk of removing any culverts along the toe of the slope would outweigh any functional lift to the habitat. Please let me know if you have any additional questions, Ryan Ryan Hawkins, EIT I Water & Natural Resources 10230 NE Points Dr. Suite 400 I Kirkland, WA 98033 v: 425.739.4228 lc: 206.432.1824 If: 425.827.9577 "\V\.vw.otak.com ~ "The health of our waters is the principle measure of how we Jive on the land ... -Luna Leopold 1 The information transmitted in this e-mail mes md attachments, if any, may contain confidential mate. , and is intended only for the use of the individual or .. entity n<J!l1ed above. Distribution to, or review by, unauthorized persons is prohibited. In the event of the unauthorized use of any material in this transmission. neither Otak nor the sender shall have any liability and the recipient shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the sender. Otak and its principals, agents, employees and subconsultants from all related claims and damages. The recipient understands and agrees that any use or distribution of the material in this transmission is conditioned upon the acceptance of the terms stated in this disclaimer. If you have received this transmission in error, immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this transmission including attachments, if any. 2 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Renton Reporter has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed lo its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a: Public Notice was published on August 26, 2011. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $143.50, . , ~/ ~ efi?tbt )// ,i!f'tfJ. mdaM. Mills Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter Subscri];ied and sworn J;Q me this 26th day of August, 2011. the State of Washington, Residing .\' . NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETER'.\-ll~ATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND PUBLIC HEARING RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Deter- mination of Non-Significance- Mitigated for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code McCormick Plat LUA 11-034, ECF. PP. V-A, PP\JD Location: 16405 SE Renlon- Maplc Valley Road. The request includes SEPA review. Prelimi- nary Plat and Planned Urban Development, and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot, l 0 tract subdivision of one 11.592 acre lot at 16405 Renton-Maple Valley Road, zoned R-8 resulting in a density of 6.33 du/ac The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park Access to all lots 1s proposed via two new roads off of Maple Valley Hv,:y The site contains landslide hazards, seis- mic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream. Stream buffer reduction, temporary con- struction impacts to the stream . . ",;,,_. -··<.~ -.. 't'·n r4,p -1.;:.,. . .<. :: ' ... f°' buffer and a trail through the wetlands and slream huller~ are proposed. The development would rcqmre approximately 8,248 cubic yards of e1-cavated material and 7,924 rnhu: vards of fill . Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p rn on September 9, 20 I I .Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee \Vith: l learin~ Examiner, City of Renton. 105:. South Grady Way. Renton. WI\ 98057. Appeals to the F.:xaminer are governed by Cit) of Rcnlon Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional informa- tion regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office. (425)430-6510. A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers, City l-lall. on September 20. 2011 :-it I ·OO p.m. to consider the Preliminary Plat, Preliminary Planned Urban Development. and Critical Areas Variance lf the Environmental Determmation is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing Interested parties arc invited to attend the public hearing Published 111 the Renton Reporter on August 26, 2011 #519483 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ANO PUBLIC HEARING ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE. MITIGATED (DNS-M} POSTED TO NQTlfY INTERE~TED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: McC,,rmk:~ Plat PROJECT NUM&ER: lUAll-<114, ECF, P9, \/·A. PPUD LOCATION: 16405 Ronlon-Maplo Valley Road DESCll.!HlON: Tho applicant 1$ "'ountl"1 Envlrnnmental Revf~w (SEMI, • Pr11llminary Plat and PJ;,nn•d Urban Dovolopment (PUDI. and• Ctitlcal Ar•u Varian« to pl•ce utllltfes In• rtrnm buffer, f<>ra 34- lot subdM<lon of on• parcel locat•d at lli411S Maplo Vall'"V Hl(lhwav. Th• wbJort ,tte Is ,oned RtsldenLl•l I IR4) units/not aero and I• •pprDJCJmatelv 7.32 arn,s lo arH. A portion of the silo Is loca«.d within kln1 Cou~, In tne RA-5 ,one, resultln1 In • t<>la/ land•"'• al 11.59 ''"''· The p'<ll)C)Sed donslty of th• ,tte would ~ 6.33 dworili"I units ptr not acr•. Tho ,tt. I, cum,rrtt-, doV11loped with the Vall•y View MobUe llome Pa,k. which contain, 4ll mobile homes and two •ti<k·ltullt structura. Tho prnposi,d lot, ran1e In sl1e from 2,444 squaro fee! tc l,421 sq,i;,rt1 feot. In add!tlon to u,. 3fl lots, 10 tract, are prop,,••d for .rltbl Arus, Open Si>au, U!llltlo,, Stormwalu, and a Park. THE CITT Of RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE jERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT TJ;E PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AOVER.5E IMPACT ON THC ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the envlronmt1ntal dt1lennlnatlon mu!rt be Hied In wrltlns on or befote S:00 p.m. on Septemb•r 9, 2011. Appeals must be filed In writfn1 to1ether with Iha required fee with: Hearing E1t;1mlnu, City of Renton, 10S5 South Grady Way, R,mton, WA 9SOS7. Appeals !o the Ex;imlner are go¥•rnad by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4·8-110.B. Addltlonal Information reg;irdlng Iha appeal procen may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk', 01fi"1!, l41SI 4l~510. A PUBLIC HEARING Will BE HELO BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL (HM10ERS ON THE ITH FLOOR OF (ITV HALL, 1055 SOOTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON. ON SEPTEMBER 20, ZOU AT 1:00 PM TO CONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, PLANNED VIIBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND CRITICAL AAEAS VARIANCE. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 15 APPEALED, THC APPCAl Will BE HEARD AS PART OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING. =· FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (4251430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file Jderitlfleatlon. CERTIFICATION I, ~li1t\.':r.JC, flt. \be ( . hereby certify that 'S copies of the above document were posted in _3__ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: 8 /i,f/ I/ Signed: ffi11J!M Ced) [h (__ STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that V,cM f'>,, l) o i h ~" signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the oses mentioned in the instrument. Notary (Print): ___ \'-'\~A'-'--,-,Cc~;-'-"-,-::c\-.._.-'-',,_-______ _ My a p poi ntm e nt expires: __ ..:.:\_,_· .:.'':.:';,i,1-=v.:..· '::..:, "-=---·.:..:;l_c._,_(Jr--'-;,"-.. L.:.'...;'-:..J.,_ ___ _ .... CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 24th day of August, 2011, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Environmental Determination documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached Parties of Record See attached SEPA Registry (emailed) Department of Ecology . j~.,., 1 m ~1,,J?,,IA ,. ~~',,. (Signature of Sender): . r ... ~ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ~· ,..... \ .-I~ ) ss • -I' E COUNTY OF KING \ .,,,,. .... '\ i:, : ~ a-ti ~~~ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker :.r,-. °" ,..,.~ ,,,c:-,, ........ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the ~\Wt~'e'urposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary Publlc in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): 1-t. A cLb ,.,. -------~~~~-------------- My appointment expires: Project Name: McCormick Plat Project Number: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, PPUD, V-A template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology* Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region* Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers* Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-37SS Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY {DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office* 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01 W Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015-172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program* Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172"d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City of Tukwila Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS'', the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the notice of application. template -affidavit of service by mailing _., . PARTIES OF RECORD McCormick Plat LUAll-034, PP, PPUD, V-A, ECF Courtney Kaylor Attorney at Law McCullough Hill Leary, ps 701 Fifth Avenue Avenue ste: #7220 Seattle, WA 98104 tel: (206) 812-3379 eml: courtney@mseattle.com (party of record) Jose Rodriguez Montoya 16405 SE Maple Valley Road ste: #9 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 793-0930 (party of record) Monica Crystal Garnice 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #20 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 761-6032 (party of record) Jose R. Cisneros 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy ste: #24 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 442-1353 (party of record) Feliciano Galvez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #27 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 228-8941 (party of record) Hallie Sword PO Box 6314 Federal Way, WA 98063 tel: (253) 740-8205 (party of record) Updated: 08/24/11 Juanita Shields 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #41 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 271-2516 (party of record) Jose Garibay 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #1 Renton, WA 98058 (party of record) Fernandez Alejandre 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #20 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 269-7557 (party of record) Tien Tran 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #25 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 246-8927 (party of record) Doug Peterson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #17 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 228-7702 (party of record) Carl McMurtry 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #32 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 970-3117 em!: otsedom49@comcast.net (party of record) Dan Greggs 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd ste: #3 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 533-1371 (party of record) Ruth Martinez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #1 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 647-3519 (party of record) Sandra Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 442-4968 (party of record) David Serrano 16405 Se Maple Valley Road ste: #28 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 445-5044 (party of record) John Brigham 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #36 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 271-9767 (party of record) Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #16 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 687-6142 (party of record) (Page 1 of 2) PARTIES OF RECORD McCormick Plat LUA11-034, PP, PPUD, V-A, ECF Lauren D. Mclees Allen 16405 Renton Maple Valley Road ste: #53 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 221-1784 (party of record) Bill Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 442-5408 (party of record) Robert McCormick 161 Maple Way Road Selah, WA 98942 (owner/ applicant) Joe Castillo 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd ste: #6 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (509) 840-4917 (party of record) Danh Cao Dinh 411 164th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 tel: (425) 644-5637 (party of record) Toni Dinius 1512 6th Street Renton, WA 98057 tel: (425) 204-9324 eml: jdinius501@gmail.com (party of record) Updated: 08/24/11 Clyde Arnold 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #46 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 255-7595 (party of record) Barbara Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 273-0559 (party of record) Greg Diener, P.E. Pacific Engineering Design LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S ste: #100 Seattle, WA 98188 tel: (206) 431-7970 eml: greg@paceng.com (contact) Rita Smith & Robert Barnes 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #38 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (253) 249-8915 (party of record) Edward D. Tharp, Jr. 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #18 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 890-2514 (party of record) Miguel Mendoza 16405 Maple Valley Road SE ste: #29 Renton, WA 98058 eml: yolanda_327@q.com (party of record) Esther Lopez 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #8 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 274-5623 (party of record) Resident 2820 SW 110th Place Seattle, WA 98146 (party of record) Mr. & Mrs. Daniel Desjardins, Jr. 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #44 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 228-3743 (party of record) Maria Concepcion Perez Syala 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #45 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 495-0907 (party of record) Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #16 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 687-6142 (party of record) Myrtle Olson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #23 Renton, WA 98058 (party of record) (Page 2 of 2) City of , ___ ..,,.,.,,..---r1. tIJ f'CJIJ OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION AND PUBLIC HEARING ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: McCormick Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD LOCATION: 16405 Renton-Maple Valley Road DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD}, and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34- lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 40 mobile homes and two stick-built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Stormwater, and a Park. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 9, 2011. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, {425) 430-6510. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON SEPTEMBER 20, 2011 AT 1:00 PM TO CONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, PLANNED URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND CRITICAL AREAS VARIANCE. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, THE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD AS PART OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING. ; ; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. Denis Law Mayor August 24, 2011 Greg Diener, P.E. Pacific Engineering Design LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S ste: #100 Seattle, WA 98188 City o l ·.~_t.rw·r1 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch,Administrator SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD (SEPA) DETERMINATION McCormick Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, PPUD, V-A Dear Mr. Diener: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project and have issued a threshold Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the enclosed ERC Report and Decision, Part 2, Section B for a list of the Mitigation Measures. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before S:00 p.m. on September 9, 2011. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8- 110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)430-6510. Also, a public hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on September 20, 2011 at 1:00 p.m. to consider the Preliminary Plat, Planned Urban Development, and Critical Areas Variance. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant i, required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you prior to the hearing. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at (425) 430-7314. Renton City Hat! • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Greg Diener Page 2 of 2 August 24, 2011 For the Environmental Review Committee, ~-Doi~ Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Enclosure cc: Robert McCormick/ Owner(s) See attached/ Party(ies) of Record ERC Determination Ur DNS-M 11-034.doc - ____ D_e:n:is:L~aw _____ ,,,,,, .... ~ r City O l Mayor -l·~~llWll August 24, 2011 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL {SEPA) DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on August 22, 2011: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED PROJECT NAME: McCormick Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, PPUD, V-A LOCATION: 1640S SE Renton-Maple Vallev Road DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 1640S Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7 .32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 9, 2011. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8- 110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7314. For the Environmental Review Committee, ~-DclheJL Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Washington State Departm Page 2 of 2 August 24, 2011 Enclosure f Ecology cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region Larry Fisher, WDFW Duwamish Tribal Office US Army Corp. of Engineers DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Robert E. McCormick McCormick Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 40 mobile homes and two stick- built structures. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1. The debris flow mitigation berm shall be constructed as a part of the plat infrastructure installation. The berm shall be inspected and a letter of approval shall be submitted to the City from Otak verifying compliance with the standards specified within their May 17, 2010 Geomorphic and Deberis Flow Analysis. The construction and certification letter shall be received by the Planning Division prior to final plat recording. 2. A final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan including engineering details shall be submitted and approved by City of Renton Project Manager prior to Final Plat approval; this plan shall be made available to the new residence of the McCormick Plat and shall be included as part of the neighborhood Code, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R). 3. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, and the recommendations included in the Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, prepared by Otak, dated May 17, 2010. Including but not limited to: a. The installation of a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. b. A 25-foot buffer should be established from the southeastern slope. ERC Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 3 c. If soil is deposited into the buffer via landslides and/or soil movement, the soil should be removed within a few weeks to keep the buffers free to "catch" more soil in the future. d. All foundations shall be supported on at least 2 feet of structural fill, non individual footings should be used, and foundations should be designed to span 10-feet unsupported. 4. The vehicle storage area/parking area located on the southern portion of the site shall be decommissioned and the area shall be re-vegetated to the minimum amount necessary to prevent erosion; this re- vegetation shall be included in the final mitigation and monitoring plan for stream buffer reduction. The final mitigation and monitoring plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department Project Manager for review and approval prior to final plat recording. 5. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated August 12, 2011. 6. Construction fencing and silt fencing shall be placed along the buffer (or reduced buffer) of the stream and wetlands during construction. During construction of the debris flow mitigation berm, the fencing may be moved south to provide space to construct the berm within the buffer area. 7. Additional downstream analysis shall be conducted to analyze the impacts of stormwater runoff on Ron Regis Park and any impacts to the Park shall be mitigated. This analysis can be included in the Drainage Report submitted with the construction permit application. 8. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton Planning Division, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. 9. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010, that was submitted with the project application and provided a right turn pocket along SR-169 for safe access to the subject site. 10. The applicant shall pay the Traffic Impact/Mitigation Fee as required at the time of Final Plat recording, Construction Permit, or Building Permit based on the codes in place at that time. 11. The owner of the Valley View Mobile Home Park ("owner") voluntarily agrees and shall pay the relocation cost of the homeowners within the Valley View Mobile Home Park subject to the following conditions: a. The relocation assistance program currently administered by the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program") must exist at the time notice of closure of the Park is provided by the Owner; b. Assistance shall be provided to all homeowners that reside within Valley View Mobile Home Park at the time of park closure notice and meet the State Relocation Assistance Program income requirements for eligibility, however those homeowners whom qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the homeowners qualification; c. The Owner will pay up to $7,500 for a single-section home and $12,000 for a multi-section home, the funds would be paid only those relocation cost for which the State Relocation Assistance Program provides reimbursement, including but not limited to removal and reattachment of attached awnings, decks, and stairs; prep for transport; moving the home; permits; hook-ups to all utilities; rental of ERC Mitigation Measures Page 2 of 3 moving equipment; repair of damage caused during transport; or demolition and a down payment for another manufactured home; and d. The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. 12. Information shall be posted on site visible to the residents notifying them of any land use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. The notice shall be posted prior to submittal to the City or the same day as the submittal. ERC Mitigation Measures Page 3 of3 DEPARTMENT OF COMM UNI IV AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Robert E. McCormick McCormick Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 40 mobile homes and two stick- built structures. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. ERC Advisory Notes Page 1 of4 4. The applicant will be required to submit a Final Stream Mitigation Report and Maintenance and Monitoring proposal. In addition, the applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and signage, and providing the City with a site restoration surety device and, later, a maintenance and monitoring surety device. 5. 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. 6. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. 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 (SO'). 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. Plan Review -Water: 1. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water District. 2. Per the City Fire Marshal, the preliminary 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. Lateral spacing of fire hydrants is predicated on hydrants being located at street intersections (also capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 gpm) within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along the travel route. 3. All lots on dead end access roadways that exceed 500 feet require fire sprinklers. This applies to lots 14 through 17, and lots 20 through 26, as proposed. 4. The proposed project needs to show how they intend to serve the new development with water service to all of the lots and fire protection. Plan Review -Sanitary Sewer: 1. A sanitary sewer availability certificate is required from the Cedar River Sewer District. 2. The proposed project needs to show how they intend to serve the new development with sanitary sewer service to all of the lots. Plan Review -Street Improvements: 1. Street improvements including curb, gutter, 5' sidewalks, street lighting, and paving with an 8' planter strip all to City standards will be required to be installed across the full frontage of the parcel being developed. 2. The internal streets shall install a minimum of 20' pavement with parking on one side; hence, a 26' pavement section. The road section shall include 5' sidewalks on both sides (in those areas where there are lots on both sides). 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 20 feet wide, fully paved, with a turning radius of 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside. ERC Advisory Notes Page 2 of4 4. Residential alleys are 16 feet in width. 5. Street lighting will be required per City of Renton standards along the frontage and on the internal streets. Private street lighting, including PSE, is not allowed. 6. All new electrical, phone, and cable services and lines must be undergrounded. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording the plat. Plan Review-Storm Drainage: 1. The City does not have any records of existing storm drainage facilities in Maple Valley Hwy fronting this parcel. 2. A conceptual drainage plan and report is required to be submitted with the formal application for the plat. A drainage control plan designed per the City of Renton Amendments to the King County Surface Water Manual 2009 is required. 3. The conceptual storm drainage plan needs to address how the roof runoff from the new lots will be handled. 4. SDC fees are $1,012 per lot. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. Plan Review -General: 1. All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals, prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards, by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two of the City of Renton Horizontal and Vertical Control Network. 3. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. Half of the fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. Fire and Emergency Services: 1. Fire mitigation and/or impact fees shall be paid at the time of final plat recording. 2. 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 building and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. A water availability certificate is required form Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 322-psi point loading exceeding 150-feet require an approved turnaround. Full 90-foot diameter cul-de-sac required is required when dead end streets exceed 300-feet long. City street standards required 20-foot wide streets with a 6-foot wide parking area on one side of the street only. Parking is not allowed on the other side of the street and shall be posted as such. 4. Homes on all proposed lots are required to be fire sprinkled. Park Department: 1. Parks mitigation and/or impact fees shall be paid at the time of final plat recording. ERC Advisory Notes Page 3 of4 Property Services: 1. Property Services Comments are attached to this report as Exhibit 15. King County: 1. King county Code 21A.24 shall be followed for the portion of the site located within King County. ERC Advisory Notes Page 4 of 4 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUI ____ , AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE APPLICATION NO(S): APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: -MITIGATED (DNS-M) LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Robert E. McCormick McCormick Plat DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 40 mobile homes and two stick-built structures. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 9, 2011. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8- 110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Gregg Zim rm , Administrator Public Works Department erry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department August 26, 2011 August 22, 2011 Date Economic Development J(b.;;/1 x-r-- DEPARTMENT OF CO .... JIUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO: FROM: MEETING DATE: TIME: LOCATION: McCormick Plat ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE MEETING AGENDA Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator Mark Peterson, Fire & Emergency Services Administrator Alex Pietsch, CED Administrator Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Monday, August 22, 2011 3:00 p.m. Sixth Floor Conference Room #620 LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD {Dolbee) Location: 16405 Renton-Maple Valley Road. Description: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 40 mobile homes and two stick-built structures. cc: D. Law, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer s. Dale Estey, CED Director• R. Perteet, Deputy PW Administrator -Transportation C. Vincent, CED Planning Director• N. Watts, Development Services Director• L Warren, City Attorney• Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal" J. Medzegian, Council DEPARTMENT OF COMMUI f , r/ Cityof , . .. . (? ---------r ·:.. _,, IJ I 0 JJ 0 AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: Project Name: Owner/Applicant: Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Summary: Praject Location: Exist. Bldg. Area SF: Site Area: STAFF RECOMMENDA T/ON: August 22, 2011 McCormick Plat Robert E. McCormick, 161 Mapleway Road, Selah, WA 98942 Greg Diener, P.E., Pacific Engineering Design LLC, 15445 53rd Avenue 5, Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98188 LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34-lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 40 mobile homes and two stick-built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Stormwater, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of the Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The deveopment would requrie approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road 2,232 square feet 11.59 acres Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): Total Building Area GSF: N/A N/A N/A Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). ERC Report11-034.doc City of Renton Department of Communit11 & Economic Development MCCORMICK PLAT Report of Augu st 22, 20 11 Project Location Map ERC Reportll-034.doc Environmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Pag e 2 of 24 City of Renton Department of Commu. MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development PART ONE; PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ BACKGROUND ronmentol Review Committee Report WAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 3 of 24 The applicant, Robert McCormick, is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a Critical Areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34-lot, 8 tract subdivision of an 11.59 acre site. The proposed McCormick Plat would be located along the south side of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169) at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (parcel #2323059029). The site consists of one parcel, the majority of which is located within the City of Renton. However, a long, narrow "dog leg" extends southward off the southeastern side of the rectangular portion ofthe site; this portion is within unincorporated King County, which is not proposed to be developed. The site is currently the location of the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which provides space for approximately 40 mobile homes. In addition to the mobile homes and multiple out buildings on site, there are two permanent structures, a duplex and maintenance building. The applicant proposes to remove all existing structures, and mobile homes. The site is bordered to the north by Maple Valley Highway (SR-169), to the west the Summer View neighborhood, a single-family residential subdivision, and the south and east by undeveloped forested areas. The subject property is zoned Residential 8 dwelling units per net acre (R-8) and the portion located in King County is zoned Rural Area, 1 dwelling unit per acre (RA-5) King County zoning. The proposed development would be within the R-8 zone as such, R-8 development standards would be applicable to the subject project. The portion of the site zoned RA-5 remains within King County. The Land Use designation is Residential Single Family (RSF) for the portion located within the City of Renton, and is Rural Residential, 1 du/2.5-lOac for the King County portion. The proposed subdivision would result in 34 lots ranging in lot size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet, resulting in a net density of 6.33 dwelling units per acre. In addition to the single family lots, 8 tracts are proposed which included stormwater detention, Native Growth Protection Areas, access and utilities, Open Space, and critical areas. In addition to the traditional subdivision lots and tracts, the applicant has proposed a looped trail around the site which crosses Open Space tract E and C and a small tot lot with a play area. The subdivision would gain access from Maple Valley Highway at one access point, identified as "Road A", herein. Road A connects to a looped road, "Road B", which provides access throughout the development. Proposed Lots 1-8, and 11-17 are directly accessed off of Road B. Proposed Lots 9 and 10 would gain access via an access and utilities Tract, identified as Tract D. Proposed Lots 18 -34 would be accessed via a proposed alley, "Road C". In addition, a 20-foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of SR-169. Road improvements including sidewalks on both sides on Road A, and on one side of Road Bare proposed. Street frontage improvements are not proposed along SR 169. Pursuant to the City of Renton's critical areas maps, wetlands, a stream, steep slopes, erosion hazards, landslide hazards and seismic hazards have been identified on the subject property. The geotechnical hazards located on the site are due to the steep slope inclinations, soils generally susceptible to erosion, and history of landslides in the area. The critical areas map indicates that the approximate northerly portion of the rectangular area of the site is within a Seismic Hazard area. In addition, the northeast corner of the site is located within the 200-foot Shoreline Area measured from the Cedar River, which is located across Maple Valley Highway. The shoreline area impacts proposed Lots 9 and 10, Lot 10 would be approximately 170 feet from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and Lot 9 would be approximately 190 feet from the OHWM. The "dog leg" portion of the site, located in King County, would be subject to King County critical areas regulations, KCC 21A.24, whereas the remainder of the site would be subject to City of Renton critical areas regulations. King County Sensitive Areas Maps indicated that the subject site is ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Communit11 & Economic Development MCCORMICK PIA T Report of August 22, 2011 Eflvironmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 4 of 24 located in a Critical Aquifer Recharge Area and is an area susceptible to ground water contamination. The City's critical areas maps do not identify this area for Aquifer Protection. The developed portion of the Mobile Home Park has an approximate slope of 9 to 10 percent sloping in and southeast-to-northwest direction. As this portion of the site remains within the Landslide and Erosion Hazard area, it is the mildest slope on site. The property is bounded to the south and southeast by steep slopes that extend down from the Renton uplands. The steep slope at the southeast corner of the site, ranges from about an elevation of 230 feet down to the toe-of-slope to an elevation of 160 to 180 feet, and averages about a 100 percent grade. Similarly, the steep slope adjacent to the south side of the mobile home park that extends above the creek is well over 100 feet high and has an average grade of about 100 percent. The applicant has proposed a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm along the base of the steep slope located on the southern border of the site to divert water and/or soil within the stream buffer toward the western side ofthe site. In addition, a 25-foot buffer from the southeastern slope is proposed for landslide protection for lots 14-17. The applicant has indicated that grading the site would be necessary to modify for stormwater requirements. The applicant has indicated the total excavation would be 8,248 cubic yards and fill is estimated at 7,924 cubic yards. The soil that is usable from the excavation on site would be utilized on site, other materials such as selected borrow and gravel are expected to be imported to the site. The applicant submitted with the application a Revised Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. dated April 12, 2011. This report indicates there are two wetlands located on site, both identified as Category 2 wetlands. Wetland 'A' is located along the west side of the site and Wetland 'B' is located along the northeast edge of the site. Category 2 wetlands typically have SO-foot buffers. The Critical Areas report further indentifies a single intermittent stream that flows through the site. The subject stream is a Class 3 stream and was designated as a Type N stream by Bill Kershke, King County Biologist, in his review of the feature. Class 3 streams typically have 7S-foot buffers measured from the ordinary high water mark. The applicant has proposed to reduce the stream buffer from 75 feet to 60 feet for the majority of the buffer area. In addition, the applicant has requested a variance to place a water line through the stream buffer to connect to existing 10-inch water line stub provided by the neighboring Summer View neighborhood. The area of the site that is currently developed as a mobile home park consists of ornamental plants placed by residents of the mobile home park in addition to a few large conifer trees which are scattered about the site. The steep slopes on site are covered with dense understory vegetation consisting of mostly sword ferns and an upperstory of scattered big leaf maple trees. The wetland and stream areas of the site consist mainly of reed canary grass, creeping buttercup and a few small alders. It should be noted, that the applicant currently has a vested King County project for a 34-lot subdivision at this site. A number of the environmental studies submitted with this application are the same studies submitted with the older King County project. As such, many of these studies contain a cover memo and/or letter addressing any changes based on the changes to the project. I PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Communit" & Economic Development MCCORMICK PIA T Report of August 22, 2011 A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Environmental Review Committee Report LUA!l-034, £CF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 5 of 24 Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period. B. Mitigation Measures 1. The debris flow mitigation berm shall be constructed as a part of the plat infrastructure installation. The berm shall be inspected and a letter of approval shall be submitted to the City from Otak verifying compliance with the standards specified within their May 17, 2010 Geomorphic and Deberis Flow Analysis. The construction and certification letter shall be received by the Planning Division prior to final plat recording. 2. A final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan including engineering details shall be submitted and approved by City of Renton Project Manager prior to Final Plat approval; this plan shall be made available to the new residence of the McCormick Plat and shall be included as part of the neighborhood Code, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R). 3. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, and the recommendations included in the Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, prepared by Otak, dated May 17, 2010. Including but not limited to: a. The installation of a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. b. A 25-foot buffer should be established from the southeastern slope. c. If soil is deposited into the buffer via landslides and/or soil movement, the soil should be removed within a few weeks to keep the buffers free to "catch" more soil in the future. d. All foundations shall be supported on at least 2 feet of structural fill, non individual footings should be used, and foundations should be designed to span 10-feet unsupported. 4. The vehicle storage area/parking area located on the southern portion of the site shall be decommissioned and the area shall be re-vegetated to the minimum amount necessary to prevent erosion; this re-vegetation shall be included in the final mitigation and monitoring plan for stream buffer reduction. The final mitigation and monitoring plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department Project Manager for review and approval prior to final plat recording. 5. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated August 12, 2011. 6. Construction fencing and silt fencing shall be placed along the buffer (or reduced buffer) of the stream and wetlands during construction. During construction of the debris flow mitigation berm, the fencing may be moved south to provide space to construct the berm within the buffer area. 7. Additional downstream analysis shall be conducted to analyze the impacts of stormwater runoff on Ron Regis Park and any impacts to the Park shall be mitigated. This analysis can be included in the Drainage Report submitted with the construction permit application. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commun MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development Dnmental Review Commntee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 6 of 24 8. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton Planning Division, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. 9. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010, that was submitted with the project application and provided a right turn pocket along SR-169 for safe access to the subject site. 10. The applicant shall pay the Traffic Impact/Mitigation Fee as required at the time of Final Plat recording, Construction Permit, or Building Permit based on the codes in place at that time. 11. The owner of the Valley View Mobile Home Park ("owner") voluntarily agrees and shall pay the relocation cost of the homeowners within the Valley View Mobile Home Park subject to the following conditions: a. The relocation assistance program currently administered by the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program") must exist at the time notice of closure of the Park is provided by the Owner; b. Assistance shall be provided to all homeowners that reside within Valley View Mobile Home Park at the time of park closure notice and meet the State Relocation Assistance Program income requirements for eligibility, however those homeowners whom qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the homeowners qualification; c. The Owner will pay up to $7,500 for a single-section home and $12,000 for a multi- section home, the funds would be paid only those relocation cost for which the State Relocation Assistance Program provides reimbursement, including but not limited to removal and reattachment of attached awnings, decks, and stairs; prep for transport; moving the home; permits; hook-ups to all utilities; rental of moving equipment; repair of damage caused during transport; or demolition and a down payment for another manufactured home; and d. The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. 12. Information shall be posted on site visible to the residents notifying them of any land use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. The notice shall be posted prior to submittal to the City or the same day as the submittal. C. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 ERC Reportll-034.doc Cover Sheet -Neighborhood Map Preliminary Plat Map TESC and Tree Removal Plan Conceptual Site Plan Site Stream buffer Sections Conceptual Road and Site Section Conceptual Pond and Berm Section City of Renton Department af Commu. MCCORMICK PLAT Economic Development Report of August 22, 2011 Slope Analysis Existing Conditions McCormick Plat Conceptual Mitigation Plan Mitigation Plan Planting Sheet Mitigation Plan Notes Sheet Conceptual Landscape Plan Conceptual Landscape Plan Notes and Details Property Services Comments ronmenta/ Review Committee Report LUA11-0~4, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 7 of 24 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Comments and City's Response D. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: With the project application, the applicant submitted a Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, which was accompanied by a cover letter dated October 8, 2010. The subject property contains four distinct topographic features; the developed existing Mobile Home Park, the south slope, the southeast slope, and the "dog leg" ravine. The developed area is located at the mouth of a ravine, and the overall topography is that of a relatively gentle-to-moderate slope extending to the northwest towards the Cedar River. The Geotechnical report indicates that the site elevations within the developed portions of the mobile home park range from about elevation 180 feet at the southeast corner down to about elevation 120 feet over a southeast-to-northwest diagonal distance of about 550 lineal feet, which is about a grade of 9 to 10 percent. The report further indicates that the grades within the developed portions of the site vary based on past grading completed to develop the interior road, mobile home pads and various facility building sites. According to this report, the Valley View Mobile Home Park has been located at this site nearly 50 years. In this time, grading was done; fill was placed at the top of the slope and some excavation done at the bottom to install an ecology block wall. The site is bounded by steep slopes on the south and southeast sides, these areas have been identified on City of Renton critical areas maps as Landslide Hazard and Erosion Hazard areas. The critical areas maps indicated that the Hazards associated with landslides and erosion cover the entire site including the developed portions of the site with the milder slopes. The steep slope at the southeast corner of the site, which represents the south flank of the ravine mouth, ranges from an approximate elevation of 230 feet to the toe-of-slope which has elevations ranging from 160 to 180 feet, with an average grade of about 100 percent. The Geotechnical report indicates that some grading had been conducted in the past along the southeastern slope because a concrete-block wall is located at the base. Similarly, the steep slope adjacent to the south side of the mobile home park extends above the creek and is well over 100 feet high and has an average grade of about 100 percent. Pursuant to the provided geotechnical report, the "dog leg" portion of the site extends about another 925 feet southwards and upslope of the main mobile home park site. The extension follows an existing ERC Report11-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commu. MCCORMICK PIA T Report of August 22, 2011 ( Economic Development ronmental Review Committee Report LUA!l-034, ECF,PP, V-A, PPUD Page 8 of 24 creek and a portion of this area has been graded to a uniform surface. The "dog leg" slopes gently-to- moderately down to the developed portion of the site with elevations ranging from about 310 feet at the southernmost property line down to an elevation of 180 feet where the "dog leg" meets the existing mobile home park. The Geologic Map of King County indicated that the site and area above the site is underlain by five basic soils: 1) glacial till, 2) advanced outwash sand and gravel, 3) mostly silt, but some sand soils, deposited thousands of years before the last glacial advance into the Puget Sound, 4) mass wastage deposits that eroded or sloughed from the steep slopes and ravine areas above the site, and, 5) soils deposited as alluvium from the Cedar River. Pursuant to the Geotech Consultants, the mass wastage material was derived from erosion and landslides occurring in the ravine. Fourteen test pits were excavated by Geotech Consultants to determine subsurface site conditions. Groundwater seepage was observed in all but four test pits, ranging in depth from 2.5 feet below surface to 11.5 feet below surface. The geotechnical report concluded that groundwater could be encountered in most areas during most of the year. Landslide Hazards The provided Geotechnical report indicated that many landslides were observed within the narrow ravine area above the site. The major area that this occurred is the interface of the outwash sand and gravel and underlying Pre-Fraser soils. This is because groundwater can easily flow through the outwash soil, but cannot continue downward because of the Pre-Fraser soils, which are much less pervious. The landsliding and erosion in the area has left numerous hard silt "benches" sitting about 10 to 20 feet above the base of the creek within 150 lineal feet of the south "dog leg" property line. Furthermore, the Geotech Consultants observed one such landslide just upslope, to the east of the existing water well, at the south end of the "dog leg" area. The Geotech Consultants indicated this landslide visually appeared to be about 50 feet wide by 100 feet long and about 5 feet deep. The consultants indicated that about half of the total volume of landslide soil and debris remain on the face of the slide as an elongated mound of loose, disturbed material. However, a recent landslide along the bottom of this mound suggests that future sloughing off the mound will occur. Runout of this area would likely extend to the creek bed. Shallow landslides have occurred in the past on the steep south slope. Currently, this slope is scattered with big leaf maple trees that are bowed and appeared to have moved downslope in the past. There was no observation of recent landsliding, or deep-seated landsliding, on the steep southeast and south slopes. In 1990, a landslide event occurred in the ravine during a large rain event that caused some flooding and soil deposition in the mobile home park. During review of the, vested King County McCormick Plat (not a part of the comment period for the subject submittal) a resident of Valley View Mobile Home Park (Clyde Arnold and others) provided public comment indicating that this landslide resulted in flooding and a $100,000 cost to the applicant, Mr. McCormick, for cleanup and removal of the debris. The provided Geotechnical report indicated that at least 200 cubic yards of soil and debris, or more, were trucked to a vacant parcel adjacent to the subject parcel. This debris was identified as a number of elongated piles of loose fill extending north south across this parcel. The provided Geotechnical report concludes that the construction of the proposed development is suitable from a geotechnical engineering standpoint, but several significant issues have to be considered. These issues include the potential for soil movement from adjacent steep slopes, some of ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commu. MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development ronmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 9 of 24 which could block the existing creek, the potential for a soil moving onto the slope from the creek area in and above the southeast "dog leg" of the property, and the potential for seismic liquefaction of the upper soils in the area of the proposed development. There are clear indications that landsliding occurs in the ravine that includes the southeastern "dog leg" ofthe property and the area to the south of the "dog leg". There are indications of soil movement on the steep slope that is south of the creek, on the main portion ofthe site. The creek that originates south of the "dog leg" could potentially become blocked by a landslide in and south of the "dog leg", and to a lesser extent from potential soil movement on the steep southern slope. The Geotech Consultants recommend (based on the 1990 event in the subject area), to protect future residences from landslide hazards, a debris flow mitigation berm would be needed at the northern edge of the stream buffer to divert water and/or soil within the buffer toward the western side of the site in the case of a landslide event. It is possible, although very unlikely, that a similar landslide could block the entire ravine soil, and that the entire soil mass could be transported by the creek to the southeastern side oft he proposed development. The Geotech Consultants determined that the likelihood of this occurring is remote, although, they believe that the new development needs to be protected against the potential of this event. As such, they recommend that the easternmost 100 feet of the soil berm, that is recommended to be on the northern side of the 60-foot stream buffer, be constructed 5 feet tall and because the landslide soil would become less thick as it moved to the west; the Geotech Consultants believe that the berm can be constructed 1 foot shorter for every 50 feet west of the eastern 100-foot area to a minimum of a 2 feet tall. The 2-foot berm should be constructed along the entire northern side of the stream buffer. The 2-foot berm would be needed to divert any water from the creek that may have been rerouted during a landslide event. Furthermore, the Geotech Consultants recommend that a 25-foot buffer be established from the southeastern slope, for protection of the proposed development from landslide hazards. Landslide Hazards -King County Review and Secondary Review Under review of the vested King County McCormick Plat, on June 9, 2008 King County requested additional information from the applicant including but not limited to a specific geotechnical evaluation of the debris flow risk associated with an emergency overflow event or embankment breach in the pond at the head of the ravine. King County requested, if appropriate, additional mitigation measures to minimize the hazard from these and other low probability, high hazards events. Geotech Consultants, Inc., provided a response letter dated September 9, 2008, which indicated that the debris flow mitigation berm would provide protection against a debris flow that could begin well upslope of the berm. Their analysis of the proposed berm concluded that the berm would provided adequate life safety for the inhabitants of the proposed subdivision if a 1-in-100 years precipitation event, or higher, were to occur. Although, if a catastrophic event were to occur that included the failure ofthe upslope detention pond, the berm may be overtaken. The response letter states that the only scenario for the failure of the pond would involve a very significant earthquake during or following and extreme precipitation event and because the likelihood of two significant events occurring together is extremely low they believe that designing the berm for the possibility of the failure of the upper detention pond is not warranted for the project. During review of the vested King County McCormick Plat, staff requested an independent secondary review by a City approved geotechnical consultant be conducted at the applicant's expense. This secondary independent evaluation of the landslide and erosion hazards provided recommendations for fRC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commu, MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development ronmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 10 of 24 mitigation that would best reduce the potential risk to human life and safety and evaluate the proposed mitigation in the report provided by Geotech Consultants, Inc, dated April 1, 2008 and the responses included in the September 9, 2008 response letter. Kleinfelder conducted a Technical Peer Review of the provided Geotechnical report, dated April 17, 2009 and associated geotechnical drawings and letters. Kleinfelder addressed two main geotechnical issues in their peer review; landslides and the adequacy of the soil berm for life safety and liquefaction potential during an earthquake event. Kleinfelder concluded that landslides and liquefaction are the two main geotechnical hazards at the site. They concur the mitigation measures discussed for each issue appear to be reasonable and within the standard of practice. However, Kleinfelder recommended that more information should be provided on the rational for the size and location of the debris flow mitigation berm. It was Kleinfelder's opinion that the debris flow mitigation berm, as originally designed, was not the best and most effective way to mitigate the potential hazards for future residences of the McCormick Plat. Furthermore, Kleinfelder concluded that additional analysis may be needed to estimate the debris flow volume, type of debris flow, density, kind and size of debris flow material, geometry of the blocked channel area, and velocity of the debris flow. Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis Based on Kleinfelder's recommendations, the applicant conducted a Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, dated May 17, 2010 prepared by Otak. The purpose of the geomorphic investigation was to provide insight into the potential impacts on hillslope and stream channel stability if overtopping and overflow ofthe detention basin spillway located at the upstream extent of the ravine "dog leg" was to occur. The report included qualitative assessments regarding sediment production, flow dynamics, sediment transport capacity, and channel forming processes. Otak provided conclusions and mitigation considerations within their analysis. Otak concluded that the worst-case event would be the failure of the detention basin (pond) located at the top of the ravine (south end of the "dog leg") in combination with a 100-year rainfall event, resulting in a flow of 15.8 cfs in the ravine. Furthermore, Otak concluded that future landslide activity will occur in the ravine, that sediment introduced from colluvial processes would likely be metered out over many years, and soil deposition would occur in the area used for overflow parking near the bottom of the ravine. Otack's analysis concluded that under the worst-case scenario, 749 to 2,323 cubic yards of sediment could be delivered to the downstream reach during debris flow and active landslide conditions. Finally, Otak provided specific standards to be utilized when development the debris flow berm to ensure the highest safety standards for the new residences of the proposed subdivision. Moreover, the berm should be 5-feet high and armored in the area at the base of the ravine, the berm should be located on the north side of the stream to insure sufficient storage for debris, and the berm can taper in height over a length of 100-feet to a minimum height of 2 feet for the remainder of the distance of the slope to Wetland A. The proposed mitigation berm is vital to the safety of the citizens that would inhabit this development, as such staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the debris flow mitigation berm be constructed and completed as a part of the infrastructure installation. The berm shall be inspected and a letter of approval shall be submitted to the City from Otak verifying compliance with the standards specified within their May 17, 2010 Geomorphic and Deberis Flow Analysis. The construction and certification letter shall be received prior to final plat recording. Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan £RC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commun MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development onmental Review Committee Report LUA11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 11 of 24 King County's letter dated June 9, 2008 also requested a conceptual "debris flow mitigation area maintenance plan" for cleaning or repairs after a debris flow event. The City of Renton received a Conceptual Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan on November 17, 2008, which addresses maintenance, ownership, access, and financial responsibilities. The mitigation plan was originally designed around the old plat layout and should be updated to reflect the new proposed plat plan and the debris volumes identified in the Otak report. Staff recommends as a mitigation measure, that a final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan including engineering details be submitted and approved by City of Renton Project Manager prior to Final Plat approval, this plan shall be made available to the new residence of the McCormick Plat and shall be included as part of the neighborhood CC&Rs. The saturated, alluvial soils consisting of silty sand, sand, and sandy silt have been demonstrated to have a moderate to potentially high potential for liquefaction during a large earthquake event. As such, the April 1, 2008 Geotechnical report also includes recommendations for foundations construction and footings for the proposed structures to be built on the subject site. The report also includes recommendations for excavation and grading, lowest building floors, structural fill, and foundation drains. Due to the potential hazards onsite Staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, and the recommendations included in the Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, prepared by Otak, dated May 17, 2010. Due to the erosion potential of the subject site, staff recommends a mitigation measure that Temporary Erosion Control measures be installed and maintained in accordance with the latest Department of Ecology Standards with reports submitted weekly from a Certified Erosion Control Technician and a construction mitigation plan shall be submitted to the Plan Review Project Manager. Mitigation Measures: 1. The debris flow mitigation berm shall be constructed as a part of the plat infrastructure installation. The berm shall be inspected and a letter of approval shall be submitted to the City from Otak verifying compliance with the standards specified within their May 17, 2010 Geomorphic and Deberis Flow Analysis. The construction and certification letter shall be received by the Planning Division prior to final plat recording. 2. A final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan including engineering details shall be submitted and approved by City of Renton Project Manager prior to Final Plat approval; this plan shall be made available to the new residence ofthe McCormick Plat and shall be included as part of the neighborhood Code, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R). 3. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, and the recommendations included in the Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, prepared by Otak, dated May 17, 2010. Including but not limited to: a. The installation of a Debris Flow Mitigation Berm. b. A 25-foot buffer should be established from the southeastern slope. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commun MCCORMICK PIA T Economic Development onmentoJ Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD - Report of August 22, 2011 Page 12 of 24 c. If soil is deposited into the buffer via landslides and/or soil movement, the soil should be removed within a few weeks to keep the buffers free to "catch" more soil in the future. d. All foundations shall be supported on at least 2 feet of structural fill, non individual footings shou Id be used, and foundations should be designed to span 10-feet unsupported. Nexus; SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: The applicant submitted with the application a Critical Areas Report and a Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated April 12, 2011 and August 12, 2011 respectively. This report and the City of Renton critical areas maps indicated that a stream flows through the site. The provided report also indentified two wetlands located on the subject parcel, both identified as Category 2 wetlands. Wetlands The first wetland, identified as "Wetland A" herein, is located at the toe of the slope along the south side of the site and is bisected by the stream. A small portion of the wetland extends north of the stream in an old excavated low point. A foundation was identified along the north edge of the wetland in this area. Wetland A consists of a slope-type wetland where groundwater is discharging onto the surface and is 2,803 square feet in size. The second wetland, identified as "Wetland B" herein, is located along the northeast corner of the site. Wetland B consists of a salmon berry and blackberry dominated scrub-shrub slope type wetland and is 3,955 square feet. Category 2 wetlands require a SO-foot buffer. The SO-foot buffer is shown to be retained on the plat plan, and the only impacts anticipated for both Wetland A and Wetland B, is the construction of a pedestrian trail through their buffers. Stream The submitted Critical Areas Report also identified a single intermittent stream that extends from the uplands areas, through the south "dog leg" and downstream to the developed portion of the site. The stream varies in width but is generally less than 5 feet wide. The creek bed becomes deeply incised as the stream enters the "dog leg" portion of the site. Once the creek reaches the developed portion of the site, the creek is routed into a narrow ditch, then to an existing half-round PVC pipe that extends westward along the toe of the steep south slope. The half-round pipe stops at the westerly edge of the subject parcel and is then carried in a shallow ditch along the west property line. The creek then drains into a culvert under Maple Valley Highway and eventually discharges into the Cedar River. Sewall Wetland Consulting indicated that it does not appear to be feasible for fish to utilize this stream channel. The subject stream was reviewed during Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. study for the Cedar River Trail (a report dated October 15, 1996) and classified as a Class 3 stream. The stream was also designated as a Type N stream by Bill Kershke in his review, and Sewall Wetland consulting concurs with Mr. Kershke's determination. Sewall Wetland Consultant's review has revealed that the subject stream is intermittent and lacking any fish use. The typical buffer required for a Class 3 stream is 75 feet measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). Stream Buffer Reduction ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commu MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 i Economic Development ronmental Review Committee Report LUA_ll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 13 of 24 The applicant has proposed to reduce the 75-foot stream buffer to 60 feet as permitted, if compliance with RMC 4-3-0SOL.5.c can be met. Sewall Wetland consultants identified that the area where buffer reduction is proposed, is associated with a current site condition of asphalt mobile home pads. In addition to buffer reduction along the south side of the site where the exiting mobile homes are located, the applicant has proposed buffer reduction adjacent to the proposed storm pond. The provided stream report did not identify the need for this buffer reduction; however an e-mail received from Greg Diener on August 15, 2011 indicated that the buffer reduction was originally proposed because of a 15-foot building setback. Based on the provided e-mail, the buffer reduction is not necessary for this portion of the stream however temporary impact to the outer 15 feet of the buffer are anticipated for the construction of the detention pond. Based on the lack of need for the buffer reduction near the storm pond staff recommends denial of a buffer reduction adjacent to the proposed storm pond, but recommends approval of the temporary construction impacts with a native vegetation re- planting plan. Page 11 of the provided Critical Areas study addressed each criterion for buffer reduction included in RMC 4-3-0SOL.5.c, the following table identifies the findings for the requested stream buffer reduction on the south edge of the site: RMC 4-3-0SOL.5.c Reduction of Buffer Width: April 12, 2011 Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study Conclusions, Sewall Wetland Consulting Inc. (a} (2) The slope is less than 15% and the (2) The buffer can be enhanced with native applicant is proposing to plant native trees vegetation and removal of non-native species and shrubs in the reduced buffer area. per criteria in subsection LSc(iv)(c) of this (3) The existing functions of the buffer in the Section, and has less than fifteen percent (15%) reduced area are close to none. The stream is slopes; and located in a Y, culvert. Nearly all the surface next to the stream is impervious pavement, (3) The width reduction will not reduce stream concrete slabs, mobile homes and small or lake functions, including those of patches of grass. A few trees exist that can anadromous fish or nonfish habitat; and provide some woody debris to the channel, but these are of minimal value as the channel is artificial and provides no habitat in this area. (4) The width reduction will not degrade The function of the buffer in the existing state riparian habitat; and have no bearing on its width since it is essentially completely developed. A reduced (5) No direct or indirect, short-term or long-buffer with native plantings including trees term, adverse impacts to regulated water and shrubs would provide shade, keeping bodies, as determined by the City, will result water cool to benefit downstream fish habitat from a regulated activity. The City's and would provide a source of organic debris determination shall be based on specific site to benefit riparian insect life and provide a studies by recognized experts, pursuant to habitat travel corridor. subsection F3 of this section and RMC (4) As described above under subsection (3), ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commur MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development (c) The project includes a buffer enhancement plan using native vegetation and substantiates that the enhanced area will be equal to or improve the functional attributes of the buffer; or in the case of existing developed sites where a natural buffer is not possible, the proposal includes on-or off-site riparian/lakeshore or aquatic enhancement proportionate to its project specific or cumulative impact on shoreline ecological functions; and (d) The proposal will result in, at minimum, no net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and ERC Reportll-034.doc ·onmenta/ Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 14 of 24 there is no riparian habitat in this area currently. The restored 60-foot buffer will restore habitat. (5) No impacts to the channel would occur. All development is proposed down slope and draining away from the stream. The only work in and around the stream is the restoration of its buffer. The proposed enhancement and removal of impervious surface would improve the function of the northern buffer area substantially as outlined previously. The applicant has proposed a mitigation plan which includes enhancement of the buffer in the area that has been degraded in the past from use as a mobile home park. The areas where there is existing pavement and other impervious surfaces will be removed and then replanted with a mix of native trees and shrubs. The proposed reduced and enhanced buffer would provide better protection to the stream than the current condition. As previously described, the vegetation community would be enhanced within this buffer, increasing the density of woody plants, increasing shade and organic imputes to the buffer, creating habitat for wildlife and macro invertebrates, which in turn improve downstream fish habitat. The mitigation area consist of riparian and wetland buffer degraded from the historic use as well as a vegetation community comprised of a mix of invasive species. This area provides few of the recognized function of riparian buffers. The lack of woody vegetation reduces numerous functions in the riparian area including: lack of shading, source of woody debris recruitment, structure for riparian wildlife for food, denning and shelter, thermal cover for riparian wildlife, and a lack of durable woody plants with root systems that hold, protect and bind the stream bank in place. Comparing qualitatively and functional attributes of this area before, as well as after the enhancement with a mix of woody tree City of Renton Department of Commun MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development (e) The proposal does not result in increased flood hazard risk; and (f) The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905. onmental Review Committee Report WAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 15 of 24 and shrub species, reveals all functions would be increased. The proposal would not increase the flood hazard risk on the site, and in fact helps mitigate risk with the debris flow berm. In addition the removal of the impervious surface increases flood area roughness as well as provides and area for storage and infiltration of potential flood waters. The proposed use of enhanced buffers for reduction in width is a standard format that has been backed by many studies and is considered the "best available science". The reduced width has been compensated for through restoration and enhancement to make up for the lost function due to a reduction in width. The applicant has provided a mitigation plan which depicts the buffer enhancement plan, and maintenance and monitoring. Conceptually the mitigation plan appears acceptable; however, many details of the plan are missing to gain compliance with RMC 4-8-120. As such, staff recommends approval of the proposed buffer reduction for the area located adjacent to Road B (south) pursuant to the submittal of a detailed stream buffer mitigation and monitoring plan that complies with the criteria included in RMC 4-8-120 and RMC 3-4-050. Debris Flow Berm in Stream Buffer In addition to the stream buffer reduction the applicant has proposed to place the debris flow mitigation berm within the northern boundary of the stream buffer. The provided critical areas report indicates that the existing conditions of the stream buffer is highly degraded and lacks typical buffer functions for a number of reasons, as discussed above. The report concludes that the rocked portion of the buffer would not create any new impacts or degrade the buffer from its existing condition. The reduction in buffer and the placement of the berm are necessary for the proposed plat layout to function with a looped road. Water Line is Stream Buffer Beyond the proposed buffer reduction and berm placement within the buffer the applicant is requesting a variance to construct a water line through the stream buffer. This would be a temporary buffer impact of approximately 1,000 square feet of stream buffer during the construction ofthe water line. Based on the existing utilities in the area, the applicant contends there is no other location where this water connection can be made. The applicant has proposed to complete the construction work in the dry season and re-plant the area with native vegetation. This subject work would require a Hydraulic Permit Approval (HPA), and the applicant intends to follow all the requirements anticipated as a part of the HPA. The provided ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commu, MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development onmental Review Committee Report LUA11-034, £_CF, PP,_ V-)l, PPUD Page 16 of 24 Critical Areas Report concluded that the extension of the water line and the restoration of the buffer would not negatively impact the waterbody in any way. Pedestrian Trail Included as a part of the proposal, the applicant has provided a pedestrian trail system throughout the development. This trail system creates a loop around the site, utilizing the top of the debris flow mitigation berm located in the stream buffer and a portion of the trail is located in the buffer of both Wetland A and B. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-0SOC.7.a trails are permitted in stream and wetland buffers provided the trail is located in the outer 25% ofthe buffer, enhancement of the buffer area is provided, the trail width is equal to or less than 12 feet in width, and the trail is constructed of permeable materials. The provided mitigation plan identifies buffer enhancement plantings for Wetland A and Bin addition to enhancement for the stream buffer. However, the material to be used for trail construction was not provided with the application. As such, staff recommends approval of the trail within both the stream buffer and the wetland based on the criteria in RMC 4-3-0SOC.7.a subject approval of the trail surface materials. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Comments On July 23, 2011 staff received comments from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division. Many comments requested clarification about project details, however additional concerns were noted. The Muckleshoot's noted the debris flow mitigation berm location within the stream buffer and the potential for this berm to reduce the lateral movements of the stream. Furthermore, a portion of the stream is located within existing half culverts, and the Muckelshoot's recommend the removal of the cu Ivers as a part of the project to restore the stream to a more natural condition. In addition to the half culverts, under current conditions there is a gravel storage/parking lot located in the "dog leg" section of the site. The Muckelshoot's comments recommend this parking area be decommissioned and replanted, as this facility would no longer be needed as a part ofthe proposed project. Based on the impacts anticipated to the stream through the buffer reduction and the including of a berm in the stream buffer staff concurs with the Muckelshoot's recommendations to decommission the vehicle parking area. As such, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the vehicle storage area/parking area located on the southern portion of the site be decommissioned and e- vegetated to prevent additional erosion impacts. Due to the potential stream impacts on site, Staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated August 12, 2011. Mitigation Measures: 1. The vehicle storage area/parking area located on the southern portion of the site shall be decommissioned and the area shall be re-vegetated to the minimum amount necessary to prevent erosion; this re-vegetation shall be included in the final mitigation and monitoring plan for stream buffer reduction. The final mitigation and monitoring plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department Project Manager for review and approval prior to final plat recording. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commu, MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 Economic Development onmental Review Committee Report . LUA11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 17 of 24 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Revised Critical Areas Report & Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated August 12, 2011. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations b. Storm Water Impacts: The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report ("Drainage Report") with the project application, prepared by Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, dated March 15, 2011. The Drainage Report includes preliminary analysis of existing site conditions and addresses the presence of the stream, wetlands, and steep slopes. Pursuant to the provided report, under current conditions, the stream, a drainage ditch that runs along the south side of SR-169, and a 12- inch culvert and catch basin at the SR-169 entrance are the only storm drainage structures onsite. For storm water detention and water quality treatment, the applicant has proposed a detention/wet pond to be located in a separate tract in the northwest corner ofthe site. The Drainage Report indicates that runoff from roof drains, yards, and driveways would be collected and conveyed to a drainage system under the proposed roads that would convey stormwater to the proposed detention/wet pond. The pond is proposed to be a combined detention and water quality pond, with permanent storage in the bottom of the pond, and live flow control storage above the dead storage. The pond has been designed to provided Level 2 flow control and Basic water quality treatment. The proposed design of the detention pond would provide at least 59,500 cubic feet of storage, The detention facility would release the storm water to its natural discharge location at the northwest corner of the site to the south roadside ditch of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169). The developed site would have approximately 2.82 acres of impervious surface and 1.66 acres of landscaped and planed area (excluding stream buffers and other critical areas), The Drainage Report identifies that the conveyance system proposed for the development would be designed to convey the 25-year peak flows and checked for flooding conditions at the 100-year event per King County drainage standards. The applicant proposed to provide erosion and sedimentation control by utilizing Best Management Practices (BMPs) from the King County Stormwater Management Manual. BMPs proposed to be utilized included sediment pond(s) and/or trap(s), silt fencing, construction safety fencing, interceptor v-ditches, rock check dams, plastic sheeting of stockpiles, straw mulch, hydro- seeding, catch basin protection, and rocked construction entrances, etc. Furthermore, the applicant has proposed to utilize the detention/wet pond as a temporary erosion and sediment control pond during construction. BMPs should be helpful in mitigating the potential impacts of erosion and sedimentation however; the proposed detention pond and berm are both located within the stream buffer and/or close proximity to the stream buffer. Due to the potential for impacts to the stream and wetlands as a result of construction actives, staff recommends a mitigation measure that construction fencing and silt fencing be placed along the buffer (or reduced buffer) of the stream and wetlands during construction. The Drainage Report addressed both upstream and downstream runoff analysis. Pursuant to the provided report the drainage pattern for the upstream portion would remain the same under the proposed developed condition. Offsite runoff would be conveyed around the site to the roadside ditch along the south side of Maple Valley Highway {SR-169), The outfall of the proposed ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commw MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 , Economic Development ronmenta/ Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 18 of 24 detention pond would discharge into the SR-169 south side ditch near the northwest corner of the site. Then near the west property line of the site, where the stream joins SR-169, the discharged stormwater runoff is proposed to enter an existing 36-inch CMP culvert that crosses under the highway and discharges to the wetland area inside the Cedar River Flood plain, located in Cavanaugh Pond Natural Area. Pursuant to the downstream analysis, the 36-inch culvert has a slightly reversed slope and is nearly buried by sediment. However, the Drainage Report concludes that if the 36-inch culvert is under capacity, the SR-169 south ditch would continue to drain to the west and either crosses under SR-169 northerly at the next downstream culverts or continue in the ditch and directly discharged into the Cedar River near the bridge. The Drainage Report concludes the proposed development would not create negative effect to the downstream drainage system and proposes to remove the sediment around the inlet of the 36-inch CMP culvert and provided rip rap around the inlet, to improve the sediment problem. However, once the 36-inch culvert is improved the runoff directly discharges into Cavanaugh Pond, a King County Park, and not directly into the Cedar River, furthermore if runoff bypasses this culvert the drainage report has indicated that stormwater would cross Maple Valley Highway further to the west. To the west is the City of Renton Park, Ron Regis, if stormwater is discharged directly into Ron Regis Park, it could have impacts on the City's Park. Because of this unique situation, there may be additional impact to the City's park as a result of stormwater discharge at this location. As such, staff recommends as a mitigation measure, that additional downstream analysis is conducted to analyze the impacts of stormwater runoff on Ron Regis Park and any impacts to the Park shall be mitigated. This analysis can be included in the Drainage Report submitted with the construction permit application. Mitigation Measures: l. Construction fencing and silt fencing shall be placed along the buffer (or reduced buffer) of the stream and wetlands during construction. During construction of the debris flow mitigation berm, the fencing may be moved south to provide space to construct the berm within the buffer area. 2. Additional downstream analysis shall be conducted to analyze the impacts of stormwater runoff on Ron Regis Park and any impacts to the Park shall be mitigated. This analysis can be included in the Drainage Report submitted with the construction permit application. Nexus: SEPA Regulations 3. Parks and Recreation Impacts: The proposed development would reduce the number of housing units at the subject site. As such the impacts on parks may also be reduced as a result of this change. Based on the exiting number of units the proposed project would not be subject to mitigation fees for Parks. However, the City is currently amending the SEPA based mitigation fee to a GMA based impact fee. The applicant shall be required to pay any fees in place at the time of Final Plat, Construction Permit, or Building Permit, based on the codes in place at the time. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 4. Historic and Cultural Preservation Impacts: Pursuant to the Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008. The Cedar River historically flowed up against the southern slopes of the site. Since approximately 13,000 years ago, the Cedar River has meandered downstream ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commu MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 ~ Economic Development ironmental Review Committee Report . __ WAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 19 of 24 in the Renton-Maple Valley area across the width of the river valley. Furthermore, developments within the vicinity of the Cedar River are more likely to be sites where significant historic and/or cultural resources would be found, and the subject development has indicated that site grading would be conducted. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure that requires the applicant and/or developer to stop work and immediately notify the City of Renton Planning Division, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation if any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found. Mitigation Measures: If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found, all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton Planning Division, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 5. Transportation Impacts: The applicant submitted with the project application packet a Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010. This analysis concludes that the McCormick Plat would result in an estimated net increase of 6 PM peak hour trips, 5 AM peak hour trips and an overall increase in 89 trips. The site is bordered by SR-169 on the north; this road has a posted speed limit of 50 mph. The school bus stop for Tiffany Park Elementary, Nelsen Middle School and/or Lindbergh High School is located in a bus pullout area on the south side of SR-169 adjacent to the east side of the existing Valley View Mobile Home Park driveway. Furthermore, four accidents were recorded within approximately 1,000 feet of the Valley View Mobile Home Park driveway for the 3-year period ending in April 30, 2010. All four accidents were single vehicle accidents, and the TraffEx report concludes that there are no safety issues with the proposed site access to SR 169. The Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) current Design Manual was used to determine if the subject projected traffic volumes at the intersection of the site's access point warrant a right turn lane or pocket on SR-169. The WSDOT Design Manual recommends a right turn pocket or taper on SR 169 at the site access. Due to the potential traffic impacts of the subject project, staff recommends as a mitigation measures that the applicant be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010, that was submitted with the project application and provided a right turn pocket along SR-169 for safe access to the subject site. Furthermore traffic impacts to City streets are expected due to the additional trips created as a result of the proposed development. As such, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant pay a Traffic Impact/Mitigation Fee in place at the time of Final Plat recording. Current fee structure includes a $75.00 per new trip, based on the proposal this fee would equate to $6,675.00 (89 trips x $75.00 = $6,675.00). Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated October 14, 2010, that was submitted with the project application and provided a right turn pocket along SR-169 for safe access to the subject site. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Deportment of Commu MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 1 Economic Development ironmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 20 of 24 2. The applicant shall pay the Traffic Impact/Mitigation Fee as required at the time of Final Plat recording, Construction Permit, or Building Permit based on the codes in place at that time. Nexus: SEPA, Transportation Mitigation Fee Ordinance No. 3100., GMA 6, Fire & Police Impacts: The proposed development would reduce the number of housing units at the subject site. As such the impacts on Fire and Police may also be reduced as a result of this change. Based on the exiting number of units the proposed project would not be subject to mitigation fees for Fire. However, the City is currently amending the SEPA based mitigation fees to a GMA based impact fee. The applicant shall be required to pay any fees in place at the time of Final Plat, Construction Permit, or Building Permit, based on the codes in place at the time. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 7, Housing Impacts: The existing development (Valley View Mobile Home Park) consists of approximately 40 mobile homes and 1 existing duplex, which equals 42 dwelling units that provide housing to the low- income residence of the City of Renton. The applicant has proposed to remove all 42 dwelling units to develop the McCormick Plat. The new residential development proposal would provide 34 single- family residential units, which are anticipated to provide housing for the middle-income housing bracket. This proposed development would result in a potential loss of affordable housing in the Renton community by eliminating approximately 42 existing manufactured homes spaces and replacing them with 34 new single-family residential lots; an actual net loss of 10 dwelling units. City policies in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan ensure that housing exists for all economic segments of Renton's populations. The project impacts existing affordable housing in Renton, including a loss of affordable manufactured and mobile home units and direct impacts to the residents currently living at Valley View Mobile Home Park as such, mitigation should be provided. Currently the State of Washington provides financial assistance to manufactured home owners who must relocate due to redevelopment/park closure. However, this program requires each homeowner to qualify for reimbursement and the residents are required to fund their own relocation and then apply to the State for reimbursement. Finding the available funds to relocate and waiting for approval and reimbursement from the State is a hardship in itself for the low-income residence located at the Valley View Mobile Home Park. Pursuant to a Memorandum issued by the State Relocation Assistance Program, from February of 2010, a large number of park closures are causing delay in reimbursement for relocation expenses to eligible applicants. The State proclaims, in this Memo, that they are unable to estimate how long the reimbursement process will take due to the fluctuation of the revenue source. However, the state will reimburse qualified homeowners up to $7,500 for a single-section home and $12,000 for a multi-section home, there is no State reimbursement for owners of recreational vehicles, park models, and travel trailers. During the comment period for the subject project, many phone calls and personal visits from residents or mobile home owners living at the site were fielded by staff. However, these comments are unofficial, as they are not in writing, but the conversations lead staff to believe that re-location assistance is necessary for the residents located in Valley View. On August 2, 2011 a letter was received from Courtney Kaylor with McCullough Hill Leary, PS the legal representation for Mr. ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commu. MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 ', Economic Development ·ronmentaf Review Committee Report WAll-034, £CF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 21 of 24 McCormick. This letter represented the above situation with State reimbursement and the need to provided re-location assistance to the residence at Valley View Mobile Home Park. Included in this letter was Mr. McCormick agreement to a mitigation measure to mitigate for the loss of affordable housing. Mr. McCormick ("owner") voluntary agreed to pay the relocation cost of the homeowners within the Valley View Mobile Home Park subject to the following conditions: 1. The relocation assistance program currently administered by the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program") must exist at the time notice of closure of the Park is provided by the Owner; 2. The Homeowners to whom assistance is provided must qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the Homeowners qualification; 3. The Owner will pay only those relocation cost for which the State Relocation Assistance Program provides reimbursement; and 4. The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. The above mitigation measure would provide the residents of Valley View upfront funds to relocate, prior to State reimbursement. In turn, the property owner would receive the reimbursement from the State. The above mitigation measure would assist any residents that qualify for State relocation assistance; however for those who do not qualify would not receive assistance from the landowner. As such staff recommends a mitigation measure for the loss of affordable housing that is similar to the proposed mitigation by the applicant; however, the assistance shall be provided to all residence residing in Valley View at the time of park closure notice. All the residents of Valley View Mobile Home Park are not property owners, as such, they are not automatically notified regarding land use applications for the subject project or permitted activities on the subject site, although, the residents would be directly affected by any changes to the site. As such, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that information be posted on site visible to the residents notifying them of any land use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. Mitigation Measures: 1. The owner of the Valley View Mobile Home Park ("owner") voluntary agreed and shall pay the relocation cost of the homeowners within the Valley View Mobile Home Park subject to the following conditions: a. The relocation assistance program currently administered by the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program") must exist at the time notice of closure of the Park is provided by the Owner; b. Assistance shall be provided to all homeowners that reside within Valley View Mobile Home Park at the time of park closure notice and meet the State Relocation Assistance Program income requirements for eligibility, however those homeowners who qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the homeowners qualification; c. The Owner will pay up to $7,500 for a single-section home and $12,000 for a multi-section home, the funds would be paid only those relocation cost for which the State Relocation Assistance Program provides reimbursement, including but not limited to removal and ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Commu MCCORMICK PLAT Report of August 22, 2011 ~ Economic Development ironmental Review Committee Report LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Page 22 of 24 reattachment of attached awnings, decks, and stairs; prep for transport; moving the home; permits; hook-ups to all utilities; rental of moving equipment; repair of damage caused during transport; or demolition and a down payment for another manufactured home; and d. The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. 2. Information shall be posted on site visible to the residents notifying them of any land use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. The notice shall be posted prior to submittal to the City or the same day as the submittal. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, City of Renton Comprehensive Plan E. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant." ,/ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report_ Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, September 9, 2011. Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be filed in writing at the City Clerk's office along with the required fee. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton WA 98057. ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Communitv & Economic Development MCCORMICK PIA T r-··ironmental Review Committee Report WAll-034, £CF, PP, V-A, PPUD Report of August 22, 2011 Page 23 of 24 of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. The applicant will be required to submit a Final Stream Mitigation Report and Maintenance and Monitoring proposal. In addition, the applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and signage, and providing the City with a site restoration surety device and, later, a maintenance and monitoring surety device. 5. 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. 6. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. 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. Plan Review -Water: l. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water District. 2. Per the City Fire Marshal, the preliminary 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 ifthe fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. Lateral spacing of fire hydrants is predicated on hydrants being located at street intersections (also capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 gpm) within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along the travel route. 3. All lots on dead end access roadways that exceed 500 feet require fire sprinklers. This applies to lots 14 through 17, and lots 20 through 26, as proposed. 4. The proposed project needs to show how they intend to serve the new development with water service to all of the lots and fire protection. Plan Review -Sanitary Sewer: l. A sanitary sewer availability certificate is required from the Cedar River Sewer District. 2. The proposed project needs to show how they intend to serve the new development with sanitary sewer service to all of the lots. Plan Review -Street Improvements: 1. Street improvements including curb, gutter, 5' sidewalks, street lighting, and paving with an 8' planter strip all to City standards will be required to be installed across the full frontage of the parcel being developed. 2. The internal streets shall install a minimum of 20' pavement with parking on one side; hence, a 26' pavement section. The road section shall include 5' sidewalks on both sides (in those areas where there are lots on both sides). 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 20 feet wide, fully paved, with a turning radius of 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside. 4. Residential alleys are 16 feet in width. 5. Street lighting will be required per City of Renton standards along the frontage and on the internal ERC Reportll-034.doc City of Renton Department of Communitv & Economic Development MCCORMICK PLAT c-vironmental Review Committee Report LUA11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD - Report of August 22, 2011 Page 24 of 24 streets. Private street lighting, including PSE, is not allowed. 6. All new electrical, phone, and cable services and lines must be undergrounded. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording the plat. Plan Review -Storm Drainage: l. The City does not have any records of existing storm drainage facilities in Maple Valley Hwy fronting this parcel. 2. A conceptual drainage plan and report is required to be submitted with the formal application for the plat. A drainage control plan designed per the City of Renton Amendments to the King County Surface Water Manual 2009 is required. 3. The conceptual storm drainage plan needs to address how the roof runoff from the new lots will be handled. 4. SDC fees are $1,012 per lot. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. Plan Review -General: 1. All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals, prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards, by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two of the City of Renton Horizontal and Vertical Control Network. 3. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. Half ofthe fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. Fire and Emergency Services: 1. Fire mitigation and/or impact fees shall be paid at the time of final plat recording. 2. 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 building and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. A water availability certificate is required form Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 322-psi point loading exceeding 150-feet require an approved turnaround. Full 90-foot diameter cul-de-sac required is required when dead end streets exceed 300-feet long. City street standards required 20-foot wide streets with a 6-foot wide parking area on one side of the street only. Parking is not allowed on the other side of the street and shall be posted as such. 4. Homes on all proposed lots are required to be fire sprinkled. Park Department: Parks mitigation and/or impact fees shall be paid at the time of final plat recording. Property Services: Property Services Comments are attached to this report as Exhibit 15. King County: King county Code 21A.24 shall be followed for the portion of the site located within King County. ERC Reportll-034.doc .,--' 0 1 i 5 ' n..8 I • ~ ~ I s' f i ui ~ g "' 0 ~ ) ui 0 (j ~ 0 " ' a: ~ L z " "' ~ f-- ,f '<::( "'_j ~a_ :t~ ~o ~~ ~ct ~o go ~ (.) ~~ 0 ~u_ ~o wa :::) ~a_ i>-"ct i "' : ' i !_~ "-0~ w- "'-J f UJ ~8: I f-I u. 0 z g 0 1 1 I ~ 0 IL .,: ' ! ; j! I 0 N I::; a:I 1-1 ::c >< w (j w (D I sf ;:, w ~ ' (D w I f-- ll. 0 z 0 F a: 0 0.. <( C I .. I ~ ' 0 :; i ' • ' i E ' • ! i l ;~ I I! ., ~~ 1~ ! ! ' l Ei IE ·! I: ' ,£ ,, 8~ t{~ ·- -- ' i ' 11:;~ ~i ! I 1! !,, ' ii. I~ 6tlu :1 '""' "'< !Ze;"" ,. "rii !i ., ·, " Ii I: !i; " o,e; ~ n ! ,· .!• s d 11 ' ' I! ,, ,' 8i i I ' • :~ ! ' ' ' ~ ::::h '. !i "1 I! i • M I- I-I m 1-1 ::c >< w ' ' ~ ! ~;5 ' :, ~ . ' I • i Q ~ ~· :. ~ ui Ill ill C, a: i il 0.: I ~ I ,;f I "' (j I w '~ co I / I ... ,;f I ;:, I J I 1 I ' I I i I I JI ; I g (j w co t w Cl w I I '1 ~ ! ! / > I fC I I I a: I 0 J: .tt ._ • ! < \: i~! i ;,I i \ i:l1 !.~ i ,,, ~.,. I ( ::1 ;i w 10 ill ('J a: z (') "' 0.: ~ ef "' (j w [/) ef ~ w [/) w I I- IL 0 z 0 F a: 0 D.. <( 0 z <( ~ $C ill 10 ill ('J a: z (') "' 0.: ~ ~ (j w Cl) ef ~ w [/) w ~ IL 0 z 0 F a: 0 0.. <( ' ! !----li ,, ·i) =====.lfl ! i: ' ! I . I • r 0 ~ 0 <O ~· ·~-. -.-~-: --•. -~; "i "'c._.. ! _,_. ::::_:c_::--:==;:;,.~.- f 0 ~ 0 " ! ,0 <C "i ,. 0 ~";~, Ill I~-::-a:v _.._ co N <( _'<:j'" .K) 'CL 0 N • C ' ~ ' i I i.n t:; m 1-4 :c >< w 0['1;,oN,;, A PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 23, TWP. 23 N., AGE. 5 E., WM.ANDA PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 24, TWP. 23 N., AGE. 5 E., W.M. ~ce_-1 I--=-----·=···-1·=··,:·~~-~ .... ,0---~··r .;.;11 i-· r-1 1--DIO"E,_."[(ffl'.J .1:1~-·-~,:;»--·-~ ROAD A CR'088 9EC110N (·~~/ HKll!IMYJnil~.-· "" , .. , ! ,J--'""~ j i I ·· .-,-, .. ,, .. ~, r I _ .. ,·-[--,-·· < I I '""'' ll~OO,l'tl•NtllYI') I ,,,.DCOOIVC,.."C(WI') I l[ .... e I,. e• U(~r j~ .. --~=1 l = -rn-0, :;"1'1;~,;:111~=1 ~~1.0:\:)i!~,£,.~. s ·-,~·;;~:;~!111'i\"i/' ROAD B CROSS SECTION ,. Pn<ll'OS,::O!IE10t'C"C[ -PA<lPOSfO O(SIO[Nf.E STAE/IM BUFFER lJ'R\'ll'<)Q ""- I SITE SECTION C-C SC,,llE; r·-10· EXHIBIT 6 y) -~ -~ ,_, " ,,"·•'" ~ .,,ii m·il 'l i: r-' '"" If ~~;;j;;;p ... ~:,i ! E §, ! I I,) 'iii !~ ~ '" ROAD C CROSS SECTION = Cit1: f...,,,_ . .-• 0.f ,,D II: (I) ' .i ·-Cl ' • g . 1· -~ D. t•:111\l § ~ "' I~ ,• . ~µ~J u .;; !, ~ "I ~ B " u @ Ill 11!! o' ::; ~nOJFCf NO' orou.a ""A"" SY• <'-!B 12.--m-~ma CONCEP"IVAI.. ROAD AND Bill: B!:CllON f<)nn. it?r,t 11/g Div -Iv, J IS10, I MAy 2 i) 2011 I E.9?, !?:•, · f;· «:\~u11r~;f)) ~ 3i w "' ui C, cc z " N {L ~ ,f N 0 w (/) ,f ~ w (/) w I f- IL 0 z 0 E 0 0.. .,: 0 z .,: ~ ;;: w "' ui C, a: z "' N [L ~ ci N 0 w (/) ,f ~ w (/) w I f- IL 0 z 0 E 0 a.. .,: ! =;::.,~~ ooc.<i""' ~~ IV'lclO=: , I ! l ~ :; ' CO, , O• O....i "' .... 1-1 CCI 1-1 ::c >< w ·-,, \, / ··\: t.(\·-.. \ .:__;::_'.'.:. ·::.:. ~~ ·:,.--~'--< '' ) ( • < ~,.i. \ ~ '---·-~ / / ' I i -.. ..., ' co I- I-I ca 1-1 :c >< w D Wr TJJ !I 0, z 0 ~. 2 <: °' I:; llCI 1-1 ::c >< w I Ph1dirig Area A (Sh~et W-2) T ~--------------1 ~~::·::.~_-_:: EXHIBIT 10 ' ! I • i -, •• ~1<< D -·= -.. ---..__.,......._ =-.. ~ ~± ~~~:;~j~~~------- I_ __ FloJrtinq l\reoJ A (Sht!el W-2} --8 . © @ • © 0 ' ® © • © . ---,--1 --... ~-i ~::;-:;L-.... \) © . __ ,.,.,_ .... © EXHIBIT 11 Plan,irc Area B --= ~~-·--.. =-=--· ~-----' --,~ ---,~ ----,~ ·-----~ ----'~ ~--,~ --I I ' J l i l ! ' l • i ' ! I ii !l '. { ' i • l ' ~ i ' • t • l 1 l :d . , ' ' 1 ! l ' • i l i ! ' , , I' ., l~ •• N ..-1 1- 1-t ca t-1 ::c >< w ._$1 ~~ ·~-l j . . M ,-1 I- I-I cc M ::c >< w ! • ' I ! " 0 6 I ' ~ ' n !~•ill " !ii,!,! 1IHi Iii !lj!:ji 1111 !i ~!ii!; ii~~ ii ,h, •• _.I t : ~ f i !' ! I! iii 1' in M ! I .;., ih i _, i(H ,.. i-11 • ·1 ;u; I ,r~ ~d1 h~! ~~iz hh ' I I . h l ! !I . i ! ?., ; : i fir I ! ' !l. I!! ... ... 'r hi m .,, I!! i •. ' ii Jil ! lilJif!!i 1 lllm 1!1 I l g~ ":~ i i~~ -. ' ~! ~· N :.'·i ! '· ! i! i! ! 1! ! 1! 1" !,, ,1 ii ,I I 111 il , I s;:: ' • 1 • DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: TO: FROM: June 21, 2011 Vanessa Dolbee Bob Mac Onie-~ I SUBJECT: McCormick Plat, LUA-11-034-PP, PUD Format and Legal Description Review I have reviewed the above referenced preliminary plat submittal and have the following comments: Comments for Project Manager: Please note that the City of Renton currently has a lien recorded against this property, under recording number 20110215001066. This subdivision should include the segregation of the "panhandle" portion of the property into a separate "Tract." I don't know how only part of a property can be platted, underlying Parcel 'A.' If a separate tract isn't to be created by the plat a lot line adjustment needs to be approved and recorded prior to the recording of the plat. Comments for the Applicant: Correct the indexing information with respect to Section 24 as the site is a portion of the SW quarter. The work 'TRACT appears in several of the underlying 'Parcel' legal descriptions on the Plat and on the title report when it is apparent that the word should be 'TRACK' vis-a-vis reference to the 'centerline of tract [sic] and right of way.' The title company should also correct their records as well. Remove the Project Data block, including the blocks for the owner, Engineer and Surveyor on page 1 of 2 as these are only preliminary plat approval requirements. Information needed for final plat approval includes the following: -----------===== h:\file sysllnd -land subdivision & surveying records\lnd-10 -plats\0486\rvl 10622.doc Addressee Kame Page 2 of3 Date of Memo Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA-11-034-FP and LND-10-0486 respectively, on the final plat submittal (all submittal sheets). The LUA number will change for when final plat submittal is made. Provide sufficient information to determine how the final plat boundary was established and identify a basis of bearing related to the defining elements, the date existing monuments were visited, note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any, and all the other requirements specified in WAC 332-130-050. List and if possible delineate all easements and other encumbrances of record. Show any encroachments by or on the property at issue. Provide calculations and closures for the Plat and lots and tracts. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC 332-130-100. Note the addresses for the platted lots. The address will be available after approval of the preliminary plat. Street names are be assign and will be provided when available. Note what is to be set at all property corners and for right of way monuments. Complete City of Renton Monument Cards, with reference points of all new right of way monuments set as part of the plat. Provide an OWNER'S DECLARATION; statement of dedication of the plat. Required City of Renton signatures on the final plat submittal include the Administrator of Public Works, the Mayor and the City Clerk. An approval block for the city's Finance Director is also required. Note that the title for the Administrator has changed. Also provide the pertinent King County recording an approval blocks. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat need to sign the final plat and the signatures must be accompanied by the appropriate notaries. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, easements or agreements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawing and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) will be cross referenced on the plat in the appropriate locations. With a Homeowner's Association (HOA) planned for this plat, the following language concerning ownership of the various Tracts (the open space and recreation tracts) applies to this plat and should be noted on the final plat submittal as follows: --------------------- Upon the recording of this plat, Tract(s) .... is hereby granted and conveyed to the Plat Name Homeowners' Association (HOA) for Purpose of Tracts. All h:\file sys\lnd -land subdivision & surveying records\lnd-10 -plats\0486\rv110622.doc Addressee Name Page 3 of3 Date of Memo necessary maintenance activities for said Tract(s) will be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non-payment of property taxes for .a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have ,an equal and undivided interest in the Tract previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. NOTE: Use the above noted language for the other tracts associated with this plat, with changes made to said language as needed, depending on the type of tract noted. Clearly state who is to own the various tract's created if not the HOA. Provide a 'Legend' for the plat drawing identifying the symbols used therein. Include a north arrow with the vicinity map. Note whether the adjoining properties are platted (show plat name and lot numbers) or 'Unplatted'. A Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) statement needs to be include.d for those areas identified as such. An updated Plat Certificate dated within 45 days of final approval by the Hearing Examiner. Fee Review Comments: Please contact Dave Christensen for the fee review. -------·-····---··----------·---·-------------·-·--·----'--·-··· . ---~-----------------~---·--· h:\file sys\lnd -land subdivision & surveying records\lnd-10 -plats\0486\rvl 10622.doc Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Karen, Vanessa Dolbee Thursday, August 18, 2011 8:28 AM 'Karen Walter' EXHIBIT 16 RE: McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUA11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPDU; Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated A8-106 Revised Report 8-12-11 (2).pdf; AS-106 Data Forms.pct!; AS-106 8-8-2011 Base CONCEPT.PDF; AS-106 8-8-2011 Base PLANTING.PDF; AS-106 8-8-2011 Base NOTES.PDF Thank you for your comments on the McCormick Plat and PUD, LUAll-034. Please find responses to your comments below: I. Please clarify the purpose of the "debris flow berm" proposed for this project. This berm will restrict the lateral movement of the Type N stream and likely interfere with the transport of spawning gravels and wood from the upstream portions of the stream that may otherwise distribute downstream including the Cedar River. The purpose of the debris flow berm is to prevent debris overflow to the McCormick Plat future homes. There is an existing water quality/detention pond (known as Summerfield Creek Wet Pond #1) at the headwaters to the stream that runs along the south side of the site. The pond has a primary and secondary overflow system. In the extremely unlikely event that both systems fail, the debris flow berm will halt overflow of water and soil debris from reaching the development. The stream is located in a half culvert at the toe of the slope located to the south of the site. The stream is topographically higher than land to the north and generally no gravel or sediment enters the stream from the north side of the channel. The berm is located to the north of the stream and is located entirely outside the ordinary high water mark of the stream. Therefore, the berm will actually allow spawning gravels and wood to be maintained within the channel and will not interfere with any transport or recruitment of gravel. 2. We would also like to see the proposed planting plan for the berm and stream riparian areas described in the revised Critical Areas report to ensure that riparian functions will be maximized. The detailed mitigation plan and an updated Critical Area Report dated August 12, 2011 provide this information and show the proposed plantings, habitat materials as well as describe functional lift from the proposed enhancement project. Please find this information attached. 3. Please clarify the purpose of the existing half culverts in the stream on site. These culverts should be removed as part of this project if they are not needed to provide access to the southern portion of the site to restore the stream to a more natural condition. The gravel road should also be decommissioned and replanted, as well as the vehicle storage area since they are likely not needed for the project and will reduce sediment sources to the stream. As described in the Critical Area Report dated August 12, 2011, the project significantly improves the quality of the stream buffer by removing existing mobile homes and concrete pads located in the buffer area. The half- culvert that the stream flows in is an existing condition. The half-culvert is south of and outside any work --------···---··-------'--"-== 1 The applicant contends that no kin the channel is required for this p ect. Removal of the culverts would require substantial stream channel relocation and armoring to prevent erosion, which would in turn require state and federal permits. This work is outside the scope of this project. As such, in order to resolve this concern City staff feels a meeting between the tribes, City of Renton, the Applicant and Ed Sewall, project Biologist would facilitate in resolving concerns around this stream. The applicant and City staff would like to keep the project on schedule for the Public Hearing, as many members of the public have been notified of the hearing date. If it all possible a meeting for early next week, Monday or Tuesday would be ideal. The City staff is proposing a mitigation measure that would require the removal of the overflow parking area including the impervious surfaces. This area would be required to be re-landscaped to reduce erosion potential. 4. The existing potable water well should be required to be decommissioned as part of the project since the project will be receiving municipal water from the Cedar Water and Sewer District. The applicant has indicated that they would like to reserve the right to utilize any existing wells and water rights on site for irrigation purposes. Any well not chosen by the applicant for utilization will be decommissioned. 5. Please clarify how the applicant proposes to route stormwater to the Cedar River. This approach would require piping stormwater offset underneath SR 169 and through downstream properties. Since there is no discussion about easements or other agreements with downstream property owners, it is not clear how the stormwater will be routed directly to the Cedar River. Also, what analysis has been completed to evaluate the potential to infiltrate stormwater or use low impact development techniques to treat and manage stormwater. The proposed detention/wet pond will discharge to the public stormwater system. Therefore, no drainage easement is required. The stormwater system for the plat connects to an existing public drainage conveyance adjacent to the western property boundary to an existing 36" CMP culvert crossing underneath SR 169 near the northwest corner of the site. The culvert drains to a stream/open channel that in turn discharges to the Cedar River. A rip-rap erosion control pad at the discharge point is proposed. The detention/wet pond is designed with extensive landscaping to provide wildlife habitat and an amenity to the site. A Geotechnical Report has been prepared by Geotech Consultant, Inc. According to the Geotechnical Report, the site is covered with approximately 10 to 40 feet of relatively loose mass waste soils lying over mostly medium-dense alluvial sand and gravel. Groundwater was encountered at 2.5' to 11.5' below existing ground at test pits and boring locations. Due to the shallow ground water level and hilly site condition, infiltration is not suitable for this site. Small lot sizes are proposed for this site to minimize the footprint for the site. Other low impact improvement BMPs that utilize infiltration or dispersion are not deemed suitable for this site. Please let me know as soon as possible if a meeting next week would be workable. Again, thank you for your comments on the subject project. 'Vanessa Cf)o[6ee Senior Planner 2 Department of Community & Eco, City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 c Development From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 12:18 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPDU; Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, In today's mail, we received the revised Notice of Application for the McCormick Preliminary Plat. Previously we submitted the comments in the email below to the Notice of Application. Did the City send a response to these comments? I cannot find record of them in our files. If not, please consider these comments applicable to the Revised Notice of Application. We look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 171'd Ave SE Aubum, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Karen Walter Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 11:45 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPDU; Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Notice of Application including the proposed mitigation measures, the environmental checklist and the revised Critical Areas Report (April 12 2011 ). We offer the following comments in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's treaty protected fisheries resources. 6. Please clarify the purpose of the "debris flow berm" proposed for this project. This berm will restrict the lateral movement of the Type N stream and likely interfere with the transport of spawning gravels and wood from the upstream portions of the stream that may otherwise distribute downstream including the Cedar River. 7. We would also like to see the proposed planting plan for the berm and stream riparian areas described in the revised Critical Areas report to ensure that riparian functions will be maximized. 8. Please clarify the purpose of the existing half culverts in the stream on site. These culverts should be removed as part of this project if they are not needed to provide access to the southern portion of the site to restore the stream to a more natural condition. The gravel road should also be decommissioned and replanted, as well as the vehicle storage area since they are likely not needed for the project and will reduce sediment sources to the stream. -------- 3 9. The existing potable water should be required to be decommission s part of the project since the project will be receiving municipal water from the Cedar Water and Sewer District. 10. Please clarify how the applicant proposes to route stormwater to the Cedar River. This approach would require piping stormwater offset underneath SR 169 and through downstream properties. Since there is no discussion about easements or other agreements with downstream property owners, it is not clear how the stormwater will be routed directly to the Cedar River. Also, what analysis has been completed to evaluate the potential to infiltrate stormwater or use low impact development techniques to treat and manage stormwater. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 172"1 Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 4 Denis Law c· - __ _:Ma:yoc _______ .. r· lty Q l August 23, 2011 Greg Diener Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S #100 Seattle, WA 98188 SUBJECT; "Off Hold" Notice ..!w~l!Wll Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator McCormick Plat/ LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Dear Mr. Diener Thank you for submitting the additional materials requested in the June 10, 2011 letter from the City. Your project has been taken off hold and the City will continue review of the McCormick Plat project. The Preliminary Plat, Preliminary PUD, and Critical Areas Variance were reviewed by the ERC, on Monday, August 22, 2011 and is tentatively scheduled to go before the Hearing Examiner on September 20, 2011 at 1:00 p.m. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 430- 7314. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: Robert McCormick/ Owner(s) Parties of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mark Peterson Tuesday, August 23, 2011 9: 11 AM Vanessa Dolbee David Pargas; Corey W Thomas McCormick Plat ' '.I , : , -, { .. ,' -·'. ... , ··" \ 1j . I..· " C Per our conversation yesterday, I will require the installation of fire sprinklers in all lots of the development. Based on the 2009 International Fire Code Chapter 9 Section 901.4.3, this requirement is due to the distance from the nearest fire station(s), a single point of access into the plat and reduced setbacks between the structures. Please amend Advisory Notes to Applicant under Fire & Emergency Services# 4 (pg 24) to reflect this requirement. Mark Peterson Fire Chief/Emergency Services Administrator City of Renton Fire & Emergency Services Dept. 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430. 7083 mapeterson@rentonwa.gov 1 • Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Karen, Vanessa Dolbee Thursday, August 18, 2011 8:28 AM 'Karen Walter' RE: McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUA11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPDU; Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated A8-106 Revised Report 8-12-11 (2).pdf; AS-106 Data Forms.pd!; A8-106 8-8-2011 Base CONCEPT.PDF; AS-106 8-8-2011 Base PLANTING.PDF; AB-106 8-8-2011 Base NOTES.PDF Thank you for your comments on the McCormick Plat and PUD, LUAll-034. Please find responses to your comments below: I. Please clarify the purpose of the "debris flow berm" proposed for this project. This berm will restrict the lateral movement of the Type N stream and likely interfere with the transport of spawning gravels and wood from the upstream portions of the stream that may otherwise distribute downstream including the Cedar River. The purpose of the debris flow berm is to prevent debris overflow to the McCormick Plat future homes. There is an existing water quality/detention pond (known as Summerfield Creek Wet Pond #1) at the headwaters to the stream that runs along the south side of the site. The pond has a primary and secondary overflow system. In the extremely unlikely event t!lat both systems fail, the debris flow berm will halt overflow of water and soil debris from reaching the development. The stream is located in a half culvert at the toe ofthe slope located to the south of the site. The stream is topographically higher than land to the north and generally no gravel or sediment enters the stream from the north side of the channel. The berm is located to the north of the stream and is located entirely outside the ordinary high water mark of the stream. Therefore, the berm will actually allow spawning gravels and wood to be maintained within the channel and will not interfere with any transport or recruitment of gravel. 2. We would also like to see the proposed planting plan for the berm and stream riparian areas described in the revised Critical Areas report to ensure that riparian functions will be maximized. The detailed mitigation plan and an updated Critical Area Report dated August 12, 2011 provide this information and show the proposed plantings, habitat materials as well as describe functional lift from the proposed enhancement project. Please find this information attached. 3. Please clarify the purpose of the existing half culverts in the stream on site. These culverts should be removed as part of this project if they are not needed to provide access to the southern portion of the site to restore the stream to a more natural condition. The gravel road should also be decommissioned and replanted, as well as the vehicle storage area since they are likely not needed for the project and will reduce sediment sources to the stream. As described in the Critical Area Report dated August 12, 2011, the project significantly improves the quality of the stream buffer by removing existing mobile homes and concrete pads located in the buffer area. The half- culvert that the stream flows in is an existing condition. The half-culvert is south of and outside any work proposed. I The applicant contends that no work in the channel is required for this project. Removal of the culverts would require substantial stream channel relocation and armoring to prevent erosion, which would in turn require state and federal permits. This work is outside the scope of this project. As such, in order to resolve this concern City staff feels a meeting between the tribes, City of Renton, the Applicant and Ed Sewall, project Biologist would facilitate in resolving concerns around this stream. The applicant and City staff would like to keep the project on schedule for the Public Hearing, as many members of the public have been notified of the hearing date. If it all possible a meeting for early next week, Monday or Tuesday would be ideal. The City staff is proposing a mitigation measure that would require the removal ofthe overflow parking area including the impervious surfaces. This area would be required to be re-landscaped to reduce erosion potential. 4. The existing potable water well should be required to be decommissioned as part of the project since the project will be receiving municipal water from the Cedar Water and Sewer District. The applicant has indicated that they would like to reserve the right to utilize any existing wells and water rights on site for irrigation purposes. Any well not chosen by the applicant for utilization will be decommissioned. 5. Please clarify how the applicant proposes to route stormwater to the Cedar River. This approach would require piping stormwater offset underneath SR 169 and through downstream properties. Since there is no discussion about easements or other agreements with downstream property owners, it is not clear how the stormwater will be routed directly to the Cedar River. Also, what analysis has been completed to evaluate the potential to infiltrate stormwater or use low impact development techniques to treat and manage stormwater. The proposed detention/wet pond will discharge to the public stormwater system. Therefore, no drainage easement is required. The stormwater system for the plat connects to an existing public drainage conveyance adjacent to the western property boundary to an existing 36" CMP culvert crossing underneath SR 169 near the northwest corner of the site. The culvert drains to a stream/open channel that in turn discharges to the Cedar River. A rip-rap erosion control pad at the discharge point is proposed. The detention/wet pond is designed with extensive landscaping to provide wildlife habitat and an amenity to the site. A Geotechnical Report has been prepared by Geotech Consultant, Inc. According to the Geotechnical Report, the site is covered with approximately 10 to 40 feet of relatively loose mass waste soils lying over mostly medium-dense alluvial sand and gravel. Groundwater was encountered at 2.5' to 11.5' below existing ground at test pits and boring locations. Due to the shallow ground water level and hilly site condition, infiltration is not suitable for this site. Small lot sizes are proposed for this site to minimize the footprint for the site. Other low impact improvement BMPs that utilize infiltration or dispersion are not deemed suitable for this site. Please let me know as soon as possible if a meeting next week would be workable. Again, thank you for your comments on the subject project. 'Vanessa <Dof6ee Senior Planner 2 Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430. 7314 From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Thursday, July 14, 201112:18 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPDU; Revised Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, In today's mail, we received the revised Notice of Application for the McCormick Preliminary Plat. Previously we submitted the comments in the email below to the Notice of Application. Did the City send a response to these comments? I cannot find record of them in our files. If not, please consider these comments applicable to the Revised Notice of Application. We look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/es/wot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015172'" Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Karen Walter Sent: Thursday, June 23, 201111:45 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPDU; Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Notice of Application including the proposed mitigation measures, the environmental checklist and the revised Critical Areas Report (April 12 2011 ). We offer the following comments in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's treaty protected fisheries resources. 6. Please clarify the purpose of the "debris flow berm" proposed for this project. This berm will restrict the lateral movement of the Type N stream and likely interfere with the transport of spawning gravels and wood from the upstream portions of the stream that may otherwise distribute downstream including the Cedar River. 7. We would also like to see the proposed planting plan for the berm and stream riparian areas described in the revised Critical Areas report to ensure that riparian functions will be maximized. 8. Please clarify the purpose of the existing half culverts in the stream on site. These culverts should be removed as part of this project if they are not needed to provide access to the southern portion of the site to restore the stream to a more natural condition. The gravel road should also be decommissioned and replanted, as well as the vehicle storage area since they are likely not needed for the project and will reduce sediment sources to the stream. 3 9. The existing potable water well should be required to be decommissioned as part of the project since the project will be receiving municipal water from the Cedar Water and Sewer District. 10. Please clarify how the applicant proposes to route stormwater to the Cedar River. This approach would require piping stormwater offset un<lerneath SR 169 and through downstream properties. Since there is no discussion about easements or other a,,reements with downstream property owners, it is not clear how the stormwater will be routed directly to the Cedar River. Also, what analysis has been completed to evaluate the potential to infiltrate stormwater or use I-ow impact development techniques to treat and manage stormwater. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015172"" Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 4 Denis Law r City of l -----~M:a:yo:, ____ .......... ... _!_~lJWll August 3, 2011 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Greg Diener Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S #100 Seattle, WA 98188 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice McCormick Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD / LUA Dear Mr. Diener: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on June 10, 2011. During our review, .staff has determined that additional information is necessary in order to proceed further. The following information will need to be submitted before August 10, 2011 so that we may continue the review of the above subject application: • A supplemental stream study that meets the requirements included in RMC 4-8- 120. Specifically addressing the following: o Page 11 of the provided Critical Areas report partially addresses the approval criteria for buffer reduction. However, criteria (c), (d), (e), and (f) were not addressed. o The provided Critical Areas report addressed stream buffer reduction for criterion (a) only for the portion of the stream buffer on the south side of the property, none of the criteria was addressed for the stream buffer reduction proposed near the detention facility. Please include in the supplemental stream study an analysis of the approval criteria for this portion of the stream buffer reduction, including an analysis of functions and values of the stream buffer in this area. o The provided Critical Areas report did not address the temporary impacts that would result from the proposed water line extension through the buffer. Furthermore, no mitigation was proposed for this extension. Please address these impacts and propose mitigation for the temporary impacts to the stream buffer. o The provided Critical Areas report did not address the approval criteria located in RMC 4-3-0SOC.7.a for the pedestrian trails included in the Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov • stream and wetland buffer. Please address these approval criteria in the supplemental stream study. At this time, your project has been placed "on hold" pending receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, 1/dflMtA,~d~ Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: Robert McCormick/ Owner(s) Parties of Record/ Owner(s) 1\AcCuLLOUGH HILL LEARY, rs Vanessa Dolbee Senior Phnner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 August 2, 2011 RE: McCormick Plat (LUAl 1-034, ECF, PP, V-1, PPUD) Dear Ms. Dolbee: City of Renton Pianntnq Division I represent the applicant Robert McConnick. This letter follows up on the applicant's prior comment on the proposed Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated ("DNS-M") for this project. As discussed in that comment, state hw prohibits the City from imposing a condition on the project in the DNS-M that requires mitigation for the loss of affordable housing. Robinson•-Seattle, 119 Wn.2d 34,830 P.2d 318 (1992);G,rimontv. Clark, 121 Wn.2d 586,854 P.2d 1 (1993); WAC 197-11-660(1). The State of Washington provides financial assistance to manufactured home owners who must relocate due to redevelopment. Under this program, qualifying homeowners are reimbursed for relocation expenses by the state, up to $7 500 for a one-section and $1200 for a multi-section manufactured home. These payments are provided only after the expenses are incurred by the homemvners, however, and there may be a waiting list for reimbursement. Also, these payments are reduced by the amount of relocation assistance provided by third parties. Despite the fact that it is not legally required, the applicant is willing to voluntarily provide assistance to relocating homeowners in a manner that is compatible with the state relocation assistance program. Specifically, the applicant will agree to pay the homeowners' relocation expenses "up frnnt," subject to later rein1bursement by the state, so that the homeowners will have immediate access to the funds for relocation. Accordingly, the applicant will agree to the follmving condition: The property owner ("Owner'') voluntarily agrees to pay the relocation costs of the homeowners ("Homeowners") within the Valley View Mobile Home Park ("Park"), subject to the following terms and conditions: (1) The relocation assistance program currently administered by tl1e Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 59.21 and WAC 365-212 ("State Relocation Assistance Program") must exist at the time notice of tl1e closure of the Park is provided by the Owner; 701 Fifth Avenue• Suite 7220 • Seattle, Washington 98104 • 206.812.3388 • Fax206.812.3'lR9 • wwwmhsesttl,mm Vanessa Dolbee August 2, 2011 Page2 of2 (2) The Homeowners to whom assistance is provided must qualify for relocation assistance under the State Relocation Assistance Program and the Department of Commerce must verify the Homeowners' qualification; (3) The Owner will pay only those relocation costs for which the State Relocation Assistance Progt'll.m provides reimbursement; ( 4) The Homeowner must agree in writing using a form acceptable to the Owner that the right to reimbursement provided by the State Relocation Assistance program is assigned to the Owner. Thank you. Sincerely, {;w,~ ~(w Courtney A. Kaylor cc: Robert McCormick Greg Diener tQ King County Department of Development and Environmental Services 900 Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Renton, WA 98057-5212 206-296-6600 TTY 206-296-7217 www.kingcounty.gov July 27, 2011 Vanessa Dolbee City of Renton, Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057 RE: Proposed Plat and PUD -McCormick Renton File No. LUA 11-034 Dear Ms. Dolbee: • I I) \\ I~\\ J\!c > ' Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed plat and planned urban development of McCormick. At this time, no development proposals for the area in unincorporated King County have been submitted for review. King County Code 21A.24 governs the critical area regulations for streams, wetlands, steep slopes, including buffers, setbacks and tracts. If you have further questions, please call me at 206-296-7167 or via e-mail Kimberly.claussen@kingcounty.gov. Thank you. Sine rely, UA----- im Claussen, Project Manager Ill Planning & Customer Service Section Building & Fire Services Division r~ityof,, -r< ;co rl rr,T1 -__,.._,,, __ -J __ REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED [DNS-M) JU'!' :l. lCll \\JAll-0'4."°'·'"·"·>.PPUD !OJOc; D"<'ll'1'0N, ""' >ppli<10( !1 ,,.._..,, ..... '""''d"T,.,t,, ,,,_ (S,eAI, > •·,I·"""'" P'," •ml ''"""' v,brn o,,,.lop.,.n( \PUOI, ,nd a ,,tti<~ '"" V'"'"" to°'"''"""" In a mum buH« 'o<' 1< ''" """'"'''"""'°"'"'mllocat..J;t!&<Os,..,oa,v,,>r,••1""•• "'''"*"~''""""':'".,""""'''1"·'1°0•"1'"' t~it:Jtf JJ~if ili~tl/t\{i:~t~{]tf ~~l] ~'"''""'" o< '" ,,,.,. ,,...,, Tho1e,ei<lO"""' ,..o,ld "''""' .,,, • ..,,.,m,tolj l.l" rob'< ,,ro< ,, '"'"'"1 ""'""~ aad 1,Jl4rnbk;y,o0,"1"".n,,,'"'"'"''"i'""''""''""'"''"""""""'"''''"'"'"'''"'""'"""''"d"""'''1 '""""'''..>dc,rcul"1'"'"'"'m'noad•"""°"""'" Ol'TIONA< CETtRt,<INUlON OF NOl<,,IGNmc,.HC,, Mffl•:.~T!O IOH>-"11, .. <ti. lood .. ,,,..., '"'-"'" ol Ro,tonhas •<'•mt<""d lh1! ,.,,Hi<,nt ,n,a,o,,...nlal ""'""' "' ,nll>•'v to ,.,.,1, ''""' ""' ,.,,,,.,d "'"''" "'"''"'' " 0,.,i,lt,o~ ""'" en, ACW O llCllO. lh< (;ty oP q..,.o,, k ""'I '"' OOl'Oot' OMS '4 '"'""' to 1~1 ""<k• I hat • ONS. M Li 11,,.., to bo lt!S>M. Comm<'I ,,rtoo, fo• <h< ''""" ,no ,1>< O,Ol>o<«I DNS.S< 1•1 '""•"''"" ,nto • ""I" <0mm,nl """"' n,,., ""'' b. ..-, '""'"""' o,,-'""°"'"it>, ,,,..,...,.,, ol th< 1',o,t.;,ld o,,.,..,,,,.,.,n of"°" ~gn,O"nae•MICll"o<l [~NH<). ;. l<•dn" ., .. ,t ""'""' ''"" (o''°"' th< '""'"'' oP "'' ON>-" ,.,,,,, .. 1~ ... _. ....... od". ,,qu,.,,.,,,.,.,,~ Jun,10,,011 S<01 Olo""'· l'>•fn• En1IM<rlo! o.,,,,. LL(; 1'<4' >l~ ~"""" ,, Sult< 100:SuW<. WAH111: !ml• 1"<-""l·<Om !""'"'""''"'''1'"")11..<••·''"''"'"'"'"""""" .. , "'°""'nkt,,1r., v>t!,n,..,...,,..,,, Pmlmln1,y "'""'"' u,t,an o.-,,•,..,,.n,,o,,,,.., Coo«Nctlon1•d••"'"'"'""'" G<Ol"''""''"'"""·Cri1;.,1onH••p<><t."'•""""'"""'"'P .. ..,... ..... r.-.Hl<'mo,<1••,."r•II lf,o, •Oukl ., .. co 00 m,d•, ,..,., ol ,o'°"' to"""' lum,o, '"'"'"''""" on thl> ,._,..a o••I•<"· "'"'°'"'" ''" ,...,, '"" """'"'o: ""'"'"'"""·ao-"'"'""'o'"'"''"· 1055 so fj•..J,w,,. "'""'"· "'""""" "'"''I''' No.: """""''"'"b1/lU•11-00•, !C>, ... v.i.. PPUO """"'-------------------~ J .- '""'"""ff""··••""'"""'"'' "'"""'""''d" PUSl/C~F••oNC;• COfi••>Tl~"°"'"""w IonlnJ/\ondU10 E,.-<,o,m,n"I00<um,01>ta,, , ..... ,..,....._ ... .,,,1 .. ,• o .. ,lopm"" , .. ,1,<1on1 u .. a,,,.,,.,«<,.."'•'"°"' •·ooo,od'41111oc1onM,...,,.-,. n,,p,oj,c.tw,lle,,uttecttolh,C;o,-·,>1••0""" .. '""·"""'-'·i\OO SMC•· l•OSO. •MC <-7011(\. aMC ,.~]50, RMC 4-•·lSO •"<I a.,., ,ool,uh,. ""'" "'d"'i"~"°''"'"''"'""·· ;:,.',~"~~~ ,;;::·~:~;;~~,:;:,:' ~::~.:: ;~d'::"c.-:;.:;:..::~7:::: :o""""''"""'''"'"'..i· .. el"""'""""•--• n--,oe,•'"'"'"'"'''"'"""""'''°''"''P,..._.,""'"''"""°''"'""'•"''""' ,,,,,,,,,~."''""''"0"''"''"""""''"""'""""''"'"""'"""''"·""'' ~.:~;;:::~:~;~~E:wi:E:;·,~~~=:·.;,;;t::;:;E~7:t:£:£.f:~·:;,,::::·~-:; ;,,_ Oppbn< >M• ,.,~,, o rl,:ol D,!>riJ Flow ,..,liqo!la,, •«• """''"""°' o<aa OOd,,,,.'n9 _.,.-,Olp. o,,,,,. o,,d f/nomol ""'"""''""~ /acO,dr,,I <eg/""'""• "''"''· _.,, ,,.,,., o, ioi,,,,/rt,d ,,.., """''"''" ;,.-"'' ~"'"'""'"' o/ [omm,m,r,-~ ""'°"''' O,vtro,,,,.nr, Pl<mo•no n,~,,,,.. ot0jW "'"""I"- 'KPE _bx 'i 00 FM•" I~ Th., ,,.,tlu wtll I>• """••ul,O lo,, ~vblot "'""'~ on , ;.,, to b• "•<mm<d. if ,ou has,, ou .. tio"' •b<>U< thi< pn,po,..1, o, ""'" lo"• mod• , ••"Y ,r roco,O ,no'"'""'" ddltk'"al lnlo,,,.,llo,, by mllP, pl••« conwc<: lhe 0"'1'" '"'"'I"· Anv,>ne -t.o s,bm;t, ,.,ltton ,omm.-n(! aH ,uiom,.,<>l"r O..:om• , ""' or •eco,d and wm ,, no<L~•d of'"' O«<!lon 0" lhl> 0,,Jttt CERTIFICATION CONTACT PERSON: V~nessJ Dolbee, Senior Plarrner; Tel: (4ZS) 430-T vdolb@<!@rentonwa.gov Pl.EASE INClUD< THE ?RO/ECT NVM6EFI WHEN CAlUNG fOR PROPER FILE IDENTII 1, 1 (t I/ f'i.SC\ Dc:'Ll-::>cc? . hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted in_:;:__ conspicuous places or nearby the de~ribed property on A/ ·'. • Date:-7 )13)i I Signed~f~·z l?_J!/lJi(t-,{JLM(;{! STATE OF WASHINGTON 55 COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that V c C\ e SS CL ]?c, l l, r-'K'. signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dater!: '1 ., , · I . , '°''""""1t'd:li'f-'"u=1,l-..... ~2r"'"d""",0'"1 .. . ,·'~p.,a£~t1•,,(,,1 I (? ... ,,~\\\\\,.... ,, ... ,~·~ ,, .,,~ ...... ~ ~,, !~~ . ... ~ ._. o I -::.. . ' .'"· ~ -~" ;;: ;>·,·, •, C ii!-- 'J.\f· :f.' Notary (Print): My appointment expires: ___ .L!-t..1-~·""1~,., 'e-"'v-,"'-..J.\ _ ___.l~3:... 1 -")o""'-'(ui ___ _ CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 12th day of July, 2011, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing a Revised NOA documents. This information was sent to: Name Agencies 300' Surrounding Property Owners -NOA only Parties of Record -NOA (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) 55 ) See Attached See Attached See Attached I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker Representing signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary Publ~ in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) : ___ ...LL·'--"'l.......J..:"'"". •wr.:.··-..:.":.;,1,,:!•c..... ____________ _ My appointment expires: Project Name: McCormick Plat Project Number: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology ** Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region * Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers* Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETIER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher• 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office* 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal Liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01 W Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.* Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015 -172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program* Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172'' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City of Tukwila Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 "'Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS"1 the marked agencies and cities will neE!d to be sent a copy of the checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the notice of application. **Receives NOA, PMT, & Environmental Checklist via email to SEPA registry. template -affidavit of service by mailing S 242305901306 AQUA BARN RANCH 115 GARFIELD ST #4139 SUMAS WA 98295 885689032005 DILES ROBERTA J 16122 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 885691002004 GEIST JOEL A 16115 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 029600005507 KING COUNTY WATER/LAND RES ATTN NANCY FAEGENBURG 201 S JACKSON ST STE 600 SEATTLE WA 98104 885691003002 MAYS CAMERON+JAZMINE RAMIRE 16121 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 885691004000 NIEDERLE PETER+ANNA 16125 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 242305902304 BNSF PO BOX 961089 FORT WORTH TX 76161 885689034001 FITZGERALD STEVEN A+MICHELE 16110 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 885689031007 GRIFFUS WILLIAM M+RHONDA J 16126 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 029600008204 KNAUSS LARRY G 16405 SE JONES RD RENTON WA 98058 232305902909 MCCORMICK ROBERT 161 MAPLEWAY DR SELAH WA 98942 885691001006 SCHULZE BRIAN 15618 161ST AVE SE RENTON WA 98058 885689030009 CLEVENGER JACK A 16136 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 029600006505 FOSTER JEFF M 7243 TWIN CEDAR LN SE OLYMPIA WA 98501 955800108008 KING COUNTY 500 KC ADMIN BLDG 500 4TH AVE SEATTLE WA 98104 885689029001 LE BRENDA T 15608 161ST AVE SE RENTON WA 98058 885689033003 NGUYEN THOMAS 16116 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 885691005007 TO THANH M+HO VIVIAN NGUYEN 16131 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 PARTIES OF RECORD McCormick Plat LUA11-034, PP, PPUD, V-A, ECF Courtney Kaylor Attorney at Law McCullough Hill Leary, ps 701 Fifth Avenue Avenue ste: #7220 Seattle, WA 98104 tel: (206) 812-3379 eml: courtney@mseattle.com (party of record) Jose Rodriguez Montoya 16405 SE Maple Valley Road ste: #9 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 793-0930 (party of record) Monica Crystal Garnice 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #20 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 761-6032 (party of record) Jose R. Cisneros 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy ste: #24 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 442-1353 (party of record) Feliciano Galvez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #27 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 228-8941 (party of record) Hallie Sword PO Box 6314 Federal Way, WA 98063 tel: (253) 740-8205 (party of record) Updated: 07/12/11 Juanita Shields 16405 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 271-2516 (party of record) Jose Garibay 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #1 Renton, WA 98058 (party of record) Fernandez Alejandre 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #20 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 269-7557 (party of record) Tien Tran 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #25 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 246-8927 (party of record) Doug Peterson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #17 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 228-7702 (party of record) Carl McMurtry 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #32 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 970-3117 eml: otsedom49@comcast.net (party of record) Dan Greggs 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd ste: #3 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 533-1371 (party of record) Ruth Martinez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #1 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 647-3519 (party of record) Sandra Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 442-4968 (party of record) David Serrano 16405 Se Maple Valley Road ste: #28 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 445-5044 (party of record) John Brigham 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #36 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 271-976 7 (party of record) Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #16 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 687-6142 (party of record) (Page 1 of 2) ' PARTIES OF RECORD McCormick Plat LUAll-034, PP, PPUD, V-A, ECF Lauren D. Mclees Allen 16405 Renton Maple Valley Road ste: #53 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 221-1784 (party of record) Bill Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 442-5408 (party of record) Robert McCormick 161 Maple Way Road Selah, WA 98942 (owner/ applicant) Joe Castillo 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd ste: #6 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 509) 840-4917 (party of record) Danh Cao Dinh 411 164th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 tel: ( 425) 644-5637 (party of record) Toni Dinius 1512 6th Street Renton, WA 98057 tel: (425) 204-9324 eml: jdinius501@gmail.com (party of record) Updated: 07/12/11 Clyde Arnold 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #46 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 255-7595 (party of record) Barbara Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 273-0559 (party of record) Greg Diener, P.E. Pacific Engineering Design LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S ste: #100 Seattle, WA 98188 tel: (206) 431-7970 eml: greg@paceng.com (contact) Rita Smith & Robert Barnes 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #38 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (253) 249-8915 (party of record) Edward D. Tharp, Jr. 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #18 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 890-2514 (party of record) Esther Lopez 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #8 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 274-5623 (party of record) Resident 2820 SW 110th Place Seattle, WA 98146 (party of record) Mr. & Mrs. Daniel Desjardins, Jr. 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #44 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 228-3743 (party of record) Maria Concepcion Perez Syala 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #45 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 495-0907 (party of record) Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #16 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 687-6142 (party of record) (Page 2 of 2) City of wm sil [ 0IJ REVISED NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: July 12, 2011 LAND USE NUMBER: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD PROJECT NAME: McCormick Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 {R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 47 mobile homes and two stick built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3.421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Detention, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The development would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a pub(ic alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. PROJECT LOCATION: 16405 Maple Valley Highway OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M}: 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-M process to give notice that a DNS- M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: May 25, 2011 June 10, 2011 Greg Diener, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC; 15445 53rc1 Avenue S; Suite 100; Seattle, WA 98188; Eml: greg@paceng.com Environmental (SEPAi Review, Preliminary Plat approval, Administrative Variance approval, Preliminary Planned Urban Development approval Construction and Building Permits Geotechnical Report, Critical Areas Report, Preliminary Drainage Report and Traffic Impact Analysis If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED-Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: McCormick Plat/LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD NAME: --------------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: Location where application may be reviewed: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSISTENCT OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)-Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 A public hearing will be scheduled on a date to be determined. The subject site is designated Residential Single-Family (RSF) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential -8 (R-8) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-llOA, RMC 4- 3-050, RMC 4-7-080, RMC 4-9-150, RMC 4-9-250 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. The following Mitigation Measures will !ikely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Transportation Mitigation Fee; The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee; and The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Porks Mitigation Fee. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, Kleinfelder Technical Peer Review dated April 17, 2009, and Otak, Inc. Geomorphic and Debris Flow Analysis, doted May 17, 2010. The applicant shall submit o Final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Plan addressing ownership, access and financial responsibilities, including engineering details, which shall be submitted and approved by the Department of Community & Economic Development, Planning Division project manager. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated April 12, 2011. The applicant shall install an information board in a visible location on site, where the applicant shall post information for the residents notifying them of any land-use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. The applicant shall mitigate for the loss of affordable housing. If any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) are found all construction activity shall stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning department, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeological and Historic Preservation. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Traf/Ex, dated October 14, 2010. The comment period has been extended therefore, comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, CED -Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on July 26, 2011. This matter will be rescheduled for a public hearing on a date to be determined. 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: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7314; Eml : vdolbee@rentonwa .gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION Denis Law Mayor July 12, 2011 Kimberly Claussen King County DOES 900 Oakesdale Avenue SE Renton, WA 98057 r l\ ___ ;>....., Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator SUBJECT: McCormick Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Dear Ms. Claussen: The City of Renton has received an application for the McCormick Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD) at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The majority of the property is located within the City of Renton; however, a portion of the subject site extends beyond the City boundaries into King County (parcel #2323059029). Because a portion of this property is not within the City's jurisdiction, we have provided you with materials to review and comment on the proposed preliminary plat and PUD. The portion of property located within King County contains a large number of critical areas including protected slopes with over 100 percent grades and a stream. If this portion of the site was located within the City of Renton, we would require this area to be placed within a Native Growth Protection Easement. If King County has specific language for a similar mechanism to protect the critical areas located on this portion of the site, comments would be appreciated, so that we may provide the applicant with direction on how to proceed. Thank you for taking the time to review the enclosed McCormick Plat, please submit your comments on the above application, in writing, to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, CED -Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 p.m. by July 26, 2011. If you have questions and/or need additional materials you may contact me at (425) 430-7314. Sincerely, ~ -D(JlbefL Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Enclosure(s): McCormick Plat-submittal packet Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov McCULLOUGH Hr11 LEARY. 1's Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 June 24, 2011 RE: :\lcCormick Plat (LUA! 1-034, ECF, PP, V-1, PPUD) Dear Ms. Dolbee: City of Renton Planning Division I represent the applicant Robert McCormick. 1 am writing to comment on the proposed Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated ("DNS-M") for this project. The applicant objects to the proposed mitigation measure requiring mitigation for the loss of affordable housing for three reasons. First, the Washington Supreme Court has determined that requiring a property owner to mitigate for the loss of affordable housing is unconstitutional. Robinson,,. Seattle, 119 Wn.2d 34,830 P.2d 318 (1992). In Robinson, the Court struck down d1e City of Seattle's Housing Preservation Ordinance, which required the payment of relocation assistance to low income tenants displaced by redevelopment. The Court found the ordinance violated the substantive due process rights of the property owner. The Court stated, "solving the problem of the decrease in affordable rental housing ... is a burden to be shouldered commonly and not imposed on individual property owners." Id. at 42. Similarly in the manufactured home context, the \Xlashi.ngton Supreme Court has determined that relocation assistance requirements are unconstitutional. G11imon! v. Clark, 121 Wn.2d 586, 854 P.2d 1 (1993). In Guimont, the Court found that the Mobile I !ome Relocation Assistance Act in effect at the time (former RCW 59.21) that required a park owner to contribute money toward relocation costs upon park closing was an unconstitutional taking on the grounds that d1e law was unduly oppressive and therefore violated park owners' substantive due process rights. Following Gttimont, RCW 59.21 was amended in 1995 to change the program to what it is now. The state provides financial assistance to manufactured home owners who must relocate due to redevelopment. The relocation fund administered by ilie state is funded by a $100 fee charged on every transfer of title for a mobile home, as well as other funding allocated by the legislature. (fhc program is described on CTED's web site athttp://www.cted.wa.gov/site/ 484/default.aspx.) 701 Fifth Avenue • Suite 7220 • Seattle, Washinb'lon 98104 • 206.812.3388 • Fax 206.812.3389 • www.mhseattle.com \' ancssa Dolbee June 24, 2011 Page 2 of 2 Second, impacts to current residents arc economic ones. Econotnic i1npacts are not the proper subject of mitigation under the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA"). LVe.,/ 514, l11c. ,,. Co11nty of Spokane, 53 Wn. App. 838, 770 P.2d 1065 (1989). Third, under SEP A, mitigation may only be imposed if it: (1) addresses a significant adverse environmental impact of the proposal identified in an environmental document; and (2) is based on a wtittcn SEP/\ policy adopted by the jurisdiction. WAC 197-11-660(1). Herc, these requirements arc not met. For these reasons, the applicant requests that the final DNS-M not include the condition relating to initigation for the loss of affordable housing. The applicant will continue to work with the City on the issue of mitigation for the loss of the existing housing. However, any mitigation provided is purely voluntary and cannot legally be imposed as a SEP A condition. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Courl1ley J\. Kaylor cc: Robert McCormick Greg Diener Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Karen Walter [KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Thursday, June 23, 2011 11 :45 AM Vanessa Dolbee McCormick Preliminary Plat, LUA11-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPDU; Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Vanessa, The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Notice of Application including the proposed mitigation measures, the environmental checklist and the revised Critical Areas Report (April 12 2011 ). We offer the following comments in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's treaty protected fisheries resources. 1. Please clarify the purpose of the "debris flow berm" proposed for this project. This berm will restrict the lateral movement of the Type N stream and likely interfere with the transport of spawning gravels and wood from the upstream portions of the stream that may otherwise distribute downstream including the Cedar River. 2. We would also like to see the proposed planting plan for the berm and stream riparian areas described in the revised Critical Areas report to ensure that riparian functions will be maximized. 3. Please clarify the purpose of the existing half culverts in the stream on site. These culverts should be removed as part of this project if they are not needed to provide access to the southern portion of the site to restore the stream to a more natural condition. The gravel road should also be decommissioned and replanted, as well as the vehicle storage area since they are likely not needed for the project and will reduce sediment sources to the stream. 4. The existing potable water well should be required to be decommissioned as part of the project since the project will be receiving municipal water from the Cedar Water and Sewer District. 5. Please clarify how the applicant proposes to route stormwater to the Cedar River. This approach would require piping stormwater offset underneath SR 169 and through downstream properties. Since there is no discussion about easements or other agreements with downstream property owners, it is not clear how the stormwater will be routed directly to the Cedar River. Also, what analysis has been completed to evaluate the potential to infiltrate stormwater or use l0w impact development techniques to treat and manage stormwater. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 17:t'" Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 1 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 24, 2011 APPLICATION NO: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 10, 2011 APPLICANT: Robert McCormick PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: McCormick Plat PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 318,998 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,232 square feet LOCATION: 16405 Maple Valley Highway PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 47 mobile homes and two stick built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Detention, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The dewlopment would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code} COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinn Air Aesthetics Water Lioht/Glore Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transaortation Environmental Health Public Services ... Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 23, 2011 TO: Vanessa Dolbee, Planner FROM: Arneta Henninger, Plan Review ,f # SUBJECT: MCCORMICK PLAT 16405 MAPLE VALLEY HWY LUA 11-034, PARCEL #2323059029 I have completed a review for the above-referenced 34-lot plat proposal located in the vicinity of Maple Valley Hwy and Jones Rd, all in SEY. of Sect. 23 & 24, Twp 23N Rng 5 E. The following comments are based on the application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. EXISTING CONDITIONS WATER: This site is located in the Cedar River Water District water service boundary. It is not located in the Aquifer Protection Zone. SANITARY SEWER: This site is located in the Cedar River Sewer District sanitary sewer service boundary. STORM: The City does not have any records of storm drainage facilities in Maple Valley Hwy fronting this parcel. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER • A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water District. • Per the City Fire Marshal, the preliminary 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. Lateral spacing offire hydrants is predicated on hydrants being located at street intersections (also capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 gpm) within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along the travel route. • All lots on dead end access roadways that exceed 500 feet require fire sprinklers. This applies to lots 14 through 17, and lots 20 through 26, as proposed. • The proposed project needs to show how they intend to serve the new development with water service to all of the lots and fire protection. H:/CED/Planning/Current Planning/PROJECTS/11-034.Vanessa/Plan Review Comments LUA 11-034.doc McCormick Plat -LUA 11-034 Page 2 of 2 June 23, 2011 SANITARY SEWER • A sanitary sewer availability certificate is required from the Cedar River Sewer District. • The proposed project needs to show how they intend to serve the new development with sanitary sewer service to all of the lots. STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Street improvements including curb, gutter, 5' sidewalks, street lighting, and paving with an 8' planter strip all to City standards will be required to be installed across the full frontage of the parcel being developed. • The internal streets shall install a minimum of 20' pavement with parking on one side; hence, a 26' pavement section. The road section shall include 5' sidewalks on both sides (in those areas where there are lots on both sides) and 8' between curb and sidewalk for a planter strip. • Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 20 feet wide, fully paved, with a turning radius of 25 feet inside and 45 feet outside. • Residential alleys are 16 feet in width. • Street lighting will be required per City of Renton standards along the frontage and on the internal streets. Private street lighting, including PSE, is not allowed. • Traffic mitigation fees will apply. Traffic mitigation fees of $6,675 will be required prior to recording of the plat as a condition of the plat. • All new electrical, phone, and cable services and lines must be undergrounded. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording the plat. STORM DRAINAGE • The City does not have any records of existing storm drainage facilities in Maple Valley Hwy fronting this parcel. • A conceptual drainage plan and report is required to be submitted with the formal application for the plat. A drainage control plan designed per the City of Renton Amendments to the King County Surface Water Manual 2009 is required. • The conceptual storm drainage plan needs to address how the roof runoff from the new lots will be handled. • SDC fees are $1,012 per lot. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. GENERAL • All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals, prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards, by a licensed Civil Engineer. • All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two of the City of Renton Horizontal and Vertical Control Network. • Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. Half of the fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. H:/CED/Planning/Current Planning/PROJECTS/11-034.Vanessa/Plan Review Comments LUA 11-034.doc City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 24, 2011 . APPLICATION NO: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 10, 2011 APPLICANT: Robert McCormick PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: McCormick Plat PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger _S::.:l_:.:TE:.:Ac.:Rc.::E::.Acc: _:3:..:1..::Bc;.,9.:.9.::.8.::.sq:,.;u:.:a::...re=-f:..:e..::et.:..._ _________ +E==X.:::IS:..:Tc.:IN.:.cG=-=-BL==D:..:G:..:Ac.:R.c:E::...Ac.,.(g"'r-"'o.::ss"'):-=2:.c,2=:3:..:2:..:sc:,q.::cua::.:r_:e_c._fe::..:e:..,t"-;,..:·=· '"'·,.,.--~\.,.__,,:· < ___ i' i) LOCATION: 16405 Maple Valley Highway PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 47 mobile homes and two stick built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Detention, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The development would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code} COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water LiohttGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Er:ergy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS 1 ,,d j.( I 5# 879 TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE Project Name: McCormick Preliminary Plat Project Address: 16405 Maple Valley Highway Contact Person: Robert McCormick Permit Number: LUA11-034 Project Description: 34-lot SFR plat and Planned Unit Development with existing mobile homes and a duplex sfr Land Use Type: Method of Calculation: D Residential D Retail 0Non-retail ITE Trip Generation Manual, 5th Edition X Traffic Study Calculation: New Trips: 326 Existing Trips Credit: <237> Additional Daily Trips: 89 89 X $75.00 : $6,675.00 Transportation Mitigation Fee: 6 675.00 D Other TraffEx 10/14/2010 Calculated by: -'K""."-K"'it:.::tr..cic:;;.k;...;;;;;)) ____________ Date: 6/10/2011 Date of Payment: I City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT, Trcll\~-'fr',rw,___-h,"\l""l COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 24, 2011 ' APPLICATION NO: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 10, 2011 .. APPLICANT: Robert McCormick PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: McCormick Plat PROJECT REVIEWER: Arn eta Henninger .. ·• ... :· I> SITE AREA: 318,998 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,232 square feet LOCATION: 16405 Maple Valley Highway PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 47 mobile homes and two stick built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Detention, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The development would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention po;id. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Nece55ory Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Uaht/Gfare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transnartation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 1.,,/10/d-ol\ 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM June 21, 2011 Vanessa Dolbee Bob Mac Oniet\'I ! McCormick Plat, LUA-11-034-PP, PUD Format and Legal Description Review I have reviewed the above referenced preliminary plat submittal and have the following comments: Comments for Project Manager: Please note that the City of Renton currently has a lien recorded against this property, under recording number 20110215001066. This subdivision should include the segregation of the "panhandle" portion of the property into a separate 'Tract." I don't know how only part of a property can be platted, underlying Parcel 'A.' If a separate tract isn't to be created by the plat a lot line adjustment needs to be approved and recorded prior to the recording of the plat. Comments for the Applicant: Correct the indexing information with respect to Section 24 as the site is a portion of the SW quarter. The work 'TRACT' appears in several of the underlying 'Parcel' legal descriptions on the Plat and on the title report when it is apparent that the word should be 'TRACK' vis-a-vis reference to the 'centerline of tract [sic] and right of way.' The title company should also correct their records as well. Remove the Project Data block, including the blocks for the owner, Engineer and Surveyor on page 1 of 2 as these are only preliminary plat approval requirements. Information needed for final plat approval includes the following: h:\file sys\lnd -land subdivision & surveying records\lnd-10 -plats\0486\rv 110622.doc Addressee Name Page2of3 Date of Memo Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA-11-034-FP and LND-10-0486 respectively, on the final plat submittal (all submittal sheets). The LUA number will change for when final plat submittal is made. Provide sufficient information to determine how the final plat boundary was established and identify a basis of bearing related to the defining elements, the date existing monuments were visited, note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any, and all the other requirements specified in WAC 332-130-050. List and if possible delineate all easements and other encumbrances of record. Show any encroachments by or on the property at issue. Provide calculations and closures for the Plat and lots and tracts. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC 332-130-100. Note the addresses for the platted lots. The address will be available after approval of the preliminary plat. Street names are be assign and will be provided when available. Note what is to be set at all property corners and for right of way monuments. Complete City of Renton Monument Cards, with reference points of all new right of way monuments set as part of the plat. Provide an OWNER'S DECLARATION; statement of dedication of the plat. Required City of Renton signatures on the final plat submittal include the Administrator of Public Works the Mayor and the City Clerk. An approval block for the city's Finance Director is also required. Note that the title for the Administrator has changed. Also provide the pertinent King County recording an approval blocks. All vested owner(s) of the subject plat need to sign the final plat and the signatures must be accompanied by the appropriate notaries. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, easements or agreements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawing and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) will be cross referenced on the plat in the appropriate locations. With a Homeowner's Association (HOA) planned for this plat, the following language concerning ownership of the various Tracts (the open space and recreation tracts) applies to this plat and should be noted on the final plat submittal as follows: U pan the recording of this plat, Tract(s) .... is hereby granted and conveyed to the Plat Name Homeowners' Association (HOA) for Purpose of Tracts. All h:\fi!c sys\lnd-land subdivision & surveying recurds\lnd-10 -plats\0486\rvl 10622.doc Addressee Name Page3of3 Date of Memo necessary maintenance activities for said Tract(s) will be the responsibility of the HOA. In the event that the HOA is dissolved or otherwise fails to meet its property tax obligations, as evidenced by non-payment of property taxes for a period of eighteen (18) months, then each lot in this plat shall assume and have , an equal and undivided interest in the Tract previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. NOTE: Use the above noted language for the other tracts associated with this plat. with changes made to said language as needed, depending on the type of tract noted. Clearly state who is to own the various tract's created if not the HOA. Provide a 'Legend' for the plat drawing identifying the symbols used therein. Include a north arrow with the vicinity map. Note whether the adjoining properties are platted (show plat name and lot numbers) or 'Un platted'. A Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) statement needs to be included for those areas identified as such. An updated Plat Certificate dated within 45 days of final approval by the Hearing Examiner. Fee Review Comments: Please contact Dave Christensen for the fee review. h:\fik sys\lnd -land .subdivision & .surveying records\lnd-10 -plats\0486\rv 110622.doc City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 'Pv'OOt")(f-U Rvc::") COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 24, 2011 ' , _ _; APPLICATION NO: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 10, 2011 APPLICANT: Robert McCormick PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: McCormick Plat PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 318,998 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,232 square feet LOCATION: 16405 Maple Valley Highway PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 47 mobile homes and two stick built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Detention, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The development would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Neceuary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Liaht!Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet \ (.\ ,_..__ ', '---"--'·-, r' \ \ B. \ ,~ ... ~· I . I,\ ' '---·.:, r·-le_(_'- C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact ~--o'.."reas_where ,ad~fot-~:on is neetd to prerly ajsess this proposal. I ' \~-;;::.!,,; N_ V: --:z::: ( \ > ? ii ," u t / Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REv1Ew1NG DEPARTMENT: fconl"mv·, T)cv COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 24, 2011 APPLICATION ND: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 10, 2011 APPLICANT: Robert McCormick PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: McCormick Plat PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 318,998 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,232 square feet LOCATION: 16405 Maple Valley Highway PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD). and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway, The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7,32 acres is area, A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres, The proposed density of the site would be 6,33 dwelling units per acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 47 mobile homes and two stick built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Detention, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The development would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill, The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Nan-Code} COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Liaht/Gfore Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transoortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14 000 Feet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with partkular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signatur f Di ector or Authorized Representative fsir=r/1 I Dat I 06-13-'11; 01: 33PM; Denis Law Mayor ; 4252844..C:65 June 10, 2011 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Nancy Rawls · Department of Transportation Renton School District . 420 Park Avenue N Renton, WA 98055 Subject: McCormick Plat LUAU-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD The City of Renton's Department of Community and Economic Development (CED) has received an ·application for a 34-lot subdivision located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. · 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. Please fill in the appropriate schools on the list below and return this letter to my attention, c_ity of Renton, CED; Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Wa{ ·Renton, Washington 98057 by June 24, 2011. Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the impact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed develop·ment? Yes If No . ~ . --- Any Comments=-------------~-----------~-- 4 _ Ll-Ren.·tonCityHall • 10S5SouthGradyWay ;;i-":S-rl~O-7,3bn . · • R~nton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov # 1 / DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: June 14, 2011 CITY OF RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU MEMORANDUM Vanessa Dolby, Senior Planner Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector Comments for McCormick Plat Environmental Impact Comments: 1. The fire mitigation fees are applicable at the rate of $488.00 per single family unit. This fee is paid prior to recording the plat. Credits are granted for existing homes and it appears there are more existing homes than proposed homes so no charges will be applied to this project. Code Related Comments: 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. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 2. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 322-psi point loading. Access is required within 150-feet of all points on the buildings. Dead end streets exceeding 150-feet require an approved turnaround. Full 90-foot diameter cul-de- sac required is required when dead end streets exceed 300-feet long. City street standards require 20-foot wide streets with a 6-foot wide parking area on one side of the street only. Parking is not allowed on the other side of the street and shall be posted as such. 3. All lots on dead end access roadways that exceed 500-feet are required to be fire sprinklered. This applies to lots 14 through 17 and lots 20 through 26 as proposed. CT:ct Mcconnick Renton Fire Department I PRE-FIRE PLANNING I ln an eftOrt to streamline our pre-fire process, \Ve an.' requesting that you submit a site plan of your construction project in one of the follm:ving formats \\-'hich \Ve can thell convert to VISIO.vsd. This is required to be submitted prior to occupancy. ' I ABC Flowchartcr.af3 ARC rlowcharter.at2 ----- Adobe lllustrntor File.ai ---- AutoCJd Drawing.dwg AutoCad Drawing.dPn Computer Graohics Metafile.cgm Corel C 'linart rormat.cm.x -- Corel DRAVV! Ora\ving File Forn1at.e~1:_ ___ Corel Flow.cfl I:::ncapsulakd Postscript ~ile.ens Enhanc<:d i\:ktafile.emf ~Ci!5 Or~wing File Format.iPs Graohics Intcrchanee format.gif \1acintosh PICT Formal.net ----·----- '\1icrogra[\ Uesi2:ncr Ver 3. I .drw .. II ., ,. () .. M1cw,...,1alx Desi nc1 Ve1 6.0=.d=s.cf _______ _____c Microstation [)r~_\y_i1_1g~d_~'-"----------~ Portahlc Network G!:_.:_11?.hics Format. nf Postscript Fil_~.ps Ta~ Imal!L' File Forrnal.0 .cti.cf __________ ~ Tcxt.txt Tcxt.c\v VISIO.vsd \Vinc~o:"..:~-Bitmap. bmp \Vindows Bitmap.dib \Vindows rv1etafi!t·.wmf Zsol't PC ~aintbrush Bitma .pcx ' " City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 24, 2011 APPLICATION NO: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 10, 2011 APPLICANT: Robert McCormick PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: McCormick Plat PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 318,998 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,232 square feet LOCATION: 16405 Maple Valley Highway PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPAi, a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 47 mobile homes and two stick built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Detention, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The development would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code} COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Uaht!Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we hove expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. ;?r:7~,0-- Signature of Director or Authorized Rep~esentative Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: '-Petrk:..5 Cen+. COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 24, 2011 Q ,, APPLICATION NO: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD s.0 m DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 10, 2011 ;;;::= '- APPLICANT: Robert McCormick PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee ~( z I.. } --<" ,...... PROJECT TITLE: McCormick Plat ,: ' .. PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger ~~ 0 -::::: EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 2,232 square fe.i;Q = m --SITE AREA: 318,998 square feet LOCATION: 16405 Maple Valley Highway PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A m 0 CJ) SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 47 mobile homes and two stick built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 lots, 10 tracts are proposed for Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Detention, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The development would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Ptobable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Hovsina Air Aesthetics Water x.. Liaht/G/are Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transoortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natura( Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet {",ZK_ 7 ·/z,,/n 7c:V-~1\_,, _4-,,/ ,· a,-· a:o le w cl:20-;r; s11rc·L)1J NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNI F!CANCE-M ITIGATED (DNS-M) ""•w.,011 LV~ll-OH,ECF.P•.,•A,,.U{J 'OOIE<:1"0ES<>IP1'10,, 'th• ooollcoo< ii """"""I '"""°""''°"I ""'"" ISEP•I. , ""m"""' P'•l ,ml ~'"""° u,o..., o,,.,..1o,.,,..,, 1•~01. ,..., , ""~., """' ""'""" ,, oim """'"' '" , ""'""' o.n.,., ,,. , ,. ~, , .. oo~.,.,,.,ofoe,,p,..-.:"'°"',.,.." ,..,,,.,,o,ov,1 .. ""'''"' '"''"''"''"""'""""'·~''"""'i"-'1"""""" '""''""~'"''"'""''"''l'acne•"""· •-"'"'''"••lt•'•lo",.,.."''"'""""'''""·l"""'<A·<""'• '"'""''"''""'"'"""·••''''"'"'~'"''"""'"'''°'"''"''"''"'""'""' ... ""-""''""I"'"'"'·'"' '"''''""'"'"<lt•"°P<'d~''"'"'"'"'"''"'"oblltH0<01P,rk.wh1ch,00"1"'""'°"''"°'""""''-«~•1,.,,, ''""'""'· "'°""'"""""'"""'''"~"''""' , .... ,,,..,,,, .. ,1,J.'2),q,,.,,,.t<. In••"'''""'~""''~ 10 "''" '" ,,_,., '"''""''' "'"· Op,1n '""""· u,m"•~ ""'""'" "', ,.,, "'""" '''°" ,, '"''"''"""" ... ~ °''' o~ of M,pi, V, .... ""'"'" Th, '"bJ0<\ ~<e rnotola, ~ad, ... , h,,o,O,, H'I"'~ """'" ''""°" ho,oro, . ... u,od~,,..,,,c,.,.,,,.,,"',S,tl\o,pall<0ol""""O'°>C:,iCl"'"-''""""'"'""'G,nt"h"<""''°" """"""' "'""''""'"''"'""''"'"''·'•·•"'""""'''"""'"'"'"'"'""""'""'""''""'""'''"""'"'""''"'"' "'"'"~"''' """"''"'' '"'"''"'"'"""'""'"'''"'""''""''""'·'·~··""'"''"'"''''"''"'"'"""""'"' l,9l4 "'"' ,..;, °'""· ,,,. ""'""''° ""Jocc "'""' o,o"do ,~, "'" o,><I, m•,m ""', ,,><~ , .. , "'"''''"" ,o, ""'"''"'""~""""'"'"''""''""'j'l'""""""""· ,...,o ... , 00"-"'"~TI<Jf' o, NON-""""'"'"""· MmOAr,o ION!-M], <, ,e, '"" '"""'· .... Cir,-ol '""" '" '""''""'"''"''''""'"''"''"""'"m,nl~lm?Kt•m,n<lk<~""'""'""''""'"''"'""'"""' Th'"''"''·" ><""l"od '°"'' !Oo OCW •J.llC.llQ. , ... Cir,-o( "'"'°"" "'"I ,s, 00<-ON,.,. o<0<•u ,o I'>'• oo<<• tha< , ,,,,,_ " 1, "''"' to be '"""' (ow'"•"' ,.,,o,1, ro, '·"' "'*'' ,,,; "-• ''""°"" ONS-" "' .. ,,.,.,, .,., , "'"'1• "'""'"' ""'""' ,..,, "'' 0. oo "'"'"''"' ''""" '""°""'' U-., "'"""" of 1/,o '"'""""' .. ,.,""~''°" o< Noa ;11"111<>nco·""•'11•tolONS-Ml.•l'-.Oo,•00"1""n°""'''°low'h''""'""or,.,.oN,;.,., """·"'" "'"'-1Ci#<T/,OO/,;CT CONrACT ,OO<ON· G"I '"""· hdO. '"'"'""'• OuJo•. \.l.C; 1 ... ! !!" .,...,, ~ !Ml" 100, S.,Nlo, WA mU: '""' 1"1.PK•""-. """'"'"·"'-""'""'~ '"'''"""''""'I''""'' .. -· .... ,-.... ""'""'""' "'"""~'"""' "'~'"'' .,........,, """"""'""''"""'"'b•o 0, .. .,,.....,.,..,,,...1 "'""'"""'"•"k"""""""'"'"d' """''''""""'""""'""''"""b ................. "'"""""'''"''""-Cn<k.>l"""'"',_..,,..,,.,, .. ..,0-."•• ••-•""T"l~<lmo"'""'""~ ,,...,,.. ... i.,,, .. ..,,,,p,.c,of""°"''o'''"""""',..'"''°""''"'"""'""""'""''"ll'<'i«c«•<•<am<t,~ '•=•ad,.t,m lo C"' ''"'"'"" C,O-P1>,.,.,. ...... ,,. "'"'"' ""'•W•r, """""· WA"'°;, """''"' ""'·' "'-""""l<l "'•tl•u•u--OJ• . .c,, "· v-•. """° llL!PHONENO co~srmNCl'o'IE!Vl!W: '""'""'"""""' '""""'""'""'""""'"""'"" l••"-'"'""""'"""d'o,j"'" o..-,1o,"""''tf"I""''" U10d,o,P,o/«tM1<•1•tlo•· ''"'"'""""""'"'"''"''""" o,,.,,,,,.,, o4 '''""'""" & E<0nom~ O"''"""""' ICEOI -"'"""'< 01,r,1na, "''" ~=, "'""'" "'< """· '"" <,,uct,G...,, wo,. ""'""· W~ •=• ,,t.lchoJrMillrnl' hrr~K11,,~NOC/oi1wt<l 1011 ,,r.,,m, .. , oO H11!1lll fYTIIJ'Ctn F\<•!Oo [?"!"f'9'•'"01" """~ i><f<•" cc,,oo, m," "•"'"'"''"'"""""'"'""Cl"""'~'"'"'""'"'""'~""""''' Th,,vbi,«•'•""•"•"""'""'""'~'''"'''"''"'"°IRSSloolh•Cl<,ol ''"'"' Comp!""'~"' l.lad U" "•• 100 '"lo,otl>I ·, l•·•I-><> ,h, "" , __ .. .., ,.,. ""'I"'-">•""'"' !o '"' C..', ""''"''""''·,Mc '-HIOI. RMC ,. 1-0:l!l.,Mc,-1-0110,,"""'-'·'"'·""'c ... ,.,so.,.,.'""'""'~'''•'-' '"""'"'""'"'" '""'°"'" n..10,>o..,,,1r.<1e,11!1oo,<o11u,o,w;n11,,,,,,,.00ttooo"'"''°'"' ""''"" '"'"' '""'"''"'""'' "'·~·-....... ,., ...... ,, "'"'"" '~""' -"''""'b1•"'""l<OOHaodr,1ulot"'"'""''°'bo" '"''""''""''"'"'"'""''""'""'"""'-"'"''""'''"""""'"'"" .. 7', ,wil<ool ''""'""""',.;,>re,''""""'""""""''°"""'° '''fl'°'""""°'""""""_. ... G,o,,.o '""'""'""-'"'-· do«d•""' I.'°""· '"''"""""""'""°''""'""'""'· '"°" "'''"''"'"r"""'"ll\w ..... ~do!,dApn !7, l(}()., -Oro<.'"'-_,..,.,ndO.Omf-An""'I~ d,,, • .,,, ''· ,ow """""-'' ,noll '°""'~ O '"'"' O,h,,,-F'o~ M•'c•Ooa .,., M""""<'"« ,to,, -""'"O """'"'"'-°'"" '"" ·""""'"" "'"""'''""""· "'"""'"' '""'""'"'" .. ,.,,, ""~' ,,a,1"' "'"""~·· '"' '""'°""' .. "'' "''"'"'"'"' ofC""'m"""' & r,.,,,,m~ 0ow1.,.,,.,,,,. """""'" o,,;""" ,,,.;"' ""'"'"'"' ,,,.,..,'1<,,.,,,o11 __ ,.,.,,. .. .,..,...,..,,,,.,,1-"'""'c,,"'°'""'"""""'·""'""""l ....... ,...,.,..,.,,,., ... ~'"'" '"""'""'"·'"" r/,,r •0/>/<o,,< -"'"'""" "''""""""" -'" • ~,..,.'"'"'""'on~,,.~"'"""""""""'''"'"""'' .,,,,,_.,. /o, ,,.. ,,,, ... .,, """fl,no ,,..m of""' !OM..,;;""'°"' anO o, """"~' ,ub.,/ho• thor woi,id ,ff«1 '"'"*""'-"" "·-""""''""""""""'''"''"'""'ofo/f"'""""'"""'"•- if""' ""'""" '""'~'" '"'"{</ "'"''"',o/ogi<:OV<,~-· '''"'""" , .. .,.. •mf-1 ... '"""' o< """'""''O'< O<fP,/f,-<l>oP !<Op•"",,,."'""''/<'<., ..... , ,>oil ""m•-•'r """" rh< (/"of"'"'°"'"""'""' ....... m•al, <O'"""'"d To .. ,· a,0"'°' '°'"""'""" ond 10, Wo,hh!O""' l""t ,,._,,, ;f At<i><o/o9,<o/""" HIH-,,,.,,,_.,. "", .... .,,,>ho<,..,.,.,.-•• !M "' __ .. oom,-don , .. f,a/11< """""'~""""~ Jl'f/Xl'f40!' T/cffli,. ""'"'°''-'"·,OW, """"°'"" "'th• ,o,., applk:1tlon mu,t o, ,.o,.,,tt.d '" '"''""' <o v,,, .. ,. OolbH, ''"'" """""'· c,o - "'""''"" <>1¥1,lon, LO!S =•h aro,, Wr,, """'""· ,,.. """"·..,. ,ax, PM"" •••• ,~,'""· Th<,'""'"" ,1.,. '"""'"•Iv uhedulod Jar , p,11,1, hu,<n1 oo ~u1u,t l. JOU. "10 00, m, ew .. i Ch•"'"""· Sov,o,h Flo,,.-. Roo"'" (lty "•I. 1055 South GtadVW>v, Ronton. ~ ro• ,ro '"'"'"'''" ,n "'""""'• th, h••~•1, ,,,.,. cooloct tho 0,,.1,0.,.,,, _.,co, OMS">n to'"'""' thll tho hu~nc hn not""" ,T><1>1dc>iod 1t\"lSI <JO. 'lll. lfcom,,,.nt><innol ""'""""'",j In """"I by<h~d,,. ;ndlalto ollo-,o, y,,,,ma,«Ml opp11tltth1 hu,~ ,nd ?"""' "'" """"'""".., th, "'""°'•I b..ro,... rt-.. ~ouln,i £,•mine, If y,,u "'"" q"'"'""' 11>out ,M, proooHI, or whh lo Oo ,,,,d, , .. ,., o/ ,.,,;o,d •nd =•M •ddlU"nol lnl<Jm,.,">n O'f °"I, ,1,.,, «n10ct 1h, proioct. "''"''"· Any,:,oe WOO ,.om,t, -;n,o '°"'"''"" "'II '"""'"'"''iv b•rnm,, '"'' or -""' ,nd ... 1 i., oo,m,o of ••1 01<1,i... '" '"" '""'<' CERTIFICATION CONTACT PERSON· V3ness~ Dolb.,.,, Senior Planner; Tel; (425) ~30-7314; EIT vdol bee@rentonwa.gov PlfME INCLIJO< THE PIIOIECT NUMBER WHEN CALW'IG FOIi PIIQPfM FILE IDENTIFICATIOf I, Uanes;'];c, 0\) l ~ . hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted in~ conspicuous places or nearby th~ 'scribed property on . Date: &_/10 /1 / Signedhri@ac,< flcdb STATE OF WASHINGTON COUN1Y OF KING ) ) 55 ) ' I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that -~Y~' '~"'~·~"~s'-s~· ,~,_:J?_,,_· ~"'~· \~\c~i~"'~f-, ____ _ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses il\\1/..~i,oses mentioned in the instrument. ,,,,.... ~ ,,,,, ~~ ' 111QC X Ct I ___ __.;'-d'--"A_,__..4'1'0""'-"'-=1 .. > ... c"") ___________ _ _ 'c _ /.J. i ;,,,\ ,f, \ 1 Notary Public m and for the State of Washington :: ' ::~ _4, ... ~ 0 ~ -,.:,o' \ ... ~ ""-:-z .. • !t ti:,) C, ~ ~. •""' ""; ;t -,,;J ~II ~' ff ~ !: , e. !f ---,;;-:: ,/'~'t' ~ "'t·-('If .._:i-" , r_ ~- Notary (Print): H A My appointment expires: t\i" 9 "j): J3 dud --~=~:"'1='-'---=--'--==------ CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 10th day of June, 2011, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance Letter, NOA, Environmental Checklist, Critical Areas Report, Traffic Impact Analysis, & Site Plan PMT documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached John Lefotu & Ramin Pazooki -Traffic Impact Analysis WSDOT Karen Walter -Critical Areas Report, Env. Checklist, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries NOA Greg Diener -Acceptance Letter Contact Robert McCormick -Accpt Ltr, NOA Owner/Applicant 300' Surrounding Property Owners -NOA only See Attached Parties of Record -Accpt Ltr, NOA See Attached Department of Ecology -emailed NOA, Env. Checklist State Agency (Signature of Sender): ~I Ju ,1,; // /) £.~~ V I . . \ STATE OF WASHINGTON l ,, ~ -. -:::: 55 t,; COUNTY OF KING 1 \ \\ ~~~ 'If ~,, ,-'$:.. "#G ~:.- 1 certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker ''11111 IIWAS .. ,.- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the1U~~~'lJi'i) purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: 91vo, ID xOI/ . ) Notary Puic in and for the State of Washington ' Notary (Print): ___ ..J:1.....£..L..--1LJ' '-'-"11.L<'!L( _____________ _ My appointment expires: Project Name: McCormick Plat Project Number: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD template • affidavit of service by mailing r; r City of ~IJICJIJ NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: June 10, 2011 LAND USE NUMBER: LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD PROJECT NAME: McCormick Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental Review (SEPA), a Preliminary Plat and Planned Urban Development (PUD), and a critical areas Variance to place utilities in a stream buffer, for a 34 lot subdivision of one parcel located at 16405 Maple Valley Highway. The subject site is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) units/net acre and is approximately 7.32 acres is area. A portion of the site is located within King County, in the RA-5 zone, resulting in a total land area of 11.59 acres. The proposed density of the site would be 6.33 dwelling units per acre. The site is currently developed with the Valley View Mobile Home Park, which contains 47 mobile homes and two stick built structures. The proposed lots range in size from 2,444 square feet to 3,421 square feet. In addition to the 34 !ots, 10 tracts are proposed far Critical Areas, Open Space, Utilities, Detention, and a Park. Access to all lots is proposed via new roads off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream; as such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. Excluding trees located in critical areas, the applicant has proposed to retain two significant trees on site and replant with a minimum of 36 new trees. The development would require approximately 8,248 cubic yards of excavated material and 7,924 cubic yards of fill. The proposed project would provide two new public streets and a public alley in addition to a small park and circular trail system and a detention pond. PROJECT LOCATION: 16405 Maple Valley Highway OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): 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-M process to give notice that a DNS- M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: May 25, 2011 June 10, 2011 Greg Diener, Pacific Engineering Design, LLC; 15445 53"1 Avenue S; Suite 100; Seattle, WA 98188; Eml: greg@p:aceng.com Environmental (SEPAJ Review, Preliminary Plat approval, Administrative Variance approval, Preliminary Planned Urban Development approval Construction and Building Permits Geotechnical Report, Critical Areas Report, Preliminary Drainage Report and Traffic Impact Analysis Jf you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED -Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: McCormick Plat/LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD NAME:------------------------------------ MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.c Location where application may be reviewed: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: 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 August 2, 2011 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers. Hearings begin at 10:00 a.m. on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. The subject site is designated Residential Single-Family (RSF) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential -8 (R-8) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-llOA, RMC 4- 3-050, RMC 4-7-080, RMC 4-9-150, RMC 4-9-250 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. The applicant will be required ta pay the appropriate Transportation Mitigation Fee; The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee; and The applicant wit/ be required to pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc., dated April 1, 2008, the response letter dated September 9, 2008, Kleinfelder Technical Peer Review dated April 17, 2009, and Otak, Inc. Geamarphic and Debris Flaw Analysis, dated May 17, 2010. The applicant shall submit a Final Debris Flow Mitigation Area Maintenance Pion addressing ownership, access and financial responsibilities, including engineering details, which shall be submitted and approved by the Deportment of Community & Economic Development, Planning Division project manager. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated April 12, 2011. The applicant shall install an information board in a visible location an site, where the applicant shall post information far the residents notifying them of any land-use actions and or permits submitted that would affect the subject property. The applicant shall mitigate for the lass of affordable housing. if any Native American grave(s) or archaeological/cultural resources (Indian artifacts) ore found all construction activity sha/f stop and the owner/developer shall immediately notify the City of Renton planning deportment, concerned Tribes' cultural committees, and the Washington State Department of Archeo/ogicol and Historic Preservation. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations found in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Traf!Ex, dated October 14, 2010. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, CED - Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on June 24, 2011. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on August 2, 2011, at 10:00 a.m., Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Development Services Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430- 7282. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on 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 : Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner; Tel : (425) 430-7314; Eml: vdolbee@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION Dept. of Ecology** Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region * Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office,.. 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-OlW Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015-172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program* Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015172°d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City of Tukwila Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 *Note; If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the notice of application. **Receives NOA, PMT, & Environmental Checklist via email to SEPA registry. template -affidavit of service by mailing S 242305901306 AQUA BARN RANCH 115 GARFIELD ST #4139 SUMAS WA 98295 885689032005 DILES ROBERTA J 16122 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 885691002004 GEIST JOEL A 16115 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 029600005507 KING COUNTY WATER/LAND RES ATIN NANCY FAEGENBURG 201 S JACKSON ST STE 600 SEATILE WA 98104 885691003002 MAYS CAMERON+JAZMINE RAMIRE 16121 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 885691004000 NIEDERLE PETER+ANNA 16125 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 242305902304 BNSF PO BOX 961089 FORT WORTH TX 76161 885689034001 FITZGERALD STEVEN A+MICHELE 16110 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 885689031007 GRIFFUS WILLIAM M+RHONDA l 16126 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 029600008204 KNAUSS LARRY G 16405 SE JONES RD RENTON WA 98058 232305902909 MCCORMICK ROBERT 161 MAPLEWAY DR SELAH WA 98942 885691001006 SCHULZE BRIAN 15618 161ST AVE SE RENTON WA 98058 885689030009 CLEVENGER JACK A 16136 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 029600006505 FOSTER JEFF M 7243 TWIN CEDAR LN SE OLYMPIA WA 98501 955800108008 KING COUNTY 500 KC ADMIN BLDG 500 4TH AVE SEATILE WA 98104 885689029001 LE BRENDA T 15608 161ST AVE SE RENTON WA 98058 885689033003 NGUYEN THOMAS 16116 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 885691005007 TO THANH M+HO VIVIAN NGUYEN 16131 SE 156TH ST RENTON WA 98058 PARTIES OF RECORD McCormick Plat LUA11-034, PP, PPUD, V-A, ECF Courtney Kaylor Attorney at Law McCullough Hill Leary, ps 701 Fifth Avenue Avenue ste: #7220 Seattle, WA 98104 tel: (206) 812-3379 eml: courtney@mseattle.com (party of record) Mark Hoskinson 16405 Renton Maple Valley Hwy ste: #30 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 271-3902 (party of record) Jose Garibay 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #1 Renton, WA 98058 (party of record) Fernandez Alejandre 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #20 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 269-7557 (party of record) Tien Tran 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #25 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 246-8927 (party of record) Feliciano Galvez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #27 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 228-8941 (party of record) Updated: 06/10/11 Lana Johnson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #7 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 314-5550 (party of record) Dan Greggs 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd ste: #3 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 533-1371 (party of record) Ruth Martinez 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #1 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 647-3519 (party of record) Sandra Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 442-4968 (party of record) David Serrano 16405 Se Maple Valley Road ste: #28 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 445-5044 (party of record) Doug Peterson 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #17 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 228-7702 (party of record) Juanita Shields 16405 Maple Valley Hwy Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 271-2516 (party of record) Jose Rodriguez Montoya 16405 SE Maple Valley Road ste: #9 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 793-0930 (party of record) Monica Crystal Garnice 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #20 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 761-6032 (party of record) Jose R. Cisneros 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy ste: #24 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 442-1353 (party of record) Martin Schroeder 16405 Maple Valley Road Renton, WA 98058 tel: (206) 335-5535 (party of record) Jan Ploegman 16405 SE Maple Valley Road ste: #10 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 227-9284 (party of record) (Page 1 of 3) PARTIES OF RECORD McCormick Plat LUAll-034, PP, PPUD, V-A, ECF John Brigham 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #36 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 271-9767 (party of record) Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #16 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 687-6142 (party of record) Esther Lopez 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #8 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 274-5623 (party of record) Resident 2820 SW 110th Place Seattle, WA 98146 (party of record) Mr. & Mrs. Daniel Desjardins, Jr. 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #44 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 228-3743 (party of record) Janlin Diaz 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd ste: #5 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (206) 370-0517 (party of record) Updated: 06/10/11 Hallie Sword PO Box 6314 Federal Way, WA 98063 tel: (253) 740-8205 (party of record) Lauren D. Mclees Allen 16405 Renton Maple Valley Road ste: #53 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 221-1784 (party of record) Bill Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 442-5408 (party of record) Robert McCormick 161 Mapleway Road Selah, WA 98942 (owner/ applicant) Joe Castillo 16405 SE Maple Valley Rd ste: #6 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (509) 840-4917 (party of record) Dionne R. Dunkel 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Rd Renton, WA 98058 tel: (206) 422-6285 (party of record) Carl McMurtry 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #32 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 970-3117 eml: otsedom49@comcast.net (party of record) Clyde Arnold 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #46 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 255-7595 (party of record) Barbara Workman 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #33 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 273-0559 (party of record) Greg Diener, P.E. Pacific Engineering Design LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S Seattle, WA 98188 tel: (206) 431-7970 eml: greg@paceng.com (contact) Rita Smith & Robert Barnes 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #38 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (253) 249-8915 (party of record) Cheryl Galer 16405 SE Renton Maple Valley Hwy ste: A-1 Renton, WA 98058 (party of record) (Page 2 of 3) Carlos Barbo 3501 NE 8th Street Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 277-4073 (party of record) Danh Cao Dinh 411 164th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 tel: ( 425) 644-5637 (party of record) Updated: 06/10/11 PARTIES OF RECORD McCormick Plat LUA11-034, PP, PPUD, V-A, ECF Hung Van Pham 16405 SE Maple Valley ste: #12 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 227-9974 (party of record) Edward D. Tharp, Jr. 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #18 Renton, WA 98058 tel: (425) 890-2514 (party of record) Maria Concepcion Perez Syala 16405 Maple Valley Hwy ste: #45 Renton, WA 98058 . tel: ( 425) 495-0907 (party of record) Herb Wendland 16405 SE Maple Valley Hwy ste: #16 Renton, WA 98058 tel: ( 425) 687-6142 (party of record) (Page 3 of 3) Denis Law C' f - __ _:Ma:yor _______ ... r . lty_O l June 10, 2011 Greg Diener Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 53rd Avenue S #100 Seattle, WA 98188 -1,wµl!WJ.! Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Subject: Notice of Complete Application McCormick Plat, LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Dear Mr. Diener: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements; however the following information is required to be submitted prior to June 17, 2011: 1. A table identifying which section of Renton Municipal Code the applicant would like to amend through the PUD process. This table shall include the existing development standard and the requested new standard. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on July 11, 2011. 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 August 2, 2011 at 10:00 a.m., Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. 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 prior to the scheduled hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: Robert McCormick/ Owner(s) Parties of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov ____ D_e:::'.sy:;,a_w ______ ....... r City of l .. . . . ~ -~· r r~J:Oil June 10, 2011 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Attn: John Lefotu and Ramin Pazooki Washington State Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue North PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 SUBJECT: McCormick Plat LUAll-034, ECF, PP, V-A, PPUD Dear Sirs: Enclosed is a copy of the TIA for the subject land use application along with a copy of the proposed site plan. If you have additional comments or concerns, you may either send them via mail or email them to me at vdolbee@rentonwa.gov. The Environmental Review Committee is scheduled for July 11, 2011. I would appreciate your comments prior to the meeting, preferably by June 24, 2011, if possible, so that I may incorporate them into the staff report. Sincerely, ~-DoliuuL Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Enclosures cc; Project File Arneta Henninger, City of Renton -Plan Review Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady \f'i/ay • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov 15. King County traffic impact fees may be required in conjunction with development. 1(),-v the ·· J ;017 , . ..-:,:.;,- ((_. :Ir< PUBLIC SERVICES ~r~:.., .... ,. '.c-J/ ;L,7,. ,, l~/C::.. a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: · i.S::/f)) fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No, the need for public services is anticipated to be similar to that of the existing development. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The project will be designed with properly located fire hydrants and roadways designed to allow access for emergency services such as. medic, police and fire department personell. King County Fire Department impact fees may be required in connection with the development. School mitigation fees may also be required. Other services will be paid for by taxes assessed against each of the proposed lots. 16. UTILITIES a. Check utilities currently available at the site: 1:8:1 electricity 1:8:1 natural gas 1:8:1 water 1:8:1 refuse service 1:8:1 telephone, 1:8:1 sanitary sewer D septic system 1:8:1 other: Cable. 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. Cedar River Water and Sewer District will provide water and sewer. PSE will provide natural gas and electricity. Comcast provides cable services. Telephone service is provided by Qwest. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or ack of full disclosure on m part. Name Printed: Date: S'-2, 1.-r, -15 · 06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc I::::> I I -037 WA I I-03Lj . - City of Renton -, ,.,., R · .. ,,.n,,. -ento1 '/J Divi . LAND USE PERMIT sron lef4y2. o 2011 MASTER APPLICATIONl14~·cc'/#·1111@,u, PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: Robert McCormick PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: McCormick Plat ADDRESS: 161 Maple Way Road PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 16405 Maple Valley Highway Renton, WA 98058 CITY: Selah ZIP: 98942 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 509-945-2219 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 2323059029 APPLICANT (if other than owner) EXISTING LAND USE(S): NAME: Mobile Home Park COMPANY (if applicable): PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Single Family residences EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: Residential Single Family (RSF) PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CITY: ZIP: (if applicable) Residential Sinale Familv IRSFl EXISTING ZONING: TELEPHONE NUMBER: R-8 CONTACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): R-8 Greg Diener SITE AREA (in square feet): NAME: 318,998 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (if applicable): Pacific Engineering Design, LLC DEDICATED: 62,845 15445 53"' Ave S, Suite 100 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: ADDRESS: 1,073 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET CITY: Seattle ZIP: 98188 ACRE (if applicable) 8 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) 34 206-431-7970 greg@l;!aceng.com NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 34 R:\07093 McConnick Plat\Land Use PermJt Master Application Form\PPUD Version form.doc • I • PROJECT INFORMATION (continued) --~-----~----------- NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: 40 $7,480,000 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): Unknown IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): None SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): None D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE D AOUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO D FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): None D GEOLOGIC HAZARD(steep slope) 24 038 sq. ft. NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if D HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. applicable): None D SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES 1 430 sq. ft. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): None D WETLANDS !Um_sq.ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE SE QUARTER OF SECTION ...n_, TOWNSHIP ...n_, RANGE_.Q§_, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. Preliminary PUD 3. Environmental Checklist Review 2. Preliminary Plat 4. Variance (Water} Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ 8446 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP Id£~!--J '1 £ ~~, ',,... 1/-, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of I, (Print Name/s) r.; Washington that I am (please check one) .JI_ the current owner of the property Involved in this application or_ the authorized representative to act for a cor ration (please attach proof of authorlzation) and that the foregoing statements end answers herein contained and the information herewith are In all sp s tr and correct to&the best of myJknowled:• and belief. ~ b bt,¥\-f: . , . a~-I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Y)\ e C O V l'V\ I ~ .--.;· signed this instrument and acknowledge It to be his/her/their free and voluntary . c act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. ofOwne~~l~~'.~~~~'.~,ti~~)'":•,iiidJli,i'.'.lllllllllg ( \' (A~ Q_, \OnnJ7 § t;ow~y ;_•,,],lie = Nota~JJclnendfortheStateofWa~ § State of y,·,.,_s11in:;ton ; (Signature of OwneWepres.1iii.ilv~) '' l . r: :· I z ;= MY cc1 ;_,,,.i;sS!C:-. ::::<Pl:1.ES = :: Septci:'i'.J<;r' 15, ?Cl 3 _ 01111111111111111111111111111111111:11111111110 Notary (Print) My appointment expires: --°'-~I _I _')"_/_I_~-- R:\07093 McCormick Plat\Land Use Pennit Master Application Fonn\PPUD Version form.doc -2 . I, Robert McCormick, authorize Greg A. Diener P.E. of Pacific Engineering Design, LLC as my agent to make statements and representations herein on behalf of my proposed development, McCormick Plat. Robert McCormick Date: S'-(3-t I I, (Print Name/s) Uf.:.,,.f £ H5--Cac-: ck' , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State ofWashi;that I am the current owner of the property involved In this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the infomiation here'Nith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. QI 111 i 1111: ! Ii l, I I I lllil:, i ! : ! I lilllll 1 ! II lillQ Not .. : ·'Y ·.--~u.blic = = Stat~ o;· ·~ .. \, .. < ,J.ngton = fvh (-_. -: 1· t.1.·~.;2.,' .. ,; : :~Y.?JHES S0µ .. ,;,1h01 lti, ::•o·: ~i = DI 111111111 i lli!!i i 111; ! i ll!il i 1, ! I! 11111111110 I certify !hat I know or have satisfactol)' evidence that Ko \?e.., « € {l)j.C:,ovm I c., ~ signed this instrument and acknowledge It to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) My appointment expires: q I 1 5:: I 1 ~ LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: THE WEST 201 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, A DISTANCE OF 201 FEET; THENCE NORTH TO THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF COUNTY ROAD; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID COUNTY ROAD TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE WEST LINE THEREOF TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL C: COMMENCING AT A POINT ON THE EAST BOUNDARY LINE OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, WHICH POINT IS NORTH 0"12'43" EAST 1398.72 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23 AND SOUTH 0"12'43" WEST 90.13 FEET FROM THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED EAST BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID SECTION 23 AND THE CENTER LINE OF THE TRACT AND RIGHT OF WAY OF THE COLUMBIA AND PUGET SOUND RAILWAY; AND BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE SOUTH 0°12'43" WEST 420.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81°35'17" WEST 295.04 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0"12'43" EAST 400 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A LINE CONCENTRIC WITH AND 90 FEET (RADIAL MEASUREMENT)SOUTH- OF THE CENTER LINE OF THE COLUMBIA AND PUGET SOUND RAILWAY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CONCENTRIC LINE 295 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT ANY PORTION THEREOF WHICH LIES NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SOUTHEAST RENTON-MAPLE VALLEY HIGHWAY (P.S.H. NO. 2) AS ESTABLISHED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 1545508. PARCEL D: A PORTION OF A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION AT A SAID POINT NORTH 0"12"43" EAST 1398.72 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION AND SOUTH 0°12'43'" WEST 90.13 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID EASTERLY LINE WITH CENTER OF TRACT AND RIGHT OF WAY OF COLUMBIA AND PUGET SOUND RAILWAY; THENCE SOUTH 0°12'43" WEST 420.63 FEET;THENCE NORTH 81°35'17" WEST 295.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 0°12'43'" EAST 265.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81"35'17'" WEST 20.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0°12'43" WEST 265 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 81"35'17" EAST 20.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL E: THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION AT A POINT NORTH 0"12'43" EAST, 1,398.72 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION AND SOUTH 0°12'43" WEST, 90.13 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID EASTERLY LINE WITH THE CENTERLINE OF TRACT AND RIGHT- OF-WAY OF COLUMBIA AND PUGET SOUND RAILWAY; THENCE SOUTH 0"12'43" WEST, 420.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81"35'17" WEST, 195.04 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 81"35'17" WEST, 353.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0"12'43" EAST, 384.52 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ON A 0"28' CURVE TO THE LEFT THROUGH AN ANGLE OF 2"32'28", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 350.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THE EAST 100 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION AT A POINT NORTH 0"12'43" EAST, 1,398.72 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION AND SOUTH 0°12'43" WEST, 90.13 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID EASTERLY LINE WITH THE CENTER TRACT AND RIGHT-OF-WAY OF COLUMBIA & PUGET SOUND RAILWAY; THENCE SOUTH 0°12'43" WEST, 420.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81°35'17" WEST, 295.04 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 0°12'43" EAST, 265.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81°35'17" WEST, 20.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0°12'43" WEST, 265.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 81°35'17" EAST, 20.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; AND EXCEPT PORTION LYING WITHIN PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY No. 5. PARCEL F: THE NORTH 50 FEET OF THE EAST 350 FEET OF TRACT A OF THE PLAT OF VALLEY FAIRE II, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 131 OF PLATS, PAGES 39 THROUGH 43, INCLUSIVE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AS MEASURED ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT A. PREAPPLICATION MEETING FQR,,, •7t;r,;i'.'(_) -... ' \ .... : MCCORMICK PLAT PREAPPLICATION -1 '11 /1s1~·tJ ,1,/4 • I/ } 6 - .: J !!} 16405 MAPLE VALLEY HWY !;~<--71 ' · r;;; IC";;c., , CITY OF RENTON '"-~l![V&;,!Q) Department of Community and Economic Development Current Planning Division PRE10-027 August 05, 2010 Contact Information: Planner: Vanessa Dolbee Phone: 425.430. 7314 Public Works Reviewer: Arneta Henninger Phone: 425.430. 7298 Fire Prevention Reviewer: Dave Pargas Phone: 425.430. 7023 Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell Phone: 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 (planner) 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 and Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU MEMORANDUM August 4, 201 O Vanessa Dolby, Acting Senior Planner Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector Preliminary Comments for McCormick Plat 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. A water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water and Sewer District. 2. The fire mitigation fees are applicable at the rate of $488.00 per single family unit. This fee is paid prior to recording the plat. Credits are granted for existing homes and it appears there are more existing homes than proposed homes so no charges will be applied to this project. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be minimum 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 322-psi point loading. Access is required within 150-feet of all points on the buildings. Dead end streets exceeding 150-feet require an approved turnaround. Full 90-foot diameter cul-de- sac required is required when dead end streets exceed 300-feet long. City street standards require 20-foot wide streets with a 6-foot wide parking area on one side of the street only. Parking is not allowed on the other side of the street and shall be posted as such. 4. All lots on dead end access roadways that exceed 500-feet are required to be fire sprinklered. This applies to lots 14 through 17 and lots 20 through 26 as proposed. CT:ct Mcconnick Renton Fire Department I PRE-FIRE PLANNING I In an effort to streamline our pre-fire process, we are requesting that you submit a site plan of your construction project in one of the following formats which we can then convert to VIS IO. vsd. This is required to be submitted prior to occupancy. ABC Flowcharter.af3 ABC Flowcharter.af2 Adobe Illustrator File.ai AutoCad Drawing.dwg AutoCad Drawin•.d= Comouter Granhics Metafile.cmn Corel Clioart Format.clllX Corel DRAW! Drawine File Format.edr Corel Flow.cf! Encapsulated Postscript File.eps Eohanced Metafile.emf IGES Drawing File Format.igs Graphics Interchange Format. •if Macintosh PICT Format.pct Microerafx Desi,mer Ver 3.1.drw Microorafx Desio-ner Ver 6.0.dsf Microstation Drawing.don Portable Network Graohics Forrnat.onf Postscriot File.us Tag Image File Format.tif Text.Ix! Text.csv VISIO.vsd Windows Bitmap. bmp Windows Bitmao.dib Windows Metafile.wmf 1 Zsoft PC Paintbrush Bitmao.ocx DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM August 4, 2010 Vanessa Dolbee, Planner Arneta Henninger, Plan Review /[If McCormick Plat 16405 SE Maple Valley Highway-2323059029 PRE 10-027 NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non- binding and may be 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 34-lot plat proposal, located on the south side of Maple Valley Hwy, all in Sect. 23, Twp 23N, Rng SE; and in Sect. 24, Twp 23N, Rng SE. The following comments are based on the pre-application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. WATER: • This site is located in the Cedar River Water District water service boundary. A current water availability certificate is required from Cedar River Water District. • This site is not located in the Aquifer Protection Zone. • The project will need to provide domestic service and fire service to serve the proposed development. • Per the City Fire Marshal, the preliminary 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; two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. Lateral spacing offire hydrants is predicated on hydrants being located at street intersections. • All lots on dead end access roadways that exceed 500 feet are required to be fire sprinklered. This applies to lots 14 through 17, and lots 20 through 26 as proposed. SANITARY SEWER: • This site is located in the Cedar River Sanitary Sewer District service boundary. A current sanitary sewer availability certificate is required from the Cedar River Sewer District. McCormick Plat-PRE 10-027 Page 2 of2 August 4, 2010 • The proposed project needs to show how they propose to serve the new development with sanitary sewer service to all of the lots. STREET IMPROVEMENTS: • Street improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and paving will be required to be installed across the full frontage of the parcel being developed if not existing. • The internal streets shall install a minimum of 20' pavement with parking on one side, hence a 26' pavement section. The road section shall include 5' sidewalks on both sides and 8' between curb and sidewalk for a planter strip. • Per the City of Renton Fire Marshal, the roadway shall be required to have a 25' inside and a 45' outside turning radius. • Residential alleys are 12 feet in width. • Street lighting will be required per City of Renton standards along the frontage and on the internal streets. Private street lighting, including PSE, is not allowed. • Traffic mitigation fees will apply. Traffic mitigation fees of approximately $75 per net new average daily trip will be required prior to recording of the short plat as a condition of the plat. • All new electrical, phone, and cable services and lines must be undergrounded. The construction of these franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector prior to recording the plat. STORM DRAINAGE: • The City does not have any records of existing storm drainage facilities in Maple Valley Hwy, fronting this parcel. • A conceptual drainage plan and report is required to be submitted with the formal application for the plat. A drainage control plan designed per the City of Renton Amendments to the King County Surface Water Manual 2009 is required. • The conceptual storm drainage plan needs to address how the roof runoff from the new lots will be handled. • The Surface Water SDC fees are $1,012 per lot. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. GENERAL: • All required utility, drainage, and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two of the City of Renton Horizontal and Vertical Control Network. Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. Half of the fee must be paid upon application for the construction permits, and the remainder when the perm its are issued. There will be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: General CITY OF RENTON Department of Community & Economic Development MEMORANDUM August 5, 2010 Pre-Application File No. PREl0-027 Vanessa Dolbee, (Acting) Senior Planner (425) 430-7314 McCormick PUD/Plat -16405 Maple Valley Highway We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above-referenced development proposal. The following comments on deve/opmentond 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, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Public Works Administrator, 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 on the City's website www.rentonwa.gov Project Proposal The applicant is proposing a 34-lot PUD subdivision located on the east side Maple Valley Highway (SR-169) at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (parcel #2323059029). The subject site is 11.59 acres and is zone Residential 8 (R-8) dwelling units per net acre. The site is currently developed as the Valley View Mobile Home Park, containing two permanent structures, which are to be removed. Access to all lots is proposed via a new road off of Maple Valley Highway. The subject site contains landslide hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, wetlands, and a stream. As proposed, the subject subdivision would also include 4 tracts for critical areas, utilities, open space, and drainage. Current Use: The property is currently developed as the Valley View Mobile Home Park with 40 existing Mobile Home spaces, a duplex and maintenance building. Planned Urban Development There are two principal purposes of the planned urban development regulations. First, it is to preserve and protect natural features of the land. Second, it is to encourage innovation and creativity in the development of residential, business, manufacturing, or mixed use developments by permitting a variety in the type, design, and arrangement of structures and improvements. McCormick PUD/Plat August 5, 2010 Page 2 of9 Planned Urban Development Standards RMC 4-9-150 states that in approving a planned urban development, the City may modify any of the standards of chapters 4-2, 4-4, and 4-7 RMC and RMC 4-6-060, except as listed in subsection B3 of this Section. All modifications to lot size, width, depth, building standards, street standards and setbacks will be considered simultaneously as part of the planned urban development. Zoning/Density Requirements-RMC 4-9-150B3 states that the number of dwellings units shall not exceed the density allowances of the applicable base or overlay zone or bonus criteria in chapter 4-2 or 4-9 RMC. The subject property is located within the Residential -8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zoning designation. The density range required 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 of public and private streets and critical areas would be deducted from the gross site area to determine the "net" site area prior to calculating density. The applicant provided a Density Worksheet with their application, pursuant to this worksheet the density of the proposed PUD would be 6.42 dwelling units/net acres, which complies with the permitted densities in the R- 8 zone. Common Open Space -Open space shall be concentrated in large usable areas and may be designed to provide either active or passive recreation. Open space must be equal to or greater in size than the total square footage of the lot area reductions requested by the planned urban development. The open space shall not include a critical area and be concentrated in large usable areas. Specific lot sizes were not provided with the application materials therefore staff could not determine the required amount of open space. *This section of the PUD regulations is currently undergoing a legislative review. If approved the following changes would be made to the "Common Open Space" section of the PUD regulations: For residential developments open space must equal at least 10 percent {10%} of the development site's gross land area. i. Open space may include, but is not limited to, the following: (a) A trail that allows opportunity for passive recreation within a critical area buffer (only the square footage of the trial shall be included in the open space orea calculation), or {b) A sidewalk and its associated landscape strip, when abutting the edge of a critical area buffer and when a part of a new public or private road, or ( c) A similar proposal as approved by the reviewing official, ii. Additionally, a minimum area equal to fifty {50} square feet per unit of common space or recreation area shall be provided in a concentrated space as illustrated in Figure 1. Private Open Space -Each residential unit in a planned urban development shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors) for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit and shall be an area of at least twenty McCormick PUD/Plat August 5, 2D10 Page 3 of9 percent (20%) of the gross square footage of the dwelling units. The private open space shall be well demarcated and at least ten feet (10') in every dimension. Decks on upper floors can substitute for some of the required private open space for upper floor units. For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty (60) square feet in size with no dimension less than five feet (5'). It appears each lot would have sufficient space to comply with the Private Open Space requirements. *This section of the PUD regulations is currently undergoing a legislative review. If approved the following changes would be made to the "Private Open Space" section of the PUD regulations: Each residential unit in a planned urban deve/apment shall have usable private open space (in addition to parking, storage space, lobbies, and corridors) for the exclusive use of the occupants of that unit. Each ground floor unit, whether attached or detached, shall have private open space which is contiguous to the unit. The private open space shall be well demarcated and at least fifteen feet (15') in every dimension {decks on upper floors can substitute for the required private open space). For dwelling units which are exclusively upper story units, there shall be deck areas totaling at least sixty {60} square feet in size with no dimension less than five feet {5'). Installation and Maintenance of Common Open Space -All common area and open space shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscaping plan submitted by the applicant and approved by the City; provided, that common open space c·ontaining natural features worthy of preservation may be left unimproved. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the developer shall furnish a security device to the City in an amount equal to the provisions of RMC 4-9-060. Landscaping shall be planted within one year of the date of final approval ofthe planned urban development, and maintained for a period of two (2) years thereafter prior to the release of the security device. A security device for providing maintenance of landscaping may be waived if a landscaping maintenance contract with a reputable landscaping firm licensed to do business in the City of Renton is executed and kept active for a two {2) year period. A copy of such contract shall be kept on file with the Development Services Division. Landscaping shall be maintained pursuant to requirements of RMC 4-4-070. Decision Criteria The City may approve a planned urban development only if it finds that the following requirements are met. Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required -Applicants must demonstrate that a proposed development is in compliance with the purposes of the Planned Urban Development and with the Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that which would result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. Public Benefit-In addition, applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable impacts to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more McCormick PUD/Plat August 5, 2010 Page 4of9 of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed planned urban development: 1. Critical Areas: Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development; or 2. Natural Features: Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations; or 3. Public Facilities: Provides public facilities that could not be required by the City for development of the subject property without a planned urban development; or 4. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior in one or more of the following ways to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development: a. Open Space/Recreation: i. Provides increased open space or recreational facilities beyond standard code requirements and considered equivalent to features that would offset park mitigation fees in Resolution 3082; and ii. Provides a quality environment through either passive or active recreation facilities and attractive common areas, including accessibility to buildings from parking areas and public walkways; or b. Circulation/Screening: Provides superior circulation patterns or location or screening of parking facilities; or c. Landscaping/Screening: Provides superior landscaping, buffering, or screening in or around the proposed planned urban development; or d. Site and Building Design: Provides superior architectural design, placement, relationship or orientation of structures, or use of solar energy; or e. Alleys: Provides alleys to at least fifty percent (SO%) of any proposed single family detached, semi-attached, or townhouse units. *This section of the PUD regulations is currently undergoing a legislative review. Minor changes are proposed which include the addition of Sustainable Development techniques as a public benefit option. Additional Review Criteria -A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: 1. Building and Site Design: a. Perimeter: Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. b. Interior Design: Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be McCormick PUD/Plat August 5, 2010 Page 5 of9 provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single family, detached, attached, townhouses, etc. 2. Circulation: a. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. b. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. c. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. d. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. 3. Infrastructure and Services: Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. 4. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space: An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. S. Privacy and Building Separation: Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. 6. Building Orientation: Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. 7. Parking Area Design: a. Design: Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. 8. Phasing: Each phase of the proposed development contains the required parking spaces, open space, recreation spaces, landscaping and utilities necessary for creating and McCormick PUD/Plat August 5, 2010 Page 6 of 9 sustaining a desirable and stable environment, so that each phase, together with previous phases, can stand alone. Residential Design and Open Space Standards: Residential Design and Open Space Standards are conceived to implement policies established in the Land Use and Community Design Elements of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, enhance quality of life by encouraging new residential development to produce beautiful neighborhoods of well designed homes, and to mitigate the impacts of density for the neighborhood and the surrounding community. These standards are divided into three areas: 1. Site Design: Quality neighborhoods are characterized by well landscaped, safe, pedestrian oriented streets fronted by a variety of housing types. These qualities are enhanced by lots in a variety of sizes and widths and by homes which vary in scale and massing, each with a prominent entry and generous fenestration facing the street. Garages, while a necessity to today's lifestyles, should not visually dominate the streetscape. 2. Open Space: In order to provide residents with a livable community, private and public open space shall be provided. Public open spaces shall be located so that a hierarchy and/or variety of open spaces throughout the neighborhood is created. 3. Residential Design: Key characteristics of attractive neighborhoods include variety of housing architectural styles, enhanced by attention to selection of exterior materials, colors, and architectural detailing. This Section lists elements that are required to be included in all residential development in the R- 8 zone. Each element includes both standards, as well as guidelines. In order to provide predictability, standards are provided. These standards specify a prescriptive manner in which the requirement can be met. In order to provide flexibility, guidelines are also stated for each element. These guidelines provide direction for those who seek to meet the required element in a manner that is different from the standards. The determination as to the satisfaction of the requirement through the use of the guidelines is to be made by the Reviewing Official. Residential Design and Open Spaces Standards are provided herewith. Access: Access for the proposed lots would be provided via one access point off of Maple Valley Highway. A new loop road is proposed in addition to an alley that would provide rear access to lots 18-34. The new roads shall comply with the City's street standards (RMC 4-6-060 enclosed) unless a modification is approved through the PUD process. Pursuant to the provided street cross sections, landscape strips and parking was excluded for the right-of-way. Significant Tree Retention: A tree inventory and a tree retention plan along with a tree retention worksheet shall be provided with the formal land use application. The tree retention plan must show preservation of at least 30 percent (30 %) of significant trees, and indicate how proposed development would be designed to accommodate preservation of significant trees that would be retained. If the trees cannot be retained, they may be replaced with minimum 2 inch caliper trees at a rate of six to one. McCormick PUD/P!at August 5, 2010 Page7of9 Critical Areas Pursuant to the City of Renton's critical areas maps, wetlands, a stream, steep slopes, erosion hazards, landslide hazards and seismic hazards have been identified on the subject property. Wetlands -A wetland and stream report delineating and classifying the wetland and stream on site is required to be submitted with the formal land use application. In addition, as there are proposed impacts to the wetland and/or stream, a mitigation plan should also be submitted. City staff may require secondary review of the wetland and/or stream report, at the expense of the applicant. Enclosed is a list of City-approved biologists for secondary review. If secondary review is required, the applicant may choose from this list of biologists. RMC 4-3-0SOM.6.f states that standard wetland buffer zones may be modified by averaging buffer widths. Upon applicant request, wetland buffer width averaging may be allowed by the Department Administrator only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. That the wetland contains variations in ecological sensitivity or there are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and ii. That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland function and values; and iii. That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and iv. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon The Science of Wetland Buffers and Its Implications for the Management of Wetlands, McMillan 2000, or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4-9-25DF are followed. v. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than fifty percent (50%) of the standard buffer or be less than twenty five feet (25') wide. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance per subsection N3 of this Section and RMC 4-9-2508; and vi. Buffer enhancement in the areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case-by-case basis where appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. vii. Notification may be required pursuant to subsection F8 of this Section. Geological Hazards -The City of Renton's Sensitive Areas maps indicate the presence of "protected slopes" on the subject site. Protected slopes are defined as topographical features that slope in excess of 40% and have o vertical rise of 15 feet or more. In addition, the project is located in an unclassified landslide hazard area, an erosion hazard area, and a seismic hazard area. If any work is planned on a "protected slope" a Variance from the Critical Areas regulations would be required. Please note, the variance would be reviewed by the Planning Director and the burden would be on the applicant to demonstrate that there is no feasible alternative other than to disturb the "protected slopes." In any event, a geotechnical report addressing the slopes, McCormick PUD/P!at August 5, 2010 Page 8 of 9 erosion, and landslide hazard concerns will be required as part of the environmental and PUD review process. The seismic hazard is related to potential liquefaction of soils during an earthquake event. The required geotechnical analysis needs to assess soil conditions and detail construction measures to assure building stability. City staff may require secondary review of the geotechnical report, at the expense of the applicant. Environmental Review The proposed project would be subject to Washington State Environmental Policy Act {SEPA) review, due to the number of proposed lots and the presence of critical areas. Therefore, an environmental checklist is a submittal requirement. An environmental determination will be made by the Renton Environmental Review Committee. This determination is subject to appeal by either the project proponent, by a citizen of the community, or another entity having standing for an appeal. Permit Requirements The project would require Preliminary Approval of a Planned Urban Development, Final Approval of a Planned Urban Development, Preliminary Plat review, Final Plat Review and Environmental (SEPA) Review. The application fees would be $2,000.00 for Preliminary Approval of a Planned Urban Development and $1,000.00 for Environmental Review/SEPA Review. The preliminary development plan shall include the general intent of the development, apportionment of land for buildings and land use, proposed phases, if any, and such other information or documentation which the Department of Community & Economic Development shall require. The approval of a preliminary plan constitutes the City's acceptance of the general project, including its density, intensity, arrangement and design. Approval authorizes the applicant or subsequent owner to apply for final plan approval of the planned urban development or phase(s) thereof. Preliminary plan approval does not authorize any building permits or any site work without appropriate permits. An approved preliminary plan binds the future planned urban development site and all subsequent owners to the uses, densities, and standards of the preliminary plan until such time as a final plan is approved for the entire site or all phases of the site, or a new preliminary plan is approved, or the preliminary plan is abandoned in writing or expires. Time limits: The developer shall, within two (2) years of the effective date of action by the Hearing Examiner to approve the preliminary plan, submit to the Department of Community and Economic Development a final development plan, showing the ultimate design and specific details of the proposed planned urban development or the final phase or phases thereof, at this time the applicant would also apply for Preliminary Plat approval. The fee for the Preliminary Plat would be $2,000.00 and the fee for the Final Planned Urban Development would be $1,000.00. Concurrent Review: A preliminary planned urban development may be considered simultaneously with any other land use permit required for a proposal, including final planed urban development, McCormick PUD/P!at August 5, 2010 Page 9 of 9 preliminary plats, environmental review, critical area modifications and variances, or other applications. Where merged, the review criteria for all of the applications shall be considered simultaneously with the planned urban development criteria. With concurrent review of these applications, the process would take an estimated time frame of 16 weeks. After the required notification period, the Environmental Review Committee would issue a Threshold Determination for the project. When the required two-week appeal period is completed, the project would go before the Hearing Examiner for a decision on the Preliminary/Final Planned Urban Development and the Preliminary Plat. The Hearing Examiner's recommendation, as well as the decision issued by the City Council, would be subject to two-week appeal periods. The applicant will be required to install a public information sign on the property. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal requirements is provided in the attached handouts. Once Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Preliminary Plat approval is obtained, the applicant must complete the required improvements and dedications, as well as satisfy any conditions of the preliminary approval before submitting for Final Plat review. The Final Plat process also requires Hearing Examiner approval. Once final approval is received, the plat may be recorded. The newly created lots may only be sold after the plat has been recorded. Fees In addition to the applicable building and construction permit fees, the following mitigation fees would be required prior to the recording of the plat. • A Transportation Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project; and, • Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per new single-family residence. • Renton School District Impact Fee based on $6,310.00 per new single-family residence. A handout listing all of the City's Development related fees in attached for your review. cc: Jennifer Henning /"'\ ··"'·-~'441hf'I :,_ ' ' ,-\\,-:::_=\~-- \\\ / / / -'---. RMH RC :: F7 -14 T23N RSE E 1/2 . ---···-:t:: -- < --~,- :~~1~,fu, . pr·, '--! ; :---·~! , ··15. a.- --[ ~i---- r R-4 !! -1 ~!--- --'---;-' . . ' ··-' ... ' .. _! I I I I t N ,,,., I I t ''--~~-~~~~-~-'-_-.:,,,_,_-__________ L ____ J ___ ~ I -s1a2coi;;;j · ZONING MAP BOOK PW TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED ON 11/13/09 rs;,""'"""''"'"'"""""'"'"""""""' """'""'"'"''......,'""'"''·'""~"'"'"" .s,0<,t~r.,rm,;oa ... ,ii,11,.,ol1h,<1.:,,,.,,,n Th,'""'""''"''''""'"'~"'"'"""""'"'~ H7 -26 T23N RSE E 1/2 G7 0 200 4GO '-d I ~ Feet 23 T23N RSE E 1/2 1:4,800 5323 PLAT NAME RESERVATION CERTIFICATE TO: GREG DIENER 15445 -53RD AVE. S, SUITE 100 SEATILE, WA 98188 PLAT RESERVATION EFFECTIVE DATE: March 17, 2011 I.IA)' 25 ZOii The plat name, MCCORMICK has been reserved for future use by ROB MCCORMICK, AGENT, PACIFIC ENGINEERING DESIGN LLC. 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 March 17, 2012, 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 . . ----... -~. ---' PACIFIC L-1\JGINEERING D~;::)_IGN I LLC _ CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS March 15,2011 City of Renton Attn: Planning Division Vanessa Dolbee 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Subject: McCormick Plat Project Narrative Ms Dolbee, On behalf of my client, Robert McCormick, Inc, I request a preliminary review of the proposal for the McCormick Plat. Project/Proposal Description: The project name is McCormick Plat. Land use permits required for the proposed project are Preliminary Plat permit and Preliminary Planed Urban Development permit. The proposed project is located at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road, Renton, WA 98058 in a portion of the East half of the Southeast quarter of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 5 East and in a portion of the west half of Southwest quarter of Section 24, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, King County, Washington. The developable site is located in the jurisdiction of the City of Renton within an R-8 zone, parcel #2323059029. The southern portion of the site (panhandle) is located in the RA-5 zone of King County (not part of the project). The total area of the site is 11.59 acres. The project area to be plated is 7.32 acres (not including the panhandle). Currently, approximately 40 mobile homes, a duplex and maintenance building are on-site. The existing structures will be removed for the proposed development. The proposed development consists of 34 single family dwelling units, paved public roads, utilities, a recreational area and a detention and water quality facility. Net lot area is 5.37 acres, and net density is 6.33 unit/acre. The plat will utilize access from SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (SR-169). Proposed off-site improvements include a right turn lane entrance and a right turn taper exit at SR-169. The estimated construction cost of the entire project is $2,792,480. Estimated fair market value of the proposed project is $7,480,000. The estimated total excavation is 8248 cubic yards and the estimated fill is 7924 cubic yards. Fill material include native material, selected borrow, and gravel. There are a total often 12" to 34" firs, twenty 12" to 18" cotton woods, and miscellaneous alders to be removed. A 20 foot wide right-of-way dedication is proposed along the frontage of SR-169. The proposed development includes two new public streets and a public alley. One is located at the entrance of the site with sidewalks at both sides of the street (Road A) and the other loops around the site with a sidewalk at the inner side of the street (one side only, Road B). Lot 18 to 34 will be accessed from the public alley (Road C). Also a 5' wide trail will be installed in Tract E from the sidewalk at the entrance street to the top www.paceng.com 15445 53RD AVENUE SOUTH, SUITE1 DO.SEATTLE, WA 881 BB FAX 206388-1648 PHONE 425251-8811 206 431-7970 of berm along the north bank of the creek. Another 5' wide trail will be installed from Tract D to the new right of way of SR-169 and ties back to the sidewalk along the east side of the entrance. Other than the sidewalks at both sides of the entrance street (the sidewalk along the west side of the entrance extends to the end of the bus stop for school bus), no offsite sidewalk is proposed along SR-169. Temporary job shacks and sales trailers may be used during construction period. One or two of the 34 units may be used as model home until the project is finished and all the units are sold. A debris flow protection berm is proposed along the edge of the buffer. Under existing condition, there is no buffer along the north bank of the stream. The existing mobile homes have encroached into the proposed 60' stream buffer area. Vegetation will be reestablished in the buffer area according to the wetland plan to provide better protection of the stream. In August 20 I 0, a pre-application meeting was held for this project. Site Description: The site is irregular in shape, but generally rectangular east-west, with a long narrow corridor shaped like a panhandle that runs north-south. The southern portion of the site (panhandle which is not part of the proposed plat and will remain undisturbed) contains steep slopes (slopes in excess of 40%), extending north-south. The site and its adjacent area are mapped as containing Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 25 to 70 percent slopes (AkF) in the south portion of the site, Mixed Alluvial Land (Ma) near the stream and Puyallup fine sandy Loam (Py) in the north portion of the site in the Soil Survey of King County, Washington. Under existing condition, the site drains northerly and northwesterly to the roadside ditch that runs along the south side of SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (SR-169). The northeast corner of the site is located within 200 feet of Cedar River. The north corners of the proposed Lot 9 and 10 are encroached into the 200 feet buffer from the high water mark of the river. The northeast corner of lot IO is approximately 170' from the high water mark of the river and the northeast corner of lot 9 is approximately 190' from the high water mark of the river. The existing shoreline is covered with native vegetations (mostly pasture with some trees). The Maple Valley Highway (SR-169) and the Cedar River Park Trail are also located within the 200 feet buffer from the high water mark of the river. No existing and proposed residential units will have an obstructed view in the event the proposed project exceeds a height of 35 feet above the average grade level. Adjacent Uses: The site is bordered to the north by SE Renton Maple Valley Road (SR-169), to the west by Plat of Valley Faire (a single family residential subdivision now called Summerfield) and to the north and east by undeveloped forest areas. The site is currently used as a mobile home park. Critical Areas: Stream and Wetlands: There is an unnamed class 3 stream that starts at McGarvey Park Open Space south of the site. This stream runs northerly through the middle of the south portion of the site (stream bottom approximately 2 to 4' wide, slope approximately 13%) and then turns westerly and runs along the south boundary of the site (approximately 320' of the stream is lined with 18" CPEP half R:\07093 McCormick Plat\Pre-Application Meeting\Project Narrative 2011-3-15.doc Page 2 of 5 pipe, another 40' of the stream is lined with 12" CPEP half pipe) until near the west boundary of the site and then turns northerly and runs along the west boundary of the site until it reaches the road side ditch along the south side of SR-169 and then crosses SR-169 through a 36" CMP culvert which eventually drains to Cedar River. There is a wetland flagged as Wetland "A" (AAI-AA6) by Sewall Wetland Consulting located at the southwest comer of the site. The stream and wetlands are classified as class 3 stream and category 2 wetlands. Development is proposed adjacent to the stream and wetland. A 75-foot (south of the detention/wet pond) and a 60-foot stream buffer (along the detention/wet pond) for the portion of the stream running along the west boundary of the site and a 60-foot stream buffer for the portion of the stream running along the south boundary of the site is proposed from the ordinary high water mark of the stream and a 50-foot wetland buffer is proposed from the ordinary high water mark of the wetland. The buffers will be established to prevent encroachment into the sensitive areas. There is an area on the northeast comer of the site that is a sloped wetland and was flagged as Wetland "B" (Bl-Bl 7) by Sewall Wetland Consulting. From the aerial photo it looks like most of the flags are located just offsite, though it does cross the property boundary near the northwest comer. This is a category 2 wetland with a 50 feet buffer. In addition to the 50 feet wetland buffer the proposed lots (lot 10 to 13) adjacent to the wetland also have a 15 feet building setback. Steep Slopes: The southern portion of the site (near the panhandle) contains steep slopes (slopes in excess of 40% ), extending north-south. Disturbance within these areas will be minimal and appropriate setbacks to the top and toe of slopes will be established to minimize the potential for erosion and landslides. A 25 foot steep slope buffer together with a 15' building setback will apply to this area (lot 14 to 17). The panhandle is not part of this plat and will remain undisturbed. Utility Availability: Water: A Certificate of Water Supply Availability was issued by Cedar River Water and Sewer District on October 27, 2010. There is a 10" ductile iron water stub extended to the site from the Plat of Valley Faire. The water stub is approximately 8.2' away from the sewer main. Currently, there are two wells on-site that will be abandoned. Sewer: A Certificate of Sewer Availability was issued by Cedar River Water and Sewer District on October 27, 2010. There are existing sewer lines servicing this site. The sewer lines are basically following the driveway loop, they drain to the sewer main for the Plat of Valley Faire through a sewer easement. Most of the existing onsite sewers will be replaced with new sewers to serve the proposed development. Storm Water Detention Storrnwater runoff will be generated by the proposed impervious and pervious surfaces. Project generated storrnwater will be collected in a pipe and catch basin system and routed to on-site detention and water quality facility which then flows to the Cedar River. R:\07093 McCormick Plat\Pre-Application Meeting\Project Narrative 2011-3-15.doc Page 3 of 5 In order to mitigate existing and potential drainage problems, the proposed development will include a combined detention/wet pond designed to provide Level 2 detention and basic water quality treatment. The storm facility will be designed following the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The proposed development will not create negative effects to the downstream drainage system. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this submittal, please contact me at 206.431. 7970. Enclosure(s): cc: Preliminary Drainage Report prepared by Pacific Engineering Design LLC dated 7/15/2010 (5 copies) Preliminary Plat Plans (P-1 to P-11) prepared by Pacific Engineering Design LLC dated 12/13/2010 (5 copies) Robert McCormick (with application, Preliminary Drainage Report& plans) Courtney Kaylor (with application, Preliminary Drainage Report& plans) R\07093 McCormick Plat\Pre-Application Meeting\Project Narrative 2011-3-15.doc Page 4 of 5 Project Contacts: Primarv Contact: Civil Engineer: Greg Diener, PE. Jingsong Feng, PE. Pacific Engineering Design, LLC 15445 -53rd Ave. S, Suite 100 Seattle, WA 98188 Phone: (206) 431-7970 Fax: (206) 388-1648 Applicant I Land Owner I Developer: Robert McCormick 161 Mapleway Road Selah, WA 98942 Phone: (509) 945-2219 Fax: (509) 248-6161 Attorney: Courtney Kaylor McCullough Hill, P.S. 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 7220 Seattle, WA 9 81 04 Phone: (206) 812-3388 Fax: (206) 812-3389 GeoTechnical Engineer: Rob Ward, PE. Geotechnical Consultants 13256 NE 20th St Ste 16 Bellevue, WA 98005-2021 Phone: (425) 747-5618 Fax: (425) 747-8561 Traffic Engineer: Vince Geglia TrafjEx 10104 111th Avenue NE Kirkland, WA 98033 Phone: (425) 522-4118 Fax: (425) 522-4311 Wetland Biologist: Ed Sewall Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. 1103 W. Meeker St. #101 Kent, WA 98032-5751 Phone: (253) 859-0515 Fax: (253) 852-4 732 Geomorphic Evaluation Russ Gaston, PE. OTAK Inc. 10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400 Kirkland, WA 98033 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\Pre-Application Meeting\Project Narrative 2011-3-15.doc Page 5 of 5 .• PACIFIC lltNGINEERING DE ....... GN, LLC= . .1 CIVIL ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSUL TAN TS May 10, 2011 City of Renton Development Services Division Attn: Vanessa Dolbee 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: McCormick Plat (Parcel # 2323059029) Subject: Variance for Installation of Water Line within Stream Buffer Ms. Dolbee: I am writing to request a critical areas variance for the following issue: The McCormick Plat development proposes to construct 34 single family homes on 7.32 acres of land. Within the existing Maple Valley Hwy ROW there is no water line to which would provide water and fire service to these homes. The only available access to a water utility exists from a IO" water line stub provided by the neighboring Summer View plat to the west. See attached drawing. The least impact on buffers would be to access this existing water line through the proposed 60' stream buffer. There do not appear to be any reasonable alternatives. Per the City of Renton Code on Variances: 5. Decision Criteria: Except for variances from critical areas regulations, the Reviewing Official shall have authority to grant a variance upon making a determination in writing that the conditions specified below have been found to exist: (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification; No existing water main is located within Maple Valley Hwy ROW; no other possible connections exist except within the stream buffer. www.paceng.com 154L5 53RD AVENUE SOUTH, SL1ITE1 DO.SEATTLE, WA 88188 FAX206388-1648 PHONE 425 251-8811 206 431-7870 Ms. Vanessa Dolbee - McCormick Plat y of Renton 2 May 10, 2011 b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated; A single 10 "pipe will be installed, and the buffer area will be restored and planted. c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated; An existing Sanitary Sewer utility line currently crosses the buffer area for the same purpose of providing the sole means of sewer service to the site. The existing water line currently serves the adjacent Summer View Plat and this request is consistent with benefits available to adjacent properties. d. That the approval as determined by the Reviewing Official is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. (Amd. Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) The single JO" pipe will cross through the buffer (approximately 60lf) as directly as possible. We request approval of a Critical Areas Variance to provide a means for connection to this water line through the stream buffer. Included is an exhibit highlighting the existing water line from the Summer View plat and the buffer the water line proposes to cross. Thank you for considering our Critical Areas Variance Request. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Sincerely, PA FIC ENGINEERING DESIGN, LLC Enc: Cedar River Water As-Built map cc: Courtney Kaylor, Rob McCormick r ~·-, .. " 1-u iii i10 ~~ ;;; ~ ffl I\) I i:J I r- I' -1\:1 • I 9 I I I ~ (JI -1- ... O> ' s ~ ' ' ': .:, X )> ""O 0 ~ 0 z (' :i! m 286 LF-12• DI.·· 161ST A~. SE -..q,.: ~- :IJ ~ )> ~ :IJ :IJ _m C)>)> mz· (I) () 0 -I m "'Tl ii!Biii .,:~ " 0 ~ " ~ ~ ~ > 0 ~ " 0 C > • ' ~ " z 0 w ~ ~ /., ' 00 ~ "' w 0 =t I I ~ "' I I I I I 11 , __ - McCORMICK PLAT FOR• AOBEflT McCORMICK 161 MAPLEWA Y AOAD SELAH, WA 96942 PHOtE, (509) 845-2219 l~ I' -0 • E ~ m m CITY OF RENTON ' i,, X ' "' ' ' r i Phone: (206) 431-7970 Fax= (206)388-1648 en m ...... ...... _.f>. en m 0 I\) _Q ~ ,, ~~ :u 0 m 01 -m ~ _: -~ ~ )> z 0 )> ""O 0 ~ 0 z 0 11 -I I m en m ...... ...... _.f>. en m 0 ~- J ~ ~ I\) Q ,z rt--1-~---:u 0 [TI 01 ,m ~ ; 15445 53RD Ave. S.Seattle, WA 98188 www.paceng.com 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: 1. 318 998 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: 48,385 square feet 1 730 square feet 35,017 square feet 2. 85 132 3. 233,866 square feet square feet square feet 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 4. 5.37 acres 5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned: 5. 34 units/lots 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 6. 6.33 = 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. R:\07093 McCormick Plat\Preliminary Plat· Renton\density.doc • I • 03/08 City of Renton ' ·'"t,, TREE RETENTION t • •f ~ •i T 1' ', ',1r1r,, WORKSHEET ,i;j,, • 1 2 :; 20,, 1. Total number of trees over 6" in diameter1 on project site: 1. 2. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dead, diseased or dangerous 2 O Trees in proposed public streets 4 Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts O Trees in critical areas3 and buffers 18 trees trees trees trees Total number of excluded trees: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1: 2. __ ___,2=2=---trees 3. __ ___,2=-7,..___ trees 4. Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained4, multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, R-4, or R-8 0.1 in all other residential zones 0.05 in all commercial and industrial zones 4. __ __.,8'------trees 5. List the number of 6" or larger trees that you are proposing 5 to retain 4 : 5. 2 trees 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: (If line 6 is less than zero, stop here. No replacement trees are required). 6. ---=6 ___ trees 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 7. 72 inches 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: (Minimum 2" caliper trees requirec) 8. __ _,2=------inches 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees6 : (if remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 1. Measured at chest height. per tree 9. 36 trees 2 · Dead, diseased or dangerous trees must be certified as such by a forester, registered landscape architect, or certified arborist, and approved by the City. 3 · Critical Areas, such as wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined in Section 4-3-050 of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC). 4 Count only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers. s. 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 Inches of street trees, inches of trees added to critical areas/buffers. and inches of trees retained on site that are less than 6" but are greater than 2" can be used to meet the tree replacement requirement. R:\07093 McCormick Plat\Preliminary Plat -Renton\TreeRetentionWorksheet.doc 12/08 Transportation Department December 8, 2010 Pacific Engineering Design, LLC Collin Barrett 15445 53'd Ave S Suite 100 Seattle, Was 98188 Subject: School Bus Stop 420 Park Avenue North, Renton WA 98057 phone: 425.204.4455 fax: 425.204.4465 tra nsportatio n@renton.wednet.edu 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road in King County Dear Collin, Ut.L, 1 5 2010 PACIFIC ~NGINEERING Project No: 07093 We spoke regarding the new proposed development located at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Rd. We understand this is preliminary and nothing has been finalized as to a start date for this project development. We talked about during construction there would be no children to pick up, therefore, no reason for us to drive into this site. Once the project is complete, we are able to utilize the neighborhood loop road which you say will be able to accommodate a full size school bus if we choose to do so. Since this is our only means for turning around at our furthest point on the Maple Valley Rd, we need to be able to make a left turn heading west-bound on Maple Valley Highway exiting the development. Thank You. Debora Gilroy Assistant Director of Transportation 425-204-4455 425-204-4465 fax deb b ie .g ii roy@re nto n sch oo Is. us z:..~ ~ (o Uat. £,ff6¢,u,. Construction Mitigation Description: • Proposed construction will begin June 2011 and will end June 2013. • Construction operation will be limited in accordance with City of Renton Code, normally from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. on week days and 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. on week ends. • Proposed hauling/transportation routes: The site can be access from SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (SR-169) through the existing 162nd Avenue SE entrance. • The following measures will be used to minimize dust, traffic and transportation impacts, erosion, mud, noise, and other noxious characteristics: Construction noise will be limited to normally from 7 a.m. to IO p.m. on week days and 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. on week ends. Water will be used to control dust. This project will add a SR-169 right turn lane to the site. Flag man and traffic cones/drums will be used to control traffic during construction period. A temporary erosion and sediment control pond will be constructed at the location of the proposed detention/wet pond. By the time the proposed detention/wet pond is constructed, it can be used for temporary erosion and sediment control. Other temporary erosion and sediment control methods including but not limited to rocked construction entrance, temporary intercept ditches, check dams, silt fonces, plastic covers, mulches, temporary seeding, hydro-seeding, slope drains will also be used. • Flag man and traffic cones/drums will be used to control traffic during construction period. • This project does not require the use of cranes. GitYor R C>1. . . er.ton · c1nru1 .ic) ') .. ,_ .. ' IV/Sion PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL1St~'0 rr," ._ _________________________________ -.... r.,s, .. ,; ·-.--.,;-.,--.. !e,'1 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 v('lfon lei<_i 2 s 2011 ,:;S1/{':;.~I;;"\'! ~ --~ l\;1~~11rw ,rl!J:!fJJ The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for non project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For non project actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. -1 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlstdoc A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: McCormick Plat 2. Name of applicant: Robert McCormick-Valley View Mobile Park, LLC. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Robert McCormick Valley View Mobile Park, LLC 161 Mapleway Road, Selah, WA 98942 (509) 945-2219 Contact Person(s):Pacific Engineering Design, LLC, Greg Diener/Lou Larsen 15445 53rd Avenue S, Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98188 (206) 431-7970 4. Date checklist prepared: March 15, 2011 S. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or sch.edule (including phasing, if applicable): Submission of complete preliminary plat application expected in January 2011. Final plat will be submitted within 60 months of preliminary plat approval. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No. No further additions, expansion, or further activity is proposed related to this proposal. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The following environmental documents have been or will be prepared related to this proposal: • Topographical Survey, Prepared by Hansen Surveying • Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, dated 10/20/2010 • Level I Downstream Analysis, prepared by Pacific Engineering Design LLC, dated 07/15/2010 -2 - R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc 06/09 • Preliminary Drainage Report, prepared by Pacific Engineering Design LLC, dated 07/15/2010 • Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report, Geotech Consultants, dated 10/08/2010 • Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by TraffEx, dated 10/14/2010 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. The applicant is unaware of any applications pending for government approvals of other proposals directly affecting the proposed project. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. • Issuance of a SEPA Threshold Determination, Preliminary Plat Approval, Preliminary Planed Urban Development Approval, Final Plat Approval, Final Planed Urban Development Approval, Construction Drawing Approval, Building Permits and Demolition Permit issued by City of Renton. • Water and Sewer Availability, Developer's Extension Agreements and approval of Water & Sewer Plans by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. Construction Stormwater General Permit (NPDES) issued by WA State Department of Ecology. Possible WSDOT Access Permit for proposed access to SE Renton Maple Valley Road (SR169), WSDOT Developer Agreement for ROW Improvements. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. The proposed development is comprised of 34 single-family lots, a paved public access road, associated utility installations, recreation space, a detention and water quality treatment facility and a tract for a stream and wetlands and their associated buffers. Water and sewer availability will be provided by Cedar River Water and Sewer District. The site is 11.59 acres and is zoned both R-12 and RA-5. Since the RA-5 zoned portion of the property (the panhandle) is not proposed for development, the area to be plated is 7.32 acres. The site will be accessed from SE Renton-Maple Valley Road (SR-169). The site contains a Class 3 stream. A 75 feet buffer (south of the detention/wet pond) and a 60 feet buffer (along the detention/wet pond) is proposed from the ordinary highwater mark of the stream that runs along the west boundary of the site and a 60 feet buffer is proposed from the ordinary highwater mark of the stream that runs along the south boundary of the site. The site also contains a category 2 wetland in the southwest area of the site (Wetland A); a 50 buffer is proposed. There is an offsite category 2 wetland located near the northeast corner of the site (Wetland B) which has a proposed 50 buffer that will encroach onto the McCormick site. A steep slope rises to the east along the eastern edge of the site and a 25 foot buffer is proposed. -3 -06/09 R:107093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc 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. The proposed project is located at 16405 SE Renton-Maple Valley Road, Renton WA 98058 (Parcel# 2323059029). The proposed project consists of an irregularly shaped parcel located in a portion of the East half of the Southeast quarter of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 5 East as well as in a portion of the west half of Southwest quarter of Section 24, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, King County, Washington. The developable site (north portion) is located in R-8 zone of City of Renton. The south portion (panhandle) of the site is located in RA-5 zone of King County. This portion of the site is not proposed for development. The total area of the site is 11.59 acres. The total area to be plated is 7.32 acres. The site is bordered to the north by SE Renton- Maple Valley Road (SR-169), to the east by Plat of Valley Faire (single family residential division) and to the south and east by undeveloped forest areas. The site is currently used as Valley View Mobile Home Park. There are approximately 45 existing mobile homes on the site and 1 duplex. The existing structures will be removed in connection with the development of the proposed plat. Please see the topographical survey (existing conditions plans -Sheets 8 and 9 and the plat plans -Sheets 1 and 2) for vicinity map and legal description. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (check one); ~ flat, Drolling, ~hilly, ~steep slopes, Dmountainous, Dother ------ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) The steepest slope on the site is approximately 70% and is located on the panhandle of the site, which is in the RA-5 zone of King County. Development will be located in the R-8 zone of City of Renton with an average slope of 9%. A steep slope rises to the east along the eastern edge of the site and a 25 foot buffer is proposed. 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 prime farmland. The near-surface soil on the steeply sloped areas on the south and east edges of the site is mostly a glacially consolidatd silt. The near-surface soil throughout much of the remainder of the site, where the average slope is around 9 percent, -4 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc is a combination of sand and silt that has essentially flowed down from a steep ravine via a groundwater spring that begins south/southeast of the site. This soil is classified geologically as a "mass waste deposit". Medium-dense to dense, alluvial sand and gravel underlie the mass waste deposit. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Yes, The project site is in a landslide hazard area. As noted in the previous section, a mass waste deposit covers much of the flatter portion of the site. These deposits flowed from higher ground located to the south/southeast of the site via a natural, groundwater-fed stream. Much of the deposit is likely quite old, occurring over the last 10,000 years. It appears that the amount of waste deposit activity has slowed considerably in the last 100 years. A complete geotechnical engineering study will be completed to address the landslide hazards, steep slope setback requirements and provide appropriate hazard mitigation measures. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Grading of the site will be necessary to modify the site for stormwater drainage flow. The exact quantity is unknown at this time. Stormwater will be directed to a detention and water quality facility located in the northwest corner of the site. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, Erosion could occur in connection with construction, but should be limited because the new development areas are currently developed with a trailer park and are only gently sloped. Erosion controls will be implemented prior to clearing in conformance with an engineered Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control (TESC) Plan to be submitted to City of Renton for approval along with project site infrastructure construction drawings. Erosion control measures are expected to include Best Management Practices. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Due to the preliminary nature of the plans, the exact percentage of impervious surfaces is unknown at this time. It is projected from the current layout that the site will be approximately 27% impervious. This will include roads, sidewalks, roofs, patios and driveways. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: As noted in Section B.1.f. above, temporary erosion and sedimentation control Best Management Practices will be implemented to control erosion and sedimentation during site construction. Erosion control measures are expected to include Best Management Practices such as construction of drainage ditches, installation of silt fencing, construction of sedimentation control ponds, and construction access pads at the site entry and other measures as appropriate. -5-06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Emissions and dust particulates generated primarily by construction equipment will likely be produced during the construction phase of this project. The amount of such transitory emissions to the air is expected to be minimal. Once the project is completed, emissions will be those typically associated with a residential development. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. The applicant is not aware of off-site sources of emissions or odors that may affect this proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: During the site work construction phase of the project, watering dusty portions of the site to help control dust. 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. Yes, According to the Critical Areas Report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting on October 20, 2010, Wetland A, a Category 2 wetland, is located at the toe of the slope along the south side of the site and is bisected by the ditched Class 3 stream. A small portion of the wetland extends north of the stream. Wetland B, a Category 2 wetland, is located along the northeast corner of the site. Category 2 wetlands typically have a 50' buffer measured from the wetland edge. See the Critical Areas Report for further information regarding the buffer mitigation. Additionally, a single intermittent Class 3 stream flows through the south narrow section of the site before draining in a half culvert through the south edge of the mobile home park. The stream was also designated as a Type N stream by King County. Class 3 stream typically have a 75' buffer measured from the ordinary high water mark. The city has approved to reduce the buffer to 60' for the portion of the stream that runs along the south boundary of the site and the portion of the stream that runs along the proposed detention/wet pond. Please see the Critical Areas Report for further details . • 6 • 06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlstdoc 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. Yes, A 75 foot buffer (along the west boundary of the site) and a 60 foot buffer (along the south boundary of the site and along the proposed detention/wet pond) are proposed from the ordinary high water mark of the stream and 50 foot buffers are proposed for the wetlands. 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. None. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. S) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 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. -7 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? 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. No waste material will be discharged into the ground. Each of the 37 proposed lots will be connected to the public gravity sewer system. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. Stormwater runoff will be generated by the proposed impervious and pervious surfaces. Project generated stormwater will be collected in a pipe and catch basin system and routed to on-site detention and water quality facility located in the northwest corner of the site which then flows to the Cedar River. 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. Stormwater runoff from paved surfaces will be treated in the proposed detention and water quality facility. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Installation of proposed stormwater collection system, stormwater detention and water quality facility pursuant to City of Renton standards. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _X_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _X_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _X_ shrubs _X_ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain _X_ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other _X_ other types of vegetation See Critical Areas Report prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? -8 - R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc 06/09 Existing lawns, shrubs, ornamental trees from previous use will be removed. Also, some trees will be removed where necessary at the perimeter of the development. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are no known threatened or endangered species on or near the subject property. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Cleared and graded areas will be revegetated per City of Renton standards for single family subdivisions. Buffers will be observed near the stream and wetlands. For the portion of the site located in the RA-5 zone, existing mobile homes and asphalt pavements will be removed and replaced with landscaping area. See landscaping plans. 5. ANIMALS a. Check or circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other ,,Co.:ro"-w'-'-"-s ______ _ Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other~~-------- Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other ______ _ b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are no known threatened or endangered animal species on or near the subject property. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Yes, the site may be part of the Pacific Flyway. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Buffers will be in place near the stream and wetlands. The portion of the site located in the RA-5 zone will remain in its existing forested condition. 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. The project is expected to use electric and natural gas energy sources for heating, lighting, small appliances, and other uses as applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. -9 -06109 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlstdoc 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: The future residences will be designed and constructed in conformance with the Washington State Energy Code. 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, it is unlikely that under normal working conditions that environmental health hazards would be encountered. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. All appropriate precautionary emergency measures will be employed to prevent an emergency situation. However, if an emergency occurs KC Fire District services would be employed. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: State regulations will be followed when handling any hazardous materials. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic Noise from SE Renton-May Valley Road (SR 169) may have some minimal affect on the project. 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. During site construction, the operation of trucks and heavy equipment and construction activities will create short-term noise. In the long term, traffic and other noise typical of residential uses will be created. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Construction-related noise will be limited to City of Renton's permitted work hours. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is bordered to the north by SE Renton Maple Valley Road (SR-169), to the east by Plat of Valley Faire (single family residential division) and to the north and east by undeveloped forest areas. The site is currently used as a mobile home park. There are approximately 45 existing mobile homes and one duplex on the site. -10 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlsldoc b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. Currently, there are approximately 45 mobile homes on the site and 1 duplex. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, all mobile homes will be removed. The existing duplex will be reomoved. Existing wells will remain. e. What is the current zoning classification ofthe site? The current zoning classifications of the site are R-8 of Renton and RA-5 of King County. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The current comprehensive plan designation of the site is Residential Single Family (RSF), g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, an unnamed stream starts south of the site, runs northerly through the middle of the south portion of the site (panhandle) & turns westerly and runs along the south boundary of the site. There is a wetland in the SW corner of the site & an offsite wetland near the NE corner of the site. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 85 people (an estimated 2.5 people per residence) would reside in the completed project. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None proposed. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: -11 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton'McCormick envchlstdoc This project has been carefully designed to provide desirable housing in conformance with existing zoning and the King County's Comprehensive Plan. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Approximatley 34 single family housing units will ultimately be provided. The homes are expected to be in the middle income housing bracket. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Approximately 45 mobile homes and one existing duplex unit will be removed. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None proposed. 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. The tallest site structures will be single-family residential structures in accordance with City of Renton's maximum building height regulations for the R- 8 zone. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Houses will be constructed in accordance with City of Renton's requirements. Landscaping will be provided. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Minor amounts of light or glare may occur from vehicles entering and exiting the site as well as from internal streetlights along the proposed residential access street and from the ultimately-constructed homes. These light sources are expected to be minimal and are expected to occur during early morning and evening hours. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. • 12 -06/09 R\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Adjacent homes to the west may emit minimal light that may affect the proposal. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Utilization of low intensity downward-aimed streetlights will reduce or control light and glare impacts. Installation of street trees will help alleviate some of the light or glare from streetlights and headlights. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The applicant is proposing to provide on-site recreational space. Other nearby recreational opportunities include the Cedar River, which is to the north of the site just across Renton-Maple Valley Road (SR-169). There is also a pedestrian trail along the Cedar River that will provide recreational opportunities for residents. Cedar River Park and Cedar Grove Park are near the proposal as well as the Renton Fish and Game Club Recreation Area. 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: A 4188 sq ft park and total 29,073 sq ft of open space will be provided in the subdivision. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. No known landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance are known to be on or next to the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: If archaeological site(s) are discovered during excavation and/or construction, the contractor will stop work in the vicinity of the site(s) and the owner will notify appropriate agenc(ies) for direction as required by law. -13 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick PJat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The proposed development will have one access to SR-169 (Renton-Maple Valley Highway) at the existing entrance. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No. According to the King County Metro Transit Trip Planner, the closest stops to 16405 RENTON MAPLE VALLEY are the following: Stop Name Distance Renton Maple Valley & 201st Pl SE 0. 77 mile Renton Maple Valley & 201st Pl SE 0.80 mile Renton Maple Valley & Cedar Grove Rd 1.17 mile Renton Maple Valley & 18015 1.17 mile Renton Maple Valley & Cedar Grove Rd SE 1.26 mile Area MAPLE VALLEY MAPLE VALLEY MAPLE VALLEY RENTON MAPLE VALLEY c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The project will have two parking spaces on each lot's driveway, for a total of 68 parking spaces. Additional on street parallel parking will be provided. The project replace parking for existing uses. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? An interior public street will be constructed to serve proposed development. The site will gain access from Renton-Maple Valley Road (SR-169). The proposal may require improvements to Renton-Maple Valley Road (SR-169). e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. The project will not use water, rail, or air transportation. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. According to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx dated October 14, 2010, 326 average vehicular weekday trips would be generated by the completed project. 26 AM peak hour trips and 34 PM peak hour trips would be generated. The existing trips generated by the Valley View Trailer Park will be removed with the McCormick plat. A PM peak hour traffic count was performed on March 5, 2008 to determine the existing traffic volumes at the site access. After removal of the Valley View Trailer Park and construction of the McCormick plat, there will be an estimated net increase of 6 PM peak hour trips. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: -14 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Check!ist Renton\McCormick envch!st.doc King County traffic impact fees may be required in conjunction with the development. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No, the need for public services is anticipated to be similar to that of the existing development. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The project will be designed with properly located fire hydrants and roadways designed to allow access for emergency services such as medic, police and fire department personell. King County Fire Department impact fees may be required in connection with the development. School mitigation fees may also be required. Other services will be paid for by taxes assessed against each of the proposed lots. 16. UTILITIES a. Check utilities currently available at the site: ~ electricity ~ natural gas ~water ~ refuse service ~ telephone, ~ sanitary sewer D septic system ~ other: Cable. 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. Cedar River Water and Sewer District will provide water and sewer. PSE will provide natural gas and electricity. Comcast provides cable services. Telephone service is provided by Qwest. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack offull disclosure on my part. ,.,vv:iH -c,~ Proponent Signature: __ 0=-.:'--'-0---+~-',.-->,.-,1.~-~:.:.~.:.+-'.------ Name Printed: 11N'?l$0NC~ "f'GNG;- Date: 3//5/2.-ol ! -15 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NON PROJECT ACTIONS (These sheets should only be used for actions involving decisions on policies, plans and rograms. You do not need to fill out these sheets for project actions.) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements ofthe environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? -16 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlstdoc Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent Signature: ----"~~~----.--'1CC~-'-~-.4-__.k-=~c:..~1----- j" j ~SO N6J :f&N(?J Name Printed: Date: D!,/ /5/2-0/ J -17 -06/09 R:\07093 McCormick Plat\SEPA Checklist & DNS\SEPA Checklist Renton\McCormick envchlst.doc 1. McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement M~v ,, c:.- . 4, d fl/11 Demonstration of Compliance and Superiority Required. Applicaµ,t~ must · de.monstrate that a proposed development is in compliance wi.th the p~~o.f,;;; , ·- this Sectlon [Renton Mumc1pal Code Sect10n 4-9-150] and with the · '•'s,,j 'i'f.'S}[JJ Comprehensive Plan, that the proposed development will be superior to that ""' which would result without a planned urban development, and that the development will not be unduly detrimental to surrounding properties. Purposes ofRMC 4-9-150 The purposes of the City's PUD regulations are: (I) to preserve and protect natural features of the land; and (2) to encourage innovation and creativity in the development of residential, business, manufacturing, or mixed use developments by permitting a variety in the type, design, and arrangement of structures and improvements. RMC 4-9-150.A. The proposed PUD is consistent with both of these purposes. The proposal provides a generous setback from the adjacent steep slope to the south of the property (approximately 100 feet between the toe of the slope and residential structures). The proposal also provides buffers from the onsite stream and wetlands, protecting these features. In addition, the proposal includes creativity in the arrangement of the residential lots and structures, resulting in a superior open space design that includes (I) a large landscaped open space area contiguous to the critical area buffer; (3) a soft surface trail system; (3) substantial landscaped open space along the Maple Valley Highway frontage; and ( 4) a separate active recreation park area. Exhibit A. Comprehensive Plan The proposed PUD is also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The land use designation of the project area is Residential Single Family ("RSF"). The zoning of the project area is Residential 8 du/ac (R-8). The proposed project will develop 34 single family residential units in a 7.32 acre site. Actual lot density of this project is 6.42 du/ac ( excluding public streets, private access easements and critical areas). The proposal provides housing consistent with this land use designation and zoning as well as the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: • A community that it healthy and safe, that has cohesive, well-established neighborhoods and a growing diversity of housing to match the diversity of the population with its various needs and wants. Comprehensive Plan, p. II-I. • [T]here is an objective to increase the supply of single-family housing through infill development. Some of this single-family infill will occur in newly annexed areas of the City, as a way to meet the desired single/multi-family housing mix and provide efficient urban services. Id. • A significant characteristic of the neighborhoods of Renton is their multi-level diversity. Most neighborhoods include households that vary from one another in McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement -Page I age range or generation, economic level, and place of origin or nationality. In order to respect and protect this quality, the City must allow for a full range of housing types to accommodate the diverse population, from larger, "move up" homes to smaller scale single-family, multi-family, and condominium developments, as well as to traditional single-family houses. Id. • LU Goal 7: Promote new development and neighborhoods in the City that: a) Contribute to a strong sense of community and neighborhood identity; b) Are walkable places where people can live, shop, play, and get to work without always having to drive; c) Are developed at densities sufficient to support public transportation and make efficient use of urban services and infrastructure; d) Offer a variety of housing types for a population diverse in age, income, and lifestyle; e) Are varied or unique in character; t) Support "grid" and "flexible grid" street and pathway patterns where appropriate. g) Are visually attractive, safe, and healthy environments in which to live; h) Offer connection to the community instead of isolation; and i) Provide a sense of home. • Policy LU-9. Encourage infill development as a means to increase capacity for single-family units within the existing city limits. • Objective LU-FF: Manage and plan for high quality residential growth in Renton and the Potential Annexation Area that: I) Supports transit by providing urban densities; 2) Promotes efficient land utilization; and 3) Creates stable neighborhoods incorporating built amenities and natural features. • Policy LU-140. Pursue multiple strategies for residential growth including ... 2) Infill development on vacant and underutilized parcels in Renton's established neighborhoods ... • Policy LU-146. Small-lot, single-family infill developments and plat should be supported as alternatives to multi-family development to both increase the City's supply of single-family detached housing and provide homeownership opportunities. • Land designated Residential Single Family is intended to be used for quality detached residential development organized into neighborhoods at urban densities. It is intended that larger subdivision, infill development, and McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement -Page 2 rehabilitation of existing housing be carefully designed to enhance and improve the quality of single-family living environments. Comprehensive Plan, p. IX-28. • Objective LU-JJ. Encourage re-investment and rehabilitation of existing housing, and development of new residential plats resulting in quality neighborhoods that: 1) Are planned at urban densities and implement Growth Management targets, 2) Promote expansion and use of public transportation; and 3) Make more efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. • Policy LU-158. Net development densities should fall within a range of 4.0 to 8.0 dwelling units per net acre in Residential Single Family neighborhoods. • Policy LU-168. A range and variety oflot sizes and building densities should be encouraged. • Objective H-D: Encourage the private sector to provide market range housing for the widest possible range of income groups including middle-and moderate- income households. • Policy H-19. Market Renton to housing developers. Superior to Result without PUD The property that is the subject of this proposal was annexed to the City in 2008. Prior to annexation, the applicant submitted a subdivision application to King County. This vested subdivision uses cul-de-sacs rather than a loop road, does not include alley-loaded lots, places lots immediately adjacent to the wetland and stream buffers, does not include a trail system, and has lots immediately adjacent to the Maple Valley Highway frontage. Exhibit B. In cooperation with City staff, the applicant agreed to place this vested application "on hold" and instead pursue a PUD under the City Code. The PUD proposal includes a loop road, locating residential structures approximately 100 feet from the adjacent steep slope on the southern side of the property. The PUD also has a superior open space design that includes (1) a large landscaped open space area contiguous to the critical area buffer; (3) a soft surface trail system; (3) substantial landscaped open space along the Maple Valley Highway frontage; and (4) a separate active recreation park area. Exhibit A. The PUD design is superior to the result without the PUD. Not Detrimental to Surrounding Properties The PUD is not detrimental to surrounding properties. The PUD proposes single family detached residential homes at a density compatible with (less than) that of the existing McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement -Page 3 residential subdivision (Summerfield) immediately to the west of the property. The property also includes a natural buffer from this adjacent subdivision. A stream runs along the west side of the property in the Summerfield subdivision. Exhibit A. Under the City Code, the stream and its buffer must be maintained as open space. Accordingly, the stream and its buffer provide a natural buffer between the property and the Summerfield subdivision. The area to the south and east of the property is located in King County and zoned for rural residential development. The stream also runs along the south side of the property, creating a natural buffer on the south property boundary. Id. In addition, natural buffers in the form of off-site undevelopable steep slopes exist on the south and east sides of the property. Id. The Maple Valley Highway borders the north side of the property. Id. Accordingly, the property is buffered on all four sides from adjacent properties. 2. Public Benefit Required. In addition, applicants shall demonstrate that a proposed development will provide specifically identified benefits that clearly outweigh any adverse impacts or undesirable effects of the proposed planned urban development, particularly those adverse and undesirable effects to surrounding properties, and that the proposed development will provide one or more of the following benefits than would result from the development of the subject site without the proposed planned urban development. The proposal provides significant public benefits, which are more specifically described below. The proposal does not have any adverse impacts or undesirable effects. The PUD provides single family detached homes at a density compatible with existing adjacent residential development. Natural features provide buffers from adjacent uses on three sides of the property and the Maple Valley Highway separates the property from adjacent uses on its forth side. Note: Since the PUD application form was prepared, the public benefit provisions of RMC 4-9-150D have been amended. This discussion reflects the current language of RMC 4-9-150D. a. Critical Areas. Protects critical areas that would not be protected otherwise to the same degree as without a planned urban development The PUD provides a substantial setback from the steep slope to the south of the property. With the PUD, residential structures are set back approximately 100 from the steep slope, greater than provided without the PUD. Exhibit A. The PUD also provides 50' wetland buffers around wetland "A" and wetland "B," a 60' stream buffer for the stream that runs along the south, a 60' to 7 5' stream buffer for the stream that runs along the west boundary of the site and a 25' steep slope buffer from the steep slope area at the southeast corner of the site. In addition to these buffers, the PUD provides open space contiguous to the wetland and stream buffers in the western portion of the property. The PUD also places the loop road adjacent to the open space and stream buffer, providing increased protection for the resource than immediately adjacent McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement -Page 4 residential properties. Exhibit A. Without the PUD, open space would not be provided contiguous to the wetland and stream buffer and residential lots would directly abut these buffers. Exhibit B. b. Natural Features. Preserves, enhances, or rehabilitates natural features of the subject property, such as significant woodlands, native vegetation, topography, or noncritical area wildlife habitats, not otherwise required by other City regulations. This PUD will preserve a stream that runs along the south and west boundary of the site, two wetlands that are located in the southwest and northeast comers of the site and a steep slope area in the southeast comer of the site. The sensitive areas and their buffers form a 50 to 110 feet strip of preserved area along the east, west and south boundaries of the site. Under existing conditions, part of the stream buffer area along the south boundary of the site and part of the wetland buffer area along the east boundary of the site have been developed and are occupied with mobile homes. With this PUD, native vegetation will be re-established in these areas. The project provides a full 97,980 sf of landscaping in excess of the requirements of the City Code. c. Public Facilities. Provides public facilities that could not be required by the City for development of the subject property without a planned urban development This PUD provides a 4188 sf. park, 34,244 sf. of open space and 73,405 sf. of buffer area. This exceeds City Code requirements for the park by 2,488 sf, and open space by 5,509 sf. The total area provided for open space is 111,837 sf. d. Use of Sustainable Development Techniques. Design which results in a sustainable development; such as LEED certification, energy efficiency, use of alternative energy resources, low impact development techniques, etc. The project will fully comply with all applicable stormwater management and building design requirements of the City of Renton. e. Overall Design: Provides a planned urban development design that is superior to the design that would result from development of the subject property without a planned urban development. A superior design may include the following: i. Open Space/Recreation. (a) Provides increased open space or recreational facilities beyond standard code requirements and considered equivalent to features that would offset park mitigation fees in Resolution 3082; and (b) Provides a quality environment through either passive or active recreation facilities and attractive common areas, including accessibility to buildings from parking areas and McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement -Page 5 public walkways. This PUD provides a 4188 sf. park, 34,244 sf. of open space and 73,405 sf. of buffer area. This exceeds City Code requirements for the park by 2,488 sf, and open space by 5,509 sf. The total area provided for open space is 111,837 sf. The PUD also has a superior open space design that includes: • A large landscaped open space area contiguous to the critical area buffer • Split rail fences that separate the open space and sensitive areas • A soft surface trail system • Seating (benches) along the trail and interpretive signs along the trail • A covered bus stop at the site entrance on Maple Valley Highway (SR-169) • Substantial landscaped open space along the Maple Valley Highway frontage • A separate active recreation park area. Exhibit A. ii. Circulation/Screening. Provides superior circulation patterns or location or screening of parking facilities This PUD provides two public streets, one that provides access to SR-169 and another that loops around the site, and one public alley for lot access. Parking spaces are provided by garages. Two more parking spaces will be provided in front of the garage for each lot. Lot 18 to 34 will be accessed from a public alley, thus, the parking for these lots will be screened from the public street. For other lots, the parking will be screened from the subdivision entrance and from Renton-Maple Valley Road (SR-169) by landscaped areas. This PUD provides better onsite traffic circulation with a looped public street and a public alley than what would be provided without a PUD. A tabletop design will be created for the intersection of Road A and Road B and alternative paving will be provided for the crosswalks for pedestrian safety. iii. Landscaping/Screening. Provides superior landscaping, buffering, or screening in or around the proposed planned urban development The PUD also has a superior open space design that includes (I) a large landscaped open space area contiguous to the critical area buffer; (2) a soft surface trail system; (3) substantial landscaped open space along the Maple Valley Highway frontage; and ( 4) a separate active recreation park area. Exhibit A. Landscaping exceeds city standards by 97,980 sf. Street trees will be planted at least one per lot along the frontage of each lot to provide screening. iv. Site and Building Design. Provides superior architectural design, placement, relationship or orientation of structures, or use of solar energy. McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement -Page 6 The lots within the PUD are oriented to facilitate the use of solar energy. Twenty-seven of the lots (in 3 rows) are north-south oriented and 7 of the lots (in 1 row) are east-west oriented. v. Alleys: Provides alleys for proposed detached or attached units with individual, private ground related entries. Seventeen lots (50%) will be accessed from a public alley and 2 lots will be accessed from a private alley. 3. Additional Review Criteria. A proposed planned urban development shall also be reviewed for consistency with all of the following criteria: a. Building and Site Design: i. Perimeter. Size, scale, mass, character and architectural design along the planned urban development perimeter provide a suitable transition to adjacent or abutting lower density/intensity zones. Materials shall reduce the potential for light and glare. The PUD proposes single family detached residential homes at a density compatible with (less than) that of the existing residential subdivision (Summerfield) immediately to the west of the property. The property also includes a natural buffer from this adjacent subdivision. A stream runs along the west side of the property in the Summerfield subdivision. Exhibit A. Under the City Code, the stream and its buffer must be maintained as open space. Accordingly, the stream and its buffer provide a natural buffer between the property and the Summerfield subdivision. The area to the south and east of the property is located in King County and zoned for rural residential development. The stream also runs along the south side of the property, creating a natural buffer on the south property boundary. Id. In addition, natural buffers in the form of off-site undevelopable steep slopes exist on the south and east sides of the property. Id. The Maple Valley Highway borders the north side of the property. Id. Landscaped open space is provided between the project's lots and Maple Valley Highway. Accordingly, the property is buffered on all four sides from adjacent properties. ii. Interior Design. Promotes a coordinated site and building design. Buildings in groups should be related by coordinated materials and roof styles, but contrast should be provided throughout a site by the use of varied materials, architectural detailing, building orientation or housing type; e.g., single family, townhouses, flats, etc. The project will comply with all applicable design guidelines adopted by the City. See Exhibit C (Conceptual Elevations). b. Circulation. McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement -Page 7 i. Provides sufficient streets and pedestrian facilities. The planned urban development shall have sufficient pedestrian and vehicle access commensurate with the location, size and density of the proposed development. All public and private streets shall accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic demand created by the development as documented in a traffic and circulation report approved by the City. Vehicle access shall not be unduly detrimental to adjacent areas. This PUD provides two public streets, one public alley and one private alley for onsite access. The two public streets (one locates at the entrance to the SR-169, and the other loops around the site) have curb, gutter and sidewalk. The streets accommodate emergency vehicle access and the traffic generated by the project. The project will not result in any significant adverse traffic impacts. ii. Promotes safety through sufficient sight distance, separation of vehicles from pedestrians, limited driveways on busy streets, avoidance of difficult turning patterns, and minimization of steep gradients. Sufficient sight distances are available at the entrance to the SR-169 and along the two public streets. The two public streets have curb, gutter and sidewalk to provide separation of vehicles from pedestrians. Only one entrance is provided for access to the SR-169; half of the lots are accessed from the public alley. All these provide limited driveways on busy streets. The SR-169 frontage is a five lane street with a median turning lane and two travel lanes at both sides. The PUD will provide a new right tum deceleration lane for access to the site from the SR-169 and a right tum taper for access to SR-169 from the site eastbound. The entrance street to the site is designed with less than 12% slope with landing and vertical curve transition at both ends. The looped street around the site is designed with less than 8% slope with landings at intersections with the entrance street and the public alley. iii. Provision of a system of walkways which tie residential areas to recreational areas, transit, public walkways, schools, and commercial activities. The two public streets (one locates at the entrance to the SR-169, and the other loops around the site) have curb and gutter on both sides. The entrance street has sidewalks at both sides and the looped street has sidewalk at the inner side only. In addition, the project has a trail system with connections to the project sidewalks. These sidewalks and trail system provide a system of walkways which tie residential areas to open spaces, park and to the shoulder of the SR-169. The project also provides a school bus stop on SR-169. iv. Provides safe, efficient access for emergency vehicles. McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement -Page 8 The entrance street has a pavement width of 26'. The looped street also has a pavement width of26'. These two streets meet the requirement for emergency vehicle access. c. Infrastructure and Services. Provides utility services, emergency services, and other improvements, existing and proposed, which are sufficient to serve the development. Utility services including water, sewer, storm, power, telephone will be provided. Other utility services may also available. d. Clusters or Building Groups and Open Space. An appearance of openness created by clustering, separation of building groups, and through the use of well-designed open space and landscaping, or a reduction in amount of impervious surfaces not otherwise required. The buildings within the subdivision are clustered. They are divided into three groups. One north-south oriented group (17 lots) is enclosed by the looped street. Another north- south oriented group (10 lots) is aligned along the frontage of the SR-169. One east-west oriented group (7 lots) is aligned along the east side of the looped street. In addition, the PUD has a superior open space design that includes (I) a large landscaped open space area contiguous to the critical area buffer; (3) a soft surface trail system; (3) substantial landscaped open space along the Maple Valley Highway frontage; and (4) a separate active recreation park area. Exhibit A. e. Privacy and Building Separation. Provides internal privacy between dwelling units, and external privacy for adjacent dwelling units. Each residential or mixed use development shall provide visual and acoustical privacy for dwelling units and surrounding properties. Fences, insulation, walks, barriers, and landscaping are used, as appropriate, for the protection and aesthetic enhancement of the property, the privacy of site occupants and surrounding properties, and for screening of storage, mechanical or other appropriate areas, and for the reduction of noise. Windows are placed at such a height or location or screened to provide sufficient privacy. Sufficient light and air are provided to each dwelling unit. The project provides a wetland and stream buffer and substantial additional landscaped open space on its west side, providing privacy between the homes in the Summerfield subdivision and the project. The project provides a substantial landscaped area along its north frontage with SR-169. The south and east sides of the project have critical areas buffers and are surrounded by undevelopable steep slopes. Thus, the project provides screening and privacy on all four sides. Within the subdivision, five foot side yard setbacks are provided. Also, wood fences will be used to separate the single family lots and provide screening. f. Building Orientation. Provides buildings oriented to enhance views from within the site by taking advantage of topography, building location and style. McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement -Page 9 The buildings are divided into 3 groups. One north-south oriented group (17 lots in two rows) is enclosed by the looped street. Another north-south oriented group (IO lots in one row) is aligned along the frontage of the SR-169. One east-west oriented ,,'foup (7 lots in one row) is aligned along the east side of the looped street. The topography of the site is ascending from north to south. All the buildings will have views to the Cedar River. g. Parking Area Design. Provides parking areas that are complemented by landscaping and not designed in long rows. The size of parking areas is minimized in comparison to typical designs, and each area related to the group of buildings served. The design provides for efficient use of parking, and shared parking facilities where appropriate. Parking spaces are provided by garages. Two more parking spaces will be provided in front of the garage for each lot. One parking lane is provided along the inner side (the side with sidewalk) of the looped street. No parking lane is provided along the entrance street for screening reasons. h. Phasing. Each phase of the proposed development contains the required parking spaces, open space, recreation spaces, landscaping and utilities necessary for creating and sustaining a desirable and stable environment, so that each phase, together with previous phases, can stand alone. This project will be constructed in a single phase. McCormick Plat Project's Compliance Statement-Page IO --~ -~; --'~-'-"----------__ L te-RE!:N:r"-0~--E-------VALLEY RD--CSA-469) - --~ ----- ---- =--~=--- 7 --+ r-::_/~--E~E--D-~CrE-L;--RA-TION ;Ji P:h'S'( 1 f:)\¥'''5;l i (/// _// I ----I' -.... I ' . X H, / I BUS WAmNG ARCA ~ on "" W;1, --·-------,-7J'J/ , I ..... •;,. »",• :, •• :.~·,.-::;:_~7·,;:::_., ;-:; -:__._, -i-- , ; ,-_--_-/.>•'m_/_/ __ ._._': _-__ ·_-·_---~ 1 covERED scHooL ' :1_:1 __ <ACT c , ..,..LITIES sorr suRFAC_ E =r _ --___ _ --___ -_ _ _ I ,---------n:/ __ •?_<)(_/), I oi,:TENTIONJWET @ \ ( 1 1' I 2 I : I 3 I : I 4 I: I 5 I: I 6 I: I 7 I: I 8 I : \ 9 _J 1 \ 10 I /,,-\ <'/ __ ! j / '.1'":!~ ~---------1 "\-:-J'~-. _J I_J CL . J LJjl~~~: .. /;/)JI.__ -~--- ' 1 ( //'. I -R()AOB • .--/~/' ._ /~"">}' \ ---r\)'_/--//)'_ TRACT /,,~~;--;r~·~t--t~~--.-.~-~~1·\ \~l~~:.. '·. \~):~:/\, 111 ~ ... ·-( I I \ } / a::>' /.I BENCHES AND INTERPRETIVE SIGNS PLACED ALONG TRAIL -.~ , ' -I -• " 12 / /''_;r;;:>· Ex STREA M~ \.(;.;",,/' 1 1 sorr-stJREAcr:J L-~i L.JI [ 11 1 ll 11' l_liLJ 1L-Jl' L___/ · 1 L;::-1_3-:fJ: ~>: I · V ,/ ;!':; , ' , , -} TRAIL _ -J _-=:_L----:: _ _ ---------------~ • ' ' / ,/ ;/~ I ' : , ..'<.,..W·, . . l r----pUBUC AUEYfROAD c --: r·-c:.c:.:=;'-f / ,: i' ' ~ 1' \/,f~~< · _, ~~ 11-1:1~1~1rnG-=-m=-11~~-1.. ,S-:,.___?>·:Y;7·~ 71 , , . .. . u,J(l / '"" , ~1 L 19 1 i1 20 1 : 1 21 1, 1 22 1, 123 1, 124 1, 1 251 : 1 26 1 L ;-c--r--,111J-. •d / ,, ~ ~ ,;;i,_A ,,//-/-;---~"--:"'.t,;,:,:-,Jc~ ~ ~-......____J L_~I ±'L ~,L ~11 ~,L IL---/ "/r--...:::__----:::-u:#l' "'1 ---1-' N , ----• 1•/ V <,,•\;,i,,, ~ ~ >,,• --o/ 6 ~ • f O -L__ /' ' y-' / / ,' -,. . ... -,,,,,, __ , . ' -. ~ -----~ 1 / )'") lrj ~ :--:-l_t ~. "-:, / -7( >/ . , _-,"~ :".;;:_,-,~_, ~ -r\ .. -e,., ". 0· -.8.,;. . . ··--.,·""""' .. -. . . /-..::...----~ , . O,.,,_ ./ - • 1 • ·i< , • -.-',".. ---~~ ~ • TR"·CT H --------• "'::.;:i ~ / / // ' "''i;!';~n,!~.c, , . ------. . . , / ', "--._ 17 ""'l ffe . 1 ~A : / " ~--. / ' -"""'''~·· / ~ . / /. •·. ,, / . /'. "-/ ~~ \:1.~/ >'<~ ;~gi7:·r5'/;'S~-f/1,;,,;;.;· ~ ~~: , v,; !zow § SOFT SURfACE , .. .,, , , / \ • V . , / , , ,' ; · -""'"' , • ',( / ./ le, TRAIL ON TOP -7:.-•-=-0='7=----/ . , ' . -~ · ~~-"°!""'"''-/,. ... .,-/ . ·•. -/ / a:IZ Of BERM -"·---.. , -" ·-•, 00' "'"" • • .._. . ;\, \ · S2 --sum:R TRACT G ' / 1 \· , • \/ >\ \ fX STREAM RUNNING STREAM DEBRIS --! / ·. • ' /f\,-8 ZONE THROUGH 1B" cPEP BARRIER BERM --_ NGPA v. ,X . ._\\_,--,,(_RENTON) cur IN HALf EXH\B\T A -<"\; /\(/ \ --- CURRENT PROPOSAL I I i'i 120 0 30 60 120 I~ -al ' I i --QAAPH\C SCALE f•60' RE"1Sl0NS: A PORTION OF TH lE 1/4, SEC. 23, lWP. 23 N., I : 5 E., W.M.ANDA PORTION OF THE SE 1/4, SEC. 24, lWP. 23 N., ROE. 5 E., W.M. ---~-= --~ RENTON '~ -- . ~: .. > .. . -"'' ---EilGE 0.-PA~~G 1iP: ---D;l'IM$, 1/JI/Oi "" ,,"' ,os"Piw.TC.iiialNC jl' ROONEY HANSEN,, P.LS O~P~.JYP. _._.,______ ~ ;;;;,--1· --P.LS. NO. 21464 PHONE: ( 425) 2!53-B440 INY~1 u •• ; . r1R" '""'~ -..-111· c~ -·---- -·-o ~--:.-~="' , ._ rJN·119·"9 h(~-112.50 ,f -. ____ --.. -~.~~ / ·-L.' , 12 "CONC. =at11 f l~t~=~~==:=~~~-=;;=;~;=;;~=~::;;:::;=;~:~; 1 .. ;, ------L __ ...:. '·---~·, .-.~ ... r .. e·~ --12o.a g .-/-~"'.~2.o..~~ ·-c~ I' f:· ---......._ ...._.. 1 ---= ....::..:_.:._. .· ' ---• / r~ D.S£Mem- (f,' ID'PUC POWEfl-:---"'!19.22 -------.::.·._..:_ ,-r -l~l~Ho7J, -. r /· ESIIT < No. ei 1 ·-----------.......... ---t-'--, .... L_ __ / RAcr c 44 -~ 2 R,,.1332.2 10· .t1,,,QJ·i.2·o 7~ -~ 'L - './. ! I --""i",,:;-~--I • --or-"--n~ -I •• --·=. ' ' ~RACT E (UT!LITIES} ~. I ;..;. I= -~--Jti--. A=;JZ2.Q_SF ± ---~ ----_-_ . A=l,698 SF±_ 1,0 ~ It I !\ fESMT(nEIJllo.!O} / __ .,.,,_ • 1 ----~=-·--. . l 1 ' - 1:.1j / l I / ' ----Jo.-~ --------..,.---..-,-...., ... ----~.:._ --~ --= --_------.... -' -'" TllkWCt.1.00'fPD!PLO,~ 1./ I Q.W.IDIT(ITEMNo !i) I ! o,.... '/, ---ss--ss-----------.' ---30 ----~-t-'3§--J 1 · J I °' :" F -, -~ ---:-~ ..,;.,< --~-;;...l. ·;', ·, I '""'"-=/M<=••" : ,. j ]-~ • JI "·.:::'.::_,::---:..:._ -,_,,,~-~~r=-tlL[,-:-n :r=J,:C:.""J., -:c-~,---tr I ,o -: ::;:_c,-=====-=-~~- Ii i I E/,S(IIU.T{rrEl,(No 4) I J 11"'.l; / / ... -'t--,-::....-~-~~·:/{·.i.--E Lj--J---~---'I: l. I J' I -'-1-___ _,__ }.. I iii) r i>. . L ______ -----,, • -i / J .A~{?-Ac--c::'i;?fii°';~~:t~~~·1, 6i51lJi~J,·M~;ii1[·J1;;)(;t,r;-1f/fC:~J1f' "J:ilr1'/" . . I~ 'I' oj"-------~-' -~~--r 1--c-:ifG7~"-'c.c-~===--~-~F-·1-·~.::_rm· 1-:rr -1, -:l'~ ,."ss r I <43SF I 1~,s,.· ------c.... _ow~.!? IINll£l},ljE DMml~ltlQ ~ --. ---- ~ EJJGE o_r PA11HG _ l'r?. \ ! / 1 · ~~ ~-~~---J;t:c:-.::;4,(" _,~;,;:, ~JI·-·,:;,_ 1.>JJt-:.,J_ L.J ,l:; _ ~ -J :LJ') -: . I . .. --i I :~::IT!:iw, I iii I ;:r:,i --_JJUL-1-flEs-:..=--=---J if_J ::,J,!-;..~ --.: _/ _1ry/ f Cr-... --ss~<'· .... , _J t L -, '-_---.--:.,-=---$ i I ~ ,, .,,, ..... , ,11 ··-.-=-"'=~~-A,,;=~£ SF --i,:c--:c· ----:::0-r----l -. u . . . . .:: ....... '30' : ,o· . --~ ----. ... . --I nc~ 1 = 1 = 1 :1_ ;....--~--ss-___ ..... --, _,.,. ------I_ ---;""-------=-==:--~-..:...__i · , TRACTG ...._ -' JO' .:50 -.... --TRACT!3:"1~ · •'-~ _____ -----11 -==:::::::::::-::::::· ~ _:::-~ ~~-,.....-..... ------.---, ' 3 --1 , 1 ~ctss & UJiuriE"'""' ---=:::;:....:....._ "'::..... , • 40' ~ NGPA•.";t'G _ \ ! -"" f I -=---Ss-~.....-,-'-~--, _. _. , , '' r I J409SF " Cl 30 . :__A"" 19 SF S Y..._, __ ~ '!......._ RACT 4 A=298,348.±Sf._•.\ T- --0-l'r-• ~ . ' -~--; ":l ' ' "'.l 6"COHC. ._-.ts -. ACCE J s----1o---__ µfL. --=::::.--::."':=-·;::::-:::·-..-. -c--:-·· ":l _ rr·~-::-------IIT----·~· . ....iJ. ce -102'' 1 -/ ----..::::-1-~.-:-..... , A.-s,s & UTJLIT!(§,ff <.£.. ,.,\. -----iJ! ---I ': --··-· -.. _·--.:. __ . ~"'• 11111•143.ll~ ) _, .... ...;,~-.; ·:--:--.._ , -,578 Sf +\ii,ii:..15Jro-'' ...... : \ ---.. ,".'. . .,.,:3196 is·~. • 1 _ ~.·· -.-~ .. --c~. ~ llN•mW("lf) -1·' / ::-J' .. --.:"..,:.<.-~ ..... . . -f#•Hs."10SWi-l.l'.' I} ,..,._ , ·.___...9Ee':Tlo~ 1776 ") 4J:j, I . ,..._~.:---._ '-... 99' ,.,,~,-,~.-,!'-'!; -:1.,. ( .:.. \ ' . __..-: _;....---""'\: 1 ) ! 34::?6SF . -·. . I g I' .. · I . ~ J--c.' 1c:c~~--~-, ·. I. I -. ,o ~~""' I,, . • \...-__..,-iv ,.,. r Pc/ +p.+ -.,L.+»• '·. . ... , .· \;;~ ....._~', iy.J"' ·-'1··IWETLAND R[C. tic. 85(1211-0Jl\ 1-/1 : ·· ' -----a . • ~ ·-~-r.::r-----, ---~· ._! .,. f"> ,..._ ~. I. f;K IWl p ' ii ,~--!:....-• i .<--; -0 I If ~----,+--.. TRACTD . •· /" / / -..... -;:5~' r...,_1 TION•1"6i .( ,f 8 "i~~:,\'=-._, , / ; , ·· -:. ",. ~( : ; '.3". _/, . : j "' . I\ . :. . . . . -': . .\· OPEN SPAC~ · \' .,/<i_ .I . ' /....__ '--..... ___ -:,_' ,'¥4 /,,;-\) ---,1 ' ; :' 3~29SF / /"\ I--··----I l / ; . /' .,A=13,788 SFj± t:/$? <' 'I r:::::..1¢.._~J 4-t ~ ,i ·.' fl · -----"· i /,/ '/ f · '°' f 'k;_,, " ··· . · 1' \ . ;, . ,'~~/ ,,:,sl'f l/7 ~-, :~o.&v /' ,:•.',;.""',,,: ~... ,'ii ~ ' -...._ ; ; \):; . 32 / ,, . i , •" S' ·f ~ / . ,t , g \ , .. I ::l \ ,' -,.__ / l/! / ~ ' · ' ' / i .. '\ ii E Si Sa, ,/ '" ' ' ·. 27635:/1)1'---.;_, . 2' !l ) \ + 2S' --__ 1_:.. _'_ -:... ' i .. ,; y . i" ~ r------=:-fiil. Ii • •. <.. '· .,.. ~ ~ ~~,,,. '"'." /;/ . ;,,n .11 ;, i',_'O. : It \ 8 " 1 ... ~. ~L . ..,.7( . ,,3." . , ·), • 2 c'.I,....,_ , -:' V 31 < / / _..-/ I " . I j+oo n. '. J ~ ... ~1~~,~ . , "II ,..,__.___ . , o-. : / I.I , 8u~D, , \/, 28>1SF;// , ./, / '. .' 1 \1 I. l~-s·s,·.,· ~.oo I '1,;.,"11'•2"-... . .· . 381''7"/_;J.''' · . . / ·.· '['/r,-.. ,'j> ij-. I __ soFl/ / ;1,:5"! 'ki*1i~.--,-ROADA I ·1 /1~------~--. ~ / ,, .·(~·.,1,··./-· _· __ -· __ --_"' : .. \ ··, .. _· ,~--/~ 2746?, ,,f,,1.lat:s,/XT1~1·;1--oo·_ 1i"Jo·'' I :t"'°1AL~I} Jo· 1;1·· (3~· i ~-lr-~-:._{lF-'-__,"' 4' . . '., ~·:J..---~-::-:.:.; . .:...: . ....:.-·'...-'. '· _i1 .· I r, r, r,i r, n 1 / 1 -' :t"/ . ,J~\"-'t,\ r. Z' , "-,./;' iJ~,;,-,----11 r0 'J'I [";~st i.-f'1lfdl b,;,s~t2~s,1' b24~S~ ;;lr1~~1It~1' ":.~~~.l.·.>\\ .... \*% ..•. ~.kwkifii£,I. .,,, ,..,.,,,, ~"::~-:.:...:.:_ ·/·.. lid' ',., ..1..,. 1r-t_ ,;}_-'_/,· II I \ .' /.L/G,!./,SF O ·, ?/.'/i,'//··-',): .:·,--'·<::'!·.· _ _-_--;.:,:.~-- --......:.:::::--,: 1,, B FfER "\,.,._ .........__ ~I) / I '-"'--M::...!__ J __ .· / ... t .,_ .... _ ,,:,::·': :,•;,,_. ,.: --:_:.-__ :·.:·,--~ ~;:·::--.:=:--:.:·-<.""--"' \~ . /. •.· . ~ ·!---:::---1---/---r Sf.---i 1-.-=-i I -J / lLJ I _ ")--l~ '"' ... ·"!11.'1,'•'//i!:'•:, /:'f,'({(,·>·:::-._-~jC, . -:,---==.,~~c....·'" .···· ... ··· · ... · .··· ; . -~;.=-'~ "-=,_~ --.=J-u -:-.LJ JI L;... ' ·-·'-:-·-=~?(rtic:::: . . : .. :.·,:\. ,;;::::i; ;;: . . ··-'"-~.::m-:.,~_ .. ,, r: ___ _::_' ,J ·.P:~~ -c 7~_s91\s' I t> '"' .(;i{;Uf .'.i.1\i!/i """"""""' -~",,J • .. ·. ·1 / ', . . ·. . . , , I -"l'JJt"j---"--4'-'tcH'~\\\.ce'.c:~',_;;t~-/1·0 ~-:.:_~,"m '~~''-' ,·· ~><//>~<~,~:r:~~~~:--------.5~u5'"~~=~~=;~~-L-,"~7 ~,~~,~ :!~'' a,~~~}i?t1f:~!if:~~jLJ I LEGEND ------PROPERTY BOUNDARY -··----LOT LINE -----ROAD CENTERLINE ---------EXISTING EASEMENT ''° EXISTING EASEMENTS OR PORTIONS OF EASEMENTS TO BE VACATED EXISTING GRADE CONTOUR d _ ·,:"~~.'-~"-, ,,, ... ,; ',,.c ',, . t Access,& UTILITIES. <''" .· , \-,\-,1 . ', '· ·;: ,•,,;:,,:\(i' llj ~{Srrt;;t~-=---::_:Ji::;iii~Siz;:l \ · _· .. r.~ti;tll l ·.. I "' . •. . --~ -. ,. . :<~"'i0/ ·I ',1 ""'"""'"l~~ .. ·'' .. ' ... ,.,,I ! I »EXHIBIT s·, --,,-,. -.-,>~,.~"'-,,\,~\--\r,,,i-·" r:,,.:':1 :\ .• 1\:.~; KING /;4..()> U:N· :TY:_.;:.: .. ·v: .... E" ··s· ···r'''E_:_: :D;.:p;"'l::x:· '\~~',\' \'\)~; .···. \ -i '! "' '; ·~5 ~ i'+' . . . ; : ~,-.\,):·:: ::.:{~f{.i:;~-} .. ! ! JQ OIC:ZOJQ ~-...........: --SCAl..E f-30' '[ ! § ~ ...I (L ~ ,,, ;>if~ " ti'IZ..: ·E fil i{ r .s ~~ "S ~ ~ ll !JO. § !!Ir ID U ii 8 ii "-.: R" ;i (0~ 3~ ~6 _g ac .. 2 ! 0 !!1! ~ a: 0 ~ ~1b~ ~ PROJECT NO.: 07093 ORA.VIN BY: HC8 / BCS ISSUE DATE: 04-02--2008 SHEET REV., PREUMINAAY PLAT MAP P02 SHEET I OF t -,, ' ' L ,..,.,...,. ~ ·~· C / .. -· . ···=' \~~ .. -;./i"l ~ ~-... . ~: I .•. ' ,- 1~ / \ ·=~,, -' ""'\ ,, -- VICINITY MAP PROJECT DIRECTORY OWNER: ARCHlTECT CIVIL ENGCNEER: SURVEYOR.! F:DBERT Mc:COR'JvHCJi: 16i MAPLE'NAY ROAD SELAH, WA 0094-2 (5::"19) 945-221!3 IWTLEDGE MAUL ARCHITECTS 18'636 4-P' AYE. N.E. SEAffLE, WA 98155 (206)440-0330 (206)362·4-;>;e,1 (fAX) CONTACT: DAVE MAUL PAC[FIC ENGINEERING DESIGN 1~5 53,o AYE. S. 5EATfLE, WA 9818B (206) 4:31-7970 (206) 3M·ffi48 (FAX) CONT/let: GREG DIENER HANSEN SUFMcYING 1742016™ A'VE. 5.E. RE:.IT0N,WA98<h8 (425) 253-M-10 (425) 253-V£66 ('=AX) GENERAL NOTE5 'I.-~··-,.,__, j ··-;-::sl fHE A~HrfECTURAL CONSTis:UCflON DRAWINGS ANC GENERAL NOTES DELINEATE AND DESCRl~E ONLY LCCATIONS, DtMEN610NS, AND TYf'ES Of MA7ER1ALS AND GENERAL METHODS Cf'-ASSEMBLING OR FASTENING. T"EY A.:.E. NOf INTENDC:D fO SPECIFY PARTICULAR PRODUCTS OR OfHER MEfH0D5 OF Af'PLICA7ION, EXCEPT WHERE SPECIFICALLY NOTED. THE ARCHITECT AS5UME5 NO RE5PON5le,iLITY FOR THE SELECTION, FAtlRICATION OR INS""'.'ALLATICN OF MN 5!'ECIFIC MATERIAL, PRODtx:T OR METHOD. FIE~D OBSER>'ATON Vl51T5 BY THE l\l<!CHITECi5 R.El'RESENTKIVE 5HA-L /..OT BE CONSTRUED /,.5 IN5PECflON OR APPROVAL Of CON5TRUCT10N. ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE TO T,iE FACE Of STUD UNLESS NO'fED OfHERWISE. DRAWINGS NOf TO e-E SCALi,:D FOR DIMENSIONS. CONT'RJ,CTOK TO USE CALCULATED DIMENSIONS ONLY. NO e.UILDING OR PORTION OF A BUILDING SHALL t:!E OCCUP,ED OR USED FO-< STORAGE PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE Of fl-<E O::CUPANCY PERM ff. THE EMPHAS1S l'LIICED UPON CODE/5.,-ANDARD REQUIREMEN75 DOES NOf ABect.VE THE CONTRACTOR OR THEIR AGENfS FROM MEETING ALL THE APPLICABLE CODE/STANDARD Rffi~IREMENTS NECE55A~ FOR THIS CCNTRACT. !\Of -ro SCALE ~-~.,.---.:......:_,_ _ _;_ RENToN -MAPLE-VAUEY ROAD (SR 169:J ,,,.,,/ ---.• -· --<PRlhlCIP.ALAA.rewALJ ···----•. ----- ,-- / ·' ------------------------=-~~~ -_, ,~~~=rr.n ~,-:_ \/ r/ ---,_,J/~ ., \•_ ! (-..._. i'; I Ir' /. ·,., f,IJ~I / i' / )fV..W.~~7 I .. / ,., -..... Vot..l~ "" ' ~ / . 30 {I/ -r/ / ,,_../ ,, -·-·<·.: -I i j----+-'c:::: -·--· '~. ;;;::-:-------- '.-:-:~~· .,. "•u,ii.10 , A•o.,• ..._ \ :::0.. ~ / ... J~;~ t 2 ~ I icl, I ::,; ~z!Ji .s Il!F:i .jEJ'i. ~ i~H ... J1 /J_ '-'-,J/ -, I / '/ ./ ~ry J -,I ; , -------~ --, -; ''ec-:/l//' ,, ',it ;;;,,-~~>-,'' ;:,,-,_, ; 7 /\ r;;:y· l 'li-,-.:,;~ ! i I~' " L-----, ·-v / ',_J 1 1 ,,, /~~;c=_ -=----~ ,'t, ,, ,, I '""""h•,-,, t l ( 1 // 15 / ..,---%0~.;-~:_:=-c::-:o,;_:':C:·-=---::-' -,, -I ' I ' , M,-•:,'Jc,,_ - ' , '; -•,, _; f,,,, f'Ci/hT,fo , ' ' --' -\-L -" ' ' -,; /'// 'ii':: /"ll(C<ec •,~\ fi ',_ .// ) \ ' ' , I _'i(i:/1 11[:/~Ji\:l)/,'j'/~/i/ -·1 · '< ' I ' ~ ... ___ ! .... ., I I I\, \\ 1 1)'1 1' -,. _, ? \ OADB . . '11,,,, \'I '11111111 ;SW,t;.~ (~.:::_-_·:,-'--;:'--.. ... j .-I ~~ t_ ' .-~~ ) . ' i,;)i:).!,!:ti1/;;, 1/I • ,$8:_&_~~.,,..2.~ ... 2',~-~ ~~~~·~\ ~~0~~~-~~j-,,.':i.'}iu;.(:1,1 ,, /' ,_ ----,--=------l -! ) ~~Ni;, ... , "/J'I' I ' -=>-,,"<>,+=----' ' ' ' I . ·'''"' 111 I ' ~~~~-:·'-'\~--~--~ • /' ,' : / I ( ' / .... --.. (._ 11' I 11 . '-----"-" '"''' "'-' ' , --' -----~ 1 1 '/ 11 1 11111 ----... -·-.-'"'"'''-'.. .. -----'·" ,, -/ / / -= . -= ' . . I I .• "''C, 'CcC'q*"'"Ztcoc>,,,' _ -se~,eo-----' -_ -_,_, -, _ ,_,_~ ·,~ \ , -__ , ',, ,,,11.i· , , • -'''°'h--;_t;0'-;,~'ls~'''--~c ~i"'i<S,c;; c._~ ~ c;c~c ~5, : '~'.~, -::--.-~ \··'(1 1 , •,,_,I,,!" /i N '<~1,,,_--,t'fu,,z_,,~_C'"--,,-,, __ ~~--~\, 1 \ 1 1),1 \1\,\'\ * •';_~"'~,,~~"~~ " c•~C" -'C ~;;,-; "• ' •, ' ' ~~i·=]•[• ==~~· . "':t~-:;~AL RESIOEN11AL DESIGN PWSDED FO< THESe "71'5 SITE PLAN ECALE.: I" =40 CODE INFORMATION APPL(CAf!LE CODESl 2003 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE ICC I ANSI A117.1"2003 OCCUPANCYi R-2 TYPE OF CON5T1WCTION: TYF'E V·B NO. OF 5TORIE51 2 SfORIE5 OY'ER BASEMENT ZONING ANALY515 JUR(5D!C110Ni ZON1NG: SliEAREA1 MINIMUM P.U.D. LDr 51ZE1 5E.T~AGK5: CITY Of REI>, TON R·8 3lE>,9985.F. 7.32ACRES 2,5505.F, 35'-0'TYP.WIDTH 85'-0" TYP. DEfrH BASED ON PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FRONT(ROADB): 10 FT. 51DE: 5 FT. REAR (ON ROAD C ): 10 FT. PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT ADDRESS: 16405 MAPLE VALL£'( H,W. RE,'1TON, WA 9e:05e. l'R.OJECT DESCll:WTIONi 1Yf'ICAL SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DES!G:-.J FOR INCLUS(JN IN PLAT l'Ro::ESS FOR/.. l'LANNED U/..'fT DEVELOPMENf ACCESSORS PA~El #1 232305!:029 LEGAL DE5CRJPTION: f'OR Of 5E 1/40" STR 2.3-23·5 & PCROF SW \/4'0F 24-23-5 e-EGATSE 1/4COR OF SD 5EC23 TH N ALGE LN THOF 97423 FTTl-1 N B'1-35·\7W54B.Q4FTTH N 00-12-43 E 364.EO FT TO SLY MGN OF ST RD #5 TH E ALG 5[) i/GN ON CRVTO LfT RAD=13322.i0 FT ill BEARS N 04-45-1e, E A"i:.C DIST 74424 FT CIA c::H2-03 TH S 00-\2·42! W 1389.4'3 fT TH N 86---43-07 'f'I 20: FT TO POB TGW N W FT OF E 350 fT OF-n: A VALLEY FNRE II PER KC!..L.J\ 5S2L0194 AF'PROIED 12·09·92 5HEETINDEX A1.00 A200 AW A2.10 A2,20 Aaoo Aao, A3.10 AB-20 CO'IERSHEET & SITE PLAN BASEMENT & GROUND FLOOR (LOf:33) SECOND FLOOR& WO/>-PLAN (LOf33) BULDING ELEVATIONS (LOT 33) BUILO,NG SECTIONS (LOT 33) BASEME~& GROUND f!...OOR (LOf21) SECOND FLOOR & ROOF PLAN (LOT 21) BULDIN<3 ELEVATIONS (LOT 21) BUILDING SECTIONS (LOf 2\) EXHIBIT C CONCEPTUAL HOUSE PLANS W / ELEVATIONS < ....J ~ ll.. I )-'a l..) :::; ~ --" * ~ 1< uJ " ~ . ~ c..Z < I"' Q ::Sz "' uJ <..) ~"' I..) \Q ~ rn,Jt~ ,, R·IOl3 !.~Ei:0:~~c:·:.~~~~tf.t· ,...,.. Dr.to: :';. 1 f.(J/2010 COVER SHEET & SITE PLAN A 1.00 5n<aN>. MHAl B(p, ~f>5~NG tJ.UAL B(p,__,,. fl.155IOIN(, ·-·-·-·-·-· 1ITP-CJt-~ 1 ·;~ ...,,,--· ·----cwik~ "r •= ""-0", 5EC0ND """' ~ "'"" ,,,~-~ lbi'df .,('AAJ,Gf Fl.ex:; 1~1'-6" NEi f1Nl5HG~ -0" ·-~ "''" EXHIBIT C _ .. _ ,,,,,,..,,,,,,.=.•--"'-'--::t•=t~ E_ 1!~~.~mm1mm.i 11!.11111~w iiil1~~mm~.1_1~~' 'I' ' ,1_ l j,'_ ~ -~ · · · · · 1 1&i·s;~ "r ' 1111,1111!11/l/lllll!IJllll//l~Jl'!l!!!I '!Iii, i llliJ[llllJll'lt~ D --·1 •=rr 159"·5" "G_ __ _ f'ARAP'Ef ~ ___ i)L """ I I I !!,_ ) I .--l' I c; ( ----·-· \40"-0"~ ' Ftm , @ =~U:.H. ~.:.EVATION @ ~O~D ,c • CONCEPTUAL @ ~:.5 ;..:L.::ATION ~ ' • m--·:-,.· --1 1 1S?li•$ "r ~ l"NW'"H ' J;.f;J"$ Jr' ·~· ~J:'.:::-~·-· . ... . . •• --r----·--'---" C ,,_,_, i ~IUIUJII""~'-l,~lll.,~1Jltt"1J -111,1'ilii.1·11,m11a~ir~1ri1;: 'II ll"!tliOOlll~llill1lli'fCll,!,!,W""ll"!~r11!!!.!m111,111111111111m11w1,,Yi1 I' METAL ea,: Rrf>51PING ·-·-·-·-· 6ftoo'6~ 'I< ~ FLOOR ® :~,s~.-~L~:ATION ' ' ,. • ELEVATIONS :~~,rJj~i~-~~ LOT 33 -~-- ii>,,11.D! PN-/El 51DING.TYr. D -~'°' ,-Rre>SIDING ·-··· 1/\ D /\ __ ...... _,. __ -·-· ··----- ]l§1! CD ~A~R:.~. ~~-EVATION @ ~O~D .B • n '"""'' 150'--D", ---r, eoo, ~ FLOOR I ; ! I i ' !C! , 1E1 1 i l ~ ~ ...J tl.. ... u t{) -t{) ~b ~ ...J 0 u 0 ~ ~ I '-' )-C w ,(> ::l .. "-' < w 3: ~ . ~ ~1"1 2 \C z lD w ~ " "~.'::~:...... , .... ~·101~j{i :~~.if~'.':'.':~:~~ PAVE l,;J..1.Jl ""'·;,,"'Mo"""I'" Jll ................. , ...... lo•u< P=· 7DEC 2010 1-- I 1--- I---------------------.-. -----1 I··· 1- ELEVATIONS A 2.10 Sn«tN<>. •. • METIIL 00)( R1!15lDING [] @ :~u:~. ~:.EVATI~ < ··-·-·----3or$ ·1 1 rvl.RDIPMEL 5'1DING. TYP. f'Av.F'i:T ~ """'" 167'-0" ~ fl.CU: ~ ""'" ,1'-2' FJNISHG~E -·-·----~ FLOOR ,-~:.J.~L __.,,, • EXHIBIT C CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS LOT 21 -·-·-·-·-· 11W&"$ '(-~ ""'" 176'-S" :is= J'AAN'-Ef ,-1tr~~~~ ~ HOO~ Ji I 'c r-h i (5 ~Z-~ ~q,,,, 1 ~ """ ----·-·-· ,.\'Em$ 1 J~ FINl51i GIU\DE i=:;:!l! 148·.3· '"""' ® :~5~ 4 E.L::ATIO~ ' .. MET"'L 00)( ,--~!15IOl~G @ ~:5:. ~L 1 : 0 VATIO~ METN..OOX ,~J!ISIDING ~ l-l,IRD,'l'A~EL ,-51C1NG,1Yr: CD ~~.R:~. ~.:~VATI~ ' •. ~ •. -·----~· F'-"lt'.l"ET 176'-5" -'"""'" ·-·-·-,Y;J-$ >If Pl1!U1f'Ef 176'-.e>' = ""'" ·---·-·-s~Wi-l~$ ..rrJ12 . " ,!~ ! -·-·---'tii..wS "r FJ.<'.'.IOI;: • i ~ ic1i ~ 1 l! ~ ~ le ~ 'E'l ! .... ~ ...J ll.. u~ -C\I ~1-°" 3 0 u 0 ~ ~ I µ I'' \!j ., i;; o 'I' _J a: ' _J ~ -: "'< w $' s: z 1· <( ~ ; ::, z ID W a"' ~ ' ProJ,ct-1· t:-101;!1 r,,, fh.:C'~ii..;,;~; ""Di..i't:'iiAIJl. ~·/:!:ii~:~~~::. "jL~ IONJcO•k: 7"1)i:i;"j();(i ELEVATIONS A 3.10 S'l!""-" "'•"""'9 -( AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF KING ) ) duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: r;;t,v· ··J· t r '", ;. _.·--.-?A~1tQ •. . -. •. n ~ ,~nnfng Divisi~n MAY z 5 LDII being first 1. On the ZZ-day of Nfi?_otf , 2olL_, I installed-'--public information sign(s) ¢, plastic flyer box on the property located at I~ 9-9$ Wa:p k ~:tfi ct.)U1 for the following project: -0~ ,Ll!k<t8o58 -~Y\,\~cCz...lf 0:.:« Project name Robert McCormick Owner Name , ·*:2: ·-f'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 Chapter 7 Title 4 of Renton Municipal Code and the City's "Public Information Si stallation" handout package. __ day of ~a.{ en. , 20__1L. Th~ -!l\o,na_ 'l@z>r'P. ~,es; NOTARUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at l>.\ln)('f\ 'Ill 0.CThC\.3 \iW\ . My commission expires on "\\~"\\\4 C:\Documents and Settings\Bev Nason\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\R6N771J4\pubsign.doc • 3 -03108 UNDEVELOPED / }j~.~1 CEDAR RIVER AREA ; 1 .l.Jf:'..~~. PARK 'lft ~· .r·i.~.~· .. · 232/l(JS8188 r'; j -1,rrrr~r'1 rii--_'.:-~i~~E ~;-~~-Ei'h-::'!~~c~,-~ J11 l_L)_j' / ,-----n:.: : : j i fr1i1fi1'1rl[1111r~rli/1 . --A;UA~~~~NCI _·---t------_ --~ :, IL------" ~.dih!~~JL~~_JVIL__JU :=-'{f{~~ 2423059011 -j I rUMM!~tJ/'--x-1 \', ,,,?~-~l rl r.1-,~;,~ lr1 nfi,,1/r1~ ,;~~) I ' ~ =~ - I i I--I ~ ::,JI~"--' LJ ~iLJJkd-~// ;-=,J I ~ ~ -----' I I r-------,___ C', \ I ( tJ.Q>,(.2_ • 1 \;' ! '~'-' . ,_\.~,>.Ql1lt1lrf1~11 r1; ,f;; I ~ p12-ev1!~ ---1 1 , I ·. .. 1 ---,~-:!/~~1~.J L \/_-::/ ~I \, , ~~ c.o .. ) ~-~\L-J __ 1--.. -l~--~:....=.:-_,_l;;~ l · "'""' , , ---:~ ..•• • \ 1 ~ RANCH , ' --' PARCEL.le ', ',, 100 , '° ,,, "' S1TE7 ----' __ j 2423059013 ', ', ~-.. I I j ,..... ....., -. ', ', (lRAPI-IIC SCALE \ \ \ ' ',, ',, NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP '· ' Printed: 05-25-2011 Payment Made: CITY OF RENTON 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: LUA 11-034 MAY 2;; c.. LUi! Receipt Number: R1101886 Total Payment: 05/25/2011 11 :52 AM 8,446.00 Payee: Valley View Mobile Home Park, LLC Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description 3080 503.000000.004.322 Technology Fee 5010 000.000000.007.345 Environmental Review 5011 000.000000.007.345 Prelim/Tentative Plat 5013 000.000000.007.345 PUD 5022 000.000000.007.345 Variance Fees Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount Payment Check 6706 8,446.00 Account Balances Amount 246.00 1,000.00 4,000.00 2,000.00 1,200.00 Trans Account Code Description Balance Due 3021 303.000000.020.345 Park Mitigation Fee 3080 503.000000.004.322 Technology Fee 5006 000.000000.007.345 Annexation Fees 5007 000.000000.011.345 Appeals/Waivers 5008 000.000000.007.345 Binding Site/Short Plat 5009 000.000000.007.345 Conditional Use Fees 5010 000.000000.007.345 Environmental Review 5011 000.000000.007.345 Prelim/Tentative Plat 5012 000.000000.007.345 Final Plat 5013 000.000000.007.345 PUD 5014 000.000000.007.345 Grading & Filling Fees 5015 000.000000.007.345 Lot Line Adjustment 5016 000.000000.007.345 Mobile Home Parks 5017 000.000000.007.345 Rezone 5018 ooo.000000.007.345 Routine Vegetation Mgmt 5019 000.000000.007.345 Shoreline Subst Dev 5020 000.000000.007.345 Site Plan Approval 5021 000.000000.007.345 Temp Use, Hobbyk, Fence 5022 000.000000.007.345 Variance Fees 5024 000.000000.007.345 Conditional Approval Fee 5036 000.000000.007.345 Comprehensive Plan Amend 5909 ooo.000000.002.341 Booklets/EIS/Copies 5941 000.000000.007.341 Maps (Taxable) 5954 650.237.00.00.0000 DO NOT USE -USE 3954 5998 000.000000.000.231 Tax .oo .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 Remaining Balance Due: $0.00