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

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutReport 02 - 1 of 4all IM11 JIM vfl-j LL LL - t Inn h I nnn- r W.QLi Inc Ujty j7. IC:) e4 4� f 6 t7 . L CJ IM tz- L j :Zt OL 4 EON A t C, xxxx-xxx 390IN 31GI80 iV 3AVT)N3 3H1 I�N C.3 QR z is all IM11 JIM vfl-j LL LL - t Inn h I nnn- r W.QLi Inc Ujty j7. IC:) e4 4� f 6 t7 . L CJ IM tz- L j :Zt OL 4 EON A t C, xxxx-xxx 390IN 31GI80 iV 3AVT)N3 3H1 Y toy,OWN < A I RNA a N H A w �`�`�� In e c lot � qd LS�$y " agyRd�� r.d = a emu a•ggo Nil rbR � 0.0 ill 2! �&Aar,C�� I N . n�' nit. L.L.. en 0 f t SGL < A I a N H A w � . e L.L.. f t SGL � r�� I ; I "e "_e bl Iib ;u � �' �% n n. eW £cb s. �" l eo �e e- R V A. f- d 8 Non rl" F y]p p pA M M iY Sp ITS •k W}^ e C� e L. :Fom+ lerALa_M ANY yR IS a �I i.� Ri it 3 6 1 ham' '� � n� C2 lit IT gn d rr� �� r ', � ;fie �: t:l P '� " � a• fia�_ 3�' /n $= F _Xxx 3901a 110Nb i iV 3AVION3 3Hl < A I a N H A w � . e � r�� I ; I "e "_e bl Iib ;u � �' �% n n. eW £cb s. �" l eo �e e- R V A. f- d 8 Non rl" F y]p p pA M M iY Sp ITS •k W}^ e C� e L. :Fom+ lerALa_M ANY yR IS a �I i.� Ri it 3 6 1 ham' '� � n� C2 lit IT gn d rr� �� r ', � ;fie �: t:l P '� " � a• fia�_ 3�' /n $= F _Xxx 3901a 110Nb i iV 3AVION3 3Hl 3WfN ll3f0.Yd ., ....,a, .��. r��atr-yMa.�y�r,..o�cuwrn.lref�a 3 V 4iO ks 2Q Z 611 XXXX—XXX MON 310180 1V 3AVION3 3Hi 3— AD3R 8 00 r~ t, L rc z� LL W .�% ~r W 8 00 r~ I I � A I QE � wm �0Lr A I I I I �0Lr Z p I - _W � Q MOW 3101x8 IV 3AY13N3 3H1 3— —.. Lf g IMTHA 1 C ` �0Lr Z p I - _W � Q r� z W Z EL w o b a MOW 3101x8 IV 3AY13N3 3H1 3— —.. Lf g IMTHA 1 C ` qlq�I M XXXX—XXX 30016 3101218 ltl 3Atl13N3 3HI 3M 133f 1, XXXX—XXX 30016 3101218 ltl 3Atl13N3 3HI 3M 133f �u L 4 Z p •:I. L � Q t2 a �7 w Lam; w o L w xxxx-xxx I 3001H 31GIHS iV 3AVION3 3H1 anus named XXXX—XXX I 30018 310188 iV 3AVION3 3H1 amu 103— R a w � L 0 � 4 Jg0 as azo z �m U� � ;a w coLd f }z USY € R a XXXX—XXX 35018 3-Iala8 !b 3AVIDN3 3Hl 3- 133- i g a a e W a I o � a q haw M fl W .. L] ` L-G _ � S g _ LL g a 3mM LT31otld d _M•L'!ia Jx"" L�y+- , Ail p IVYI �'Ati l/�i�l Vhf fNICI'IOH AA VQ l DNA gg a i �� 4 g Edd en !Fy�3 o 4N� iN ' z 1 F � 4 L In� W'k3H 33W Lam.., SL B 1 _ c+ 2 c 1 t- i -r1- lJ N 1 _QD i 1 r .. I I JI �T; , � I n. I a � i e � u I e �I I 1 i k• ' �11DNUIOH MNd SNp151A3N i,;1 � 1 1 I f I I �i +r•, -rZm m I �i +r•, -rZm m D11 S9N010N MNd (/-I', :�r Y a I .Y VIM r' N n u'� a ti .l xci NVI' O SNUISIA3d _ - X11 S�NI��OW MNd :.:,,. Ms r � I I I (/-I', :�r Y a I .Y VIM r' 5"(1y O i r � I I I VIM r' 5"(1y O xxxx—XXX ISOIN 3ITII G lb' 3AVION3 3H1 aw.x n3raad R z g 00 J w 0 w r mY .. L-- ¢¢ W =ai �1 w xxxx—XXX ISOIN 3ITII G lb' 3AVION3 3H1 aw.x n3raad ITEMS BELOW THIS SHEET HAVE BEEN COPIED FOR SUPERIOR COURT ****DO NOT ADD ANYTHING BELOW THIS SHEET **** February 3, 2014 Justin Lagers PN W Holdings, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge -City of Renton SWC Job413-187 1.0 INTRODUCTION Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. 27641 Covr g Way SE #2 253-&� 15 Co&rjbon, WA 98042 FEB27ioia ,G This report describes our observations of any jurisdictional wetlands. streams and buffers on or within 200' of the proposed "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge" plat, which consists of two Parcels (#1423059023 & 9122), located on the east side of 156`h Avenue SE, in the City of Renton, Washington (the "site"). Vicinity Map Enleati ei 4 13-I87 Sc wall Wetland Consulting, Inc. February 3, 2014 Page 2 The site is 8.54 acres in size and contains a single family home with associated sheds, lawn and landscaped areas, as well as gravel driveway. The site is located in the SE '/a of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East of the W.M. 2.0 METHODOLOGY Ed Sewall of Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. inspected the site on January 24, 2014. The site was reviewed using methodology described in the Washington State Wetlands Identification Manual (WADOE, March 1997). This is the methodology currently recognized by the City of Renton and the State of Washington for wetland determinations and delineations. The site was also inspected using the methodology described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), and the Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast region Supplement (Version 2.0) dated June 24, 2010, as required by the US Army Corps of Engineers. Soil colors were identified using the 1990 Edited and Revised Edition of the Munsell Soil Color Charts (Kollmorgen Instruments Corp. 1990). The Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual and the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual/Regional Supplement all require the use of the three -parameter approach in identifying and delineating wetlands. A wetland should support a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, have hydric soils and display wetland hydrology. To be considered hydrophytic vegetation, over 50% of the dominant species in an area must have an indicator status of facultative (FAC), facultative wetland (FACW), or obligate wetland (OBL), according to the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9) (Reed, 1988). A hydric soil is "a soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part". Anaerobic conditions are indicated in the field by soils with low chromas (2 or less), as determined by using the Munsell Sol] Color Charts; iron oxide mottles; hydrogen sulfide odor and other indicators. Generally, wetland hydrology is defined by inundation or saturation to the surface for a consecutive period of 12.5% or greater of the growing season. Areas that contain indicators of wetland hydrology between 5%-12.5% of the growing season may or may not be wetlands depending upon other indicators. Field indicators include visual observation of soil inundation, saturation, oxidized rhizospheres, water marks on trees or other fixed objects, drift lines, etc. Under normal circumstances, indicators of all three parameters will be present in wetland areas. Enlcave19 13-187 Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. February 3, 2014 Page 3 3.0 OBSERVATIONS 3.1.1 NRCS Soil Survey According to the NRCS Soil .Mapper website, the entire site is mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. Alderwood soils are not considered wetland or hydric soils. NRCS Soil Map of the site 3.1.2 USFWS National Wetland Inventory According to the mapping done by the US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory, there are no wetlands or streams mapped on or within approximately 2000' of the site. Enlcave,`#13-187 Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. February 3, 2014 Page 4 USP WS National Wetland Inventory Map of'the site 3.1.3 Cite of Renton Stream Inventory Map According to the City of Renton Stream Inventory Map, the closest stream to the site is approximately 1,000' west of the site. Enleave/413-187 .5'eivall Wetland Consulting, Inc. February 3, 2014 Page 5 City of Renton Stream Inventory map 3.1.4 King County iMap Wetland and Stream mapping. The King County iMap website with the stream and wetland mapping layers activated (see vicinity map Page 1 of this report) depicts no wetlands or streams on or near the site. 3.1.5 WDFW Priority Habitats According to the WDFW Priority Habitats mapping website, the closest "priority habitat" is a biodiversity corridor mapped along the stream ravine approximately 1,000' west of the site. - w cn Liberty SE 138th PI_ SE138th Fi- Lane SE 139th Pk. u S� 739th PI. � : a tR � SE =49th Pk. L SITE 142nd St. n SE 143rd, 5t. 5f 143rd P1. '44th 5t, 3 145th ; A s . !h a q se c s: 5E 146th P1 s£s 1 #_ st City of Renton Stream Inventory map 3.1.4 King County iMap Wetland and Stream mapping. The King County iMap website with the stream and wetland mapping layers activated (see vicinity map Page 1 of this report) depicts no wetlands or streams on or near the site. 3.1.5 WDFW Priority Habitats According to the WDFW Priority Habitats mapping website, the closest "priority habitat" is a biodiversity corridor mapped along the stream ravine approximately 1,000' west of the site. Fnlcave%913-187 Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. February 3, 2014 Page G Above: WDP'W Priority habitat mapping of area of the site. 3.2 Field Observations As previously mentioned, the site currently contains a single family residential structure located near the southwest portion of the property as well as scattered remains of farm buildings, sheds and old foundations a gravel driveway and an old well house. The site slopes from a high point on the northeast corner of the site to a low on the southwest. The majority of the site is fallow pasture although the eastern and northern side of the site contains some third growth Douglas fir forested areas. Scattered native overstory trees including douglas fir, big leaf maple, red alder and several cottonwoods are found on the site. Understory species in the forested areasinclude Himalayan blackberry, iridian plum and sword fern. The pasture is vegetated with a mix of upland species such as orchard grass, tansy ragwort, Himalayan blackberry and scotch broom. Soil pits excavate din these areas revealed a dry gravelly loam similar to the Alderwood soil profilc with no soil saturation or wetland hydrology indicators present. Fn1cave14 13-187 Sewall Jl'etland Consulting, Inc. February 3, 2014 Page 7 A small patch of buttercup is located near the driveway where a roadside ditch overflowed onto the site just north of the driveway. This area was investigated and found to have dry, upland soils with no wetland indicators. In addition, a low spot where a former pig wallow was located according to the owner was investigated as it contained small patch of red -osier dogwood. This area was found to contain a dry, loam with a soil color of 10YR 3/2 during our January 2014 site visit in the wet, non -growing season. This area was determined not to be a wetland. 4.0 CONCLUSION No wetlands, streams or buffers are present on the site. If you have any questions regarding this report, please call us at (253) 859-0515 or at esewall@sewallwc.com . Sincerely, Sewall Wetland Consulting, ,Inc. Ed Sewall Senior Wetlands Ecologist PWS #212 Stewart Plata#13-178 Sewall K'elland Consulting, Inc. December 19, 2013 Page 8 REFERENCES City of Renton Municipal Code Cowardin, L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79- 31. Washington, D. C. NRCS Soil Mapper website Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi, Munsell Color. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, Maryland. National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. 1991. Hydric Soils of the United States. USDA Misc. Publ. No. 1491. USF&WS, National Wetlands Inventory Maps Reed, P., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). 1988, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Inland Freshwater Ecology Section, St. Petersburg, Florida. Reed, P.B. Jr. 1993, 1993 Supplement to the list of plant species that occur in wetlands; Northwest (Region 9). USFWS supplement to Biol. Rpt. 88(26.9) May 1988. USDA NRCS & National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, September 1995. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States - Version 2.1 US Army Corps of Engineers. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), and the Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast region Supplement (Version 2.0) June 2010 WADOE, Washington State Wetland rating System for Western Washington, Revised, Pub#04-06-025.2004 -1 Q6. I 9 Lk s 5 � a I 9 W1 I } r f 21 lit a�4LL� I I I I Ids E I I � fi I �I IIII I� 8 F I �I w I � I I I I I I dQ U I c I l l i I I I 0 � II x n N +. � LflM, n V ✓ 7 p i I I 3 C I } r f 21 lit a�4LL� I I I I Ids I I � t It1I��I �I IIII I� I�I I �I I I I I I I I I I dQ I I I I l l i I I I � II I N +. n� n n V ✓ .: b p i � yP I 3 C I JGreenforest Incorporated gsi r 2/18/2014 Justin Lagers, Director of Land Acquisition & Development FEB 2 7 X014 PNW Holdings, LLC 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 a h,< :_.N7 ON Mercer Island, WA 98040 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Tree inspection, 14038156th Ave SE, Renton WA 98059 Dear Mr. Lagers: You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and evaluate the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. (Tax Parcel Numbers 142305-9023, 9057, & 9112). 1 received a TREE CUTTING AND LAND CLEARING PLAN from D R Strong Consulting Engineers showing the location and numbers of the surveyed trees. I visited the site last week and inspected the trees indicated on the sheet, which are the subject of this report. TREE INSPECTION My initial inspection was limited to visual observation from the subject parcels. Trees off site were included in the inspection but are not included in this report. Both health and structure were evaluated. A tree's structure is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to failure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. I identified the species of each tree, confirmed trunk diameter (DBH), estimated average dripline extension and recorded visible defects. At the east property boundary (Near tree 6185) is an infection center for a root rot disease. This is evidenced by a tree -free circular area (actually, semi circular as bisected by the parcel boundary) with standing dead trees, recently or previously failed trees, and trees with thinning and/or chlorotic canopies at the edge of the infection area. After my initial inspection I returned to the site and performed rootcrown excavations on the conifers bordering this infection area. I found both signs and symptoms of armillaria root rot fungus, as evidenced by the presence of mycelial fans and fungal rhizomorphs, oozing resin flow, and varying stages of root decay in approximately a dozen trees on the north and south sides of this infection area. 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 2 of 12 The results of this inspection are based on what is visible at the time of the inspection and is limited by the extent of feasible root excavation. The attached inventory provides the following information for each tree: Tree number as shown on the attached plan. Tree Species Common name. DBH Stem diameter in inches measured 4.5 feet from the ground. Dripline Canopy radius measured in feet. Dangerous Tree Certification Trees that are certified as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous.' Notes Obvious structural defects or diseases visible at time of inspection, which includes: Asymmetric canopy —the tree has an asymmetric canopy from space and light competition from adjacent trees. Branch dieback - Mature branches in canopy are dying/dead and the tree is in an active state of decline. Canker - Disease cankers are established on trunk/branches. Dead—tree is dead. Diseased —foliage and trunk/branches are diseased. Dogleg in trunk—bow or defective bend in trunk. Included bark - Bark inclusion at attachment of multiple leaders and is preventing a woad -to -wood attachment Lean — Trunk has significant lean from vertical and at risk of failure. Multiple leaders - the tree has multiple stem attachments, which may lead to tree failure and require maintenance or monitoring over time. Root Rot Infection — tree infected with root rotting decay fungus. Suppressed — tree crowded by larger adjacent trees; with defective structure and/or low vigor. Retain tree only as a grove tree, not stand-alone. Trunk failure —Tree trunk previously broken and defective. Taper (Slender) - change in diameter over the length of trunks, branches and roots. Root Rot —The tree is infected with a root rot fungus. Suppressed - Tree is suppressed by adjacent tree canopies. Trunk decay — Advanced wood decay is visible in the trunk. 1 Renton Municipal Code. §4-11-200 DEFINITIONS T: (Accessed online 2/12/14) Greenfarest a Registered Consulting Arborist Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 3 of 12 SIGNIFICANT TREES The attached tree inventory identifies 305 significant trees. Eighty-one of these trees are considered dangerous as defined by City code. Sincerely, Gre rest, Inc. By Favero Gree orest, M ISA Certified Arborist # PN -0143A ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist® #379 PNW-ISA Certified Tree Risk Assessor #579 Attachments: 1. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 2. Tree Inventory Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 4 of 12 Attachment No. 1- Assumptions & Limiting Conditions 1) A field examination of the site was made 2/13/2014. My observations and conclusions are as of that date. 2) Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/arborist can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 3) Unless stated other wise: 1) information contained in this report covers only those trees that were examined and reflects the condition of those trees at the time of inspection; and 2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of the subject trees from the subject property, without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied that problems or deficiencies of the subject tree may not arise in the future. 4) All trees possess the risk of failure. Trees can fail at any time, with or without obvious defects, and with or without applied stress. 5) Construction activities can significantly affect the condition of retained trees. All retained trees should be inspected after construction is completed, and then inspected regularly as part of routine maintenance. 6) The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made. 7) Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. 8) Unless required by law otherwise, possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant/appraiser. 9) This report and any values/opinions expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant/appraiser, and the consultant's/appraiser's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported. 10) Ownership and use of consultant's documents, work product and deliverables shall pass to the Client only when ALL fees have been paid. Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 5 of 12 No. 2 - Tree Inventory Tree No. Species DBH DL Dangerous Tree? Notes 5024 Black Locust 8,12 14 Asymmetric Canopy 5027 Black Locust 8 10 Yes Double Leader With Included Bark 5029 Douglas -fir 8 10 5030 Douglas -fir 18 16 5111 Red alder 16 12 Yes Diseased, Branch Failure 5124 Red alder 12 12 Yes Diseased, Decayed 5128 Douglas -fir 20 18 Asymmetric Canopy 5130 Douglas -fir 8 0 Yes Dead 5133 Douglas -fir 14 14 Yes Trunk Decay 5134 Douglas -fir 18 16 Asymmetric Canopy 5139 Douglas -fir 26 16 Asymmetric Canopy 5142 Douglas -fir 10 10 Suppressed 5143 Douglas -fir 18 16 Asymmetric Canopy 5144 Douglas -fir 28 20 Asymmetric Canopy 5173 Douglas -fir 14 14 5174 Douglas -fir 10 12 5175 Douglas -fir 10 10 5176 Douglas -fir 8 6 Asymmetric Canopy 5177 Douglas -fir 8 6 Asymmetric Canopy 5178 8igleaf maple 8, 8, 10 12 5179 Bigleaf maple 8 14 Asymmetric Canopy 5180 Douglas -fir 8 10 5209 Douglas -fir 44 20 5210 Douglas -fir 36 20 Double Leader 5211 Douglas -fir 32 16 Yes Trunk Failure 5229 Douglas -fir 28 18 Yes Dogleg In Trunk 5230 Douglas -fir 26 18 Double Leader 5231 Douglas -fir 24 18 Asymmetric Canopy 5232 Douglas -fir 16 12 Asymmetric Canopy 5233 Douglas -fir 12 6 Yes Dead 5234 Douglas -fir 10 8 Asymmetric Canopy 5235 Douglas -fir 8 14 Asymmetric Canopy 5236 Douglas -fir 22 18 Yes Trunk Girdled 5237 Douglas -fir 126,26 24 Yes Multiple Attachments With Included Bark 5276 Douglas -fir 10 12 Suppressed 5277 Douglas -fir 18 14 Asymmetric Canopy 5278 Douglas -fir 20 14 Asymmetric Canopy Greenforest (�) Registered Consulting Arborist Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 6 of 12 Tree No. Species DBH DL Dangerous Tree? Notes 5285 Douglas -fir 22 16 5295 Black cottonwood 20,40 24 5297 Black cottonwood 38 24 5298 1 Bigleaf maple 8,8 10 Multiple Leaders 5300 Black cottonwood 36 24 5301 Black cottonwood 20 18 Asymmetric Canopy 5306 Douglas -fir 24 16 Asymmetric Canopy 5307 Douglas -fir 24 16 Asymmetric Canopy 5308 Douglas -fir 32 16 5313 Bigleaf maple 10,10,12 18 Multiple Leaders 5394 Black cottonwood 10 12 5398 Douglas -fir 58 25 Deadwood 5399 Douglas -fir 36 20 5400 Douglas -fir 26 18 5401 Douglas -fir 32 20 5402 Douglas -fir 32 18 5403 Douglas -fir 18 14 5404 Douglas -fir 10 6 Suppressed 5406 Douglas -fir 10 12 Yes Root Rot Infection 5408 Douglas -fir 10 12 Yes Root Rot Infection 5409 Douglas -fir 18 16 Yes Root Rot Infection 5410 Douglas -fir 18 12 Yes Root Rot Infection 5411 Douglas -fir 12 10 Yes Root Rot Infection 5412 Douglas -fir 14 16 Yes Root Rot Infection 5413 Douglas -fir 18 16 Yes Root Rot Infection 5414 Douglas -fir 16 14 Yes Root Rat Infection 5416 Bigleaf maple 8 12 5417 Douglas -fir 20 16 Asymmetric Canopy 5418 Douglas -fir 24 16 5419 Douglas -fir 22 18 Asymmetric Canopy 5420 Douglas -fir 22 18 Asymmetric Canopy 5421 Douglas -fir 18 18 Yes Girdled 5422 Douglas -fir 22 16 Asymmetric Canopy 5423 Douglas -fir 8 8 Suppressed 5424 Douglas -fir 26 16 5425 Douglas -fir 18 12 5426 Pacific dogwood 8 6 5427 Bitter cherry 8 8 Yes Top Failure 5428 Bitter cherry 8 1 Yes Trunk Failure Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 7 of 12 Tree No. Species DBH DL Dangerous Tree? Notes 5433 Douglas -fir 8 10 5434 Douglas -fir 10 12 5436 Douglas -fir 8 8 5441 Douglas -fir 8 8 5442 Douglas -fir 28 16 Asymmetric Canopy 5443 Douglas -fir 22 14 Asymmetric Canopy 5444 Douglas -fir 26 16 5445 Douglas -fir 38 20 5446 Bitter cherry 8 10 5447 Douglas -fir 12 14 5448 Douglas -fir 12 14 5449 Douglas -fir 32 20 Asymmetric Canopy 5450 Douglas -fir 20 18 Asymmetric Canopy 5451 1 Douglas -fir 22 14 5452 Douglas -fir 32 16 Asymmetric Canopy 5453 Douglas -fir 14 12 Suppressed 5454 Douglas -fir 22 16 5455 Douglas -fir 26 18 5456 1 Douglas -fir 8 10 5457 Douglas -fir 12,16 16 Double Leader 5458 Douglas -fir 24 16 5459 Douglas -fir 18 14 5460 Douglas -fir 18 14 5486 Douglas -fir 10 12 Asymmetric Canopy 5487 Douglas -fir 28 18 Asymmetric Canopy 5488 Douglas -fir 10 8 5489 Douglas -fir 12 14 Asymmetric Canopy 5490 Douglas -fir 6 10 Asymmetric Canopy 5491 Douglas -fir 8,18 16 5493 Douglas -fir 14,14 18 Asymmetric Canopy 5494 Douglas -fir 10 12 5495 Douglas -fir 10 0 Yes Dead 5496 Douglas -fir 16 14 Asymmetric Canopy 5497 Douglas -fir 12 12 Asymmetric Canopy 5498 Douglas -fir 10 8 Suppressed 5499 Douglas -fir 26 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6000 Douglas -fir 16 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6001 Douglas -fir 16 14 Asymmetric Canopy 6002 Douglas -fir 20 18 Asymmetric Canopy Greenforest (�) Registered Consulting Arborist Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 8 of 12 Tree No. Species DBH DL Dangerous Tree? Notes 6004 Douglas -fir 38 18 6005 Douglas -fir 22 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6006 Douglas -fir 12 8 Suppressed 6007 Douglas -fir 18 12 Asymmetric Canopy 6008 Douglas -fir 24 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6009 Douglas -fir 28 18 6010 Douglas -fir 24 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6011 Douglas -fir 20 14 6012 Douglas -fir 20 14 6013 Douglas -fir 36 18 6014 Douglas -fir 20 16 6015 Douglas -fir 28,34 25 Double Leader 6017 Douglas -fir 20 14 6018 Douglas -fir 10 12 Yes Stem Canker 6019 Black cottonwood 12 114 6020 Douglas -fir 16 14 6021 Douglas -fir 26 16 6022 Douglas -fir 28 18 6023 Bigleaf maple 12,16 16 Double Leader 6043 Black cottonwood 24 18 6044 Douglas -fir 28 20 Asymmetric Canopy 6045 Douglas -fir 16 14 Asymmetric Canopy 6046 Douglas -fir 14 12 Asymmetric Canopy 6047 Douglas -fir 8 12 Asymmetric Canopy 6048 Douglas -fir 24 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6049 Bigleaf maple 6 8 Asymmetric Canopy 6050 Douglas -fir 18 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6051 Douglas -fir 16 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6052 Douglas -fir 22 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6053 Douglas -fir 14 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6054 Douglas -fir 16 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6055 1 Douglas -fir 16 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6056 Douglas -fir 16,20 18 Double Leader 6057 Douglas -fir 14 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6058 Douglas -fir 20 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6059 Douglas -fir 20 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6060 Douglas -fir 26 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6061 Douglas -fir 28 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6062 Douglas -fir 8 6 Suppressed Greenforest (�) Registered Consulting Arborist Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 9 of 12 Tree No. Species DBH DL Dangerous Tree? Notes 6072 Red alder 8 10 Yes Diseased 6073 Douglas -fir 26 18 6074 Douglas -fir 26 18 6077 Douglas -fir 24 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6078 Douglas -fir 26 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6079 Douglas -fir 16 14 Asymmetric Canopy 6080 Douglas -fir 14 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6081 Douglas -fir 28 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6082 Douglas -fir 14 12 Asymmetric Canopy 6083 Douglas -fir 26 18 6084 Douglas -fir 24 16 6085 Douglas -fir 26 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6086 Douglas -fir 22 16 6087 Douglas -fir 20 14 6088 Douglas -fir 14 12 6089 Douglas -fir 16 16 6090 Black cottonwood 18 18 6091 Douglas -fir 12 14 Asymmetric Canopy 6092 Douglas -fir 18 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6093 Douglas -fir 18 16 6094 1 Douglas -fir 10 8 6095 Douglas -fir 6 6 Suppressed 6096 Douglas -fir 14 16 6097 Douglas -fir 16 14 6098 Douglas -fir 22 16 6099 Douglas -fir 20 16 6100 Douglas -fir 20 16 6101 Douglas -fir 20 16 Yes Dogleg In Trunk 6102 Douglas -fir 20 16 6103 Willow {6} 6 0 Yes Dead 6104 Douglas -fir 18 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6105 Douglas -fir 8 6 1 Suppressed 6106 Douglas -fir 14 12 Asymmetric Canopy 6107 Douglas -fir 18 16 6108 Douglas -fir 6 6 Suppressed 6109 Douglas -fir 26 18 Asymmetric Canopy 6110 Bigleaf maple 10 0 Yes Dead 6111 Douglas -fir 10,24 18 Asymmetric Canopy, Double Leader 6113 Douglas -fir 18 16 Asymmetric Canopy Greenforest a Registered Consulting Arborist m Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 10 of 12 Tree No. Species DBH DL Dangerous Tree? Notes 6121 Red alder 10,12 16 Yes Trunk Failure 6123 Red alder 6 8 Yes Branch Dieback 6124 Douglas -fir 6 6 Suppressed 6125 Red alder 6,8 14 Yes Trunk Dieback 6127 Red alder 10 14 6128 Red alder 8 10 Yes Lean 6129 fled alder 8 4 Yes Trunk Failure 6130 Red alder 8 12 Yes Trunk Failure 6131 Black cottonwood 8 2 Yes Trunk Failure 6132 Black cottonwood 20 16 6133 Red alder 10 14 Asymmetric Canopy 6134 Douglas -fir 8 10 Asymmetric Canopy 6135 Red alder 8 6 Yes Branch Dieback 6136 Douglas -fir 8 10 Asymmetric Canopy 6137 Red alder 6 6 Yes Suppressed 6138 Douglas -fir 16 12 6139 Douglas -fir 20 16 6141 Douglas -fir 32 18 6142 Douglas -fir 40 20 6156 Douglas -fir 14 16 6157 Douglas -fir 8 10 6159 Douglas -fir 16 16 Asymmetric Canopy 6160 Douglas -fir 6 8 Asymmetric Canopy 6161 Douglas -fir 8 8 6162 Douglas -fir 8 10 Yes Root Failure 6163 Douglas -fir 8 8 6164 Douglas -fir 8 8 Suppressed 6165 Black cottonwood 16 18 6166 Black cottonwood 8 6 Yes Lean 6167 Douglas -fir 12 14 6168 Douglas -fir 6 8 Asymmetric Canopy 6169 Douglas -fir 6 8 Asymmetric Canopy 6170 Black cottonwood 8 10 Yes Slender 6171 Douglas -fir 8 10 Asymmetric Canopy 6172 Red alder 10 10 Yes Trunk Decay 6173 Red alder 10 8 Yes Trunk Decay 6174 Red alder 8,10 14 6176 Douglas -fir 6 8 Yes Top Failure 6177 Douglas -fir 26 18 Greenforest (�) Registered Consulting Arborist Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 11 of 12 Tree No. Species DBH DL Dangerous Tree? Notes 6178 Douglas -fir 16 14 6179 Douglas -fir 14 16 6180 Douglas -fir 24 16 6181 Douglas -fir 24 16 Yes Root Rot Infection 6182 Douglas -fir 20 14 Yes Root Rot Infection 6183 Douglas -fir 22 16 Yes Root Rot Infection 6184 Bigleaf maple 26 14 Yes Root Failure; Root Rot Infection 6185 Douglas -fir 12 0 Yes Dead 6187 Bigleaf maple 8 10 6223 Red alder 8 6 Yes Trunk Failure 6226 Douglas -fir 8 0 Yes Dead 6229 Red alder 8 6 Yes Trunk Decay 6230 Red alder 10 8 Yes Trunk Decline 6231 Red alder 8 6 Yes Lean 6232 Bigleaf maple 10 14 Asymmetric Canopy 6233 Bigleaf maple 10 14 6234 Bigleaf maple 8 8 Yes Trunk Decay 6236 Bigleaf maple 10 12 Asymmetric Canopy 6239 Red alder 8 0 Yes Dead 6240 Red alder 10 12 Branch Dieback 6241 Bigleaf maple 16 18 6242 Douglas -fir 8 10 Yes Suppressed 6243 Douglas -fir 10 12 Asymmetric Canopy 6244 Red alder 8 10 Yes Trunk Failure 6245 Red alder 6 0 Yes Dead 6246 Red alder 8 10 Yes Trunk Decline 6247 Douglas -fir 10 12 6248 Douglas -fir 20 16 6249 Red alder 6 3 Yes Trunk Decline 6250 Red alder 8 10 Yes Branch Dieback 6251 Douglas -fir 8 10 Asymmetric Canopy 6252 Douglas -fir 44 18 6253 Douglas -fir 16 12 Asymmetric Canopy 6254 Douglas -fir 18 16 6255 Douglas -fir 6 8 Asymmetric Canopy 6256 Red alder 8 0 Yes Dead 6257 Douglas -fir 8 10 6258 Douglas -fir 34 18 6259 Douglas -fir 34 18 Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist ke . Justin Lagers - PNW Holdings, LLC RE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton WA 98059 2/18/2014 Page 12 of 12 Tree No. Species DBH DL Dangerous Tree? Notes 6260 Bitter cherry 8 10 6261 Douglas -fir 42 18 6262 Bitter cherry 8 10 6263 Douglas -fir 26 18 6265 Red alder 8 0 Yes Dead 6266 Red alder 8 12 Yes Branch And Trunk Decline 6267 Bigleaf maple 10 10 6268 Douglas -fir 48 20 6269 Red alder 14 18 Yes Top Dieback 6270 Red alder 8 8 Yes Suppressed 6271 Red alder 10 12 Yes Trunk Decay 6272 Red alder 8 6 Yes Branch And Trunk Decline 6273 Red alder 8 8 6274 Red alder 10 6 Yes Asymmetric Canopy 6275 Bitter cherry 8 0 Yes Dead 6276 Red alder 8 6 Yes Branch And Trunk Decline 6277 Douglas -fir 10 10 6278 Red alder 8 6 Yes Branch Dieback 6280 Red alder 8 8 6281 Douglas -fir 10 12 6282 Red alder 14,16 16 Yes Branch Dieback 6284 Red alder 8 10 Yes Branch Dieback 6285 Red alder 10 14 Asymmetric Canopy 6286 Bigleaf maple 8 0 Yes Dead 6287 Red alder 8 10 Asymmetric Canopy 6288 Red alder 6 8 Yes Trunk Failure 6289 Red alder 8 8 Yes Branch And Trunk Decline 6290 Red alder 10 14 Yes Branch And Trunk Decline 6291 Red alder 8 12 Yes Branch And Trunk Decline 6292 Red alder 6 8 Yes Lean 6293 Red alder 8 6 Yes Lean 6294 Douglas -fir 34 18 6295 Douglas -fir 26 18 6341 Black Locust 32 16 Yes Branch And Trunk Decline Greenforest a Registered Consulting Arborist THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer island, WA 98040 Prepared by 'r 46f A , I j rX NoRr,"wcsr?E TRA f FI G EXRER TS 11410 NE 124th St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 rraffzmy 1VORTHWEST rRAFF/C EXRERTE 11410 ONE 124th St. x`590 i{ifMwd, WA 98034 Phom:425,522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36" St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: We are pleased to present this traffic impact analysis report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located on two parcels at 14038 156th Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The scope of this analysis is based upon the preliminary plat site plan and the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development. Our summary, conclusions and recommendations begin on page 5 of this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and study area. Figure 2 shows the preliminary site plan. The two site access streets connect to156th Ave SE. The site access streets will have curb, gutter and sidewalk on both sides. Curb, gutter and sidewalk will also be installed on the site frontage on 156th Ave. SE as shown on the site plan. Development of The Enclave at Bridle Ridge is expected to occur by the year 2015. Therefore, for purposes of this study, 2015 is used as the horizon year. One existing single family residence within the project site will be removed with this development. Page 1 The Enclave at Bridle Ride Tra&M, TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION The 31 single-family units in the proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge are expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the street traffic peak hours as shown below: Time Period Trip Rate Trips Trips Total Trips per unit Entering Exiting 148 149 Average Weekday 9.57 297 50% 50% AM Peak Hour 0.75 6 17 23 25% 75% PM Peak Hour 1.01 31 620 371 A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. The trip generation is calculated using the average trip rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation. for Single Family Detached Housing (ITE Land Use Code 210). These trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including resident, visitor, and service and delivery vehicle trips. Figure 3 shows the estimated trip distribution and the calculated site -generated traffic volumes. The distribution is based on existing traffic volume patterns, the characteristics of the road network, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times, and previous traffic studies. EXISTING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Street Facilities The streets in the study area are classified per the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan as follows - 156 th ollows: 156th Ave. SE Minor Arterial SE 142nd PI. Residential Access Page 2 The Enclave at Bridle Ride 1'raffZZY 156th Ave. SE has a speed limit of 25 mph and consists of two 12 ft. lanes and a shoulder approximately six feet wide in the vicinity of the project site. 156th Ave SE is straight and flat at the access streets with excellent sight distance in both directions. SE 142nd PI. has a speed limit of 25 mph and consists of two 12 ft. lanes and a paved shoulder. The 156th Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. is an all- way stop controlled intersection with stop signs on all three approaches. There are no curbs, gutters or sidewalks on 156th Ave SE or SE 142nd PI. in the project vicinity. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic Volumes Figure 4 shows existing, future without project and future with project PM peak hour traffic volumes at the two proposed site access streets to 156th Ave. SE and the 156th Ave SEISE 142nd St. intersections. Per the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development intersections and road segments that experience an increase of 5% in traffic volumes require analysis. No intersections meet these requirements. However, a level of service calculation was performed for these three intersections due to their proximity to the site. A PM peak hour traffic count was performed on 156th Ave SEISE 142ndPl. intersection and is included in the Technical Appendix. Level of Service Analvsis Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic flow, and the perception of these conditions by drivers or passengers. These conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions (free flow, little delay) and LOS F the worst (congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate and LOS E and F are low. Table 1 shows calculated level of service (LOS) for existing and future conditions including project traffic at the pertinent street intersection. The LOS was calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual The LOS shown indicates overall intersection operation. At intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average control delay per vehicle. The LOS and corresponding average control delay in seconds are as follows: Page 3 The Enclave at Bridle Ride Taffy TYPE OF INTERSECTION A B C D E F Signalized 10. >10.0 and >20.0 and >35.0 and >55.0 and >80. 0 X20.0 <35.0 <55.0 X80.0 0 Stop Sign Control <0 >10 and X15 >15 and <25 >25 and X35 >35 and <50 1 >50 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figure 4 shows projected 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing traffic volume counts plus background traffic growth. The background growth factor accounts for traffic volumes generated from other approved but unbuilt subdivisions and general growth in traffic traveling through the area. A 3% per year annual background growth rate was added for each year of the two year time period (for a total of 6%) from the 2013 traffic count to the 2015 horizon year of the proposal. The 3% per year growth rate should result in a conservative analysis since the growth in traffic volumes has remained relatively flat the last several years. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Figure 4 shows the projected future 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site -generated PM peak hour traffic volumes were added to the projected future without project volumes to obtain the future with project volumes. Table 1 shows calculated LOS for future with project volumes at the study intersections. The study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS of for future 2015 conditions except for the southbound approach to the 156th Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. intersection that currently operates at LOS F and continues to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. The project adds 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection that is 0.65 % of the total trips. Since this is well below the 5% City of Renton volume increase threshold, and the LOS remains unchanged, the proposed project does not significantly impact the operation of the intersection. The Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets and Alleys in the City of Renton Street Standards, requires a site access street to be located a minimum of 125 ft. from an intersection on a minor arterial. The south site access street is located Page 4 The Enclave at Bridle Ride T!affay. approximately 250 ft north of the 156th Ave. SEISE 142nd Pl. intersection and therefore meets the standard. TRAFFIC MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City of Renton requires a Transportation Mitigation Fee payment of $75 per new daily trip attributed to new development. One existing single family residence on site will be removed with this development resulting in a net increase of 30 single family homes. The net new daily trips due to this development are 287 trips (30 units x 9.57 daily trips per unit). The estimated Transportation Mitigation Impact Fee is $21,525 (287 daily trips X $75 per daily trip). SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that The Enclave at Bridle Ridge be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: Construct the street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk for the site access streets and site frontage on 156th Ave. SE. • Contribute the approximately $21,525 Transportation Mitigation fee to the City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince nwtraffex.com or iarry(cD-nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 5 pNAC4 Q c Ur 0251 Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx TABLE 1 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY The Enclave at Bridle Ridge TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS INTERSECTION EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2095 WITH EB 2013 PROJECT PROJECT North Site Access / southbound approach 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 12.6) South Site Access 1 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 11.2) 156th Ave SEI EB (D 25.6) EB (D 29.8) EB (D 30.7) SE 142"' PI. NB (B 12.4) NB (B 12.9) NB (B 13.0) SB (F 98.8) SB (F 133.2) SB (F 137.1) Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the worst approach or movement which determines the LOS for an unsignalized intersection per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual (XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 6 74:0AMEX TRAFf"/C EXPEIC'TS The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure Site Plan 1 2 `fs�MAVEsE _ ------------------------------- ------ µ - -- - I I I € M r! II € F �'r it I I its � E i i I t 1 r itt I f� I ! I I II _ l -I W ilk I I ! ♦I .. N The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure Site Plan 1 2 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 20 Exit 11 Total 31 �4 t rr2 St M N Access( 156th ave Access/ 156th Ave 15CithAve/ 5E 142 PI The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton PM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution Zra►f�'RrHWESr TRAFf%C EXPERTS SE 141st P[ SE 142nd St SE i4 t ra to Legend 15% Percentage of Project Traffic — 3 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 3 t.. C r .. SE 139th Pt cn 1 Project M Site C,c7'. t vy r m SE 142nd St. r �p� a 6 I SE 143rd St CV sin PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 20 Exit 11 Total 31 �4 t rr2 St M N Access( 156th ave Access/ 156th Ave 15CithAve/ 5E 142 PI The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton PM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution Zra►f�'RrHWESr TRAFf%C EXPERTS SE 141st P[ SE 142nd St SE i4 t ra to Legend 15% Percentage of Project Traffic — 3 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 3 M N r- o I 0 �r0 t r CI) 0 CP N Access/ 156th ave S Access! 1561h Ave Ln Ln co tp Cfl 309, 3 104 � 1 N C'n 6) CD 156th Avel SF 147 P N Aocess/ 156th ave S Access/ 156th Ave LO M N CD r- 328, 328, 3 106 t 07 r~ 02 [D 156th Ave/ SE 142 PI N Access/ 156th ave N r` k-4 2 r t r 1 M M S Access! 156th Ave N r- 4 r 1 O N ti r- ti I k'� 1 t rr 2 r+ co r• N Aocess/ 156th avP S AfXP.S^.I 159th Avp r+ M M CD x- 332,' { a 106. t QD O] O � 4COS" A.— preen rx The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 1 4 ti 00 NZO?AOMEX TRAFFJC EXI�ERTB cn 5; SE 139th PI a na � a 1 Project rn Site SE 141st Pi i crs 'w M M 1LC SE 142nd St �O4�o \:J _ SE 142nd St � SEI E7%°'? B PI ? % .- SE 143rd St ro rn Future Project Future Existing without Project Traffic with Project M N r- o I 0 �r0 t r CI) 0 CP N Access/ 156th ave S Access! 1561h Ave Ln Ln co tp Cfl 309, 3 104 � 1 N C'n 6) CD 156th Avel SF 147 P N Aocess/ 156th ave S Access/ 156th Ave LO M N CD r- 328, 328, 3 106 t 07 r~ 02 [D 156th Ave/ SE 142 PI N Access/ 156th ave N r` k-4 2 r t r 1 M M S Access! 156th Ave N r- 4 r 1 O N ti r- ti I k'� 1 t rr 2 r+ co r• N Aocess/ 156th avP S AfXP.S^.I 159th Avp r+ M M CD x- 332,' { a 106. t QD O] O � 4COS" A.— preen rx The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 1 4 TECHNICAL APPENDIX Prepared ler: Tr a ffex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. ® Phone (253)926-6009 FAX:(253)922-7211 E -Mail, 7eemQ7C2lrc.e0m WBEIUBE 156th Ave SE & St 142nd Pl bale of Count: Tues 12'1712013 Renton. Washinetnr Ch..ir..l Ar.- ....... "I me lntcnal From North on (SB)From 156th Ave SE 0 1 157 South on (NB) 156th Ave SE 6 1 179 1 From Eaal on (WB) 0 1 0 1 From nest on (EB) SE 142nd Pl Interval Total Ending at T L S R T L S R T L S R I L 5 R 63 0 4:15 P 2 0 16 1.26 0 32 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 28 283 4:30 P 6 0 13 172 1 14 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 27 308 4:45 P 2 0 18 156 0 28 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 0 29 345 500 P 0 0 18 179 2 22 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 20 328 5:15 P t U L9 148 1 28 L7 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 24 306 5:30 P 1 0 20 148 0 19 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 0 28 297 545 P 0 0 29 151 0 18 19 0 D 0 0 0 0 93 0 29 339 6:00 P U 0 24 144 2 18 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 74 0 17 291 6a5 p0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 U D 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 6:45P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00P U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 U i 0 0 0 0 U 1 0 0 0 Total Sunny 1 12 1 0 1 157 112241 6 1 179 1 Ill 1 0 1 D 0 1 0 1 D 1 l 1 618 1 0 1 202 1 2497 Peal:liaur: 4: LS PM to 5:151'M Total 9 0 68 655 4 92 63 0 0 D D 0 0 309 11 100 1287 A pruach 723 155 0 409 1287 %HY 1.2% 2.6% Na Na I- SE 142nd P1 ?47 I Ped';' 0 Bikc'..�p._I 1156 309 156th Ave SE 1095 Hike 8A 0 ;Ped 409 4.15 PM to 5:15 PM IIxJ 1't1" 1....._........_...'E N 5 L W Pcd 0 i 92 63 1380 1.0 PIIF Peak Hour Volk e »... ............ ... . INT 01 - 0 Bike:_ -0--_ PIIF 91d[V INT 42 D L$ n,'a INT 07 0 168 1S5 Check WB WE INT 04 0 In: 1287 NB 2.6% INT 05 U J23 Out: 1287 SH 1.2% INT ns NO PEt3S 0 156th Ave SE T Int. 0.93 T.U% INT 07 0 Blcytles From: N S E W SH ucucs INT 08 0 INT 01 0 5-8 INT 09 - 0 ENT 02 0 15+ INT 10 0 INT 00 0 15+ ENT 11 0 INT 04 0 15E - INT 12 0 INT 05 0 8-10 0 INT C6 NO BlKbS 0 8-10 Special Notes INT 07 - - 0 8-10 Rolling queue headed SB - at most there INT 08 0 5-8 were 5.8 vehicles actually slopped. ENT 09 - 0 15+ signifies rolling queue as far as L could see ENT 10 0 INT 11 0 INT 12 0 0 0 0 00 D O D O TRA13184M 01 Existing PM Peak 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE 12/26/2013 t Lane Configurations 4 � Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 309 100 92 63 68 655 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 332 108 99 68 73 704 Mal� { ";." 5� 'y�.5:¢ Volume Total (vph) 440 167 777 Volume Left (vph) 332 99 0 Volume Right (vph) 108 0 704 Hadj (s) 0.03 0.12 -0.51 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.6 5.2 Degree Utilization, x 0.75 0.30 1.12 Capacity (vehlh) 572 526 679 Control Delay (s) 25.6 12.4 94.8 Approach Delay (s) 25.6 12.4 94.8 Approach LOS D B F Delay 62.9 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.711/o ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Future Without Project 3: SE 142nd P1 & 156th Ave SE 12/26/2013 4 41 Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 328 106 98 67 72 695 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 353 114 105 72 77 747 Volume Total (vph) 467 177 825 Volume Left (vph) 353 105 0 Volume Right (vph) 114 0 747 Hadj (s) 0.03 0.12 -0.51 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.7 5.3 Degree Utilization, x 0.80 0.33 1.22 Capacity (vehih) 571 518 665 Control Delay (s) 29,8 12.9 133.2 Approach Delay (s) 29.8 12.9 133.2 Approach LOS D B F Delay 85.8 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.3% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Future With Project 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE 12126/2013 Lane Configurations Y 4 t► Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 332 106 98 69 73 697 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 357 114 105 74 78 749 M, ,� :� r F - jam' Volume Total (vph) 471 180 828 Volume Left (vph) 357 105 0 Volume Right (vph) 114 0 749 Hadj (s) 0.03 0.12 -0.51 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.7 5.4 Degree Utilization, x 0.81 0.33 1.23 Capacity (veh/h) 571 516 662 Control Delay (s) 30.7 13.0 137.1 Approach Delay (s) 30.7 13.0 137.1 Approach LOS D B F ac �"' A- ke�."'i ♦ h .t .z��x.fe@� - �7::9tc Y".yx � '� A 'y�^r ! 'a�. Delay 88.1 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 90.80/0 ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synch ro7- Report Page 1 Future With Project 5: North Site Access & 156th Ave SE 12/26/2013 'r k t I*, i �^Y "� i�"4,. 5.'� '"•. f<-� '#� � f :F� F K f":"�F'A.(4 �1- f" yyY.,1 La ne Co of igu ratio ns ► '�..y �Le Volume (veh/h) 2 4 177 3 7 774 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 09/0 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0,93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 4 190 3 8 832 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1039 192 194 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1039 192 194 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 256 855 1392 Volume Total 6 194 840 ka Volume Left 2 0 8 Volume Right 4 3 0 cSH 481 1700 1392 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.11 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 12.6 0.0 0.1 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 12.6 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS B Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 Future With Project 7: South Site Access & 156th Ave SE 12126/2013 t --'I ... . W Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 1 4 176 3 7 769 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 4 189 3 8 827 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (f0s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1033 191 192 vC1, stage I conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1033 191 192 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 pO queue free % 100 99 99 cM capacity (veh1h) 258 856 1393 . . SEEM Volume Total 5 19 2 83 4 Volume Left 1 0 8 Volume Right 4 3 0 cSH 585 1700 1393 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.11 0.01 Queue Length 951h (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 11.2 0.0 0.1 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 11.2 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS B -, 07 zx, 14MA-01M, Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 3 ITEMS BELOW THIS SHEET HAVE BEEN COPIED FOR SUPERIOR COURT ****DO NOT ADD ANYTHING BELOW THIS SHEET **** ITEMS BELOW THIS SHEET HAVE BEEN COPIED FOR SUPERIOR COURT ****DO NOT ADD ANYTHING BELOW THIS SHEET **** Denis Law Mayor City of. k r Ir i r =� r June 9, 2014 City Clerk - Bonnie-I.Walton NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED BY: Roger A. Paulsen RE: Environmental Review. Determination; Enclave at -Bridal Ridge; LUA14-000241, ECF, PP To Parties of Records. Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Rentor: City Code of Ordinances; written appeal of the Environmental Review Committee`s Determination: as referenced has been filed with the City Clerk. NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the. Hearing Examiner in a hearing scheduled.'for 8:00 a.m., Tuesday, June 24, 2014. The hearing will take place in the 7th Floor Council Chambers_ of Renton City Hall. The address is. 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Enclosed is copy of the appeal filing. Also enclosed is copy of Renton Municipal code section 4-87110.E. regarding appeals of Environmental -Review decisions or recommendations. For additional information or assistance, please feel free to contact me at 425430-6502. Sincerely; Bonnie 1. Walton City Clerk Enclosures (2) cc: Applicant Justin Lagers Owners Sally Lou Nipert and G. Richard Qulrnet Parties of Record Hearing Examiner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director, Gregg Zimmerman, PW Administrator 3055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510/ Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov June 5, 2014 City of Renton Attn: Heating Examiner 1055 South. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 CSTY OF ;�,'ENTOW JUN 05 2014 RECEIVED CITY CLERIC'S OFFICE REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO CITY OF RENTON CODE SECTION 4.8.110(E) Dear Hearing Examiner, Pursuant to City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4.8.110(E), please accept this letter as a formal Request for Appeal of the Environmental (SEPA) Threshold Determination issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee for project # LUA14-000241, ECF, PP, dated May 19, 2014. As a party of record for this project, this Request for Appeal is filed with the intent of utilizing all available administrative remedies to see that the adverse environmental impacts of this project are adequately understood, documented, and mitigated by the City and/or applicant -- all in the spirit of the City of Renton's adopted codes, policies and procedures. As an ordinary citizen, I found the City of Renton's code section 4.8.110 on appeals to offer very little practical guidance or direction with respect to how the Request for Reconsideration and Appeals processes work in concert with one another. To that end, I beg your patience and understanding if the format of this Appeal Request is not in-line with what you may typically receive. Please note that I have also filed a concurrent Request for Reconsideration pursuant to Renton Code Section 4.8.110(E)(2) with the understanding that If the Reconsideration Request is not granted, this appeal will be processed, and my appeal payment check cashed. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request, and for your thoughtful attention to the issues I believe warrant additional study and mitigation in order to adequately protect the public safety, health and interests of the citizens of out community. As a long --standing member of this community, I both accept and embrace growth and change in the City of Renton. Unfortunately, my engagement in this process reveals what I believe to be a series of missteps by the City in processing this application. In the spirit of ensuring that the public process we hold so dear in this country is respected, I submit this Request for Appeal. Standing As an adjacent landowner, and as a party of record who properly submitted written comments on the Enclave at Bridle Ridge application (Exhibit A) as well as a previous Request for Reconsideration of the Environmental Determination for this project (Exhibit B), and as a City of Renton resident who has only one point of access to the City's transportation network via the SE 5`h Place/ 156th AVE SE intersection, my public health, safety and welfare are at -risk should the City not carefully consider this Request for Appeal and adopt the necessary actions I am requesting. To allow additional unmitigated traffic from this project absent a full understanding of the project's impacts as is required under SEPA, has the potential to adversely impact both my personal safety interests, as well as my private property interests as they relate to the value of my property at the time of future re -sale. For these and other reasons, I believe I have the required standing to bring this Request for Appeal. Identification of Concerns for Which This Appeal is Requested The issues for which I request this Appeal relate to the transportation impacts of the proposed project, and to the public comment notice process associated with the original SEPA Threshold Determination. Point of Appeal #1. Transportation The proposed access to the Enclave at Bridle Ridge project site is via a new looped internal public street with two access points off of 156`' Avenue SE, just north of the 156,` Ave SE and 142"d Place intersection (Preliminary Plat Plan, Exhibit C). In response to concerns raised in my earlier Request for Reconsideration (dated April 16`h) the applicant commissioned an additional Traffic Study on April 22"', and submitted an Addendum (Attachment D) to the original Traffic Impact Analysis. The Addendum, dated April 29, 2014, concluded that the two proposed site access streets will operate at an acceptable level of service (C) for future conditions. Subsequent to the April 22"d Traffic Study and the April 29" Addendum, the City added to its Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) the installation of a traffic signal at the 156`'` Ave SE and 142"d Place intersection. Reference the May 5`h letter from Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations (attachment E), and the May 22"d letter from Mr. C.E. Vincent, CED Administrator (Attachment F'). On May 19"', the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) met to consider my April 16th Request for Reconsideration, and retained its threshold Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated, with one additional mitigation measure: Due to the existing Level of Sen7ce (LOS) designation of P at the 15e Ave. SE / SE 142nd PL Sic: intersection] and the proposal to add additional trips to the existing situation, the proposed project shall be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a nese signal to be installed at the 156'6 Ave. SE / SE 142'd PL intersection. The ERC Meeting Summary (attachment G) includes on page 2, the following statement: IX/ith the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, it is anticipated that the traffic conditions in the project vicinity would improve. The first reason for this appeal is simply that the record lacks any analysis of the impact of the proposed traffic signal upon the level of service at the two proposed streets associated with this plat, and the adjacent intersections of concern, including the intersection at 156`h Ave. SE / SE 5`h Pl., and the intersection of 154`h Ave. SE / SE 142`3 PL_. The City was aware of the plan to install the new traffic signal, but failed to consider its impact on the proposed development when it issued its threshold Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated on May 19th. It is very likely, based upon the longer queue times associated with a signalized intersection, that the level of service associated with ingress and egress at the two new access streets, as well as at adjacent 0 existing streets such as SE 5"' Place, will actually prove worse than has been modeled to -date for an un -signalized intersection. While the Level of Service of the 1566 Ave. SE / SE 142"d Pl. intersection may end up "improved" as a result of the new signal, the record lacks agy data or anal rsis for understanding the potential adverse impacts associated with the new signal as it relates to the new points of ingress and egress. Until such an analysis is completed and made available for public review as part of a public SEPA review process, it is impossible to know whether the project will result in a traffic condition that meets level of service or adequate provision standards necessary to allow for plat approval by the City. Point of Appeal #2 Public Process and Notice As raised in my initial comment letter (Exhibit A) and my original Request for Reconsideration (Exhibit B) I remain concerned that the City's "Notice of Application ...." (Exhibit H) with respect to the opportunity for public comment on issues of concern, such as the transportation concerns I have raised herein, misrepresented the actual opportunities for public engagement in the environmental SEPA review of this project. In short, the notice implies that a citizen having concern., who is not able to provide written comment prior to the March 24, 2014 deadline, will have the opportunity to provide comment at the Public Hearing on April 22". Nowhere in the notice to the public is it explained that by waiting until April 22', the opportunity to provide input that would inform the SEPA review and determination, will have passed. As a result, the record now shows that only two public comment letters were received prior to the original Threshold Determination being issued. I believe that you will find that many more people will attend the Public Hearing on June 24th' and they will do so raising issues that should have been considered as part of the SEPA determination for this project. I fully understand the efficiency that the City is attempting to achieve by combining their notice and comment periods, but I urge you to review these notices carefully to understand the concern I am attempting once again to raise here. Requested Outcomes of Appeal Based upon each of the above concerns, and as part of this Request for Appeal, I ask that the Hearing Examiner take the following action: • Withdraw the May 191, 2014 Threshold Determination for this project, and require that the applicant work with City staff to prepare a proper Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), sufficient to adequately inform the City and public's understanding of the likely Level of Service impacts of the proposed new signal on the two new access streets, as well as on SE 56 Place. • Further, given the misrepresentation of the public comment opportunity as it relates to informing the City's SEPA review process, I request that, once an adequate and proper Traffic Impact Analysis conforming to the City's requirements is completed, the Notice of Application and SEPA continent periods be re -started to allow the City of Renton's public an opportunity to participate in the development review process for this project. Thank you again for providing this opportunity to request Appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's Threshold Determination for this project. Respectfully Submitted, Rog n 6617 SE 5=h Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A — R. Paulsen Comment Letter Exhibit B — Request for Reconsideration (April 16 h) Exhibit C — Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit D — Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum Exhibit E — Ronald Mar Letter Exhibit F — C.E. Vincent Letter Exhibit G — ERC Meeting Summary Exhibit H --- Notice of Application and Proposed Mitigation.... 4 EXHIBIT A March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED -- Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mail to Avoid Delay @ Jdin xentonwa.Qov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project 4LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22"d. l also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing, Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5th Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5t'' Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 156th Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142nd intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 1561" and 142nd that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156th north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 51h Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139th PI.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142nd, and then only IF the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156`h north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. EXHIBIT A The addition of ANY new trips to SE 156'h between SE 5th Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this project to be implemented without adequate mitigation has significant potential to threaten public health,safe , and welfare for the existing residents who access 156th from SE 5th Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156'1 142'd intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156"' during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156th/ 142"d intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156th/ 142°d intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 5th Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accommodate future waste water access to the new sewer lines being installed as part of this project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would mare logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. 2 EXHIBIT A Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot 94, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot #4. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 24`h deadline, that it CAN be provided at the Apri122nd public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination rior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22nd, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22❑d to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. 3 EXHIBIT A If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at Ro erAPaulsen(&cs.com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application. 4 1:1:1:11=]kAti April 16, 2014 Citv of Renton Attn: City Clerk Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO CITY OF RENTON CODE SECTION 4.8.110(E)(2) To All Whom It May Concern, Pursuant to City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4.8.110(E)(2), please accept this letter as a formal Request for Reconsideration of the Environmental (SEPA) Threshold Determination issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee for project # LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. As a party of record for this project, this Request for Reconsideration is filed with the intent of utilizing all available administrative remedies to see that the adverse environmental impacts of this project are adequately understood, documented, and mitigated by the City and/or applicant -- all in the spirit of the City of Renton's adopted codes, policies and procedures. As an ordinary citizen, I have found the City of Renton's code section 4.8.110 on appeals to offer very little practical guidance or direction with respect to how the Request for Reconsideration process works, or even who considers the request. While I encourage you to dedicate time to improving this information for the benefit of future citizens, the time provided for me to become educated, and file this request in a timely manner, leaves me with no option other than to simply offer the best I can. To that end, I beg your patience and understanding if the format of this Request is not in-line with what you may typically receive. Thank you for taping the time to consider this request, and for your thoughtful attention to the issues I believe warrant additional study and mitigation in order to adequately protect the public safely, health and interests of the citizens of our community. As a long-standing member of this community, I both accept and embrace growth and change in the City of Renton_ Unfortunately, my engagement in this process reveals what I believe to be serious missteps by the City in processing this application. In the spirit of ensuring that the public process we hold so dear in this country is respected, I submit this Request for Reconsideration. Staff As an adjacent landowner, and as a party of record who properly submitted written comments regarding the concerns identified in this Request for Reconsideration (Exhibit A), and as a City of Renton resident who has only one point of access to the City's transportation network via the SE 5'h Place/ 156`h AVE SE intersection, my public health, safety and welfare are at -risk should the City not carefully consider this Request for Reconsideration and adopt the necessary actions I am requesting. To allow additional unmitigated traffic from this project, absent a full understanding of the project's impacts as required under SEPA, has the potential to adversely impact both my personal safety interests, as well as my private property interests as they relate to the value of my property at the time of future re -sale. For these and other reasons, i believe that I have the required standing to bring this Request for Reconsideration Identification of Concerns for Which Reconsideration is Requested The issues for which I request your reconsideration relate to the transportation impacts of the proposed project, and to the public comment notice and process associated with the Threshold Determination. Concern #1. Transportation After review of the Environmental Review Comrnittee Report for this project dated March 31, 2014, (Exhibit D) it is clear that the City's Environmental Review Committee made an error in basing their Determination upon the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Traffex (Exhibit B, dated December 27, 2013). The Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon for this Determination fails to comply with the City's own policy for such analyses. Specifically, this analysis fails to study the AM Peak traffic condition in addition to the PM Peak traffic condition associated with the project. In the TIA submitted by the applicant, and relied upon by the ERC, the author states as follows: 'The scope of this analysis is based upon the preliminary plat site plan and the Cite of Renton Policy Guidelines for Trac Impact Analysis for Neiv Development". By relying upon this report, the City failed to adequately inform itself with the full range of potential adverse environmental impacts associated with the transportation demands of this project, as the report is clearly not in compliance with the City's Policy Guidelines For Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development, attached as Exhibit C to this request. Specifically, the City's policy states clearly that for a project such as this, where A.M. or P.M. Peak Hour Trip contributions are >20, a complete Traffic Impact Analysis shall be completed, and said analysis shall present and consider both the A -M. and P,M. Peak Hour conditions, among other analysis. See excerpt below: Site Generated Traffic Volumes: The analysis should present a tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed, 2 It is a matter of fact that the Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon by the City of Renton ERC did not provide the minimum information and analysis required by the City of Renton's own policy, and therefore the ERC has erred in issuing their Determination absent this information, and their Determination shod be found to be arbitrary and capricious, in addition to in error. Concern #2. Transportation My second concern also relates to transportation, and the ERC's apparent misunderstanding of the scope of the Traffic Impact Analysis that was received by the City. On page #7 of their March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report (Exhibit D), the Committee states: "I`he Traffic ImpactAnalysis (Exhibit 10) also includes a Level of Service (LOS) review of the surrounding intersections in the immediate vicinity... " This report goes on to conclude that: "... the surrounding intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Semite (LOS) with the exception of the southbound approach to the 156`6 Avenue SE/ SE 142" Place intersection. " Both of these statements appear to assume that the analysis completed by the applicant actually looked at existing intersections other than the 156`h/ 142 a Place intersection. They did not. In fact, the 150 Ave SE/ 142" intersection is the ONLY existing intersection that was analyzed by the applicant. Despite public comment informing city staff and the ERC of concerns at the closest adjacent existing intersection to the proposed project (SE 5"' Place), the ERC did not require additional information from the applicant to inform an understanding of the impacts at this intersection. Additionally, by only analyzing the P.M. Peak Hour {just 2 hrs. 45 nen on December 17"), the analysis completely failed to understand or analyze the impacts of A.M. Peak Hour traffic conditions on 156`" at SE 5`h Place or other impacted intersections to the north. The ERC's Threshold Determination is not supported by fact, as it clearly did not include an analysis of additional existing intersections, despite the ERC concluding that it did. Because of this, the ERC erred when they based their Threshold Determination upon the TIA. Concern #3 Transportation Ironically, in light of Concerns #1 and #2 above, when one digs deeper into the March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report, we find that City of Renton staff are not only aware of potential adverse impacts of the proposed project as they relate to access from the project to 156`h, but they go so far as to inform the applicant that they may "... impose left turn restrictions at that intersection. "(See Exhibit D, Page 10 of 11, Transportation Item #3)_ This already contemplated "remedy" identified by City of Renton staff not only acknowledges that there is a serious Level of Service issue that is likely to be exacerbated by this project given the lack of available capacity at the 156th/ 142"d intersection, but also suggests that the City's "remedy" will force this traffic to the right, or north, onto 156", further degrading the Level of Service at the 156`'/ SE 5'h PL intersection, and other intersections to the north along 156`'' Ave. SE. Again, since no analysis was completed to inform an understanding of potential adverse traffic impacts north of the proposed project on 156`h, the ERC's Threshold Determination could only have been based upon incomplete information. This is an error on the part of the ERC, and should be corrected as part of this Request for Reconsideration. Concern #4 Transportation This concern .relates specifically to how the ERC proposes to mitigate the impacts that were identified by the study. In their Threshold Determination, the ERC mitigates the identified transportation impacts by adopting, by reference, the recommendations identified by the applicant's consultant in the Traffic Impact Analysis. When one looks closer, we find that, other than otherwise required street frontage improvements; the only mitigation recommended is the payment of an otherwise required Traffic Mitigation Fee that is based upon the number of lots in the proposed project. In the ERC's March 31, 2014 Report (Page 7 of 11) they conclude as follows: `71 is not anticipated that the proposed iroject significunty adversely impact (sic) the City of Renton's street system subject to the payment of code required impact fees and the construction of code required frontage improvements. " Unfortunately, nowhere is a nexus established between the impacts identified in the TIA and the proposed mitigation. A review of the City's 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program reveals that the deficiencies of the 156`'/ 142 d intersection are not addressed in any form. For this reason, the ERC has erred in simply applying the mitigations recommended by the applicant, as they fail to satisfy the requirements under State Law (RCW 58.17 & the Growth Management Act) that capacity for additional traffic be available at the time of project approval. In order for this to be true, there must be an established nexus between the fees that will be paid and the deficient traffic conditions at the 156`'/ 142"`' or other intersections where a proper analysis may indicate a Level of Service deficiency. Concern #5 Transportation Also related to the above concerns (ie:, the transportation impacts of the proposed project) I have received new information in response to a Public Records Request which I filed to better understand the City's internal review process as it relates to transportation concurrency, a requirement under State law and City of Renton ordinances. As you can see in the e-mail below, dated April 15, 2014 from Steve Lee, Dev, Engineering Manager, it is noted that the City's Transportation Division is "currently assessing any improvements are warranted (if any)... ". This confirms that work is on-going at this time (April 15"') to both evaluate and mitigate the proposed project. 4 This e-mail serves to document yet again that the ERC was not fully informed with respect to the bkely or probable adverse environmental impacts and possible mitigations associated with this project. This constitutes an error on the part of the ERC, as well as the City's development review process, and further validates the merits of this Request for Reconsideration. Sandi Weir From: Sterne free Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2414 11.14 AM To: CityClerk Records cr_ Jan Urian, IN ting, Meir ii_ Watts: Jennifer T. Henning, Robini Nair "ect RE. New Public records Request. - PRR-14-085 (Paulsen) Attachments: TranspoConcPolicy14O4I5.pdf See attached files that are related documentation an the City prc,cess for concurrency, standards and process relating to Renton Code Section 4-6-070. 1 Relieve this Is the inFormation Mr. Paulsen is seeking. The information, as extracted from the approved City Comprehensive Plan, provides IVCs. Paulsen hour the City administers a malti modal test. Renton Code Section 4-6-070 nates that transportation concurrency can be a combination of improvements or strategies in place at the time of building permit issuance, or within a reasonable amount of time after building issuance. per 4-"70 A.I, or a financial commitment is placed, Afinancial commitment can be the traffic mitigation fees paid for the new development and is generally used by the City for -improvements throughout the City. QurTransportation Division is the technIcat review authority and is currently assessing any improvements are warranted (if arty) (ord, 5575, 12-3-2012), The Transportation Division has trurrently provided some direction as to an initial response with the statement, "Witho the City of Renton, the steep topography between Maple Valley Highway and the upper plateau (and on to Cemetery Road) makes 4 in feasible to provide additional access. Widening 1-405 (�,v hich the State is pursuing ) to provide more traffic capacity could attract some traffic now using 156 Th 5E to access Cernetery Road." Thanks. -Steve tee, PE, MS, CESCt City of Fenton Dew. Engineering Manager 425.430.7299 sleearentonwa.aov Concern #6 Public Process and Notice As raised in my initial comment letter (Exhibit A), I remain concerned that the City's notice with respect to the opportunity for public comment on issues of concern, such as the transportation concerns I have raised herein, misrepresented the actual opportunities for public engagement in the environmental (SEPA. review of this project. In short, the notice implies that a citizen having concern, who is not able to provide written comment prior to the March 24, 2014 deadline, will have the opportunity to provide comment at the Public Hearing on April 22°d. Nowhere in the notice to the public is it explained that by waiting until April 22°3, the opportunity to provide input to inform the SEPA .review and determination, will have passed. (see Exhibit E "Notice of Application... ") As a result, the record now shows that only two public comment letters were received prior to the Threshold Determination being issued. I believe that you will find that many more people will attend the Public Hearing on April 22"', and they will do so raising issues that should have been considered as part of the SEPA determination for this project. I fully understand the efficiency that the City is attempting to achieve by combining their notice and comment periods, but I urge you to review these notices carefully to understand the concern I am attempting, once again, to raise here. Requested Outcomes Based upon each and all of the above concerns, and as part of this Request for Reconsideration, I ask that the body hearing this Request take the following actions: Withdraw the Threshold Determination for this project and require that the applicant work with city staff to prepare a proper Traffic Impact Analysis for this project. This analysis should be sufficient to adequately inform the City and public's understanding of the likely impacts of this project during both the A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour, including at the immediately adjacent intersection of SE 5`r Place and 156`h Ave. SE, and other intersections likely to be impacted further north on 150 • Further, given the misrepresentation of the public comment opportunity as it relates to informing the City's SEPA review process, I request that, once an adequate and proper Traffic Impact Analysis conforming to the City's requirements is completed, the Notice of Application. and SEPA comment periods be re -started to allow the City of Renton's public an opportunity to participate in the development review process for this project. Thank you again for providing this opportunity to request reconsideration of the Environmental Review Committee's Threshold Determination for this project. Should the body charged with reviewing this request decline reconsideration, it is my intent to also pursue the formal appeal remedies established by City Code to ensure that the record shows I have pursued all of my lawful administrative remedies. Respectfully Submitted, Roger A Paulsen 6617 SE 5" Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A — SEPA Determination Comment Letter Exhibit B —Traffic Impact Analysis Exhibit C — Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development Exhibit D -m Environmental Review Committee Report Exhibit E — Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance-iVlitigated EXHIBIT C THE 9 CLAVE AT BR DLL RIDGE F xxX-XXX} zz— ,t J. _ - rr rr rr � _- - `• J � i ]t��a: !__ _�" � � t s-G�/-...�5 'gr Ssi -f } ` 1. �e � T. i�� _ y ., .fir' -t- .._._.-•.f.. -. � �4 1 . � 1 '' n� I-� , .s i• ��j I a-� � 1 1-� ��.{-i �e L f A Zr F T �Y�L'QQY♦� R 4 RRRRR RiRRRRtR4 I ifs€ i II -a[a,lcea pit i Jill ON EXHIBIT D THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE ADDENDUM TO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 361h St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by r JVcRrHwEHT TRA F`FAC EXRFR TS 11410 NE '124th St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 April 29, 2014 rralff,2y April 29, 2014 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36"' St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Addendum to the Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: NC7RTmw--BT TRAFF/C EXPzRrs 11410 NE 124thSt. x-590 Kirkland. VVA 9&034 Phone:425,522.115 Fax, 425.522.4311 We are pleased to present this addendum to traffic impact analysis (TIA) report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located at 14038 156th Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The purpose of the addendum is to provide information in response to questions concerning the original TIA and requests for additional analysis. The additional information includes traffic counts and an analysis at the SE 51h PI/156th Ave. SE intersection and also traffic counts and analysis of all study intersection in the AM peak hour as well as the PM peak hour. The trip generation, trip distribution, background traffic growth and other data and assumptions are unchanged from the original TIA unless otherwise noted. The analysis is summarized as follows: • No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes due to the proposed project. Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. is The 142nd PI. SEISE 156th intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. AM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS AM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 5th PI/156th Ave SE and 142nd PI. SEISE 156th intersection on Tuesday 4/22/2014 from 7 to 9 AM. The peak hour occurred from 7:15 to 8:15 AM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. Figure 1 shows the AM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. No Page 1 The Enclave at Bridle Ride rrd2ffZ:i queues were observed to back up from the 142nd PI. SEISE 156th intersection to SE 5th PI. in the AM peak hour. The longest queue observed was 9 vehicles. Table 1 shows the calculated level of service at the study intersections for existing conditions and future conditions with and without the project. The level of service calculations are attached in the technical appendix. TABLE 1 AM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY INTERSECTION EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2015 WITH NB 2013 PROJECT PROJECT SE 5 PI/ 156" Ave SE WB (C 15.1) WB (C 15.8) WB (C 16.1) North Site Access I 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (C 16.4) South Site Access / 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (C 17.0) SE 142ndPi / SE / th Ave Overall (F 53.7) Overall (F 71.4) Overall (F 72.5) Number shown is the average delay in seconds per vehicle which defines the LOS per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual For a side street, stop controlled intersection (i -e. SE 5Eh PI./156`h Ave SE) LOS is the average vehicle delay for the worst movement (the side street approach) For an all -way stop controlled intersection (SE 142"d/156`h Ave. SE) the LOS is the average vehicle delay for all movements (X XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 2 The Enclave at Bridle Ride rraffim, PM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS PM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 51h P1/156th Ave SE and 142nd PI. SEISE 156th intersection on Tuesday 4/22/2014 from 4 to 6 PM. The peak hour occurred from 4:15 to 5:15 PM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. 'Figure 2 shows the PM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. There were four queues observed that backed up from the 142nd Pi. SEISE 156th intersection to SE 5th PI. in the 4 to 6 PM time period. Left turns out of SE 5th Pl. were blocked for a total cumulative time of 9 minutes and 21 seconds. Right turns out of SE 5th Pl. were unproblematic. Table 2 shows the calculated level of service for existing conditions and future conditions with and without the project. The level of service calculations are attached in the technical appendix. TABLE 2 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2015 WITH INTERSECTION 2013 PROJECT PROJECT SE 5 Pl/ SE WB (C 15.4) WB (C 16.3) WB (C 16.6) 156" Ave North Site Access / NA NA WB (C 15.2) 156th Ave. SE. South Site Access / NA NA WB (B 13.3) 156th Ave. SE. 142" PI / Overall F 66.4 ( ) Overall F 89.9 ( } Overall F 92.3 ) ( 156th Ave SE 15 (X XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 3 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge 'r 'ifM, FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. Tables 1 and 2 show the calculated LOS for future with project volumes at the study intersections. The study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS of for future conditions except for the 156th Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. intersection. That intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. Figures 1 and 2 shows the number and percentage of project generated trips passing through each of the study intersections. The percentage of project trips range from a high of 2.23% at the north site access intersection to a low of 0.615 % at the 142nd Pl. SEI156th Ave SE intersection. Per the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development the study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development. No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes. Page 4 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge a --- SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The additional information collected for this addendum and resulting analysis supports the conclusions and recommendations of the original TIA. We recommend that The Enclave at Bridle Ridge be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: Construct the street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk for the site access streets and site frontage on 156th Ave. SE. Contribute the approximately $21,525 Transportation Mitigation fee to the City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince nwtraffex.com or laruPnwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 5 VA Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx FPO" EXHIBIT E PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Gtyof M E 11110 R A N D U M DATE: May 5, 2014 TO: Chris Barnes, Transportation Operations Manager FROM: Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations SUBJECT: Proposed Signal, Southeast 142"d Place at 156th Avenue Southeast Issue: Should we install a signal at the intersection of Southeast 142"d Place and 156th Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne ofcmba ne maii.com? Recommendation: We should place this intersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a new signal. Background: We have analyzed the intersection of Southeast 142"d Place and 156th Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, interruption of Continuous Traffic for Eight Hours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes for Four Hours. Please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Table 4C-1 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Controi Devices, Figures 4C-1 through 4C-4 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis_ This intersection does not meet Warrant i for crash experience. Since 2009, there have been five recorded accidents on 156th Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end accidents and the other two involved vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast. The other four accidents occurred at least two blocks away from the intersection in question. Please find attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents. h:\divisions\transpor.Yat\aperaU0V0n\to m\t0rn9645a.doc I EXHIBIT F Denis yoa'" City of Community & Economic Development Department May 22, 2014. C.E."Chip"Vincent,Admfnistrator Roger Paulsen 6617 SE 5th Place Renton, WA 98059 RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat/ LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Paulsen: As part of the review of your Request for Reconsideration, the City conducted an independent study of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection. The study concluded that -the iS6th Avenue SE/SE 142"d Place intersection warrants the installation of a traffic signal. The City has added and is prioritizing the installation of a traffic signal at this location to its Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Although it has been determined that the additional traffic anticipated through the development of the Enclave at Bridle Ridge preliminary plat would not significantly impact the existing traffic situation at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection, the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has decided to require the. developer to pay their fair share for the installation of the traffic signal as an additional mitigation measure through SEPA. It is not anticipated that the installation of the traffic signal would occur as a part of this project, but would occur at a later date as additional funding becomes available. If you have any further questions on this matter., please contact Jill Ding, Project Manager, at (425) 430-6598 or via email at 1ding@ rentonwa. ov. Sincerely, C.E. "Chip„ Vincent CED Administrator Attachments cc: ERC Members Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Justin Lagers, Applicant Sally Lou Niper, Owner G. Richard ouimet, Owner Parties of Record Renton City Hall 1055 South Grady Way . Renton, Washington 98057. rentonwa.gov • Cit of DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D� AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 19, 2014 TO: Environmental Review Committee (ERC) FROM: Jill Ding, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Enclave at Bridle Ridge (LUA14-000241) SEPA Request for Reconsideration The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) reviewed the above mentioned preliminary plat application and issued a SEPA Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated (ONS -M) on March 31, 2014 with one mitigation measure: 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). The DiV =M was -was d' on -April 4,'= 2014 with an appeal perid that ended on Ami# -8--- `.r 2014. A request for reconsideratibn of the SEPA determination was received" on April 17; 2014 from Roger Paulsen. The request for reconsideration cites transportation impacts and public notice as the primary justifications for the filing of the request for reconsideration to the ERC. Below is a summary of the concerns cited: 1. The submitted Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) relied upon by the ERC for the issuance of the SEPA DNS -M was incomplete and did not include the AM and PM peak hour conditions per item #1 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis. Staff Comment: The originally submitted TIA included a PM peak hour Level of Service (LOS) analysis. After the receipt of the request for reconsideration, the applicant voluntarily conducted an additional traffic analysis and submitted an Addendum to the original Traffic Impact Analysis (dated April 29, 2014). The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 156'x' Avenue SE/SE 5t' Place intersection and an AM and PM peak hour LOS analysis. After conducting the additional analysis, the applicant's traffic engineer concluded that the proposed project would not result in a significant adverse impact on the existing surrounding street system. The City's Transportation Division has reviewed the originally submitted TIA and the Addendum and they concur that the proposed h:lcedlplanninglcuumt plammnglprojects114-000241.jallem reconsideration recommendation memo.dot.docx t~nvixnnnaental Review Co ce Page 2 of 4 May 19, 2014 project would not have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding street system, The City's Transportation Division has conducted an independent study of the existing background traffic situation at the 156"' Avenue SE/SE 142"d Street intersection. Based on the City's study the existing conditions warrant the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection with or without the construction of the proposed subdivision. With the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, it is anticipated that the traffic conditions in the project vicinity would improve. The installation of a traffic signal is not included on the City's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), therefore transportation impacts fees would not fund the installation of a signal. Due to the existing LOS designation F atthe 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"d Street intersection and the fact that the required traffic impact fees would not fund a traffic signal at this intersection, staff recommends as a new SEPA mitigation measure that the proposed project be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips _ 0.00687 x $500,040 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 2. The submitted T1A provided a level of Service (LOS) Analysis for the 156th t Averi e S /SE 142"d Street rntefse - ion; i# did riot include a LOS analysis or t - - 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. Staff Comment: Item # 2 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis states that the "study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development"- The proposed development would not result in a 556 increase in peak hour traffic at any intersection therefore no analysis of any intersection was required. However per the City's request an analysis was done for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection and was included in the submitted TIA. The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. According to the addendum the LOS for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 56 Place intersection currently operates at a LOS C and would continue to operate at a LOS C with or without the proposed subdivision. The current delay for westbound traffic is 15.1 seconds, the delay is anticipated to increase to 15.5 seconds without the project and to 16.1 seconds with the project. Therefore, according to the submitted addendum, it is anticipated that the proposed . subdivision would result in an additional delay of 0.3 seconds for vehicles at the 1561h Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection- The report does not recommend any additional mitigation beyond the required traffic impact fees as the LOS at the hAcedlplanninglcurrmt planing1projsctsl14-OOO241.jilllerc reconsideration recommendation memc.dot,docx. Environmental Review iittee Page 3 of 4 May 19, 2014 156th Avenue SE/5E 51h Place intersection will remain at C with or without the proposed subdivision. Therefore, staff concludes that no further traffic mitigation is warranted for the subject project. 3. Public notice for the proposed -subdivision was misleading. People who didn't submit written comments during the 14 day Notice of Application comment period may think they can provide comments on the SEPA at the public hearing. Staff Comment: Public notice for the proposed subdivision was provided in accordance with the requirements outline in FtMC 4-5-090. The notice states that individuals have 14 days to comment on the proposed subdivision application and also mentions that additional comments may be provided at the public hearing. In addition, any party who requested to be made a party of record would receive the applicable SEPA determination, which provides a 14 day appeal period. The notice is not misleading as anyone receiving the notice would have been notified of the public comment period, the date of the hearing, and has the opportunity to become a party of record and receive additional information on the project. Recommendation: In light of the additional information provided in the independent traffic study conducted by the City, which states that a signal is warranted at the 156" Avenue SE/SE 142"d Street intersection, staff recommends that the ERC retain the - existjng DSN-M"with on'e'new rriitigation measure as fbliows:. _ 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). 2. Due to. -the existing Level of Service (LOS) designation of F at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place and the proposal to add additional trips to the existing situation, the proposed project shall be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"a Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips = 0.00687 x $540,000 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat_ Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on June 6, 2014. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. h:lcedlplannia&urreat planning1projects114-000241.jilllerc reconsideration recommendation memo.dot.dou Environmental Review Cc tee Page 4 of May 19, 2014 Date of decision: May 19, 2014 signatures: h:lcedlpI=1inglcwrenr planninglprojects114-000241 jiU\= reconsideration recommendation memo,dotdocx Gregg Zi' m r a D,,/A'driminiArator Mark Peterson, Administrator Puhfic Works e artment P Date Fire & Ernergen y Services Date C ilk Terry Higashiyama, Administrator C.E_ "Chip"'Vincent, Administrator Services Department pate ,Department of Community & DateCommunit Economic Development h:lcedlpI=1inglcwrenr planninglprojects114-000241 jiU\= reconsideration recommendation memo,dotdocx EXHIBIT H City of -i C b NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NDN -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -- Ptanning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICAnON: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA14.000241, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 81 acre project site located within the R-4 {Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result In the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts {Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet- Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No cr'st+cat areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038156"' Ave SE OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE, 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 43.210.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-iv1 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 Nan -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M). A 14 -day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS -M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Justin Lagers / PNW Holdings, LLC / 9675 SE 36v` Street Suite 105, Mercer Island, WA 98040 / EML: Justin@arnericanclassichomes.corn Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Review Other Permits which may be required: Construction, Building, fire Requested Studies: Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Trak Study Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -- Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hal 1,1055 South Grady iA/ay, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing Is tentatively scheduled for April 22. 2014.before the Renton Hearing Examine r in Benton Council Cham rs at 10:00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way, 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.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-=241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: City/state/zip: TELEPHONE NO.: City oiF,- --._..,..,_,,.,� I � ,.;`,.,� "�� .;, `' ,,,,,��; err •r� CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: The subject site is designated Residential Low Density (COMP -RLP) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Nlap and R4 on the City's Zoning Map. - Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the City`s SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-110 Residential Development and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: 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. • Project construction shall be required to comply with the submitted geotechnical report. ■ Project construction shall he required to comply with the submitted traffic study. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, CED — Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by s:oo PM on March 24, 2024. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on April 22, 2034, at 20:40 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hail, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430.5578, 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: Jill Ding, Senior Planner, Tel: (425) 430-6598; Eml: jding@rentonwa.goy PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION 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 5o. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, Name/File No.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-400241, ECF, PP NAME -- MAILING ADDRESS: City/State/Zip— TELEPHONE NO.: 6/6/2014 RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE 4-8-110 APPEALS: APPEALS TO HEARING EXAMINER OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATIONS: 1. Applicability and Authority: a. Administrative Determinations: Any administrative decisions made may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner, in writing, filed with the City Clerk. b. Environmental Determinations: Except for permits and variances issued pursuant to RMC 4-3- 090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, when any proposal or action is granted, conditioned, or denied on the basis of SEPA by a nonelected official, the decision shall be appealable to the Hearing Examiner under the provisions of this Section. 2. Optional Request for Reconsideration: a. When a reconsideration request has been submitted, the matter shall be held in abeyance pending the outcome of the reconsideration. A new fourteen (14) calendar day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. b. In order to request reconsideration, the person or entity must have been made a party of record, or submitted written comments to City staff prior to the issuance of the determination for which the reconsideration is being requested. 3. Standing: Unless otherwise provided by state law or exempted by a state or federal agency, only the applicant, City or a person who has been made a party of record prior to the issuance of a decision may appeal the administrative or environmental decision. In order to appeal the person or entity shall be aggrieved or affected by the administrative or environmental decision. In order to be aggrieved, the person or entity must demonstrate the following: a. An injury in fact, in that the person or entity will be specifically and perceptively harmed; and b. That the interest the person or entity seeks to protect is arguably within the zone of interests to be protected or regulated. 4. Time for Appeal: Any such appeal shall be made in writing and filed with the City Clerk's office, together with the applicable appeal fee, within fourteen (14) calendar days of the final decision or publication of the final decision, whichever occurs later, except in the case of a Final EIS, in which the appeal shall be made within twenty (20) calendar days of the publication of the final decision. S. Clarification of Appeal: If the appeal is unclear and does not sufficiently explain the basis for the appeal, the Hearing Examiner may issue an order requiring that the appellant amend the appeal within ten (10) calendar days of the date of the order. If the appeal is not satisfactorily amended within the time allowed, it shall be dismissed. 6. Motions: The Hearing Examiner may dismiss an appeal, without hearing, when it is determined by the Hearing Examiner to be untimely, without merit on its face, incomplete, or frivolous. Any application to the Hearing Examiner for an order shall be by motion which, unless made during a hearing, shall be in writing, stating the reasons for the request and setting forth the relief or order sought. Written motions shall be received at least five (5) business days in advance of the hearing. 7. Parties: The parties in appeal hearings shall be the City, the applicant, and the appellant(s), if different from the applicant or the City. No other persons shall be allowed to testify unless serving as a witness to one of the parties. 8. Notice of Hearing Required: A written notice of the time and place of the hearing at which the appeal shall be considered by the Hearing Examiner shall be mailed to the applicant, all parties of record in the case, 6/s/2014 and to the officer from whom the appeal is taken not less than ten (10) calendar days prior to the date of the hearing. 9. Format of the Appeal Hearing: The appeal hearing will be of an informal nature, but organized so that testimony and other evidence can be presented efficiently. An appeal hearing shall include at least the following: a. An introductory outline of the procedure by the Hearing Examiner. b. Presentation by the appellant, including any witnesses. C. Cross-examination, if any, of appellant and appellant's witnesses. d. Presentation by City staff, summarizing the staff analysis and including any witnesses for the City. e. Cross-examination, if any, of City staff and staff's witnesses. f. Presentation by the project applicant, if different from appellant, including any witnesses. g. Cross-examination of any of the project applicant and applicant's witnesses. h. Rebuttal testimony and closing by City staff. L Rebuttal testimony and closing by applicant, if different from appellant. j. Rebuttal testimony and closing by appellant. 10. Prehearing Conference: The Hearing Examiner may schedule and hold a prehearing conference when it appears that the orderly and efficient conduct of the hearing will be served, or that settlement of the appeal through such a conference is likely. A prehearing conference may, among other things, consider: a. Simplification of the issues. b. The existence of undisputed facts to which the parties are willing to stipulate. C. The identification of witnesses and documentary or other evidence to be presented at hearing. d. Any reasonable needs any party may have for discovering the details of the case the other party intends to present. e. The imposition of reasonable time limits. Based upon the discussions and agreements at such a conference, the Hearing Examiner may enter a prehearing order, which shall govern subsequent proceedings. If the case is settled at such a conference, the Hearing Examiner shall enter an order reciting the terms of the settlement and dismissing the appeal. 11. Content of the Record. The record of an appeal hearing conducted by the Hearing Examiner shall include at least the following: a. The notice of appeal and any amendments. b. The staff analysis responding to the appeal and all accompanying documents, including the papers that comprise the record of the decision subject to appeal. C. Additional documentary or physical evidence received and considered, including all exhibits filed. d. The Hearing Examiner's decision. e. Electronic recordings of the proceedings and/or an accurate written transcription thereof. 12_ Hearing Examiner Decision: a. Substantial Weight: The procedural determination by the Environmental Review Committee or City staff shall carry substantial weight in any appeal proceeding. The Hearing Examiner shall give substantial weight to any discretionary decision of the City rendered pursuant to this Chapter/Title. b. Hearing Examiner Decision Options and Decision Criteria: The Hearing Examiner may affirm the decision or remand the case for further proceedings, or it may reverse the decision if the substantial rights of the applicant may have been prejudiced because the decision is: i. In violation of constitutional provisions; or ii. In excess of the authority or jurisdiction of the agency; or iii. Made upon unlawful procedure; or iv. Affected by other error of law; or 6/6/2014 V. Clearly erroneous in view of the entire record as submitted; or VL Arbitrary or capricious. C. Time for Hearing Examiner's Decision: Each final decision of a Hearing Examiner, unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the applicant and the Hearing Examiner, shall be rendered within ten (10) business days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings. I Collateral Estoppel (Issue Preclusion): The Hearing Examiner may deny a party's request to relitigate one or more issues or determinative facts decided or ruled upon in a previous litigation if the party against whom the collateral estoppel doctrine is to be applied had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in the prior proceeding. The party requesting application of the collateral estoppel doctrine must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that (1) the issue decided in the earlier proceeding was identical to the issue presented in the later proceeding; (2) the earlier proceeding ended in a judgment on the merits; (3) the party against whom collateral estoppel is asserted was a party to, or in privity with a party to, the earlier proceeding; and (4) application of collateral estoppel does not work an injustice on the party against whom it is applied. The Hearing Examiner may apply collateral estoppel, sua sponte. e. Res Judicata (Claim Preclusion): The Hearing Examiner may apply a prior ruling or summarily decide an action or appeal if the current, pending or proposed action or appeal is substantially identical to a prior action or appeal in four (4) respects (1) the same persons and parties or a person or party in privity with the prior person or party; (2) causes of action that substantially involve the same rights or interest, the same evidence, an infringement of substantially the same rights or interests, or the two (2) actions or appeals arise out of substantially the same facts; (3) subject matter is identical or substantially the same; and (4) at least one or more of the parties are bound by the priorjudgment or ruling. The party requesting application of the res judicata doctrine does not have to prove each factor, but must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that application of res judicata is appropriate. The Hearing Examiner may apply res judicata, sua sponte. f. Full and Fair Opportunity: Failure to seek or obtain evidence or information that existed at the time of the prior proceeding does not establish that a party did not have a full or fair opportunity to litigate an issue or change the subject matter of an action or appeal. 13. Optional Request for Reconsideration. a. When a reconsideration request has been submitted, the matter shall be held in abeyance pending the outcome of the reconsideration. A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. b. In order to request reconsideration, the person or entity must have been made a party of record prior to the close of the hearing, participated in the hearing or have submitted written comments to the Hearing Examiner prior to the close of the hearing. 14. Appeal of Hearing Examiner Decision to City Council: Unless a specific section or state law providing for review of decision of the Hearing Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or other body, all other appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision shall be made to the City Council within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Hearing Examiner's written report. 3 June 5, 2014 City of Renton Attn: Hearing Examiner 1055 South. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 CITY OF MENTON ,SUN 0 5 2014 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO CITY OF RENTON CODE SECTION 4.8.110(E) Dear Hearing Examiner, Pursuant to City of Renton .Municipal Code Section 4.8.11O(E), please accept this letter as a formal Request for Appeal of the Environmental (SEPA) 'Threshold Determination issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee for project # LUA14-000241, ECF, PP, dated May 19, 2014. As a party of record for this project, this Request for Appeal is filed with the intent of utilizing all available administrative remedies to see that the adverse environmental impacts of this project are adequately understood, documented, and mitigated by the City= and/or applicant -- all in the spirit of the City of Renton's adopted codes, policies and procedures. As an ordinary citizen, I found the City of Renton's code section 4.8.110 on appeals to offer very little practical guidance or direction with respect to how the Request for Reconsideration and Appeals processes work in concert with one another. To that end, I beg your patience and understanding if the format of this Appeal Request is not in-line with what you may typically receive. Please note that I have also filed a concurrent Request for Reconsideration pursuant to Renton Code Section 4.8.110(E)(2) with the understanding that if the Reconsideration Request is not granted, this appeal will be processed, and my appeal payment check cashed. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request, and for your thoughtful attention to the issues I believe warrant additional study and mitigation in order to adequately protect the public safety, health and interests of the citizens of our community. As a long-standing member of this community, I both accept and embrace growth and change in the City of Renton. Unfortunately, my engagement in this process reveals what I believe to be a series of missteps by the City in processing this application. In the spirit of ensuring that the public process we hold so dear in this country is respected, I submit this Request for Appeal. Standing As an adjacent landowner, and as a party- of record who properly submitted written comments on the Enclave at Bridle Ridge application (Exhibit A) as well as a previous Request for Reconsideration of the Environmental Determination for this project (Exhibit B), and as a City of Renton resident who has only one point of access to the City's transportation network via the SE 5`" Place/ 156`h AVE SE intersection, my public health, safety and welfare are at -risk should the City not carefully consider this Request for Appeal and adopt the necessary actions I am requesting. To allow additional unmitigated traffic from this project absent a full understanding of the project's impacts as is required under SEPA, has the potential to adversely impact both my personal safety interests, as well as myprivate property, interests as thcy relate to the value of my property at the time of future re -sale. For these and other reasons, 1 bclieve I have the required standing to bring this Request for Appeal. Identification of Concerns for Which This Appeal is Requested The issues for which I request this Appeal relate to the transportation impacts of the proposed project, and to the public comment notice process associated with the original SEPA Threshold Determination. Point of Appeal #1. Transportation The proposed access to the Enclave at Bridle Ridge project site is via a new looped internal public street with two access points off of 156th Avenue SE, just north of the 156'4 Ave SE and 142"d Place intersection (Preliminary- Plat Plan, Exhibit C). In response to concerns raised in my earlier Request for Reconsideration (dated April 16`h) the applicant commissioned an additional Traffic Study on April 22", and submitted an Addendum (Attachment D) to the original Traffic Impact Analysis. The Addendum, dated April 29, 2014, concluded that the two proposed site access streets will operate at an acceptable level of service (C) for future conditions. Subsequent to the April 22" Traffic Study and the April 29`h Addendum, the City added to its Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) the installation of a traffic signal at the 156" Ave SE and 142'a Place intersection. Reference the May 5'h letter from Ronald Mar, '1"ransportation Operations (attachment E), and the May 22"`' letter from Mr. C.E. Vincent, CED Administrator (Attachment F). On May 19th, the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) met to consider my April 16"' Request for Reconsideration, and retained its threshold Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated, with one additional mitigation measure: Due to the existing Level of Service (LOS) designation of F at the 956" Ave. SE / SE 142m" PL Jic. intersection; and the proposal to add additional trips to the exisiinrg situation, the proposed project shall be responsible for paying their fair sham of the cost o f a new signal to be installed al the 15e Aix. SE / SE 142"' PL intersection. The ERC Meeting Summary (attachment G) includes on page 2, the following statement: Wlith the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, it is anticipated that the traffic conditions in the project vicinity would improve. The first reason for this appeal is simply that the record lacks any analysis of the impact of the proposed traffic signal upon the level of service at the two proposed streets associated with this plat, and the adjacent intersections of concern, including the intersection at 156`h Ave. SE / SE 5hPI., and the intersection of 154`' Ave. SE / SE 142"`` PL.. The City was aware of the plan to install the new traffic signal, but failed to consider its impact on the proposed development when it issued its threshold Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated on May 19th. It is very likely, based upon the longer queue times associated with a signalized intersection, that the level of service associated with ingress and egress at the two new access streets, as well as at adjacent 2 existing streets such as SE 5" Place, will actually prove worse than has been modeled to -date for an un -signalized intersection. While the bevel of Service of the 156`h Ave. SE / SE 142"l Pl. intersection may end up "improved" as a result of the new signal, the record lacks any data or analysis for understanding the potential adverse impacts associated with the new signal as it relates to the new points of ingres�gress. Until such an analysis is completed and made available for public review as part of a public SEPA review process, it is impossible to know whether the project will result in a traffic condition that meets level of service or adequate provision standards necessary to allow for plat approval by the City. Point of Appeal #2 Public Process and Notice As raised in my initial comment letter (Exhibit A) and my original Request for Reconsideration (Exhibit B) I remain concerned that the City's "Notice of Application ...." (Exhibit H) with respect to the opportunity for public comment on issues of concern, such as the transportation concerns I have raised herein, misrepresented the actual opportunities for public engagement in the environmental (SEPA)_review of this project. In short, the notice implies that a citizen having concern, who is not able to provide written comment prior to the March 24, 2014 deadline, will have the opportunity to provide comment at the Public Hearing on April 22"`'. Nowhere in the notice to the public is it explained that by waiting until April 22nd, the opportunity to provide input that would inform the SEPI review and determination, will have passed. As a result, the record now shows that only two public comment letters were received prior to the original Threshold Determination being issued. I believe that you will find that many more people will attend the Public Hearing on June 24th' and they will do so raising issues that should have been considered as part of the SEPA determination for this project. I fully understand the efficiency that the City is attempting to achieve by combining their notice and comment periods, but I urge you to review these notices carefully to understand the concern I am attempting once again to raise here. Requested Outcomes of Appeal Based upon each of the above concerns, and as part of this Request for Appeal, I ask that the Hearing Examiner take the following action: Withdraw the May 19r", 2014 Threshold Determination for this project, and require that the applicant work with City staff to prepare a proper Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), sufficient to adequately inform the City and public's understanding of the likely Level of Service impacts of the proposed new signal on the two neer access streets, as well as on SE 5`" Place. Further, given the misrepresentation of the public comment opportunity as it relates to informing the City's SEPA review process, I request that, once an adequate and proper Traffic Impact Analysis conforming to the City's requirements is completed, the Notice of Application 3 and SEPA comment periods be re -started to allow the City of Renton's public an opportunity to participate in the development review process for this project. Thank you again for providing this opportunity to request Appeal of the Environmental Review Comnuttee's Threshold Determination for this project. Respectfully Submitted, Rog n 6617 SE 5`h Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A — R. Paulsen Comment Letter Exhibit B — Request for Reconsideration (April 16") Exhibit C — Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit D — Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum Exhibit E — Ronald Mar Letter Exhibit F — C.E. Vincent Letter Exhibit G — ERC Fleeting Summary Exhibit H — Notice of Application and Proposed Mitigation.... 4 EXHIBIT A March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED — Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mail to Avoid Delay Cd .b in ]krentonwa.xov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project #LUA 14-00024 1, ECF, PR My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22"d. I also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5th Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5th Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 156th Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142nd intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156th and 142°d that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156th north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 5th Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139th Pl.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142 d, and then only IF the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will till up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. EXHIBIT A The addition of ANY new trips to SE 156th between SE 5th Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this project to be implemented without adequate mitigation has significant potential to threaten public health safety and welfare for the existing residents who access 156" from SE 5th Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156 / 142nd intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156`h during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156th/ 142nd intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156tH! 142°d intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 51h Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accommodate future waste water access to the new sewer lines being installed as part of this project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. 2 EXHIBIT A Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot #4, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), 1 would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot 44. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 20' deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22nd public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination prior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22"d, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22nd to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. EXHIBIT A If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at RogerAPaulsen(ia cs.com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application 4 EXHIBIT B April 16, 2014 City of Renton Attn: City Clerk Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO CITY OF RENTON CODE SECTION 4.8.110(E)(2) To All Whom It May Concern, Pursuant to City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4.8.110(E)(2), please accept this letter as a formal Request for Reconsideration of the. Environmental (SEPA) Threshold Determination issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee for project # LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. As a party of record for this project, this Request for Reconsideration is Filed with the intent of utilizing all available administrative remedies to see that the adverse environmental impacts of this project are adequately= understood, documented, and mitigated by the City and/or applicant -- all in the spirit of the City= of Renton's adopted codes, policies and procedures. As an ordinary citizen, I have found the City of Renton's code section 4.8.110 on appeals to offer very- little practical guidance or direction with respect to how the Request for Reconsideration process works, or even who considers the request. While I encourage you to dedicate time to improving this information for the benefit of future citizens, the time provided for me to become educated, and file this request in a timely manner, leaves me with no option other than to simply offer the best I can. To that end, I beg your patience and understanding if the format of this Request is not in-line with what you may typically receive. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request, and for your thoughtful attention to the issues I believe warrant additional study and mitigation in order to adequately- protect the public safely, health and interests of the citizens of our community. As a long-standing member of this community, I both accept and embrace growth and change in the City of Renton. Unfortunately, my engagement in this process reveals what I believe to be serious missteps by the City in processing this application. In the spirit of ensuring that the public process we hold so dear in this country is respected, I submit this Request for Reconsideration. Standing As an adjacent landowner, and as a party of record who properly submitted written comments regarding the concerns identified in this Request for Reconsideration (Exhibit A), and as a City of Renton resident who has only one point of access to the City's transportation network via the SE 5`}' Place/ 156`h AVE SE intersection, my public health, safety and welfare are at -risk should the City not carefully consider this Request for Reconsideration and adopt the necessary actions I am requesting. To allow additional unmitigated traffic from this project, absent a full understanding of the project's impacts as required under SEPA, has the potential to adversely impact both my personal safety interests, as well as my private property interests as thev relate to the value of my property at the time of future re -sale. For these and other reasons, I believe that I have the required standing to bring this Request for Reconsideration Identification of Concerns for Which Reconsideration is Requested The issues for which I request your reconsideration relate to the transportation impacts of the proposed project, and to the public comment notice and process associated with the 'Threshold Determination, Concern #1. Transportation After review of the Environmental Review Comiriittee Report for this project dated March 31, 2414, (Exhibit D) it is clear that the City's Environmental Review Committee made an error in basing their Determination upon the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Traffex (Exhibit B, dated December 27, 2013). The Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon for this Determination fails to comply with the City's own policy= for such analyses. Specifically, this analysis fails to study the AM Peak traffic condition in addition to the PM Peak traffic condition associated with the project. In the TIA submitted by the applicant, and relied upon by the ERC, the author states as follows: "711e .scope of this anal},sis is horsed upon the preliminary plat site plan and the Ciat3 of Denton Policy Guidelines f or Traf c Impact Analysis f or Nev) Development ". By relying upon this report, the City failed to adequately inform itself with the full range of potential adverse environmental impacts associated with the transportation demands of this project, as the report is clearly not in compliance with the City's Policy= Guidelines For Traffic impact Analysis for New Development, attached as Exhibit C to this request. Specifically, the City's policy states clearly that for a project such as this, where A.M. or P.M. Peak I Iour Trip contributions are X20, a complete Traffic Impact Analysis shall be completed, and said analysis shall present and consider both the A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour conditions, among other analysis. See excerpt below: Site Generated Traffic Volumes: The analysis should present a tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed. 2 It is a matter of fact that the Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon by the City of Renton ERC did riot provide the minimum information and analy=sis required by the City of Renton's own policy, and therefore the FRC has erred in issuing their Determination absent this information, and their Determination should be found to be arbitrary and capricious, in addition to in error. Concern #2. Transportation My second concern also relates to transportation, and the ERC's apparent misunderstanding of the scope of the Traffic Impact Analysis that was received by the City=. On page #7 of their March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report (Exhibit D), the Committee states; `The Traffic Impact.flnalysir (Exhibit 10) also inclades a Level of Service (LO.S) reuiew of the surrounding intersections in the immediate vicinit�r... " This report goes on to conclude that- ". .. hat: "... the surrounding intersections mould continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Servive (LOS) mith the exception of the southbound approach to the 1 a6'''.Avenue .SEI SE 142"' Place intersection, " Both of these statements appear to assume that the analysis completed by the applicant actually looked at existing intersections other than the 156'x'/ 142"d Place intersecrion. They did not. In fact, the 156`h Ave SE/ 142"`' intersection is the ONLY exis�tin>r intersection that was analyzed by the applicant. Despite public comment informing city staff and the ERC of concerns at the closest adjacent existing intersection to the proposed project (SE 5" Place), the ERC did not require additional information from the applicant to inform an understanding of the impacts at this intersection. Additionally, by only analyzing the P.M. Peak Hour (just 2 hrs. 45 min on December 17`"), the analysis completely failed to understand or analyze the impacts of A.M. Peak Hour traffic conditions on 156`h at Sl : 5'h Place or other impacted intersections to the north. The ERC's Threshold Determination is not supported by fact, as it clearly did not include an analysis of additional existing intersections, despite the ERC concluding that it did. Because of this, the ERC erred when they based their Threshold Determination upon the ` I A. Concern #3 Transportation Ironically, in light of Concerns #1 and #2 above, when one digs deeper into the March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Comrnittee Report, we find that City of Renton staff are not only aware of potential adverse impacts of the proposed project as they relate to access from the project to 156"', but they go so far as to inform the applicant that they may "...impose left turn restrictions at that intersection."(See Exhibit D, Page 10 of 11, Transportation Item #3). This already contemplated "remedy" identified by City of Renton staff not only acknowledges that there is a serious Level of Service issue that is likely to be exacerbated by this project given the lack of available capacity at the 156`h/ 142`1 intersection, but also suggests that the City's "remedy" will 3 force this traffic to the right, or north, onto 156", further degrading the Level of Service at the 156"/ SF 5`h PL intersection, and other intersections to the north along 156"' Ave. SE. Again, since no analysis was completed to inform an understanding of potential adverse traffic impacts north of the proposed project on 156", the ERC's Threshold Determination could only have been based upon incomplete information. This is an error on the part of the ERC, and should be corrected as part of this Request for Reconsideration. Concern #4 Transportation This concern relates specifically to how the ERC proposes to mitigate the impacts that were identified by the study. In their Threshold Determination, the ERC mitigates the identified transportation impacts by adopting, by reference, the recommendations identified by the applicant's consultant in the Traffic Impact Analysis. When one looks closer, we find that, other than otherwise required street frontage improvements; the only mitigation recommended is the payment of an otherwise required Traffic Mitigation Fee that is based upon the number of lots in the proposed project. In the ERC's March 31, 2014 Report (Page 7 of 11) they conclude as follows: "Itis not anticipated that tbe pra ased traject .rignificantly adversely impact (sic) the GO oj" Kenton'.r street system sul�ect to the payment of code required impartfees and the construction of code regarired frontage improvements. " Unfortunately, nowhere is a nexus established between the impacts identified in the TIA and the proposed mitigation. A review of the City's 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program reveals that the deficiencies of the 156"/ 142"d intersection are not addressed in any form. For this reason, the ERC has erred in simply applying the mitigations recommended by the applicant, as they fail to satisfy the requirements under State Law (RCW 58.17 & the Growth Management Act) that capacity for additional traffic be available at the time of project approval. In order for this to be true, there must be an established nexus between the fees that will be paid and the deficient traffic conditions at the 156'h/ 142d or other intersections where a proper analysis may indicate a Level of Service deficiencv. Concern #5 Transportation Also related to the above concerns (ie:, the transportation impacts of the proposed project) I have received new information in response to a Public Records Request which I filed to better understand the City's internal review process as it relates to transportation concurrency, a requirement under State law and City of Renton ordinances. As you can see in the e-mail below, dated Aprii 15, 2014 from Steve Lee, Dev, Engineering Manager, itis noted that the City's Transportation Division is "currentll assessing any improverfzents are warranted (if any)... ': This confirms that work is on-going at this time (April 15`h) to both evaluate and mitigate the proposed project. 4 This e-mail serves to document yet again that the ERC was not fully informed with respect to the likely or probable adverse environmental impacts and possible nutigations associated with this project. This constitutes an error on the part of the ERC, as well as the City's development review process, and further validates the merits of this Request for Reconsideration. Sandi Weir From: Steve Lee Sent; Tuesday, April 15, 2024 11:14 AM To. CityCterle Records CC lace Illian; NO Ding: Neil R. Watts: Jennifer i, Henning; Rohini Nair Subject RE: New Public Records Request - PRR-14-085 (Paulsen) Attachuwnw TranspoConcPolicy140415.pdf See attached flies that are related docurnentation on the City process for cdnturreney, standards ,and process relating to Renton Code Section 4-6.070. 1 believe this is the information Mr_ Paulsen is seeking: The information, as extracted from the approved City Comprehensive Plan, provides Mr. Paulsen how the City administers a multi modal test.. Renton Code Section 4-"70 notes that transportation concurrency can be a combination of improvements or strategies in place at the time of building permit issuance, or within a reasonable account of time after building issuance, per 4-6-070 A.1, or a financial commitment is placed. A financW commitment can be the traffic mitigation fees pald for the new development and is generally used by the City for improvements throughout the City. OurTransportation Division is the technical review authority and is turrentiy assessing any improvements are warranted (if aryl lord. 5675, 12-3-2012). The Transportation Division has currently provided some direction as to an initial response with the statement, "Within the City of Renton, the steep topography between Maple Valley Highway and tete upper plateal: land on to cemetery Road) makes it in feasible to provide additional access, widening 1-405 (which the State is pursuing) to provide more traffic capacity could attract some traffic now using 156 th SE to access Cemetery Road-" Thanks. Steve Lee, PE, NAS, CESCL City of Renton herr. Engineering Manager 4.25.430.7299 5teel2rentonwagov Concern #6 Public Process and Notice As raised in my initial comment letter (Exhibit A), I remain concerned that the City's notice with respect to the opportunity for public comment on issues of concern, such as the transportation concerns I have raised herein, misrepresented the actual opportunities for public„ engagement in the environmental SETA review of this 12romect. In short, the notice implies that a citizen having concern, who is not able to provide written comment prior to the March 24, 2014 deadline, w=ill have the opportunity to provide comment at the Public Hearing on April 22"'1. Nowhere in the notice to the public is it explained that by waiting until April 22"d, the opportunity to provide input to inform the SEPA review and determination, will have passed. (see Exhibit E "Notice of Application...") As a result, the record now shows that only two public comment letters were received prior to the Threshold Determination being issued. I believe that you will find that many more people will attend the Public Hearing on April 22", and they will do so raising issues that should have been considered as part of the SEPA deternairiation for this project. I fully understand the efficiency that the City is attempting to achieve by combining their notice and comment periods, but I urge you to review these notices carefully to understand the concern I am attempting, once again, to raise here. Requested Outcomes Based upon each and all of the above concerns, and as part of this Request for Reconsideration, I ask that the body hearing this Request take the following actions: Withdraw the Threshold Determination for this project and require that the applicant work with city staff to prepare a proper Traffic Impact Analysis for this project_ This analysis should be sufficient to adequately= inform the City and public's understanding of the likely impacts of this project during both the A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour, including at the immediately adjacent intersection of SE 5" Place and 156" Ave. SE, and other intersections likely to be impacted further north on 156"' a Further, given the misrepresentation of the public comment opportunity as it relates to informing the City's SEPA review process, I request that, once an adequate and proper Traffic Impact Analysis conforming to the City's requirements is completed, the Notice of Application and SEPA comment periods be re -started to allow the City of Renton's public an opportunity to participate in the development review process for this project. Thank you again for providing this opportunity to request reconsideration of the Environmental Review Committee's 'Threshold Determination for this project. Should the body charged with reviewing this request decline reconsideration, it is my intent to also pursue the formal appeal remedies established by City Code to ensure that the record shows I have pursued all of my lawful administrative remedies. Respectfully Submitted, Roger A Paulsen 6617 SE 5`h Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A — SEPA Determination Comment Letter Exhibit B —Traffic Impact analysis Exhibit C Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development Exhibit D Environmental Review Conunitte.e Report Exhibit E — Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Nan -Significance -Mitigated I EXHIBIT C THE ENCLAVE AT WDLE RIDGE XXX—XXX) ?4 A. A - up i n-< 00 xi 1 ILII jj 4 {� �#yS;! C S�� e • li 0;0 xi 1 ILII jj 4 {� �#yS;! C S�� e • li EXHIBIT D THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE ADDENDUM TO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by WA 7A:R4ffEAm r NORTHWEST TI?A F`FFIC ExPE'R Ts 11410 NE 124th St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 April 29, 2014 rrdiff)EY April 29, 2014 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer island, WA 98040 A&7R7'Hwzsr rjjqAF-�c Exp.-mTs Phone: 42 522,41118 Fax, .522 43311 5 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Addendum to the Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: We are pleased to present this addendum to traffic impact analysis (TIA) report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located at 14038 156th Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The purpose of the addendum is to provide information in response to questions concerning the original TIA and requests for additional analysis. The additional information includes traffic counts and an analysis at the SE 5 h P11156th Ave. SE intersection and also traffic counts and analysis of all study intersection in the AM peak hour as well as the PM peak hour. The trip generation, trip distribution, background traffic growth and other data and assumptions are unchanged from the original TIA unless otherwise noted. The analysis is summarized as follows: • No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes due to the proposed project. • Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. • The 142nd Pl. SEISE 156th intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. AM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS AM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 5" P111561h Ave SE and 142,d PI. SEISE 156th intersection on Tuesday 4/22/2014 from 7 to 9 AM. The peak hour occurred from 7:15 to 8:15 AM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. Figure 1 shows the AM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. No Page 1 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge rjw queues were observed to back up from the 142nd PI. SEISE 1561h intersection to SE Stn PI. in the AM peak hour. The longest queue observed was 9 vehicles. Table 1 shows the calculated level of service at the study intersections for existing conditions and future conditions with and without the project. The level of service calculations are attached in the technical appendix. TABLE 1 AM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY INTERSECTION EXISTING 2095 WITHOUT 2015 WITH NB 2013 PROJECT PROJECT SE 5th PI/ 156th Ave SE WB (C 15.1) WB (C 15.8) WB (C 16.1) North Site Access / 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (C 16.4) South Site Access/ 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (C 17.0) SE 142 M,PI / 156th Ave SE Overall (F 53.7) Overall (F 71.4) Overall (F 72.5) Number shown is the average delay in seconds per vehicle which defines the LOS per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual For a side street, stop controlled intersection (i.e. SE 51h PIA 561h Ave SE) LOS is the average vehicle delay for the worst movement (the side street approach) For an all -way stop controlled intersection (SE 142nd/156`h Ave. SE) the LOS is the average vehicle delay for all movements (X XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 2 The Enclave at Bridle Ride 7 PM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS PM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 51h PI/156'h Ave SE and 142"d PI. SEISE 156th intersection on Tuesday 4/22/2014 from 4 to 6 PM. The peak hour occurred from 4:15 to 5:15 PM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. . Figure 2 shows the PM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. There were four queues observed that backed up from the 142nd PI. SE/SE 156th intersection to SE 5th Pl. in the 4 to 6 PM time period. Left turns out of SE 5th PI. were blocked for a total cumulative time of 9 minutes and 21 seconds. Right turns out of SE 5th PI. were unproblematic. Table 2 shows the calculated level of service for existing conditions and future conditions with and without the project. The level of service calculations are attached in the technical appendix. TABLE 2 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2015 WITH INTERSECTION 2013 PROJECT PROJECT SE 9 PI/ 156th Ave SE WB (C 15.4) WB (C 16.3) WB (C 16.6) North Site Access / NA NA WB (C 15.2) 156th Ave. SE. South Site Access / NA NA WB (B 13.3) 156th Ave. SE. l / SE 142ndPI / SE th Overall (F 66.4) Overall (F 89.9) Overall (F 92.3) Ave (X XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 3 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. Tables 1 and 2 show the calculated LOS for future with project volumes at the study intersections. The study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS of for future conditions except for the 156th Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. intersection. That intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. Figures 1 and 2 shows the number and percentage of project generated trips passing through each of the study intersections. The percentage of project trips range from a high of 2.23% at the north site access intersection to a low of 0.65 % at the 1421,d Pi. SE/156th Ave SE intersection. Per the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development the study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development. No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes. Page 4 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The additional information collected for this addendum and resulting analysis supports the conclusions and recommendations of the original TIA. We recommend that The Enclave at Bridle Ridge be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: Construct the street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk for the site access streets and site frontage on 156th Ave. SE. Contribute the approximately $21,525 Transportation Mitigation fee to the City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince nwtraffex.com or IarryPnwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 5 Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx EXHIBIT E k - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT �, Qcityc�� ^ M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 5, 2014 TO_ Chris Barnes, Transportation Operations Manager FROM: Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations SUBJECT: Proposed Signal, Southeast 142nd Place at 1561h Avenue Southeast Issue: Should we install a signal at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne ofcmbayne@gmail.com? Recommendation: We should place this intersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a new signal. Background: We have analyzed the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, Interruption of Continuous Traffic for Eight Hours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes for Four Hours. Please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Table 4C-1 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Figures 4C-1 through 4C-4 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis. This intersection does not meet Warrant 7 for crash experience. Since 2009, there have been five recorded accidents on 156'b Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end accidents and the other two involved vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 155th Avenue Southeast. The other four accidents occurred at least two blocks away from the intersection in question. Please find attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents. h;\division.s\tran spor.tat\aperatio\ron\tom\tom9645a.doc Denis Law Mayor May 22, 2014 Roger Paulsen 6617 SE 5th Place Renton, WA 98059 EXHIBIT F City of . Community & Economic Development Department C.E."ChipNincent; Administrator RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat / LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Paulsen: As part of the review of your Request for Reconsideration, the City conducted an independent study of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142�d Place intersection. The study concluded that the 1561h Avenue SE/SE 1420a Place intersection warrants the installation of a traffic signal. The City has added and is prioritizing the installation of a traffic signal at this location to its Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Although it has been determined that the additional traffic anticipated through the development of the Enclave at Bridle Ridge preliminary plat would not significantly impact the existing traffic situation at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection, the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has decided to require the developer to pay their fair share for the installation of the traffic signal as an additional mitigation measure through SEPA. It is not anticipated that the installation of the traffic signal would occur as a part of this project, but would occur at a later date as additional funding becomes available. If you have any further questions on this matter, please contact Jill Ding, Project Manager, at (425) 430-6598 or via email at iding@rentonwa.gv. Sincerely, C.E, "Chip" Vincent CED Administrator Attachments cc: ERC Members Son nie Walton, City Clerk Justin Lagers, Applicant Sally Lou Niper, Owner G. Richard Ouimet, Owner Parties of Record Renton City Hall - 1055 South Grady Way . Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov i EXHIBIT G _ Denis Law Mayor City Of,.: - �? y Community & Economic Development- Department May 19, 2014. C.E "Chi p"Vin cent, Administrator Roger Paulsen th 6617 SE 5. Place Renton, WA 98059 Subject., RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Enclave at Bridle Ridge Prelimirnary.Plat / LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Paulsen: The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) held a meeting on.May 19., 2014 to consider r your Request for Reconsideration, submitted April 16, 2014. Please find attached to this letter a copy of the &-cision of your Request for Reconsideration signed by the members of the ERC including one. new SEPA mitigation measure, If you have any questions, please contact the project manager, Jill Ding; at (425) 430-65.98 or via email at jding@rentonwa.gov. Sincerely, Gregg: Zimmerman Environmental Review Committee, Chair Attachments cc: Bonnie Walton, City.Clerk Justin Lagers J Applicant Sally. Lou Nipert /Owner G. Richard Oulmet J Owner Parties of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Wash!ngton 98057 rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY Dr 1 AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 19, 2014 TO: Environmental Review Committee (ERC) FROM: Jill Ding, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Enclave at Bridle Ridge (LUA14-000241) SEPA Request for Reconsideration The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) reviewed the above mentioned preliminary plat application and issued a SEPA Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated (DNS -M) on March 31, 2014 with one mitigation measure: 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). =LL The DN& -M was published or .Aptly -2014 with an appeal perkod that ended 2014. A request for reconsideration of the SEPA determination was received'on'April 17, 2014 from Roger Paulsen. The request for reconsideration cites transportation impacts and public notice as the primary justifications for the filing of the request for reconsideration to the ERC. Below is a summary of the concerns cited: 1. The submitted Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) relied upon by the ERC for the issuance of the SEPA DNS -M was incomplete and did not include the AM and PM peak hour conditions per item #1 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis. Staff Comment: The originally submitted TIA included a PM peak hour Level of Service (LOS) analysis. After the receipt of the request for reconsideration, the applicant voluntarily conducted an additional traffic analysis and submitted an Addendum to the original Traffic Impact Analysis (dated April 29, 2014). The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 156 t Avenue SE/SE 5u' Place intersection and an AM and PM peak hour LOS analysis_ After conducting the additional analysis, the applicant's traffic engineer concluded that the proposed project would not result in a significant adverse impact on the existing surrounding street system. The City's Transportation Division has reviewed the originally submitted TIA and the Addendum and they concur that the proposed h:kcdlplanninglcurrent planning\projects114-000241,jilllerc reconsideration recommendation bpemo.dot.docx Environmental Review C ittee Page 2 of May 19, 2014 project would not have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding street system. The City's Transportation Division has conducted an independent study of the existing background traffic situation at the 156th Avenue 5E/5E 142"a Street intersection. Based on the City's study the existing conditions warrant the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection with or without the construction of the proposed subdivision. With the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, it is anticipated that the traffic conditions in the project vicinity would improve_ The installation of a traffic signal is not included on the City's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), therefore transportation impacts fees would not fund the installation of a signal. Due to the existing LOS designation F at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection and the fact that the required traffic impact fees would not fund a traffic signal at this intersection, staff recommends as a new SEPA mitigation measure that the proposed project be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips = 0.00687 x $500,000 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 2. The submitted TIA provided a Level of Service (LOS) Analysis for the 156th A�eriue SQSE 142"`t Street in it did not include a LDS ani ysis'for ffie" 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. Staff Comment: Item # 2 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis states that the "study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development". The proposed development would not result in a 5% increase in peak hour traffic at any intersection therefore no analysis of any intersection was required. However per the City's request an analysis was done for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection and was included in the submitted TIA, The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. According to the addendum the LOS for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection currently operates at a LOS C and would continue to operate at a LDS C with or without the proposed subdivision. The current delay for westbound traffic is 15.1 seconds, the delay is anticipated to increase to 15.8 seconds without the project and to 16.1 seconds with the project. Therefore, according to the submitted addendum, it is anticipated that the proposed subdivision would result in an additional delay of 0.3 seconds for vehicles at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. The report does not recommend any additional mitigation beyond the required traffic impact fees as the LOS at the h:lced%ptanninglcurrent planninglprojecu\14-000241 jflBerc reconsideration recommendation memo_dotdocx Envisonmerntat Review Cot—rttce Pane 3 of 4 May 19, 2014 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection will remain at C with or without the proposed subdivision. Therefore, staff concludes that no further traffic mitigation is warranted forthe subject project. 3. Public notice for the proposed -subdivision was misleading- People who didn't submit written comments during the 14 day Notice of Application comment period may think they can provide comments on the SEPA at the public hearing. Staff Comment: Public notice for the proposed subdivision was provided in accordance with the requirements outline in RVIC 4-8-090. The notice states that individuals have 14 days to comment on the proposed subdivision application and also mentions that additional comments may be provided at the public hearing. In addition, any party who requested to be made a party of record would receive the applicable SEPA determination, which provides a 14 day appeal period. The notice is not misleading as anyone receiving the notice would have been notified of the public comment period, the date of the hearing, and has the opportunity to become a party of record and receive additional information on the project. Recommendation: In light of the additional information provided in the independent traffic study conducted by the City, which states that a signal is warranted at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"" Street intersection, staff recommends that the ERC retain the - existing DSII M itvith on`e'new rriitigation measure as follows 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). 2. Due to the existing Level of Service (LOS) designation of F at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"a Place and the proposal to add additional trips to the existing situation, the proposed project shall be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156`h Avenue SE/SE 142"d Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips = 0.00687 x $500,000 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat_ Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. an June 6, 2014. 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 RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. h:lcedl 1 min&urrent planninglprajects114-000241_jilAerc reconsideration recommendation memo.dot.docx Environmental Review C itfee Page 4 of 4 May 19, 2014 Date of decision: May 19, 2014 signatures: Gregg Zi"mra ,Adminis#rator Mark Peterson, Administrator Public Works epartment Date Fire & Emergen y Services Date Terry Higashiyama, Administrator C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Community Services Department Date Department of Community & i Date Economic Development h:'tcedlpEanning%cnrrent planninglpro3ects114-000241 _j ilAerc reconsideration recommendadon,memo.dot.docx EXHIBIT H City of, tip} F .Y e NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (GED) -- Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The pfoposai would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and 8) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet, Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14.000250) Is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision- No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038 156" Ave SE 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 43.210.110, 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 Nan -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M). A 14 -day appeal period will followthe issuance of the DNS -M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 APPLicANT/Pmecr CONTACT PERSON: Justin Lagers / PNW Holdings, LLC/ 9675 SE 360'Street Suite 105, Memer Islami, WA 98040 / EML: justln@americanclassichomes.com Permfts/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Review Other Permits which may be required: Construction, Building, Fire Requested Studies: Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Traffic Study Location where appikation may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)— Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearina is tentatively scheduled for April 22, 2014 before the Renton Nearing Examiner in Renton Councll Chambers at 10:00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Halt located at 1055 South Grady Way. 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.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-000241, EGF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: City/Statej2ip: City Of , CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW-. Zoning/Land Use: The subject site is designated Residential Low Density (COMP-RLD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land We Map and R4 on the City's Zoning Map. . Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-110 Residential Development and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: 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. ■ Project construction shall be required to comply with the submitted geotechafcol report. ■ Project construction shall be required to comply with the submitted troic study. Comments an the above application must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, CED — Planning Division, 1054 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM an March 24, 2014. This matter Is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on April 22, 2014, at 10:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1OS5 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested In attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-6576. 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 Exam€ner. 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 wilt be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tei: (425) 430-6598; Eml: idirleCirentonwa.�nw PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION if you would like to be made a party of record to receive further Information on this proposed project, complete this farm and return to: City of Renton, CEO — Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, Name/File No.: The Enclave at Bridle R€dge/LUA14.000241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: City/State/Zip: TELEPHONE NO.: CITY OF R.ENTON Receipt N2 2125 City Clerk Division + .4 + 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 ( ANO 425-430-6510 Date (.- l 1 Li ❑ Cash ❑ Copy Fee ❑ Notary Service Yheck No. `"lH5VAppeal Fee ❑ Description: ,: ';it'. c L U i -C� i, CL� '�L- Funds Received From: Name ll� .J Address City/Zip, Amount City Staff Signature June 9, 2014 NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED BY: Roger A. Paulsen RE: Environmental Review Determination; Enclave at Bridal Ridge; LUA14-000241, ECF, PP To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's Determination as referenced has been filed with the City Clerk. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Hearing Examiner in a hearing scheduled for 5:00 a.m., Tuesday, June 24, 2014. The hearing will take place in the 7th Floor Council Chambers of Renton City Hall. The address is 1055 S. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Enclosed is copy of the appeal filing. Also enclosed is copy of Renton Municipal code section 4-8-110.E. regarding appeals of Environmental Review decisions or recommendations. For additional information or assistance, please feel free to contact me at 425 430-6502. Sincerely, Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Enclosures (2) cc: Applicant Justin Lagers Owners Sally Lou Nipert and G. Richard Oulmet Parties of Record Hearing Examiner Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Gregg Zimmerman, PW Administrator Easy Peel® Labels • Bend along line to 1 A�(i® 5160 Ilse Avery Template 51600 Ifled Paper �� expose Pop -Up Edge*'" 1 Justin Lagers, PNW Holdings LLC 9675 SE 36th 5t, 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Maher Joudi D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers 10604 NE 38th PI, 232 Kirkland, WA 98033 Wade Willoughby 6512 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 Jason Paulson 31 Mazama Pines Ln Mazama, WA 98333 Richard Ouimet 2923 Maltby Rd Bothell, WA 98012 Sally Nipert 14004 156th Ave SE Renton, WA 98059 Roger Paulson 6617 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 Eloise Stachowiak 6614 SE 5th P1 Denton, WA 98059 M.A. Huniu 6608 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 DAVID MICHALSKI 6525 SE 5TH PI RENTON, WA 98059 Gwendolyn High PO Box 2936 Renton, WA 98056 Nauettes fadles h paler ; A Repliez A la hachure afin de ; www avery cm 111 charaement Utillsez le gabarit AVERY® 51600 Sens de r ��ler le rebord Po p' iJ *M ' 1 -800 -GO -AVERY ' 14ppe-a r Denis Law city 01 Y Mayor `1 ��} rj r + June 9, 2014 City Clerk - Bonnie I. Walton Mr. Roger A. Paulsen 6617 SE 5th Place Renton, WA 98059 Re: Enclave at Bridal Ridge; LUA-14-0241, ECF, PP Dear Mr. Paulsen: Regarding the referenced land use application, the City Environmental Review Committee issued a response to your April 16th Request for Reconsideration on May 19, 2014. On Friday, June 5`h, you personally filed the following in this office: 1) A letter dated June 5, 2014, withdrawing the pending appeal dated April 16th that was being held pending the outcome of the Response to Request for Reconsideration. Your check #9443 for the appeal fee was returned to you. 2) A letter with attachments dated June 5, 2014, serving as anew Request for Reconsideration of the Environmental Determination. 3) A letter with attachments dated June 5, 2014, serving as a new Appeal document, accompanied by your check #9490 for the $250 appeal fee. After review it has been determined that there is no option or availability at this time for another request for reconsideration of this matter. The Response to the Request for Reconsideration dated May 191h clearly sets forth the option for appeal, however there is no option at this point for request for reconsideration. Therefore it is necessary that the Request for Reconsideration filing dated June 5, 2014, be considered invalid and will be marked void. The appeal process, however, will now go forward based on the appeal document you submitted June 5, 2014. The receipt forthe appeal fee is enclosed. Our appeal notification will be coming to you by separate letter soon. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Bonnie Walton City Clerk Cc: Gregg Zimmerman, ERC Committee Chair Jennifer Henning, Planning Director 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425) 430-6510 / Fax (425) 430-6516 • rentonwa.gov June 5, 2014 C , of Renton Att ' City Clerk 1055. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 / ktl)� •ca CITY OF RENTON JUN 05 2014 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE trl Iae,� oa a REQUES OR RECONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PU;UA NT TO CITY OF RENTON CODE SECTION 4.8.110(E)(2) I'o All Whom It \Reco , Pursuant to City unicipal Code Section 4.8.110(E)(2), please accept this letter as a formal Request fation of the Environmental (SEPI)Threshold Determination issued by the City's Enveview Committee for project # LUA14-000241, ECF, PP, dated May 19, 2014. As a party of record for this prof ct, this Request for Reconsideration is filed with the intent of utilizing all available administrative emedies to see that the adverse environmental impacts of this project are adequately understood,cure d, and mitigated by the City and/or applicant -- all in the spirit of the City of Renton's adop d codes, policies and procedures. Thank you for taking the time to consider s request, and for your thoughtful attention to the issues I believe warrant additional study and'tigation in order to adequately protect the public safety, health and interests of the citizens of o community_ As a long-standing member of this community, I b) th City of Renton. Unfortunately, my engagement in thN missteps by the City in processing this application. In we hold so dear in this country is respected, I submit 1 Standins� accept and embrace growth and change in the process reveals what i believe to be serious Skie spirit of ensuring that the public process uest for Reconsideration. As an adjacent landowner, and as a party of record who properl submitted written comments on the Enclave at Bridle Ridge application (Exhibit A) as well as a pr vious Request for Reconsideration of the Environmental Determination for this proj\(Exhibit B), and as a City of Renton resident who has only one point of access to the City's trannetwork via the SE 5th Place/ 156" AVE SE intersection, my public health, safety and we -risk should the City not carefully consider this Request for Reconsideration and adopt ry actions I am requesting. To allow additional unmitigated traffic from this projefull understanding of the project's impacts as is required under SEPA, has the potential to adversely ' pact both my personal safety interests, as well as my private property interests as they relate t the value of my property at the time of future re -sale. For these and other reasons, I believe I hay, the required standing to bring this Request for Reconsideration. Identification of Concerns for Which Reconsideration is Requested The issue for which I request your reconsideration. relates to the transportation impacts of the proposed project. Concern: Transportation The proposed access to the Enclave at Bridle Ridge project site is via a new looped internal public street with two access points off of 156`h Avenue SE, just north of the 1561i Ave SE and 142"d Place intersection (Preliminary Plat Plan, Exhibit C). In response to concerns raised in my earlier Request for Reconsideration (dated April 16") the applicant commissioned an additional Traffic Study on April 22°1, and submitted an Addendum (Attachment D) to the original Traffic Impact Analysis. The Addendum, dated April 29, 2014, concluded that the two proposed site access streets will operate at an acceptable level of service (C) for future conditions. Subsequent to the April 22n6 Traffic Study and the April 29' Addendum, the City added to its Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) the installation of a traffic signal at the 156`h Ave SE and 142r1 Place intersection. Reference the May 51h letter from Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations (attachment E), and the May 22nd letter from Mr. C.E. Vincent, CED Administrator (Attachment F). On May 19"', the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) met to consider my April 16`' Request for Reconsideration, and retained its threshold Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated, with one additional mitigation measure: Due to the eacisting Level of �Serrrice (LOS) designation of F at the 15e -Ave. SE / SE 1421 PL Sic. intersection /and the proposal to add additional trips to the existing situation, the proposed project shall be responsible for pa• y�ing their fair share of the cost of a new Signal to be installed at the 15G'h Ave. SE / SE 14Z' PL intersection. The ERC Meeting Summary (attachment G) includes on page 2, the following statement: iY�ith the installation of a traffic si,gnal at this intersection, it is anticipated that the traffic conditions in the project tt ni!y would improve. The first reason for this Request for Reconsideration is simply that the record lacks any analysis of the impact of the proposed traffic signal upon the level of service at the two proposed streets associated with this plat, and the adjacent intersections of concern, including the intersection at 156th Ave. SE / SE 5th Pl., and the intersection of 1541" Ave. SE / SE 142nd PL.. The City was aware of the plan to install the new traffic signal, but failed to consider its impact on the proposed development when it issued its threshold Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated on May 19th. It is very likely, based upon the longer queue times associated with a signalized intersection, that the level of service associated with ingress and egress at the two new access streets, as well as at adjacent existing streets such as SE 5`h Place, will actually prove worse than has been modeled to -date for an un -signalized intersection. While the Level of Service of the 156`' Ave. SE / SE 142"' Pl. intersection may end up "improved" as a result of the new signal, the record lacks any data or anal sis for understanding the potential adverse i=acts associated with the new signal as it relates to the new 120ints of ingtess and egKess. 2 Until such an analysis is completed and made available for public review as part of a public SEPA review process, it is impossible to know whether the project will result in a traffic condition that meets level of service or adequate provision standards accessary to allow for plat approval by the City. Requested Outcomes Based upon each and all of the above concerns, and as part of this Request for Reconsideration, I ask that the body hearing this Request take the following actions: Withdraw the May 19`h, 2014 Threshold Determination for this project, and require that the applicant prepare a proper Traffic Impact Analy=sis (TIA), sufficient to adequately inform the City and public's understanding of the likely Level of Service impacts of the proposed new signal on the two new access streets, as well as on SE 5°' Place. Once an adequate and proper 'Traffic Impact Analysis conforming to the City's requirements is completed, reconsider the SEPA 'Threshold Determination for this project. Thank you again for providing this opportunity to request reconsideration of the Environmental Review Committee's Threshold Determination.. Should the body charged with reviewing this request decline reconsideration, it is my intent to also pursue the formal appeal remedies established by City Code to ensure that the record shows I have pursued all of my lawful administrative remedies. Respectfully Submitted, Paulsen 6617 SE 51h Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 List of Exhibits: List of Exhibits: Exhibit A — R. Paulsen Comment Letter Exhibit B — Request for Reconsideration (April 16th) Exhibit C — Preliminary flat Plan Exhibit D — Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum Exhibit E — Ronald Mar Letter Exhibit F — C.E. Vincent Letter Exhibit G — ERC Meeting Summary EXHIBIT A March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED — Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mail to Avoid Delay @ Jdingir7rentonwa.,-ov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project #LUA]4-000241, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22nd. I also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5`h Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5`h Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 156`x' Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "roiling stop" situation present at the 142nd intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156th and 142nd that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself; the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156`h north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress tum from SE 51h Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139`h PI.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142"d, and then only IF the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. EXHIBIT A The addition of ANY new trips to SE 156th between SE 5th Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this vroiect to be implemented without adequate mitigation has significant potential to threaten public health, safety and welfare for the existing residents who access 156th from SE 5th Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156th/ 142"d intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156th during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156th/ 142nd intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156th/ 142nd intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattem of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 5th Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accommodate future waste water access to the new sewer lines being installed as part of this project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. 2 EXHIBIT A Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot 44, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot #4. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 24th deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22nd public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination prior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22"d, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22"d to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. EXHIBIT A If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at RogerAPaulsenges.com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application 4 EXHIBIT B April 16, 2014 City of Renton Attn: City Clerk Renton City Hall 105 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO CITY OF RENTON CODE SECTION 4.8.110(E)(2) To All Whom It May Concern, Pursuant to City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4.8.110(E)(2), please accept this letter as a formal Request for Reconsideration of the Environmental (SEPA) 'Threshold Determination issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee for project # LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. As a party of record for this project, this Request for Reconsideration is filed with the intent of utilizing all available administrative remedies to see that the adverse environmental impacts of this project are adequately understood, documented, and mitigated by the City and/or applicant -- all in the spirit of the City of Renton's adopted codes, policies and procedures_ As an ordinary citizen, I have found the City of Renton's code section 4.8.110 on appeals to offer very little practical guidance or direction with respect to how the Request for Reconsideration process works, or even who considers the request. While I encourage you to dedicate time to improving this information for the benefit of future citizens, the time provided for me to become educated, and file this request in a timely manner, leaves me with no option other than to simply offer the best I can. To that end, I beg your patience and understanding if the format of this Request is not in-line with what you may typically receive. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request, and for your thoughtful attention to the issues I believe warrant additional study and mitigation in order to adequately protect the public safely, health and interests of the citizens of our community. As a long-standing member of this community, I both accept and embrace growth and change in the City of Renton. Unfortunately, my engagement in this process reveals what I believe to be serious missteps by the City in processing this application. In the spirit of ensuring that the public process we hold so dear in this country is respected, I submit this Request for Reconsideration_ Standing As an adjacent landowner, and as a party of record who properly submitted written comments regarding the concerns identified in this Request for Reconsideration (Exhibit A), and as a City of Renton resident who has only one point of access to the City's transportation network via the SE 5`h Place/ 156"' AVE SE intersection, my public health, safety and welfare are at -risk should the City not carefully consider this Request for Reconsideration and adopt the necessary actions I am requesting. To allow additional unmitigated traffic from this project, absent a full understanding of the project's impacts as required under SEPA, has the potential to adversely= impact both my personal safety interests, as well as my private property interests as they relate to the value of my, property at the time of future re -sale. For these and other reasons, I believe that I have the required standing to bring this Request for Reconsideration Identification of Concerns for Which Reconsideration is Re uested The issues for which I request your reconsideration relate to the transportation impacts of the proposed project, and to the public comment notice and process associated with the Threshold Determination. Concern #1. Transportation After review of the Environmental Review Committee Report for this project dated March 31, 2014, (Exhibit D) it is clear that the City's Environmental Review Committee made an error in basing their Determination upon the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Traffex (Exhibit B, dated December 27, 2013). The Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon for this Determination fails to comply with the City's own policy for such analyses. Specifically, this analysis fails to study the AM Peak traffic condition in addition to the PM Peak traffic condition associated with the project, In the TIA submitted by the applicant, and relied upon by the ERC, the author states as follows: "The scope of this analysis is based upon the preliminary plat site plan and the City of Denton Polio! Guidelines for Tragic Impact Analysis for New Development". By relying upon this report, the City failed to adequately inform itself with the full range of potential adverse env=ironmental impacts associated with the transportation demands of this project, as the report is clearly not in compliance with the City's Policy Guidelines For Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development, attached as Exhibit C to this request. Specifically, the City's policy states clearly that for a project such as this, where A.M. or P.M. Peak Hour Trip contributions are X20, a complete 'Eraffic Impact Analysis shall be completed, and said analysis shall present and consider both the A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour conditions, among other analysis. See excerpt below: Site Generated Traffic Volumes. The analysis should present a tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed. It is a matter of fact that the Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon by the Cita of Renton ERC did not provide the minimum information and analysis required by the City of Renton's own policy, and therefore the ERC has erred in issuing their Determination absent this information, and their Determination should be found to be arbitrary and capricious, in addition to in error. Concern #2. Transportation My second concern also relates to transportation, and the ERC's apparent misunderstanding of the scope of the Traffic Impact Analysis that was received by the City. On page #7 of their March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report (Exhibit D), the Committee states: The Traffic Impact . l na lsis (Exhihil 10) also includes a Level of Service LOS) rev' 2v of '1be .rurroun&ing intersections in the it me&ate vicinity... " This report goes on to conclude that: the srrrrosrnding intersections nvidd continue to operate at an acceptable Level o f Service (LOS) will) the exception of'the southbound approach to the 150 Avenue SE/ SE 942" Place intersection. " Both of these statements appear to assume that the analysis completed by the applicant actually looked at existing intersections other than the 156`"/ 142nd Place intersection. They did not. In fact, the 156`" Ave SE/ 142"' intersection is the ONLY existing intersection that was analyzed by the applicant. Despite public comment informing city staff and the ERC of concerns at the closest adjacent existing intersection to the proposed project (SE 5"' Place), the ERC did not require additional information from the applicant to inform an understanding of the impacts at this intersection_ Additionally, by only analyzing the P.M. Peak I lour (just 2 hrs. 45 min on December 17'h), the analysis completely failed to understand or analyze the impacts of A.M. Peak Hour traffic conditions on 156`" at SE 5t" Place or other impacted intersections to the north. The ERC's Threshold Determination is not supported by fact, as it clearly did not include an analysis of additional existing intersections, despite the ERC concluding that it did. Because of this, the ERC erred when they based their Threshold Determination upon the TIA. Concern #3 Transportation Ironically, in light of Concerns #1 and #2 above, when one digs deeper into the March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report, we find that City of Renton staff are not only aware of potential adverse impacts of the proposed project as they relate to access from the project to 156`", but they go so far as to inform the applicant that they may ".—impose left tarn restrictions at that interveclion. "(See Exhibit D, Page 10 of 11, Transportation Item #3). This already contemplated "remedy" identified by City of Renton staff not only acknowledges that there is a serious Level of Service issue that is likely to be exacerbated by this project given the lack of available capacity at the 1561"/ 142nd intersection, but also suggests that the City's "remedy",will force this traffic to the right, or north, onto 156", further degrading the Level of Service at the 156`h/ SE 5'h PL intersection, and other intersections to the north along 156`h Ave. SE. Again, since no analysis was completed to inform an understanding of potential adverse traffic impacts north of the proposed project on 156`h, the ERC's `I"hreshold Determination could only have been based upon incomplete information. This is an error on the part of the ERC, and should be corrected as part of this Request for Reconsideration. Concerts #4 Transportation This concern relates specifically to how the ERC proposes to mitigate the impacts that zvere identified by the study. In their Threshold Determination, the ERC mitigates the identified transportation impacts by adopting, by reference, the recommendations identified by the applicant's consultant in the Traffic Impact Analysis. VThen one looks closer, we find that, other than otherwise required street frontage improvements; the only mitigation recommended is the payment of an otherwise required Traffic Midgation Fee that is based upon the number of lots in the proposed project. In the ERC's March 31, 2014 Report (Page 7 of 11) they conclude as follows: 2t is not anticipated that the proposed project si,gnificantly adverseb- impact (sic) the City of Renton's street system subject to the payment of code required impact fees and the construction of code requirrd frontage improvements. " Unfortunately, nowhere is a nexus established between the impacts identified in the TIA and the proposed mitigation. A review of the City's 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program reveals that the deficiencies of the 156`h/ 142"`' intersection are not addressed in any form. For this reason, the ERC has erred in simply applying the mitigations recommended by the applicant, as they fail to satisfy the requirements under State Law (RCW 58.17 & the Growth Management Act) that capacity for additional traffic be available at the time of project approval. In order for this to be true, there must be an established nexus between the fees that will be paid and the deficient traffic conditions at the 156"/ 142"d or other intersections where a proper analysis may indicate a Level of Service deficiencv. Concern #5 Transportation Also related to the above concerns (ie:, the transportation impacts of the proposed project) I have received new information in response to a Public Records Request which I filed to better understand the City's internal review process as it relates to transportation concurrency, a requirement under State law and City of Renton ordinances. As you can see in the e-mail below, dated April 15, 2014 from Steve Lee, Dev. Engineering Manager, it is noted that the City's Transportation Division is `curntly assessing any improvements are warranted (if any)... ". This confirms that work is on-going at this time (April 15`h) to both evaluate and mitigate the proposed project. 4 This e-mail serves to document vet again that the ERC was not fully informed with respect to the likely or probable adverse environmental impacts and possible mitigations associated with this project. This constitutes an error on the part of the ERC, as well as the City's development review process, and further validates the merits of this Request for Reconsideration. Sandi Weir From: Steve tee Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 11:14 AM To: CitKlerk Records cc Jan Iiiian; Jill I3inq Neil R. Walls; Jennifer T. Fh-nning; RohAni Nair stawect RE: New Public records Request - PRR-I4-08S [Paulsen) Ams TranspoConcPol icy14t1415.pdf See attached files that are related documentation on the City protest frarcdhcurtency, standards and process relating to Renton Code Section 4-6-070. f believe this is the information Mr. Paulsen is seeking. The information, as extracted from the approved City Comprehensive Pian, provides Mr. Pautsen how the City administers a multi modal test. Renton Code Section 4-6-070 rotes that transportation conturrenty can be a combination of improvements or strategies in place at the time of building permit issuance., or within a reasonable amount of time after building issuance, per 46-070 AA, or a financial commitment is placed. A financial commitment can be the traffic mitigation fees paid for the new development and is generally used by the City for improvements throughout the City. Our Transportation C4vlsion is the technical review authority and is currently as5esSing any improvements are warranted (if any) lora. 5675, 12-3-20121. The Transportation Division has currently provided some direction as to an initial response with tfw statement, "Within the City of Renton, the steep topography between Maple Malley Highway and the upper plateau #and an to Cemetery Road) makes it in feasible to provide additional access, Widening 1-405 (which the State is pursuing) to provide more traffic capacity could attract some traffic now using 156 th SE to access Cemetery Road_" Thanks, -Steve Lee, PE, NMS, CESCL City of Renton Dev, Engineering Manager 425.430.7299 steg(4? realtyn►va.ttov Concern #6 Public Process and Notice As raised in my initial comment letter (Exhibit A), I remain concerned that the City's notice with respect to the opportunity for public comment on issues of concern, such as the transportation concerns I have raised herein, misrepresented the actual opportunities for public engagement in the environmental (SEPA) review of this project. In short, the notice implies that a citizen having concern, who is not able to provide written comment prior to the March 24, 2014 deadline, will have the opportunity to provide comment at the Public Hearing on April 22"'. Nowhere in the notice to the public is it explained that by waiting until April 22"", the opportunity to provide input to inform the SEPA review and determination, will have passed. (see 1':xhibit E "Notice of Application...") As a result, the record now shows that only two public comment letters were received prior to the Threshold Determination being issued. I believe that you will find that many more people will attend the Public Hearing on April 22nd, and they will do so raising issues that should have been considered as part of the SEPA determination for this project. I fully understand the efficiency that the City is attempting to achieve by combining their notice and comment periods, but I urge you to review these notices carefully to understand the concern I am attempting, once again, to raise here. Requested Outcomes Based upon each and all of the above concerns, and as part of this Request for Reconsideration, I ask that the body hearing this Request take the following actions: Withdraw the Threshold Determination for this project and require that the applicant work with city staff to prepare a proper Traffic Impact Analysis for this project. This analysis should be sufficient to adequately inform the City and public's understanding of the likely impacts of this project during both the A -M. and P.M. Peak I -lour, including at the immediately adjacent intersection of SE 5th Place and 156`h Ave_ SE, and other intersections likely to be impacted further north on 156" i Further, given the misrepresentation of the public comment opportunity as it relates to informing the City's SEPA review process, I request that, once an adequate and proper Traffic Impact Analysis conforming to the City's requirements is completed, the Notice of Application and SEPA comment periods be re --started to allow the City of Renton's public an opportunity to participate in the development review process for this project. Thank you again for providing this opportunity to request reconsideration of the Environmental Review Committee's Threshold Determination for this project. Should the body charged with reviewing this request decline reconsideration, it is my intent to also pursue the formal appeal remedies established by City Code to ensure that the record shows I have pursued all of my lawful administrative remedies. Respectfully Submitted, Roger A Paulsen 6617 SE 5th Place Renton, %VA 98059 425-228-1589 6 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A — SF.PA Determination Comment Letter Exhibit B — Traffic Impact Analysis Exhibit C — Polio Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development Exhibit D Environmental Review Committee Report Exhibit E — Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance-.NEtigated 7 EXHIBIT C THE ENCLAVE AT BROLZ RIDGE xxx-xxxx z 0 A t -40 f .41000-10-0, 1 X11 I I HIM I 111AMI lilt I a. NIL- EXHIBIT D THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE ADDENDUM TO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by IVURTHWEST TRA FF/G' EXPE'R TS 11410 NE 124th St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 April 29, 2014 rraffZZY April 29, 2014 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 lVamriYWSBT 7"RArF c ExpERT14 11410 NE:124th St. #590 KjNagd, WA 98834 Phone, 425.522.118 Faux:. 425.522.4311 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Addendum to the Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: We are pleased to present this addendum to traffic impact analysis (TIA) report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located at 14038 156th Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The purpose of the addendum is to provide information in response to questions concerning the original TIA and requests for additional analysis. The additional information includes traffic counts and an analysis at the SE 5 h Pl/156th Ave. SE intersection and also traffic counts and analysis of all study intersection in the AM peak hour as well as the PM peak hour. The trip generation, trip distribution, background traffic growth and other data and assumptions are unchanged from the original TIA unless otherwise noted. The analysis is summarized as follows: • No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes due to the proposed project. • Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. • The 142" d PI. SEISE 156th intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. AM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS AM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 51h PI/156th Ave SE and 142nd PI. SE/SE 156th intersection on Tuesday 4/22/2014 from 7 to 9 AM. The peak hour occurred from 7:15 to 8:15 AM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. Figure 1 shows the AM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. No Page 9 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge 7�y 1 i queues were observed to back up from the 142nd PI. SEISE 156th intersection to SE 5th PI. in the AM peak hour. The longest queue observed was 9 vehicles. Table 1 shows the calculated level of service at the study intersections for existing conditions and future conditions with and without the project. The level of service calculations are attached in the technical appendix. TABLE 1 AM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY INTERSECTION EXISTING 2018 WITHOUT 2015 WITH NB 2013 PROJECT PROJECT SE 5 PI/ 156th Ave SE WB (C 15.1) WB (C 15.8) WB (C 16.1) North Site Access / 1561h Ave. SE. NA NA WB (C 16.4) South Site Access / 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (C 17.0) SE 142n PI 1 156th Ave SE Overall (F 53.7) Overall (F 71.4) Overall (F 72.5) Number shown is the average delay in seconds per vehicle which defines the LOS per the Transportation Research Board.Highway Capacity Manual For a side street, stop controlled intersection (i.e. SE 5`h Pl.11561h Ave SE) LOS is the average vehicle delay for the worst movement (the side street approach) For an all -way stop controlled intersection (SE 142nd/156th Ave. SE) the LOS is the average vehicle delay for all movements (X XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 2 The Enclave at Bridle Ride T PM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS PM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 5th PI/156"' Ave SE and 142nd PI. SEISE 156th intersection on Tuesday 4/22/2014 from 4 to 6 PM. The peak hour occurred from 4.15 to 5:15 PM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. 'Figure 2 shows the PM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. There were four queues observed that backed up from the 142nd Pl. SEISE 156th intersection to SE 5th Pl. in the 4 to 6 PM time period. Left turns out of SE 5th PI. were blocked for a total cumulative time of 9 minutes and 21 seconds. Right turns out of SE 5th PI. were unproblematic. Table 2 shows the calculated levet of service for existing conditions and future conditions with and without the project. The level of service calculations are attached in the technical appendix. TABLE 2 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2015 WITH INTERSECTION 2013 PROJECT PROJECT SE 5 PI/ 156th Ave SE WB (C 15.4) WB (C 16.3) WB (C 16.6) North Site Access / NA NA WB (C 15.2) 156th Ave. SE. South Site Access ! 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 13.3) 142n PI / Overall F 56.4 { ) Overall F 89.9 ( ) Overall F 92.3) ) ( 156th Ave SE (X XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 3 The Enclave at Bridle Ride FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. Tables 1 and 2 show the calculated LOS for future with project volumes at the study intersections. The study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS of for future conditions except for the 156th Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. intersection. That intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. Figures 1 and 2 shows the number and percentage of project generated trips passing through each of the study intersections. The percentage of project trips range from a high of 2.23% at the north site access intersection to a low of 0.65 % at the 142nd PI. SE/1561h Ave SE intersection. Per the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development the study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development. No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes. Page 4 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge 7ff SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The additional information collected for this addendum and resulting analysis supports the conclusions and recommendations of the original TIA. We recommend that The Enclave at Bridle Ridge be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: Construct the street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk for the site access streets and site frontage on 156'" Ave. 5E. Contribute the approximately $21,525 Transportation Mitigation fee to the City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince@nwtraffex.com or lar nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 5 ..r - C- - It Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx EXHIBIT E PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 111111111111110 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 5, 2014 TO: Chris Barnes, Transportation Operations Manager FROM: Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations SUBJECT: Proposed Signal, Southeast 142nd Place at 1561h Avenue Southeast Issue: Should we install a signal at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 155th Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne of cmbayne@gmail.com? Recommendation: We should place this intersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a new signal. Background - We have analyzed the intersection of Southeast 142"d Place and 155th Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, Interruption of Continuous Traffic for Eight Hours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes for Four Flours. Please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Table 4C-1 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Figures 4C-1 through 4C-4 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis. This intersection does not meet Warrant 7 for crash experience. Since 2009, there have been five recorded accidents on 156th Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end accidents and the other two involved vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast. The other four accidents occurred at least two blocks away from the intersection in question. Please find attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents. h:\divis-ion.s\transpor.tat\operatio\ron\tom\tom9645a.doc EXHIBIT F Denis Law r. f. Mayor City ow.IL_.. ,-.,mom . 00000 i Community & Economic Development Department May 22, 2014 C.E_."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Roger Paulsen 6617 SE 5th Place Renton, WA 98059 RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat / LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Paulsen: As part of the review of your Request for Reconsideration, the City conducted an independent study of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection. The study concluded that the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"" Place intersection warrants the installation of a traffic signal. The City has added and is prioritizing the installation of a traffic signal at this location to its Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Although it has been determined that the additional traffic anticipated through the development of the Enclave at Bridle Ridge preliminary plat would not significantly impact the existing traffic situation at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"d Place intersection, the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has decided to require the developer to. pay their fair share for the installation of the traffic signal as an additional mitigation measure through SEPA. It is not anticipated that the installation of the traffic signal would occur as a part of this project, but would occur at a later date as additional funding becomes available. If you have any further questions on this matter, please contact Jill Ding, Project Manager, at . (425) 430-6598 or via email at jding@rentonwa.gov. Sincerely, C.E. "Chip" Vincent CED Administrator Attachments cc: ERC Members Bonnie Watton, City Clerk Justin Lagers, Applicant Sady Lou Niper, owner G, Richard Dunnet, Owner Parties of Record Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way . Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov EXHIBIT G Denis Mayorr City of a a + Community & Economic Development Department May 19, 2014 C.E.."Chip" Vincent, Administrator Roger Paulsen .6617 SE 5th Place Renton, WA 98059 Subject. RESPONSE -TO REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary.Plat / LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Paulsen: The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) held a -meeting on May 19, 2014 to consider your Request for Reconsideration, submitted April 16, 2014,. Please find attached to this letter a copy of the decision of your Request for Reconsideration signed by the members of the ERC including one.new SEPA mitigation measure. If you have any questions, please contact the project manager, Jill Ding; at (425).434-6598 or via. email at jding@rentonwa.goV. . Sincer-ely, Gregg Zimmerman Environmental Review Committee, Chair Attachments cc: 9ohnie Walton; City Clerk. Sustin Lagers/ Applicant Sally Lou Nipert /Owner G. Richard Ouimet / Owner Parties of Record Renton City Hall + 1055 South Grady Way Renton,Washington 98057. rentonwa:gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY cit of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M ID R A N D U M DATE: May 19, 2014 TO: Environmental Review Committee (ERC) FROM: Jill Ding, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Enclave at Bridle Ridge (LUA14-000241) SEPA Request for Reconsideration The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) reviewed the above mentioned preliminary plat application and issued a SEPA Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated (DNS -M) on March 31, 2014 with one mitigation measure: 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). The DW M was frublished orrApri+,42.014 with an appeal period that ended on 2014. A request for reconsideration of the SEPA determination was received'on'Aprii 17, - 2014 from Roger Paulsen. The request for reconsideration cites transportation impacts and public notice as the primary justifications for the filing of the request for reconsideration to the ERC. Below is a summary of the concerns cited: 1. The submitted Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) relied upon by the ERC for the issuance of the SEPA DNS -M was incomplete and did not include the AM and PM peak hour conditions per item #1 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis. Staff Comment: The originally submitted TEA included a PM peak hour Level of Service (LOS) analysis. After the receipt of the request for reconsideration, the applicant voluntarily conducted an additional traffic analysis and submitted an Addendum to the original Traffic Impact Analysis (dated April 29, 2014). The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 15e Avenue SE/SE 5n' Place intersection and an AM and PM peak hour LOS analysis_ After conducting the additional analysis, the applicant's traffic engineer concluded that the proposed project would not result in a significant adverse impact on the existing surrounding street system. The City's Transportation Division has reviewed the originally submitted TIA and the Addendum and they concur that the proposed h:kcdlplanninglcurrent plammglprojects114-000241 ji111erc reconsideration recammwdation memo.dotdoex Environmental Review Co tee Page 2 of 4 May 19, 2014 project would not have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding street system. The City's Transportation Division has conducted an independent study of the existing background traffic situation at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"d Street intersection. Based on the City's study the existing conditions warrant the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection with or without the construction of the proposed subdivision. With the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, it is anticipated that the traffic conditions in the project vicinity would improve- The installation of a traffic signal is not included on the City's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), therefore transportation impacts fees would not fund the installation of a signal. Due to the existing LOS designation F at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection and the fact that the required traffic impact fees would not fund a traffic signal at this intersection, staff recommends as a new SEPA mitigation measure that the proposed project be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,31.0 Total PM peak hour trips = 0.00687 x $500,000 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 2. The submitted TIA provided a Level of Service (LOS) Analysis for the 156th Avenue SE SE I42 5 hreet intersectiori; itd`riot include a LOS analysis fdr fhe"- 156 Avenue SE SE 5 Place intersection. - Staff Comment: Item # 2 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis states that the "study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development"_ The proposed development would not result in a 5% increase in peak hour traffic at any intersection therefore no analysis of any intersection was required. However per the City's request an analysis was done for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection and was included in the submitted TIA. The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 156E' Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. According to the addendum the LOS for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection currently operates at a LOS C and would continue to operate at a LOS C with or without the proposed subdivision. The current delay for westbound traffic is 15.1 seconds, the delay is anticipated to increase to 15.8 seconds without the project and to 16.1 seconds with the project. Therefore, according to the submitted addendum, it is anticipated that the proposed subdivision would result in an additional delay of 0.3 seconds for vehicles at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. The report does not recommend any additional mitigation beyond the required traffic impact fees as the LOS at the h.lcedlplanninglcmmt planninglproj "\ 14-000241.j iillerc reconsideration recommendation memo. dotdocx Environmental Review Coy ittee Page 3 of 4 May 19, 2014 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection will remain at C with or without the proposed subdivision. Therefore, staff concludes that no further traffic mitigation is warranted for the subject project. 3. Public notice for the proposed subdivision was misleading. People who didn't submit written comments during the 14 day Notice of Application comment period may think they can provide comments on the SEPA at the public hearing. Staff Comment: Public notice for the proposed subdivision was provided in accordance with the requirements outline in RMC 4-8-090. The notice states that individuals have 14 days to comment on the proposed subdivision application and also mentions that additional comments may be provided at the public bearing. In addition, any party who requested to be made a party of record would receive the applicable SEPA determination, which provides a 14 day appeal period. The notice is not misleading as anyone receiving the notice would have been notified of the public comment period, the date of the hearing, and has the opportunity to become a party of record and receive additional information on the project. Recommendation: in light of the additional information provided in the independent traffic study conducted by the City, which states that a signal is warranted at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection, staff recommends that the ERC retain the - existing DSU M*with one new mitigation measure'as follows:. . 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2414). 2. Due to. -the existing Level of Service (LOS) designation of F at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place and the proposal to add additional trips to the existing situation, the proposed project shall be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156th Avenue SE/SF 142nd Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips = 0.00687 x $500,000 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on June 6, 2014. 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 RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Menton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. h:lcedlplw iag\currentplamung1projects114-000241.jilElerc reconsideration recommendation memo-dot.docx Environmental Review Co ttee Page 4 of 4 -May 19, 2©14 Date of decision: May 19, 2014 signatures: 4 ] E! Gregg Ziinm r a , Administrator __-- Mark Peterson, Administrator Pulalic Works epartment Date Fire & Emerges y Services Date Terry Higashiyarna, Administrator C.E. -Chip" Vincent, Administrator Community Services Department Date Department of Community & Date Economic Development h:lcedlplannin&urrent planeing1projects114-000241.jii1lerc reconsideration recommendation.rnemo.dot.do" CITY OF- RENTON June 5, 2014 JUN Of 2014 City of Renton RECEIVED Atte: City Clerk CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: Enclave at Bridle Ridge - Project LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Dear City Clerk's Office, I wish to withdraw the Request for Appeal I submitted to your office on April 16'. Based on a recommendation by your office, that Appeal was placed "on hold" pending the City's review of a Request for Reconsideration that I submitted at the same time. In response to that Request for Consideration, the City's Environmental Review Committee issued an updated threshold determination for the Enclave at Bridle Ridge Project on May 19th. Enclosed with this cover letter, please find a new Request for Reconsideration of that updated determination, and a new Request for Appeal, pursuant to the guidance provided by Renton Code Section 4.8.110(E). The personal check (#9443) in the amount of $250 that accompanied y' original appeal can be applied to this new appeal. Alf a) CWF4< /fSf/6rj Af 0 f If for any reason the opportunity for Reconsideration is not available at this stage of the City's process, please cash my check and consider this appeal as being timet filed. If the accompanying Request for Reconsideration is accepted, I understand that will be given the opportunity to withdraw my Request for Appeal after reviewing the City's response. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions related to this submission_ MY contact information is shown below. Thank you for your assistance!! Sincer , R ,en 6617 SE 5"' Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 Roger,NPaulsen@cs.com Enclosure(s): Request for Reconsideration, with attachments Request for Appeal, with attachments ID - CL e nCr _ 1 rD s=OC cl o co Urfa cc CDrox � u0 —� O a Baa —rte by rD �3 cro CD 0� 0 rr°x -0-rD¢� w� (u rD .1 ro =,, c Z� n O a s V)fDs _ rDcon rD CDqq CD a r U aa Q.. i� ° cro o' Q- ., ?i CO 5 ?+ %'o m trF�lO'3�]FA�1i\*�` _ 12 t�Ej X EL -EL N G S V — F C -i 1; it —• F � � r ... 'l ..� 4 :l"� r f{G � f1E ^r '3"� - � {f0 G � 5 Denis Law city Of,, Mayor _ �1 r� �= � "��« r Community & Economic Development Department May 22, 2014 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator CITY OF R£F{TOM Roger Paulsen 6617 SE 5th Place MAY 122014 Renton, WA 98059 RECEIVED CITY CLE R K'S OFFICE RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat % LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Paulsen: As part of the review of your Request for Reconsideration, the City conducted an.i.ndependent study of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection. The study concluded that the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection warrants the installation of a traffic signal. The City has added and is prioritizing the installation of a traffic signal at this location to its Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Although it has been determined that the additional traffic anticipated through the development of the Enclave at Bridle Ridge preliminary plat would not significantly impact the existing traffic situation at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection, the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has decided to require the developer to pay their fair share for the installation of the traffic signal as an additional mitigation measure through SEPA. It is not anticipated that the installation of the traffic signal would occur as a part of this project, but would occur at a later date as additional funding becomes available. If you have any further questions on this matter, please contact Jill Ding, Project Manager, at (425) 430-6598 or via email at !ding@rentonwa.goy. Sincerely, C.E. "Chip" Vincent CED Administrator Attachments cc: ERC Members Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Justin Lagers,.Applicant Sally Lou Niper, Owner G. Richard Ouimet, Owner Parties of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way . Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov PiJBI_lC WORKS DEPARTMENT M E M- 0 R A N D U M DATE: May 5, 2014 TO: Chris Barnes; Transportation Operations Manager FROM: Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations SUBJECT: Proposed Signal, Southeast 142"d Place at 156th Avenue Southeast Issue: Should we install a signal at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne of cmbayne@gmail_com? Recommendation: We should place this intersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a new signal. Background: We have analyzed the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place a.nd 156th Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, Interruption of Continuous Traffic for Eight Hours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes for Four Hours. Please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Table 4C-1 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Figures 4C-1 through 4C=4 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis. This intersection does not meet Warrant 7 for crash experience. Since 2009, there have been five recorded accidents on 155th Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end accidents and the other two involved vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred ai the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast. The other four accidents occurred at least two blocks away from the intersection in question. Please find attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents. h:\divisio n.s\tra nspo r.tat\ope ratioVon\tomNtom9645 a Am Page 438 2009 Editi0li Standard: W The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours 0 A��s:: of an average day: e A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist On ,' the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, th respectively, to the intersection; or,"'Ar., B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C -I exist an' the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection. Lt applying each condition the major -street and minor -street volumes shall be for the same 8 hours. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these 8 hours. Option: f 05 If the pasted or statutory speed limit or the 85th -percentile speed on the major street exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 1Q,000, the, traffic volumes in the 70 percent columns in Table 4C-1 may be used in pIace of the 100 percent columns. t( Guidance: a!` as The combination of Conditions A and B is intended for application at locations 11,1re)-e Condition A is not satisfied and Condition B is riot satisfied and should be applied only after Ql an adequate trial of other altenratireY t hal could cause less delay and inconvenience to traffic hers failed to solve the traffic problems. Standard: _ 6 PI 07 The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day: A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exes, on: the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, ei respectively, to the intersection, aist respectively, B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist ons` the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection. - These major -street and minor -street volumes be for shall the same 8 hours for each condition; however, 'he 8 hours satisfied in Condition A shall not be required to be the same 8 hours satisfied in Condition B. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of the 8 hours. Table 4C-1. Warrant f, Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume condition A—Minimum Vehicular Vofume Number of lanes for moving Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour on higher -volume traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) minor -street approach (one direction onty) Major Street Minor Street 100°a' 80%a 7090' S6%d 100Yo BO°kb 70'/ 56%d 2 or mare 1 11 600 480 420 336 150 120 105 84 :xAA -^7`F �x ?°f ?' a ? o,_ ;r110 _ua600 . ,:.r480{ ,..3d2(1 a7 s cru, c 2 or more 11500 1 400 1 350 1 280 11 200 180 140 112 _LL Condition 13—Interruption of Continuous Traffic Number of lanes for moving Vehicles per hour on major street ve-'kles per hour on higher -volume traffic an each approach {total of both approaches) minor -street approach {one direction only) Major Street Minor Street 100%' 80%" 70 %� 58%° t DO t,+ 80./ 70%� 5fi%" 2 or more 1 900 720 630504 75 60 i 53 42 2a more - 2 56 car, ore 9D0 �720� 630 SOd11J0 3 X80 X70 t 2 or mare 750 600 525 429 100 80 70 56 Basic minimum hourly volume " Used for combination of Gonditiens A and B alter adequate trial of other remedial measures May be used when the major -street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000 ° May be used for combination of Conciftfons A and B after adequate trial of other remedial measures when the major -street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of fess than 10,000 Sect, 40.02 De,wriber Page 440 500 400 MINOR STREET Soo HIGHER - VOLUME APPROACH- 200 VPH 100 Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2, Four -Hoar Vehicular Volume 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OROM RE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE ,I LANE & 1�LANE 2009 Edition 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET ----TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES --- VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) *Nate: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume Cora minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET) 400 300 MINOR STREET HIGHER- 200 VOLUME APPROACH - VPH 100 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR mbRE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE 1 .1 LANE & 1 LANE BO' 50' 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 9c0 1000 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note: BO vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. srcl. 4c.04 De.rnV�Ier Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3, Peak Hour 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE ,1 LANE & 1 LANE MAJOR STREET TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) `Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET) 400 MINOR STREET Soo HIGHER - VOLUME APPROACH- 200 VPH 100 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES — 2 O R OR I LANE I& 1 LAN E } �1 LANE & 1 LANE 100' 75' 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) `Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Page 44€ 150' 100' I TUB Sect. 40.04 600 500 MINOR STREET 400 HIGHER - VOLUME aoo APPROACH - VPH 200 100 Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3, Peak Hour 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE ,1 LANE & 1 LANE MAJOR STREET TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) `Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET) 400 MINOR STREET Soo HIGHER - VOLUME APPROACH- 200 VPH 100 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES — 2 O R OR I LANE I& 1 LAN E } �1 LANE & 1 LANE 100' 75' 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) `Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Page 44€ 150' 100' I TUB Sect. 40.04 M Signal Priority Ratings: A = Number of correctible accidents in a 12 month period AR = Accident bating = 1001 5 x A Vrn = Average of the 8 highest hours of main main street volume in veh/hr (total both directions) Vs = Average of the 8 highest hours of side street volume in veh/hr (total both directions) (Vote: right turns on red and/or free right turns are subtracted from the side street volumes. K = reduction factor = (0.97 In (Vrn! Vs)) - 0.32 Cv = Capacity constant Note: When the 85th percentile speed of main street is >40 MPH, MUTCD volume warrants are reduced therefore, reduce Cv so that Cu = 0.49 x Cv Number of Lanes Main Side Street Street Cv 1 1 750 2+ 1 900 2+ 2+ 1200 1 2+ 1000 VR = Vehicular Volume Rating = (Vm x Vs) / (K x Cv) Prn = Average of the 8 highest hours of main street pedestrian in ped/hr (total bath directions) Wm = width of main street in feet Cp = pedestrian constant = 78000 PR = Pedestrian Volume Rating = Vm x Pm x Wm / Cp Total Rating = AR + VR + PR Intersection A �:AI : Vm Vs ::>.:::K ::: Cv :-::VR:::::;: Pm Wm ;:;:;PI'S:::::-Tdtal. SW 41 st ST/Oakesdale AV SW 5 :100: 615 407 ::::O:*O8 =: 900 : 345810: D 56 0 S 4th STIW€Iliams AV S 0 ':;:17:: 442 357 ::::-0,.11 1000 :-1398:47: 12 43 NE 44th ST/1-405 NB Ramps 3 0< 539 476 ::7`0',20 : 900-.142 ;;42: 0.5 40 <:0;14:; :-# $ SW 7th STILind AV SW 6 120 783 306 ::::0.59. 1200." 337 A -;: 0.5 51 ::0:2:6.:::::4 :- S 7th ST/Talbot RD S 0.3 :: 6 :: 9901 315 `: 0,79 - 900 9 74 NB 12th ST/Union AV NE 0 :: 0=: 449 220 '::::'O. 37: " 750 . 354.06::: 6.25 45 ::AAZ: - ::356 SE 31 st SUBenson RD S 2 : 40:' 1221 270 ': 1 14 1100 •;262:{}4':: 0.33 51 ::.1126:::::302: NE 4th ST/Hoquiam AV NE 2 :;4D: 1899 153 :'::21'A2 588 ::232:74:: 0 62 ':01:00*:.:::273:. S 55th ST/Talbot RD S 3 ::80 898 174 ::#:.27 : - 750 :::1s:$4 < 0.37 36 N 44th ST/1-405 SIB Ramps 3 :;EO. 460 1 179 ::-'00 '11000 ::A:j8 26': 0.17 56 ::0:96;::.1 a&-:. NE 12th ST/Kirkland AV NE 6 ::1:20 5421 120 :1;14: 900 ::::3:26:::: 5 38 SE 142nd PL1156th AV SE 0 0 9761 167 ::); `' 750 :: i1�&� 0 39 ::.CK.00;:::,1 S Eagle Ridge DR/Benson RD S 3 :1;0. 1148 93 :2 #2:: 539 :::93:83<: 0 1 39 :=Q::G}0:::AS,4 N Landis LN/Garden AV N 0 '::D: 504 158 :':i}:$t:: 750 TA1T.'377 16 1 41 .4:24.: 7:13.6 NE Sunset BLIHo ua€m AV NE 2 FAD, 838 69.5 :::2:10 368 :=:7.5:65: 1 37 ::0:401-116. S Carr RDIMill AV S 1 ::20.. 1887 44.5 "::3:31 441 ::::57:44-<: i 49 NE 4th ST/Bremerton AV NE 2 1::.40,12035 20 :4:16, 441 ;:::2 1:6;.:: 4 56 SW 34th ST/L€nd AV Sw 2 1AQ 1161 49 :2: 6` 1200 0 58 NE 21stST/Duva11 AV NE 1' ::;2q 1310 37 :::3'14.. 441 :;:;3 :00 :: 0.5 53 NE 12th STIDuvall AV NE 1 :::20.` 994 37 ::2;$7 : 441 7::'25'04:' 7 51 S 26th ST/Benson RDS 0 ::=R= 1008 27 `3::9 '. 368 :=:23,:17::: 15 47 :::9: i NE 6th 5T1Duva[[ AV NE 0 :: 0: 949 38 `2.80 % 441 :.:29;19::, 2 58 1:4.1: :' 3I NE 10th ST/Duvall AV NE 0 :? 0 ' 458 1 48 1.137, 441 2@.68:: 6.38 58 2:17; : NE 4th ST/Queen AV NE 0 .::0. ; 1641 16 :;:417 ' 441 T4.27 0.16 66 0:22: ; HA Donel done done done done done done TOM 9645W SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS Southeast 142"d Placej1561h Avenue Southeast WARRANT 1 Meets warrant — volumes meet Condition B for eight hours. WARRANT 2 Meets warrant —four-hour volumes exceed the curve in Figure 4C-1 for seven hours. WARRANT 3 Does not meet —this intersection is not near an unusual peak hour traffic generator. WARRANT 4 Does not meet —the number of pedestrians crossing the street never exceed 100 per hour. WARRANT 5 Does not meet --this is not a school crossing. WARRANT 6 Does not meet —there are no plans to make this a coordinated system. WARRANT 7 Does not meet — there are fewer than five accidents preventable by a signal within a twelve-month period. WARRANT 8 Does not meet — We classify 156th Avenue Southeast south of Southeast 142nd Place as a residential street. WARRANT 9 Does not meet — This intersection is not near a railroad crossing. FN: TOM962MV d (D. co 0NrE`�yNMMTNf�N"LON0) I� d N M,OD,c:� c�3"`- M;- L co N co r - Cts 00 r, rt, 1" d df T.r. 00 N 00 CO;d �TrN T; m co �, Lf7lSt-T�C'7`Q"(D COE# ��tr'CDQ LO m tf7 M.N N V d T �:CB Q LO N.0'N N d d C4 Lci LCS IfJ li7 t� !� W , , r I�f cl) N T cV T J m; WN c} CD I� M 0 00:0 N. Ln N d M' d OO T O `. C) (D Cc) T d CD M 0)" CO d r C37 (D ' '4t d d T T ; T co 00 T L(y d' (0:00 (o N . Ln " O r (D CLa'',Cp d',M N N C,4: CO. it'd' "t.(Y) N'N N a'� W m , OD I�r Co. d N : Q 00 O , N Imo• CC) 00 ' LQ 0D m Cfl LO M CO CO C) 04 N0,� r � LC3'00 r'Q et'(fl O:LO O N N N I- It'M I -'d N N N::N Md' C4 ',ti t�LL(j', T NN;� M d cQ m + m LD N O T d C7 " M co M C D N � � ' j p N Ci) M N hi N ' N -f' f? 'St ' r7 Lo:o T ' I` N 0 d r NM 1` � Z N C!'N N N N'M M;m co N,N at W �' (/) Ce) o(} N c� ` M -.ODN[D CSO cli 0 0 M `t � ti d r ', p f� l!7 CD " C� r T"r Tr T'r T'T ^d M Q QN 00 m ro t N 00 C7? CO ' Lo d N .t M , CO CD . f- Ln T C) Co. CO, N C4:CO M,N �- d', C0 CD'Ln Cg`M,d 0 f'.r M 0 EA Q'f� C'7 Ln 000;000da000do'dc�o00000d 0 a d:O ;Z ;0 d cd Q O o C) 0 0: Cl 0 w (11 ; C') "T Ln (D l� CO :' Q) 0 T N M d• Lf} CD t [- 00 CJS , o ;' r CN Cl) '4- Ir r.:e- T',T T r;r- r',T N:N N:N N' Q. OoOdOOOdod0o,OQo00OdC]C) O dQ 00 O Q 0'O CO 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 d 0 0 0Q'0 Q T N c+3 U')Cfl ti Op M0 T N C'7 d Lf] CQ : I� 00 0 Q . r N {+) Y T T T'r r:T ...... : ...., _... Denis City of., o Mayor Community & Economic Development Department May 19, 2014.. C.E."Chip`'Vincent,Administrator CITY OFRENTON - RMAY flger Paulsen .2 0 2014 6617 5E'5th Place RECEIVED Renton, WA 98059 CITY CLEWS OFFICE Subject:.' RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat/ LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Paulsen: i The Environmental Review Committee (ERQ held a meeting on May 19, 2014 to.consider your Request for Reconsideration, submitted April 16, 2014.. Please find attached to this letter a copy of the decision of your Request for Reconsideration signed by the members of the ERC including one new SEPA mitigation measure. If you have any questions, please contact the project manager, Jill Ding, at (425) 430-65.98 or via entail at jding@rentonwa.gov. Sincerely; n` - 4 ee6� f � Gregg.Zimmerman Environmental Review Committee, Chair. Attachments cc: Bonnie Walton, City Clerk. Justin Lagers % Applicant - Sally. Lou Nipert /Owner G. Richard Ouimet /owner Parties.of Record Renton City Hall : 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa goy DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY Q Qty� AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M ID R A N D U M DATE: May 19, 2014 TO: Environmental Review Committee (ERC) FROM: Jill Ding, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Enclave at Bridle Ridge (LUA14-000241) SEPA Request for Reconsideration The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) reviewed the above mentioned preliminary plat application and issued a SEPA Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated (DN -S -M) on March 31, 2014 with one mitigation measure: 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). - - - The DNS --:EM orf -,April 4 2014 with an appeal period that ended on 2014. A request for reconsideration of the SEPA determination was received'on'Apri#"17; 2014 from Roger Paulsen. The request for reconsideration cites transportation impacts and public notice as the primary justifications for the filing of the request for reconsideration to the ERC" Below is a summary of the concerns cited: 1. The submitted Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) relied upon by the ERC for the issuance of the SEPA DNS -M was incomplete and did not include the AM and PM peak hour conditions per item #1 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis. Staff Comment: The originally submitted TIA included a PM peak hour Level of Service (LOS) analysis. After the receipt of the request for reconsideration, the applicant voluntarily conducted an additional traffic analysis and submitted an Addendum to the original Traffic Impact Analysis (dated April 29, 2014). The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 155ti' Avenue SE/SE St' Place intersection and an AM and PM peak hour LOS analysis- After conducting the additional analysis, the applicant's traffic engineer concluded that the proposed project would not result in a significant adverse impact on the existing surrounding street system. The City's Transportation Division has reviewed the originally submitted TIA and the Addendum and they concur that the proposed h:\ced\planning\ourent plarminglprojeels\14-000241.jiJllerc recomid�sation recommendation memo. dot ducx Environmental Review Committee Page 2 of 4 May 19, 2414 project would not have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding street system. The City's Transportation Division has conducted an independent study of the existing background traffic situation at the 156"' Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection. Based on the City's study the existing conditions warrant the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection with or without the construction of the proposed subdivision. With the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, it is anticipated that the traffic conditions in the project vicinity would improve. The installation of a traffic signal is not included on the City's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), therefore transportation impacts fees would not fund the installation of a signal. Due to the existing LOS designation F at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection and the fact that the required traffic impact fees would not fund a traffic signal at this intersection, staff recommends as a new SEPA mitigation measure that the proposed project be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 1,56th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips = 0.00687 x $500,000 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 2. The submitted TIA provided a Level of Service (LOS) Analysis for the 156th _ - : -= ._�. w , �,ry 156 Avenue SE/SE 5 Pet tntersectiori, it id"nat'inciude a LOS anaNsis f`or the A�eiiue SE SE 142 Stre th tolace intersection. Staff Comment: Item # 2 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis states that the "study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development". The proposed development would not result in a 5% increase in peak hour traffic at any intersection therefore no analysis of any intersection was required. However per the City's request an analysis was done for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection and was included in the submitted TIA. The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection- According to the addendum the LOS for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5`h Place intersection currently operates at a LOS C and would continue to operate at a LOS C with or without the proposed subdivision. The current delay for westbound traffic is 15.1 seconds, the delay is anticipated to increase to 15.8 seconds without the project and to 16.1 seconds with the project. Therefore, according to the submitted addendum, it is anticipated that the proposed subdivision would result in an additional delay of 0.3 seconds for vehicles at the 156th Avenue SE/SE Stn Place intersection. The report does not recommend any additional mitigation beyond the required traffic impact fees as the LOS atthe hz: ! dlpbaaning\current planning*rojectsl14-00024I Jilllerc reconsideration recommendation memo.dot,docx. Environmental Review Committ= Page 3 of 4 May 19, 2014 156th Avenue SE/SE 51h Place intersection will remain at C with or without the proposed subdivision. Therefore, staff concludes that no further traffic mitigation is warranted for the subject project. 3. Public notice for the proposed subdivision was misleading. People who didn't submit written comments during the 14 day Notice of Application comment period may think they can provide comments on the SEPA at the public hearing. Staff Comment: Public notice for the proposed subdivision was provided in accordance with the requirements outline in RMC 4-8-090. The notice states that individuals have 14 days to comment on the proposed subdivision application and also mentions that additional comments may be provided at the public hearing. In addition, any party who requested to be made a party of record would receive the applicable SEPA determination, which provides a 14 day appeal period. The notice is not misleading as anyone receiving the notice would have been notified of the public comment period, the date of the hearing, and has the opportunity to become a party of record and receive additional information on the project. Recommendation: In light of the additional information provided in the independent traffic study conducted by the City, which states that a signal is warranted at the 156" i Avenue SE/SE 142"d Street intersection, staff recommends that the ERC retain the existing DSS M"With one rrew mitigation measure as follows: Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). 2. due to. -the existing Level of Service (LOS) designation of F at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"1 Place and the proposal to add additional trips to the existing situation, the proposed project shall be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"0 Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips = 0.00687 x $500,000 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on lune 6, 2014. 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 RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510_ h:lcedl&mninglcurrent planning1projt�au\14000241.jill\cm reconsideration recommendatioa memo-dotdom Environmental Review Committee Page 4 of 4 May 19, 2014 Date of decision: May 19, 2014 signatures: Gregg Zimm r a , Administrator Mark Peterson, Administrator Public Works epartment Date Fire & Emergen Services Date Terry Higashiyama, Administrator C.E. "Chip"'Vincent, Administrator i Community Services Department Date Department of Community & Date Economic Development i i h_IcedlplanninglGuirent plauninglprojects114 000241 jiIIierc rowmideration recommendation.n=o.dotdocx Traff� Ap6129, 2014 Mr_ Justin Lagers PNW. Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36" St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Addendum to the Traffic impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: I ORrHWF-S7- rJVAFFIU L�XFI 11410 NP 241h SI. #59 Kirk", WA S Piton Q5,b.2 118 Fa)c 425,52.2: We are pleased to present this addendum to traffic impact analysis (TIA) report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located at 14038 156" Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The purpose of the addendum is to provide information in response to questions concerning the original TIA and requests for additional analysis. The additional information includes traffic counts and an analysis at the SE 51t' PI/1561, Ave. SE intersection and also traffic counts and analysis of all study intersection in the AM peak hour as well as the PM peak hour. The trip generation, trip distribution, background traffic growth and other data and assumptions are unchanged from the original TIA unless otherwise noted. The analysis is summarized as follows: • No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes due to the proposed project. • Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. • The 142nd Pl. SE/SE 156tt' intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. AM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS AM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 5th PV15e Ave SE and 142nd PI. SE/SE 156'J' intersection on Tuesday 4/22/2014 from 7 to 9 AM. The peak hour occurred from 7:15 to 8:.15 AM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. Figure 1 shows the AM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. No Page 7 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 4ay at� M E M D R A N D U M DATE: May 5, 2024 TO: Chris Barnes, Transportation Operations Manager FROM: Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations SUBJECT: Proposed Signal, Southeast 142"0 Place of 15eAtrenue Southeast Issue: Should we install a signs! at the intersection of Southeast 112°d, Place and 15e Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne of cmbae mail.carn , Recommendation: 3 I We should place this intersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a -newsignal. - r Background: We have analyzed the intersection of Suuth�ast 142nd Place— and 150, Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Trac Control Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, Interruption of Continuous -I raffic for Eight Flours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes -for Four Hours. Please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Fable .4C-1 frorn the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devh7es, Figures 4C-1 through 4C4 from the Manuaf of Uniform Trgffic Contrci Devices and.a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis. This intersections does not meet Warrant 7 for crash experience. Since. 2009, there have been five recorded accidents an 155#' Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end aWdents and the other tWo inwived vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred at the intersection of Southeast 1424 Place and 155'J' Avenue South' east The other four accideSts occurred at least -two blocks assay from the intersection in question_ Please fiM attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents.. h �divisiansltr nsportat�operatigjran�tarn�to�,9G45a_d oc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Issue'. M E M- 0 R A N Q U M May 5, 2014 Chris Barnes, Transportation Operations Manager Ronaid Mar, Transportation Operations Proposed Signal, Southeast 1424a Place at 156th Avenue Southeast Should we i6sta11 a signal of the intersection of Southeast 14?" d. Place and 156th Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne of cmbaYne@grmail.com7 . Recommendation: We should place this intersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a thew signal. Background. We have analyzed the intersection of Southeast 14ZO Place and 15e Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, Interruption of Continuous Traffic for Eight Hours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes for Four Hours. Please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Table 4C-1 from the Manual of uniform Traffic Control Devices, Figures 4C--1 through 4C-4 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and -a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis. This intersection does not meet Warrant 7 for crash experience. Since. 2009, there have been five recorded accidents on 156t` Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end accidents and the other two involved vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156'j'Avenue Southeast The other fauir accidents occurred at least two blocks away from the intersection in question. Please find attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents.. h.%divisior s\trr nspor.tat`operatioNrnn\tom�tom9645a_doc COMMUNITY &00�ccs ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 18, 264 T0: Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Steve Lee, Development Engineering Manager FROM: Neil Watts, Development Services Director SUB.IECf: Traffic Concurrency Fest for The Enclave at Bridle Ridge. Preliminary -Plat The proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge preliminary plat consists of 31 single family lots, with a calculated daily trip generation of an additional 297 trips. The project passes the City of Renton Traffic Concurrency Test per RMC 4-6-070.D as follows. Traffic Concurrency Test Criteria Pass? Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan? Yes Within allowed growth levels? Yes _ Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees? Site specific street improvements to be completed by project? Yes Yes Traffic Concurrency Test Passes Evaluation of Test Criteria Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan?. As shown on the attached citywide traffic . concurrency summary, the city's investment in completion of the forecast traffic improvements are at 130`0 of the scheduled expenditure through 2013_ Within allowed rowth levels?: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the calculated citywide trip capacity for concurrency with the city adopted model for 2014 is 96,998 trips, which provides sufficient capacity to accommodate the 297 additional trips from this project. Eroject subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees?: The project will be subject to transportation impact fees at time of building permit. Site specific street improvements to be completed by project?: The project will be required to complete all internal and frontage street improvements for the plat prior to recording. Any additional off-site improvements identified through SEPA or land use approval will also be completed prior to recording of the plat. Background Information on Traffic Concurrency Test for Renton The City of Renton Traffic Concurrency requirements for proposed development projects are covered under Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-6-070_ The specific concurrency test requirement is covered in RMC 4-6-070.1), which is listed for reference: ti Transportation Concurrency Test - The Enclave at Undle Ridge Preliminary Plat April 18, 2014 D. CONCURRENCY REVIEW PROCESS: i. Test Required. A concurrency test shall be conducted by the Department for each nonexempt development activity. The concurrency test shall determine consistency with the adopted Citywide Level of Service Index and Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, according to rules and procedures established by the Department- The Department shafi issue an initial concurrency test result describing the outcome of the concurrency test. 2. Written Finding Required: Prior to approval of any nonexempt development activity permit application, a written finding of concurrency shall be made by the City as part of the development permit approval. The finding of concurrency shall be made by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development permits required for a development activity. A written finding of concurrency shall apply only to the specific land uses, densities, intensities, and development project described in the application and development permit 3. Failure of Test: If no reconsideration is requested, or if upon reconsideration a project faits the I yLy .. concurrency.test,-the project application -shalt be denied by the decision maker with.the 'autharrty tp approve the accompanying development activity permit application. The Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element on page XI -65 of the Comprehensive Pian states the following-, Based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS -tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation, development will have met City of Menton concurrency requirements. 2 April 16, 2014 City of Renton Attn: City Clerk Renton City Hall 1055 S_ Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 CITY OF RENTON CIL^- APP 16 2014 PECEIVED CITY CLLPK'S OFFICE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO CITY OF RENTON CODE SECTION 4.8.110(E)(2) To All Whom It May Concern, Pursuant to City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4.8.110(E)(2), please accept this letter as a formal Request for Reconsideration of the Environmental (SETA) Threshold Determination issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee for project # LUA14-400241, ECF, PP. As a party of record for this project, this Request for Reconsideration is filed with the intent of utilizing all available administrative remedies to see that the adverse environmental impacts of this project are adequately understood, documented, and mitigated by the City and/or applicant -- all in the spirit of the City of Renton's adopted codes, policies and procedures. As an ordinary citizen, I have found the City of Renton's code section 4.8.110 on appeals to offer very little practical guidance or direction with respect to how the Request for Reconsideration process works, or even who considers the (request. While I encourage you to dedicate time to improving this information for the benefit of future citizens, the time provided for me to become educated, and file this request in a timely manner, leaves me with no option other than to simply offer the best I can. To that end, I beg your patience and understanding if the format of this Request is not in-line with what you may typically receive. Thank you for taming the time to consider this request, and for your thoughtful attention to the issues I believe warrant additional study and mitigation in order to adequately protect the public safely, health and interests of the citizens of out community. As a long-standing member of tins community, I both accept and embrace growth and change in the City of Renton. Unfortunately, my engagement in this process reveals what I believe to be serious missteps by the City in processing this application. In the spirit of ensuring that the public process we hold so dear in this country is respected, I submit this Request for Reconsideration. Standing As an adjacent landowner, and as a party of record who properly submitted written comments regarding the concerns identified in this Request for Reconsideration (Exhibit A), and as a City of Renton resident who has only one point of access to the City's transportation network "ia the SE 5h Place/ 1566 AVE SE intersection, my public health, safety and welfare are at -risk should the City not catefully consider this Request for Reconsideration and adopt the necessary actions I am requesting. To allow additional unmitigated traffic from this project, absent a full understanding of the project's impacts as required under SEPA, has the potential to adversely impact both my personal safety interests, as well as my private property interests as they relate to the value of my property at the time of future re -sale. For these and other reasons, I believe that I have the required standing to bring this Request for Reconsideration Identification of Concerns for Which Reconsideration is Requested The issues for which I request your reconsideration relate to the transportation impacts of the proposed project, and to the public comment notice and process associated with the Threshold Determination. Concern #1. Transportation After review of the Environmental Review Committee Report for this project dated March 31, 2014, (Exhibit D) it is clear that the City's Environmental Review Comunittce made an error in basing their Determination upon the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Traffex (Exhibit B, dated December 27, 2013). 'ne Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon for this Determination fails to comply with the City's own policy for such analyses. Specifically, this analysis fails to study the AM Peak traffic condition in addition to the PM Peak traffic condition associated with the project. In the TLk submitted by the applicant, and relied upon by the ERC, the author states as follows: "The scope of this analysis is based upon the preliminay plat site plan and the Cite of14enton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact -Ana/yrir for IVew Development ". By relying upon this report, the City failed to adequately inform itself with the fullrange of potential adverse environmental impacts associated with the transportation demands of this project, as the report is clearly not in compliance with the City's Policy Guidelines For Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development, attached as Exhibit C to this request. Specifically, the City's policy states clearly that for a project such as this, where A.M. or P.M. Peak Hour Trip contributions are >20, a complete Traffic Impact Analysis shall be completed, and said analysis shall present and consider both the A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour conditions, among other analysis. See excerpt below: Site Generated Traffic Volumes: The analysis should present a tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed. 2 It is a matter of fact that the Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon by the City of Renton ERC did not provide the minimum information and analysis required by the City of Renton's own policy, and therefore the ERC has erred in issuing their Determtnation absent this information, and their Determination should be found to be arbitrary and capricious, in addition to in error. Concern #2. Transportation. My second concern also relates to transportation, and the ERC's apparent misunderstanding of the scope of the Traffic Impact Analysis that was received by the City. On page #7 of their Match 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report (Exhibit D), the Committee states: `The Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 10) also includes a Level of Semx (LOS) review of the sumunding intersections in the immediate vicinily... " This report goes on to conclude that: "...the surrounding intersections nvuld continue to operate at an acceptable I-evel of Service (LOS) with the exception of the southbound approach to the 15e Avenue SE/ SE 142 place intersection. " Both of these statements appear to assume that the analysis completed by the applicant actually looked at existing intersections other than the 156"'/ 142"d Place intersection. They did not. In fact, the 156"' Ave SE/ 142d intetsection is the ONLY exist7nintersection that was analyzed by the applicant. Despite public comment informing city staff and the ERC of concerns at the closest adjacent existing intersection to the proposed project (SE 5' Place), the ERC did not require additional information from the applicant to inform an understanding of the impacts at this intersection. Additionally, by only analyzing the P.M. Peak Hour (just 2 hrs. 45 min on December 17`x'), the analysis completely failed to understand or analyze the impacts of A.M. Peak Hour traffic conditions on 156`x' at SE 5"' Place or other impacted intersections to the north. The ERC's Threshold Determination is not supported by fact, as it clearly did not include an analysis of additional existing intersections, despite the ERC concluding that it did. Because of this, the T?RC erred when they based their Threshold Determination upon the TIA. Concern #3 Transportation Ironically, in light of Concerns #1 and #2 above, when one digs deeper into the March 31, 2014 Environmental Regrew Committee Report, we find that City of Renton staff are not only aware of potential adverse impacts of the proposed project as they relate to access from the project to 156"', but they go so fat as to inform the applicant that they may "...impose left turn restrictions at that intersection. "(See Exhibit D, Page 10 of 11, Transportation Item #3). This already contemplated "remedy" identified by City of Renton staff not only acknowledges that there is a serious Level of Service issue that is likely to be exacerbated by this project given the lack of available capacity at the 156h/142 d intersection, but also suggests that the City's "remedy" will force this traffic to the right, or north, onto 156`h, further degrading the Level of Service at the 156t'/ SE 5" PL intersection, and other intersections to the north along 156''' Ave. SE. Again, since no analysis was completed to inform an understanding of potential adverse traffic impacts north of the proposed project on 156th, the ERC's Threshold Determination could only have been based upon incomplete information. This is an error on the part of the ERC, and should be corrected as part of this Request for Reconsideration. Concern #4 Transportation This concern relates specific -ally to how the EAC proposes to mitigate the impacts that were identified by the study. In their Threshold Determination, the ERC mitigates the identified transportation impacts by adopting, by reference, the recommendations identified by the applicant's consultant in the Traffic Impact Analysis. When one looks closer, we find that, other than otherwise required street frontage improvements; the only mitigation recommended is the payment of an otherwise required Traffic Mitigation Fee that is based upon the number of lots in the proposed project. In the ERC's March 31, 2014 Report (rage 7 of 11) they conclude as follows: `7t is not anticipated that she proposed project rignificantly adversely impact (sic) the City of Kenzo 's street ystem sr[6ject to the payment of code required impact fees and the construction of code required frontage improvements " Unfortunately, nowhere is a nexus established between the impacts identified in the TLA and the proposed mitigation. A review of the City's 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program reveals that the deficiencies of the 156h/ 142"d intersection are not addressed in any form. For this reason, the ERC has erred in simply applying the mitigations recommended by the applicant, as they fail to satisfy the requirements under State Law (RCW 58.17 & the Growth Management Act) that capacity for additional traffic be available at the time of project approval. In order for this to be true, there must be an established nexus between the fees that will be paid and the deficient traffic conditions at the 156t'/ 142 or other intersections where a proper analysis may indicate a Level of Service deficiency. Concern #5 Transportation Also related to the above concerns (ic:, the transportation impacts of the proposed project) I have received new information in response to a Public Records Request which I filed to better understand the City's internal review process as it relates to transportation concurrency, a requirement under State law and City of Renton ordinances. As you can see in the e --mail below, dated April 15, 2014 from Steve Lee, Dev. Engineering Manager, it is noted that the City's Transportation Division is "currently assessing any improvements are warranted (if any)... ". This confirms that work is on --going at this time (April 15'f') to both evaluate and mitigate the proposed project. 4 This e-mail serves to document yet again that the ERC was not fully informed with respect to the likely or probable adverse environmental impacts and possible mitigations associated with this project This constitutes an error on the part of the ERC, as well as the City's development review process, and further validates the merits of this Request for Reconsideration. Sandi Weir From Steve Lee sent Tuesday, April 15, 201411:14 AM Tor, CityOerk Records tic Jan Elfin; AR Ding; Pfeil R. Watts; Jennifer T. Henning; Rohird Nair Subject: RE: New Pubfit Records Request - PRR-14-OSS (Paulsen) Atuchmorrim TranspoConcPoltcy1404154xdf See attached riles that are related documentation on the City process far cbArurtency, standards and process relating to Renton Code Section 4-6-070. 1 believe this is the information Mr. Paulsen is seeking: The information. as extracted from the approved City Comprehensive Plan, provides Mt. Paulsen how the City administers a multi modal test. Renton Code Section 4-6-070 notes that transportation concurrenry can be a corWmation of improvements or strategies in place at the time of building permit issuance, or within a reasonable amount of time after buWing issuance. per 44-070 A.1, or a financial commitment is placed. A financial commitment can be the traffic mitigation fees paid for the new development and is generally used by the City for improvements throughout the City. Our Transportation Division is the technical review authority and is currently assessing any improvements are warranted (if any) (ord. 5675, 12-3.2012). The Transportation Ulvision has currently provided some direction as to an initial response with the statement, "Within the City of Renton, the steep topography between Maple Valiey NghwEay and the upper plateau (and on to Cemetery Road) makes it in feasible to provide additional access- Widening 1-405 (which the State is pursuing) to provide more traffic capacity could attract some traffic now using 256 th SE to access Cemetery Road." Thanks. -Steve tee, PE, MIS, CESCE City of Renton Uev. Engineering Manager 425.4 3(1,7299 sleeRrentonv�.Wv Concern #6 Public Process and Notice As raised in my initial comment letter (Exhibit A), I remain concerned that the City's notice with respect to the opportunity for public comment on issues of concern, such as the transportation concerns I have raised herein, rnisrQresented the actual opportunities for public enaaQem� ent in the environmental 5EPA review of this project - In short, the notice implies that a citizen having concern, who is not able to provide written comment prior to the March 24, 2014 deadline, will have the opportunity to provide comment at the Public Hearing on April 22❑d. Nowhere in the notice to the public is it explained that by waiting until April 22,d , the opportunity to provide input to inform the SEPA review and determination, will have passed. (see Exhibit E "Notice of Application...") As a result, the record now shows that only two public comment letters were received prior to the Threshold Determination being issued. I believe that you will find that many more people will attend the Public Hearing on April 22"d, and they will do so raising issues that should have been considered as part of the SEPA determination for this project. I fully understand the efficiency that the City is attempting to achieve by combining their notice and comment periods, but I urge you to review these notices carefully to understand the concern I am attempting, once again, to raise here. Requested Outcomes Based upon each and all of the above concerns, and as part of this Request for Reconsideration, I ask that the body hearing this Request take the following actions: • Withdraw the Threshold Determination for this project and require that the applicant work with city staff to prepare a proper Traffic Impact Analysis for this project. This analysis should be sufficient to adequately inform the City and public's understanding of the likely impacts of this project during both the A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour, including at the immediately adjacent intersection of SE 5�' Place and 156`x' Ave. SE, and other intersections likely to be impacted further north on 150 • Further, given the misrepresentation of the public comment opportunity as it relates to informM9 the City's SEPA review process, I request that, once an adequate and proper Traffic Impact Analysis conforming to the City's requirements is completed, the Notice of Application and SEPA comment periods be re -started to allow the City of Renton's public an opportunity to participate in the development review process for this project_ Thank you again for providing this opportunity to request reconsideration of the Environmental Review Committee's Threshold Determination for this project. Should the body charged with reviewing this request decline reconsideration, it is my intent to also pursue the formal appeal remedies established by City Code to ensure that the record shows I have pursued all of my Iawful administrative remedies. Respectfully Submitted, Ro aul 6617 SE 5h Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 6 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A — SEPA Determination Comment Letter Exhibit B —Traffic Impact Analysis Exhibit C — Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development Exhibit D — Environmental Review Committee Deport Exhibit E — Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated 7 EXHIBIT A March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED — Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mail to Avoid Delay @ Jdin�(a�xenton wa gov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project #LUA 14-00024 1, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22°d. I also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5th Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5th Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 156`' Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142"d intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below_ At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the Ievel or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156th and 142nd that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156th north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 5th Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139th Pl.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142"d, and then only IF the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. EXHIBIT A The addition of ANY new trips to SE 156"' between SE ? Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this proiect to be implemented without adequate mitiaation has significant potential to threaten public vel fare for the existin the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156"1/ 142d intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 150 during the aftemoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156th/ 142"' intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156th/ 142°' intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes -- particularly for those furthest east on SE 5`h Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accommodate future waste water access to the new sewer Iines being installed as part of this project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. 2 EXHIBIT A Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot #4, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback. where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot A. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 20' deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22nd public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination prior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but prily those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22"d, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22"d to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. EXMBIT A If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at Ro erAPaulsen cs.com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically JVdhout Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application 4 EXHIBIT B THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTGN Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36"' St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by rraffirfVCRTHWEST X TRAFF-IC EXPERTS 11410 NE 124th St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4198 Fax: 425.522.4391 December 27, 2013 rraffa, NaRrf,rivEer TRarn�c Exp�re 11410 NE 124th St. #W WA.96M F=w. -425.522.4118 .522.4311 December 27, 2013 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE Wk., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 88040 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: We are pleased to present this traffic impact analysis report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located on two parcels at 14038156` Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The scope of this analysis is based upon the preliminary plat site plan and the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Anal is for New Develo ment. Our summary, conclusions and recommendations begin on page 5 of this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and study area. Figure 2 shows the preliminary site plan. The two site access streets connect ta156t' Ave SE. The site access streets will have curb, gutter and sidewalk on both sides. Curb, gutter and sidewalk will also be installed on the site frontage on 1561h Ave. SE as shown on the site plan. Development of The Enclave at Bridle Ridge is expected to occur by the year 2015. Therefore, for purposes of this study, 2015 is used as the horizon year. One existing single family residence within the project site will be removed with this development. Page 7 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge rinfift TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION The 31 single-family units in the proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge are expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the street traffic peak hours as shown below: Time Period Tri Rate Total Trips per unit Entering Exiting 148 149 Average Weekday 9.57 297 50% 50% AM Peak Hour 0.75 23 25070 75% PM Peak Hour 1.01 31 630 3T1 A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. The trip generation is calculated using the average trip rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, for Single Family Detached Housing (ITE Land Use Code 210). These trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including resident, visitor, and service and delivery vehicle trips. Figure 3 shows the estimated trip distribution and the calculated site -generated traffic volumes. The distribution is based on existing traffic volume patterns, the characteristics of the road network, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times, and previous traffic studies. EXISTING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Street Facilities The streets in the study area are classified per the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan as follows: 156'' Ave. SE Minor Arterial SE 142"d Pl. Residential Access Page 2 The Enclave at„Bridle Ride Lrdf—ff—AM 156'' Ave. SE has a speed limit of 25 mph and consists of two 12 ft. lanes and a shoulder approximately six feet wide in the vicinity of the project site. 156' Ave SE is strai ht and flat at the access streets with excellent sight distance in both directions. SE 142 Pi. has a speed limit of 25 mph and oonsists of two 12 ft. lanes and a paved shoulder. The 156d' Ave. SEISE 142"d Pl. is an all- way stop controlled intersection with stop signs on all three approaches. There are no curbs, gutters or sidewalks on 1561' Ave SE or SE 142"d Pi. in the project vicinity. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic Volumes Figure 4 shows existing, future without project and future with project PM peak hour traffic volumes at the two proposed site access streets to 11561' Ave. SE and the 156'h Ave SEISE 142"d St. intersections. Per the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development intersections and road segments that experience an increase of 5% in traffic volumes require analysis. No intersections meet these requirements. However, a level of service calculation was performed for these three intersections due to their proximity to the site. A PM peak hour traffic count was performed on 15611 Ave SEISE 142ndPl. intersection and is included in the Technical Appendix. Level of Service Analvsis Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic flow, and the perception of these conditions by drivers or passengers. These conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions (free flow, little delay) and LOS F the worst (congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate and LOS E and F are low. Table 1 shows calculated level of service (LOS) for existing and future conditions including project traffic at the pertinent street intersection. The LOS was calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Ca ac' Manual The LOS shown indicates overall intersection operation. At intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average control delay per vehicle. The LOS and corresponding average control delay in seconds are as follows: Paye 3 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge A&MAW TYPE OF INTERSECTION A B C D E F Signalized < 10. >10.0 and >20.0 and >35.0 and >55.0 and >80. 0 <20.0 — <35.0 -- <55.0 — <80.0 — 0 Stop Sign Control <1 .0 1 >10 and <15 >15 and <25 >25 and <35 >35 and <50 >50 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figure 4 shows projected 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing traffic volume counts plus background traffic growth. The background growth factor accounts for traffic volumes generated from other approved but unbuilt subdivisions and general growth in traffic traveling through the area. A 3% per year annual background growth rate was added for each year of the two year time period (for a total of 6%) from the 2013 traffic count to the 2015 horizon year of the proposal. The 3% per year growth rate should result in a conservative analysis since the growth in traffic volumes has remained relatively flat the last several years. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Figure 4 shows the projected future 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site -generated PM peak hour traffic volumes were added to the projected future without project volumes to obtain the future with project volumes. Table 1 shows calculated LOS for future with project volumes at the study intersections, The study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS of for future 2015 conditions except for the southbound approach to the 156' Ave. SEISE 142"d PI. intersection that currently operates at LOS F and continues to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. The project adds 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection that is 0.65 % of the total trips. Since this is well below the 5% City of Renton volume increase threshold, and the LOS remains unchanged, the proposed project does not significantly impact the operation of the intersection. The Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets and Alleys in the City of Renton Street Standards, requires a site access street to be located a minimum of 125 ft. from an intersection on a minor arterial. The south site access street Is located Page 4 The Enclave at Bridle Ride Lraffay, approximately 250 ft north of the 156t` Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. intersection and therefore meets the standard. TRAFFIC MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City of Renton requires a Transportation Mitigation Fee payment of $75 per new daily trip attributed to new development. One existing single family residence on site will be removed with this development resulting in a net increase of 30 single family homes, The net new daily trips due to this development are 287 trips (30 units x 9.57 daily trips per unit). The estimated Transportation Mitigation Impact Fee is $21,525 (287 daily trips X $75 per daily trip). SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that The Enclave at Bridle Ridge be constructed as shown an the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: Construct the street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk for the site access streets and site frontage on 156th Ave. SE. • Contribute the approximately $21,525 Transportation Mitigation fee to the City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince nwtraffex.com or larr nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 5 pNALp .w ONAL i � iGr 'w Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the worst approach or movement which determines the LOS for an unsignalized intersection per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual (XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 6 TABLE 1 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY The Enclave at Bridle Ridge TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS INTERSECTION JEXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2015 WITH 2013 PROJECT PROJECT North Site Access J 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 12.6) South Site Access / 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 11.2) 156" Ave SE/ EB (D 25.6) EB (D 29.8) EB (D 30,7) SE 142", PI. NB (B 12.4) NB (B 12.9) NB (B 13.0) SB (F 98.8) SB (F 133.2) SB (F 137.1) Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the worst approach or movement which determines the LOS for an unsignalized intersection per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual (XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 6 N.C7RTKLi�.9T TRAF7c/C ExPEk'r6 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure Vicinity Map The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Site Plan Figure 2 Future Project xisting without Project Traffic N Aooessf 155th ave n. o t � 0 t rr0 Ch n CO S AcceW 156th Ave kn Ln CO fb CC> 309,' t 100 % , N rn co 156th Avel S5-142 P N Acrossf 156th ave S Aomsl 156th Ave W3 M N CO f— a2sJ 106, 1 CO t_ M to 156th Ave! SE 142 PI ess! 156th ave S Acoessl 156th Ave N 4Jd; D� � t o 04 156thAvel SE142p The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton PRS Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Future with Project N Atxessl 156th ave S Access+ 156th Ave r GS M 332 J mCDCD 10 156thAvel SE 142 PI Figure 4 TECHNICAL APPENDIX Prsparal Tar; Tr affex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Ptmna(253j920-6009 FAX:1253)822.7271 E.Malk TemI@TC2lrr.com WHr'".'13BE Mteramtler: 156th Ave SE & SE 1 Rad I'f 041a al Gaunt Tate I7,'17,1013 Locator: Renkta. Wasbiagtaa ohodmd gy- lea Time Ffam IMWWGrthOfk B) mm Saudiam 6} RomEeatallwB) FwmWwton�lm lawwal Iatmsl 1561h Avc SE 156th Aw SE [I SE 142nd P1 Told F>Nliaq at T L S R T L S It T L 5 R T I L 5 R 4;ISP 1 0- 16 116 9.U II - 0 0 - 1) :. 0 '.:.. 0_. _ _.0 .. '.7Q 0 _.8 38.3 430 P 6 0 13 172 1 14 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 27 1118 1:45-P .a 0 . 1% 136 _ n - 28 .Is .. 0 .._0 0 ,. 0 : 0., . . 0 99 - 0 , 19. :. .345 STOO P 0 0 17. 179 2 22 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 6 10 32S 5:15 0 A - - ' 0 - - 19 148 1 ' 28 .. -i7 .. .. 0 : 0 , 0 `.' 0 0. - (1 70 1) 24:1 - :.: 3d6 5-30 P 1 0 20 14E 0 19 1 10 1 P 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 72 0 n 297 5-.dS:k P 0 29. l5! 6 i8 .E4 '0 " 0 .. 0 !F -0. .. D 43 , . 0 - 24 339' 6=0OP 0 0 24 144 2 18 t4 0 0 0 0 0 1 74 0 17 291 6;1SP . 0' 0, _ 0 0 0 0 0..,.. 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 Q U 6,30 P 0 0 0 n 0 0 o n U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..... _6:450 0. :0 O_, :U. -�.0 Q'. - 0' U- 0 0-. �. p.: -:0 .,p ,..-.. a p 0. 0.: 7:100? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T- 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 Sw, 12 0 157 M-3 6 179 117 0 0 0 0 Q l 618 0 302 2497 S.IS PM.: Ttea1 9 0 68 615 4 92 63 0 0 U 0 0 0 309 a IW 1287 A arowh M t 5 5 a 409 1287 7LHV 1.29: 2.6'4 Na n'a 1,0% PHP 0.93 1561L Ave SE 1095 �_J JT2 I • — u --_?Hite SE 142nd PI Ess ss L U�r d 741 Ped' 0 -I ss>7;c' 10 1156 309 e03 4;15 PI.t 16 5:E5I'M 111n PEN E w Pcdj 0q2 67 ISMO 1A P111' Pt L Haut 1o1w.nC arrof ',;._.. ..!. 0 Uils, 1 0 0 NIF ! '.11V a¢T a2r 0 a1 +........_ ..... ___ I 0 166 13s Lltect LU 14'31 W. Es -a 4t -i at 4 In: 1257 1:10 2.r'4 Was R 333 out: 1297 Sn 1.21.: 3 KT 06 NO PLUS0 1915th Ave SE Tia[. 0,93 WT OT -___L___._;_„_... ............. 0 ekyal..Frraa N 8 E W 50 acus Wag 115+ 0 W62 ... KT to 1 f I 0 wr0s _-- -.... .. wTT1i 1 0 wr0a I ....... I ._. _-1 ..--0 E9+ w712 —_ i”...I ..., 0 wr 05 ! .... ..__... 0 8-30 0 NTI 06 ND 1111.fS � -.: _ 0 8.10 5 Na1n ANT 07; ( 0 6-10 RolOngquwc hcadad SH - al nlwsl 0lam eNTm --. _.�...... �. ...� .. 0 S-8 wom 5-B veLictes acn.atly woppcd. wive...... .. .... .. 1. ...._ 0 IS+signifies n4ling Qucu= as W ai 1 could scu. VU ID �......... ... . _.____.[..__.......:..:.0 .,__... 0 Orr 1f__�... 4JT 12 I i..,,.. .. - 0 Q a o 0 0 0 0 TRA13184M 01 Existing PM Peak 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE 12126/2013 --* %v 4N t 1 Lane L;DntlgUratigns volume (vph) 3D9 lob 92 63 68 655 Hourly flow rate (Vph) 332 108 99 68 79 704 Volume Total (vph) 440 167 777 Volume 108 0 704 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.6 5.2 m Degr�elt'Nrraimtl� x', fl5..,: ©30 A. Capacity (veh+h) 572 526 679 Approach Delay (s) 25.6 12.4 94.8 I]elay f .� HCM i evel o! Ser01ce F I6t5eafL)JE CpdCily Uififi :,IG 10 o€8tv1C�' Analysis 1?enod (min) r 15 9asa6ne 5ynchro 7 - Report Page 1 Future Without Project 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave Sit 12I26l2013 Lane Conf iguratia ns r jr 5agn Cal Slap Stop; ; ..,5tap Volume (vph) 328 106 98 67 72 695 Peak k{ut Faclar 4.93 , 033 , 093: '. 1l $3 :.: ra,93 4,93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 383 114 105 72 77 747 Volume Total (vph) 467 177 625 'i[a�utnse,feft (vpn)... Volume Right (vph) 114 0 7.4.7 Had1{s) ..:_. ©,OS; 012_..-0:51, _;• ._ Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6-75.3 Degree forra . :v: 0.80` . 0.33. 1.22 Capacity (vehfh) 571 516 665 Gottiral�Aea.4s)298 12,:1392 ,.. Approach Delay (s) 29.8 12.9 133.2 apA ,. LOSD B F _. HCM Level of Service F IntQsectipn Capaciiy llirtizaiion 90.3k. ', ICU. Leva3l.ofServ(ce: tr Analysis Period (mita) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Future With Project 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE 12126/2013 t 4 Lane Co qyr tlgns _ 0 con#a( , ..'' T Volume v h (P ) 332 106 98 69 73 697 Houq flow rate (vph) 357 114 105 74 76 749 Voiume Total (vph) 471 180 828 Volume Right (vph) 114 0 749 - Depaftre Headway (s) 6.2 6.7 5.4 De$rpe; U6Utrx&0a11{ z A. capaaty (vAM) 571 516 662 Approach Qelay (s} X.7 13.0 137.1 r4pp�aacFrLOS _ HGM Level of Service F Eriters�lorlCapacit�utl�zaUoO ;'.. :9t7�96 _ i�ULevaf�fi�ervtce " -:: Anaiysis Period (min) 15 , , :..,:.�.- .: Baseline Synchra 7 - Report Faye 1 Future With Project 5: North Site Access & 156th Ave SE 1212G/2013 Lane Configurations ` ume {y ' '; -;2. .4. 117. 3 : ;. 7 774 , . Sign Control Stop Free ..._ Free 0%... Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 4.93 .0.93 0.93 Houtly3low rate {vphi 2 4 ' 190 3 . :. S a32. - Pedestrians Walking Speed {fVs) . Percent�lok�tag�': Bight tum flare (veh) f�iedia•:#ype None Median storage veh) pX, ptataon unblocked vC, okit O*9 vofurge. :.. . 1939:` 192 vC1, stage 1 coni vol vC2, sfage2Onf,vpl vCu, unblocked vol 1039 192 194 tC,sltrgle{ 8.4: 62,:` 4,1 tC, 2 stage (s)._ p0 queue free °/u 99 99 99 [lEcap1cih'.{wehfi) 25E": t385 ':.. 1392: �IolurnB Total £ `. i 9d" , 840 .:' Volume Left 2 0 8 �hfume':Right 4 , _ . cSH 481 1700 1392 Vohrme to Capacityn OOT. 0.11, . 0.41, Queue length 95th (K) 1 0 0 0.1 . Lane LOS B A Approach;:[}eEay;sj`. ,.. 12:6 4.0 Approach LDS B Average Delay 0.2 lntersecEion Capac r U6IJ4@Gan : ' ._ 56 39 :, 1GCl Level of rvice , : B Analysis Period (min)... 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 Future With Project 7: South Site Access & 166th Ave SE 1212W413 ' t T > Baseline Synchro 7 • Report Page 3 1; .;:. , 4. _:; 178 ;'. 3 :.... 7 , Sign Control Stop Free Free Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Pedestrians Walking Speed (ftls) _. Right turn flare veh Median storage vehj pssfream:signat px, platoon unblocked yC, ronflfing utile 1 33 vC1, stage 1 cont vol rC2, staged r�nf voE '- p _ vCu unblocked vol 1033 191 192 A. tG, 2 sage (sj p0 queue tree % 100 99 99 :1393 " VumoTofia!5 '77 ,�*_ X97 B Volume Left i 0 s Vaturrreft` E4, cSH 585 1700 -.. 1 ..... ,. _. Yofum�tu;.CaAY. : U Queue Length 95th {ft} 1 0 0 Lane LOS B.. _ A Approach LOS _. Average delay 0.2 Irt[erset�aPaCrEy Uhl`�ati�i =56196 . IGtJ'levei o{ �erark.� � '.': B AnaiYs ei Period min .__ 1 15So _., Baseline Synchro 7 • Report Page 3 EXHIBIT C POLICY GUIDELINES FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT N A traffic impact analysis is required when estimated vehicular traffic generated from a proposed development exceeds 20 vehicles per hour in either the AM (6:00 - 9:00) or PM (3:00 —6:00) peak periods. A peak hour volume of 20 vehicles per hour would relate to daily volume of approximately 200 vehicles per day. Generally this includes residential plats of 20 lots or more and commercial sites that generate 20 vehicles per hour. The developer shall select a registered professional engineer with adequate experience in transportation planning and traffic engineering. Upon request, the Public Works Department will offer potential candidates. The analysis shall incorporate the following elements in the suggested format: Introduction: The introduction should, in a narrative fashion with graphics where appropriate to enhance the text, describe the proposed development (including proposed time frame), establish study area boundaries (study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development), describe existing and proposed land uses within the study area, and describe the existing transportation system to include transit routes, roadway and intersection conditions and configuration as well as currently proposed improvements. Roadways and intersections to be analyzed will be determined through coordination with the Public Works Department and Community and Economic Development staff. Site Generated Traffic Volumes: The analysis should present a .tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed. Site Generated Traffic Distribution: The distribution of site -generated traffic should be presented by direction as a percentage of the total site generated traffic in a graphic format. The basis for the distribution should be appropriately defined. Site Generated Traffic Assignment: A graphic presentation should be provided illustrating the allocation of site -generated traffic to the existing street network. The presentation should include Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and AM -PM peak hour directional volumes as well as turning movements at all intersections, driveways, and roadways within the study area. EXHIBIT C Existing and Projected Horizon Year Traffic Volumes With and Without the Proposed Development: The report should include graphics, which illustrate existing traffic volumes as well as forecasted volumes for the horizon year of the proposed development. Forecasted volumes should include a projected growth rate and volumes anticipated by pending and approved developments adjacent to the proposed development. if the development is multi -phased, forecasted volumes should be projected for the horizon year of each phase. The site -generated traffic should then be added to the horizon year background traffic to provide a composite of horizon year traffic conditions. Condition Analysis: Based upon the horizon year traffic forecasts with the proposed development, a level of service (LOS) analysis should be conducted at all intersections (including driveways serving the site). Based upon this analysis, a determination should be made as to the ability of the existing and proposed facilities to handle the proposed development. The level of service (LOS) analysis technique may include any of the commonly accepted methods. An analysis should be made of the proposed project in light of safety. Accident histories in close proximity to the site should be evaluated to determine the impact of proposed driveways and turning movements on existing problems_ Mitifa. ting Measures Based upon the results of the previous analysis, if it is determined that specific roadway improvements are necessary, the analysis should determine what improvements are needed. If the developer can reduce vehicular traffic by means of promoting transit and ridesharing usage, these methods are acceptable. Any proposed traffic signals should be documented with an appropriate warrant analysis of conditions in the horizon year with the development. Traffic signals should not be contemplated unless they meet warrants as prescribed in the Federal Highways "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices". Proposed traffic signals shall provide coordination programs to compliment the system. Any modifications necessary to insure safe and efficient circulation around the proposed site should be noted. Conclusions: This section should serve as an executive summary for the report. It should specifically define the problems related directly to the proposed developments and the improvements necessary to accommodate the development in a safe and efficient manner. A draft report shall be presented to the Development Services Division so that a review might be made of study dates, sources, methods, and findings. City Staff will then provide in writing all comments to the developer. The developer will then make all necessary changes prior to submitting the final report. Revised 3/12/2008 H:IDivision.s\Develop.serlPlan.reviTIA (3UIDF.LINFSIGUU)EL[NE5 FOR TRAFFIC IMPAC]' ANALYSIS 2008.doc K DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY EXHIBIT D - c►rYof � AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: March 31, 2014 Project Name: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Project Number: LLIA14-000241, ECF, PP Project Manager. Jill Ding, Senior Planner Owners: Saily Lou Nipert, 14004156(h Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 G. Richard Ouimet, 2923 Maltby Road, Bothell, WA 98012 Applicont%Contact: Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC, 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer Island, WA 98040 Project Location: 14038156 th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 Project Summary., Proposed subdivision of an 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would. result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being rcmoved from the proposed subdivision. The site is currently developed with two single family residences and a detached garage. An existing residence is proposed to remain on parcel 1423059057. All other structures are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. Exist. Bldg. Area SF: 1,700 SF Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): N/A Site Area: 329,129 SF Total Building Area GSF. N/A STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Co mittee issue a RECOMMENDATION: Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -MI. Project location Map ERC Report 14-000241.dorx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report rilEEAACIAVEATBRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-A0024�, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 2 of 11 I PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND I The proposal is to subdivide an 8.80 acre site composed of parcels 1423059122, 1423059023, and the east portion of 1423059057 into 31 single family residential lots for the future construction of new single family residences. The project site is located within the R-4 (residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation as well as the Residential Low Density (RLD) Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation. The surrounding properties to the north, south, and east of the project site are also zoned R-4. The properties to the west of the project site are located outside the City limits in King County. A Lot Line Adjustment (LUA14-000250) was submitted concurrently with the application for subdivision. The proposed lot line adjustment would remove the western 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 from the proposed preliminary plat..An existing 1,700 square foot residence is proposed to remain on this parcel. The applicant has indicated that the parcel would be subdivided under a future, separate subdivision application. The proposal to subdivide the 8.80 acre project site into 31 lots, results in a net density of 4.45 dwelling units per acre (after the deduction of 79,419 square feet of right-of-way proposed for dedication). The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. In addition to the proposed lots, the subdivision would also create two tracts (Tracts A and B). Tract A would be located at the southwest corner of the project site for stormwater detention. Tract B would be located at the northwest corner of the project site and is a 2 -foot wide open space strip separating proposed Road A from parcel 1423059057. Access to the proposed lots is proposed via a new "looped" public street (Roads A and B) with two access points off of 15e Avenue 5E. addition half street improvements are proposed along the project site's 156'" Ave SE street frontage. Proposed frontage improvements include paving, curb and gutter, 5 -foot sidewalks, and an 8 -foot planting strip. A significant tree inventory was submitted with the application materials, which identified 303 existing significant trees. Of the 303 existing significant trees, the applicant is proposing to retain 35 trees. There are 15 additional trees that could have been retained; however the applicant's arborist determined that the trees were either diseased or dangerous and not suitable for retention. Additional trees will be planted to ensure compliance with the City's tree retention requirements. 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. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation 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. ERC Report 14-OW241. docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development THE ENCLAVEAT BRIDLE RIDGE Report of error! Reference source not found. B. Mitigation Measures Environmental Review Committee Report LuA14-=241, FCf, PP Page 3 of 11 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). 2. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated December 27, 2013. 3. An easement for tree protection shall be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection; however the easement width shall be permitted to vary and shall be based on the width of the stand of trees to be retained. The easement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager and shall be recorded on the face of the final plat. C. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit 2 Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit 3 Conceptual Road and Grading Plan Exhibit 4 Drainage Control Plan Exhibit 5 Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan Exhibit 6 Tree Inspection Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated (dated February 18, 2014) Exhibit 7 Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC (dated February 5, 2014) Exhibit 8 Wetland Report prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. (dated February 3, 2014) Exhibit 9 Technical Information Report prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers (dated February 19, 2014) Exhibit 10 Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) Exhibit 11 Comment letter from David Michalski (dated March 21, 2014)' Exhibit 12 Comment letter from Roger Paulsen (dated March 22, 2014) Exhibit 13 Construction Mitigation Description 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 hove identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts, The applicant indicates that approximately 4,495 cubic yards of cut and 36,888 cubic yards of fill would be required for the construction of required plat improvements and new single family residences. Temporary erosion control measures would be implemented during construction FRC Report 14-=241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmeetol Review Committee Report rHE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-OW241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 4 of 11 including hay bales, siltation fences, temporary siltation ponds, controlled surface grading, and a stabilized construction entrance in accordance with City of Renton requirements. A Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February S, 2014) (Exhibit 7) was submitted with the project application. According to the submitted study, the existing site topography slopes from north to south with an elevation change of approximately 20 feet. Vegetation consists primarily of field grass, trees, and blackberries. The Soil Conservation Survey (SCS) map identifies Alderwood series soils across the entire project site. Alderwood soils formed in glacial till and typically present a slight to moderate erosion hazard and slow to medium runoff. They are comprised of gravelly ashy sandy loam transitioning to very gravelly sandy loam. A total of 6 test pits (TP -1 through TP -6) were excavated across the project site. Topsoil was encountered in the first 6 to 10 inches below grade at all test pit locations. Underlying the topsoil, native soils consisting primarily of loose to medium dense weathered glacial deposits transitioning to very dense unweathered glacial till were encountered extending to the maximum exploration depth of eight feet below existing grade. The soil conditions observed at the test pit locations are generally consistent with the SCS mapped soils. Perched groundwater was observed In three of the 6 test pits (TP -1, TP -3, and TP -6) at depths ranging from 2-3 feet. According to the submitted geotechnical study (Exhibit 7) groundwater seepage on till sites will typically be perched at variable depths within the substrata of glacial till soil near the contact between weathered and unweathered material; therefore seepage should be expected in all grading activities at this site, particularly during the winter, spring, and early summer months. The study states that fieldwork was conducted during an atypically dry winter and therefore _groundwater volumes should be expected to normally be higher than what was exhibited. The submitted geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) provides recommendations for site preparation and earthwork, wet season grading, foundations, seismic design, slab -on -grade floors, retaining walls, drainage, excavation and slopes, utility support and trench backfill, and pavement sections. Due to the high moisture content, the geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) recommends site gradingto be limited to the summer months. Staff recommends as a SEPA mitigation measure that project construction be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7). Mitigation Measures: Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7). Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review Regulations. 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: A wetland report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. (dated February 3, 2014) (Exhibit 8) was submitted with the application materials. According to the report, the site shows evidence of hydrophytic vegetation (buttercup and red -osier dogwood); however no indicators of hydric soils or wetland hydrology were present. The report concludes that there are no wetlands on the project site as two of the 3 required parameters required for wetland classification (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrology) were not present. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required FRC Report 14-WO241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & £conomk Development Emdronmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVEAT BRIDLE RIDGE 1UA140t7t7241, Eta, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 7 of 11 improvements including paving, curb and gutter, 5 -foot sidewalks, and an 8 -foot landscape strip are proposed along the project's 156th Avenue SE frontage and the frontage of new Roads A and B. There is a roadway stub located just south of the subdivision site. Pursuant to City of Renton code, the roadway is to be extended north in a straight line. However, the applicant indicated that by curving the road alignment a significant amount of trees could be retained along the east property line (see previous discussion above under vegetation). ATraffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) (Exhibit 10) was submitted with the application materials. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. The Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 10) also includes a Levu of Service (LOS) review of the surrounding intersections in the immediate vicinity. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. The Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 10) concludes that with the proposed development the surrounding intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) with the exception of the southbound approach to the 756th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The southbound approach to the intersection currently operates at LOS F with an approach delay of 94.8 seconds. The report (Exhibit 10) anticipates that the future condition of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue 5E/SE 14211d Place intersection without the proposed development would result in an approach delay of 133.2 seconds. The report (Exhibit 10) anticipates that the future condition of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection with the proposed development would result in an approach delay of 137.1 seconds, which results in an additional delay of 3.9 seconds attributable to the proposed development_ The report concludes (Exhibit 10) that this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS F with or without the new development. The project generated traffic at this intersection would increase by 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date. Staff has received two comment letters (Exhibits 11 and 12) -citing concerns with regards to the additional traffic that the proposed project will generate. Based on the submitted traffic report, the proposed project would result in the 9 new trips and a 3.9 second delay at the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection. The impacts of the additional trips would be mitigated through the payment of transportation impact fees. It is not anticipated that the proposed project significantly adversely impact the City of Renton's street system subject to the payment of code required impact fees and the construction of code required frontage improvements. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 7. Fre & Police ERC Report 14-"241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Dew1opment Fnwronmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLA VE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-tJOdZ41, FCS, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 8 of 11 Impacts: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development subject to the construction of code required improvements and the payment of code required impact fees. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 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. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14 -day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-M). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 9$057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 18, 2014. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. 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 ore not subject to the appeal processfor the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.0.2 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 plants 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) clays. 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. Fire: 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $479.28 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 2. The fire flow requirement for a single family home is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to ERC Report I4 -W02 41.dou Environmental Review Cornrnittee Report city of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development LUALC-000241, ECF, PP niEEtVC AVEATaRIDLERIDGE Page 9 of 11 Report of March 31, 2014 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. Existing fire hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code including 5 -inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from King County Water District 90. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20 -feet wide fully paved, with 25 -feet inside and 45 -feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructedto support a 30 -ton vehicle with 322 -psi point loading. Access is required within 150 - feet of all points on the buildings. Approved cul-de-sac turnarounds of 90 -foot diameter are required for dead end streets over 500 -feet long. Street system shall be design -ed to be extended to adjoining underdeveloped properties for future extension. Water: 1. Water service will be provided Water District 90. 2. A water availability certificate from Water District #90 will be required. 3. New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of ail lots. 4. Approved water plans shall be submitted to the City. Sewer: 1: Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton_ The project proposes to get sewer service by extending the 8 -inch existing sewer main, located south of the site on 156th Ave SE near the intersection with SE 144th Street and ext6ending the sewer main into. the plat. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE up to the north property line. The extension of the sewer main from the south on 156th Ave SE will require overlay pavement restoration of at least half street. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE up to the north property.line. 2. A sewer stub is to be extended from the proposed sewer main Lin the internal access road, to the east property line (with a 10 -foot sewer easement). A man hole is to be located on the sewer main in the proposed internal public street and a clean out at the end of the sewer stub. 3. System development fees for sewer are based on the size of the new domestic water meter that will serve each new lot. Fee per lot based on Ys -inch or 1 -inch water is $2,033.00. Estimated fee for sewer is $63,023.00. This fee is paid prior to issuance of the construction permit. 4. This parcel falls within the boundaries of the Central Plateau Sewer Special Assessment District. Fee calculated as of 3/24/2014 is $438.16 per new lot. Interest accrues at a daily rate of $0.05111 until the fee is paid. 5. All plats shall provide separate side sewer stubs to each building lot. Side sewers shall be a minimum 2% slope. Surface water. 1. A drainage plan and drainage report dated February 26, 2014 was submitted by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Inc. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full Drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report. The 8.7 acre vegetated site generally slopes to the southwest. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control. Flow control facility is sized to match the pre -developed rates ERCReport 14-000241.docx City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report THE ENr1AVE AT BRIDLE R06F LVA14-(100241, ECF, P? Report of March 31, 2014 Page 10 of Il for the forested condition extending from 50% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest comer of the site. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. 2. A geotechnical report, dated February 4, 2014 was submitted by Earth Solutions NW, 11C. The report identifies the soils as sand glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Due to the high moisture content, the geotech recommends site grading to be limited to the summer months. 3. Surface water system development fee is $1,228.00 per new lot. Fees are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. Estimated storm fee is $36,840.00. 4. A Construction 5tormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre. A 5tormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Transportation_ 1. The current transportation Impact fee rate Is $1,130.72 per new lot. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. Payment of the transportation impact fee is due at the time of issuance of the building permit. 2. A traffic analysis dated December 27, 2013, was provided by Traffix Northwest. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips.. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. An analysis focusing on the intersection of 156 Ave SE/SE 142 Place was done to. determine what, if any impacts the anticipated new peak hour AM and PM trips created by this development would have on an operational standpoint at this intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The intersection currently operates at LOS F. The result of the study indicates this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS F with the new development, while the project generated traffic at this intersection would increase to 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection_ Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date, 3. A looped roadway with stub ending is a temporary cul-de-sac is proposed as the internal site access. The cul-de-sac must meet City of Renton code and Fire Department requirements. To meet the City's complete street standards, the new internal roadway shall be designed to meet the residential access roadway per City code 4-6-060. The new internal roadway shall be a .53 --foot wide right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 -foot planter strip and a 5 -foot sidewalk installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road will be marked No Parking_ As per code, the minimum separation of intersections along an arterial is 125 feet. If in future there are significant concerns regarding left turns to and from the south loop of the internal public street onto 156th Ave SE, the City traffic operations may impose left tum restrictions at that intersection. 4. To meet the City's complete street standards, frontage improvements along the project side in 156"' Ave SE shall include 22 feet of paving from the centerline, gutter, a 0.5 foot wide curb, an 8 - foot planter strip and a 5 -foot roadway per City code 4-6-060. To build this street section, five and half feet of right of way dedication will be required, It is shown on the plans. 5. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and overlay Requirements. FRC Report 14-OW241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ruc FArriEVF AT &RIDLE RIDGE Report of March 31, 2014 En vironmentai Review Committee Report LUAI4d)=4t ECF, PP rage xi or ii 6. Street lighting is required for this plat. LED lighting plans will be included with the civil plan submittal. General Comments: 1. Separate permits and fees for, water meters, side sewer connection and storm connection will be required. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. Rockeries or retaining wails greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required. 4. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. ERC Report 14-000241.docx min M5 EXHIBIT i 'aw ENO I EXHIBIT 2 THE ENCLAVE 1 1 jai.. /I 4 �• � I soy i 1'i i I i � Irt ~ ! 1. �'�* e�1e++eFFi ��EE11iKi . �gy i P _ �� i : IA i j r i 1'i 1 1 � I M , i •' L•• yitp� 1 IN, At yA 1 r '. sillQL �p � �' : i�lt� •' r_-----'7 .1 . 1—`--�� •fir --Y-, ~•\'* ' ,'�� 1 I Y 1 I 1: j 1. .�h4 :•� 1 iZ ry.rY i _ __� �� -.,: r-••-^ f.. -I u`.� ='''CII• i4DI i �y k.# $ is 1J.' r r y P'_�`--_---- ^ `"•- -__; �' I'1Y Ll•Ofl =..�. 1 Z _ 1�6 � j Fry 1 llp j � , �[ n•I, �• r' -I"-^ 1 •'1 '6'11:• 1_ 1 _ 1 1fp� f ,.�� 1 i 'II: i� 1 .�1yi i•• ^l 11 J�3 -�• �r � 11 .0-. I �' it 4 1: • I• I: 1 : Ah. 1 _ 'i' 7!J a l�•• a 1- ` 1 I JJ..] �, - -.. Yr�� . �__pf.� �-~ _E��ri �_ ` i __��'�-• i-Y6f-^'�{�y'J�k.. �k �{ !' '�'a.{•L'd�• •fy�..� �a k�}-Or' 1 1� N:1 r �If 1 i 4 �� •I 1- ��-. lI r �tJ•' ''�P �I� +rlC" C I 1 31 1 1 1 I K v i f t 4K 1,,1-"-----' `�1 . � - .. �. -� �y�', aK' ?' `^r ` is i •ip �: y r '1 d' >1 t LSCCc yip4iGY w� ' � �� f � �� 4 - 1 V aglll lUllgR 1 q 2 E i��f� l� EE i ��■ � r Z � A w g t 4- ......,.,,,.�.�,.�.-.,tip_,..... ,.....,�,..� EXHIBIT 3 -mg FNrA avc EXHIBIT 4 THE ENCU EXHIBIT 5 EXHIBIT 6 Greenforest I ncorporateu Consulting Arbors-st 2)18)2014 RECEIVED Justin Lagers, Director of Land Acquisition & Development FEB 2 7 2014 PNW Holdings, LLC CITY OF RENTON 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 145 FtAWWNG DIVISION Mercer Island, WA 98040 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Tree Inspection, 14038 156th Ave 5E, Renton WA 98059 Dear Mr. Lagers: You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and evaluate the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. (Tax Parcel Numbers 142305-9023,9057, & 9112). 1 received a TREE CUTTING AND LAND CLEARING FLAN from D R Strong Consulting Engineers showing the location and numbers of the surveyed trees. I visited the site last week -and inspected the trees indicated on the sheet, which are the subject of this report. TREE INSPECTION My initial inspection was limited to visual observation from the subject parcels. Trees off site were included in the inspection but are not included in this report. Both health and structure were evaluated. 'A tree's structure is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to failure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. I identified the species of each tree, confirmed trunk diameter (DBH), estimated average dripline extension and recorded visible defects. At the east property boundary (Near tree 6185) is an infection center for a root rot disease. This is evidenced by a tree -free circular area (actually, semi circular as bisected by the parcel boundary) with standing dead trees, recently or previously failed trees, and trees with thinning and/or chlorotic canopies at the edge of the infection area. After my initial inspection I returned to the site and performed rootcrown excavations on the conifers bordering this infection area. I found both signs and symptoms of armillaria root rot fungus, as evidenced by the presence of mycelial fans and fungal rhizomorphs; oozing resin flow, and varying stages of root decay in approximately a dozgn trees on the north and south sides of this infection area. 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tei. 206-723-0656 EXHIBIT 7 PREPARED FOR AMERICAN CLASSIC HOMES February 5, 2014 "Geologist. 1t. CAA f S�aNAL Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 14038 - 156th AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON RECEIVED C D FEB 2 7 2014 CPN OF RENTON Earth Solutions NW, LLC � DjVj%0N 9805 - 136th Place Northeas% Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425-449-4704 _ Fax: 425-4494711 Toll Free: 866-336-8710 i EXHIBIT S 5ewal February 3, 2014 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC _ 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 R EC L I V E D Mercer Island, WA 98040 FEB 2 7 2014 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge -City of Renton SWC Job#13-187 Clfv OF RENTON PLANNiNC 0tVivjC)N, 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report describes our observations of any jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 200' of the proposed "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge" plat, which consists of two Parcels (#1423059023 R 9122), located on the east side of 156th Avenue SE, in the City of Renton, Washington {the Viciniry Map EXHIBIT S 5ewal February 3, 2014 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC _ 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 R EC L I V E D Mercer Island, WA 98040 FEB 2 7 2014 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge -City of Renton SWC Job#13-187 Clfv OF RENTON PLANNiNC 0tVivjC)N, 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report describes our observations of any jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 200' of the proposed "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge" plat, which consists of two Parcels (#1423059023 R 9122), located on the east side of 156th Avenue SE, in the City of Renton, Washington {the Viciniry Map EXHIBIT 9 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT for THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE Preliminary Plat 94038156"' Avenue S6 Renton, Washington DRS Project No. 13117 Renton Pile No, OwnerfApplrcant E PN1N Holdings LLC .F.:1V ED 9675 SE 36" Street, Shite 105 FEB 2 7 Mercer island, WA 98040 C2014 Repan Prepared by CITY 0;� PENTON P ANNiN� pIVJ,Sf0N D. R. STRQNG'Consulting Engineers, Inc. 620 7tI' Avenue Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827-3063 Report Issue Date February 19, 2014 (W014 D_ R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc.. EXHIBIT 10 THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36" St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by _ NORTHWEST -- TRAFFIC EXPERTS 11410 NE 124' St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 RECEIVED IE6272014 C1i'Y OF: REWON P NN'NG DWiSrdry EXHIBIT 11 David Michalski , 6525 se S* pl Renton, Wa 98059 March 21, 2014 All Ding, Senior Planner Planning Division 1055 So Grady Way i Renton, Wa 98057 This memo is regarding my concerns overthe Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-=241/ECF/PD. I five off of SF -5th pi and my residence buts up to this planned subdivision. My concern is regarding the traffic going North and South on 15e Ave Se. Since the buifdkng of the bridge across Cedar River traffic on i5e ave se is unbearable. Corning.out of any of the side streets off 1Se ave seWis sometimes impossible with wants as much as 15 minutes. At the 3 way stop south of me vehicles do a quick stop and accelerate up the hhl leaving no time between cars to allow access going both North and South. Frequently when large trucks traveling up the hill slow traffic down, there is a huge backlog of vehicles and this causes terrible traffic congestion. I see signs for additional development in the future on the West side of 155th. I feel that an -Immediate traffic study be implemented. I am really surprised there j isn't more accidents than I see. Has anyone thought'about additional access off of Maple Valley Mghway for folks to get unta Cemetary Rdad? RCCEI Sincerely,RAR 2 LAJ� David Michalski city OF PLIInP„,N 00 t Email: dcmichal(a7msn.com.. Ph# 425-271-7837 EXHIBIT 12 March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED — Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mai! to Avoid Delay @ ldin entonwa ov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project #LUA 14-00024 1, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22"d. I also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5d' Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5P' Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service . associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 15th' Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142"d intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new tragic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156x' and 142' that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156h north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 5d' Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139th PQ in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142"d, and then only E the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156d` even more difficult. The addition, of ANY new trips to SE 156' between SE 5'h Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this project to be im lemented without ad nate miti ation has siifiicant tential to threaten public health, safety_and welfare for the existing residents who access 156d' from SE 5'h Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 5$.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 15671 142nd intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156d' during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 15el 142' intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 1501 142°d intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes Iocated along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes – particularly for those furthest east on SE 5'h Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it:has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accouture waste water access to the new ar Ik&&-hrj—ng install d aspa�+ � project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot #4, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot. of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot #4. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 24a' deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22' public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination prior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22"d, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22"d to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at Ro=rAPauls en24cs.com. Sincerely, Sent ETectronlcarfy *ithout Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice ofApplication -400 City of : NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted'with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the tarty of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER_ LUAl4-00024% ECF, PP PROJECT NAMU The Enclave at Bridle Rldge PROJECT OESCRIPTIONr Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project slte located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would resuh In the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and a) and a new public street The proposed lots vmuld range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566' square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250] is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which wig result In 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision- No crltical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038156' Ave Sf OPTIONAL DETERMINATION Of NON -SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (OBIS -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 he issued. Comment periods far 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 -K PERMIT APPUCATION DATE: February 27, 2014 NO'110E OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 APPOCANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON-. Justin Lagers/ PN W Hotdings, LLC/ 9675 SE 30 Street Suite lOS, Mercerliland, WA 96040/ f. 4Litadn@anmictandanichome.s.com Permits/Revlew Requested: EnvironrAtntai (SEPA)Review, preiiminary Plat Review Other Permits which may be. required: Construction, Building, Fire Requested Studies: Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Traffic Study Location where application may, be reviewed; Department of Community & Economic Development (EfDj-Planning Division, Sixth Aour Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 91!057 PUBLIC HEARING: Publichearing is tentatively scheduled for April 22, 2014 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renter, Co(infil Chambers at 10:00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at LOSS South Grady way. If you would Rke to be made a parry of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED- Planning Division, 3055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No- The Enclave at Bridle Rldge/LUA14-OW241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS:tyf Statej7ip:. TELEPHDNE NO.: CON515TENCy DNERVIEW, Zonirtgf Land Else: The subject site is designated Residential Low Density (COMPALD) on the Cf:y of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Rd on the City's Zoning MaiL Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental ($EPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For project Niltigatlont The project will be subject to the C'ny's SEPA ordinance, RMC A-2-110 Residential Development. and other Appfrcabfe codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures:, , The following Mitlgotion Mosures v✓rll likely be Imposed on the proposed project These recommended Mitigation ]Measures address project Impacts not covered by existing codes and reguletlons as cited above, Project cvnstructfon shad be'required to comply with the submitted geotechnical report: Project construciVan shall be required to comply with the submitted. traffic study. Comments on the above application must be submitted irk writing to rdl Ding, Senior Planner, CSO— Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 989.57, by 5:D9 PM on March 2A, 2014. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on April 22, ZD14, at.10:00 AM, Coundl Chambers; Seventh Floor, Rernton Gly Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, If you are interested in attending the hearjngr please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at 1425) 430-6578. If comments cannot be whmitted in writing by the date indicated above, you May -still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing Fxaminer. 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 wig automatically become a party of record and wiU be notified ofany decision on this pmJect, CONTACT PERSON: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6598; EmI: ldingP rentofi wa." PLEA5E INCLUDETHE PROJECT AfumBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION If you would lite to be mode a party of record to tecelve further information on this proposed projeO, complete this form and return to: Gty of Renton, CED --Planning 0"IM 105550. Grady Way, Renton, WA 48057_ Namel5le No.: The Enc€a're at Sridle RidgelLUA14-000241, ECA; PP NAM E' MAILING ADDRES5: GtylstaxfJbp: TELEPHONE NO EXHIBIT E Clary of"-' NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON—SIGNIFICANCE—MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master Application has been flied and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CER) —Planning Division of the City of Renton, The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 3.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre] toning designation. The piaposel would result in The creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and'a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,556 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-00(3250} is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 34,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivisloo. No critical areas are present an the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038 1561" Ave SE 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 43.21CAW, 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 fallowing the Issuance of the Threshold Determination of Man -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M), A 14 -day appeal period will follow the issuance o1 the DNS -M, PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 2614 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Justin Lagers / PNW Holdings, LLC 19675 SE 36'v Street Suite 105, Mercer Island, WA 98040 / EMU justin@americanciessichomes.com Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (5EPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Review other Permits which may required: Construction, Building, Fire Requested Stadies: Drainage Report, Geotechnlcal Report, Traffic Study Location where application may be reviewed: Departmentof Community &Economic Development (CED)—Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98957 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hgarine Is tentatively scheduled for Aar,(I x2. Z014 before the Renton Hearing Examiner In Renton Counclr Cham. t>grs at 10:00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. if you would like to be made a party of record to feceive further Information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CEO — Planning Division, 1055 5o. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, Name/File No:: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA34.000241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: City/State/Zip: TELEPHONE NO,: Czty of.� CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW; Zonirtg/Land Use; The subject site is designated Residential Low O*rWty (COMP -ALD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R4 on the ClWs Zoning Map. . Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental ($EPA) Checklist Development Regutations Used For Project Mitigation, The project will be subject to the Ws SERA ordinance„ RMC 4-2-i10 Residential Development and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: 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. • Project construttfod Shoff be required to comply with the submitted geotechnitoi report, • Project constructlon shall be requited W comply with the submhted truffic study. iommerds on the above application must be submitted in writing to 1111 Ding, Senior Planner, CED - Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on March 74, 2(114. This matter Is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing an April 22, 2014, at 10;00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady way, Renton. If you are Interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduied .at (425) 430-b578, 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 mall, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6598; Emi: iding0rentonwa.goy PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION 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.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-000241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: City/State/Zlp: April l t, 2014 City of Renton Attn: City Clerk Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: Requests for Reconsideration and Appeal Dear City Clerk's Office, CITY OF gENTON p(MA 11 16 20141 in RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Enclosed with this cover letter, please find my official Requests for Reconsideration and Appeal, pursuant to the guidance provided by your office, and the information contained within Renton Code Section 4.8.110(E). eQ �ta r+. 1� Also enclosed is the requited fee for the Appeal, in the amount of $250. It is my understanding that the Appeal fee will only be processed if my Request for Reconsideration is denied, or results in no change in the City's Threshold Detern- nation. I plan to be traveling betw=een this date and what I understand to be the earliest possible formal appeal hearing date of .April 22, 2014. If a new hearing date is set, or if any associated procedural actions are requited, please contact me via electronic mail at RogerAPaulsenL&cs.corn. A phone message may be left for me at (425) 228-1589. Thank you for your assistance in navigating what has proven to be a complicated process for an ordinary citizen like myself. Sincerely 6Dn 6617 SE 5`h Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 Enclosure(s): Request for Reconsideration, with attachments Request for appeal, with attachments Personal Check #9443 4 lJ� J� April 16, 2014 , Ciry of Renton � ' 0 + Attn: Hearing l.;xaminer el Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way � P Renton, WA 98057 CITY OF RENTON APR 16 2014 1()-.5-rJVn RFCF EVER cyovll CITY CLERK'S OFFICE REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO CITY OF RENTON CODE SECTION 4.8.110(E) Dear Hearing Examiner, Pursuant to City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4.8.110(E), please accept this letter as a formal Request for Appeal of the Environmental (SEPA) Threshold Determination issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee for project # LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. As a party of record for this project, this Request for Appeal is filed with the intent of utilizing all available administrative remedies to see that the adverse environmental impacts of this project are adequately understood, documented, and mitigated by the City and/or applicant -- all in the spirit of the City of Renton's adopted codes, policies and procedures. As an ordinary citizen, I found the City of Renton's code section 4.8.110 on appeals to offer very little practical guidance or direction with respect to how the Request for Reconsideration and Appeals processes work in concert with one another. While I encourage you to dedicate time to improving this information for the benefit of future citizens, the time provided for me to become educated and fie this request in a timely manner leaves me with no option other than to simply offer the best I can. To that end, I beg your patience and understanding if the format of this appeal Request is not in-line with what you may typically receive. Please note that at the direction of the City Clerk I have also filed a concurrent Request for Reconsideration pursuant to Renton Code Section 4.8.1 10(E) (2) with the understanding that if the Reconsideration Request is not gtanted, this appeal will be processed, and my appeal payment check cashed. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request, and for your thoughtful attention to the issues I believe warrant additional study and mitigation in order to adequately protect the public safety, health and interests of the citizens of our communit<,. As a long-standing member of this community, 1 both accept and embrace growth and change in the City of Renton. Unfortunately, my engagement in this process reseals what I believe to be serious missteps by the City in processing this application. In the spirit of ensuring that the public process we hold so dear in this country is respected, I submit this Request for Appeal. Standing As an adjacent landowner, and as a party of record who properly submitted written comments regarding the concerns identified in this Request for Appeal (Exhibit A), and as a City of Renton resident who has only one point of access to the City's transportation network via the SE 5°i Place/ 156`s AVE SE intersection, my public health, safety and welfare are at -risk should the City not carefully consider this Request for Appeal and adopt the necessary actions I am requesting. To allow additional unmitigated traffic from this project absent a full understanding of the project's impacts as is required under SEP:, has the potential to adversely impact both my personal safety interests, as well as my private property interests as they relate to the value of my property at the time of future re -sale. For these and other reasons, I believe that I have the required standing to bring this Request for Appeal. Identification of Concerns for Which This Appeal is Requested The issues for which I request this Appeal relate to the transportation impacts of the proposed project, and to the public continent notice and process associated with the Threshold Determination. Point of Appeal #1. Transportation After review of the Environmental Review Committee Report for this project dated March 31, 2014, (Exhibit D) it is clear that the City's Environmental Review Committee made an error in basing their Determination upon the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Traffex (Exhibit B, dated December 27, 2013). The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) relied upon for this Determination fails to comply with the City's own policy for such analyses. Specifically, this analysis fails to study the AM Peak traffic condition in addition to the PM Peak traffic condition associated with the project. In the TIA submitted by the applicant, and relied upon by the ERC, the author states as follows; '7 -he scope of this anaysis is based upon the preliminary plat site plan and the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development". By relying upon this report, the City failed to adequately inform itself with the full range of potential adverse environmental impacts associated with the transportation demands of this project, as the report is clearly not in compliance with the City's Policy= Guidelines For Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development, attached as Exhibit C to this request. Specifically, the City's policy states clearly that for a project such as this, where A.M. or P.M. Peak Hour Trip contributions are X20, a complete Traffic Impact Analysis shall be completed, and said analysis shall present and consider both the A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour conditions, among other analysis. See excerpt below: 2 Site Generated Traffic Volumes: The analysis should present a tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed. It is a matter of fact that the Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon by the City of Renton ERC did not provide the minimum information and analysis required by the City of Renton's own policy, and therefore the ERC has erred in issuing their Determination absent this information, and their Determination should be found to be arbitrary and capricious, in addition to in error. Point of Appeal #2. Transportation My second concern also relates to transportation, and the ERC's apparent misunderstanding of the scope of the Traffic Impact Analysis that was received by the City. On page 47 of their March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report, the Committee states: 'The Traffic Impact llnalysis (T-xhibit 10) also includes a Level of 'Sennce (LOS) review of the rurroundin�g intersections in the immediate vicinity... " This report goes on to conclude that: "...the surmunding intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) with the exception of the southbound approach to the 156'x" Avenue SE/ ST,' 142" � Place intersection. " Both of these statements appear to assume that the analysis completed by the applicant actually looked at existing intersections other than the 156`'/ 142"`' Place intersection. They did not. In fact, the 156`h Ave SE/ 142"" intersection is the ONLY existing intersection that was analyzed by the applicant. Despite public comment informing city staff and the ERC of concerns at the closest adjacent existing intersection to the proposed project (SE 5`h Place), the 1�.RC did not require additional information from the applicant to inform an understanding of the impacts at this intersection. Additionally, by only analyzing the P.M. Pear Hour (just 2 hrs. 45 min on December 17`h), the analysis completely failed to understand or analyze the impacts of AA4. Peak Hour traffic conditions on 156"' at SE 5" Place, or other impacted intersections to the north. The ERC's Threshold Determination is not supported by fact, as it clearly did not include an analysis of additional existing intersections, despite the ERC concluding that it did. Because of this, the ERC erred when they based their Threshold Determination upon the TIA. 3 Point of Appeal #3 Transportation Ironically, in light of Concerns #1 and #2 above, when one digs deeper into the March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report, we find that City of Renton staff are not only aware of potential adverse impacts of the proposed project as they relate to access from the project to 156`h, but they go so far as to inform the applicant that they may "...impose /0 turn restrictions at that intersection. " (See Exhibit D, Page 10 of 11, Transportation Item #3). This already contemplated "remedy" identified by City of Renton staff not only acknowledges that there is a serious Level of Service issue that is likely to be exacerbated by this project given the lack of available capacity at the 156`h/ 142"' intersection, but also suggests that the City's "remedy" will force this traffic to the right, or north, onto 156th, further degrading the Level of Service at the 156th/ SE 5th intersection, and other intersections to the north along 156`h. Again, since no analysis was completed to inform an understanding of potential adverse traffic impacts north of the proposed project on 156`h, the ERC's Threshold Determination could only have been based upon incomplete information. This is an error on the part of the ERC, and should be corrected as part of this Request for Appeal. Concern #4 Transportation This concern relates specifically to how the ERC proposes to mitigate the impacts that were identified by the study. In their Threshold Determination, the ERC mitigates the identified transportation impacts by adopting, by reference, the recommendations identified by the applicant's consultant in the Traffic Impact Analysis. When one looks closer, we find that, other than otherwise required street frontage improvements, the only mitigation recommended is the payment of an otherwise required Traffic Mitigation Fee based upon the number of lots in the proposed project. In the ERC's March 31, 2014 Report (Page 7 of 11) they conclude as follows: It is not anticipated that the proposed project significantly adversely impact (sic) the City of Renton's street system subject to the payment of code requirrd impact fees and the construction of code required frontage improvements. " Unfortunately, nowhere is a nexus established between the impacts identified in the TIA and the proposed mitigation. A review of the City's 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program reveals that the deficiencies of the 156`h/ 142'`' intersection are not addressed in any form. For this reason, the ERC has erred in simply applying the mitigations recommended by the applicant, as they fail to satisfy the requirements under State Law (RCW 58.17 & the Growth Management Act) that capacity for additional traffic be available at the time of project approval. In order for this to be true, there must be an established nexus between the fees that will be paid and the deficient traffic conditions at the 156`h/ 142'x, or other intersections where a proper analysis may indicate a Level of Service deficiency. 4 Concern #5 Transportation .also related to the above concerns (ie:, the transportation impacts of the proposed project) I have received new information in response to a Public Records Request which I filed to better understand the City's internal review process as it relates to transportation concurrency, a requirement under State lav and City of Renton ordinances. As you can see in the e-mail below dated April 15, 2014 from Steve Lee, Dev. Engineering Manager, it is noted that the City's Transportation Division is "currently asses ng any improvements are warranted (tf any)...': This confirms that work is on-going at this time (April 15th) to both evaluate and mitigate the proposed project. This e-mail serves to document yet again that the ERC was not fully informed with respect to the likely or probable adverse environmental impacts and possible mitigations associated with this project. This constitutes an error on the part of the EAC, as well as the City's development review process, and further validates the merits of this Request for Appeal. Sandi Weir From; Steve lee soft Tuesday, April 15, 2014 11.14 AM To: CityClerk Records Cc Jan lllian: fill Ding; Neil R. Watts: Jennifer T, Henning: Robin Flair subjtt RE: New Public Records Request - PRR-14 5 (Paulsen) Attachr emit TranspoConcPo4cy140415.pdf See attached files that are related documentation on the City process tar concurrency, standards and process relating to Renton Code Section 4-6-070, i believe this is the information Mr. Paulsen is seeking: The information, as extracted from the approved City Comprehensive Plan, provides Mr, Paulsen how the Cityadministersa multi modal test, Renton Code Section 4-6-070 notes fliat transportations concurrency can be a combination of improvements or strategies in place at the time of building permit issuance, or within a reasonable ammnt of time after building issuance, per 4-6-070 AA, or a financial commitment is placed. A financial commitment can be the traffic mitigation fees paid for the new development and is generally used by the City for improvements throughout the City. Our Transportation Division is the technical review authority and is currently assessing any improvements are warranted (if any) (or& 5675, 12-3-2012). The Transportation Division has currently provided some direction as to aro initial response with the statement, "within the City of Renton, the steep topography between Maple Valley Highway and the upper plateau (and on to Cemetery Road) makes it in feasible to provide additional access. Widening; 1-405 (which the State Is pursuing) to provide more traffic capacity could attract some traffic now using 156 th SE to access Cemetery Road." Thanks, -Steve lee, PE, MS, CESCI City of Renton Dev. Engineering Manager 425.430.7299 slee rentonwa. ov Concern #6 Public Process and Notice As raised in my initial comment letter (Exhibit A), I remain concerned that the City='s notice with respect to the opportunity for public comment on issues of concern, such as the transportation concerns I have raised herein, misrepresented the actual opportunities for public enggge�in the environmental (SEPA) review of this project. In short, the notice implies that a citizen having concern, who is not able to provide written comment prior to the March 24, 2014 deadline, will have the opportunity to provide comment at the Public Hearing on April 22"'. Nowhere in the notice to the public is it explained that by waiting until April 22"', the opportunity to provide input to inform the SEPA review and determination, will have passed. (Exhibit E "Notice of Application.,.") As a result, the record now shows that only two public comment letters were received prior to the Threshold Determination being issued. I believe that you will find that many more people will attend the Public Hearing on April 22°'' and they will do so raising issues that should have been considered as part of the SEPA determination for this project. I fully= understand the efficiency that the City is attempting to achieve by combining their notice and comment periods, but I urge you to review these notices carefully to understand the concern I am attempting once again to raise here. Requested Outcomes Based upon each and all of the above concerns, and as part of this Request for Appeal, I ask that the Hearing Fxaminer take the following action: Withdraw the Threshold Determination for this project and require that the applicant work with city staff to prepare a proper Traffic Impact Analysis for this project. This analysis should be sufficient to adequately inform the City and public's understanding of the likely impacts of this project during both the A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour, including at the immediately adjacent intersection of SE 5`h Place and 156"' Ave. SE, and other intersections likely to be impacted further north on 156`' Further, given the misrepresentation of the public comment opportunity= as it relates to informing the City's SEPA review process, I request, once an adequate and proper Traffic Impact Analysis conforming to the City's requirements is completed, that the Notice of Application and SEPA comment periods be re -started to allow the City of Renton's public an opportunity to participate m the development review process for this project. Please note that at the time of submittal of this request for appeal, I have pending Public Records Requests pending with the City of Renton. Assuming those requests are satisfied in a timely manner, I respectfully request the ability to further inform the record in support of this appeal prior to or during any open record heating which may be held for this purpose. Thank you again for providing this opportunity to request Appeal of the Environmental Review Committee's 'Threshold Determination for this project. Respectfully Submitted R n 6617 SE 5`h Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A — SEPA Determination Comment Letter Exhibit B — Traffic Impact Analysis Exhibit C — Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development Exhibit D — Environmental Review Committee Report Exhibit E — Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated 7 EXHIBIT A March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED — Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mail to Avoid Delay @ Jdingkrentonwa.gov Re. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project #LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22nd. I also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5th Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5th Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 156th Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142"d intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156" and 142"1 that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself; the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156`h north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 5th Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139th Pl.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142nd, and then only IF the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 1561h even more difficult. EXHIBIT A The addition of ANY new trips to SE 156`" between SE 5th Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this proiect to be implemented without adequate miti Cation has significant potential to threaten public health, safety and welfare for the existing residents who access 156th from SE 5th Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156th/ 142"J intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156th during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156`h/ 142nd intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156th/ 142"d intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 5th Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accommodate future waste water access to the new sewer lines being installed as part of this project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. 2 EXHIBIT A Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot #4, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot 44. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 24th deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22" d public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determinationrp for to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22"d, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22nd to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. EXHIBIT A If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at Ro gerAPaulsenCaw s. com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application 4 EXHIBIT B THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 905 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by Zj: �*ffEx TR,4 F'FJC E�'F'E"F�* T9 11410 NE 1241h St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 rAgAfty %VGmrHwror MAFF/C Exmmgrs 11410 lE 124th St. #590 0 9M PhM:425.522.4118 ��A2.522.4311 December 27, 2013 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW HoldinRCs, LLC. 9675 SE 36 St., Suite 105 Mercier Island, WA 98040 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: We are pleased to present this traffic impact analysis report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located on two parcels at 14038 156th Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The scope of this analysis is based upon the preliminary plat site plan and the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Develo ment. Our summary, conclusions and recommendations begin on page 5 of this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and study area. Figure 2 shows the preliminary site plan. The two site access streets connect to1561h Ave SE. The site access streets will have curb, gutter and sidewalk on both sides. Curb, gutter and sidewalk will also be installed on the site frontage on 1561' Ave. SE as shown on the site plan. Development of The Enclave at Bridle Ridge is expected to occur by the year 2015. Therefore, for purposes of this study, 2015 is used as the horizon year. One existing single family residence within the project site will be removed with this development. Page t The Enclave at Bridle Ride Try TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION The 31 single-family units in the proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge are expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the street traffic peak hours as shown below: Time Period Trip Rate Trips Trips Total Trips per unit Entering Exiting 148 149 Average Weekday 9.57 297 50% 50% AM Peak Hour 0.75 7 23 25% 75% PM Peak Hour 1.01 31 630 37 0 A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. The trip generation is calculated using the average trip rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, for Single Family Detached Housing (ITE Land Use Code 210). These trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including resident, visitor, and service and delivery vehicle trips. Figure 3 shows the estimated trip distribution and the calculated site -generated traffic volumes. The distribution is based on existing traffic volume patterns, the characteristics of the road network, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times, and previous traffic studies. EXISTING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Street Facilities The streets in the study area are classified per the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan as follows: 156'h Ave. SE Minor Arterial SE 142nd PI. Residential Access Page 2 The Enclave at Bridle Ride nLffM--.r 1569' Ave. SE has a speed limit of 25 mph and consists of two 12 ft. lanes and a shoulder approximately six feet wide in the vicinity of the project site. 156th Ave SE is straight and flat at the access streets with excellent sight distance in both directions. SE 142" PI. has a speed limit of 25 mph and consists of two 12 ft, lanes and a paved shoulder. The 156" Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. is an all- way stop controlled intersection with stop signs on all three approaches. There are no curbs, gutters or sidewalks on 156t' Ave SE or SE 142nd PI. in the project vicinity. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic Volumes Figure 4 shows existing, future without project and future with project PM peak hour traffic volumes at the two proposed site access streets to 156th Ave. SE and the 1561" Ave SEISE 142nd St. intersections. Per the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development intersections and road segments that experience an increase of 5% in traffic volumes require analysis. No intersections meet these requirements. However, a level of service calculation was performed for these three intersections due to their proximity to the site. A PM peak hour traffic count was performed on 156th Ave SEISE 142ndPl. intersection and is included in the Technical Appendix. Level of Service Analvsis Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic flow, and the perception of these conditions by drivers or passengers. These conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions (free flow, little delay) and LOS F the worst (congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate and LOS E and F are low. Table 1 shows calculated level of service (LOS) for existing and future conditions including project traffic at the pertinent street intersection. The LOS was calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway CaDacily Manual The LOS shown indicates overall intersection operation. At intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average control delay per vehicle. The LOS and corresponding average control delay in seconds are as follows: Purge 3 The Enclave at Brldie Ride A&M[ TYPE OF INTERSECTION A B C D E F Signalized < 10. 710.0 and 720.0 and X35.0 and X55.0 and X80. 0 <20.0 <35.0 — <55.0 — <80.0 — 0 Stop Sign Control 10 <Q 710 and X15 715 and <25 725 and <35 735 and <50 350 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figure 4 shows projected 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing traffic volume counts plus background traffic growth. The background growth factor accounts for traffic volumes generated from other approved but unbuilt subdivisions and general growth in traffic traveling through the area. A 3% per year annual background growth rate was added for each year of the two year time period (for a total of 6%) from the 2013 traffic count to the 2015 horizon year of the proposal. The 3% per year growth rate should result in a conservative analysis since the growth in traffic volumes has remained relatively flat the last several years. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Figure 4 shows the projected future 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site -generated PM peak hour traffic volumes were added to the projected future without project volumes to obtain the future with project volumes. Table 1 shows calculated LOS for future with project volumes at the study intersections. The study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS of for future 2015 conditions except for the southbound approach to the 156th Ave. SEISE 142nd Pl. intersection that currently operates at LOS F and continues to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. The project adds 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection that is 0.65 % of the total trips. Since this is well below the 5% City of Renton volume increase threshold, and the LOS remains unchanged, the proposed project does not significantly impact the operation of the intersection. The Minimum Design Standa s Table for Public Streets and Alleys in the City of Renton Street Standards, requires a site access street to be located a minimum of 125 ft. from an intersection on a minor arterial. The south site access street is located Page 4 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge nLffm. approximately 250 ft north of the 156th Ave, SE/SE 142nd PI. intersection and therefore meets the standard. TRAFFIC MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City of Renton requires a Transportation Mitigation Fee payment of $75 per new daily trip attributed to new development. One existing single family residence on site will be removed with this development resulting in a net increase of 30 single family homes, The net new daily trips due to this development are 287 trips (30 units x 9.57 daily trips per unit). The estimated Transportation Mitigation Impact Fee is $21,525 (287 daily trips X $75 per daily trip). SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that The Enclave at Bridle Ridge be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: Construct the street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk for the site access streets and site frontage on 156th Ave. SE. • Contribute the approximately $21,525 Transportation Mitigation fee to the City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince@nwtraffex.com or larry(cD_nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Paye 5 rr �oiva is � Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the worst approach or movement which determines the LOS for an unsignalized intersection per the Transportation Research Board fthway Capacity Manual (XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 6 TABLE 1 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY The Enclave at Bridle Ridge TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS INTERSECTION EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2015 WITH 2013 PROJECT PROJECT North Site Access t 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 12.6) South Site Access ! 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 11.2) 156d' Ave SE/ EB (D 25.6) EB (D 29.8) EB (D 30.7) SE 142nd Fl. NB (B 12.4) NB (B 12.9) NB (B 13.0) SB (F 98,8) SB (F 133.2) SB (F 137.1) Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the worst approach or movement which determines the LOS for an unsignalized intersection per the Transportation Research Board fthway Capacity Manual (XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 6 FWA NeaRrfaw�sr TRAF'F'IC EXPf i4T.9 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure Vicinity Map 1 1 rngiffEx TRArr1c EXPERTS The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure Site Plan 1 2 WMAVESE - ----- --- _-- 4 jw Jaw i ! : I -3 'h► n7, 7 t A. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure Site Plan 1 2 4 jw Jaw i ! : I -3 'h► n7, 7 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure Site Plan 1 2 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 20 Exit 11 Total 31 n �4 t rr2 IT c7 N Acwss/ 156th ave asst 156th Ave riBthAupt AF W> Pi The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton PM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution Legend 15% Percentage of Project Traffic —3 PM Peak Flour Traffic Volume Figure 3 w NORTHWEST a ca TRAA'X IC EXPER7'5 M N �p r tr M o ave in Ln CO 309, 1007" N cr) M10 156th Opt N Access/ 156th ave In CR c� 326 106 , i CDri- 0)CD 1561h Ave/ SE 142 PI 4 4 (D i r t r 2 N Access! 156th ave S Access/ 156th Ave 4, i CDCII The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ave e` CI} tv t(? M 332, 1pe-'., 3 COcr) crico Figure 4 f€ i' j € Xtt St d44 . g, � � IA2rtd St m Future Project Future Existing without Project Traffic with Project M N �p r tr M o ave in Ln CO 309, 1007" N cr) M10 156th Opt N Access/ 156th ave In CR c� 326 106 , i CDri- 0)CD 1561h Ave/ SE 142 PI 4 4 (D i r t r 2 N Access! 156th ave S Access/ 156th Ave 4, i CDCII The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ave e` CI} tv t(? M 332, 1pe-'., 3 COcr) crico Figure 4 TECHNICAL APPENDIX Lig�Prepared for T r a ffcx Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Pltolta: (?.53)92b-6009 Fh%: (253)922.7217 E•Mall� Trintn#TG2lr,c.00m WHFI SH kttaeeotlon: 156th Arc SF: B Sl_ 142nd I'l Dale of Count: Tuts 12.'17,2013 Location: Henson. wtishingtun Chetkad By: 3trs Tare Ftom North tut 8) FtomS0lTDtan (MB) Rom Eat on(W8) FtomWeetan(®) lnteivel lnletval I56thAve SE 156thAvcSE 0 SE142adPI Tolet Fitdin s7 T 1, S R T L S R T' L S R T L 5 R 4;15 P 2 d 16 126 0 32 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 28 283 4:30 P 6 0 13 172 1 l4 12 0 11 0 n 0 D 70 0 27 308 4:45 P 2 0 18 tib 0 28 15 0 4 0 0 0 0 99 0 29 345 5:00P 0 0 IN €79 2 22 19 0 0 0 t€ 0 D 70 0 20 328 5:15 P 1 0 19 1 14$ l 28 17 0 0 D 11 U 0 70 0 24 306 5:30 P 1 U 1 20 1 148 0 19 10 0 0 0 D 4 0 1 72 0 21; 297 5:45P 0 p 1 29 1 L51 0 1N 19 0 0 0 U 0 0 1 93 0 29 339 6:00P 0 0 24 1 144 2 16 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 7d 0 17 291 6:15P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 D 0 q 0 0 0 0 0 5;30 P 0 0 0 D D 0 0 0 U 9 0 0 0 0 D 0 U .6145 P 0. 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 D 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 7-M p 0 0 0 0 D D D 0 0 U D 0 0 0 U p 0 Total 1 Sun' 12 0 157 1224 G 179 117 q 0 U p 0 € 618 1--0 1 202 1 2497 119--*Elaur. 4:B PM to 5:151161 Total 4 0 68 1655 d 92 63 0 0 {€ 0 0 0 309 0 100 1287 A ch 723 1$5 0 409 1287 14IF 0.43 156th Aw. SE 1095 1 _ .T U• _ �1'fikc SE 142nd PI ass uy L q�Iid 7s7 1'vll� U tJ1kCr 0 1136 3Dg aw ( d:15ph1 to 5:15 PM IfA3 Pnn• A— N 5 F: VY Pa= 92 63 E91.0 Pill; Peek [lour volunte IN70t D Flikc� D PJIF WIV INT 02 D LB n%a INT 113D 76S ts� C7sccl: Wit INT ne A In: 1287 lti}S tua 2.N':'. B+T 65 .., .,...,.. 0 323 Out: 1287 SR TN7 ne Kfl Pti[3S 0 156th Ave SE T 1a1. 0.93 ].(1% ENT 07 � ,' ... 0 BIey0 h. From: B $Ei tleeles INT 69 0 87101 INV Ise r INFffi � .. 1 —.. .. .......... ti 15+ INF !0 '� �. ., ....., U W03 .................... 0 lS• INT 71 .......' ........: 1 i [k 1w G4 INr F2 I E D niT OS j .. D 8.19 0 Prt 178 N0 HIKES _ ,.. ._ ._EI 8-14) Special Mules Rolling queuc lw-nded SR-w most thcrc MLT 177 ..... `.... ...... j ENT OB ......_. _. 0 N-Iq 0 5.6 were 5.8 vrhicles sealally Alalrped. 1NT q0 15rsi�lifie5 Faflinp qucuc M Wr ys Jcould sm. INT 10 - 0 INT71 ..............e.......... ........, ., 0 W12 ....... .... 0 0 0 0 U U 0 0 0 0 TRA13184M fl1 Existing PM Peak 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Arse SE 1212612013 � 1 -N HCM Level of SeMce F intemectian:Capa* UtiNza. Pion 85.7% ICU LOW] of Ssrvk)e. E Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Lane Configurations 4 T+ Sign CMIMI Stop Strip Stop Volume (vph) 309 140 92 63 68 655 Peak Hour Fes: ,< 0.93. 0;93 0.93 0.93 0:93 0,93 Hourly flow fate (vph) 332 108 99 68 73 704 Volume Total (uph) 440 167 777 vqll6maLeft �h)' 332 gg 0 Volume Right (vph) 108 0 704 Hadj %) 0:03 0.12 4.51 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.6 5.2 Dagree Lftllizatian, x, 0.75 0:80 1.12 - Capacity (vehlh) 572 526 679 Control Delay (s) 25k;::,.; 12A., 94.8" Approach Delay (s) 25.6 12.4 94.8 Approa� (. QS D .5 F HCM Level of SeMce F intemectian:Capa* UtiNza. Pion 85.7% ICU LOW] of Ssrvk)e. E Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Future Without Project 3: SE 142nd Pi & 156th Ave SE 1212612013 --,0 4\ fi Lane Configurations Y Sign t;eritrol'; Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 328 106 98 67 72 695 Fe&Hourfaetor 0.93 0.93 0,93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 353 114 105 72 77 747 Volume Total (vph) 467 177 825 Volume Left (vph) 353 t.05. , D Volume Right (vph) 114 0 747 Hadj (s) , 0M 0,1Z 451 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.7 5.3 Degree Uiilrzatiokx 0.80 0.33 122 Capac4 (vehfh) 571 518 665 Cont DElay.(s) 28.8, 12:9 133:2 Approach Delay (s) 29.8 12.9 133.2 Appraadh LOS ' D 1. B F y ....... 85.8 HCM Level of Service F Irffe t ori C Pac ty'ilti zalidn 90.33'6 ICU Level of 8 r*e E Analysis Period (min) .................... 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - deport Page 1 Future With Project 3: SE 142nd PI & 166th Ave SE 12/26/2013 -A -IV 4N t 1 41 Lane Configurations Suri Control Stop stop. Stop Volume (vph) 332 106 98 69 73 697 Peak HourFaotor �M3 0.93 0.:93 0.93. 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 357 114 105 74 76 749 Volume Total (vph) 471 180 828 Volume Left 357 ' 105 , 0 Volume Bight (vph) 114 0 749 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.7 5.4 fr�lltifrrr.aUon,x 081 ' 0.33� i:23 Capacity (vehlh) 571 516 662 Cantrsol `Delay (s) 30:7 13.0 ; 137.1 Approach Delay (s) 30.7 13.0 137.1 Apprt�Lt}S _ D B POW96',1 HCM Level of Service F Intar ectlon apau�ty Udlizat>on 90.8% ICU Level ofser.01 ` E Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchs 7 - Report Page 1 Future With Project 5: North Site Access & 956th Ave SE 121262013 #I- k t Lane Configurations Y 1 volume (Yehfh)' 2 4 177 3 7 Sign Control Stop Free Grade 0%..:. : 00/0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Houdy-flowrate(vph)-;: 2 4 190 3 $ Pedestrians La Wjchh (fl) Walking Speed (fVs) Petcent Btodtage Right tum flare (veh) Median type Median storage veh) l:)pstreann signal (ft} . pX'platoon unblocked vC a�rl#iii�ing yofume ' iU39 vC1, stage t cont vol 192 YW, stage;2connvol 6 194 vCu, unblocked vol 1039 192 tC, sin gla:(s�.... 6 d 6;2 tC, 2 stage (s) 3. 0 tF (s} 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 99 cm capadty:(vetvb). 258 M. None 4 774 Free 0% 0.93 832 194 4,1 2.2 99 1392 ume :,Al 6 194 840 - Volume Left 2 0 8 Volume Nhtl 4 3. 0 cSH 481 1700 1392 Volume to capacity 0.01. 0.11 0.0.1 Queue Length 95th (1t) 1 0 0 Control°Delay (s) 12.6 0.0, 0.1 Lane LOS B q APPOW,h;Petay {s} , , : <12.5 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS B Average Delay 0.2 Intersectioii;CWacity Wrization 56,390 ICU Level of Service Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 Future With Project .S 192 834 Volume tett 1 0 7: South Site Access & 156th Ave SE Motu r f gh# 4 1212612013 p cSH 585 1700 1393 Vp. , e t+� Ca as d,fi1' Lane Configurations Queue Length 95th (it) 1 0 p f cintrot`Delay (s) Vume,(vahlh) 1 4 118 3 7 769 Sign Control Stop 0,0 Free Approach LOS B Free Average Delay 0.2 inters; e' a n apaaty'Utiiiiallan' Peak hour Factor 9.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 14604E', f vph) 1 4 189 3 8 827. Pedestrians t2ir►8 Wild (ft) . - Walking Speed (fVs) i'eresfit Blndcage Right turn flare (veh) Nli iYpe None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) p>t, platoon unblocked vC, w0ding yo(uft 1033 131 .. 192 vC1, stage 1 conf vol 42; stege 2'ccrdvoi VCU, unblocked vol 1033 191 192 tCsingle (s} 6.4 62 4.1 IC, 2 stage (s) IF (s) 3,5' : 3:3 2:2 p0 queue free % 100 99 99 cM capacity(vehfi) 258 856 1393 u ...Ott ' . .S 192 834 Volume tett 1 0 8 Motu r f gh# 4 3 p cSH 585 1700 1393 Vp. , e t+� Ca as d,fi1' 6,11 Queue Length 95th (it) 1 0 p f cintrot`Delay (s) 112 0.0 0.1 Lane LOS B A 11.2 0,0 0.1 Approach LOS B Average Delay 0.2 inters; e' a n apaaty'Utiiiiallan' 66,f% IOU Level OfSeift B Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 3 EXHIBIT C % ; POLICY GUIDELINES FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS �u Ngo FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT A traffic impact analysis is required when estimated vehicular traffic generated from a proposed development exceeds 20 vehicles per hour in either the AM (6:00 - 9:00) or PM (3:00 —6:00) peak periods. A peals hour volume of 20 vehicles per hour would relate to daily volume of approximately 200 vehicles per day. Generally this includes residential plats of 20 lots or more and commercial sites that generate 20 vehicles per hour. The developer shall select a registered professional engineer with adequate experience in transportation planning and traffic engineering. Upon request, the Public Works Department will offer potential candidates. The analysis shall incorporate the following elements in the suggested format: Introduction: The introduction should, in a narrative fashion with graphics where appropriate to enhance the text, describe the proposed development (including proposed time frame), establish study area boundaries (study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development), describe existing and proposed land uses within the study area, and describe the existing transportation system to include transit routes, roadway and intersection conditions and configuration as well as currently proposed improvements. Roadways and intersections to be analyzed will be determined through coordination with the Public Works Department and Community and Economic Development staff. Site Generated Traffic Volumes: The analysis should present a tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed. Site Generated Traffic Distribution: The distribution of site -generated traffic should be presented by direction as a percentage of the total site generated traffic in a graphic format. The basis for the distribution should be appropriately defined. Site Generated Traffic Assi nment: A graphic presentation should be provided illustrating the allocation of site -generated traffic to the existing street network. The presentation should include Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and AM -PM peak hour directional volumes as well as turning movements at all intersections, driveways, and roadways within the study area. 1 EXHIBIT C Existing and Projected Horizon Year Traffic Volumes With and Without the Proposed Development; The report should include graphics, which illustrate existing traffic volumes as well as forecasted volumes for the horizon year of the proposed development. Forecasted volumes should include a projected growth rate and volumes anticipated by pending and approved developments adjacent to the proposed development. If the development is multi -phased, forecasted volumes should be projected for the horizon year of each phase. The site -generated traffic should then be added to the horizon year background traffic to provide a composite of horizon year traffic conditions. Condition Analysis: Based upon the horizon year traffic forecasts with the proposed development, a level of service (LOS) analysis should be conducted at all intersections (including driveways serving the site). Based upon this analysis, a determination should be made as to the ability of the existing and proposed facilities to handle the proposed development. The level of service (LOS) analysis technique may include any of the commonly accepted methods. An analysis should be made of the proposed project in light of safety. Accident histories in close proximity to the site should be evaluated to determine the impact of proposed driveways and turning movements on existing problems. Miti atin = Measures Based upon the results of the previous analysis, if it is determined that specific roadway improvements are necessary, the analysis should determine what improvements are needed. If the developer can reduce vehicular traffic by means of promoting transit and ridesharing usage, these methods are acceptable. Any proposed traffic signals should be documented with an appropriate warrant analysis of conditions in the horizon year with the development. Traffic signals should not be contemplated unless they meet warrants as prescribed in the Federal Highways "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices". Proposed traffic signals shall provide coordination programs to compliment the system. Any modifications necessary to insure safe and efficient circulation around the proposed site should be noted. Conelu-,ions- This section should serve as an executive summary for the report. It should specifically define the problems related directly to the proposed developments and the improvements necessary to accommodate the development in a safe and efficient manner. A draft report shall be presented to the Development Services Division so that a review might be made of study dates, sources, methods, and findings. City Staff will then provide in writing all comments to the developer. The developer will then make all necessary changes prior to submitting the final report. Revised 3/12/2008 H:1Division.slDevelop.serlPlan,revlTIA GUIDFLINEWWIDELINES FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 200$.doc K DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY EXHIBIT D �; at, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT _ _�' _ y ENVIRONMENTAL. REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: March 31, 2014 Project Name: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Project Number: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Project Manager: Jill Ding, Senior Planner Owners: Sally Lou Nipert, 14004 156th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 G. Richard Duimet, 2923 Maltby Road, Bothell, WA 98012 Applicant/Contact: Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC, 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer Island, WA 98040 Project Location: 14038 156th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 Project Summary: Proposed subdivision of an 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 2423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being rcrncved from the proPoscd subdivision. The site is currently developed with two single family residences and a detached garage. An existing residence is proposed to remain on parcel 1423059057. All other structures are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. Exist. Bldg. Area SF: 1,700 SF Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint). N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): N/A Site Area: 329,129 SF Total Building Area GSF: N/A STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a RECOMMENDATION: Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M). Project Location Map FRC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Deportment of Community & -....nomic Development cnvironmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-CM24L ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 2 of 11 I PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION J BACKGROUND I The proposal is to subdivide an 8.80 acre site composed of parcels 1423059122, 1423059023, and the east portion of 1423059057 into 31 single family residential lots for the future construction of new single family residences. The project site is located within the R-4 (residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation as well as the Residential Low Density (RLI}) Comprehensive flan Land Use designation. The surrounding properties to the north, south, and east of the project site are also zoned R-4. The properties to the west of the project site are located outside the City limits in King County. A Lot Line Adjustment (LUA14-000250) was submitted concurrently with the application for subdivision. The proposed lot line adjustment would remove the western 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 from the proposed preliminary plat.. An existing 1,700 square foot residence is proposed to remain on this parcel. The applicant has indicated that the parcel would be subdivided under a future, separate subdivision application. The proposal to subdivide the 8.80 acre project site into 31 lots, results in a net density of 4.45 dwelling units per acre (after the deduction of 79,419 square feet of right-of-way proposed for dedication). The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. In addition to the proposed lots, the subdivision would also create two tracts (Tracts A and B). Tract A would be located at the southwest corner of the project site for stormwater detention. Tract B would be located at the northwest corner of the project site and is a 2 -foot wide open space strip separating proposed Road A from parcel 1423059057. Access to the proposed lots is proposed via a new "looped" public street (Roads A and B) with two access points off of 15e Avenue SE. addition half street improvements are proposed along the project site's 156;x' Ave SE street frontage. Proposed frontage improvements include paving, curb and gutter, 5 -foot sidewalks, and an 8 -foot planting strip. A significant tree inventory was submitted with the application materials, which identified 303 existing significant trees. Of the 303 existing significant trees, the applicant is proposing to retain 35 trees. There are 15 additional trees that could have been retained; however the applicant's arborist determined that the trees were either diseased or dangerous and not suitable for retention. Additional trees will be planted to ensure compliance with the City's tree retention requirements. 1 PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW I In. compliance with RCW 43.210.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation 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. ERC Report 24-000243.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVEATBRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Report of Error Reference source not found. Page 3 of 11 B. Mitigation Measures 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). 2. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated December 27, 2013. 3. An easement for tree protection shall be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection; however the easement width shall be permitted to vary and shall be based on the width of the stand of trees to be retained. The easement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager and shall be recorded on the face of the final plat. C. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit 2 Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit 3 Conceptual Road and Grading Plan Exhibit 4 Drainage Control Plan Exhibit 5 Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan Exhibit 6 Tree Inspection Report prepared by Greenforest incorporated (dated February 18, 2014) Exhibit 7 Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC (dated February 5, 2014) Exhibit S Wetland Report prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. (dated February 3, 2014) Exhibit 9 Technical Information Report prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers (dated February 19, 2014) Exhibit 10 Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) Exhibit 11 Comment letter from David Michalski (dated March 21, 2014) Exhibit 12 Comment letter from Roger Paulsen (dated March 22, 2014) Exhibit 13 Construction Mitigation Description 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: The applicant indicates that approximately 4,495 cubic yards of cut and 36,888 cubic yards of fill would be required for the construction of required plat improvements and new single family residences. Temporary erosion control measures would be implemented during construction ERC Report .14-OW241.docx City of Renton Deportment of Community & _—nomie Development cnvironmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241, EQ, pp Report of Mareh 31, 2014 Page 4 of 11 including hay bales, siltation fences, temporary siltation ponds, controlled surface grading, and a stabilized construction entrance in accordance with City of Renton requirements. A Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7) was submitted with the project application. According to the submitted study, the existing site topography slopes from north to south with an elevation change of approximately 20 feet. Vegetation consists primarily of field grass, trees, and blackberries. The Soil Conservation Survey (SCS) map identifies Alderwood series soils across the entire project site. Alderwood soils formed in glacial till and typically present a slight to moderate erosion hazard and slow to medium runoff. They are comprised of gravelly ashy sandy loam transitioning to very gravelly sandy loam. A total of 6 test pits (TP -1 through TP -6) were excavated across the project site. Topsoil was encountered in the first 6 to 10 inches below grade at all test pit locations. Underlying the topsoil, native soils consisting primarily of loose to medium dense weathered glacial deposits transitioning to very dense unweathered glacial till were encountered extending to the maximum exploration depth of eight feet below existing grade. The soil conditions observed at the test pit locations are generally consistent with the SCS mapped soils. Perched groundwater was observed in three of the 6 test pits (TP -1, TP -3, and TP -6) at depths ranging from 2-3 feet. According to the submitted geotechnical study (Exhibit 7) groundwater seepage on till sites will typically be perched at variable depths within the substrata of glacial till soil near the contact between weathered and unweathered material; therefore seepage should be expected in all grading activities at this site, particularly during the winter, spring, and early summer months. The study states that fieldwork was conducted during an atypically dry winter and therefore. groundwater volumes should be expected to normally be higher than what was exhibited. The submitted geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) provides recommendations for site preparation and earthwork, wet season grading, foundations, seismic design, slab -on -grade floors, retaining walls, drainage, excavation and slopes, utility support and trench backfill, and pavement sections. Due to the high moisture content, the geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) recommends site grading to be limited to the summer months. Staff recommends as a SEPA mitigation measure that project construction be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7). Mitigation Measures: Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7). Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review Regulations. 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: A wetland report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. (dated February 3, 2014) (Exhibit 8) was submitted with the application materials. According to the report, the site shows evidence of hydrophytic vegetation (buttercup and red -osier dogwood); however no indicators of hydric soils or wetland hydrology were present. The report concludes that there are no wetlands on the project site as two of the 3 required parameters required for wetland classification (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrology) were not present. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required FRC Report 14-(W241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development cnvironmertof Review Committee Report THE ENt'.LAVEATBRlDLE RIDGE LUA14-OW241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 5 of 11 Nexus: N/A b. Storm Water impacts: The applicant submitted a Technical Information Report (TIR), prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc. (dated February 19, 2014) (Exhibit 9). According to the TIR (Exhibit 9) the upstream areas to the north and east of the project site are densely vegetated and any flows entering the project site would be negligible. The existing runoff from the project site sheet flows across the property towards the southwest corner of the site. From there a concrete pipe inlet conveys water west to a catch basin at the southwest corner of the site on the east side of 156th Avenue SE. Runoff continues south in the conveyance system then flow is directed west at the intersection of 156th Avenue SE and SE 144th Street. Runoff continues west across 154th Place SE and discharges to Stewart Creek, a Class 3 stream. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full Drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report (Exhibit 9). The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control. Flow control facility is sized to match the pre - developed rates for the forested condition extending from 50% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest corner of the site within Tract A. The pond will discharge to the existing conveyance system in 156th Avenue SE. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. The submitted geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) identifies the soils as sand glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Overall, it is anticipated there would be no impacts to stormwater as a result of the proposed project, provided the project complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual, and the Renton Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 3. Vegetation Impacts: A Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan (Exhibit 5) and a Tree Inspection Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated (dated February 18, 2014) (Exhibit 6) were submitted with the application materials. The Tree Inspection Report states that of the 305 significant trees identified on the project site, 81 are considered dangerous as defined in RMC 4-11-200. The Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan (Exhibit 5) identifies 35 significant trees for retention. There is a roadway stub located just south of the subdivision site. Pursuant to City of Renton code, the roadway is to be extended north in a straight line. However, the applicant indicated that by curving the road alignment a significant amount of trees could be retained along the east property line. Once the homes are sold as individual lots, each home owner has the ability to remove up to 3 trees a year without permits. These trees would not provide the vegetative screen intended if they are remove immediately following home construction as such they should be retained in perpetuity within an easement. Of the approximately 44 trees located along the east property line, the applicant is proposing to retain 21 trees. The 23 trees proposed for removal (identified as trees FRC Report 14-CM241.docx City of Renton Deportment of Community &-__nomlc Development cnvironmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE [UA144W241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 6 of 11 5406, 5408-5415, 6181-6185, 6234, and 6229-6231) have been identified as diseased and/or dangerous per the submitted Tree Inspection Report (Exhibit 6). The City's arborist will review the submitted Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan (Exhibit 5) and Tree Inspection Report (Exhibit 6) and verify which trees located along the east property boundary are available for retention. Staff recommends as a SEPA mitigation measure that an easement for tree protection be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection, however staff recommends that the easement width be permitted to vary based on the width of the stand of trees proposed to be retained. Mitigation Measures: An easement for tree protection shall be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection; however the easement width shall be permitted to vary and shall be based on the width of the stand of trees to be retained. The easement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager and shall be recorded on the face of the final plat. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review Regulations 4. Noise Impacts: Temporary construction noise is anticipated as a result of the subject project. Based on the provided construction mitigation description (Exhibit 13) the applicant has indicated that construction of the plat improvements is anticipated to begin in September of 2014 and finish in February of 2015. The construction of homes is anticipated to begin in April 2015 and finish in April 2016. The applicant has indicated that construction would comply with the City of Renton's adopted noise ordinance. As such, the temporary noise impacts are anticipate to be minimal and limited in duration. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 5. Parks and Recreation Impacts: The project site is located within the vicinity of three parks. Maplewood Heights Park is located to the east of the project site and Maplewood Neighborhood Park and the Cedar River Trail are located to the west of the project site. It is anticipated residents of the proposed development would utilize the existing parks within the project vicinity. It is not anticipated that the proposed development would adversely impact the City of Renton parks subject to the payment of code required impact fees. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 6. Transportation Impacts: Access to the project site is proposed via a new looped internal public street with two access points off of 15e Avenue SE. In addition, a dead end access is proposed connecting to the property to the south of the project site for future development. A temporary cul-de-sac turnaround is proposed for emergency access pending future development to the south. Frontage ERC Report 14-WO241.doac City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development cnvironmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-0D0241, ECF, PP Peport of March 31, 2014 Page 7 of 11 improvements including paving, curb and gutter, 5 -foot sidewalks, and an 8 -foot landscape strip are proposed along the project's 156th Avenue SE frontage and the frontage of new Roads A and B. There is a roadway stub located just south of the subdivision site. Pursuant to City of Renton code, the roadway is to be extended north in a straight line. However, the applicant indicated that by curving the road alignment a significant amount of trees could be retained along the east property line (see previous discussion above under Vegetation). ATraffic Impact Analysis prepared byTraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) (Exhibit 10) was submitted with the application materials. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. The Traffic impact Analysis (Exhibit 10) also includes a Level of Service (LOS) review of the surrounding intersections in the immediate vicinity. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. The Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 10) concludes that with the proposed development the surrounding intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) with the exception of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The southbound approach to the intersection currently operates at LOS F with an approach delay of 94.8 seconds. The report (Exhibit 10) anticipates that the future condition of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection without the proposed development would result in an approach delay of 133.2 seconds. The report (Exhibit 10) anticipates that the future condition of the southbound approach to the 15e Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection with the proposed development would result in an approach delay of 137.1 seconds, which results in an additional delay of 3.9 seconds attributable to the proposed development. The report concludes (Exhibit 10) that this intersection would continue to operate at a LCIS F with or without the new development. The project generated traffic at this intersection would increase by 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date. Staff has received two comment letters (Exhibits 11 and 12) citing concerns with regards to the additional traffic that the proposed project will generate. Based on the submitted traffic report, the proposed project would result in the 9 new trips and a 3.9 second delay at the southbound approach to the 1515P Avenue SE/SE 14Znd Place intersection. The impacts of the additional trips would be mitigated through the payment of transportation impact fees. It is not anticipated that the proposed project significantly adversely impact the City of Renton's sheet system subject to the payment of code required impact fees and the construction of code required frontage improvements. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 7. Fire & Police ERC Report 14-000241. docx City of Renton Department of Community & __-noetic Development 4nvironmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-=241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 8 of 11 Impacts: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development subject to the construction of code required improvements and the payment of code required impact fees. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 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. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14 -day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 18, 2014. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7th Floor, (425) 430-5510. 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. Plannine: 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., Uonday 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 plants 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. Fire: 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $479.28 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 2. The fire flow requirement for a single family horse is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to ERG Report 14-OW241.doex Cry of Renton Department of Community & mic Development onmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE ATBRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-M241, ECF, PR Report of March 31, 2014 Page 9 of 11 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. Existing fire hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current rode including 5 -inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from King County Water District 90. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20 -feet wide fully paved, with 25 -feet inside and 45 -feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 -ton vehicle with 322 -psi point loading. Access is required within 150 - feet of all points on the buildings. Approved cul-de-sac turnarounds of 90 -foot diameter are required for dead end streets over 500 -feet long. Street system shall be designed to be extended to adjoining underdeveloped properties for future extension. Water: 1. Water service will be provided Water District 90. z. A water availability certificate from.Water District #90 will be required. 3. New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of all lots. 4. Approved water plans shall be submitted to the City. Sewer: 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. The project proposes to get sewer service by extending the 8 -inch existing sewer main, located south of the site on 156th Ave SE near tate intersection with SE 144th Street and ext6ending the sewer main into, the plat. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE up to the north property line. The extension of the sewer main from the south on 156th Ave SE will require overlay pavement restoration of at least half street. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE up to the north property.line. 2. A sewer stub is to be extended from the proposed sewer main in the internal access road, to the east property line (with a 10 -foot sewer easement). A man hole is to be located on the sewer main in the proposed internal public street and a clean out at the end of the sewer stub. 3. System development fees for sewer are based on the size of the new domestic water meter that will serve each new lot. Fee per lot based on %-inch or 1 -inch water is $2,033.00. Estimated fee for sewer is $63,023.00. This fee is paid prior to issuance of the construction permit. 4. This parcel falls within the boundaries of the Central Plateau Sewer Special Assessment District. Fee calculated as of 3/24/2014 is $438.16 per new lot. Interest accrues at a daily rate of $0.05111 until the fee is paid. S. All plats shall provide separate side sewer stubs to each building lot. Side sewers shall be a minimum 2% slope. Surface water: 1. A drainage plan and drainage report dated February 26, 2014 was submitted by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Inc. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full Drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report. The 8.7 acre vegetated site generally slopes to the southwest. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control. Flow control facility is sized to match the pre -developed rates ERC Report 14-000241. docx City of Renton Department of Community & omic Development ironmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE L UA24-000241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 10 of 11 for the forested condition extending from 50% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest corner of the site. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. 2. A geotechnical report, dated February 4, 2014 was submitted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC. The report identifies the soils as sand glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Due to the high moisture content, the geotech recommends site grading to be limited to the summer months. 3. Surface water system development fee is $1,228.00 per new lot. Fees are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. Estimated storm fee is $36,840.00. 4. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Transportation: 1. The current transportation impact fee rate is $1,430.72 per new lot. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. Payment of the transportation impact fee is due at the time of issuance of the building permit. 2. A traffic analysis dated December 27, 2013, was provided by Traffix Northwest. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. An analysis focusing on the intersection of 156 Ave SE/SE 142 Place was done to determine what, if any impacts the anticipated new peak hour AM and PM trips created by this development would have on an operational standpoint at this intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The intersection currently operates at LOS F. The result of the study indicates this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS F with the new development, while the project generated traffic at this intersection would increase to 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date. 3. A looped roadway with stub ending is a temporary cul-de-sac is proposed as the internal site access. The cul-de-sac must meet City of Renton code and Fire Department requirements. To meet the City's complete street standards, the new internal roadway shall be designed to meet the residential access roadway per City code 4-6-060. The new internal roadway shall be a 53 -foot wide right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 -foot planter strip and a 5 -foot sidewalk installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road will be marked No Parking. As per code, the minimum separation of intersections along an arterial is 125 feet. If in future there are significant concerns regarding left turns to and from the south loop of the internal public street onto 156th Ave SE, the City traffic operations may impose left turn restrictions at that intersection. 4. To meet the City's complete street standards, frontage improvements along the project side in 156th Ave SE shall include 22 feet of paving from the centerline, gutter, a 0.5 foot wide curb, an 8 - foot planter strip and a 5 -foot roadway per City code 4-6-060. To build this street section, five and half feet of right of way dedication will be required. It is shown on the plans. 5. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. ERC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Community &. mic Development onmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 11 of 11 6. Street lighting is required for this plat. LED lighting plans will be included with the civil plan submittal. General Comments: 1. Separate permits and fees for, water meters, side sewer connection and storm connection will be required. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. Rockeries or retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required. 4. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. ERC Report 14-WO24I. docx F Me) 2 j EXHIBIT 1 THE ENCI Liu EXHIBIT 2 THE ENCLAVE Is EXHIBIT 3 THE ENCLAVE w -T | �f &{ / fie \ It ( §| q a 2 ilmom � °° | I gm , 1 jJ's, EXHIBIT 4 THE ENCU . br q .; I EXHIBIT 5 THE ENCLAVE EXHIBIT 6 enforest I ncar orateu G re p Consulting Arbo lst 2/18/2014 RECEIVED .Tustin Lagers, Director of land Acquisition & Development FEB 2 7 Zona PNW holdings, LLC Ol7Y Or RENON 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 PLAMNING D visjo,,4 Mercer Island, WA 98040 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Tree Inspection, 14038156th Ave SE, Renton WA 98059 Dear Mr. Lagers: You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and evaluate the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. (Tax Parcel Numbers 142305-9023, 9057, & 9112). 1 received a TREE CUTT'ING AND LAND CLEARING PLAN from D R Strong Consulting Engineers showing the location and numbers of the surveyed trees. I visited the site last week and inspected the trees indicated on the sheet, which are the subject of this report. TREE INSPECTION My initial inspection was limited to visual observation from the subject parcels. Trees off site were included in the inspection but are not included in this report. Both health and structure were evaluated. A tree's structure is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to failure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. identified the species of each tree, confirmed trunk diameter (DBH), estimated average dripline extension and recorded visible defects. At the east property boundary (Near tree 6185) is an infection center for a root rot disease. This is evidenced by a tree -free circular area (actually, semi circular as bisected by the parcel boundary) with standing dead trees, recently or previously failed trees, and trees with thinning and/or chlorotic canopies at the edge of the infection area. After my initial inspection I returned to the site and performed rootcrown excavations on the conifers bordering this infection area. I found moth signs and symptoms of armillaria root rot fungus, as evidenced by the presence of mycelial fans and fungal rhizomorphs, oozing resin flow, and varying stages of root decay in approximately a dozen trees on the north and south sides of this infection area. 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 EXHIBIT 7 PREPARED FOR AMERICAN CLASSIC HOMES February 5, 2014 1l1 �. Sten H. Ayr S Geologist �o F� ANAL Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 14038 - 166th AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON C RECEIVED ES -3220 FEB 2 7 2014 CITY OF Ri;NTON Earth Solutions NW, LLC PIANNifVG DIVISION 1805 -'l36m Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425-4494704 . Fax: 423-449-4711 Toll Free: 866-336-8710 EXHIBIT 8 Spwnl February 3, 2014 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105! p D Mercer Island, WA 98040 V RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge -City of Renton FEB 2 7 2014 SWC Job#13-187 CITY 0" IRENTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report describes our observations of any jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 200' of the proposed "Tine Enclave at Bridle Ridge" plat, which consists of two Parcels (#1423059023 & 9122), located on the east side of 156th Avenue SE, in the City of Renton, Washington (the "site"). Viciniry Map EXHIBIT 9 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT for THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE Preliminary Plat 14038 156"h Avenge SE Renton, Washington DRS Project No. 13117 Renton File No. Owner/Applicant PNW Holdinws LLC 9675 SE 361 Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Report Prepared by i" D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers, Inc. 620 7t' Avenue Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827.3063 Report Issue Date February 19, 2014 02014 D. R STRONG Consulting Engineers Irim RECEIVED FEB 2 7 2014 C'TY 0j; PENTON PLANNING biVISION EXHIBIT 10 THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY 4F RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36h St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by 1VORTHWEST - TRAFFIC EXPE14TS 11410 NE 124" St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 RECEIVED FEB 2 7 2014 C'IT'Y OF 1?61vT01V PiANMING D1VJS1pN David Michalski 6525 se 5ti' pl Renton, Wa 98059 March 21, 2014 Jill Ding, Senior Planner Planning Division 1055 So Grady Way Renton, Wa 98057 EXHIBIT 11 This memo is regarding my concerns over the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA144000241/ECF/PD. I five off of SE5th pi and my residence buts up to this planned subdivision. My concern is regprding the traffic going North and South on 156'' Ave 5e. Since the buliding of the bridge across Cedar River thp,.,Ar r traffic on 156x' ave se is unbearable. Coming.out of any of the side streets off 15e ave seTis sometimes impossible with waits as much as 15 minutes. At the 3 way stop south of me vehicles do a quick stop and accelerate up the hill leaving no time between cars to allow access going both North and South. Frequently when large trucks traveling up the Trill slows traffic down, there is a huge backlog of vehicles and this causes terrible traffic congestion. I see signs for additional development In the future on the West side of 15e. I feel that an -immediate traffic study be implemented. I am realty surprised there isn't more accidents than I see. Has anydne thought about additional access off of Maple Valley Highway for folks to get unto Cemetary Road? Sincerely, `D "MrC Qd David Michalski Email: dcmichal@!msn.com Ph# 425-271-7837 1,6C61V ,Ct) 2014 ctry of RFNTp GCIvIsn; - EXHIBIT 12 March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CEO — Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mall to Avoid Delay @ Jdin ntonwa. ov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project 4LUA 14-00024 1, ECP, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22nd. I also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5th Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 56' Place in light of.the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 1566i Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142Nd intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156th and 142d that the project won't snake it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156th north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to snake an egress turn from SE 5th Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 1396i Pl.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142nd, and then only IF the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. The addition of ANY new trips to SE 156h between SE 5h Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this project to be implemented without adequate mitigation has significant potential to threaten public health safe and welfare for the existing residents who access 1560' from SE 5' Place and the other residential access streets to the north_ By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also ver+ concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156 / 142nd intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156d' during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156`x/ 142nd intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 15667 142'd intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 5d' Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it -has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accomm tore waste water access to the new project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots I through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot #4, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot #4. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 240' deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22nd public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determinationrior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22nd, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22nd to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at RogerAPaulsenPcs.com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application �1ty Of"-r :. NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)— Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPUCATION: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA14-M241. ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision or a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre] zoning designation. The proposal would result W the creation of 3116U and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and'a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,450 square feet to 12,566' square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA34-=250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of panel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038 IS& Ave SE OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NOWSIGNIFICANCE, 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 43.21G.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS -M process to give notice that a DNS - M is IPkely to he issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed ONS -M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Nan -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M). A 14-dayappeaI period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M- PERMITAPPLiCAT)ON DATE: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Justin Lagers / PNW Holdings, LLC / 9675 SE 36'h Street Suite 105, Mercer island, WA 98040 / EMU Justin@americanclassichomes.com Permits/Review Requested: Enaironrrmerrml (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat. Review Other Permits which may be required: Construction, Building, Fire Requested Studlem Drainage Report, Geotechnlral Report, Traffic Study Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development(tED)— Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall,10SS South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEAAJNG: Public-hearinit is tentatively hedWrdfnrAoril 2$ 2014 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Charrthers at 1Q.'00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady. (Nay. Ir you would nee to be made a parry 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.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/WA14-000241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS- City/State/Zip: TELEPHONE NO.: City of ,- i CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: The subject site is designated Residential Low Density (COMP-RLD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R4 on the City's Zoning Map.. Environmental documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: EnAronmental (SEPAj Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation., The project will he subject to the City s SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2.110 Residential Development and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures:. The following Mitigation Measures Mil likely he imposed on the proposed project, These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. Profect construction shall he required to comply with the submitted geotechnical report. Profen construction shall be regufred to comply with the submitted traffic study. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Jai Ding, Senior Planner, CED Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on March 24, 2014. This matter Is also tentatively scheduled for a Public hearing an April 22, 2014, at 14:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hail, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (AFS) 430.6578. 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 declsion on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6598; Erni: 1dink@re€itonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION If you would like to he trade a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, COED-- Planning D'ndsion,1D55 So. Grady way, Renton, WA 98057, Namelrrle Na_: The Enciave at Bridle Ridge{LUAIII-DM241 ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: City/Statefiip: EXHIBIT E City of NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master Application has been flied and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA14-OW241, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result In the creation of 31 lou and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet- Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038 156'" Ave SE OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-51GNIFICANCE, MITIGATED IDNS-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 43.210.110, 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 -NI), A 14 -day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS -M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON. Justin Lagers / PNW Holdings, LLC / 9675 SE 3e Street Sufte 105, Mercer Island, WA 98040/ EML:)ustlrr@americanclasslchomes.com Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Review Other Permits which may be required: Construction, Building, Fire Requested Studies; Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Traffic Study Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)— planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing [E tentativelyscheduled fr ril 22 2014 6 h R nton Ham. dng, Examiner in Rg= Council Chambers at 10:00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. 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, CEO — Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14.000241, ECF, PP NAME. MAILING ADDRESS: City/State/Zip: TELEPHONE NO.: vow City of,. # r, Ali r J� CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: The subject site Is designated Residential Low Density (COMP-RLD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R4 on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 44-110 Residential Development and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: 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. • Project carrstructlorr shall be required to comply with the submitted geotechnicoi report. • Project construction shoA be required to comply with the submitted tropic study. Comments an the above application must be submitted In writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, CED — Planning Division, 1455 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 9$057, by 5:00 PM on March 24, 2014. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on April 22, 2014, at 10:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hail, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are Interested In attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-6578. 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: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6598; Eml: iding@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION 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 48057, Name/File No.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA144M241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: City/State/Zip: TELEPHONE NO.: �Y CITY OF RENTON Gti City Clerk Division + + 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6510 ❑ Cash Check No.9 LIL43 Description: ❑ Copy Fee ppeal Fee Funds Received From: Name L-Ir'zr Address r'7 D City/Zip . L�-� Receipt NP 2109 JL. Date ❑ Notary Service ❑_ ITEMS BELOW THIS SHEET HAVE BEEN COPIED FOR SUPERIOR COURT ****DO NOT ADD ANYTHING BELOW THIS SHEET **** The Enclave at Bridle Ridge LUA14-000241 PARTIES OF RECORD Applicant. ... :. Engineer - :.. Owner : .. .. . _ .. PNW Holdings LLC Maher)oudi Richard Ouimet 9675 SE 36th St, 105 D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers 2923 Maltby Rd Mercer Island, WA 98040 10604 NE 38th PI, 232 Bothell, WA 98012 (206) 588-1147 justin @pnwhol clings. cam Kirkland, WA 98033 Owner - .; " Party0neoord -- . ... Pa :....,.. -. - rty:otRecord Sally Nipert M.A. Huniu DAVID MICHALSKI 14004 156th Ave SE 6608 SE 5th PI 6525 SE 5TH PI Rentonr WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 (425)226-6594 (425)271-7837 Party of Recard,..... _ � Party of Record .. '; ,:... .:.. Party of Record ., . Wade Willoughby Roger Paulson Gwendolyn High 6512 5E 5th Pl 6617 SE 5th PI PO Box 2936 Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98056 {206) 909-8505 (425) 228-15S9 highlands neighbors@hotmai1,com Party of Record - - - .. - Parry of Record - Jason Paulson Eloise Stachowiak 31 Mazama Pines Ln 6614 SE Sth PI Mazama, WA 98333 Renton, WA 98059 (425)226-3408 P"ge 1 of 1 CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: April 16, 2014 To: City Clerk's Office From: Lisa Marie Mcelrea Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City I'lark'c Offirp_ ame: The Enclave @ Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat Number: F LUA -000241, ECF, PP erences: PRE13-001566 156th Assemblage Preliminary Plat, The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Project Manager: Jill Ding Acceptance Date: March 10, 2014 Applicant: Justin Lagers, PNW Holdings, LLC Owner: G. Richard Ouimet, Sally Lou Nipert Contact: Justin Lagers, PNW Holdings, LLC PID Number: 1423059023, 1423059122, 1423059057 ERG Deter in tion: DNS -M Date: March 31, 2014 Appeal Period Ends: Aril 18 2014 Administrative Declsion: Date: Appeal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: April 22, 2014 Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Appeal Period Ends: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. Location: 14038156 1h Ave SE Comments: ERC Determination Types: DNS - Determination of Non-Signiticance; vNs-m - ueterminarion or Non -Significance -Mitigated; DS - Determination of Significance. Denis LawN city �r Mayor a s 1 l fi� r Community & Economic Development Department May 22, 2014 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Eloise 5tachowiak 6614 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 SUBJECT: Enclave at Bridle Ridge, LUA14-004241, PP, ECF Dear Ms. 5tachowiak: Thank you for your comment letter, Your letter has been included in the official file for consideration by the decision maker. You have been added as a party of record for this project. A hearing has been scheduled for June 24th at 8:00 am, you may wish to attend and tesitfy. The hearing will be held on the 7th floor of City Hall in the Council Chambers. Please contact meat (425) 430-6598 orjding@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, JJYiIlDing Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way . Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov Denis Law City Of Mayor " A �� d 'ski} 1 Community & Economic Development Department May 22, 2014 C.E."Chip"Vincent,Administrator M. A. Huniu 6608 SE 5th Place Renton, WA 98059 SUBJECT: Enclave at Bridle Ridge, LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Huniu: This letter is to inform you, as a party of record for the Enclave at Bridle Ridge, that the hearing for the Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat has. been rescheduled for June 24th at 8:00 am. The hearing will be held on the 7th floor of City Hall in the Council Chambers. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 or jding@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov Denis Law City Of/ -k Mayor Community & Economic Development Department May 22, 2014 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Wade Willoughby 6512 SE 5th Pi Renton, WA 98059 SUBJECT: Enclave at Bridle Ridge, LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Willoughby: This letter is to inform you, as a party of record for the Enclave at Bridle Ridge, that the hearing for the Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat has been rescheduled for June 24th at 8:00 am. The hearing will be held on the 7th floor of City Hall in the Council. Chambers. Please contact me at (425) 430-5598 or jding@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov rj City OfJl NOTIC OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ANO PUBLIC HEARING ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NM SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENNIRONMENTALACRON PROIlC[HRME: TM lrclm al Brld'r REtlae LO[ATON uNfee R. IQU 16'—SF,..., WA 91059 DFS[WPSION: P _d wbdM1drbn oe an t.t am projr[t rhe bca1M .01,, N. RJ —N (RT IT— l a dwelllnt anlG qr and ranlR tlNlnatbn. The PmP+ral ,rook muk b Dtr madon el ]l Iub a W 3 4aeM1 —x and!] aM a „n„ p.pYa fl•wt, fM prvpma/ bla �.avld rano In On lrgn l.k5n Kuare A -rb f1Ase agwn fwt d,e.ua to J. new lae wwk M pwld.d.i. a •,.� puW6 m.ef df nF f ssM a.e„,w se. a Int ilm adlun„rnt Buxl4HxMvgl lr pnlwM Manan ra. parnh i/adg50aSZ aM f41305pf2t whLHi wIR nwM1 I. 30,175 r4uerr het Ff Parte ""'ONS? benp nmaretl ham tM pn"I wbdMrlmr. TM rile h tumntry tlerNOPed rdlM1 lwp rintle M1mih rtskenm and • deNahed Fmlr McPbM,q NNW. a h —P—d .-h h pn parol M305"57. All at., rmd— an Pnpantl to 1,11 nmmetl IhrautM1 BN wbdeFbn gotarx No a111u1 artaf am anFenl pn the aminl rlle. THE LITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE IE11CI HAS DEEERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION OOESNOT FAME ASIGNIFICAHTAIII IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMtNT. Appaalr al the anNnnmartral tlatrrmlvllpn mual W Rlad 1n wMlnt an pr hRFpn 5:00 p.m. on lune 6r 39L4, lo6r[her wl[h the requlrtd Frr whh: kea•Int Examiner, CftT pl Rretvlt, 1055 SwJh 6rdY war, Rantan, wA 36057. Apgah to tha Gaminx ere igemed by Uty aLAMC 0.4110 and InMmatlon tetardlnt tM appeal P•acne maY 6e ,abtalnad 5awm the Re,Hm UfY tleW'a OTAn, FA35) 4364510. 4 PUBLIC HEAPING WILL EIC HELD BY THE RENT %(I EXAMINER AT N15 REGUUP MENU IN THE cuti-Ck CHAMBERS ON THE TEN FLOOR OP CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRAVY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON JUNE 14, Z014 AT 6:00 AM TO CON90ER THE PRELIMINARY PUT. IF THE ENYIRUNMENTAL DuERMiNATION IS APPEALED. THE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD AS PART OF TNN PUBLIC HURING. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENTCF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC OEVELOPMENTAT 425 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THZ NOTICE WITHOUT PROP R UTHORMATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. CERTIFICATION IX � hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted in 37 conspicuous places or nearby the desc 'bed property on h Date:_Signed: STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that A vv_,1 t t1 c -L( signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/thea free ree and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument, Dat ed:t��14�!�►� � 1 {� � -l.� 1 r , ,F I 1 I. Notar"ublic in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): -r My appointment expires: �.7'Eoil% a�`L`�l Op WP, Notar"ublic in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): -r My appointment expires: Denis Law Mayor May 22, 2014 City of Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Roger Paulsen 6617 SE 5th Place Renton, WA 98059 RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat / LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Paulsen: As part of the review of your Request for Reconsideration, the City conducted an independent study of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection. The study concluded that the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"d Place intersection warrants the installation of a traffic signal. The City has added and is prioritizing the installation of a traffic signal at this location to its Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Although it has been determined that the additional traffic anticipated through the development of the Enclave at Bridle Ridge preliminary plat would not significantly impact the existing traffic situation at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection, the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has decided to require the developer to pay their fair share for the installation of the traffic signal as an additional mitigation measure through SEPA. It is not anticipated that the installation of the traffic signal would occur as a part of this project, but would occur at a later date as additional funding becomes available. If you have any further questions on this matter, please contact Jill Ding, Project Manager, at (425) 430-6598 or via email at 'dint;@rentonwa.Rov. Sincerely, s C.E. "Chip" Vincent CED Administrator Attachments cc ERC Members Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Justin Lagers, Applicant Sally Lou Niper, Owner G. Richard Ouimet, Owner Parties of Record Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way . Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov W PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ®�ty of�� M E M' O R A N D U M DATE: May 5, 2014 TO: Chris Barnes, Transportation Operations Manager FROM: Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations SUBJECT: Proposed Signal, Southeast 142nd Place at 156'x' Avenue Southeast Issue: Should we install a signal at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne of cmba ne mail.com? Recommendation: We should place this intersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a new signal. Background: We have analyzed the intersection of Southeast 142n1 Place and 156th Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Contra! Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, Interruption of Continuous Traffic for Eight Hours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes for Four Hours. Please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Table 4C-1 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Figures 4C-1 through 4G4 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis. This intersection does not meet Warrant 7 for crash experience. Since 2009, there have been five recorded accidents on 156th Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end accidents and the other two involved vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred at the intersection of Southeast 142"d Place and 156th Avenue Southeast. The other four accidents occurred at leasttwo blocks away from the intersection in question. Please find attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents. h:\division.s\tra nspor.tat\operatio\ron\tom\tom9645a.doc Page 438 2009 Edition: Standard: The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that one of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day: A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection; or. B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 100 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist of the mAjor-street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection. In applying each condition the major -street and minor -street volumes shall be for the same S hours- On the mirror street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of these 8 hours. Option. 05 If the posted or statutory speed limit or the 85th -percentile speed on the major street exceeds 40 mph, or if the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the.s traffic volumes in the 70 percent columns in 'Fable 4-C-1 may be used in place of the 100 percent columns. ; Guidance: 06 The combination of Conditions A and B is intended for application at locations w{ret-e Condition R is not { Sm satisfied and Condition B is not satisfied and should be applied only after an adequate trial of other altertr101.aliVes`a that could cause less delay and inconvenience to traffic has failed to solve the traffic problems, Standard: 07 The need for a traffic control signal shall be considered if an engineering study finds that both of the following conditions exist for each of any 8 hours of an average day: A. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition A in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection; arid' B. The vehicles per hour given in both of the 80 percent columns of Condition B in Table 4C-1 exist on the major -street and the higher -volume minor -street approaches, respectively, to the intersection. These major -street and minor -street volumes shall be for the same S hours for each condition; however; `he 8 hours satisfied in Condition A shall not be required to be the same 8 hours satisfied in Condition B. On the minor street, the higher volume shall not be required to be on the same approach during each of the 8 hours. _ Table 4C-1. Warrant f, Eight -Hour Vehicular Volume Condition A—Minimum Vehicular volume Number of lanes for moving Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour ort higher -volume traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) minor -street approach {erre direction only) Major Street MinorSlreet 100%8 80%h 70°/6' 56%d }Qa%`-7Qa` 5690" or more 1 600 1 480 1 420 1 336 150 12Q 105 84 2 of more 11 504 400 1 350 1 280 240 160 1 140 1 rt 12 Condition B—Interruption of Continuous Traffic Number ul lanes for moving Vehicles per hour on major street Vehicles per hour ort higher -volume traffic on each approach (total of both approaches) minor -street approaeh (one direction only) Ma'or Street Minor Street 100-Y 803'° 7pa'` 56`f ° 1 DO"/a` 80°! ° 74 %°u 56%" J or more 1 900 1 720 1 630 1 544 11 75 60 53 42 2 or more 11 75o I 600 _I- 525 L 420 11 10�80 � 7p --.. 6 ° Basic minimum hourly volume ° Used for combination of Conditions A and 8 after adequate trial of other remedial measures Maybe used when the major -street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolated community with a population of less than 10,000 ° May be used for combination of Conditions A and 8 after adequate trial of other remedial measures when the major -street speed exceeds 40 mph or in an isolaled community with a population of less than 10,Ooo Sect. 4C.02 DCCL I Page 440 Figure 4C-1. Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume 500 400 MINOR STREET 300 HIGHER— VOLUME APPROACH— 200 VPH 100 2RO MORE LANES & MORE LAMES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE •1 LANE & 1 LANE 20019 Edition 115' 60, 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note: 115 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 80 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET) 400 300 MINOR STREET HIGHER— 200 VOLUME APPROACH— VPH 100 Sect. 4C.04 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LAMES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE .1 LANE & 1 LAN 00• 50, 200 3070 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note: BO vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 60 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. pry e;v Mer su v09 Ecl;,ian 600 500 MINOR STREET 400 HIGHER - VOLUME 300 APPROACH - VPH zoo 100 Figure 4C-3. Warrant 3, Peak Hour 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE -1 LANE & 1 LANE MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note, 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET) 400 MINOR STREET 300 HIGHER - VOLUME APPROACH- 200 VPH 100 _�4)I19 2 OR MORE LANES & 2 E R MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE �1 LANE & 1 LANE 100` 75" 3DQ 400 500 800 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 'Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor -street approach with one lane. Page 441 150' 100• Sect. 40.04 1 Signa[ Priority Ratings: A = Number of correctible accidents in a 12 month period AR = Accident Rating = 100 1 5 x A Vrn = Average of the 8 highest hours of main main street volume in veh/hr (total both directions) Vs = Average of the 8 highest hours of side street volume in vehlhr (total both directions) Note: right turns on red andlor free right turns are subtracted from the side street volumes. K = reduction factor = {0.97 In (Vrn / Vs)) - 0.32 Cv = Capacity constant Note: When the 85th percentile speed of main street is X40 MPH, MUTCD volume warrants are reduced therefore, reduce Cv so that Cv = 0.49 x Cv Number of Lanes Main Side Street Street Cv 1 1 750 2+ 1 900 2+ 2+ 1200 1 2+ 1000 VR = Vehicular Volume Rating = (Vrn x Vs) 1(K x Cv) Pm = Average of the 8 highest hours of main street pedestrian in ped/hr (total both directions) Wm = width of main street in feet Cp = pedestrian constant = 78000 PR = Pedestrian Volume Rating = Vrn x Pm x Wm 1 Cp Total Rating = AR + VR + PR Intersection A 'Aft: Vrn Vs :::::::K Cv : ;'::;Vf :::;:: Pm W m :':Pfd :::3p1at SW 41st ST/Oakesdale AV SW 5 :1:00..615 407 ::::G.'08:: 900 '.3458.10: 0 56 : 00:T -'355a8 S 4th ST/Williams AV S 0 ;`.::0::: 442 357 :::=0;11 1000 -1398:4;7: 12 43 .:=2;92::: -1-.90 NE 44th STI1-405 NB Ramps 3 60: 539 476 ::::-Q;20 900 :-1429;r42: 0.5 40 ::0A4::::-- t� SW 7th 5TlLind AV SW 6 :.1:2:0: 783 306 ::::0.5$ 1200 337:�.4:> 0.5 51 ::0:25:::'::4:58 S 7th ST/Talbot RD S 0.3 ::::6::: 9901 315 s::0:79 : 900 :. 438;1:8::: 9 74 ::8.45:::=:4:53 NE 12th ST/Union AV NE 0 ::::Q::: 449 220 ;:::03T-' 750 .', 54.0.6:: 6.25 45 :::4-.6.2:::7 35�G SE 31 st St/Benson RD S 2 ::40:' 1221 270 : t 14 1100 .:262`'04::= 0.33 51 ::0:2ta:: ::302; NE 4th ST/Hoqulam AV NE 2 :::411: 1899 153 :::2:12::• 588 ;::232:74:: 0 fit ::13:00=:.::273:: S 56th 5T/Talbot RDS 3 ::130 89$ 174 27.,: 750 ::1:i~r3;$0 :; 0.37 36 :U:451:224. N 44th ST/1-405 SB Ramps 3 F60: 460 179 ::00.: 1000 0.17 56 NE 12th ST/Kirkland AV NE fi ::1:24 5421 120 ':3;14: 900 .::= t3;25>.:: 5 3B -:1 u::::::j0� SE 142nd PLJ156th AV SE 0 0 976 167 : i:$ 750 ::155,07::: 0 39 S Eagle Ridge DRIBenson RD S 3 ::-60: 1148 93 ;3:42.: 539 :<=93:3::: 0 39 N Landing LN/Garden AV N 0 :0: 504 158 770.8.1`:" -75-0-'-:13-1'1-87-:: 16 41 ::4:24:''::.7.36 NE Sunset BL/Hoquaim AV NE 2 <: 40 838 69.5 :':2:10 368 ::::75:65 ,:: 1 37 ::0:40:: `::'116: S Carr RD/Mill AV S 1 ;:2Q . 1887 44.5 . ::3:31:: 441 ::::57.44? : 1 49 NE 4th ST/Bremerton AV NE 2 ::40 2035 20 .:.A.IV 441 .::;2 : f:6 ;: 4 56:;5:84:; : ;>BS:: SW 34th ST/Lind AV Sw 2 :: i}0 1161 49 :-2.75':7 1200 17:24:`:: 0 58 NE 21 st ST/Duva 11 AV NE 1' ::20. 1310 37 441 :?:35:00 :: 0.5 53 ::0:9:::::: NE 12th ST/Duval[ AV NE 1 >20. 994 37 ::27.87:1 441 : :29,0}: ` 7 51 S 26th ST/Benson RD S 0 _Q:'. 100827 :3:;79 368 =:< ; ;:F7::= 15 47 NE 6th ST/Duvall AV NE 0 :: 0: - 949 382:80: 441 20:18. 2 58 1:41: ";" 31": NE 10th ST/Duval[ AV NE 0 ;: 0 458 48 .• :1:.87.. 441 : 26.09; 6.36 58 :2:7:7 >=:29 NE 4th ST/Queen AV NE 0 0:. 1641 16 41.7-:' 441 .14.2.7 0.16 66 0"22 14, Done done done done done done done TOM 9645W SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS Southeast 142"d place/156th Avenue Southeast WARRANT 1 Meets warrant --volumes meet Condition B for eight hours. WARRANT 2 Meets warrant — four-hour volumes exceed the curve in Figure 4C-1 for seven hours. WARRANT 3 Does not meet — this intersection is not near an unusual peak hour traffic generator. WARRANT 4 Does not meet —the number of pedestrians crossing the street never exceed 100 per hour. WARRANT 5 Does not meet —this is not a school crossing. WARRANT 6 Does not meet —there are no plans to make this a coordinated system. WARRANT 7 Does not meet — there are fewer than five accidents preventable by a signal within a twelve-month period. WARRANT 8 Does not meet — We classify 156th Avenue Southeast south of Southeast 142"d Place as a residential street. WARRANT 9 Does not meet — This intersection is not near a railroad crossing. RC TOMSOM -� Q ' � � N LC] LS7 UD O N+ T h O) " N CYC CO N co - 00 qt (0 LO c�7 T N h N LO (4 oU ; CY7 C3), .r 0[1 h h f` GO;�.�;� N c) d, t� � x:04 00.CQ V _ - - N' 00 C3rO) (Q00' �OQN h (3)r0 rL)i C13 L7 [7 N`r d Lfcr) 0) (flfl 0) C]) (D LC) LID Lt) LOl� a CD O ' LO . N O N h W' ems- � Q ' � 'T: [`y N r_ N r J m ; cp t� 11 11 C3 Q O N Ln N MOD OD C m 03 Q3 Nt r CD Ln ' (3) ' (0 c*) r d O d W ' N T r r c) C7 C3) O t r 0) (0 od T LID qt c- (0 (0! CD ' t CY) N N : (0 co . (U N Lr) co h N CY) Cr) :N :N r r (0 et CQV � Q N,LQi) oN() p OD OO mo C5 N N ti �,C") ti'O (D'cq N eN- 1 r -',N N N',N N N Ci ti C.0 I,- h'tii CO N r b rall I CD [o C+ O CL7 Ln r N r' r . f� h LC) N r " Tr C, CEJ im 03 Ol C3, o N CD CY7 N N N N d f'? 'Ct C�) 01 ; Ln 00 00 nr , tf) �) O h m Z �" N cr) N N N N N N CY) C7 M r h N; M N CV r r CD ' V �t W m [Y] t ,CON CY} CY) op N h h N O 0 Lf) h M i Lq r (Yi h h N 1C7 O co h AD:(D: �- Cr) �- co C3) () r p 4 N Lf) a� ca h CI7 00 CO C D ; Lt7 co lf] (D N � co co CO h LID CO N CD co C') N r Co 00 O LC) r O CD C 7 Q O h r [+) � Lm" T N'r r r r r c- r t r r r;0) h �t'N r' Lr) ❑ O, Co o o CK CA a o CD O' O O C o� O.O Ca o o O o o o CD Z o O Q a.O o o Oa O O o O.O o O a Q O o 0 o'a o (p LiJ r:N C7 V LC] CG1.h.oQ O r.Cy'C�J V LO CD 00C]3 O:t- N;(rJ d T N N N N: oOaOOOcm,Co WE S UO"oc�"OQr S B) ,c)C) oo ch :� Ca O S O Q 4 O Q O O Q co O O Q Co Q' p. 00 ~ r N CY7 1C7 (fl h oQ C37 O T N Cr1 d Ln CU t� ': OD O C] T N [y7 N N. N N Denis Law Cit �' Of Mayor - ♦�� *+ 77 l off{ ' + Is. �r ��.■: \ 1 � May 22 2014 Community & Economic Development Department y , C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination Memo of Reconsideration for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on May 19, 2014: SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated (DNSM) PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5.00 P.M. on June 6, 2014, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the 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 rrie at (425) 430-6598. For the Environmental Review Committee, , Jill Ding Assistant Planner Enclosure cc: . King County Wastewater Treatment Division Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Larry Fisher, WDFW Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Tribal Office Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program US Army Corp. of Engineers Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov Denis Law - -- # MayDr C1ty Cf Y k- rJ u � May 22, 2014 Community & Economic Development Department C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC 9675 36" St , Ste. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPAJ THRESHOLD DETERMINATION The Enclave at Bridle Ridge, LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr Lagers: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise you that they have completed their review of the request for reconsideration and have retained the existing threshold Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated with Mitigation Measure. Please refer to the enclosed ERC memo, for detail of the Mitigation Measure. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on June 6, 2014, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process maybe obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties notified. Also, a public hearing has been scheduled by the Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall on June 24, 2014 at 8:00am to consider the Preliminary Plat. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff recommendation 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. If you have any further questions, please call me at (425) 430-6598 For the Environmental Review Committee, Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way . Renton, Washington 98057 . wtonwa.gov Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC 9675 36th St , Ste. 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Page 2 of 2 May 22, 2014 Jill Ding Senior Planner Enclosure cc: Richard Dimet, Sally Nipert / Owner(s) M.A. Huniu, D. Michalski, W. Willoughby, Roger Paulsen, Jason Paulson, Eloise Stachowiak / Party(ies) of Record ERC Determination DNSM Reconsideration 14-000241 _001111110 City Of. 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: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP LOCATION: 14038 156" Ave 5E, Renton, WA 98059 DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of an 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. The site is currently developed with two single family residences and a detached garage. An existing residence is proposed to remain on parcel 1423059057. All other structures are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (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 June 6, 2014, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and 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 JUNE 24, 2014 AT 5:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. 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. CITY bF'AENT0N DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY &ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT,," F SERVICE BY. MAILING On the 22 day of May, 2014, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing SEPA reconsideration /determination documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Justin Lagers Applicant Sally Lou Nipert Owner G. Richard Ouimet Owner See attached Parties of Record See attached Agencies (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON ) +1`0 PQpp�`fl/!{ SS .Z' tri iii COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for In -.A os es mentioned in the instrument. Ofi "sl" I Dated: o Notary (Print):_ Un My appointment expires: Ai The Enclave at Bridle Ridge LUA14-000241, PP, ECF ry Public in and for the State of Washington M.A. Huniu 6608 SE 5th PI Benton, WA 98059 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings LLC 9675 SE 36th St, 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 LUA 1, }0241 THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE _._AGE OWNER/APPLICANT/PARTIES OF RECORD DAVID MICHALSKI 6525 SE 5TH PI RENTON, WA 98059 Roger Paulson 6617 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 Wade Willoughby 6512 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 Richard Ouimet 2923 Maltby Rd Bothell, WA 98012 Sally Nipert Jason Paulson Eloise Stachowiak 14004 156Th Ave SE 31 Mazama Pines Ln 6614 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 Mazama, WA 98333 Renton, WA 98059 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology ** WDFW - Larry Fisher* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 Issaquah, WA 98027 39015-172 nd Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv,, MS -240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015172 nd Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343 PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers *** Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Tim McHarg Attn: Jack Pace 35030 SE Douglas St. #210 Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Snoqualmie, WA 98065 12835 Newcastle Way, Ste 200 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98056 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Kathy Johnson, Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt 355 110th Ave NE 6200 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Mailstop EST 11W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98004 Seattle Public Utilities Jailaine Madura Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 *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 Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application, **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecv.wa.Rov ***Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice the following email address: seiiacenter(@dnr.wa.gov template - affidavit of service by mailing CITY OF RFNTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 20 day of May, 2014, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing SEPA reconsideration /determination documents. This information was sent to: Name Wr6sent"n Justin Lagers Applicant Sally Lou Nipert Owner G. Richard Ouimet Owner Parties of Record See attached (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and volunta mentioned in the instrument. Dated: Notary (Print): My appointment expires: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge LUA14-000241, PP, ECF HO!L / aAulgL �4 A •. CoA �� * ln rn 0110 C9 usd purposes Notary �ublic in and for the State of Washington Sc 0-R) 3Lill M.A. Huniu 6608 SE 5th PI Renton,Vj„ 98059 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings LLC 9675 SE 36th St, 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Sallv Nipert 14004 156th Ave SE Renton, WA 98059 + DAVID MICHALSKI Wade Willoughby 6525 SE 5TH PI 6512 SE 5th PI RENTON, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059 Roger Paulson Richard Ouimet 6617 SE 5th PI 2923 Maltby Rd Renton, WA 98059 Bothell, WA 98012 Jason Paulson 31 Mazama Pines Ln Mazama, WA 98333 Eloise Stachowiak 6614 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 Denis Law City of. Mayon r, x Community & Economic Development Department May 19, 2014 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Roger Paulsen 905- 6617 SE 5th Place Azo Renton, WA 98059 Subject: RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat / LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Paulsen: The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) geld a meeting on May 19, 2014 to consider your Request for Reconsideration, submitted April 16, 2014. Please find attached to this letter a copy of the do cision of your Request for Reconsideration signed by the members of the ERC including one new SEPA mitigation measure. It you have any questions, please contact the -project manager, Jill Ding, at (425) 430-65.98 or via email at jding@rentonwa.gov. Sincerely, 4��f Gregg Zimmerman Environmental Review Committee, Chair Attachments M Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Justin Lagers/Applicant sally Lou Nipert / Owner G. Richard Ouimet / Owner Parties of Record Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way • Renton,Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov City of - DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY�� AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 19, 2014 TO: Environmental Review Committee (ERC) FROM: Jill Ding, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Enclave at Bridle Ridge (LUA14-000241) SEPA Request for Reconsideration The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) reviewed the above mentioned preliminary plat application and issued a SEPA Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated (DNS -M) on March 31, 2014 with one mitigation measure: 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). The DNS -M was published on April 4; 2014 with an appeal period that ended on April 18; 2014. A request for reconsideration of the SEPA determination was received on April 17, 2014 from Roger Paulsen. The request for reconsideration cites transportation impacts and public notice as the primary justifications for the filing of the request for reconsideration to the ERC. Below is a summary of the concerns cited: 1. The submitted Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) relied upon by the ERC for the issuance of the SEPA DNS -M was incomplete and did not include the AM and PM peak hour conditions per item #1 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis. Staff Comment: The originally submitted TIA included a PM peak hour Level of Service (LOS) analysis. After the receipt of the request for reconsideration, the applicant voluntarily conducted an additional traffic analysis and submitted an Addendum to the original Traffic Impact Analysis (dated April 29, 2014). The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection and an AM and PM peak hour LOS analysis. After conducting the additional analysis, the applicant's traffic engineer concluded that the proposed project would not result in a significant adverse impact on the existing surrounding street system. The City's Transportation Division has reviewed the originally submitted TIA and the Addendum and they concur that the proposed hAcedlplanninglcurrent planninglprojects114-000241_jilllerc reconsideration recommendation memo.dot.docx Envirojnnental Review Com Page 2 of 4 May 19, 2014 project would not have a significant adverse impact on the surrounding street system. The City's Transportation Division has conducted an independent study of the existing background traffic situation at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection. Based on the City's study the existing conditions warrant the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection with or without the construction of the proposed subdivision. With the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, it is anticipated that the traffic conditions in the project vicinity would improve. The installation of a traffic signal is not included on the City's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), therefore transportation impacts fees would not fund the installation of a signal. Due to the existing LOS designation F at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection and the fact that the required traffic impact fees would not fund a traffic signal at this intersection, staff recommends as a new SEPA mitigation measure that the proposed project be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips = 0.00687 x $500,000 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 2. The submitted TIA provided a Level of Service (LOS) Analysis for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection; it did not include a LOS analysis for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. Staff Comment: Item # 2 of the City's Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis states that the "study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development". The proposed development would not result in a 5% increase in peak hour traffic at any intersection therefore no analysis of any intersection was required. However per the City's request an analysis was done for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection and was included in the submitted TIA. The submitted Addendum included an analysis of the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. According to the addendum the LOS for the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection currently operates at a LOS C and would continue to operate at a LOS C with or without the proposed subdivision. The current delay for westbound traffic is 15.1 seconds, the delay is anticipated to increase to 15.8 seconds without the project and to 16.1 seconds with the project. Therefore, according to the submitted addendum, it is anticipated that the proposed subdivision would result in an additional delay of 0.3 seconds for vehicles at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection. The report does not recommend any additional mitigation beyond the required traffic impact fees as the LOS at the hacedlplanninglcurrent planning1projects114-000241..iilllerc reconsideration recommendation memo.dot.docx Environmental Review Com Page 3 oF4 May 19, 2014. 156th Avenue SE/SE 5th Place intersection will remain at C with or without the proposed subdivision. Therefore, staff concludes that no further traffic mitigation is warranted for the subject project. 3. Public notice for the proposed subdivision was misleading. People who didn't submit written comments during the 14 day Notice of Application comment period may think they can provide comments on the SEPA at the public hearing. Staff Comment: Public notice for the proposed subdivision was provided in accordance with the requirements outline in RMC 4-8-090. The notice states that individuals have 14 days to comment on the proposed subdivision application and also mentions that additional comments may be provided at the public hearing. In addition, any party who requested to be made a party of record would receive the applicable SEPA determination, which provides a 14 day appeal period. The notice is not misleading as anyone receiving the notice would have been notified of the public comment period, the date of the hearing, and has the opportunity to become a party of record and receive additional information on the project. Recommendation: In light of the additional information provided in the independent traffic study conducted by the City, which states that a signal is warranted at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"4 Street intersection, staff recommends that the ERC retain the existing DSN-M with one new mitigation measure as follows: 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). 2. Due to the existing Level of Service (LOS) designation of F at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place and the proposal to add additional trips to the existing situation, the proposed project shall be responsible for paying their fair share of the cost of a new signal to be installed at the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Street intersection. A fee in the amount of $3,435 (9 new PM peak hour trips/1,310 Total PM peak hour trips = 0.00687 x $500,000 = $3,435) shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on June 6, 2014. 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 RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. hacedlplanninglcurrent planning1projects114-00024I jilllerc reconsideration recommendation memo.dot.doex Environmental Review Corn e Page 4 of 4 May 19, 2014 Date of decision: May 19, 2014 signatures: Gregg Zimmr a , Administrator Public Works apartment Date Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department Date L/ Mark Peterson, Administrator Fire & Emergen y ServicesDate 4�� I 1� 4I' i C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Department of Community & ©ate Economic Development hacedlplanning%current planninglprojects114-000241 _jiIkerc reconsideration recommendation.memo.dot.docx r4aff2 !1/iiF?TffH/.cS7- nqAf"F}C EXPE"#7T3 my 1141 O NE 124th St, ##590 XirWad. WA W34 Phone:425.522.4118 Fax.425.522.4311 April 29, 2014 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Addendum to the Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: We are pleased to present this addendum to traffic impact analysis (TIA) report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located at 14038 156th Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The purpose of the addendum is to provide information in response to questions concerning the original TIA and requests for additional analysis. The additional information includes traffic counts and an analysis at the SE 5th PI/156th Ave. SE intersection and also traffic counts and analysis of all study intersection in the AM peak hour as well as the PM peak hour. The trip generation, trip distribution, background traffic growth and other data and assumptions are unchanged from the original TIA unless otherwise noted. The analysis is summarized as follows: • No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes due to the proposed project. • Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. The 142nd Pi. SE/SE 156th intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. AM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS AM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 5th PI/156th Ave SE and 142nd Pi, SEISE 156th intersection on Tuesday 4/2212014 from 7 to 9 AM. The peak hour occurred from 7:15 to 8:15 AM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. Figure 1 shows the AM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. No Page 1 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT M E M- O R A N D U M DATE: May 5, 2014 TO: Chris Barnes, Transportation Operations Manager FROM: Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations SUBJECT: Proposed Signal, Southeast 142" a Place at 156t' Avenue Southeast Issue: Should we install a signal at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne of crnbayne@gmail.com7 . Recommendation - We should place this iritersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a new signal. Background: We have analyzed the lntersectfon of Southeast 142nd place and 156' Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, Interruption of Continuous Traffic for Eight Hours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes for Four Hours, please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Table 4C-1 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Figures 4C-1 through 4C=4 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and _a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis. This intersection does not meet Warrant 7 for crash experience. Since. 2009, there have been five recorded accidents on 156th Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end accidents and the other two involved vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred at the intersection of Southeast 142"d place and 156th Avenue Southeast. The other four accidents occurred at least -two blocks away from the intersection in question. Please find attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents.. h.-\divisigns1tra nspor.tat\operatioVo n\to m\tom96453.d oc PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT .eft M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 5, 2014 TO: Chris Barnes, Transportation Operations Manager FROM: Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations SUBJECT: Proposed Signal, Southeast 142nd Place at 156th Avenue Southeast 'Issue: Should we install a signal at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne ofcmba rine@gmail.com? Recommendation: We should place this intersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a new signal. Background: We have analyzed the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 15e Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, interruption of Continuous Traffic for Eight Hours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes for Four Hours. Please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Table 4C-1 from' the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, f=igures 4C-1 through 4C-4 frorn the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis. This intersection does not meet Warrant 7 for crash experience. Since. 2009, there have been five recorded accidents on 156"'Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end accidents and the other two involved vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156`h Avenue Southeast. The other four accidents occurred at least two blocks away from the intersection in question. Please find attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents. fi:\divisions\transpor.tat\operatio\ro n\t0m\tom9645a Am COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Dri7,timn, M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 18, 2014 TO: Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Steve Lee, Development Engineering Manager FROM: Neil Watts, Development Services Director 5UEUECT: Traffic Concurrency Test for The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat The proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge preliminary plat consists of 31 single family lots, with a calculated daily trip generation of an additional 297 trips. The project passes the City of Renton Traffic Concurrency Test per RMC 4-6-070.D as follows. Traffic Concurrency Test Criteria Pass? Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan? Yes Within allowed growth levels? Yes Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees? Yes Site specific street improvements to be completed by project? Yes Traffic Concurrency Test Passes Evaluation of Test Criteria Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan?: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the city's investment in completion of the forecast traffic improvements are at 130% of the scheduled expenditure through 207.3_ Within allowed growth levels?: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the calculated citywide trip capacity for concurrency with the city adopted model for 2014 is 96,998 trips, which provides sufficient capacity to accommodate the 297 additional trips from this project. Project subiect to transportation mitigation or impact fees?: The project will be subject to transportation impact fees at time of building permit. Site specific street improvements to be completed by proiect?: The project will be required to complete all internal and frontage street improvements for the plat prior to recording. Any additional off-site improvements identified through SEPA or land use approval will also be completed prior to recording of the plat. Background Information on Traffic Concurrency Test for Renton The City of Renton Traffic Concurrency requirements for proposed development projects are covered under Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-6-070. The specific concurrency test requirement is covered in RMC 4-6-070.1), which is listed for reference: Transportation Concurrency Test - T lave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat April 78, 2014 D. CONCURRENCY REVIEW PROCESS: 1. Test Required: A concurrency test shall be conducted by the Department for each nonexempt development activity. The concurrency test shall determine consistency with the adopted Citywide Level of Service Index and Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, according to rules and procedures established by the Department. The Department shall issue an initial concurrency test result describing the outcome of the concurrency test. 2. Written Finding Required: Prior to approval of any nonexempt development activity permit application, a written finding of concurrency shall be made by the City as part of the development permit approval. The finding of concurrency shall be made by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development permits required for a development activity_ A written finding of concurrency shall apply only to the specific land uses, densities, intensities, and development project described in the application and development permit. 3. Failure of Test: If no reconsideration is requested, or if upon reconsideration a project fails the concurrency test, the project application shall be denied by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development activity permit application. The Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element on page XI -65 of the Comprehensive Plan states the following: Based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS -tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation, development will have met City of Renton concurrency requirements. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ciLyaf M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 5, 2414 TO: Chris Barnes, Transportation Operations Manager FROM: Ronald Mar, Transportation Operations SUBJECT: Proposed Signal, Southeast 142"d Place at 156x' Avenue Southeast Issue: Should we install a signal at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast as requested by Carlos Bayne of cmbayne@gmail.com? . Recommendation: We should place this intersection ninth in our priority list of locations to consider for a new signal. Background: We have analyzed the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156th Avenue Southeast for signal warrants according to Section 4C of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. This proposed location meets Warrant 1, Interruption of Continuous Traffic for Eight Hours. This location also meets Warrant 2, significant Volumes for Four Hours. Please find attached a copy of the traffic volumes, Table 4C-1 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Figures 4C-1 through 4C-4 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and a copy of the Signal Warrant Analysis. This intersection does not meet Warrant 7 for crash experience. Since 2009, there have been five recorded accidents on 156th Avenue Southeast. Three were rear end accidents and the other two involved vehicles run off the road to avoid hitting a deer. Of these, only one accident occurred at the intersection of Southeast 142nd Place and 156`h Avenue Southeast. The other four accidents occurred at least two blocks away from the intersection in question. Please find attached the law enforcement reports of the five accidents. .Cm-- L'"1q-W0af Y(OW -Ple- h:\division_0ranspor.tat\operatia\rbn\tomltom9645a_ m COMMUNITY & �.Ityof �r� �^ ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 18, 2014 TO: Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Steve Lee, Development Engineering Manager FROM: Neil Watts, Development Services Director SUBJECT; Traffic Concurrency Test for The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat The proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge preliminary plat consists of 31 single family lots, with a calculated daily trip generation of an additional 297 trips. The project passes the City of Renton Traffic Concurrency Test per RMC 4-6-070.D as follows. Traffic Concurrency Test Criteria Pass? Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan? Yes Within allowed growth levels? Yes Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees? Yes Site specific street improvements to be completed by project? Yes Traffic Concurrency Test Passes Evaluation of Test Criteria Implementation of citywide Transportation Plan?: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the city's investment in completion of the forecast traffic improvements are at 130% of the scheduled expenditure through 2013_ Within allowed ;growth levels?: As shown on the attached citywide traffic concurrency summary, the calculated citywide trip capacity for concurrency with the city adopted model for 2014 is 96,998 trips, which provides sufficient capacity to accommodate the 297 additional trips from this project. Project subject to transportation mitigation or impact fees?: The project will be subject to transportation impact fees at time of building permit. Site specific street improvements to be completed by project?: The project will be required to complete all internal and frontage street improvements for the plat prior to recording. Any additional off-site improvements identified through SEPA or land use approval will also be completed prior to recording of the plat. Background Information on Traffic Concurrency Test for Renton The City of Renton Traffic Concurrency requirements for proposed development projects are covered under Renton Municipal Code (RMC) 4-6-070. The specific concurrency test requirement is covered in RMC 4-6-070.D, which is listed for reference: Transportation Concurrency Test - nclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat April 18, 2014 O. CONCURRENCY REVIEW PROCESS: 1. Test Required: A concurrency test shall be conducted by the Department for each nonexempt development activity. The concurrency test shall determine consistency with the adopted Citywide Level of Service Index and Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, according to rules and procedures established by the Department. The Department shall issue an initial concurrency test result describing the outcome of the concurrency test. 2- Written Finding Required. Prior to approval of any nonexempt development activity permit application, a written finding of concurrency shall be made by the City as part of the development permit approval. The finding of concurrency shall be made by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development permits required for a development activity_ A written finding of concurrency shall apply only to the specific land uses, densities, intensities, and development project described in the application and development permit. 3. Failure of Test: if no reconsideration is requested, or if upon reconsideration a project faits the concurrency test, the project application shalt be denied by the decision maker with the authority to approve the accompanying development activity permit application. The Concurrency Management System established in the Transportation Element on page XI -55 of the Comprehensive Plan states the following: Based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS -tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation, development will have met City of Renton concurrency requirements. THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE ADDENDUM TO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by rral, NORTHWEST jEX TRAF`F"/C EXPERTS 11410 NE 124th St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 April 29, 2014 rraffay April 29, 2014 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 361h St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Addendum to the Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: NORTHWEST TRAFFIC EXPERTS 11410 NE 124th St. #590 Kirldaad. 0 98034 Phone: 425,522.4118 Fax-, 425.522.4311 We are pleased to present this addendum to traffic impact analysis (TIA) report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located at 14038 156th Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The purpose of the addendum is to provide information in response to questions concerning the original TIA and requests for additional analsis. The additional information includes traffic counts and an analysis at the SE 5th PI1156th Ave. SE intersection and also traffic counts and analysis of all study intersection in the AM peak hour as well as the PM peak hour. The trip generation, trip distribution, background traffic growth and other data and assumptions are unchanged from the original TIA unless otherwise noted. The analysis is summarized as follows: No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes due to the proposed project. Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. The 142nd PI. SEISE 156th intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. AM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS AM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 5th PI1156th Ave SE and 142"d PI, SEISE 156th intersection on Tuesday 4/22/2014 from 7 to 9 AM. The peak hour occurred from 7:15 to 8:15 AM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. Figure 1 shows the AM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. No Page 1 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge rralay queues were observed to back up from the 142nd PI. SEISE 156th intersection to SE Stn Pl. in the AM peak hour. The longest queue observed was 9 vehicles. Table 1 shows the calculated level of service at the study intersections for existing conditions and future conditions with and without the project. The level of service calculations are attached in the technical appendix. TABLE 1 AM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY INTERSECTION EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2015 WITH NB 2013 PROJECT PROJECT SE 5 PI/ 156th Ave SE WB (C 15.1) WB (C 15.8) WB (C 16.1) North Site Access I 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (C 16.4) South Site Access 1 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (C 17.0) SE 142ndPI / 156th Ave SE Overall (F 53.7) Overall (F 71.4) overall (F 72.5) Number shown is the average delay in seconds per vehicle which defines the LOS per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual For a side street, stop controlled intersection (i.e. SE Stn PI 1156rn Ave SE) LOS is the average vehicle delay for the worst movement (the side street approach) For an all -way stop controlled intersection (SE 142nd11561h Ave. SE) the LOS is the average vehicle delay for all movements (X XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 2 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge rrafft:f PM PEAK HOUR COUNTS AND ANALYSIS PM peak hour counts were taken at the SE 5th PI/156th Ave SE and 142,4 PI, SEISE 156th intersection on Tuesday 4/22/2014 from 4 to 6 PM. The peak hour occurred from 4:15 to 5:15 PM. The counts are attached in the technical appendix. . Figure 2 shows the PM peak hour volumes for all four study intersections for existing, future without project, project trips and future with project conditions. There were four queues observed that backed up from the 142nd PI. SEISE 156th intersection to SE 51h PI. in the 4 to 6 PM time period. Left turns out of SE 5th PI. were blocked for a total cumulative time of 9 minutes and 21 seconds. Right turns out of SE 5th PI. were unproblematic. Table 2 shows the calculated level of service for existing conditions and future conditions with and without the project. The level of service calculations are attached in the technical appendix. TABLE 2 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY INTERSECTION EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2015 WITH 2013 PROJECT PROJECT SE 5 PII 156th Ave SE WB (C 15.4) WB (C 16.3) WB (C 16.6) North Site Access / 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (C 15.2) South Site Access 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 13.3) SE 1142n PI / 156 Ave SE Overall (F 66.4) Overall (F 89.9) Overall (F 92.3) (X XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 3 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge fraffay FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Adding the project generated traffic volumes does not change the LOS at any of the study intersections. Tables 1 and 2 show the calculated LOS for future with project volumes at the study intersections. The study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS of for future conditions except for the 156th Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. intersection. That intersection currently operates at an overall LOS F and will continue to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. Figures 1 and 2 shows the number and percentage of project generated trips passing through each of the study intersections. The percentage of project trips range from a high of 2.23% at the north site access intersection to a low of 0.65 % at the 142nd PI. SE1156th Ave SE intersection. Per the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development the study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development. No roadways or intersections experience a 5% increase in traffic volumes. Page 4 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Traff[ SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The additional information collected for this addendum and resulting analysis supports the conclusions and recommendations of the original TIA. We recommend that The Enclave at Bridle Ridge be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: Construct the street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk for the site access streets and site frontage on 156th Ave. SE. Contribute the approximately $21,525 Transportation Mitigation fee to the City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince@nwtraffex.com or larrygnwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Page 5 W o � r25 �O�VAL44 Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx N CO O N N 0 t `� 4 0 1 0 0 t rr 1 CD v N tv AF 51h/ 15Rth Avr N Access/ 156th ave S Access( 156th Ave m r -- CN (fl 620, (D 40--, o 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SE142 PI The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 0) C3 O N N 0 4�4 0 O 0 0 t rr1 CD CO cfl ti SF 5thl 15Rth Ava 0 O CO o + ` 0 r t r 0 CDo ti N Access/ 156th ave 0 M b L 0 L t rr 0 M o S Accessl 156th Ave O qr O 0 0 0 t rr 0 CD � o SE 5th/ 156th Ave N Access/ 156th ave N N 1 6 L 3 r t r 3 S Access/ 156th Ave 1091 1088 1084 1223 5th/ 156th Ave I N O cam] N 1 L 6 oL r t r 2 to n ti cess/ 156th ave I cess/ 156th Ave I rn N M N fti 659 O 4 42�, t m r~ CD r 5E 5th PI jyp�y�yggT�ww MA ne EXR£R7 B �. Project a) Site $' 14"bw S[ F t t nti 1>, Future Project Future Existing without Project Traffic Project % with Project of Total N CO O N N 0 t `� 4 0 1 0 0 t rr 1 CD v N tv AF 51h/ 15Rth Avr N Access/ 156th ave S Access( 156th Ave m r -- CN (fl 620, (D 40--, o 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SE142 PI The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 0) C3 O N N 0 4�4 0 O 0 0 t rr1 CD CO cfl ti SF 5thl 15Rth Ava 0 O CO o + ` 0 r t r 0 CDo ti N Access/ 156th ave 0 M b L 0 L t rr 0 M o S Accessl 156th Ave O qr O 0 0 0 t rr 0 CD � o SE 5th/ 156th Ave N Access/ 156th ave N N 1 6 L 3 r t r 3 S Access/ 156th Ave 1091 1088 1084 1223 5th/ 156th Ave I N O cam] N 1 L 6 oL r t r 2 to n ti cess/ 156th ave I cess/ 156th Ave I rn N M N fti 659 O 4 42�, t m r~ CD r SE 5th/ 156thAve LID r` a t 0 2 2 r t r 0 a) o th M N Access/ 156th ave L O I 0 3 3 r t r 0 M o LO co S Arrest! 156th AvP SE 5th/ 156th Ave N Access/ 156th ave S Arcpssi 156th Ava V r p + 0 t rr 0 00 p MWIRAMOM.M. N Accessi 156th ave N r- 1 L,4 `�4 t r 1 M M S Arressl 156th Avr 1209 1202 i 66 M CO r-- 3 ~3 a` 1 r2 t r CO CO M SF 5th! 156th Ave w ca 00rl- + L 4 ray L t rr 2 to M 00 M cess/ 156th ave I S Access/ 156th Ave 000 CD N N N M cp cp t� r� N r— r— r- 279, r+ 296, r+ 4, r t 9 300, r+ (D�1 1390 (D 111 �' t 118 ti t 0 ' t/J o.ss°�° 118 11 tt/J oO a0 da p N a0 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Avel SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SEl42 PI The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 2 r) ff'=' NCTRrHWE s`t`y TRAFFIC EXPER'T'S Project Site i� 142nd St 14".51 Future Project Future .xisting without Project Traffic Project% with Project of Total SE 5th/ 156thAve LID r` a t 0 2 2 r t r 0 a) o th M N Access/ 156th ave L O I 0 3 3 r t r 0 M o LO co S Arrest! 156th AvP SE 5th/ 156th Ave N Access/ 156th ave S Arcpssi 156th Ava V r p + 0 t rr 0 00 p MWIRAMOM.M. N Accessi 156th ave N r- 1 L,4 `�4 t r 1 M M S Arressl 156th Avr 1209 1202 i 66 M CO r-- 3 ~3 a` 1 r2 t r CO CO M SF 5th! 156th Ave w ca 00rl- + L 4 ray L t rr 2 to M 00 M cess/ 156th ave I S Access/ 156th Ave 000 CD N N N M cp cp t� r� N r— r— r- 279, r+ 296, r+ 4, r t 9 300, r+ (D�1 1390 (D 111 �' t 118 ti t 0 ' t/J o.ss°�° 118 11 tt/J oO a0 da p N a0 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Avel SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SE142 PI 156th Ave/ SEl42 PI The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 2 TECHNICAL APPENDIX 71ra..A,.,.,C .ATA GA7-MUM WO TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:15 AM TO 8:15 AM HV = Heavy Vehicles PHF = Peak Hour Factor COUNTED BY: CN REDUCED BY: CN 156th Avenue SE @ SE 5th Place Renton, WA DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4122114 TIME OF COUNT: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM REDUCTION DATE: Tue. 4122114 WEATHER: Rai HV PHF SB 5.6% 0.77 NB 4.8% 0.95 WB 0.0% 0.63 INTRS. 5.0% 0.96 HV = Heavy Vehicles PHF = Peak Hour Factor COUNTED BY: CN REDUCED BY: CN 156th Avenue SE @ SE 5th Place Renton, WA DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4122114 TIME OF COUNT: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM REDUCTION DATE: Tue. 4122114 WEATHER: Rai W87.AFF/C ..rA QA77j1EAV Il INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS REDUCTION SHEET LOCATION: 156th Avenue SE 0 SE 5th Place DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4122 I4 COUNTED BY: CN Renton WA TIME OF COUNT; 7:00 AM -9:00 AM WEATHER; Ralny TIME INTERVAL ENDING AT Pads FROM NORTH ON 156th Avenue SE HV UTum Left Thru Right Pods FROM SOUTH ON 156th Avenue SE .'HV:.UTurn Left Thru Ri ht Peds HV. FROM EAST ON SE 5th Place UTum Left Thru Right Peds FROM WEST ON HV UTurn Lert Thru Right INTERVAL TOTAL$ 05:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 '; 0 0 0 0 4 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05:30AM -:ril=,<' 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..... '0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "0 0 0 0 Q 0 0 05:45 AM '" D 0' 'r 0 0 0 0 A V 0 0 0 0 0 -. 0 p 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:00 AM 0 :.== 0 0 0 0 D ��. 0 1 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 , 6G 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:15 AM 0 0 '- 0 0 0 0 : 0 0- p 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 1 0' 0 0 0 0 0 06:34 AM 0 ':.0: Q 0 0 0 0-- --0-- 0 D 0 Q ;::;:0 .......::: :......p:.:.:� 0 0 0 0 0 '0;.-: D 0 0 0 0 06:45 AM 0 0 �' 0 0 0 0 0'' 0 0 0 0 0 .................O...r 0 0 0 0 ,U 0.t: 0 0 0 0 0 07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 `as0mill "' 0 0 0 0 0 �0 - ��: 0 D 0 p 0 -_ D' 0 0 0 0 0 07:15 AM 0 0 37 0 0 2 0 0 123 0 - 4 '-4' 0 0 0 1 - 0 .D 0 0 0 0 161 07:30 AM 0 5 0 0 92 0 0 1 a 0 0 162 0 0 - 0- 0 1 0 1 0 .. 0 0 0 0 0 256 07:45 AM 0 3' 0 2 61 0 0 4 0 0 190 0 0 0 0 0 D 1 0::..0 ` 0 0 0 0 254 06:00 AM 0� 5 0 0 73 0 0 13 0 0 169 0 -0 - 0 0 0 0 1 D 0 0 0 p 263 04:15AM 0 -3--- 0 0 56 0 0 '. 12:- 0 0 163 1 -O 0 0 0 0 1 D� ffi: 0 0 0 0 241 00:30 AM 0 2 0 0 61 0 sin ':t0;:. 0 0 167 0 0 .'.0 -:: 0 2 0 D 0 '.0� 0 0 0 0 220 08:45 AM 0 0 57 0 0 11 0 0 164 0 0 `-0 . 0 0 0 0 0 "0 0 0 0 0 241 09:00 AM 0 4 ': 0 0 5p 0 0- 13 0 0 176 0 0- - il' - 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 227 PEAK HOUR TOTALS --- 4 78 0 2 262 0 ........0...1i .tf3:: 0 0 724 1 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 INTERSECTION ALL MOVEMENTS 264 725 5 0 1014 % HV 5.6% 4.8% 0.0% #NIA 5-0% PEAK HOUR FACTOR 0.77 0.95 0.63 #NIA 4.96 PHF = Peak Hour Factor 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:15 AM TO 8:15 AM REDUCED BY: CN DATE OF REDUCTION. 412212014 ROLLING HOUR COUNT FROM NORTH ON 156th Avenue SE FROM SOUTH ON 1561h Avenue SE FROM EAST ON FROM WEST ON SE 5th Place INTERVAL TOTALS TIME INTERVAL Parta NV.� UTurn Left Thru Ri ht PFIY UTurn Left Thru RI ht Peds HV UTurn Left Thru RI hl 1;;;l`HV: UTum Left Thru RI ht 5:00 AM -6:00 AM I,�O.,- "'Q . 0 p D 0 0 .:�: ::��0:.:._.1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 - 0 -- 0 1 D 1 0 1 0 1 0 7FTRAFiFIC DATA GATT' HMIG TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:15 AM TO 8:15 AM M74+ w 2 a� c 7 ¢ L r' 213 310 0 FU -Turns] 0 620 660 40 INTERSECTION PEAK HOUR VOLUME IN 1,146 OUT 1,146 COUNTED BY: SN REDUCED BY: CN REDUCTION DATE: Tue. 4/22/14 LLI Lmc UPeds 109 156th Avenue SE @ SE 142nd Place Renton, WA HV = Heavy Vehicles PHF = Peak Hour Factor DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4/22/14 TIME OF COUNT: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM WEATHER: Rainy HV PHF SB 6.1% 0.96 NB 1.9% 0.59 EB 5.3% 10.92 INTRS. 1 4.9% 0.92 HV = Heavy Vehicles PHF = Peak Hour Factor DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4/22/14 TIME OF COUNT: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM WEATHER: Rainy I_ lra TRAFFIC DATA OArIIERWO INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS REDUCTION SHEET LOCATION: 156th Avenue SE Q SE 142nd Place PATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4122114 Rental WA TIME OF COUNT: 7:00 AM -9:D0 AM COUNTED BY: SN WEATHER: Rainy TIME INTERVAL ENDING AT peNs HV-. FROM NORTH ON FROM SOUTH ON 156th Avenue SE 156th Avenue SE UTurn Left Thru Right, Pods "HV UTurn Left Thru Right PWS W-. FROM EAST ON UTurn Left Thru Riuht PW; HV. FROM WEST ON SE 142nd Place UTurn Left Thru Ri ht INTERVAL TOTALS 05_iSAM D' 0` 0 0 C 0 D 0 r C 0 0 0 0 0. C 0 0 0 .0 :0 0 0 0 0 0 05:36 AM - 0 0. 0 0 0 0 .0 0 C 0 0 0 0 -0--- 0 0 0 0 0- 0. 0 0 0 0 0 05:45 AM -L2 D 0 0 0 0 `0 - D-- p 0 0 6 0 0 0 4 0 0 4' �'. D 0 0 0 0 06:00 AM 0 p 0 0 0 0_ -'. --0 0 0 0 0 Q U: 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:15 AM =.0 1 `0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 -- ----0 0 0 0 0 '0 D ''''' 0 0 0 0 0 06:30 AMS 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 q 0 p 0 0 0 0 -0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 06:45 AM -- 0 0- 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I`11 . -'R 0 C 0 0 p- 0 0 0 0 0 0 07:00 AM 4 D '' 0 0 0 C 0 0 -' 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0:.0 0 0 0 4 0 D 07:15AM 0 5 0 0 25 26 0 '2�?E'' 0 15 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1C8 0 15 214 07:30AM 4 6 0 0 25 46 0-` '.0 - 0 35 22 00 'YO'` 0 0 0 0 `0r 7;' 0 136 0 13 277 07:45 AM i.. 0. 2 0 0 1 18 51 0-1 1 '' 0 26 62 0 0 D 1 0 D 1 0 1 0 0 1 3_, 0 1 144 0 10 311 08:00 AM 0� 0 0 14 59 0:-` 1 -- 0 13 11 0 0 0- 0 0 0 C .g<-: 0 171 0 6 276 08:15 AM 0 ":4 0 0 10 57 'D�r 2 0 23 14 0 D ': 0- 0 0 0 0 0 14 = 0 169 0 9 282 08:30 AM 0 1--- 0 0 1C 44 4 ''. 1 'r 0 20 10 0 4-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 7--- 0 165 0 1C 259 08:45 AM - 0 '3 -: 0 0 9 52 4 0 0 28 7 0 0.- -.-0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 171 0 9 276 D9:00 AM 0 4 0 0 9 39 $�-- p 26 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0.1 3 0 143 0 6 241 PEAK HOUR 70TALS D 17 0 0 67 213 '-0 ;4 0 97 109 0 4 '0 0 0 6 0 D 35 0 620 0 40 INTERSECTION ALL MOVEM ENTS 280 1 206 0 660 1146 % HV 6.1% 1.9% #NIA 5.3% 4.9% PEAK HOUR FACTOR 0.96 0.59 #NIA 0.92 0.92 PHF = Peak Hour Factor 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM PEAK HOUR: 7:15 AM TO 8,15 AM REDUCED BY: CN DATE OF REDUCTION: ROLLING HOUR COUNT 4/22)2014 FROM NORTH ON FROM SOUTH ON FROM EAST ON FROM WEST ON 1561h Avenue SE 156th Avenue SE SE 142nd Place INTERVAL TOTALS TIME INTERVAL Peds .h1V U'rurni Left I Thru Rr ht PWdB HVA'. UT.r.1 Lett I Thru I Right Pedal I HV I UTurn I Left i Thru I Right Peds I 14V ��:I UT.r.1 Left I Thru FU ht 5:00 AM -6:00 AM '' 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0- j 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q> 0 01 0 1 0 0 0 71rg..A..... BATA OA MERWO TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:15 PM TO 5:15 PM HV = Heavy Vehicles PHF = Peak Hour Factor COUNTED BY: CN REDUCED BY: CN REDUCTION DATE: Tue. 4122114 156th Avenue SE @ SE 5th Place Renton, WA DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4/22114 TIME OF COUNT: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM WEATHER: Rainy__ HV PHF SB 2.1% 0.96 NB 1.7% 0.91 WB 0.0% 0.63 INTRS. 2.0% 0.94 HV = Heavy Vehicles PHF = Peak Hour Factor COUNTED BY: CN REDUCED BY: CN REDUCTION DATE: Tue. 4122114 156th Avenue SE @ SE 5th Place Renton, WA DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4/22114 TIME OF COUNT: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM WEATHER: Rainy__ LD Ire 7/9A,'... DATA GATT-AL=R/PIF0 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS REDUCTION SHEET LOCATION: 1$6th Avenue SE LED SE 5th Place DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4122114 Renton WA TIME OF COUNT: 4:00 PM -6:00 PM COUNTED BY: CN WEATHER: Rainy TIME INTERVAL ENDING AT Pads FROM NORTH ON 1564h Avenue SE - HV UTurn Lek Thru Ri ht Peds FROM SOUTH ON 156th Avenue SE HV JVTu.j Lett I Thr. Right Peds HV FROM EAST ON SE 51h Place UTurn Left Thru .. ht Pada FROM WEST ON HV UT.. Left Thr. RI ht INTERVAL TOTALS 02:15 PM . 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 02:30 PM 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 3.0 0'- 0 0 0 0 0 02:45 PM 'tto 0.- .:: 0 0 0 0 0--.- 0 `�� 0 0 0 0 10 .0 0 0 0 0 0-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 PM 0- «,0 ��u�' 0 0 0 0-:0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 03t15PM - 0"7 0 0 0 a 0 �0 0 0 0 0 0 0� Ot:�== 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 03:30 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ---0"" 0 0 0 0 ''0 1 0 q 0 0 0 0 03;45 PM 0' D __- 0 0 0 0 0` 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 p 0 0 04:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 ..:0:.: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 04:15 PM :. .3:'' 0 0 181 0 0 2 0 0 90 0 0 '0 p p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 j 0 1 271 04:30 PM ,0.. 3 ':' 0 0 198 0.0 2 0 0 98 1 0 a £0 :- 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 298 04:45 PM 0 -4 0 2 191 0 .,0 -2 0 0 89 0 O'I`.i0 " 0 q p 1 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 202 05:00 PM --C1 Of '1' 0 5 152 0 '0- �1., 0 0 83 1 0 :`px 0-. 0 1 0 1 0 0- 0 0 0 0 272 05:15 PM ':. D^ a :: 0 0 182 0 ' 'D •: 1 '' 0 0 88 0 0 `D 0 0 0 2 0 0- -- 0 0 0 0 272 05:30PM 1 0 ' 2 ':': 0 1 173 1 0 . A 2 0 0 96 0 ` 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0--: '- 0 p 1 0 0 271 D5:45 PM 0 4 0 1 192 0 ::::D •' 1 0 0 87 0 0 :.0 0 0 0 1 ° 0' 0 0 0 0 0 281 06:00 PM - 0 1 `- 0 1 154 0 A`= 2:-` 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 D 0 0 0 0 247 PEAK HOUR TOTALS 0 -16 I 07 753 0j 0 -_ • $,' _ 0 0 1 3511 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0: 0 0 0 0 INTERSECTION ALL MOVEMENTS 760 359 5 0 1124 %HV 2.1% 1.7% 0.0% AMA 2-0% PEAK HOUR FACTOR 0.86 0.91 0.63 #NfA 0-94 PHF = Peak Hour Factor 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:15 PM TO 5:15 PM REDUCED BY; CN DATE OF RFDLICTION; 4122;2014 ROLLING HOUR COUNT FROM NORTH ON 156th Avenue SE FROM SOUTH ON 156th Avenue SE FROM EAST ON FROM WEST ON SE 5th Place INTERVAL TOTALS TIME INTERVAL peds HV UTurn Leff Thru RI ht Pdds -HV UTurn Left Thru RI ht Peds --HV UTurn Left Thru RI ht Peds 14VUTurn LeftThru Right 2;00 PM - 3:00 PM _•0 _0 - q 0 1 0 1 0 0"1 0 -- 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 4---- 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 71rg7NAJ9r-7C DATA GATNIERHNG TURNING MOVEMENTS DIAGRAM 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:15 PM TO 5:15 PM Z8* Lu d) Ln 6 758 0 11 rOT79 m n 390 111 cin 76 85 m INTERSECTION c 0 m PEAK HOUR VOLUME Q U -Turns IN 1,301 ups 179 161 OUT 1,301 Peds = 0 COUNTED BY: VT REDUCED BY: CN REDUCTION DATE: Tue. 4122114 156th Avenue SE @ SE 142nd Place Renton, WA HV = Heavy Vehicles PHF = Peak Hour Factor DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4122114 TIME OF COUNT: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM WEATHER: Rainy HV PHF SB 2.8% 0.95 NB 5.0% 0.91 EB 1.0% 0.88 INTRS. 1 2.5% 0.93 HV = Heavy Vehicles PHF = Peak Hour Factor DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4122114 TIME OF COUNT: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM WEATHER: Rainy 717 TRAFFIC DATA GATfALSR/NG INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENTS REDUCTION SHEET LOCATION: 156th Avenue SE ft SE 142nd Place DATE OF COUNT: Tue. 4122!14 COUNTED BY: VT Renton, WA TIME DF COUNT: 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM WEATHER: Rainy TIME INTERVAL ENDING AT Pada FROM NORTH ON 156th Avenue SE :.HV UTurn Left Thru Right Peds HV FROM SOUTH ON 156th Avenue SE UTum Left Thru Right Peds HV FROM EAST ON UTurn Left Thru Ri hl Peds HV FROM WEST ON SE 142nd Place UTurn Left Thru Right INTERVAL TOTALS 02:15 PM "p 1 0 0 C 0 0 D... ..0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02:30 PM 0 0. 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 _-0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'r 0 0 0 0 0 02:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 P'0 0 0 0 0 D .OV: 0 0 0 0 0 03:00 PM 0 _• ..<.0 .. ,. 0 0 0 0 -0 --- 0 1 0 0 0 0 :0 0 0 0 0 4 0 ,p-.:. 0 0 0 0 0 03:15 PM 0 0-: 0 0 0 0 '0 '0-" 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 D .0S 0 0 0 0 0 03:30 PM 0�� 0:- 0 1 0 0 0 0$ 0 ;i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '•0 0 0 0 0 0 03:45 PM 0 �°� :' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ':D 0 0 0 0 p `- 0 q 0 D 0 0 04:00 PM 0 �lh��',', 0 0 C 0 0. 0%' C 0 0 0 -0 0 :- 0 0 0 0 '0 ;0--- 0 0 0 0 0 04:15PM p S I'. 0 0 16 155 0 "3 0 16 22 0 0 .0° ! D 0 0 0 ".0- C 76 0 29 314 04:30 PM 0 5 S'. 0 0 27 166 0 4 1 0 19 25 0 :0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 78 0 33 348 04:45 PM ','0 •:1 4 -� 0 0 14 183 0 0' 0 18 20 0 A .0 0 a D 0 0" 1 `�'I 0 72 0 20 327 05:00 PM -_ -2 C 0 10 167 '.0 .. 4 0 24 20 0 0 0 :< 0 C 0 00 rS0 0 56 C 24 301 05:15 PM 0 10 0 1 0 1 17 166 0` 0. 0 15 20 0 0 -0--- 0 1 0 0 0 -0 2 1 0 73 0 34 325 05:30 PM 0 c 3 0 0 1 7 171 0 3 -- - 0 20 26 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 73 0 19 316 05:45 PM 0 $ 0 0 14 176 -0 - -- -`1 - 0 19 30 0 0 0 '.1 0 60 0 36 355 06:00 PM 0 ... 0 0 C 15 139 .. -0 - 2 0 15 31 0 ...... .............................................. ................................................ .0; ............. 0........1' 0 0 0 0 0. `+' 2 . ' 0 84 0 19 303 PEAK HOUR TOTALS '! 0 1 21 0 0 68 682 0 8: 0 76 85 0 . 0 D 0 0 0: °d " 0 279 0 111 INTERSECTION ALL MOVEMENTS 750 161 0 390 1301 %HV 2.8% 5.0% #NIA 1.D% 2.5% PEAK HOUR FACTOR 0.95 0.91 #NIA 0.88 0.93 PHF = Peak Hour Factor 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM PEAK HOUR: 4:15 PM TO 5:15 PM REDUCED BY: CN DATE OF REDUCTION: 41222014 ROLLING HOUR COUNT FROM NORTH ON FROM SOUTH ON 156th Avenue BE 156th Avenue SE FROM EAST ON FROM WEST ON SE 142nd Place INTERVAL TOTALS TIME INTERVAL I Par. L HV UTu.1 Left Thru I RI ht .I Left I ThruI Right Peds ': HV UTum Left ThruI Right Peds I HV: -.I UT.,nj Left Thru Right 2:00 PM -3:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 q '0 0.: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 :0 0--:1 0 0 0 1 0 0':• �0-1 0 1 0 0 0 0 AM EXISTING PROJECT 10: SE 5TH PL & 156TH AVE SE 4126/2014 'r k f Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Configurations Y T* ot Volume (vehlh) 1 4 724 1 2 282 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 4 762 1 2 297 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ftls) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (#t) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1064 763 763 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1064 763 763 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2,2 p0 queue free % 100 99 100 cM capacity (vehlh) 248 408 859 Volume Total 5 763 299 Volume Left 1 0 2 Volume Right 4 1 0 cSH 361 1700 859 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.45 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 15.1 0.0 0-1 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 15.1 0-0 0.1 Approach LOS C Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 AM EXISTING PROJECT 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE 4/26/2014 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Lane Configurations j. Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 620 40 97 109 67 213 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly flow rate (vph) 646 42 101 114 70 222 Volume Total (vph) 688 215 292 Volume Left (vph) 646 101 0 Volume Right (vph) 42 0 222 Hadj (s) 0.23 0.11 -0.38 Departure Headway (s) 5.7 6.5 5.9 Degree Utilization, x 1.08 0.39 0.48 Capacity (vehlh) 625 546 602 Control Delay (s) 83.1 13.5 14.1 Approach Delay (s) 83.1 13.5 14.1 Approach LOS F B. B ' - `'''i':;i ..r+ �v.i. 3'+�^ a _,•�^., .yx.`r.; ,, 3 k Y✓y�k�.l..V�S"�.�a.. '?°h �� y3 �,"..;i';�-^Z:. Delay 53.7 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.5% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 AM FUTURE WITHOUT PROJECT 10: SE 5TH PL & 156TH AVE SE 4/2612014 'r k 1 l Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 Lane Configurations *t Volume (veh/h) 1 4 768 1 2 299 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0°/a 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 4 898 1 2 315 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1128 809 809 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1128 809 809 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 227 384 825 5:. ,. Volume Total 5 809 317 Volume Left 1 0 2 Volume Right 4 1 0 cSH 337 1700 825 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.48 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 15.8 0.0 0.1 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 15.8 0-0 0.1 Approach LOS C F bm �- Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.5° ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 AM FUTURE WITHOUT PROJECT 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE 4126/2014 --4 -V 4N t i W �e S:I Y� ,:n.3?#: I � ,= .' �`.i- •- �v. -., �,qh �,�, ,.,:" 5 i• '�:. t. � . �x3 ; �KhT"�� N',` Lane Configurations Y Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 658 42 103 116 71 226 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly flow rate (vph) 685 44 107 121 74 235 .:1 QLD' P.J •'��3 �::i.> 7.. .F f <' Volume Total (vph) 729 228 309 Volume Left (vph) 685 107 0 Volume Flight (vph) 44 0 235 Hadj (s) 0.23 0.11 -0.38 Departure headway (s) 5.8 6.5 5.9 Degree Utilization, x 1.17 0.41 0.51 Capacity (vehlh) 618 543 599 Control Delay (s) 113.4 14.0 14.8 Approach Delay (s) 113.4 14.0 14.8 Approach LOS F B B No Delay 71.4 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.50/o ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 w AM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 10: SE 5TH PL & 156TH AVE SE 4!2612014 "r 4- Iv. Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 4 Yw. �. � s .� ✓_�-£� .( i <.; 2":11 -�, ' T-•3. �Z' �.p,W " 5+24" Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 1 4 780 1 2 303 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 4 821 1 2 319 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1145 822 822 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1145 822 822 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3,3 2.2 p0 queue free % 100 99 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 222 $77 816 Volume Total 5 822 321 Volume Left 1 0 2 Volume Right 4 1 0 cSH 331 1700 816 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.48 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 16.1 0.0 0.1 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 16.1 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS C ,y r _ 4 •.e 'n , ' < �F A •y. x '- 1 Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 4 AM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 5: North Site Access & 156th Ave SE 4/26/2014 Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50,9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 b Lane Configurations Volume (veh/h) 2 6 775 1 2 302 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 6 816 1 2 318 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1138 816 817 vC1, stage 1 cont vol vC2, stage 2 oonf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1138 816 817 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) T (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 PO queue free % 99 9B 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 224 380 820 Volume Total 8 817 320 Volume Left 2 0 2 Volume Right 6 1 0 cSH 324 1700 820 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.48 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 0 Control Delay (s) 16.4 0.0 0.1 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 16.4 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS C Average Delay 0.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50,9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 AM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 7: South Site Access & 156th Ave SE 4/2612014 Ir k t �► 1 Baseline Synchro7- Report Page 3 11 511", 111 r� �s Lane Configurations Volume (vehlh) 3 6 770 1 2 302 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly flow rate (vph) 3 6 811 1 2 318 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1133 811 812 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1133 811 812 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 98 100 cM capacity (vehlh) 226 383 824 Volume Total 9 812 320 Volume Left 3 0 2 Volume Right 6 1 0 cSH 311 1700 824 Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.48 0.00 Queue Length 95th (ft) 2 0 0 Control Delay (s) 17.0 0.0 0.1 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 17.0 0.0 0.1 Approach LOS C .r �x`�� „'�. � x- :��. � r�c: �"�«4 x,��`.rs�'aAr °�, �' �»�;� 'a`S, �'..``z'..y $' r4`,�„�r•+� "°'°" �� '�._ �, 5; , ' �� w ,� "' - �M ..�..5 � Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 50.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro7- Report Page 3 i AM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE --* -,* 4\ t 4 4V 4/26/2014 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Lane Configurations Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 659 42 103 117 73 229 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly flow rate (vph) 686 44 107 122 76 239 ..._. ,.4 ..'� .� Z'- t...- f-i'f:!-".�..1;„ } -t i2`--,yt"aN.k'k,,r Vii'. �' �f i{,• Volume Total (vph) 730 229 315 Volume Left (vph) 686 107 0 Volume Right (vph) 44 0 239 Hadj (s) 0.23 0.11 -0.38 Departure Headway (s) 5.8 6.5 5-9 Degree Utilization, x 1.17 0.41 0.52 Capacity (vehlh) 617 542 599 Control Delay (s) 115.6 14.0 15.0 Approach Delay (s) 115.6 14.0 15.0 Approach LOS F B C cv -�: ,},'i.: -.f eC.3 ` ..a:.. -r= >" 3f4,t ) ✓- .w�'.r+i2- 5yry' °"i!!�'.',;gAT '� Delay 72.5 HCI Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.9% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 EXISTING PM PEAK 10: SE 5TH PL & 156TH AVE SE 4/26/2014 r 4- t 0 l "`� "' �r '� a . > . E ,. B �'k✓ ,�^. 3. - ^�� d� ,.�>:�< , , �.. ;amu Lane Configurations►, Volume (vehlh) 2 3 358 1 7 753 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 3 373 1 7 818 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ftls) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1206 373 374 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 cont vol vCu, unblocked vol 1206 373 374 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 100 99 cM capacity (vehlh) 203 677 1185 r::ti A i l+tirv.�.fia F Volume Total 5 374 826 Volume Left 2 0 7 Volume Right 3 1 0 cSH 350 1700 1185 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.22 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 15.4 0.0 0.2 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 15.4 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS C �.�;%� �:.�s � 'i'��-�� „,6 �3 �s _' �,1+.�-,;ab��....i�?�j'?Y +``""._.}d 'a ,ah •= z �.`�'�,a ..: a.h�, ..e .h Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.2% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 ff EXISTING PM PEAK 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE 4/2612014 --* -V 4N Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Lane Configurations, Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 279 111 76 85 68 682 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 294 117 80 89 72 733y as Volume Total (vph) 411 169 805 Volume Left (vph) 294 80 0 Volume Right (vph) 117 0 733 Hadj (s) -0.02 0.14 -0.50 Departure Headway (s) 6.1 6.5 5.1 Degree Utilization, x 0.70 0.30 1.14 Capacity (veh/h) 574 536 695 Control Delay (s) 22.1 12.2 100.4 Approach Delay (s) 22.1 12.2 100.4 Approach LOS C l3 F Delay 66.4 NCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 86.611/0 ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 W PM FUTURE WITHOUT PROJECT 10: SE 5TH PL & 156TH AVE SE 4126014 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 t a� Y Lane Configurations Y Volume (veh/h) 2 3 380 1 7 799 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 3 396 1 7 868 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1279 396 397 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1279 396 397 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 184 657 1162 WE— ASA 0 F- Volume Total 5 397 676 Volume Left 2 0 7 Volume Right 3 1 0 cSH 324 1700 1162 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.23 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 16.3 0.0 0.2 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 16.3 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS C Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 PM FUTURE WITHOUT PROJECT 3: SE 142nd PI & 155th Ave SE 4126014 ---* *-V 4\ t 4 41 , F Lane Configurations Y 4 it Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 296 118 81 90 72 724 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 312 124 85 95 76 778 -Y . _. ...�� F. ,,` „'L-`'�' a,•� � L � ) - :. �,. .n., 'J ) _ Vie$ ' t ) .. �'t,n-_ "'e. �'y ry(•,� Volume Total (vph) 436 180 854 Volume Left (vph) 312 85 0 Volume Right (vph) 124 0 778 Hadj (s) -0.02 0.14 -0.50 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.6 5.2 Degree Utilization, x 0.75 0.33 1.24 Capacity (vehlh) 573 528 680 Control Delay (s) 25.0 12,7 139.3 Approach Delay (s) 25.0 12.7 139.3 Approach LOS C B F Delay 89.9 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.3% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 10: SE 5TH PL & 156TH AVE SE 4/26/2014 k 19� , x Lane Configurations �, Volume (veh/h) 2 3 388 1 7 813 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 3 404 1 7 884 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked VC, conflicting volume 1303 405 405 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1303 405 405 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2,2 p0 queue free % 99 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 178 650 1154 Volume Total 5 405 891 Volume Left 2 0 7 Volume Right 3 1 0 cSH 315 1700 1154 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.24 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 16.6 0.0 0.2 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 16.6 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS yC� �.} Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.41/6 ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 4 PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 5: North Site Access & 156th Ave SE 4/26/2014 4,- k t i Lane Configurations Y T +T Volume (vehlh) 2 4 385 3 7 808 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly flow rate (vph) 2 4 401 3 7 842 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1259 403 404 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1259 403 404 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.4 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 99 cM capacity (veh1h) 189 652 1165 Volume Total 6 404 849 Volume Left 2 0 7 Volume Right 4 3 0 cSH 359 1700 1165 Volume to Capacity 0,02 0.24 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 15.2 0.0 0.2 Lane LOS C A Approach Delay (s) 15.2 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS C ':d;ay'i �•�' .. F .,�.qt 4q ','='"s.l , oidc i - � �� Eh 4 ik ' _ ry' .f is $ Y's, � ..� �"x ,` a �;,.'°, �-• ate: Average Delay 0,2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 7: South Site Access & 156th Ave SE 4/26/2014 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 3 f, 4,- t r l Lane Configurations Y t+ Volume (vehlh) 1 4 384 3 7 803 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly flow rate (vph) 1 4 400 3 7 836 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ftls) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1253 402 403 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1253 402 403 tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 99 cM capacity (vehlh) 191 653 1167 x .� ��,. ��$#.�" `'�' s d ••& ` »� ;''�,S°�r fin.',• {.r..,. ':,�:i... :. :- "�rh' �'7 Volume Total 5 403 844 Volume Left 1 0 7 Volume Right 4 3 0 cSH 440 1700 1167 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.24 0.01 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 Control Delay (s) 13.3 0.0 0.2 Lane LOS B A Approach Delay (s) 13.3 0.0 0.2 Approach LOS B -.., �'l+-x ".�, �Y,��b� �.-f `i` ,�.�-'�'a$ �5 v"�a _N . l.v ,.P:. �`c <&4?3�+Y�'. irrY� `�� ! c��,1.• W Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 3 PM FUTURE WITH PROJECT 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE 4/26/2014 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 t l ELL Lane Configurations Y, Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 300 118 81 92 73 726 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 316 124 85 97 77 781 k Vol u me Total (vph) 440 182 857 Volume Left (vph) 316 85 0 Volume Right (vph) 124 0 781 Hadj (s) -0.01 0.14 -0.50 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.6 5.3 Degree Utilization, x 0.75 0.33 1.25 Capacity (vehlh) 572 526 677 Control Delay (s) 25.6 12.8 143.5 Approach Delay (s) 25.6 12.8 143.5 Approach LOS D B F Delay 92.3 HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 91.8% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2014 11:26 AM To: Jill Ding; Vanessa Dolbee; Chip Vincent; Jennifer T. Henning; Larry Warren Subject: Request for Reconsideration of Environmental Determination Attachments: Req for Recon -Enclave pp.pdf Attached is copy of a Request for Reconsideration filed in this office yesterday by Roger Paulsen. Once the response to this request has been issued, and I receive copy, then I will be checking with Mr. Paulsen to see if he wishes to proceed with his appeal, currently filed, but on hold pending the RFR. Bonnie Walton City Clerk X6502 April 16, 2014 City of Renton Attn: City Clerk Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 CfTY OF Iii Nr()N APR 16 2014 RECEIVED C7Y CLERK'S OFFICE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO CITY OF RENTON CODE SECTION 4.8.110(E)(2) To All Whom It May Concern, Pursuant to City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4.8.110(F:)(2), please accept this letter as a formal Request for Reconsideration of the Environmental (SEPA) Threshold Determination issued by the City's Environmental Review Committee for project # LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. As a party of record for this project, this Request for Reconsideration is filed with the intent of utilizing all available administrative remedies to see that the adverse environmental impacts of this project are adequately understood, documented, and mitigated by the City and/or applicant -- all in the spirit of the City of Renton's adopted codes, policies and procedures. As an ordinary citizen, I have found the City= of Renton's code section 4.8.110 on appeals to offer very little practical guidance or direction with respect to how the Requcst for Reconsideration process works, or even who considers the request. While I encourage you to dedicate time to improving this information for the benefit of future citizens, the time provided for me to become educated, and file this request in a timely manner, leaves me with no option other than to Simply offer the best I can. To that end, I beg your patience and understanding if the format of this Request is not mi -line with what you may typically receive. Thank you for taking the time to consider this request, and for your thoughtful attention to the issues I believe warrant additional study and mitigation in order to adequately protect the public safely, health and interests of the citizens of our community. As a long-standing member of this community, I both accept and embrace growth and change in the City of Renton. Unfortunately, my, engagemcnt in this process reveals what I believe to be serious missteps by the City in processing this application. In the spirit of ensuring that the public process we hold so dear in this country is respected, I submit this Request for Reconsideration. Standir As an adjacent landowner, and as a patty of record who properly submitted written comments regarding the concerns identified in this Request for Reconsideration (Exhibit A), and as a City of Renton resident who has only one point of acccss to the City's transportation network via the SE 5" Place/ 156"' AVE SE intersection, my public health, safcty and welfare are at -risk should the City not carefully= consider this Request for Reconsideration and adopt the necessary actions I am requesting. To allow additional unmitigated traffic from this project, absent a full understanding of the project's impacts as required under SEPA, has the potential to adversely impact both my personal safety interests, as well as my private property interests as they relate to the value of my property at the time of future re -sale. For these and other reasons, I believe that I have the required standing to bring this Request for Reconsideration Identification of Concerns for Which Reconsideration is Re uested The issues for which I request your reconsideration relate to the transportation impacts of the proposed project, and to the public comment notice and process associated with the Threshold Determination. Concern #1. Transportation After review of the Environmental Review Committee Report for this project dated March 31, 2014, (Exhibit D) it is clear that the City's Environmental Review Committee made an error in basing their Determination upon the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Traffex (Exhibit B, dated December 27, 2013). The Traffic Impact Analysis relied upon for this Determination fails to comply with the City's own policy for such analyses. Specifically, this analysis fails to study the AM Peak traffic condition in addition to the PM Peak traffic condition associated with the project. In the TIA submitted by the applicant, and relied upon by the ERC, the author states as follows: `Tire scope of this analysis is based upon the preliminary plat site plan and the City of Kenton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for,Vew Development". By relying upon this report, the City failed to adequately inform itself with the full range of potential adverse environmental impacts associated with the transportation demands of this project, as the report is clearly not in compliance with the City's Policy Guidelines For Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development, attached as Exhibit C to this request. Specifically, the City's policy states clearly that for a project such as this, where A.M. or P.M. Peak Hour Trip contributions are X20, a complete Traffic Impact Analysis shall be completed, and said analysis shall present and consider both the A.M. and P.M. Peak Hour conditions, among other analysis. See excerpt below: Site Generated Traffic Volumes: The analysis should present a tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed. 2 It is a matter of fact that the Traffic Impact analysis relied upon by the City of Renton ERC did not provide the minimum information and analysis required by the City of Renton's own policy=, and therefore the ERC has erred in issuing their Determination absent this information, and their Determination should be found to be arbitrary and capricious, in addition to in error. Concern #2. Transportation My second concern also relates to transportation, and the ERC's apparent misunderstanding of the scope of the Traffic Impact Analysis that was received by the City. On page #7 of their March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report (Exhibit D), the Committee states: ' 1 he T rade Impact flna�ysis (F.-xhibit 14) also includes a Level of Service (LOS) review of the surrounding intersections in the immediate vicinity... " This report goes on to conclude that: "...the so ending intersections n)ould continue to operate at an acceptable level of Sen)iee (LO.S) n ith the exception of the southbound approach to the 15(;" Avenue SE/ SF. 142"' Mace intersection. " Both of these statements appear to assume that the analysis completed by the applicant actually looked at existing intersections other than the 1561"/ 142" Place intersection. They did not. In fact, the 156" Ave SE/ 142"' intersection is the ONLY existing intersection that was analy=zed by the applicant. Despite public comment informing city staff and the ERC of concerns at the closest adjacent existing intersection to the proposed project (SE 5th Place), the ERC did not require additional information from, the applicant to inform an understanding of the impacts at this intersection. Additionally, by only analyzing the P.M. Peak Hour (just 2 hrs. 45 min on December 17"), the analysis completely failed to understand or analyze the impacts of A.M. Peak Hour traffic conditions on 156th at SE 5" Place or other impacted intersections to the north. The ERC's 'Threshold Determination is not supported by fact, as it clearly did not include an analysis of additional existing intersections, despite the ERC concluding that it did. Because of this, the ERC erred when they based their Threshold Determination upon the TIA. Concern #3 Transportation Ironically, in light of Concerns #1 and #2 above, when one digs deeper into the March 31, 2014 Environmental Review Committee Report, we find that City of Renton staff are not only aware of potential adverse impacts of the proposed project as they relate to access from the project to 1561h, but they go so far as to inform the applicant that they may "...impose left turn astrictions at that intersection."(See Exhibit D, Page 10 of 11, Transportation Item #3)_ This already contemplated "remedy" identified by City of Denton staff not only acknowledges that there is a serious Level of Service issue that is likely to be exacerbated by this project given the lack of available capacity at the 156"/ 142"`' intersection, but also suggests that the City's "remedy" will 3 force this traffic to the right, or north, onto 156`h, further degrading the Level of Service at the 156`h/ SE 5`h PL intersection, and other intersections to the north along 156th Ave. SE. Again, since no analysis was completed to inform an understanding of potential adverse traffic impacts north of the proposed project on 156th, the ERC's Threshold Determination could only have been based upon incomplete information. This is an error on the part of the ERC, and should be corrected as part of this Request for Reconsideration. Concern #4 Transportation This concern relates specifically to how the ERC proposes to mitigate the impacts that were identified by the study. In their Threshold Determination, the ERC mitigates the identified transportation impacts by adopting, by reference, the recommendations identified by the applicant's consultant in the Traffic Impact Analysis. When one looks closer, we find that, other than otherwise required street frontage improvements, the only mitigation recommended is the payment of an otherwise required Traffic Mitigation Fee that is based upon the number of lots in the proposed project. In the ERC's March 31, 2014 Report (Page 7 of 11) they conclude as follows: "!t is not anticipated that the proposed project significantly adversely impact (sic) the City of Renton's street system subject to the payment of code required impact fees and the construction of code required f vintage impm)emenis. " Unfortunately, nowhere is a nexus established between the impacts identified in the TIA and the proposed mitigation. A review of the City's 6 Year Transportation Improvement Program reveals that the deficiencies of the 156`h/ 142nd intersection are not addressed in any form. For this reason, the ERC has erred in simply applying the mitigations recommended by the applicant, as they fail to satisfy the requirements under State Law (RCW 58.17 & the Growth ManagementAct) that capacity for additional traffic be available at the time of project approval. In order for this to be true, there trust be an established nexus between the fees that will be paid and the deficient traffic conditions at the 156`h/ 142"`' or other intersections where a proper analysis may indicate a Level of Service deficiency. Concern #5 Transportation Also related to the above concerns (ie:, the transportation impacts of the proposed project) I have received new information in response to a Public Records Request which I filed to better understand the City's internal review process as it relates to transportation concurrency, a requirement under State law and City of Renton ordinances. As you can see in the e-mail below, dated April 15, 2014 from Steve Lee, Dev. Engineering Manager, it is noted that the City's Transportation Division is `currently assessing any improvements are warranted (f any)...': This confirms that work is on-going at this time (April 15th) to both evaluate and mitigate the proposed project. H This e-mail serves to document yet again that the ERC was not fully informed with respect to the likely: or probable adverse environmental impacts and possible mitigations associated with this project. This constitutes an error on the part of the FRC, as well as the City's development review process, and further validates the merits of this Request for Reconsideration. Sandi Weir From: Steve Lee Serf Tuesday, April 15, 201 11:14 AMI: To: City0erk RKords Cr. Jan €iiian; JO Ding; Neil R. Watts; Jennifer T. Henning; Rohini Nair Subject: RE. New Public Records Request - PRR,14.085 (Paulsen) Attachr »elms: TranspoConcPohcy14tt41S.pdf See attached flies that are related documentation on the City process for coPrcurrency, standards and process relating to Renton Cade Section 4-6-070. I believe this is the information Mr. Paulsen is seekinq; The information, as extracted from the approved City Comprehensive Plan, provides Mr. Paulsen hour the City administers a multi modal test. Renton Code Section 4-6-070 notes that transportation concurrency can be a combination of improvements or strategies in place atthe time of building permit issuance., or within a reasonable amount of time after building issuance, per 4-6.070 A.1, or a financial commitment is placed. A financial commitment can be the traffic mitigation fees paid for the new development and is generally osed by the City for improvements throughout the City. Our Transportation Division is the technical review authority and is currently assessing any improvements are vrarranted (if any) (ord. 5675, 12-3-2012). The Transportation 13Mvision has currently provided some direction as to an initial: response with the statement, "W thin the City of Renton, the steep topography between Maple Valley Highway and the upper plateau (and on to Cemetery Road) makes it in feasible to provide additional access. Widening 1-405 {which the State is pursuing ) to provide more traffic capacity could attract some traffic now using 156 th SE to access Cemetery Road." Thanks. -Steve tee, PE, AAS, CESCL City of Renton Dev. Engineering Manager 425.430.7299 S l e e tffi tgzt�rn w a .aov Concern #6 Public Process and Notice As raised in my initial comment letter (Exhibit A), I remain concerned that the City's notice with respect to the opportunity for public comment on issues of concern, such as the transportation concerns I have raised herein, misrepresented the actual opportunities for public engagement in the environmental (SEPA) review of this project. In short, the notice implies that a citizen having concern, who is not able to provide written comment prior to the March 24, 2014 deadline, will have the opportunity to provide comment at the Public Hearing on April 22""_ Nowhere in the notice to the public is it explained that by waiting until April 22", the opportunity to provide input to inform the SEPA review and determination, will have passed. (see Exhibit E "Notice of Application...") As a result, the record now shows that only two public comment letters were received prior to the Threshold Determination being issued. I believe that you will find that many more people will attend the Public Hearing on April 22"', and they will do so raising issues that should have been considered as part of the SEPA determination for this project. I fully understand the efficiency that the City is attempting to achieve by combining their notice and comment periods, but I urge you to review these notices carefully to understand the concern I am attempting, once again, to raise here. Requested Outcomes Based upon each and all of the above concerns, and as part of this Request for Reconsideration, I ask that the body hearing this Request take the following actions: • Withdraw the Threshold Determination for this project and require that the applicant work with city staff to prepare a proper Traffic Impact Analysis for this project. This analysis should be sufficient to adequately inform the City and public's understanding of the likely impacts of this project during both the A.M. and P.M. Peale Hour, including at the immediately adjacent intersection of SE 5`h Place and 156`h Ave. SE, and other intersections likely to be impacted further north on 156`h • Further, given the misrepresentation of the public comment opportunity as it relates to informing the City's SEPA review process, I request that, once an adequate and proper Traffic Impact Analysis conforming to the City's requirements is completed, the Notice of Application and SEPA comment periods be re -started to allow the City of Renton's public an opportunity to participate in the development review process for this project. Thank you again for providing this opportunity to request reconsideration of the FInvironmental Review Committee's Threshold Determination for this project. Should the body charged with reviewing this request decline reconsideration, it is my intent to also pursue the formal appeal remedies established by City Code to ensure that the record shows I have pursued all of my lawful administrative remedies. Respectfully Submitted, Ro aul 6617 SE 5`h Place Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 6 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A — SEPA Determination Comment Letter Exhibit B —Traffic Impact Analysis Exhibit C — Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development Exhibit 1? — Environmental Review Committee Report Exhibit F, — Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated EXHIBIT A March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior planner CED — Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mail to Avoid Delay @ JdinmC&rentonwa.gov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project #LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22nd. I also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5"' Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5th Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 156th Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142nd intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156" and 142nd that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156th north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 5th Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139th P1.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142nd, and then only IF the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. EXHIBIT A The addition of ANY new trips to SE 150h between SE 5th Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this proiect to be implemented without adequate mitigation has significant potential to threaten public health, safety and welfare for the existing residents who access 156th from SE 5th Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also ver concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156' / 142"d intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156'h during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156`'/ 142"d intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156"/ 142"d intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 5th Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accommodate future waste water access to the new sewer lines being installed as part of this project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. 2 imn1 n 111 1 Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot 44, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot #4. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232.-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 24'h deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22nd public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination prior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22nd, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22nd to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, 1 ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. EXHIBIT A If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at Rm,,erAPaulsen&cs.com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application 4 EXHIBIT B THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTGN Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC, 9675 SE 36h St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by 1Va'RrHW£ST EX 7R- Af F/C EXPERTS 11410 NE 1241' St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 NCRTHweor MArno EXFBRrs rrdiffay 11410 K 124th St. #550 WA.9W Rm: 425.522.4118 fax 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36 St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Traffic Impact Analysis Dear Mr. Lagers: We are pleased to present this traffic impact analysis report for the proposed 31 lot Enclave at Bridle Ridge plat located on two parcels at 14038 1561' Ave. SE in the City of Renton. The scope of this analysis is based upon the preliminary plat site plan and the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Develo ment. Our summary, conclusions and recommendations begin on page 5 of this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the location of the site and study area. Figure 2 shows the preliminary site plan. The two site access streets connect to156'" Ave SE. The site access streets will have curb, gutter and sidewalk on both sides. Curb, gutter and sidewalk will also be installed on the site frontage on 15611 Ave. SE as shown on the site plan. Development of The Enclave at Bridle Ridge is expected to occur by the year 2015. Therefore, for purposes of this study, 2015 is used as the horizon year. One existing single family residence within the project site will be removed with this development. Page 1 ffar The Enclave at Bridle Ride Tri► TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION The 31 single-family units in the proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge are expected to generate the vehicular trips during an average weekday and during the street traffic peak hours as shown below: Time Period Trip Rate Trips Trips Total Trips per unit Entering Exiting Average Weekday 9.57 148 149 297 50% 50% AM Peak Hour 0.75 7 23 2�% 7 PM Peak Hour 1,01 20 11 31 63% 37% A vehicle trip is defined as a single or one direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination (exiting or entering) inside the study site. The trip generation is calculated using the average trip rates in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation for Single Family Detached Housing (ITE Land Use Code 210). These trip generation values account for all site trips made by all vehicles for all purposes, including resident, visitor, and service and delivery vehicle trips. Figure 3 shows the estimated trip distribution and the calculated site -generated traffic volumes. The distribution is based on existing traffic volume patterns, the characteristics of the road network, the location of likely trip origins and destinations (employment, shopping, social and recreational opportunities), expected travel times, and previous traffic studies. EXISTING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Street F cilities The streets in the study area are classified per the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan as follows: 156'h Ave. SE Minor Arterial SE 142`d PI. Residential Access Page 2 The Enclave at Bridle Ride P-?!M-M-K 156'' Ave. SE has a speed limit of 25 mph and consists of two 12 ft. lanes and a shoulder approximately six feet wide in the vicinity of the project site. 156th Ave SE is straight and flat at the access streets with excellent sight distance in both directions. SE 142" Pl. has a speed limit of 25 mph and consists of two 12 ft. lanes and a paved shoulder. The 156" Ave. SEISE 14211d Pl. is an all- way stop controlled intersection with stop signs on all three approaches. There are no curbs, gutters or sidewalks on 156th Ave SE or SE 142nd PI. in the project vicinity. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS Traffic Volumes Figure 4 shows existing, future without project and future with project PM peak hour traffic volumes at the two proposed site access streets to 1561h Ave. SE and the 1561h Ave SE/SE 142nd St. intersections. Per the City of Renton Policy Guidelines for T_rafFic Impact Analysis for New Development intersections and road segments that experience an increase of 5% in traffic volumes require analysis. No intersections meet these requirements. However, a level of service calculation was performed for these three intersections due to their proximity to the site. A PM peak hour traffic count was performed on 156th Ave SEISE 142ndPl. intersection and is included in the Technical Appendix. Level of Service Analvsis Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic flow, and the perception of these conditions by drivers or passengers. These conditions include factors such as speed, delay, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions (free flow, little delay) and LOS F the worst (congestion, long delays). Generally, LOS A and B are high, LOS C and D are moderate and LOS E and F are low. Table 1 shows calculated level of service (LOS) for existing and future conditions including project traffic at the pertinent street intersection. The LOS was calculated using the procedures in the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual The LOS shown indicates overall intersection operation. At intersections, LOS is determined by the calculated average control delay per vehicle. The LOS and corresponding average control delay in seconds are as follows: Page 3 The Enclave at Bridle Ride TYPE OF INTERSECTION A B C D E F Signalized 10. >10.0 and >20.0 and >35.0 and >55.0 and >80. 0 <20.0 — <35.0 — <55.0 — <80.0 — 0 Stop Sign Control `0 >10 and X15 >15 and <25 >25 and <35 >35 and <50 >50 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROJECT Figure 4 shows projected 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes without the project. These volumes include the existing traffic volume counts plus background traffic growth. The background growth factor accounts for traffic volumes generated from other approved but unbuilt subdivisions and general growth in traffic traveling through the area. A 3% per year annual background growth rate was added for each year of the two year time period (for a total of 6%) from the 2013 traffic count to the 2015 horizon year of the proposal. The 3% per year growth rate should result in a conservative analysis since the growth in traffic volumes has remained relatively flat the last several years. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Figure 4 shows the projected future 2015 PM peak hour traffic volumes with the proposed project. The site -generated PM peak hour traffic volumes were added to the projected future without project volumes to obtain the future with project volumes. Table 1 shows calculated LOS for future with project volumes at the study intersections. The study intersections operate at an acceptable LOS of for future 2015 conditions except for the southbound approach to the 156"' Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. intersection that currently operates at LOS F and continues to operate at LOS F for future conditions with or without project generated traffic. The project adds 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection that is 0.65 % of the total trips. Since this is well below the 5% City of Renton volume increase threshold, and the LOS remains unchanged, the proposed project does not significantly impact the operation of the intersection. The Minimum Design Standards Table for Public Streets and Alleys in the City of Renton Street Standards, requires—a site access street to be located a minimum of 125 ft. from an intersection on a minor arterial. The south site access street is located Page 4 The Enclave at Bridle Ride ?r749ffmy approximately 250 ft north of the 1561" Ave. SEISE 142nd PI. intersection and therefore meets the standard. TRAFFIC MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS The City of Renton requires a Transportation Mitigation Fee payment of $75 per new daily trip attributed to new development. One existing single family residence on site will be removed with this development resulting in a net increase of 30 single family homes. The net new daily trips due to this development are 287 trips (30 units x 9.57 daily trips per unit). The estimated Transportation Mitigation Impact Fee is $21,525 (287 daily trips X $75 per daily trip). SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that The Enclave at Bridle Ridge be constructed as shown on the site plan with the following traffic impact mitigation measures: Construct the street improvements including curb, gutter and sidewalk for the site access streets and site frontage on 156`x' Ave. 5E. Contribute the approximately $21,525 Transportation Mitigation fee to the City of Renton. No other traffic mitigation should be necessary. If you have any questions, please call 425-522-4118. You may also contact us via e-mail at vince@nwtraffex.com or larry@nwtraffex.com. Very truly yours, Vincent J. Geglia Principal TraffEx Paga 5 aN Lo h U/? T� Larry D. Hobbs, P.E. Principal TraffEx Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the worst approach or movement which determines the LOS for an unsignalized intersection per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual (XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 6 TABLE 1 PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY The Enclave at Bridle Ridge TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS INTERSECTION EXISTING 2015 WITHOUT 2075 WITH 2013 PROJECT PROJECT North Site Access 1 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 12.6) South Site Access 156th Ave. SE. NA NA WB (B 11.2) 156t' Ave SEI EB (D 25.6) EB (D 29.8) EB (D 30.7) SE 142nd PI. NB (B 12.4) NB (B 12.9) NB (B 13.0) SB (F 98.8) SB (F 133.2) SB (F 137.1) Number shown is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle for the worst approach or movement which determines the LOS for an unsignalized intersection per the Transportation Research Board Highway Capacity Manual (XX) LOS and average control delay WB westbound approach EB eastbound approach NB northbound approach SB southbound approach Page 6 i?APff,EX rRAFrfC EXP--RTS The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure Vicinity Map I 1 The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton Figure Site Plan 1 2 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 20 Exit 11 Total 31 �4 t rr2 v MI N Access/ 156th ave S Aacessl 156th 156thAvef SE142 PI The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton PM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution Legend 15% Percentage of Project Traffic •-- 3 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 3 F � fEx T {� JVO iVO E ��qss E, farr ■ ss sssss�:E -. € .... 4 E .:- fr e t/j.. sr. s., s. ry yam. �y 4 �E.141 al �i -.€ E _ _ is's iE g - .t... SEd2i.lt1�, Rssi P d E1 ._ ... hl nem.' + ..s ��.. �w'� f�FY S _ ,ss ss sis .�ss .... ... _. �... .: .. ............�... ..... ss - :.'.�.. 3 ....,.: CeC i i'i.t: [tea .. .. ... PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Enter 20 Exit 11 Total 31 �4 t rr2 v MI N Access/ 156th ave S Aacessl 156th 156thAvef SE142 PI The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton PM Peak Hour Trip Generation and Distribution Legend 15% Percentage of Project Traffic •-- 3 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 3 N Access/ 156th ave S Access/ 156th Ave Ln Ln to 309, lop, t N M Q1 ai Mllez:1 N Access/ 156th ave uz C 32U 3 106,, i Goti m to r Jc TkAFFIC EXPERTS ,,:SE.139tkiPf e 3 pra�ect Si{.��.... 1AistFtp - K ..... 8. .. s .. _ � eQ��n' Project Future Traffic with Project i D � b y f -. r.Y:' Future Existing without Project N Access/ 156th ave S Access/ 156th Ave Ln Ln to 309, lop, t N M Q1 ai Mllez:1 N Access/ 156th ave uz C 32U 3 106,, i Goti m to 4 1 r t r 2 N Access/ 156th ave f N w t4 (D ' -I ii Ir M 01) S Access/ 166th Ave S 4-, D,t O N The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton avI j Figure PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes I 4 74AH-M-Sr EX Jc TkAFFIC EXPERTS ,,:SE.139tkiPf e 3 pra�ect Si{.��.... 1AistFtp .. s .. _ Project Future Traffic with Project 4 1 r t r 2 N Access/ 156th ave f N w t4 (D ' -I ii Ir M 01) S Access/ 166th Ave S 4-, D,t O N The Enclave at Bridle Ridge - City of Renton avI j Figure PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes I 4 TECHNICAL APPENDIX 11toparcd for: Lig rr T r a ffex Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Rtantr (253) 928-60p9 FAX: (253)@23-7211 E•Malt: FaanQiC2inC.00m W11 IDBE lnlareactloa: 156th Ave S1i 6r S1: 142nd PI Dale of Count: Tues 12117:2013 Location. Reran, Washingwn Checked lay: less Time Fant North on 9) From oulh on (N13) From Eaal on IWO) From Weal on { Interval Interval 1561h Ave SE 136th Ave SE 41 SE 142nd P1 Toll Ending at T I- I S It I F I L 1 S R T L S R T L 5 I R 4:15 P 125 0 2 0[�4 32 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 28 263 4:30 P d 0172 l 14 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 37 308 47351, 2 0 IM 0 28 I5 0 0 0 p 0 0 99 0 29 34k STOOP 0 0 179 2 22 19 0 0 0 0 n 0 70 0 20 328 5:1511 1 0 IIB .l 28 17 .. 0 Q U 0 0 0 70 0 24 306 5:3011 1 0 148 p 19 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 0 28 297 $:45 P 0 0151 U 18 19 0 0 O U 0 0 93 0 29 739 6:00P 0 tl144 2 18 13 0 0 0 (1 0 l 74 0 17 291 A:15P 0- @ 0 0 0 0 0 p p 0 0 0 a- 0 0 0 0 6:30P 0 p 0 0 11 0 0 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 q 0 IS,A 1P 0 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 -0 7-0O P 0 0 Q n 0 0 0 0 a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Toml 1 I I Sures 12 0 157 1224 6 L79 117 n 0 1 n 1 0 1 U 1 l Sle n 2n2 2447 Pca►llote: 4.15 PM In 5:15 Ptd Tam! 9 0 68 1651 4 t 92 1 63 1 0 0 1 (1 0 0 0 309 0 100 1287 Approach 7D 155 0 409 1287 95fLY Ilti 7.691 Na Na 12% PtIF 0.93 1561h Ave SE 1095 SE 142nd P, 6i3 L-a , Prd 747 Ekd� 0� Met 0 1156 109 444 4:15 PAI IG 5:151'M 100 A— N S 1: w 7 PedL— 0_-� 1.01`111"PmLllenlrv0l1,11x IN7 0 nu! ;__9._ PI1F `,AIY INT 02 - 0 LB n'a £NT 09 _ 0 1� 145 a mi Check A'Il nh X04 0 __..__. 1n: 1267 NB 2.6'-. -_. ; 0 X05 323 Out: E267 Sit INT 06 NO PFDS a 156th Ave SE T Int. 0.93 1.0;0 .......... 0 IW 0tVT02 n 15=10 LWT07. U 114T 03 0 Is' `i U INT 94 I 0 15+ -n tNT 05 � 1 0 B-to IN7na N0111K 0 8-to INT07 � 0 8-10 gqaded SB-at yawl thea 44T Oe 0 5-8 w+erc 5-8 vehicles ft-orally slopw. NT n90 15, signi5cs rolling queue as far as 1 s+nuld sec. INT 30 - - q INT £1 :. .... .... n WT 12 q 0 p 01 00 0 0 0 0 TRA13184M 01PI Existing PM Peak 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Arse SE 1212612013 -A --v 4% 1 Lane Configurations Sig col Stop Stott Stop Volume (vph) 309 100 92 63 68 655 NMI' Mur, Faotar 093:. ; 0.93 0.93 0:93 0.93 0:93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 332 108 99 68 73 704 Volume Total (vph) 440 167 777 Volume Leif VOP) 332 99 0 Volume Right (vph) 108 0 704 {s) O.M 0.12! -0.59 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.6 5.2 Oegree IJtNmmion� x 0.75' 0:30 1.12 Capacity (vehlh) 572 526 679 Control Delay W r,25.6 12:4 9418 Approach Delay (s) 25.6 12.4 94.8 �proat�t►`LOS D 8' F HCM Level of Service F Weileciio� G�'tJtiization: � 85:7° lCU Level of Serve kM; Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Future Without Project 3: SE 142nd PI & 156th Ave SE 12/26013 -A -4 .4\ t I 119 Configurations Y 4 T* Sign Contra[, Stop Stop Stop Volume (vph) 328 106 98 67 72 695 Pe*Hour;Factor 0,93 0.93 0.93 6,93 0.93 0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 353 114 105 72 77 747 Volume Total (vph) 467 177 825 Vnlgme Leff (vphj 353 105 p Volume Right (vph) 114 0 747 Hadi (s) 0:03 ' ` 0>12 -0.51 Departure headway (s) 6.2 6,7 5.3 Dwee zdarlo,x 0:80 _, , :0.33 122. . . Capacity (vehlh) 571 518 665 Caritra! Delay:(j 29.8 12.9 1392 Approach Delay (s) 29,8 12.9 133.2 Approach.LOS t? B F - j3eley 85.8' HCM Level of Service F InfIr$OftmCapacity _Utilization 90.3%. ICED Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Future With Project 3: SE 142nd Pi & 156th Ave SE -.-* -V 1 t 4 -V 12126/2013 HCS! Level of Service I lyderset*n Cawity Utilization 90.8%.ICU Leval of`Ser*e: i= Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Lane Configurations S46 COs: Slop - Slop Stop Volume (vph) 332 106 98 69 73 697 Peak Horth' Factor 0:93 0:93 ;.0193 0.93 0:93 .0.93 Hourly flow rate (vph) 357 114 105 74 78 749 Volume Total (vph) 471 180 828 Volume tett'{v ) 357 105 0 Volume Right (vph) 114 0 749 Hadj (s `, .. . 0.03 0.12 .0.51 Departure Headway (s) 6.2 6.7 5.4 Ng" Utilization, x 0.81 0.33 1..23 Capacity (vehlh) 571 516 662 Coral fletay {s) 30.7 13.0 137.1 Approach Delay (s) 30.7 13.0 137.1 Appreach.LOS. D.:` . 'B F HCS! Level of Service I lyderset*n Cawity Utilization 90.8%.ICU Leval of`Ser*e: i= Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 1 Future With Project 5: North Site Access & 156th Ave SE 12/26/2013 t Lane Configurations Y 1� 4T Volume (ve*) 2 4 177 3 ? 774 Sign Control Stop Free Free ivst T' 'Anal'(ity Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 1-E401y tloa+ rste NO) : 2 4 190 3 8 832 Pedestrians irly, cunfiidn'vofurr O 1039 192 te°Wlrih ft 194 VC1, stage 1 conf Vol Walking Speed (fVs) Pe�cerg�8lae' Right turn flare (veh) ledaype; : ; None ..None Median storage veh) ivst T' 'Anal'(ity - pX, platoon unblocked irly, cunfiidn'vofurr O 1039 192 194 VC1, stage 1 conf Vol VG2 stage 2 coiiFviil vCu, unblocked vol 1039 192 194 64 6.2 tG, 2 stage (s) tz) 3.3 2.2 pl) queue tree % 99 99 99 cNtcapa*:("hfi) 256" . ; 8% 1392 V me,otal° 8 `` < 194 840 . .. Volume Left 2 0 8 Vokima . i ht 4 . 3 0 cSH 481 1700 1392 Volume to capacity,. 0,01 0.11. 0,01 Queue Length 96th (ft) 1 p 0 Gor is x1+. (s) ::, . 12;6 0:0 0,1 Lane LOS g A Approack Delay '(s) .. < 126 X0.0 0.1 Approach LOS $ Average Delay 0,2 Intersactior; Capacity Utilization ;; 58:3°I° ICU Level of Service g Analysis Period (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 2 Future With Project 7: South Site Access & 156th Ave SE 12126120t3 4�- k- t Lane Configurations Y 192834 1� Volume Left 4 i✓alume (Vei1) ; _ 1 4 176 : 3 7 759 Sign Control Stop 1700 Free 1l01411106taGapacity Free Gwe ti90 Queue Length 95th (ft) 0% 0 090 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Watrly 1 4 189 3 3 827 Pedestrians B Average Delay Lane 0.2 itit 60 apadyLlfiftation 56AN' 1W Level of 96n e B ; Walking Speed (ftls) 15 fent Blockage Right tern flare (veh) Mediartaype _ None None ; Median storage veh) iJ�rrt trial (� A platoon unblocked vC ,60.in ng.volu�rtte 1�033 _. 191 192 uC1, stage 1 cont vol stage vCu, unblocked vol 1033 191 192 f; rCYgle(sil" 6,4 62, , 4:1 IC, 2 stage (s) lF (5} 3:5 :; 3:3 ; 2<2` p0 queue free % 100 99 99 bm Ca adIVI'AM 258 8.5E Vo.eo " 5 192834 Volume Left 1 0 8 otme,Hiri4 g U GSH 585 1700 1393 1l01411106taGapacity 601 0.11: 0.41 Queue Length 95th (ft) 1 0 0 POW[k(s) "; ;` 11.2 X0:0 0:1 Larne LOS B A Approtelay (s)' t1 0;p 0.1 , Approach LOS B Average Delay 0.2 itit 60 apadyLlfiftation 56AN' 1W Level of 96n e B ; Analysis Perim (min) 15 Baseline Synchro 7 - Report Page 3 EXHIBIT C Y N./U=.R POLICY GUIDELINES FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ., FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT A traffic impact analysis is required when estimated vehicular traffic generated from a proposed development exceeds 20 vehicles per hour in either the AM (6:00 - 9:00) or PM (3:00 —6:00) peak periods. A peak hour volume of 20 vehicles per hour would relate to daily volume of approximately 200 vehicles per day. Generally this includes residential plats of 20 lots or more and commercial sites that generate 20 vehicles per hour. The developer shall select a registered professional engineer with adequate experience in transportation planning and traffic engineering. Upon request, the Public Works Department will offer potential candidates. The analysis shall incorporate the following elements in the suggested format: Introduction: The introduction should, in a narrative fashion with graphics where appropriate to enhance the text, describe the proposed development (including proposed time frame), establish study area boundaries (study area should include all roadways and intersections that would experience a 5% increase in peak hour traffic volumes as a result of the proposed development), describe existing and proposed land uses within the study area, and describe the existing transportation system to include transit routes, roadway and intersection conditions and configuration as well as currently proposed improvements. Roadways and intersections to be analyzed will be determined through coordination with the Public Works Department and Community and Economic Development staff. Site Generated Traffic Volumes: The analysis should present a tabular summary of traffic generated from the proposed development listing each type of proposed land use, the units involved, trip generation rates used (to include total daily traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour) and resultant trip generation for the time periods listed. Site Generated Traffic Distribution: The distribution of site -generated traffic should be presented by direction as a percentage of the total site generated traffic in a graphic format. The basis for the distribution should be appropriately defined. Site Generated Traffic Assignmen : A graphic presentation should be provided illustrating the allocation of site -generated traffic to the existing street network. The presentation should include Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and AM -PM peak hour directional volumes as well as turning movements at all intersections, driveways, and roadways within the study area. 1 EXHIBIT C Existing and Projected Horizon Year "Traffic Volumes With and Without the Proposed Development: The report should include graphics, which illustrate existing traffic volumes as well as forecasted volumes for the horizon year of the proposed development. Forecasted volumes should include a projected growth rate and volumes anticipated by pending and approved developments adjacent to the proposed development. if the development is multi -phased, forecasted volumes should be projected for the horizon year of each phase. The site -generated traffic should then be added to the horizon year background traffic to provide a composite of horizon year traffic conditions. Condition Analysis: Based upon the horizon year traffic forecasts with the proposed development, a level of service (LOS) analysis should be conducted at all intersections (including driveways serving the site). Based upon this analysis, a determination should be made as to the ability of the existing and proposed facilities to handle the proposed development. The level of service (LOS) analysis technique may include any of the commonly accepted methods. An analysis should be made of the proposed project in light of safety. Accident histories in close proximity to the site should be evaluated to determine the impact of proposed driveways and turning movements on existing problems. Mitigating Measures Based upon the results of the previous analysis, if it is determined that specific roadway improvements are necessary, the analysis should determine what improvements are needed. If the developer can reduce vehicular traffic by means of promoting transit and ridesharing usage, these methods are acceptable. Any proposed traffic signals should be documented with an appropriate warrant analysis of conditions in the horizon year with the development. Traffic signals should not be contemplated unless they meet warrants as prescribed in the Federal Highways "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices". Proposed traffic signals shall provide coordination programs to compliment the system. Any modifications necessary to insure safe and efficient circulation around the proposed site should be noted. Conclusions: This section should serve as an executive summary for the report. It should specifically define the problems related directly to the proposed developments and the improvements necessary to accommodate the development in a safe and efficient manner. A draft report shall be presented to the Development Services Division so that a review might be made of study dates, sources, methods, and findings. City Staff will then provide in writing all comments to the developer. The developer will then make all necessary changes prior to submitting the final report. Revised 3/IM008 H (Division. s\Develop.s&I'lan.refflA GUIDFLINESIG[JIDELINES FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 2008.dm 2 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY EXHIBIT D City of-, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ------ ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE. March 31, 2014 Project Name: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Project !Number: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Project Manager: Jill Ding, Senior Planner Owners: Sally Lou Nipert, 14004156`h Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 G. Richard Ouimet, 2923 Maltby Road, Bothell, WA 98012 Applicant/Contact: Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC, 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer island, WA 98044 Project Location: 14038 156th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 Project Summary: Proposed subdivision of an 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 142305912.2 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being rc.moved from the proposcd subdivision. The site is currently devebped with two single family residences and a detached garage. An existing residence is proposer) to remain on parcel 1.423059057. All other structures are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. Exist. Bldg. Area SF: 1,700 SF Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): N/A Site Area: 329,129 SF Total Building Area GSF: N/A STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a RECOMMENDATION: Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M). Project Location Map ERC Report 14-000241. docx City of Renton Department of Community & �t.�nomi[ Development #,vironmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLA VE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-0OM41, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 2 of 11 I PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION J BACKGROUND I The proposal is to subdivide an 8.80 acre site composed of parcels 1423059122, 1423059023, and the east portion of 1423059057 into 31 single family residential lots for the future construction of new single family residences. The project site is located within the R-4 (residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation as well as the Residential Low Density (RLD) Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation. The surrounding properties to the north, south, and east of the project site are also zoned R-4. The properties to the west of the project site are located outside the City limits in King County. A Lot Line Adjustment (LUA14-000250) was submitted concurrently with the application for subdivision. The proposed lot line adjustment would remove the western 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 from the proposed preliminary plat.. An existing 1,700 square foot residence is proposed to remain on this parcel. The applicant has indicated that the parcel would be subdivided under a future, separate subdivision application. The proposal to subdivide the 8.80 acre project site into 31 lots, results in a net density of 4.45 dwelling units per acre (after the deduction of 79,419 square feet of right-of-way proposed for dedication). The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. In addition to the proposed lots, the subdivision would also create two tracts (Tracts A and B). Tract A would be located at the southwest corner of the project site for stormwater detention. Tract B would be located at the northwest corner of the project site and is a 2 -foot wide open space strip separating proposed Road A from parcel 1423059057. Access to the proposed lots is proposed via a new "looped" public street (Roads A and 8) with two access points off of 156'h Avenue SE. addition half street improvements are proposed along the project site's 156'h Ave SE street frontage. Proposed frontage improvements include paving, curb and gutter, 5 -foot sidewalks, and an 8 -foot planting strip. A significant tree inventory was submitted with the application materials, which identified 303 existing significant trees. of the 303 existing significant trees, the applicant is proposing to retain 35 trees. There are 15 additional trees that could have been retained; however the applicant's arborist determined that the trees were either diseased or dangerous and not suitable for retention. Additional trees will be planted to ensure compliance with the City's tree retention requirements. PARTTWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In. compliance with RCW 43.210.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation 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. ERC Report 14-CW241.docx City of Renton Department of Community « Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLAI/EATBRlDLERIDGE WA14-=241, ECF, PP Report of Errorl Reference source not found. Page 3 of 11 B. Mitigation Measures 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February S, 2014). 2. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated December 27, 2013. 3. An easement for tree protection shall be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection; however the easement width shall be permitted to vary and shall be based on the width of the stand of trees to be retained. The easement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager and shall be recorded on the face of the final plat. C. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit 2 Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit 3 Conceptual Road and Grading Plan Exhibit 4 Drainage Control Plan Exhibit 5 Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan Exhibit 6 Tree Inspection Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated (dated February 18, 2014) Exhibit 7 Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC (dated February 5, 2014) Exhibit 8 Wetland Report prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. (dated February 3, 2014) Exhibit 9 Technical Information Report prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers (dated February 19, 2014) Exhibit 10 Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) Exhibit 11 Comment letter from David Michalski (dated March 21, 2014) Exhibit 12 Comment letter from Roger Paulsen (dated March 22, 2014) Exhibit 13 Construction Mitigation Description 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: The applicant indicates that approximately 4,495 cubic yards of cut and 36,888 cubic yards of fill would be required for the construction of required plat improvements and new single family residences. Temporary erosion control measures would be implemented during construction ERC Report 14-=241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & �c„nomlc Development -nvironmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVEATBRrDLERIDGE LUA14-"241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 4 of 11 including hay bales, siltation fences, temporary siltation ponds, controlled surface grading, and a stabilized construction entrance in accordance with City of Renton requirements. A Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7) was submitted with the project application. According to the submitted study, the existing site topography slopes from north to south with an elevation change of approximately 20 feet. Vegetation consists primarily of field grass, trees, and blackberries. The Soil Conservation Survey (SCS) map identifies Alderwood series soils across the entire project site. Alderwood soils formed in glacial till and typically present a slight to moderate erosion hazard and slow to medium runoff. They are comprised of gravelly ashy sandy loam transitioning to very gravelly sandy loam. A total of 6 test pits (TP -1 through TP -6) were excavated across the project site. Topsoil was encountered in the first 6 to 10 inches below grade at all test pit locations. Underlying the topsoil, native soils consisting primarily of loose to medium dense weathered glacial deposits transitioning to very dense unweathered glacial till were encountered extending to the maximum exploration depth of eight feet below existing grade. The soil conditions observed at the test pit locations are generally consistent with the SCS mapped soils. Perched groundwater was observed in three of the 6 test pits (TP -1, TP -3, and TP -6) at depths ranging from 2-3 feet. According to the submitted geotechnical study (Exhibit 7) groundwater seepage on till sites will typically be perched at variable depths within the substrata of glacial till soil near the contact between weathered and unweathered material; therefore seepage should be expected in all grading activities at this site, particularly during the winter, spring, and early summer months. The study states that fieldwork was conducted during an atypically dry winter and the refore.groundwater volumes should be expected to normally be higher than what was exhibited. The submitted geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) provides recommendations for site preparation and earthwork, wet season grading, foundations, seismic design, slab -on -grade floors, retaining walls, drainage, excavation and slopes, utility support and trench backfill, and pavement sections. Due to the high moisture content, the geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) recommends site grading to be limited to the summer months. Staff recommends as a SEPA mitigation measure that project construction be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7). Mitigation Measures: Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7). Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review Regulations. 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: A wetland report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. (dated February 3, 2014) (Exhibit 8) was submitted with the application materials. According to the report, the site shows evidence of hydrophytic vegetation (buttercup and red -osier dogwood); however no indicators of hydric soils or wetland hydrology were present. The report concludes that there are no wetlands on the project site as two of the 3 required parameters required for wetland classification (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrology) were not present. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required ERC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development tnvironmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLA VE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 5 of 11 Nexus: N/A b. Storm Water Impacts: The applicant submitted a Technical Information Report (TIR), prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc. (dated February 19, 2014) (Exhibit 9). According to the TIR (Exhibit 9) the upstream areas to the north and east of the project site are densely vegetated and any flows entering the project site would be negligible. The existing runoff from the project site sheet flows across the property towards the southwest corner of the site. From there a concrete pipe inlet conveys water west to a catch basin at the southwest corner of the site on the east side of 156th Avenue SE. Runoff continues south in the conveyance system then flow is directed west at the intersection of 156111 Avenue SE and SE 144th Street. Runoff continues west across 154th Place SE and discharges to Stewart Creek, a Class 3 stream. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full drainage review ih accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report (Exhibit 9). The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin. Based on the CiWs flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control. Flow control facility is sized to match the pre - developed rates for the forested condition extending from SO% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest corner of the site within Tract A. The pond will discharge to the existing conveyance system in 156th Avenue SE. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. The submitted geotechnical report (Exhibit %) identifies the soils as sand glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Overall, it is anticipated there would be no impacts to stormwater as a result of the proposed project, provided the project complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual, and the Renton Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 3. Vegetation Impacts: A Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan (Exhibit 5) and a Tree Inspection Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated (dated February 18, 2014) (Exhibit 6) were submitted with the application materials. The Tree Inspection Report states that of the 305 significant trees identified on the project site, 81 are considered dangerous as defined in RMC 4-11-200. The Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan (Exhibit 5) identifies 35 significant trees for retention. There is a roadway stub located just south of the subdivision site. Pursuant to City of Renton code, the roadway is to be extended north in a straight line. However, the applicant indicated that by curving the road alignment a significant amount of trees could be retained along the east property line. Once the homes are sold as individual lots, each home owner has the ability to remove up to 3 trees a year without permits. These trees would not provide the vegetative screen intended if they are remove immediately following home construction as such they should be retained in perpetuity within an easement. Of the approximately 44 trees located along the east property line, the applicant is proposing to retain 21 trees. The 23 trees proposed for removal (identified as trees ERC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & �,Onomk Development tnvironmenta! Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241, ELF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 6 of 11 5406, 5408-5415, 6181-6185, 6234, and 6229-6231) have been identified as diseased and/or dangerous per the submitted Tree Inspection Report (Exhibit 6). The City's arborist will review the submitted Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan (Exhibit 5) and Tree Inspection Report (Exhibit 6) and verify which trees located along the east property boundary are available for retention. Staff recommends as a SEPA mitigation measure that an easement for tree protection be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection, however staff recommends that the easement width be permitted to vary based on the width of the stand of trees proposed to be retained. Mitigation Measures: An easement for tree protection shall be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection; however the easement width shall be permitted to vary and shall be based on the Width of the stand of trees to be retained. The easement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager and shall be recorded on the face of the final plat. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review Regulations 4. Noise Impacts: Temporary construction noise is anticipated as a result of the subject project. Based on the provided construction mitigation description (Exhibit 13) the applicant has indicated that construction of the plat improvements is anticipated to begin in September of 2014 and finish in February of 2015. The construction of homes is anticipated to begin in April 2015 and finish in April 2016. The applicant has indicated that construction would.comply with the City of Renton's adopted noise ,ordinance. As such, the temporary noise impacts are anticipate to be minimal and limited in duration. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A S. Parks and Recreation Impacts: The project site is located within the vicinity of three parks. Maplewood Heights Park is located to the east of the project site and Maplewood Neighborhood Park and the Cedar River Trail are located to the west of the project site. It is anticipated residents of the proposed development would utilize the existing parks within the project vicinity. It is not anticipated that the proposed development would adversely impact the City of Renton parks subject to the payment of code required impact fees. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 6. Transportation Impacts: Access to the project site is proposed via a new looped internal public street with two access points off of 15e Avenue SE. In addition, a dead end access is proposed connecting to the property to the south of the project site for future development. A temporary cul-de-sac turnaround is proposed for emergency access pending future development to the south. Frontage ERC Report 14-WO241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development .„vironmento/ Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA144kW41, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 7 of 11 improvements including paving, curb and gutter, 5 -foot sidewalks, and an 8 -foot landscape strip are proposed along the project's 156th Avenue SE frontage and the frontage of new Roads A and B. There is a roadway stub located just south of the subdivision site_ Pursuant to City of Renton code, the roadway is to be extended north in a straight line. However, the applicant indicated that by curving the road alignment a significant amount of trees could be retained along the east property line (see previous discussion above under Vegetation). A Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) (Exhibit 10) was submitted with the application materials. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. The Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 10) also includes a Level of Service (LOS) review of the surrounding intersections in the immediate vicinity. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. The Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 10) concludes that with the proposed development the surrounding intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) with the exception of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"d Place intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The southbound approach to the intersection currently operates at LOS F with an approach delay of 94.8 seconds. The report (Exhibit 10) anticipates that the future condition of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"d Place intersection without the proposed development would result in an approach delay of 133.2 seconds. The report (Exhibit 10) anticipates that the future condition of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142"d Place intersection with the proposed development would result in an approach delay of 137.1 seconds, which results in an additional delay of 3.9 seconds attributable to the proposed development. The report concludes (Exhibit 10) that this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS F with or without the new development. The project generated traffic at this intersection would increase by 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date. Staff has received two comment letters (Exhibits 11 and 12) citing concerns with regards to the additional traffic that the proposed project will generate. Based on the submitted traffic report, the proposed project would result in the 9 new trips and a 3.9 second delay at the southbound approach to the 1561h Avenue SE/SE 142"d Place intersection. The impacts of the additional trips would be mitigated through the payment of transportation impact fees. It is not anticipated that the proposed project significantly adversely impact the City of Renton's street system subject to the payment of code required impact fees and the construction of code required frontage improvements. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 7, Eire & Police ERC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Community &--_nomk Development _...ironmental Review Committee Report THE ENaAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUAI"=41, Ea, Pp Report of March 31, 2014 Page 8 of 11 Impacts: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development subject to the construction of code required improvements and the payment of code required impact fees. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 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. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14 -day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Menton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 18, 2014. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the. Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall —7a' Floor, (425) 430-6510. 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 laird 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 plants 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. Fire: 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $479.28 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 2. The fire flow requirement for a single family home is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to ERC Report 14-OW241.dot:x City of Renton Department of Community & mic Development onmentol Review Committee Report rHE ENCLAVEATSRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-IM241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 9 of 11 3,500 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. Existing fire hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code including 5 -inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from King County Water District 90. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20 -feet wide fully paved, with 25 -feet inside and 45 -feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 -ton vehicle with 322 -psi point loading. Access is required within 150 - feet of all points on the buildings. Approved cul-de-sac turnarounds of 90 -foot diameter are required for dead end streets over 50D -feet long. Street system shall be designed to be extended to adjoining underdeveloped properties for future extension. Water: 1. Water service will be provided Water District 90. 2. A water availability certificate from.Water District #90 will be required. 3. New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of all lots. 4. Approved water pians shall be submitted to the City. Sewer: 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. The project proposes to get sewer service by extending the 8 -inch existing sewer main, located south of the site on 15e Ave SE near the intersection with SE 144th Street and ext6ending the sewer main into. the plat. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE up to the north property line. The extension of the sewer main from the south on 156th Ave SE will require overlay pavement restoration of at least half street. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 155th Ave SE up to the north property.line. 2. A sewer stub is to be extended from the proposed sewer main -in the internal access road, to the east property line (with a 10 -foot sewer easement). A man hole is to be located on the sewer tr=ain in the proposed internal public street and a clean out at the end of the sewer stub. 3. System development fees for sewer are based on the size of the new domestic water meter that will serve each new lot. Fee per lot based on %-inch or 1 -inch water is $2,033.00. Estimated fee for sewer is $63,023.00. This fee is paid prior to issuance of the construction permit. 4. This parcel falls within the boundaries of the Central Plateau Sewer Special Assessment District. Fee calculated as of 3/24/2014 is $438.16 per new lot. Interest accrues at a daily rate of $0.05111 until the fee is paid. 5. All plats shall provide separate side sewer stubs to each building lot. Side sewers shall be a minimum 2% slope. Surface water: 1. A drainage plan and drainage report dated February 25, 2014 was submitted by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Inc. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full Drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report. The 8.7 acre vegetated site generally slopes to the southwest. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control. Flow control facility is sized to match the pre -developed rates ERC Report 14-000241. docx City of Renton Deportment of Community & amic Development 'ronmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLA VE A T BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241,ECIF PP Report of March 31., 2414 Page 10 of 11 for the forested condition extending from 50% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest corner of the site. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. 2. A geotechnical report, dated February 4, 2014 was submitted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC. The report identifies the soils as sand glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Due to the high moisture content, the geotech recommends site grading to be limited to the summer months. 3. Surface water system development fee is $1,228.00 per new lot. Fees are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. Estimated storm fee is $36,840.00. 4. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Transportation: 1. The current transportation impact fee rate is $1,430.72 per new lot. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. Payment of the transportation impact fee is due at the time of issuance of the building permit. 2. A traffic analysis dated December 27, 2013, was provided by Traffix Northwest. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. An analysis focusing on the intersection of 156 Ave SE/SE 142 Place was done to determine what. if any impacts the anticipated new peak hour AM and PM trips created by this development would have on an operational standpoint at this intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The intersection currently operates at LOS F. The result of the study indicates this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS F with the new development, while the project generated traffic at this intersection would increase to 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date. 3. A looped roadway with stub ending is a temporary cul-de-sac is proposed as the internal site access. The cul-de-sac must meet City of Renton code and Fire Department requirements. To meet the City's complete street standards, the new internal roadway shall be designed to meet the residential access roadway per City code 4-6-060. The new internal roadway shall be a 53 -foot wide right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 -foot planter strip and a 5 -foot sidewalk installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road will be marked No Parking. As per code, the minimum separation of intersections along an arterial is 125 feet. If in future there are significant concerns regarding left turns to and from the south loop of the internal public street onto 156th Ave SE, the City traffic operations may impose left turn restrictions at that intersection. 4. To meet the City's complete street standards, frontage improvements along the project side in 156th Ave SE shall include 22 feet of paving from the centerline, gutter, a 0.5 foot wide curb, an 8 - foot planter strip and a 5 -foot roadway per City code 4-6-060. To build this street section, five and half feet of right of way dedication will be required. It is shown on the plans. S. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. CRC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & omir Development ironmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLA VE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14- 245, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 11 of 11 6. Street lighting is required for this plat. LED lighting plans will be included with the civil plan submittal. General Comments: 1. Separate permits and fees for, water meters, side sewer connection and storm connection will be required. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. Rockeries or retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required. 4. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. ERC Report 14-OW241.docx WE so EXHIBIT 1 flkj— THE ENCLAVE EXHIBIT 2 wieY�,V�swlhrrwY�r�TM-s�esn.�. erwr a�cww wr THE ENCLAVE EXHIBIT 3 - . at IL 'a i T X a �s apt r EXHIBIT 4 THE ENCU EXHIBIT 5 EXHIBIT 6 eenforest Incor Gr orateu p Consulting Arborist 2/18/2014 RECEIVED Justin Lagers, Director of Land Acquisition & Development FEB 2 7 2014 PNW Holdings, LLC CITY OF RENTON 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 PLAA NG D;vis10p4 Mercer Island, WA 98040 RE. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Tree Inspection, 14038156th Ave SE, Renton WA 98059 Dear Mr. Lagers: You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and evaluate the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. (Tax Parcel Numbers 142305-9023, 9057, & 9112). 1 received a TREE CUTTING AND LAND CLEARING PLAN from D R Strong Consulting Engineers showing the location and numbers of the surveyed trees. I visited the site last week -and inspected the trees indicated on the sheet, which are the subject of this report. TREE INSPECTION My initial inspection was limited to visual observation from the subject parcels. Trees off site were included in the inspection but are not included in this report. Both health and structure were evaluated."A tree's structure is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to failure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. identified the species of each tree, confirmed trunk diameter (DBH), estimated average dripline extension and recorded visible defects. At the east property boundary (Near tree 6185) is an infection center for a root rot disease. This is evidenced by a tree -free circular area (actually, semi circular as bisected by the parcel boundary) with standing dead trees, recently or previously failed trees, and trees with thinning and/or chlorotic canopies at the edge of the infection area. After my initial inspection I returned to the site and performed rootcrown excavations on the conifers bordering this infection area. I found both signs and symptoms of armillaria root rot fungus, as evidenced by the presence of mycelial fans and fungal rhizomorphs, oozing resin flow, and varying stages of root decay in approximately a dozen trees on the north and south sides of this infection area. 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 EXHIBIT 7 PREPARED FOR AMERICAN CLASSIC HOMES February 5, 2014 �. St en H. Avr S�j Geologist �. CA 44p a t� Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 14038 - 156th AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON RECEIVED RECEIVED ES -3220 FEB 2 7 2014 Crit' OF RENTON Earth Solutions NW, LLC PLANNING DIVISION 1805 -136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 58005 Phone: 425-449-4704 . Fax: 425-449-4711 Toll Free; 866-336-8710 EXHIBIT S Spwpl February 3, 2014 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105RECt 1 Mercer island, WA 98040 V�� FED 2 7 2 Q i4 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge -City of Renton SWC Job413-187 CITY OF KEN TON PLA,Twgii1G 0iV1S1C)\, 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report describes our observations of any jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 200' of the proposed "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge" plat, which consists of two Parcels (#1423059023 & 9122), located on the east side of 156th Avenue 5E, in the City of Renton, Washington (the "site"), Vicinity Afap EXHIBIT 9 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT for THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE Preliminary Plat 14038 1561h Avenue SE Renton, Washington Report Issue Date February 19, 2014 02014 D. R STRONG ConWfing Engineers Inc. DRS Project Na 13117 Renton File No. awner/Applrcanr RECEIVED PNW Holdings LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 1E8 2 7 2014 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Cay OF PEWON Report Prepared by PLANK N"'-- DIVOON r � D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers, Inc. 620 70' Avenue Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827.3063 Report Issue Date February 19, 2014 02014 D. R STRONG ConWfing Engineers Inc. EXHIBIT 10 THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTGN Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by NORTHWEST ARMAOR TRAFFIC E-xpERT.S" 11410 NE 924th St., #E590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 REE/ V CD FEB 2 7 2014 C'TY OF RtfvV PLANN;r'VG D1Vr$lT ON .tel - David MichalsKi 6525 se 51' pf Renton, Wa 98f]59 March 21, 2014 Jill Ding, Senior Planner Planning Division 1055 So Grady Way Renton, Wa 98057 EXHIBIT 11 This memo is regarding my concerns averthe Enclave at Bridle RidgeJLUA14^000241/ECF/P1D. I live off of SE5th pi and my residence buts up to this planned subdivision. My concem is regarding the traffic going North and South on 15e Ave Se. Since the building of the bridge across cedar River tf, ,,:. , traffic on 156th ave se is unbearable. Corning -out of any of the side streets off 15601 ave se�is sometimes Impossible with waits as much as 15 minutes. At the 3 way stop south of me vehicles do a quick stop and accelerate'up the hill leaving no time between cars to allow access going both North and South. Frequently when large trucks traveling up the hili slow traffic down, there Is a huge backlog of vehicles and this causes terrible traffic congestion. I see signs for additional development in the future on the West side of 156"'.1 feel that an -immediate traffic study be implemented. I am really surprised there isn't more accidents than I see. Has anyone thought about additional access off of Maple Valley Highway for folks to get unto Cemetary Road? Sincerely, -1)"MLtAj David Michalski Email: dcmtchal@msn.com Ph# 425-271-7837 "�Cevt,) 2014 C OF �VrO►V CvrA�Z D EXHIBIT 12 March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED — PIanning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 95057 SENT via Electronic mail to Avoid Delay @ Jdin�wrentonwa-e Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project #LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22d. I also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5th Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5"' Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 156th Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142"d intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 1564, and 142"d that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156th north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 5111 Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139th Pl.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142d, and then only IF the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. The addition of ANY new trips to SE 156d' between SE 5'h Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this proiect to be implemented without adequate mitigation has significant potential to threaten public health. safetyaand welfare for the existing residents who access 156s' from SE Sa` Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156'1 142"d intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy tragic back-up that routinely occurs on 156d' during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156'x/ 142d intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156`�l 142nd intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 5a' Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to acTmmo tore waste water access to the new e d as art project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot #4, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code_) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot 44. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 24`h deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22"d public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination prior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22d, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22"d to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the continent period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at Ro& APaulsenQcs.com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master AppAcation has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvais. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 LANO USE NUMBER: LUA14-700241, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME_ The Entlave at Bridle Ridge PROJECTDESMIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result In Ehe creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and BE and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566' square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA144=250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 142-3059122 which will result In 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038156' Ave SE OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE, 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 43.21[.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 ONS -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: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Justin Lagers / PNW Holdings, LLC/ 9675 SE 3e Street Sulte 10S, Mercer Island, WA 98040 / EMU jusdn@americanclassichomes.com Permits/Review Requested- Environmental (SEPAL Review, Preliminary Plat Review Other Permits which may be required: Construction, Building, Fire Requested Studies: Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Traffic Study " Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Ocvelopment (CEO)-- Planning Division, Sixth Floor Rerroon City Hall, loss South Grady Way, Renton, WA 99057 PUBLIC HEARING: PublichCarine is tentatively scheduled fornnrii 22 201[ before the Renton eaExaminer in Renton Council Chambers at 10'00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady way. If you would Ake to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CEO- Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No- The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-OW241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS_ City/statemp: TELEPHONE NO.: Citi of CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: The subject site is designated Residential Low Density (COMP-RLO) on the City Of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R4 on the City's Zoning r,Aap. _ Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Praje= Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2.110 Residential Development and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures:. The fallowing Mitlgatian Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project imparts ;tot covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. Project construrVan shall he required to comply with the submitted geotechnical report. ■ Project construction shall be required to comply with the submitted traffic study. Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to Jill Ding, Senior planner, CED— Planning Division, 1059 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5;00 PM on March 24, 2014. This matter Is also tentatively scheduled for a Public hearing on April 22, 2014, at 10:00 AM, Coundt Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the baring has not been rescheduled at {4Z5) 490-6578. 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: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel. (425) 430-6598; Eml: !ding@ rentonwaa-go PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this farm and return to: City of Renton, cED—Planning Division. 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, Name/File No.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge{LUA14-M24L ECF, PP NAM'e: MAILING ADDRESS: CitylState/�rp: TELEPHONE NO EXHIBIT E City of 006,00000 NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA14-000241. ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROTECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R•4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The pioposai would resuit in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION. 14038 1561" Ave 5E 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,11D, the C€ty 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 - M itlga ted (DNS -M). A 14 -day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS -M. PER MIT APPLICATION DATE: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON. Justin Lagers / PNW Holdings, LLC 19675 SE 36" Street Suite 105, Mercer Island, WA 98040 / EML: justin@americanclassichomes.com Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Review Other Permits which may he required: Construction, Building, Fire Requested Studies: Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Traffic Study Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hal I, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEARING: PUblic hearing Is Igntativeiv scheduledf rApril 22 2014 b re the Renton Hearin a itler in Re ,nt.Qrt Council Chamat 10:00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. 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-: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14.0M241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: City/State/Zip: TELEPHONE NO-: City of CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW. Zoning/Land Use: The subject site Is designated Residential Low Density (COMP-RLD) on the city of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R4 on the City's Zoning Map. . Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the Cityjs SEPA ofdinance, RMC 4-2-110 Residential Development and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: 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. • Project construction shall be required to comply with the submitted geotechnical report. ■ Project construction shall be required to comply with the submitted trofffc study. Comments on the alcove application must be submitted In writing to Jill Ding, Senior planner, CEO — Planning Division, 1055 Sough Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on March 24, 2014, This matter Is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on April 22, 2014, at 10:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-6576. 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: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6598; Eml: jdinerentonwa.l;ov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION 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/Flie No.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LLIA14-000241, ECF, PP NAME. MAILING ADDRESS: City/State/Zip: TELEPHONE NO.: / Z > Fj 2 "._ j ZUrL�tr.� cry �Y c�-E E. Q.�. _,F.,= �"'� y•D- v �_ _ _ Z• C Y ' •• Z W J; J ? w�.0 v r = ^ �: ? Y -N-, ,r, > v :� 'LJ• •� o ec G� y N G v p' •� .r.a- -r�� c'v_✓ c °D v _ o y r� c > 3 r L,C! YL y - ° E do -¢ w c� s r •• C a� L- Yom- a y c T Z=L cC r JD Z5 �.^+m F,... y �za E u ,'�� E c v 7 ",',,J,^ v a y.� E ,..'n c w".� v. �--•� mea s Liz .. O� r = C o'0 Y vE-- n E< �".� 90. .y c �:J'• `i ra _ v n. cs y vN �. G. C u; l '� a �. ��. Y _ CL w, �' .^ u L, �� n''-Y.J—_ L'l Q: FL-� .� ',S ',� ^ L � ._i O i Y -� - J i] � _ .� r•-• v �N 'J 7 .= n y � � _ � Y L J i G .n y 3 - G C � :. .+ L j ._ 4L s 'Y � CA ✓1 5!E�- a CA x N z Q r i� .� � �' y � •O C � Gq � 4' �Q 0.0 too � n fl,n � � :� Fz' � •'moi"., L � � � �+ Z� ��3•°rc�U "Cl was ' °�aaO��r Eb OA C�� 3 -o c o s cl - —' to aa� CS r C> 'L7 f3w� {Cj 0 y O s ti ff 91M IN �g"qpl On the 3rd day of April, 2014, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing SEPA determination documents. This information was sent to: Agencies See Attached See attached Owner, Applicant, Contact, Party of Record (Signature of5ender): q�o ft, STATE OF WASHINGTON \ SS COUNTY OFKING \ 1 certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Lisa M. McElrea signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for mentioned in the instrument. 806 Dated: 3, 2oty - 11.401111 Notary (Print): h Enclave @ Bridle Ridge N. LUA14-000241 template - affidavit of service by mailing The Enclave at Bridle Ridge LUA14-000241 PARTIES OF RECORD PNW Holdings LLC Maherloudi Richard Ouimet 9675 SE 36th St, 105 D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers 2923 Maltby Rd Mercer Island, WA 98040 10604 NE 38th Pl, 232 Bothell, WA 98012 (206) 588-1147 justin@pnwholdings.com Kirkland, WA 98033 ........... -�—t�° €S�"E '�.::..,.' t� $ - €�%dPig F .P ... �i � 4^'t ''FP'+FdE:. _ 1 a Sally Nipert M.A. Huniu DAVID MICHALSKI 14004 156th Ave SE 6608 SE 5th PI 6525 SE 5TH PI Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 (425) 226-6594 (425) 271-7837 Roger Paulson 6617 SE 5th PI Renton, WA 98059 (425)228-1589 Jason Paulson 31 Mazama Pines Ln Mazama, WA 98333 Page IofI AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology ** WDFW - Larry Fisher* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201. Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 Issaquah, WA 98027 39015 —17fd Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckle -shoot Cultural Resources Program Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Attn_ SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343 PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers *** Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Steve Roberge Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 Newcastle Way 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liaison Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6200 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Sox 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 *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 Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: seoaunit(@ecy.wa,eov ***Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice the following email address: ser)acenter@dnr,wa.gov template - affidavit of service by mailing City of ,p � NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL bETERMINATION ISSUANCE DFA DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED 1DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY IN17RE57ED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Enclave @ Bridle Ridge Preilmfnary Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP LOCATION: 3403& 156' Ave $E DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdi0sian of an 8.8 acre project site coated within the RA (Residential4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result fn the creation of 31 lots and 3 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street- The proposed lots would range In sire from 9,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment ILUA14-0002501 Is proposed between tax parcels 1413059057 and 1423059122 which will result In 30,175 square feet of parcel 14,13059057 being removed from the proposed subdlvisfan. The site is currently developed with two single family residences and a detached garage. An existing residence is proposed to remain on parcel 1423059051. All other structures are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGN iF{CANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the envlronmental determination must he filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 18, 2014, 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 RMC 4-8-1.10 And Information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's 0"", 14251430-6510, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON REARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON APRIL 22, 2014 AT 10:00 AM TO CONSIDFR THE -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SHORT PLAT, ETC.'. 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 DEVELOPMENTAT {4251430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. v� I, I 1-nPhereby certify that 5 copies of the above document were p sted in —3— conspicuous places or nearby the descr' property on Date: 1'/_-7 ~ I LI _ _ Signed: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) } SS COUNTY OF KING } I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that �`- ��j G��711 signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: +r IQ �r := (" i ''; Notary P c in and for the State of Washington F Notary (Print): /(,r�1vP ointment expires: _ Li;. aO 17 City of 6 �, o f' 1 C =rteJ OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Enclave @ Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP LOCATION: 14038156 Ave SE DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of an 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and e) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. The site is currently developed with two single family residences and a detached garage. An existing residence is proposed to remain on parcel 1423059057. All other structures are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (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 April 18, 2014, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and 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 APRIL 22, 2014 AT 10:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE *CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SHORT PLAT, ETC.*. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION 15 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. April 2, 2014 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION The Enclave @ Bridle Ridge, LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Dear Mr. Lagers: 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, for a list of the Mitigation Measures. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 18, 2014, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Also, a public hearing has been scheduled by the Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall on April 22, 2014 at 10:00 AM to consider the preliminary plat. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff recommendation 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. If you have any further questions, please call me at (425) 430-6598. For the Environmental Review Committee, Ding jZ7 Senior Planner Enclosure cc: Sally Lou Nipert, G. Richard Ouirnet / Owner(s) Party(ies) of Record Denis Law City of Mayor } it April 3, 2014 Department of Community and Economic Development C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on March 31, 2014: SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated (DNSM) PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m, on April 18, 2014, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the 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) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, III Ding Senior Planner Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Larry Fisher, WDFW Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Tribal Office Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program US Army Corp. of Engineers Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Renton City Hall 0 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 0 rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY ctyof e to AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 0�:,�� DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP APPLICANT: Justin Lagers, PNW Holdings, LLC �N JCI PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge i�t PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of an 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. The site is currently developed with two single family residences and a detached garage. An existing residence is proposed to remain on parcel 1423059057. All other structures are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038156 th Ave SE LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). ADIVISORY NOTES: 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 plants 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. Fire: 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $479.28 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 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 buildings and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. Existing fire hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code including 5 - inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from King County Water District 90. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20 -feet wide fully paved, with 25 -feet inside and 45 -feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 -ton vehicle with 322 -psi point loading. Access is required within 150 - feet of all points on the buildings. Approved cul-de-sac turnarounds of 90 -foot diameter are required for dead end streets over 500 -feet long. Street system shall be designed to be extended to adjoining underdeveloped properties for future extension. Water: 1. Water service will be provided Water District 90. 2. A water availability certificate from Water District #90 will be required. 3. New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of all lots. 4. Approved water plans shall be submitted to the City. Sewer: 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. The project proposes to get sewer service by extending the 8 -inch existing sewer main, located south of the site on 156th Ave SE near the intersection with SE 144th Street and ext6ending the sewer main into the plat. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE up to the north property line. The extension of the sewer main from the south on 156th Ave SE will require overlay pavement restoration of at least half street. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE up to the north property line. 2. A sewer stub is to be extended from the proposed sewer main in the internal access road, to the east property line (with a 10 -foot sewer easement). A man hole is to be located on the sewer main in the proposed internal public street and a clean out at the end of the sewer stub. 3. System development fees for sewer are based on the size of the new domestic water meter that will serve each new lot. Fee per lot based on 3/ -inch or 1 -inch water is $2,033.00. Estimated fee for sewer is $63,023.00. This fee is paid prior to issuance of the construction permit. 4. This parcel falls within the boundaries of the Central Plateau Sewer Special Assessment District. Fee calculated as of 3/24/2014 is $438.16 per new lot. Interest accrues at a daily rate of $0.05111 until the fee is paid. 5. All plats shall provide separate side sewer stubs to each building lot. Side sewers shall be a minimum 2% slope. Surface water: ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of 4 1. A drainage plan and drainage report dated February 26, 2014 was submitted by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Inc. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full Drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report. The 8.7 acre vegetated site generally slopes to the southwest. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control. Flow control facility is sized to match the pre -developed rates for the forested condition extending from 50% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest corner of the site. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. 2. A geotechnical report, dated February 4, 2014 was submitted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC. The report identifies the soils as sand glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Due to the high moisture content, the geotech recommends site grading to be limited to the summer months. 3. Surface water system development fee is $1,228.00 per new lot. Fees are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. Estimated storm fee is $36,840.00. 4. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Transportation: 1. The current transportation impact fee rate is $1,430.72 per new lot. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. Payment of the transportation impact fee is due at the time of issuance of the building permit. 2. A traffic analysis dated December 27, 2013, was provided by Traffix Northwest. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. An analysis focusing on the intersection of 156 Ave SE/SE 142 Place was done to determine what, if any impacts the anticipated new peak hour AM and PM trips created by this development would have on an operational standpoint at this intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The intersection currently operates at LOS F. The result of the study indicates this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS F with the new development, while the project generated traffic at this intersection would increase to 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date. 3. A looped roadway with stub ending is a temporary cul-de-sac is proposed as the internal site access. The cul-de-sac must meet City of Renton code and Fire Department requirements. To meet the City's complete street standards, the new internal roadway shall be designed to meet the residential access roadway per City code 4-6-060. The new internal roadway shall be a 53 -foot wide right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 -foot planter strip and a 5 -foot sidewalk installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road will be marked No Parking. As per code, the minimum separation of intersections along an arterial is 125 feet. If in future there are significant concerns regarding left turns to and from the south loop of the internal public street onto 156th Ave SE, the City traffic operations may impose left turn restrictions at that intersection. 4. To meet the City's complete street standards, frontage improvements along the project side in 156`h Ave SE shall include 22 feet of paving from the centerline, gutter, a 0.5 foot wide curb, an 8 -foot ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 3 of 4 planter strip and a 5 -foot roadway per City code 4-6-060. To build this street section, five and half feet of right of way dedication will be required. It is shown on the plans. 5. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. 6. Street lighting is required for this plat. LED lighting plans will be included with the civil plan submittal. General Comments: 1. Separate permits and fees for, water meters, side sewer connection and storm connection will be required. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. Rockeries or retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required. 4. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 4 of 4 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D City of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP APPLICANT: Justin Lagers, PNW Holdings, LLC PROJECT NAME: The Enclave @ Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038 156th Ave SE LEAD AGENCY: 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 (HS) 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 4-9-070D Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 18, 2014. 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 RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Public Works Department Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department April 4, 2014 March 31, 2014 i Mark Peterson, Administrator Date Fire & Emergency Services Date C. E. "Chip" Vincent, dministrator Date Department of Comm nity & Date Economic Development DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNE fY city°f . , AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT `�' r r '.�. I <, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: March 31, 2014 Project Name: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Project Number. LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Project Manager: Jill Ding, Senior Planner Owners: Sally Lou Nipert, 14004 156th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 G. Richard Ouimet, 2923 Maltby Road, Bothell, WA 98012 Applicant/Contact: Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC, 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105, Mercer Island, WA 98040 Project Location: 14038156 th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 Project Summary: Proposed subdivision of an 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. The site is currently developed with two single family residences and a detached garage. An existing residence is proposed to remain on parcel 1423059057. All other structures are proposed to be removed through the subdivision process. No critical areas are present on the project site. Exist. Bldg. Area SF: 1,700 SF Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): N/A Site Area: 329,129 SF Total Building Area GSF: N/A STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a RECOMMENDATION: Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M). Project Location Map �f k FRC Report 14-000241. docx City of Renton Department of Community & .nomic Development �-nvironmentol Review Committee Report THE £NCLA VE A T BRIDLE RIDGE L UA14-000241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 2 of 11 PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND The proposal is to subdivide an 8.80 acre site composed of parcels 1423059122, 1423059023, and the east portion of 1423059057 into 31 single family residential lots for the future construction of new single family residences. The project site is located within the R-4 (residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation as well as the Residential Low Density (RLD) Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation. The surrounding properties to the north, south, and east of the project site are also zoned R-4. The properties to the west of the project site are located outside the City limits in King County. A Lot Line Adjustment (LUA14-000250) was submitted concurrently with the application for subdivision. The proposed lot line adjustment would remove the western 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 from the proposed preliminary plat. An existing 1,700 square foot residence is proposed to remain on this parcel. The applicant has indicated that the parcel would be subdivided under a future, separate subdivision application. The proposal to subdivide the 8.80 acre project site into 31 lots, results in a net density of 4.45 dwelling units per acre (after the deduction of 79,419 square feet of right-of-way proposed for dedication). The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. In addition to the proposed lots, the subdivision would also create two tracts (Tracts A and B), Tract A would be located at the southwest corner of the project site for stormwater detention. Tract B would be located at the northwest corner of the project site and is a 2 -foot wide open space strip separating proposed Road A from parcel 1423059057. Access to the proposed lots is proposed via a new "looped" public street (Roads A and B) with two access points off of 156th Avenue SE. addition half street improvements are proposed along the project site's 156th Ave SE street frontage. Proposed frontage improvements include paving, curb and gutter, 5 -foot sidewalks, and an 8 -foot planting strip. A significant tree inventory was submitted with the application materials, which identified 303 existing significant trees. Of the 303 existing significant trees, the applicant is proposing to retain 35 trees. There are 15 additional trees that could have been retained; however the applicant's arborist determined that the trees were either diseased or dangerous and not suitable for retention. Additional trees will be planted to ensure compliance with the City's tree retention requirements. 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. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation 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. ERC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Communi_, _ Economic Development Enviroi,:nental Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-Ro0241, ECF, PP Report of Error! Reference source not found. Page 3 of 11 B. Mitigation Measures 1. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014). 2. Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the submitted Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated December 27, 2013. 3. An easement for tree protection shall be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection; however the easement width shall be permitted to vary and shall be based on the width of the stand of trees to be retained. The easement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager and shall be recorded on the face of the final plat. C. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit 2 Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit 3 Conceptual Road and Grading Plan Exhibit 4 Drainage Control Plan Exhibit 5 Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan Exhibit 5 Tree Inspection Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated (dated February 18, 2014) Exhibit 7 Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions NW, LLC (dated February 5, 2014) Exhibit 8 Wetland Report prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. (dated February 3, 2014) Exhibit 9 Technical Information Report prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers (dated February 19, 2014) Exhibit 10 Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) Exhibit 11 Comment letter from David Michalski (dated March 21, 2014) Exhibit 12 Comment letter from Roger Paulsen (dated March 22, 2014) Exhibit 13 Construction Mitigation Description 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: The applicant indicates that approximately 4,495 cubic yards of cut and 35,888 cubic yards of fill would be required for the construction of required plat improvements and new single family residences. Temporary erosion control measures would be implemented during construction ERC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & noetic Development _nvironmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLA VE A T BRIDLE RIDGE t UA14-000241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 Page 4 of 11 including hay bales, siltation fences, temporary siltation ponds, controlled surface grading, and a stabilized construction entrance in accordance with City of Renton requirements. A Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7) was submitted with the project application. According to the submitted study, the existing site topography slopes from north to south with an elevation change of approximately 20 feet. Vegetation consists primarily of field grass, trees, and blackberries. The Soil Conservation Survey (SCS) map identifies Alderwood series soils across the entire project site. Alderwood soils formed in glacial till and typically present a slight to moderate erosion hazard and slow to medium runoff. They are comprised of gravelly ashy sandy loam transitioning to very gravelly sandy loam. A total of 6 test pits (TP -1 through TP -6) were excavated across the project site. Topsoil was encountered in the first 6 to 10 inches below grade at all test pit locations. Underlying the topsoil, native soils consisting primarily of loose to medium dense weathered glacial deposits transitioning to very dense unweathered glacial till were encountered extending to the maximum exploration depth of eight feet below existing grade. The soil conditions observed at the test pit locations are generally consistent with the SCS mapped soils. Perched groundwater was observed in three of the 6 test pits (TP -1, TP -3, and TP -6) at depths ranging from 2-3 feet. According to the submitted geotechnical study (Exhibit 7) groundwater seepage on till sites will typically be perched at variable depths within the substrata of glacial till soil near the contact between weathered and unweathered material; therefore seepage should be expected in all grading activities at this site, particularly during the winter, spring, and early summer months. The study states that fieldwork was conducted during an atypically dry winter and therefore groundwater volumes should be expected to normally be higher than what was exhibited. The submitted geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) provides recommendations for site preparation and earthwork, wet season grading, foundations, seismic design, slab -on -grade floors, retaining walls, drainage, excavation and slopes, utility support and trench backfill, and pavement sections. Due to the high moisture content, the geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) recommends site grading to be limited to the summer months. Staff recommends as a SEPA mitigation measure that project construction be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7). Mitigation Measures: Project construction shall be required to comply with the recommendations found in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Solutions, NW (dated February 5, 2014) (Exhibit 7). Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review Regulations. 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: A wetland report, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. (dated February 3, 2014) (Exhibit 8) was submitted with the application materials. According to the report, the site shows evidence of hydrophytic vegetation (buttercup and red -osier dogwood); however no indicators of hydric soils or wetland hydrology were present. The report concludes that there are no wetlands on the project site as two of the 3 required parameters required for wetland classification (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrology) were not present. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required ENC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & omic Development _nvironmenta! Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE A T BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 � Page 5 of 11 Nexus: N/A b. Storm Water Impacts: The applicant submitted a Technical Information Report (TIR), prepared by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers, Inc. (dated February 19, 2014) (Exhibit 9). According to the TIR (Exhibit 9) the upstream areas to the north and east of the project site are densely vegetated and any flows entering the project site would be negligible. The existing runoff from the project site sheet flows across the property towards the southwest corner of the site. From there a concrete pipe inlet conveys water west to a catch basin at the southwest corner of the site on the east side of 156th Avenue SE. Runoff continues south in the conveyance system then flow is directed west at the intersection of 156th Avenue SE and SE 144th Street. Runoff continues west across 154th Place SE and discharges to Stewart Creek, a Class 3 stream. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full Drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report (Exhibit 9). The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control. Flow control facility is sized to match the pre - developed rates for the forested condition extending from 50% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest corner of the site within Tract A. The pond will discharge to the existing conveyance system in 156th Avenue SE. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. The submitted geotechnical report (Exhibit 7) identifies the soils as sand glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Overall, it is anticipated there would be no impacts to stormwater as a result of the proposed project, provided the project complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual, and the Renton Amendments. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 3. Vegetation Impacts: A Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan (Exhibit 5) and a Tree Inspection Report prepared by Greenforest Incorporated (dated February 18, 2014) (Exhibit 6) were submitted with the application materials. The Tree Inspection Report states that of the 305 significant trees identified on the project site, 81 are considered dangerous as defined in RMC 4-11-200. The Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan (Exhibit 5) identifies 3S significant trees for retention. There is a roadway stub located just south of the subdivision site. Pursuant to City of Renton code, the roadway is to be extended north in a straight line. However, the applicant indicated that by curving the road alignment a significant amount of trees could be retained along the east property line. Once the homes are sold as individual lots, each home owner has the ability to remove up to 3 trees a year without permits. These trees would not provide the vegetative screen intended if they are remove immediately following home construction as such they should be retained in perpetuity within an easement. Of the approximately 44 trees located along the east property line, the applicant is proposing to retain 21 trees. The 23 trees proposed for removal (identified as trees ERC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Deportment of Community & ___nomic Development THE EMCLA VE AT BRIDLE RIDGE Report of March 31, 2014 -nvironmental Review Committee Report LLIA14-000241, ECF, PP Page 6 of 11 5406, 5408-5415, 6181-6185, 6234, and 6229-6231) have been identified as diseased and/or dangerous per the submitted Tree Inspection Report (Exhibit 6). The City's arborist will review the submitted Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan (Exhibit 5) and Tree Inspection Report (Exhibit 6) and verify which trees located along the east property boundary are available for retention. Staff recommends as a SEPA mitigation measure that an easement for tree protection be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection, however staff recommends that the easement width be permitted to vary based on the width of the stand of trees proposed to be retained. Mitigation Measures: An easement for tree protection shall be recorded along the east property line to protect the trees available for retention (as determined by the City of Renton Arborist) in perpetuity. The easement should be of sufficient width to adequately protect the trees identified for protection; however the easement width shall be permitted to vary and shall be based on the width of the stand of trees to be retained. The easement shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager and shall be recorded on the face of the final plat. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review Regulations 4. Noise Impacts: Temporary construction noise is anticipated as a result of the subject project. Based on the provided construction mitigation description (Exhibit 13) the applicant has indicated that construction of the plat improvements is anticipated to begin in September of 2014 and finish in February of 2015. The construction of homes is anticipated to begin in April 2015 and finish in April 2016. The applicant has indicated that construction would comply with the City of Renton's adopted noise ordinance. As such, the temporary noise impacts are anticipate to be minimal and limited in duration. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A S. Parks and Recreation Impacts: The project site is located within the vicinity of three parks. Maplewood Heights Park is located to the east of the project site and Maplewood Neighborhood Park and the Cedar River Trail are located to the west of the project site. It is anticipated residents of the proposed development would utilize the existing parks within the project vicinity. It is not anticipated that the proposed development would adversely impact the City of Renton parks subject to the payment of code required impact fees. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 6. Transportation Impacts: Access to the project site is proposed via a new looped internal public street with two access points off of 156th Avenue SE. In addition, a dead end access is proposed connecting to the property to the south of the project site for future development. A temporary cul-de-sac turnaround is proposed for emergency access pending future development to the south. Frontage ERC Report 14-000241. docx City of Renton Deportment of Community & - - omic Development _nvironmentol Review Committee Report THE ENCLA VE A T BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241,Eff PP Report 2014 Page 7 of 11 improvements including paving, curb and gutter, 5 -foot sidewalks, and an 8 -foot landscape strip are proposed along the project's 156th Avenue SE frontage and the frontage of new Roads A and B. There is a roadway stub located just south of the subdivision site. Pursuant to City of Renton code, the roadway is to be extended north in a straight line. However, the applicant indicated that by curving the road alignment a significant amount of trees could be retained along the east property line (see previous discussion above under Vegetation). A Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx (dated December 27, 2013) (Exhibit 10) was submitted with the application materials. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. The Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 10) also includes a Level of Service (LOS) review of the surrounding intersections in the immediate vicinity. Levels of service are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. The Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 10) concludes that with the proposed development the surrounding intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) with the exception of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The southbound approach to the intersection currently operates at LOS F with an approach delay of 94.8 seconds. The report (Exhibit 10) anticipates that the future condition of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 1421,d Place intersection without the proposed development would result in an approach delay of 133.2 seconds. The report (Exhibit 10) anticipates that the future condition of the southbound approach to the 156th Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection with the proposed development would result in an approach delay of 137.1 seconds, which results in an additional delay of 3.9 seconds attributable to the proposed development. The report concludes (Exhibit 10) that this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS F with or without the new development. The project generated traffic at this intersection would increase by 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date. Staff has received two comment letters (Exhibits 11 and 12) citing concerns with regards to the additional traffic that the proposed project will generate. Based on the submitted traffic report, the proposed project would result in the 9 new trips and a 3.9 second delay at the southbound approach to the 1561h Avenue SE/SE 142nd Place intersection. The impacts of the additional trips would be mitigated through the payment of transportation impact fees. It is not anticipated that the proposed project significantly adversely impact the City of Renton's street system subject to the payment of code required impact fees and the construction of code required frontage improvements. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 7. Fire & Police FRC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & omic Development _nvironmentai Review Committee Report THE ENUA VE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 2014 _ Page 8 of 11 Impacts: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development subject to the construction of code required improvements and the payment of code required impact fees. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 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. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14 -day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 18, 2014. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. 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 plants 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. Fire: 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $479.28 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 2. The fire flow requirement for a single family home is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to ERC Report 14-00024 1. docx City of Renton Department of Community & omic Development-nvironmental Review Committee Report THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Report of March 31, 214 Page 9 of 11 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. Existing fire hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code including 5 -inch Storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from King County Water District 90. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20 -feet wide fully paved, with 25 -feet inside and 45 -feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 -ton vehicle with 322 -psi point loading. Access is required within 150 - feet of all points on the buildings. Approved cul-de-sac turnarounds of 90 -foot diameter are required for dead end streets over 500 -feet long. Street system shall be designed to be extended to adjoining underdeveloped properties for future extension. Water: 1. Water service will be provided Water District 90. 2. A water availability certificate from Water District #90 will be required. 3. New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of all lots. 4. Approved water plans shall be submitted to the City. Sewer: 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. The project proposes to get sewer service by extending the 8 -inch existing sewer main, located south of the site on 156th Ave SE near the intersection with SE 144th Street and ext6ending the sewer main into the plat. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE up to the north property line. The extension of the sewer main from the south on 156th Ave SE will require overlay pavement restoration of at least half street. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE up to the north property line. 2. A sewer stub is to be extended from the proposed sewer main in the internal access road, to the east property line (with a 10 -foot sewer easement). A man hole is to be located on the sewer main in the proposed internal public street and a clean out at the end of the sewer stub. 3. System development fees for sewer are based on the size of the new domestic water meter that will serve each new lot. Fee per lot based on 4 -inch or 1 -inch water is $2,033.00. Estimated fee for sewer is $63,023.00. This fee is paid prior to issuance of the construction permit. 4. This parcel falls within the boundaries of the Central Plateau Sewer Special Assessment District. Fee calculated as of 3/24/2014 is $438.16 per new lot. Interest accrues at a daily rate of $0.05111 until the fee is paid. 5. All plats shall provide separate side sewer stubs to each building lot. Side sewers shall be a minimum 2% slope. Surface water: 1. A drainage plan and drainage report dated February 26, 2014 was submitted by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Inc. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full Drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report. The 8.7 acre vegetated site generally slopes to the southwest. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control. Flow control facility is sized to match the pre -developed rates ERC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Department of Community & omic Development THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE Report of March 31, 2014 environmental Review Committee Report LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Page 10 of 11 for the forested condition extending from 50% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest corner of the site. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. 2. A geotechnical report, dated February 4, 2014 was submitted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC. The report identifies the soils as sand glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Due to the high moisture content, the geotech recommends site grading to be limited to the summer months. 3. Surface water system development fee is $1,228.00 per new lot. Fees are payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. Estimated storm fee is $36,840.00. 4. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. Transportation: 1. The current transportation impact fee rate is $1,430.72 per new lot. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. Payment of the transportation impact fee is due at the time of issuance of the building permit. 2. A traffic analysis dated December 27, 2013, was provided by Traffix Northwest. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. An analysis focusing on the intersection of 156 Ave SE/SE 142 Place was done to determine what, if any impacts the anticipated new peak hour AM and PM trips created by this development would have on an operational standpoint at this intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The intersection currently operates at LOS F. The result of the study indicates this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS F with the new development, while the project generated traffic at this intersection would increase to 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. Final determination will be made by the City's transportation department at a later date. 3. A looped roadway with stub ending is a temporary cul-de-sac is proposed as the internal site access. The cul-de-sac must meet City of Renton code and Fire Department requirements. To meet the City's complete street standards, the new internal roadway shall be designed to meet the residential access roadway per City code 4-6-060. The new internal roadway shall be a 53 -foot wide right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 -foot planter strip and a 5 -foot sidewalk installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road will be marked No Parking. As per code, the minimum separation of intersections along an arterial is 125 feet. If in future there are significant concerns regarding left turns to and from the south loop of the internal public street onto 156th Ave SE, the City traffic operations may impose left turn restrictions at that intersection. 4. To meet the City's complete street standards, frontage improvements along the project side in 156ti' Ave 5E shall include 22 feet of paving from the centerline, gutter, a 0.5 foot wide curb, an 8 - foot planter strip and a 5 -foot roadway per City code 4-6-060. To build this street section, five and half feet of right of way dedication will be required. It is shown on the plans. 5. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. ERC Report 14-000241.docx City of Renton Deportment of Community & omic Development THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE Report of March 31, 2014 nvironmentol Review Committee Report LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Page 11 of 11 6. Street lighting is required for this plat. LED lighting plans will be included with the civil plan submittal. General Comments: 1. Separate permits and fees for, water meters, side sewer connection and storm connection will be required. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. Rockeries or retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required. 4. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. ERC Report 14-OOO241.docx V z = �n Ar my CEA EXHIBIT 1 THE ENCI x EXHIBIT 2 ME ENCLAVL a A`Vito. Nt -1 AVE -S 71 A VP R" Al . 49 'i r t gyp 41car ill Q 'VO �L— I IL 71 1 ------- r "z At --j� 4 T - - z� 4 ILI zo P M A its! 12 /7 A-1 A r L.c� gyp 41car ill Q 'VO �L— r "z At --j� 4 T z� zo P its! /7 gyp 41car ill Q 'VO �L— z 0 1 7 a zoIo A rnn EXHIBIT 3 THE ENCLAVE &§` §•} � ! | {\ . } !'(q � �� ■ �r : � >� f � � § � . | � � §� | |99 !(g | # � EXHIBIT 3 THE ENCLAVE &§` §•} � ! � . } !'(q � �� ■ �r � >� f EXHIBIT 3 THE ENCLAVE | EXHIBIT 5 2E mm&7. � § !g9 I§g ; I ! § ! I � k � ( � A k §§2 § §/q # § ! I � Hi Hui # § J_Greenforest Incorporateu 2/18/2014 EXHIBIT 6 { 1_:V Justin Lagers, Director of Land Acquisition & Development FEU 2 7 2014 PNW Holdings, LLCsNTON 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 PL.-a,.>>5;,r,'.;�+o, Mercer Island, WA 98040 RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Tree Inspection, 14038 156th Ave SE, Renton WA 98059 Dear Mr. Lagers: You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and evaluate the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. (Tax Parcel Numbers 142305-9023, 9057, & 9112). 1 received a TREE CUTTING AND LAND CLEARING PLAN from 0 R Strong Consulting Engineers showing the location and numbers of the surveyed trees. I visited the site last week and inspected the trees indicated on the sheet, which are the subject of this report. TREE INSPECTION My initial inspection was limited to visual observation from the subject parcels. Trees off site were included in the inspection but are not included in this report. Both health and structure were evaluated. A tree's structure is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to failure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. identified the species of each tree, confirmed trunk diameter (DBH), estimated average dripline extension and recorded visible defects. At the east property boundary (Near tree 6185) is an infection center for a root rot disease. This is evidenced by a tree -free circular area (actually, semi circular as bisected by the parcel boundary) with standing dead trees, recently or previously failed trees, and trees with thinning and/or chlorotic canopies at the edge of the infection area. After my initial inspection I returned to the site and performed rootcrown excavations on the conifers bordering this infection area. I found both signs and symptoms of armillaria root rot fungus, as evidenced by the presence of mycelial fans and fungal rhizomorphs, oozing resin flow, and varying stages of root decay in approximately a dozen trees on the north and south sides of this infection area. 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 w w w A N EXHIBIT 7 PREPARED FOR AMERICAN CLASSIC HOMES February 5, 2014 �. S#e en H. Avriw SkyGeologist r6 7 '10 AL Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 14438 - 156th AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON ES 3220 RECEIVED FEB 2 7 2014 CITY OF RFNTON PLA"dWJG D1VrSfQ ti Earth Solutions NW, LLC 1805 - 136th Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711 Tall Free: 866-336-8710 EXHIBIT B _4'nwa I February 3, 2014 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 REEF �� Mercer Island, WA 98040 IVED D RE: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge -City of Renton FE5 2 7 U14 SWC Job413-187 C1TY OF PEN —10, tj 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report describes our observations of any jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 200' of the proposed "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge" plat, which consists of two Parcels (#1423059023 & 9122), located on the east side of 150 Avenue SE, in the City of Renton, Washington (the "site"). Vicinity Map EXHIBIT 9 TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT for THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE Preliminary Plat 14038156 1h Avenue SE Renton, Washington DRS Project No. 13117 Renton File No. Owner/Applicant j�� f� �� R\ i� PNW Holdings LLC E 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 i -ES 2 i Mercer Island, WA 98040 Report Prepared �� R"'�' R N TON by �'zarvrv�,v CaIVl510,�+ D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers, Inc. 6207 th Avenue Kirkland WA 98033 (425) 827-3063 Report Issue Date February 19, 2014 I©2014 R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. EXHIBIT 10 THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON Prepared for Mr. Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC. 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Prepared by iV ©R ?-HW.-ST TRA FF -1c Ex c7E-R TS' 11410 NE 124th St., #590 Kirkland, Washington 98034 Telephone: 425.522.4118 Fax: 425.522.4311 December 27, 2013 RECFI VFD 2 7 201A David Michalski 6525 se 5' pl Renton, Wa 98059 March 21, 2014 Jill Ding, Senior Planner Planning Division 1055 So Grady Way Renton, Wa 98057 EXHIBIT 11 This memo is regarding my concerns over the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-000241/ECF/PD. I live off of5E5th pi and my residence buts up to this planned subdivision. My concern is regarding the traffic going North and South on 156'" Ave Se. Since the building of the bridge across Cedar River the traffic on 15e ave se is unbearable. Coming out of any of the side streets off 1560' ave se is sometimes impossible with waits as much as 15 minutes. At the 3 way stop south of me vehicles do a quick stop and accelerate up the hill leaving no time between cars to allow access going both North and South. Frequently when large trucks traveling up the hill slow traffic down , there is a huge backlog of vehicles and this causes terrible traffic congestion. I see signs for additional development in the future on the West side of 15e. I feel that an immediate traffic study be implemented. I am really surprised there isn't more accidents than I see. Has anyone thought about additional access off of Maple Valley Highway for folks to get unto Cemetary Road? Sincerely, " "A r ( s David Michalski Email. dcmic.haf rnsn.com Ph# 425-271-7837 `I V V ED O EXHIBIT 12 March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mail to Avoid Delay @ Jdin, 6i6xentonwa.gov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", Project #LUA 14-00024 1, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22nd. I also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5th Place. I would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5th Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 156th Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142nd intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156th and 142nd that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156th north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 5th Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 139th PI.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142nd, and then only 1F the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. The addition ofANY new trips to SE 156 1h between SE 5th Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this project to be implemented without adequate mitigation has significant potential to threaten public health, safety and welfare for the existing residents who access 156th from SE 5th Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 5$.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156t1i/ 142nd intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156th during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156th/ 142nd intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156th/ 142"d intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 5th Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accomm,� future waste water access to the newer IFnes-heiilgltiStalJ�aspart -Of this project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make Iogical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get "ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot #4, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Kenton Municipal Code.) Because the final detennination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), i would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot #4. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate; misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 24th deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22nd public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination prior_ to the public hearing by the City's Ilearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22nd, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA determination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22nd to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, I ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please feel free to contact me at RogerAi'aulsen(c�cs.com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application City of Rent eportment of Community & Economic Deve ent ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:�MPA1♦ cOMMENTS DUE: MARCH 27, 2014 APPLICATION NO: LUA14-000241 DATE CIRCULATED: MARCH 20, 2014 APPLICANT: PNW Holdings, LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Jill Ding PROJECT TITLE: The Enclave @ Bridle Ridge PROJECT REVIEWER: Rohini Nair SITE AREA: 328129 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): n/a LOCATION: 14038 156`h Ave SE PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation, The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 155th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present on the project site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy% Natural Resources Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Housing Aesthetics Li ht/Glore Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS r C CODE -RELATED (COMMENTS -) .c L ��r'_ �L�' _ f'Lic-�c: , . �--7rGLr-� i •� ��' � c��' �(,' -��.� � lJ.'t� Ci:•.� �.,{�� )AA u We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we h04 expertise and have identified areas of proboble impact or areas where ddmonal information is n d to property assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date i p14 11 XXXX-XXX 30016 31ONS 1V 3AVION3 341 A— �— - Q3 2 - 1 1 L I i r�i tt d n �} 7 h-7.:� T�� i .�� 1 ; �• � I C XXXX-XXX 30016 31ONS 1V 3AVION3 341 A— �— - - 1 1 I XXXX-XXX 30016 31ONS 1V 3AVION3 341 A— �— 1 I I i h-7.:� T�� i .�� 1 ; �• � I C 11 1N14 XXXX-XXX 30016 31ONS 1V 3AVION3 341 A— �— ITEMS BELOW THIS SHEET HAVE BEEN COPIED FOR SUPERIOR COURT ****DO NOT ADD ANYTHING BELOW THIS SHEET **** PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS (i 14-000241)City OF r ' r i r C. PLAN ADDRESS: 14038 156TH SE AVE APPLICATION DATE: 02/27/2014 RENTON, WA 98059-7419 DESCRIPTION. Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which wlll result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present on the project site. Community Services Review Leslie Betlach Ph: 425-430-6619 email: LBetlach@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Parks Impact Fees per Ordinance 5670 applies. Engineering Review Rohini Nair Ph: 425-430-7298 email: mair@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: i have reviewed the application for The Enclave at Bridle Ridge located at 14038 —156th Ave SE and have the following comments: EXISTING CONDITIONS WATER Water service will be provided Water District 90. SEWER Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8 -inch sewer main in 156th Ave SE. STORM There is a 12 -inch storm pipe in 156th Ave SE to the north. STREETS There are no frontage improvements in the area. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER 1. A water availability certificate from Water District #90 was provided. 2. New hydrants shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of all lots. 3. Approved water plans shall be submitted to the City. SANITARY SEWER I , Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. The project proposes to get sewer service by extending the 8 -inch existing sewer main, located south of the site on 156th Ave SE near the intersection with SE 144th Street and extending the sewer main into the plat. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE upto the north property line. The extension of the sewer main from the south on 156th Ave SE will require overlay pavement restoration for atleast half street. The project is required to extend the sewer main along 156th Ave SE upto the north property line. The extension of the sewer main from the south will require pavement restoration at a minimum of overlay for at least'/ the street. 1.2. A sewer stub is to be extended from the proposed sewer main in the internal access road, to the east property line (with a 10 feet sewer easement). A man hole is to be located on the sewer main in the proposed internal public street and a clean out at the and of the sewer stub. 2. System development charge (SDC) fees for sewer are based on the size of the new domestic water meter that will serve each new lot. The current fee per lot based on '/,inch or 1 -inch water is $2,033.00. This fee is paid prior to issuance of the construction permit. 3. This parcel falls within the boundaries of the Central Plateau Sewer Special Assessment District. Fee calculated as of 3/24/2014 is $438.16 per now lot. Interest accrues at a daily rate of $0.05111 until the fee is paid. 4. All plats shall provide separate side sewer stubs to each building lot. Side sewers shall be a minimum 2% slope. SURFACE WATER A drainage plan and drainage report dated February 26, 2014 was submitted by D.R. Strong Consulting Engineers Inc. The proposed 31 lot subdivision is subject to Full Drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and six special requirements have been discussed in the report. The 8.7 acre vegetated site generally slopes to the southwest. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin and has a discharge to areas maintained by King County. King County will also be provided a copy of these plans and reports that could impact King County's Orting Hills Creek and service area. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Condition. The project is subject to basic water quality treatment and Level 2 flow control, which could be elevated to Level 3 depending on downstream conditions. A level 2 now control facility is typically sized to match the pre -developed rates for the forested condition extending from 50% of the 2 year up to the 50 year flow. The engineer has designed a combined detention and wetpond to be located at the southwest comer of the site. Access and maintenance to the proposed combined water quality and retention facility will be required per the 2009 King County SWDM and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM. A level 3 downstream analysts will be required for the project. 2. Appropriate individual lot flow control BMPs will be required to help mitigate the new runoff created by this development. The final drainage plan and drainage report must be submitted with the utility construction permit application. Secondary review will be required for the pond with both structural engineer and geotech engineer, and lining may also be required.3. A geotechnical report, dated February 4, 2014 was submitted by Earth Solutions NW, LLC. The report identifies the soils as sand April 16, 2414 ��Page 1 of 4 Fire Review - Building directly impacting the subdivision. These items are provided only for preliminary plat approval. Do note encroachments. Remove from the "LEGEND" block all tree items, utilities facilities and mailbox references, but do include in said "LEGEND" block the symbols and their details that are used in the plat drawing. Do not include a utility provider's block, an owner's block, an engineerlsurveyor block and an architect block. Do not include any references to use, density or zoning on the final submittal If the abutting properties are platted, note the lot numbers and plat name on the drawing otherwise note them as 'Unplatted'. Remove the building setback lines from the proposed lots. Setbacks will be determined at the time that building permits are issued. Note the research resources on the plat submittal. Note all easements, covenants and agreements of record on the plat drawing. The City of Renton "APPROVALS' blocks for the City of Renton Administrator, Public Works Department, the Mayor, City Clerk and the Finance Director. A pertinent approval block is also needed for the King County Assessor's Office. Provide signature lines as required. Do not make references to density and zoning information on the final plat drawing. If there is a Restrictive Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions document for this plat, then reference the same on the plat drawing and provide a space for the recording number thereof. Note that if there are restrictive covenants, agreements or easements to others (neighboring property owners, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawings and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package, The plat document will be recorded first (with King County). The recording number(s) for the associated document(s) (said documents recorded concurrently with, but following the plat) need to be referenced on the plat drawings. There needs to be language regarding the conveyance of the Tracts (A & 8) created by the plat; please check with the Stormwater Utility to see if they will require that the City be the owner of Tract'A' if not and if there is to be a Homeowners' Association (HOA) created for this plat, the following language concerning ownership of 'Tract A" (the detentiontwet vault area) applies to this plat and should be noted on the final plat drawing as follows: Upon the recording of this plat, Tract A is hereby granted and conveyed to the Plat of Name of Plat Homeowners' Association (HOA) for a detentionlwet vault facility. All necessary maintenance activities for said Tract 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 ownership interest In the Tract previously owned by the HOA and have the attendant financial and maintenance responsibilities. Otherwise, use the following language on the final plat drawing: Lots 1 through 31, inclusive, shall have an equal and undivided ownership interest in "Tract A'. The foregoing statements are to be accompanied by language defining the maintenance responsibilities for any infrastructure located on the Tract serving the plat or reference to a separate recording instrument detailing the same. Similar language is required for Tract'8'. Please discuss with the Stormwater Utility any other language requirements regarding surface water BMPs and other rights and responsibilities. All vested owners) of the subject plat, at the time of recording, need to sign the final plat. For the street dedication process, include a current btte report noting the vested property owner, Corey Thomas Ph: 425-430-7024 email: cthomas@rentanwa.gov Recommendations: Environmental Impact Comments; 1. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $479.28 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 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. Existing fire hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code including 5 -inch storz fittings. A water availability certificate is required from King County Water District 90. 2. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to he a minimum of 20 -feet wide fully paved, with 25 -feel 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. Approved cul-de-sac turnarounds of 90 -foot diameter are required for dead end streets over 500 -feet long. Street system shall be designed to be extended to adjoining underdeveloped properties for future extension. April 18, 2014�"M Page 3 of 4 Pollee Review Cyndie Parks Ph: 425-430-75 aii: cparks@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Minimal impact on police services. Estimated CFS Annually: 29 April 16, 2014 Page 4 of 4 glacial till. These soils will not support infiltration. Perched groundwater was found at a number of test pits. Due to the high moisture content, the geo •ecommends site grading be limited to the summer mont 4. The current surface % _r system development charge (SDC)fee is $1,228.00 per , ot. Fees are payable prior to Issuance of the construction permit. 5. A Construction 5tormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP} is required for this site. TRANSPORTATION/STREET 1. The current transportation impact fee rate is $1,430.72 per new lot. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be Savied. Payment of the transportation impact fee is due at the time of issuance of the building permit. 2. A traffic analysis dated December 27, 2013, was provided by Traffix Northwest. The proposed 31 lot subdivision would generate 297 average weekday vehicle trips. Weekday peak hour AM trips would generate 23 vehicle trips, with 17 vehicles leaving and 6 vehicles entering the site. Weekday peak hour PM trips would generate 31 vehicle trips, with 20 vehicles entering and 11 vehicles existing the site. An analysis focusing on the intersection of 156 Ave SEISE 142 Place was done to determine what, if any impacts the anticipated new peak hour AM and PM trips created by this development would have on an operational standpoint at this intersection. This intersection is controlled by a stop sign at each approach. The intersection currently operates at LOS F. The result of the study indicates this intersection would continue to operate at a LOS F with the new development, while the project generated traffic at this intersection would increase to 9 trips to the 1,375 total trips passing through the intersection. Increased traffic created by the development will be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. 3_ A looped roadway with stub ending is a temporary cul-de-sac is proposed as the internal site access. The cul-de-sac must meet City of Renton code and Fire Department requirements. To meet the City's complete street standards, the new internal roadway shall be designed to meet the residential access roadway per City code 4-6-060. The new internal roadway shall be a 53 -foot wide right of way, with 26 feet of pavement, curb, gutter, an 8 -foot planter strip and a 5 -foot sidewalk installed along both sides of the street. One side of the road will be marked No Parking. As per code, the minimum separation of intersections along an arterial is 125 feet. If in future there are significant concerns regarding left turns to and from the south loop of the internal public street onto 156th Ave SE, the City traffic operations may impose left tum restrictions at that intersection 4. To meet the City's complete street standards, frontage improvements along the project side in 156th Ave SE shall include 22 feet of paving from the centerline, gutter, a 0.5 feet wide curb, an 8 -foot planter strip and a 5 -foot roadway per City code 4-6- 060. To build this street section, five and half feet of right of way dedication will be required. It is shown on the plans. 4. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. 5. Street lighting is required for this plat on the frontage and on the internal access road. LED lighting plans will be included with the civil plan submittal. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Separate permits and fees for, water meters, side sewer connection and storm connection will be required. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. Rockeries or retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit. Structural calculations and plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required. 4. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan and a separate landscape pian shall be included with the civil plan submittal. Technical Services Bob MacOnie Ph: 425-430-7369 email: bmaconie@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA14-000241 and LND-10-0511, respectively, on the final plat submittal. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number provided will change when this subdivision changes from preliminary to final plat status. Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked by the city when the ties have been provided. Provide sufficient information to determine how the plat boundary was established. Include a statement of equipment and procedures used, per WAC32-130-100. Note the date the existing city monuments were visited and what was found, per WAC 332-130-150. Provide lot closure calculations. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the comers of the proposed lots. Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. The lot addresses will be provided at the time of final plat submittal. Note said addresses and the street name on the final plat drawing. On the final plat submittal, remove all references pertaining to utilities facilities, trees, concrete, gravel, decks and other items not April 16, 2014 Page 2 of 4 NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (GINS -III) A Master Application has been flied and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) - Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA14-CCO241, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT0,55CRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre) ioning designation, The proposal would result Inane creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts (Tracts A and B) and a new public.street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,090 square feet to 17,555 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA24-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059657 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038 156!' Ave SE 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 43.210-110, 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 APPUCATIDN DATE: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 7014 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Justin Lagers/ PNW Holdings, LLC / 9673 SE 36`x' Street Suite 105, Merreelsland, WA 98040/EML.-Justln@americanclassichomes.com Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Review 00er Permits which may he required: Construction, Building, Fire Reguesteii studies; Drainage, Report, aeotechn€cal Report, Traffic study Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community &Economic Development (CED)- planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Wall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing is tentativgly scheduled for April, 22,2Q14 before the Renton Hearfne Exaam iner in_Renton Council Chambers at.10:00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete thls form and return to; City of Renton, CED - Pianning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 99057, Name/File No.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14.000241, ECF, PP NAME: ,I NE MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: (o - — l� City/state/zip: � N MA- qP 11 CSM (4 s7 `# me- Jill Ding From: Jill Ding Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2014 11.32 AM To: jasonmpaulsen@gmail.com Subject: Enclave at Bridle Ridge LUA14-000241 This email is to let you know that a reconsideration/appeal has been filed for the Enclave at Bridle Ridge. As such, the hearing scheduled for April 22"6 at 10:00 am is cancelled. We will reschedule the hearing at a later date when the City has had time to review and respond to the appeal. As a party of record, you will be informed when a new date and time has been scheduled for the Hearing. Thank you! Jill Ding Senior Planner Community and Economic Develoment City of Renton id int@rentonwa.Rov Jill Ding From: Jill Ding Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2014 11:20 AM To: 'highlands_neighbors@hotmail.com'; 'Roger Paulsen; 'DAVID C MICHALSKF Subject: Enclave at Bridle Ridge LUA14-000241 This email is to let you know that a reconsideration/appeal has been filed for the Enclave at Bridle Ridge. As such, the hearing scheduled for April 22"d at 10:00 am is cancelled. We will reschedule the hearing at a later date when the City has had time to review and respond to the appeal. As a party of record, you will be informed when a new date and time has been scheduled for the Hearing. Thank you! Jill Ding Senior Planner Community and Economic Develoment City of Renton Lind@rentonwa.Bov Denis Law City of Mayor April 17, 2014 Department of Community and Economic Development C.E."Chip'Vincent, Administrator M. A. Huniu 6608 SE 5th Place Renton, WA 98059 SUBJECT: Enclave at Bridle Ridge, LUA14-000241, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Huniu: This letter is to inform you, as a party of record fo011lbe ave at Bridle Ridge, that an appeal/reconsideration request has been filed andirig originally scheduled for April 22 at 10:00 am has been cancelled to allCity time to review the reconsideration/appeal and prepare a response. informed when a new hearing date has been scheduled. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 or jding@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner Renton City Hall . 1055 south Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov } �� Biu -oo�au l , vAU (Adq A)Y Temple of the Double Flower for $tephany C'Mudlark Bolingbrook, lllinois Printed on recycled paper. Made in the USA. 11 �� March 17, 2014 Nancy Rawls Department of Transportation Renton School District 420 Park Avenue N Renton, WA 98055 Subject: Enclave @ BridleRidge LUA14-000241 The City of Renton's Department of Community and Economic Development (CED) has received an application for a Preliminary Plat located at 14038 and 14004 1561'' Ave SE. 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, City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057 or fax to (425) 430-7300, by March 31, 2014. Elementary School: Maplewood Elementary Middle School: McKnight Middle School High School. Hazen High Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the impact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed development? Yes 7S_ No Any Comments: Thank you for providing this important information. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me at (425) 430-6598. Sinc rely, II Ding Z7 Senior Planner Enclosure March 22, 2014 Ms. Jill Ding Senior Planner CED — Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 SENT via Electronic Mail to Avoid Delay C&, Jdin2Ca7,rentonwa.,-ov Re: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Dear Ms. Ding and Hearing Examiner, Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment with respect to the proposed plat "The Enclave .at Bridle Ridge", Project #LUA14-000241, ECF, PP. My comments are organized below by subject area and intended to provide input for both the City's final SEPA determination as well as the Hearing Examiner's preliminary plat review process scheduled for April 22nd. 1 also hope to attend the tentatively scheduled Public Hearing. Traffic Study and Impacts The scope of the traffic study provided by the applicant fails to adequately consider the impacts of this project upon the adjacent intersection at SE 5`h Place. 1 would ask that the applicant be required to supplement the traffic study with an analysis of this intersection as well as the next two streets to the north of SE 5th Place in light of the accident history of the intersection as well as the Level of Service associated with A.M. Peak period trips northbound on 1561h Ave. This additional study should include a video analysis of the "rolling stop" situation present at the 142nd intersection during the morning commute to help inform my concerns explained below. At current, the traffic study ignores the impact of the proposed new traffic by concluding that the level or service is already so bad at the actual intersection of 156th and 142nd that the project won't make it noticeably worse. While perhaps true in some respects for this specific intersection itself, the analysis completely fails to contemplate the project's impact to 156`h north of this intersection. Under existing conditions, the only reason it is possible to make an egress turn from SE 5ch Place (shown in the traffic study as SE 1391h Pl.) in the morning hours between 6 and 9 a.m. is due to the vehicle spacing interval created by the 3 -way stop at 142nd, and then only IF the northbound vehicles actually obey the stop light on 142nd. Adding two additional access points and associated vehicle trips from the proposed project onto SE 156th north of the 3 -way stop intersection will effectively consume the limited "capacity" created by the 3 -way stop rotation (e.g. those trips will fill up any space that currently exists between vehicles). All of this is compounded by the reality (also ignored by the traffic study) that the northbound morning traffic treats the intersection as a "rolling stop", and then quickly accelerates through the posted 25 MPH zone to speeds exceeding 35 mph, making access to 156th even more difficult. The addition of ANY new trips to SE 156"' between SE 5t" Place and the project by way of two additional access points will have a significant impact that is directly attributable to this project, and for which no adequate study has been conducted and no adequate mitigation has been proposed. To allow this project to be implemented without adequate mitigation has significant potential to threaten public health, safety and welfare for the existing residents who access 156d' from SE 5"' Place and the other residential access streets to the north. By failing to acknowledge and mitigate this reality, the applicant has failed to affirmatively address the requirements of adequate provision dictated by RCW 58.17. I am also very concerned with the close spacing between the proposed access streets to the plat, and the existing 156 / 142nd intersection. It seems almost impossible that anyone is ever going to be able to make a left-hand turn (to the south) from the plat access streets, due to the lengthy traffic back-up that routinely occurs on 156't' during the afternoon commute hours, blocking both proposed access streets. The traffic study also appears to have ignored this reality, in favor of studying the 156`h/ 142nd intersection itself. This also should be the subject of further analysis by the applicant and City prior to any final SEPA determination or plat approval. Based upon nothing more than common knowledge, it seems that the project design should be conditioned to provide for a single point of access and conventional intersection alignment at the 156"'/ 142" d intersection, including appropriate signalization (4 way stop or conventional signal or round -a- bout). This approach is supported by the City of Renton's transportation planning policies, and is clearly warranted by the level of service projections for this intersection. Sanitary Sewer Design The City of Renton Sanitary Sewer Plan includes multiple goals and policies which encourage the thoughtful extension of the City's utility to existing and future development. Most of the existing homes located along the northerly property boundary of the proposed plat are greater than 45 years old, and are serviced by septic systems of that era. Further, the topography and development pattern of these adjacent, neighboring properties is such that the waste lines, septic tanks and drain fields are all located on the south side of the homes, and at an elevation significantly lower than the street which serves these homes — particularly for those furthest east on SE 5th Place. If the City of Renton is serious about implementing its current waste water plans and the long-term responsibility of servicing the residents it has annexed, provisions should be made within the proposed plat to accommodate future waste water access to the new sewer lines being installed as part of this project. While City Engineers are best to identify how to accomplish this, it would seem that the inclusion of simple utility easements connecting the southerly parcel boundaries of the existing homes with the newly proposed street within the plat through proposed lots 1 through 4 would make logical sense. Even if future connections were subject to latecomer's agreements to fairly reimburse the developer for any up-sizing required to serve these few additional homes, common sense would dictate that now is the right time to be making adequate provision for the future needs of the City's residents. Let's get '`ahead of the curve" and take advantage of the opportunity provided by this project. Rear Yard Designations With respect to proposed lot ##4, it would appear that the applicant has applied a side -yard setback where the City's code would indicate a rear yard setback is required. (See Section 4-11-250 of Renton Municipal Code.) Because the final determination of the rear yard for a lot of this irregular lot configuration rests with the City's Planning Division Director (per City Code), I would ask that the Rear Yard requirement be clearly and consistently applied along the entire north edge of the plat as part of the recommended conditions of approval, where the plat abuts existing development to the north. As the largest of all proposed lots in the plat, there is plenty of room to accommodate a proper rear -yard on proposed lot #4. Wildlife In review of the SEPA checklist completed by the applicant and presumably reviewed by the City, it should be noted that significantly greater wildlife regularly utilize the proposed development site than has been indicated. We regularly observe deer and coyotes on the property, and occasionally have observed owls, hawks, eagles and flying squirrels. It should be properly noted on the SEPA checklist that the flying squirrel is a State protected species pursuant to WAC 232-12-011. Notice of Application and Public Comment Opportunity Finally, I call your attention to the fact that the City's Notice of Application for this project is inaccurate, misleading and biased in the favor of the applicant with respect to the opportunity to influence and inform the City's environmental determination under SEPA. The notice (both of application and anticipated SEPA determination) provided by the City (see attached) states that if written comment cannot be provided by the March 24th deadline, that it CAN be provided at the April 22nd public hearing. It is my understanding that the City typically issues its SEPA Determination prior to the public hearing by the City's Hearing Examiner, not after. Further, the City has advertised that no comment period will be provided following the issuance of the planned M -DNS. A SEPA appeal period is provided, but only those who provide comment prior to the SEPA determination are eligible for appeal, per City of Renton code. Thus, anyone who comments before April 22nd, but after the City's SEPA determination, does not actually have the opportunity advertised to provide input on this project in such a way as to inform the City's SEPA deter-nination. Given the factually misleading information provided within the above referenced Notice of Application for this project on this point, and the mistaken belief now shared by some of my neighbors that they have until April 22nd to comment on SEPA-related issues including those addressed in this letter, i ask that the City seek to validate the procedural integrity of this application by re -posting the comment period for this application, providing clear instructions in the Notice of Application that allow the general public to understand that if they wish to provide comment relative to any of the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project including the City's intended mitigation measures, they MUST do so prior to the deadline appurtenant to the City's SEPA Determination. If you have any questions regarding the comments above, please Leel free to contact me at RogerAPaulsenL&cs.com. Sincerely, Sent Electronically Without Signature to Avoid Delay Roger Paulsen Attachment: PDF of Notice of Application Lisa Marie McElrea From: Jill Ding Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 6:09 AM To: 'Roger Paulsen' Cc: Vanessa Dolbee; Lisa Marie McElrea; Rohini Nair; jasonmpaulsen@gmail.com Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Thank you for your comments, they will be included in the official land use file. Jill From: Roger Paulsen [mailto:rogerapaulsen@cs.com] Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 7:46 AM To: Jill Ding Cc: Vanessa Dolbee; Lisa Marie McElrea; Rohini Nair; jasonmpaulsen@gmail.com Subject: Re: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Please find attached an electronic copy of my comment letter for the proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge development. I'm sending this via e-mail while traveling in order to meet the March 24`h comment period deadline. I'll be entering an area of the country (southern Utah) where Internet access is unreliable. I'm copying my son, Jason Paulsen, on this is so he can address any questions or issues you may have if I'm unable to respond. Jason can be reached at 'asonm aulsen maiLcom. Please acknowledge receipt of this communication via e-mail to both Jason and me. Thanks!! Roger Paulsen -----Original Message ----- From: Jill Ding <JDing(d_)Rentonwa.gov> To: Roger Paulsen <roperapaulsen(c)cs.com> Cc: Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee0QRentonwa_.gov>; <RNair(@Rentonw_a._gov> Sent: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 6:38 am Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Roger, Lisa Marie McElrea <LMcElrea a)Rentonwa.gov>; Rohini Nair Thank you for your email. Could you send us your mailing address so that we can add you as a Party of Record? The plan reviewer assigned to review the Enclave at Bridle Ridge for utility compliance is Rohini Nair. I have copied her on this email. I do not have her direct line, but she can be reached by contacting the front desk at 425-430-7200. I primarily work remotely. I do go into Lhe office once a week on Thursdays from 1.,,,m-2pm. I will also be happy to answer any questions you have on this project via email. I will let Vanessa respond to your request for public records, as I am not sure if we grant them electronically. Thank you, Jill From: Roger Paulsen [rogerapaulsen(@cs.com] Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2014 10:41 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: Fwd: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Jill, I'm forwarding an e-mail I had copied you on -- but had your address incorrect. Hopefully this one works!! Roger Paulsen -----Original Message ----- From: Roger Paulsen <ro era aulsen cs.com> To: VDolbee <VDolbeea.Rentonwa.gov> Cc: jding <jdingQrenton.wa.4oy_>; jasonmpaulsen <iasonmgaulsen(cc gmail.com> Sent: Sun, Mar 16, 2014 10:37 pm Subject: Re: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Vanessa, This is a follow-up to my earlier correspondence regarding the project named "The Enclave at Bridle Ridge", file number: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP (see below). Now that the project has officially been posted, I request to become a party of record. Attached is an electronic copy of the required form, with my contact information. As I mentioned in my earlier e-mail, I am traveling out of the area, and won't return until after the end of the comment period on March 24th. I am an adjacent property owner (parcel 9426200080), and this project is of vital interest. I had arranged for my son (Jason Paulsen) to watch for official notice of the proposed development, and have been copied on Jason's correspondence with Jill Ding, of your department. Apparently Ms. Doing is out of the office on vacation until March 20th, and was unable to assist Jason in obtaining an electronic copy of information on the project. I'm writing you in the hope that you can help. If possible, I'd like to receive an electronic copy of application materials and supporting studies pertinent to the SEPA decision so that I can comment prior to March 24th closing date. I am especially interested in reviewing the traffic study_ I am quite willing to pay the reasonable cost of providing this information. Let me know the best way to provide payment_ Now that the project application has been officially accepted by the City, I'd like to pursue my question regarding sewer service. Can you tell me who I can/should contact to determine whether this project will provide an opportunity for adjacent properties to connect to the Renton Sewer system?? Thanks for any help you can provide!!! Roger Paulsen -----Original Message ----- From: Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee(@Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapaulsen c@cs.com> Sent: Thu, Feb 13, 2014 6.28 am Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Roger, Yes you are correct, as long as you are the property owner. The City uses the King Co. assessors data to mail out to the 300 ft. surrounding neighbors, so whatever address the assessor have for tax purposes is where the City will mail the notice. Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98067 425.430.7314 From: Roger Paulsen fmailto:roperapaulsen(acs.comi Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:33 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Re: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Vanessa, Thanks for the update!! My wife and I will be away from home for the next 6 weeks, so I won't be able to watch for the pink notice posters. Based on my conversation with Chris on Monday, I understand that we'll also receive a letter in the mail because we are within 300 feet of the development. Is that correct?? Our property actually abuts the development. We're having our mail forwarded, so I should receive the notice in time to become a party of record, and submit comments on the project. I'm assuming my question about access to the Renton Sewer system will need to wait until the City has actually accepted the application. Please let me know if my understanding is not correct. Thanks!!! Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Vanessa Dolbee <VDoibee Rentonwa. ov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <rogerapaulsenCc?cs.com> Sent: Wed, Feb 12, 2014 12:25 pm Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Roger, The name of the project based on your photos is "156' Ave. SE Assemblage" This project did go through the City's pre -application process but has not been submitted to the City as an official application. The developer is required to install these public notices signs prior to application to the City. At this point in time we do not have an official application to add you to as a party of record. Please keep an eye on the big white sign, once you see a bright pink "notice" poster stapled to the front of the sign, the application has been submitted to the City for review. At this time please contact the identified person at the City that is noted on the pink "notice" sign requesting to be added to the party of records list. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Roger Paulsen jmailto:rogerapaulsen(cDcs.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 8:15 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Re: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Vanessa, Thanks for getting back to mel!! Attached is a zip file with photos taken of the "Proposed Land Use" sign recently posted on the property. The address is 14038 156th Ave. SE. I believe the project number is 13117. Does that help?? Roger -----Original Message ----- From: Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@a Rentonwa.gov> To: 'Roger Paulsen' <ro era aulsen cs.com> Sent: Tue, Feb 11, 2014 5:23 pm Subject: RE: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Roger, I have searched the City's permit system for a project with the title "Enclave at Bridle Ridge" or a variation of this title. We do not have any records of a project with this name in our system. Can you please provide me a site address or tax parcel number so I can identify what project you are inquiring about. If you would like to become a party of record for any project, the City has to have an application to assign "you" to. In order to do this I need to identify what application you would like to become a party of record for. Thank you for the additional information. Thank you, Vanessa Dolbee Current Planning Manager Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Roger Paulsen [mailto:rogerap__ _en(a)cs.com] Seat: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 2:09 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Enclave at Bridle Ridge Vanessa, By way of introduction, my wife and I live on the East Renton Plateau, adjacent to the NE corner of proposed Enclave at Bridle Ridge development. 1 had some questions about the development, and met yesterday with Chris in your department. He suggested that I forward one of my questions to you. Our property has a 50-year old septic system. It's currently functioning correctly, but I anticipate it's life is limited. I wonder if the new development will provide us an opportunity to connect to the Renton sewer system?? If you're not the right person to address this question to, please direct me to someone who can. Although we haven't yet been formally notified of the development. I would like to become a party of record. Can I do that via this e-mail?? If so, the following is my contact information: Roger Paulsen 6617 SE 5th PL Renton, WA 98059 425-228-1589 RoaerAPaulsen(cDcs.com Thanks!!! Roger Lisa Marie McElrea From: Jill Ding Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 6:39 AM To: Lisa Marie McElrea Subject: FW: concerns: the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/Lua14-000241/ECF/PP Lisa, Could you please include a copy of this email in the LUA14-000241 land use file? Thanks! Jill From: Jill Ding Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 6:38 AM To: 'DAVID C MICHALSKI` Cc: Rohini Nair Subject: RE: concerns: the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/ Lua 14-000241/ ECF/ PP Dear Mr. Michalski, Thank you for your comments on this project. I apologize for the delay in responding. Your comments have been included in the official land use file and will be considered by the decision maker. In addition we have forwarded your comments to the City's transportation department for review. The City is aware of the delay at the 156'h Avenue SE and SE 142nd Place intersection. Unfortunately, the delay at that intersection is anticipated to increase with or without the approval of the proposed project. According to the applicant's traffic study, upon completion the project as proposed is anticipated to add 2.3 seconds to the delay at the intersection. With regards to your question regarding additional access off of Maple Valley Highway to Cemetary Road, the steep topography between Maple Valley Highway and the upper plateau (and on to Cemetery Road) makes it infeasible to provide additional access. Widening 1-405 (which the State is pursuing ) to provide more traffic capacity could attract some traffic now using 156 th SE to access Cemetery Road. The City will also be requiring the applicant to pay a traffic impact fee to help offset the impacts of the proposed development to the City of Renton street system. A public hearing on the project is scheduled for 10 am on April 22, which will include an opportunity for additional public comment. if you have further comments or concerns, I encourage you to attend the hearing. Thank you again for your comments, Jill Ding Senior Planner From: DAVID C MICHALSKI [mailto:dcm1chal6'1msn.com] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 12:00 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: concerns. the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/Lua14-000241/ECF/PP I Lisa Marie McElrea From: Jill Ding Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 6:39 AM To: Lisa Marie McElrea Subject: FW: concerns: the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/Lua14-000241/ECF/PP Lisa, Could you please include a copy of this email in the LUA14-000241 land use file? Thanks! Jill From: Jill Ding Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 6:38 AM To: 'DAVID C MICHALSKI' Cc: Rohini Nair Subject: RE: concerns: the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/Lua14-000241/ECF/PP Dear Mr. Michalski, Thank you for your comments on this project. I apologize for the delay in responding. Your comments have been included in the official land use file and will be considered by the decision maker. In addition we have forwarded your comments to the City's transportation department for review. The City is aware of the delay at the 156` Avenue SE and SE 142nd Place intersection. Unfortunately, the delay at that intersection is anticipated to increase with or without the approval of the proposed project. According to the applicant's traffic study, upon completion the project as proposed is anticipated to add 2.3 seconds to the delay at the intersection. With regards to your question regarding additional access off of Maple Valley Highway to Cemetary Road, the steep topography between Maple Valley Highway and the upper plateau (and on to Cemetery Road) makes it infeasible to provide additional access. Widening 1-405 (which the State is pursuing ) to provide more traffic capacity could attract some traffic now using 156 th SE to access Cemetery Road. The City will also be requiring the applicant to pay a traffic impact fee to help offset the impacts of the proposed development to the City of Renton street system. A public hearing on the project is scheduled for 10 am on April 22, which will include an opportunity for additional public comment. If you have further comments or concerns, I encourage you to attend the hearing. Thank you again for your comments, Jill Ding Senior Planner From: DAVID C MICHALSKI [mailto:dcmichal msn.com] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 12:00 PM To: Jill Ding Subject: concerns: the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/Lua14-000241/ECF/PP I David Michalski 6525 se 5tn pl Renton, Wa 98059 March 21, 2014 Jill Ding, Senior Planner Planning Division 1055 So Grady Way Renton, Wa 98057 This memo is regarding my concerns over the Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-000241/ECF/PD. I live off of SE5th pl and my residence buts up to this planned subdivision. My concern is regarding the traffic going North and South on 156th Ave Se. Since the building of the bridge across Cedar River the_ traffic on 156th ave se is unbearable. Coming out of any of the side streets off 156th ave se is sometimes impossible with waits as much as 15 minutes. At the 3 way stop south of me vehicles do a quick stop and accelerate up the hill leaving no time between cars to allow access going both North and South. Frequently when large trucks traveling up the hill slow traffic down, there is a huge backlog of vehicles and this causes terrible traffic congestion. I see signs for additional development in the future on the West side of 156th. I feel that an immediate traffic study be implemented. I am really surprised there isn't more accidents than I see. Has anyone thought about additional access off of Maple Valley Highway for folks to get unto Cemetary Road? Sincerely, _ 'D &.,,A David Michalski Email: dcmich_a_I@msn.com Ph# 425-271-7837 ?Iok City ofi �I t! NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master Appllutlon has been tied and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Pevelapment {CED) - Planning Dlrision of the City of Banton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approval'. DATEOF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER! LUA14-000141, ECF, PP Pficiii NAME: The Enclave at addle Ridge PROTECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the RA IResldential 4 dwelling units per acre) zoning designation, The proposal would result In the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts [Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in site from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square leet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000150) is proposed between tax parcels 1 42 3 0 59057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 142 30 5 9057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas arc present an the project site. PROTECT LOCATION: 140381561° Ave SE OPTIONAL DETERNtINATION OF NON-SIGNIFJCANCE, MITIGATED (ONSM): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant envlronmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposedproject. Therefore. as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNIprocess to give notice that a DNS - M Is likely to be Issued. Comment perlo is for the project and the proposed DI are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no, comment period fallowing the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-54nlRcari Mitigated IONS -M}. A 14 -day appeal period will fobow the issuance of the ONS -M. PERMrr APPLICATION DATE: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 14, 2014 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Justin Lagers J PNW Holdings,UC/9675 SE 36° Street suite 1115, Mercer Island, WA 980401 EML:)ustln@)americanclasslchomes,com Permits/Review Requested: Emilronmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Review Other Permits which may be required: Construction, Building, Fire Requested Studies: Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, TrafOc Study Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community 3. Economic Development {CED)- Planning Division, Siarth Floor Renton City Hall,1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 9$057 PUBLIC HEARING: P i f ringll atNe"Y`"h'a &^ T^ra II .2014 be Tore the RenSre Hearing I mperinlilinti;nCoupCI 4hambi at 10ZO AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed Project, compete m form and return to- City of Renton, CED- Planning Division. 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File Na.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-000241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: Chy/State/Zlp: ----- - FI1r r CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zon{ngfland Use: The subject site Is designated Residential Low Density (COMP-RLDI on the Cty of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R4 on the City's Zoning Map, Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental ISEPAI Checklist Development Regulatlons Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the Clty�s SEPA ordinance, RMC 42-111 l Resider Oeel vopment and other applicable codes and regulations a'. appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following MitlietInn Measures will likely to imposed on the propria project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts no covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above- • Project construction shelf be required to cumpfy with the submitted yeofechnfcof report. • Project construcdrn shall be required to coma with the submitted trojj4c study. Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, CED -Planning Dlvisior 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by S:DIT PM on March 24, 2014. This matter Is also tentatively schedule for a public hearing on April 22, 1014, at 10:90 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hoi1, 1055 soatl Grady Way, Renton. It you are Interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Oivislon to ensure tha the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-6578. if comments cannot be submitted In writing by the dal indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearin Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive addition; information by mail, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automaticall became a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON; Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel; 1425) 430-6598 Ecol: idingRrentonwa,aov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further Information on this proposed project, complete tr form and return to: City of Renton, CED -Planning Division, 105550. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: The Enclave at Bridle Rldge/LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Ni MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE Ni _ CERTIFICATION GtylState/ZiP: 1, el hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted in 3 conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Dater �0 _ Signed: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 1 } QL, �`,%""` signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary al O� uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. -�s 01A* Dated: ar - " e Notary P iic in and for the State of Washingfvn "0V�'"t 1 �� Notary (Print): e, 00vo's My appointment expires: AiA,;iji -t2-4. doll _. FF /�`1T E E f[ F f E E €€ 16�E �t �..F.sRii. T0D, 1t dY^� t CITY-MF M11 R [...,...> .....,. 9. EeW..... _..... € §.€€€EeE A n �. .................e_v.vev, .. ........._. - .t [ r..;.......e _ ,. ...........,.E.':E: ,iE e€ rr..............., i .«......._., r' B. P <`EP�IRTII�I�rC�F c()MhlillIT1F & EC[W I�[?1�.(:�PIfEilt RIAM�iE�I� �?�I�li�1�� m_. { , rr,:s�r (e5.gp On the 10th day of March, 2014, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance and Notice of Application documents. This information was sent to: Agencies See Attached Justin Lagers, PNW Holdings LLC Applicant, Contact Richard Ouimet, Sally Lou Nipert Owners See attached 300' surrounding property owners (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) SS ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Lisa M. McElrea signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the mentioned in the instrument. Dated: 7Y�a,� G !' D, Cil -'q€ N Notary (Print): �x*��1\til\14111} pC)ft�r�,, Sz us��nd'�u1rp, �O g_2c3- C? SOF WPIS Public in and for the State of Washington My appointment expires: J AAa U 1-7 The Enclave @ Bridle Ridge LUA14-000241, ECF, PP template - affidavit of service by mailing AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology ** WDFW - Larry Fisher* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 Issaquah, WA 98027 39015-172 nd Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 9 809 2-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms, Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343 PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers *** Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Steve Roberge Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave, SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 Newcastle Way 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liaison Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6200 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: ?CRD -01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 *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 Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov ***Department of Natural Resources is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice the following email address: sepacenter@dnr.wa.pov template- affidavit of service by mailing 5336700010 1463400075 1463400079 NEVE MARGARET PAWLIUKJAMI L TARWATER FREDERICK 14045 1S6TH AVE SE 14235 156TH AVE SE 14229 156TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059-7400 RENTON, WA 98056 1397500040 1397500050 1397500080 ISHII KAY+WILKINSON DAVID COYLE ROBERT W+KLUG MICHA M OBERENDER DALE C+MONICA I 15822 SE 143RD ST 15812 SE 143RD ST 15710 SE 143RD ST RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 1397500110 1397500090 1463400080 KING COUNTY-WLRD ADM-ES-0800 MCGAHA RONNIE D SMITH JOHN F+SHARON L 500 4TH AVE 15616 SE 143RD ST 12216 164TH AVE SE SEATTLE, WA 98104 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 1463400078 1423059091 1423059013 FORSELL KATHY L LEX TIM+GINA MARGITH SUMPTER DONALD J 15451 SE 142ND PL 13116 158TH AVE SE 1215 182ND AVE E RENTON, WA 98058 RENTON, WA 98059 SUMNER, WA 98390 5336700030 1423059113 1423059030 BAGGETT BRIAN L+KELLY C YOU EVERETT ROBERT P III+BRIGID PENCE ALAN D+DENISE 15436 SE 142ND PL 6716 SE 8TH ST 15812 SE 142ND ST RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 5336700005 1463400070 1423059041 THORNBURY JAMES D MCCORKLE ROBERT L+SUSAN M THOMPSON DONALD L 14041 156TH AVE SE 14040 154TH AVE SE 6715 SE 7TH ST RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 1463400069 1463400067 1463400064 HARSCH PATTI J c/o HARSCH FAMILY DENADEL GARY L+BRENDA D FRANKFURTH ANTHONY D TRUST 14013 156TH AVE SE 14009 156TH AVE SE PO BOX 2344 RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 1423059037 1423059050 1463400068 PENARANDAJOSEPH ANDERSON ROGER R+SHIRLEY A DUNNING ROBERT W+DONNAJ 6714 SE 7TH ST 15813 SE 141ST ST 16445 SE 16TH ST RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 BELLEVUE, WA 98008 1423059028 1423059057 1463400062 MAHONEY JAMES P NIPERT SALLY LOU OVERA ROGER+LINDA J 14011 160TH AVE SE 14004 156TH AVE SE 14010 154TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 9425200012 9425200080 9425200060 BECK SHAWN M+ERIC A PAULSEN ROGER A MURAYAMA PEGGY H 13928 156TH AVE SE 6617 SE STH PL 15649 SE 139TH PL RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 9425200059 9425200050 9425200040 FERENCJOZEF MICHALSKI DAVID C HEMNES VALERIE K 15643 SE 139TH PL 6525 SE 5TH PL 6519 SE 5TH PL RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 9425200030 1423059104 6084200160 HENRICKS SYDNIE M BRYANT VIRGINIA LI PU+QI CHENG 6513 SE 5TH PL 6705 SE 5TH PL 15919 SE 139TH ST RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 1423059088 1423059090 1423059044 STACHOWIAK C R HUNIU MARY ANN MCCULLOH JASON+JENNIFER 15652 SE 139TH PL 15642 SE 139TH PL 15636 SE 139TH PL RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 1423059087 1423059086 1423059027 FRANK REIKO M JENSEN JUSTIN+COLLEEN WILLOUGHBY WADE V+NANCY PO BOX 2461 6518 SE 5TH PL 15612 SE 139TH PL RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98056 1463400060 1463400081 1397500100 PHAN TRI HARRISON THERESA CROW SCOTT MATTHEW 2109 BREMERTON AVE NE 14207 156TH AVE SE 15606 SE 143RD ST RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98056 1423059046 6084200180 1397500070 MISHLER BRIAN DAVID TONG JEFF J BARKER SHARON 13908 156TH AVE SE 6731 SE 5TH ST 15718 SE 143RD ST RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 5336700020 9425200010 5336700025 CONNOR MICHAEL & BARBARA WILLETT CAROL+DAVID MACEY TONY LEE+SHIRLEY D 15446 SE 142ND PL 13922 156TH AVE SE 15440 SE 142ND PL RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 5336700015 6084200170 1397500060 LINS JOSE ROBERIO S VUE YER+VANG LA MAY RONALD G 10516 172ND CT SE 15925 SE 139TH ST 15802 SE 143RD ST RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98056 1423059023 OUIMET G RICHARD 2923 MALTBY RD BOTHELL, WA 98012 City Of �.� NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -- Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA14-000241, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed subdivision of a 8.8 acre project site located within the R-4 (Residential 4 dwelling units per acre} zoning designation. The proposal would result in the creation of 31 lots and 2 tracts {Tracts A and B) and a new public street. The proposed lots would range in size from 8,050 square feet to 12,566 square feet. Access to the new lots would be provided via a new public street off of 156th Avenue SE. A lot line adjustment (LUA14-000250) is proposed between tax parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in 30,175 square feet of parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed subdivision. No critical areas are present an the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 14038 1561h Ave SE 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: February 27, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 10, 2014 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Justin Lagers / PNW Holdings, LLC / 9675 SE 360 Street Suite 105, Mercer Island, WA 98040 / EML: justin@americanclassichomes.com Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Review other Permits which may be required: Construction, Building, Fire Requested Studies: Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, Traffic Study Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -- Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for April 22, 2014 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers at 10:00 AM on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. IE 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.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/ LUAl4-000241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: City/State/Zip: City Of i " CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: The subject site is designated Residential Low Density (COMP-RLD) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and R4 on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project. Environmental {SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-110 Residential Development and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate, Proposed Mitigation Measures: 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. Project construction shall be required to comply with the submitted geotechnical report. ■ Project construction shall be required to comply with the submitted traffic study. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, CED — Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on March 24, 2014. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on April 22, 2014, at 10:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-5578. 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 became a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-5598; Eml: idin�@rentanwa.j;o� PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION 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.: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge/LUA14-000241, ECF, PP NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: City/State/Zip: Denis Law _ __ ' City Ot - i Mayor, . `- March 10, 2014 Justin Lagers PNW Holdings, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Department of Community and Economic Development C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Subject: Notice of Complete Application The Enclave at Bridle Ridge, LUA14-000241, ECF, PP Dear Mr. Lagers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on March 31, 2014. 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 April 22, 2014 at 10:00 AM; 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) 430-6598 if you have any questions. Sincerely, t Jill Ding -Senior Planner cc: G. Richard Ouimet, Sally Lou Nipert / owner(s) Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way 6 Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov ITEMS BELOW THIS SHEET HAVE BEEN COPIED FOR SUPERIOR COURT ****DO NOT ADD ANYTHING BELOW THIS SHEET **** City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: Sally Lou Nipert - as to Parcel A/Parcel C ADDRESS: 14004156th Avenue SE CITY: Renton ZIP: 98059 TELEPHONE NUMBER: (425) 271-5581 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: PNW Holdings, LLC COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS: 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 CITY: Mercer Island, WA ZIP: 98040 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 206.588.1147 CONTACT PERSON NAME: Justin Lagers COMPANY (if applicable): PNW Holdings, LLC ADDRESS: 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 CITY: Mercer Island, WA ZIP: 98040 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: 253405-5587 Justin@americanclassichomes.com PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECTIADDRESS(S)ILOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 14038156th Ave SE Renton, WA 98059 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 1423059122 - Parcel A 1423059023 - Parcel B 1423059057 - Parcel C EXISTING LAND USE(S): Single Family Residential PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Single Family Residential EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: RDL - Residential Low Density PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) NIA EXISTING ZONING: R4 PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): R4 SITE AREA (in square feet): 328,129 sq.ft. F E8 2 7 c rj , SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROA WAYS TO BE q� DEDICATED: 79,419 S ft. CITY OF ENTON �[ gluru�nl�- SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: N/A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) 4.45 NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) 31 NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 31 H-10ED%DatnlFarms-Templates\Self--Help Handouts\Planninglmasterapp.doc - 1 - 03111 PROJECT INFORMA NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 2- SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 2800 - 3300 sq.ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL 1,10OW-111 TO REMAIN (if applicable): None 4/$ SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): None SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-REStDENTiAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): None NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): None NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): N/A 1 TION (continued PROJECT VALUE- $3,000,000.00 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. ❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. t ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. ❑ SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES sq. ft. ❑ WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal descri tion on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE SE QUARTER OF SECTION 14 , TOWNSHIP _M, RANGE 5E , IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) Sally Lou Nlpell declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) )�_ the current owner of the property involved in this application or the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. 1' jgq Signature of Owner/Represent ive Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument and acknowledcge it to be hi he eir free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the'instrument- `�\ ff _,.p�liltSy'4 Q 4Notary Public in and for the of Wa ngton 4 MQT E"tii a > Notary (Print): *jL Co � �,''r+,,,,��4�' �# = My appointment expires: led,, ASHING `-S kltk It H:10ED1DatalCbrms-TemplateslSelf--Help HandoutsTianninglmasterapp.doc - 2 - 03111 City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: G. Richard Ouimet - as to Parcel B ADDRESS: 2923 Maltby Road CITY: Bothell zip: 98012 TELEPHONE NUMBER: (425) 481-5862 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: PNW Holdings, LLC COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS: 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 CITY: Mercer Island, WA ZIP: 98040 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 206_588-1147 CONTACT PERSON NAME: Justin Lagers COMPANY (if applicable): PNW Holdings, LLC ADDRESS: 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 CITY: Mercer Island, WA ZIP: 98040 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: 253-405-5587 Justin@a americanclassichomes.com PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge PROJECTIADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 14038 156th Ave SE Renton, WA 98059 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 1423059122 - Parcel A 1423059023 - Parcel B 1423059057 - Parcel C EXISTING LAND USE(S): Single Family Residential PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Single Family Residential EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: RDL - Residential Low Density PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) NIA EXISTING ZONING: R4 PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): R4 SITE AREA (in square feet): 328,129 sq.ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAY 'Tb L"14 DEDICATED: 79,419 sq.ft. C'Ty OF P� N- SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCE &' EMIENd$: N/A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) 4.45 NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) 31 NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 31 1 fiCEDlData\Forttts-'Cemplatcs\Self--Help HandoutslPlanninalmasterapp.doc - I - 03/11 PROJECT INFORMA NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 2— SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 2800 - 3300 5q.ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL it"10otf• ,�, BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): None -NS SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): None SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): None NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): Nolle NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable). N/A TION (continued) PROJECT VALUE: $3,000,000.00 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. ❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. ❑ SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES sq. ft. ❑ WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included SITUATE IN THE SE QUARTER OF SECTION 14 , TOWNSHIP _M, RANGE 5E , IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Namels) G. Richard Ouimet , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) _X_ the current owner of the property involved in this application or /-- the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING Signature of Owner/Representative Date I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence at i xt signed this instrument and acknowledge it to b his er/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. '� r C �tr. Dated �y? I %, `per ' GOA Orr. I s`sC1 b �OO moo 7ip to toll N 1�n\andoutslPlanrsir H:1CED1DatalForms-TemplateslSelf-Help � Notary Public in and for the State of Wash' gton Notary (Print): a 4 �` C� d My appointment expires: -2- 03111 PLANNING DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR. LAND USE APPLICATIONS fi„ Plat Name Reservation 4 .. a ..y Public Works Approval L6tter2 Srrackninrr nofnil . This requirement may be waived by: 1.. Property Services PROJECT NAME;: I: 2. Public Works Plan Review 3. Building DATE: ��Lo & L& 4. Planning FED 27 I TY r ir - . PLANNING DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS This requirement may be waived by.,��•,��,_� I. Property Services- PROJECT NAME: 2. Public Works Plan Review 3. Building DATE: 4. Planning --- PREAPPLICATION MEETING FOR 156th Assemblage Preliminary Plat 14038 156th Avenue SE PRE 13-001566 CITY OF RENTON Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division November 26, 2013 Contact Information: Planner: Vanessa Dolbee, 425.430.7314 Public Works Plan Reviewer: Rohini Nair, 425.430.7298 FED 2 7 7 1 iri Fire Prevention Reviewer: Corey Thomas, 425.430.7024 Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell, 425.430.7290��:,, Please retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving copies of it to any engineers, architects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submittal, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager to have it pre-screened before making all of the required copies. The pre -application meeting is informal and non-binding. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and policies in effect at the time of review. The applicant is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations in effect at the time of project submittal. The information contained in this summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision -makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). Fire & Emergency Services Department M E M O R A N D U M DATE: 11/18/2013 12:00:OOAM TO: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner FROM: Corey Thomas, Plan Review/Inspector SUBJECT: (156th Assemblage Preliminary Plat) PRE13-001566 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. Existing fire hydrants can be counted toward the requirements as long as they meet current code including 5 -inch start fittings. A water availability certificate is required from King County Water District 90. It appears only a dead end 6 -inch main is available in this area currently. 2. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $479.28 per single family unit. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20 -feet wide fully paved, with 25 -feet inside and 45 -feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 -ton vehicle with 322 -psi point loading. Access is required within 150 -feet of all points on the buildings. Approved cul-de-sac turnarounds of 90 -foot diameter are required for dead end streets over 500 -feet long. Dead end streets exceeding 500 -feet require all homes to be provided with an approved fire sprinkler system. Dead end streets exceeding 700 -feet are not allowed and will not be approved without secondary access roadways being provided: Street system shall be designed to be extended to adjoining underdeveloped properties for future extension. Page 1 of 1 c� of DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M 0 R A N D U M DATE: November 22, 2013 TO: Vanessa Dolbee, Sr. Planner FROM: Rohini Nair, Plan Review SUBJECT: 15e Assemblage Preliminary plat Preapp 14038156th Ave SE ✓PRE13-DO1566 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 proposal. The fallowing comments are based on the pre -application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. WATER The proposed development is within the Water District 90's water service area. Water availability certificate from the Water District 90 must be provided to the City during the land use application. Approved water plans from the Water District 90 must be provided during the utility construction plan review. SANITARY SEWER 1. Sewer service shall be provided by the City of Renton. 2. The project can get sewer service by extending the 8 -inch existing sewer main, located south of the site on 156"' Ave SE near the intersection with SE 144"' Street, up to the north property line (on 15(5th Ave) of the subject development site. Applicant will extend 8 -inch sewer main on the internal public streets and on the private access easement in Lot 7, extending up to the north property line, 3. Each lot can be served by individual side sewers from the sewer main. 4. The development is subject to a wastewater system development charge (SDC) fee. The SDC fee for sewer is based on the size of the new domestic water to serve the new home on each lot. The sewer fee for a %-inch or 1 -inch meter install is $1,812.00 (2013 rate) or $2033.00 (2014 rate). 5. The Central Plateau Interceptor Special Assessment District fee (SAD) fee will be applicable on the project. The SAD fee rate when it was established in 2009 was $351.95 plus interest per lot. As of 156 Assemblage Preliminary Plat Preapp- PRE13-001.566 Page 2 of November 22, 2013 11/22/2013, the SAD fee rate per lot is $431.93 plus additional interest per day of $0.0511.1, The rate that will be applicable on the issuance day of the utility construction permit will be applicable on this project. SURFACE WATER 1. A drainage report complying with the City adopted 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City Amendments will be required. Based on the City's flow control map, the site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Site Conditions). The project is required to use the Flow Control Duration Standard (forested conditions) as the existing pre -developed condition_ Refer to Figure 1.1.2.A— Flow chart, for determining the type of drainage review required in the City of Renton 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Amendment. Storm drainage improvements on 156th Ave SE may be applicable. Stormwater BMPs applicable to the individual lots must be provided. The drainage report must account for all the improvements provided by the project. Stormwater improvements based on the drainage report study will be required to be provided by the developer. 2. A geotechnical report for the site is required. Information on the water table and soil permeability, with recommendations of appropriate flow control BMP options with typical designs for the site from the geotechnicaf engineer, shall be submitted with the application. 3. Surface water system development (SDC} fee is $1,120.00 (2013 rate) for each lot. The SDC fee for stormwater will become $1,228.00 per lot. TRANSPORTATION 1. Payment of the transportation impact fee is applicable on the single family houses at the time of building permit issuance. The current transportation impact fee rate is $717.75 per single family house. The impact fee for this type of land use will increase on January 1, 2014, to $1,430.72 per single family house. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied, payable at issuance of building permit. 2. 156' Ave is a Minor Arterial with an available right of way (ROW) width of 60 feet. Based on the Transportation plan for the 156th Ave corridor, the street will be a 3 -lane roadway with a 12 -feet wide center two way left turn lane, 11 -feet wide thru travel lanes, 5 -feet wide bike lane on both sides, gutter, 0.5 -feet wide curbs, 8 -feet wide landscaped planters, 5 -feet wide sidewalks, storm drainage improvements, and street lighting. This will require half street right of way dedication of 5.5 feet (subject to final survey) on the project frontage on 156`h Ave SE. The half street frontage improvements will be required to be built on the 156t6 Ave SE frontage by the developer. 3. According to RMC 4-6-060 section H.2, two means of access is required if the length of the dead end street is greater than 700 feet. The dead end street appears to exceed 700 feet to Lot 18, which is not allowed by code_ Dead end street, turnarounds, and secondary access must meet with fire approval and must meet the requirements of section H of RMC 4-6-060. 4. The proposed internal public street that dead ends at the south property fine is offset from the existing public street south of the site. A street that will align directly with the existing dead end street south of the site must be considered. 5. The internal access is proposed via public residential streets of ROW width 53 feet. The public residential street must have 26 -feet paved width, gutter, 0.5 -feet wide curb, 8 -feet wide landscaped H:\CED\Pianning\CurrentPlannjng\PREAPPS\13-001566vanessa\Plan Review Comments PRE13-001566.doc 1561h Assemblage Preliminary Plat Preapp- PRE 13-001.566 Page 3 of 3 November 22, 2013 planter, and 5 -feet wide sidewalk as per RMC 4-6-060. Access to lots 7, 8, and 9 is proposed via a 26 -feet wide private access road. The private road can have a paved width of 20 feet in the 26 -feet wide private access easement. 6. Street lighting is required to be provided on 156t" Ave SE and on the internal public streets. 7. A traffic study is required. The study must include the analysis of the stop sign controlled intersection to the immediate south of the project, the proposed new roadway intersection on 156th, and any potential conflicts between these two intersections. Traffic impact analysis guidelines is attached. B. All utilities serving the site are required to be undergrounded. 9. Maximum width of single family driveways for two car garage is 16 feet. Refer to RMC 4-4-080 regarding driveway regulations. 10. A minimum separation of 5 feet is required between driveway and the property line. 11. Informational comment —traffic safety guidelines include a minimum spacing of 20 feet between driveways_ GENERAL. COMMENTS I. All construction or service utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. When utility plans are complete, please submit three (8) copies of the drawings, two (2) copies of the drainage report, the permit application, an itemized cost of construction estimate, and the application fee at the counter on the sixth floor. H:\CED,Planning\CurrentPlanningj PREA.PPS\13-O01566Vanessa1Plan Review Comments PRE13-061566.doc ` City of _ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: November 26, 2013 TO: Pre -application File No. 13-001566 FROM: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner SUBJECT: 1561h Assemblage Preliminary Plat General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre -application for the above - referenced development proposal. The fallowing comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre -application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision -makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, Development Services Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant_ The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $100.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or online at www.rentonwa.gov Project Proposal: The subject property (APN 1423059023 and 1423059122) is located on the east side of 156th Avenue SE and is addressed as 14038 156t4'Avenue SE. There are no mapped critical areas on the subject property. The total area of the subject site is 372,290 square feet (8_S5 acres) in area and is zoned Residential — 4 dwelling units per acre (R-4). The applicant is proposing to subdivide the site into 27 residential lots and two tracts, one drainage tract and one access tract. The residential lots would range in size from approximately 8,050 square feet to approximately 17,442 square feet. Access to the 27 proposed residential lots would be via a new public street dead ending in a cul-de-sac extending from 156th Avenue SE with an access tract extending off the new road in the northwest corner of the site, proving access for proposed lots 6 — 9. Current Use: There is currently a single-family house on the subject property, which is proposed to be removed. Zoning/Density Requirements: The subject property is zoned Residential -4 dwelling units per acre (R-4). There is no minimum density in the R-4 zone and the maximum density is 4.0 dwelling units per net acre (du/ac). The area of public and private streets h:\ceftlanning\current planning\preapps�13-001566.vanessa\pre013-001566, assemblage pp, ZTlots, r-4.doc 156th Assemblage Preliminary Plat, PRE13-001566 Page 2 of 4 November 26, 2013 and critical areas would be deducted from the gross site area to determine the "net" site area prior to calculating density. The application materials identified a net site area of 298,821 SF (6.86 acres)- Using the net square footage provided, the proposal for 27 lots arrives at a net density of approximately 3.94 du/ac (27 lots / 6.86 acres = 3-94 du/ac), which is within the density range permitted in the R-4 zone. Development Standards: The project would be subject to RMC 4-2-11oA, "Development Standards for Single Family Zoning Designations" effective at the time of complete application (noted as "R-4 standards" herein). Single family residential development is permitted outright in the R-4 zone. Minimum Lot Size, Width and Depth — The minimum lot size permitted in Zone R-4 is 8,000 square feet except for small lot cluster development where R-8 standards apply. Minimum lot width is 70 feet for interior lots and 80 feet for corner lots; minimum lot depth is 80 feet except for small lot cluster development where R-8 standards apply. The proposal appears to comply with the lot size, width and depth requirements of the zone. Building Standards - R-4 zone allows a maximum building coverage of 35% of the lot area or 2,500 square feet, whichever is greater for lots over 5,000 square feet in size. The maximum impervious surface would be limited to 55%. Building height is restricted to 30 feet from existing grade. The proposal's compliance with the building standards would be verified at the time of building permit review for the new residences to be located on all lots. Setbacks -- Setbacks are the minimum required distance between the building footprint and the property line and any private access easement_ The required setbacks in the R- 4 zone are 30 feet for the front yard, 25 feet for the rear yard setback, interior side yards are required to have a 5 foot setbacks and side yard along a street requires a 20 foot setback. The setbacks for the new residences would be reviewed at the time of building permit. Residential Design and Open Space Standards: The Residential Design and Open Space Standards contained in RMC 4-2-115 would be applicable to any new residential structures. A handout indicating the applicable guidelines and standards is enclosed. Access/Parking: The applicant has indicated access t6 Proposed Lots would be via new public roadway extending from 156th Ave. SE. All lots would be access directly off the new public roadway with the exception of lots 6 — 9, which would be accessed via a shared access tract_ The application was not clear as to whether this access is to be a private road or a shared driveway. Below are the standards for both. A shared Private driveway may be permitted for access up to a maximum of four (4) lots. Up to three (3) of the lots may use the driveway as primary access for emergencies. The remainder of the lots must have physical frontage along a street for primary and emergency access and shall only be allowed vehicular access from the shared private h:\ced`,planning\current planning\preapps'113-001566.vanessa\pre013-001566, assemblage pp, 27 -lots, r- 4.doc 1561h Assemblage Preliminary Plat, PRE13-001566 Page 3 of 4 November 26, 2013 driveway. The private access easement shall be a minimum of sixteen feet (16') in width, with a maximum of twelve feet (12') paved driveway. Private streets are allowed for access to six (6) or fewer lots, provided at least two (2) of the six (6) lots abut a public right-of-way_ Private streets will only be permitted if a public street is not anticipated by the Department of Community and Economic Development to be necessary for existing or future traffic and/or pedestrian circulation through the subdivision or to serve adjacent property. Such private streets shall consist of a minimum of a twenty six foot (26') easement with a twelve -foot (12') pavement width. The private street shall provide a turnaround meeting the minimum requirements of this Chapter. No sidewalks are required for private streets; however, drainage improvements per City Code are required, as well as an approved pavement thickness (minimum of four inches (4") asphalt over six inches (6") crushed rock). The maximum grade for the private street shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%), except for within approved hillside subdivisions. The land area included in private street easements shall not be included in the required minimum lot area for purposes of subdivision. It should be noted that the proposed public road which results in a stub at the southern property boundary is not aligned with the existing right-of-way improvements located one parcel south of the development. Such public roadways shall align in order to make the connections in the future. Landscaping: Except for critical areas, all portions of a development area not covered by structures, required parking, access, circulation or service areas, must be landscaped with native, drought -resistant, vegetative cover. Development standards require that all pervious areas within the property boundaries be landscaped. The minimum on-site landscape width required along street frontages is 10 feet. In addition, if there is no landscape strip within the right-of-way such as for the private street, then two ornamental trees are required in the front yard setback area of each lot. These trees would need to be planted prior to the final inspection of the building permit. Please refer to landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) for further general and specific landscape requirements. A conceptual landscape plan would be required at the time of formal Short Plat application. Significant Tree Retention: It appears that several significant trees are located on the proposed project site. Since significant trees (greaterthan 6 -inch caliper) would likely be removed, 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 of significant trees, and indicate how proposed building footprints would be sited to accommodate preservation of significant trees that: would be retained. If staff determines that the trees cannot be retained, they may be replaced with minimum 2 -inch caliper trees at a ratio of six to one. Critical Areas. There are no mapped critical areas on the subject site. h:\ced\pianningrcurrent planning\preapps'113-001566_vanessa\pre013-001566, assemblage pp, 27 -lots, r- 4.doc 156th Assemblage Preliminary Plat, PRE:13-001566 Page 4 of 4 November 26, 2013 Environmental Review: Because this preliminary plat proposal includes more than 9 residential lots, Environmental (SEPA) Review would be required. Note: The fee for Environmental (SEPA) Review is $1,030.00 ($1,000.00 plus 3 % Technology Surcharge Fee). Permit Requirements: Preliminary Plat requests would be processed concurrently with the Environmental (SEPA) Review within an estimated time frame of 10 to 12 weeks, from the time that the application is accepted as complete. Note: The fee for a preliminary plat application is $4,120.00 ($4,000.00 plus 3% Technology Surcharge Fee). Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction fees, impact fees are required. Such fees apply to all projects and would be calculated at the time of building permit application and payable prior to building permit issuance. The fees for 2013 are as follows: • Transportation Impact Fee - $717.75 per new single-family house; • Park Impact Fee - $530.76 per new single-family house; • Fire Impact Fee - $479.28 per new single-family house; and • Renton Schools Impact Fee - $6,395.00 per new single-family house. A handout listing all of the City's Development related fees is attached for your review. Please note that all impact fees will increase in 2014. Note: When formal application materials are complete, the applicant must make an appointment with the project manager, Vanessa Dolbee, to have one copy of the application materials pre-screened at the 6th floor public counter prior to submitting the complete application package. Ms. Dolbee may be contacted at {425) 430-7314 or vdolbee@rentonwo.gov. Expiration: Upon approval, preliminary plats are valid for seven .years. h:\ced\planning current plan ning\preapps\13-001566.vanessalpre013-001566, assemblage pp, 27 -lots, r- 4.doc Zoning Map Non_ 1:4,794 UO 0 200 400F�tI GS_'D84_VUeb Mcrcator_Auxiliary_Sp�ere Clay Iff on. Finance & D' Division Ltrgvrlp City and County Labels City and County Boundary Olhe' Clty c' Kenton Parcels zon ng ZC Resaurre Con_ervatior .;'.' R-4 Resderilal 4 dr.'ec i . F. -E Rasid�rtia3 £ d�?ac Information Technology - GIS R entcn PAepSupporl@iRentonwa. gov 11!2512013 ...,.. F{69 -F ,RsSije!,tfal Nlu'I'-Fano j iiv-r Resldenti�l NJ a ti_ FaTiy Tratl;OIL l RV „ Residerlial4':uGFamlyt'rt nCO-, CV CC, rent=r t]uwnton;n Urhi Urban Herter-tludh-, UC-Iti2 +Jrban CFnte: riorih 7 COR Gommgrcial bffic�_A{eaidenr2 CA Cor,irt3eraa3 AriCria' CC Corn=rcial Office Th -s 'nap a user pe:,eralaq sia: c outp+r tram an rile,. ne! mapping sitz and Is fa- refereP;Eg CNMy Data Payers that epF�ar nn ,,5is map may ar may no; ce acc.rra:s, er uWu-wieQ reliable_ THIS NIAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAV.GATIUN February 25, 2014 Project No. 13117 CITY OF RENTON PROJECT NARRATIVE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE The project is a proposed single-family residential development of 8.80 acres, known as Tax Parcels 1423059122, 1423059023 and a portion of 1423059057 into 31 single- family residential lots. The property is located approximately at 14038 156th Avenue SE in the City of Renton, Washington. All existing improvements on Tax Parcels 1423059122 and 1423059023 will be demolished or removed during plat construction. Project Contact Information: Developer: PNW Holdings LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 (206) 588-1147 Engineer/Surveyor Land Use Permits Required: -Preliminary Plat Approval -Final Plat Approval -Environmental Review D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. 6207 th Avenue Kirkland, WA 98033 (425) 827-3063 Maher A. Joudi, P.E. -Grading Permit -Building Permit Zoning and Density: The property and adjacent properties are zoned R-4. FEB 2 7 2014 Current use of Site and existing improvements: The Parcels are currently developed with two single-family residences, a garage and associated gravel driveways. All existing improvements on Tax Parcels 1423059122 and 1423059023 shall be removed. All existing vegetation and trees shall be removed on Tax Parcels 1423059122 and 1423059023 with the exception of 35 trees along the project boundary. A lot line adjustment (LLA) is proposed between Tax Parcels 1423059057 and 1423059122 which will result in a portion (30,175 s.f.) of Parcel 1423059057 being removed from the proposed preliminary plat. Page 2 of 3 Special Site features: None Soil Type and Drainage Conditions: Per the King County Soil Survey, onsite soil consists of AgC, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam with slopes ranging from 6-15%. Site runoff travels to the southwest and discharges into existing conveyance systems. Proposed Use of Property: The Project is the subdivision of two existing parcels (post LLA) zoned R4 (8.8 ac. total) into 31 single-family residential lots, per the City of Renton's subdivision process. This will result in a net density of 4.45 dwelling units per acre. Lot square footages range from 8,050 to 12,566 s.f., with no lot sizes below the minimum 8,000 s.f. threshold set by the City. Access, Traffic, and Circulation: The Project will locate its access road as depicted on the attached plan. Access to the subdivision will be from 156th Avenue SE at two locations. Proposed Site Improvements: Half street improvements on 156th Avenue SE will provide 22 feet of pavement width from centerline of right of way to face of curb and will install curb, gutter, 5 foot sidewalk and 8 foot planter strip on the east side of 156th Avenue SE as per City requirements; this will require a 5.5 -foot right of way dedication. An existing water main in 156th will be tapped to serve the proposed development. Sanitary Sewer will be extended from the south from an existing sanitary sewer manhole at 156th Avenue SE and SE 144th Street. One detention/water quality pond is proposed within Tract "A" to serve the subdivision. The Project will meet the drainage requirements of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (Manual), as adopted by the City. The project will locate a job shack on the site as prescribed by the contractor during construction. Model homes will be built, however, the lots on which these homes will be built has not been determined at this time. Cut Materials: Approximately 4,495 c.y. of cut and 36,888 c.y. of fill is computed for the Project. The net fill volume is approximately 32,393 c.y. Tree Inventory: Thirty-five of the existing 303 significant trees on site will be retained onsite. There was an opportunity to retain an additional 15 trees located along the site's eastern boundary; however the project arborist has deemed them as either diseased or dangerous. These trees would eventually die and have the potential of being blown over during a storm if they are not removed during construction. Additional trees will be planted to meet the City's tree retention requirements. See tree retention spreadsheet. Palle 3 of 3 Estimated Construction Cost & Proposed Market Value: The approximate construction cost is typical of a subdivision of this size and nature totaling approximately $3,000,000.00. The estimated fair market value of the proposed project is approximately $6,975,000.00. February 20, 2014 Project No. 13117 CITY OF RENTON CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION REPORT PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE The following is a report of expected construction dates and times, as well as proposed hauling/transportation routes, ESC measures and traffic control plan. Proposed Construction Dates: Hours and Days of Operation: forth by City ordinance Clearing, Grading, Utilities and Roads September 2014 - February 2015 Home Construction: April 2015 —April 2016 Monday — Friday, Hours to meet guidelines set Proposed Hauling/Transportation Routes: South on 156th Avenue SE to SE 142nd Place, West on SE 142nd Place, SE 142nd Place turns into 154th Place SE to Hwy 169, SE Renton Maple Valley Road. ESC Measures: The Erosion and Sedimentation Control Design elements as listed in SECTION VIII (PART A) of Drainage Report shall be imposed to minimize dust, traffic and transportation impacts, erosion, mud, noise, and other noxious characteristics during Site construction. Special hours: No special hours proposed for construction at this time. Preliminary Traffic Control Plan: See attached FEB 2720'4 J t.-1 t'ii W City of Renton 1W TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET 1. Total number of trees over 6" in diameter' on project site: 1. 303 trees 2. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dead, diseased or dangerous2 57 trees Trees in proposed public streets 46 trees Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts 0 trees Trees in critical areas3 and buffers 0 trees Total number of excluded trees: 2. 103 trees 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1: 3. 200 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. 60 trees 5. List the number of 6" or larger trees that you are proposing5 to retain 4: 5. 35 treel�..r, VE D 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: 6. 25 trees FEB 2 7 7.14 (If line 6 is less than zero, stop here. No replacement trees are required). y,N 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 7. 300 inches 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: (Minimum 2" caliper trees required) 8. 2 inches per tree 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees5: (if remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 9. 150 trees Measured at chest height. 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:'20 1 311 11 3 1 17131DocumentslRcportslPrel inti naryUrceRetent ion Workshect t 3117.doe t 2/08 DENSITY WORKSHEET City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7239 1. Gross area of property: 1. 383,126 square feet 2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public streets`* Private access easements" Critical Areas* Total excluded area: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area: 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 79,419 square feet 0 square feet 0 square feet 2. 795419 square feet 3. 303,707 square feet 4. 6.97 acres 5. 31 units/lots 6. 4.45 = dwellin iii�sl2[c f >; . �; FEB 2 7 2014 *Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be n law 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. PA201311113117\3117ocumentslReportslPreliminaryldensityI3117.doc - l - 03108 DRS Project No. 13117 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RI q.....�D FL' -_P 2 7 �Oi4 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: OIC A 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 de- lays 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. © 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at 13ridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 7 of 22 City of Renton, Washington A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: The Enclave at Bridle Ridge 2. Name of applicant: PNW Holdings LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Justin Lagers 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 105 Mercer Island, Washington 98040 (206) 588-1147 Contact Person: Maher A. Joudi, P.E. D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. 620 7th Ave Kirkland, WA 98033 425 827-3063 4. Date checklist prepared: February 25, 2014 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction will start upon the receipt of all required building and construction permits. This is estimated to occur in the winter of 2014. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this Proposal? If yes, explain. Construct 31 single-family residences. o 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 2 of 22 City of Renton Washington 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this Proposal. Critical Areas Study: Sewall Wetland Consulting Arborist Report: GreenForest, Inc. Geotechnical Report: Earth Solutions NW, LLC Traffic Impact Analysis: Traffex Level One Downstream Analysis: D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your Proposal? If yes, explain. None to our knowledge. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your Proposal, if known. Boundary Line Adjustment City of Renton SEPA Determination City of Renton Preliminary Subdivision Approval City of Renton Grading Permit City of Renton Final Subdivision Approval City of Renton Building Permit City of Renton Other Customary Construction Related Permits City of Renton General Construction Stormwater Permit Department of Ecology 11. Give brief, complete description of your Proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your Proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.). Subdivide approximately 8.8 acres into 31 single-family lots with a proposed net density of 4.45 du per acre. Access to the subdivision will be from 156th Avenue SE at two locations. O 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA CherAlist Page 3 of 22 City of Renton Washington 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 Project is located in the SE 1/4 of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East. The Site is located at 14038 156th Avenue SE and 14004 '156th Avenue SE. O 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 4 of 22 City of Renton Washington B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS a. General descri tion of the site (circle one . Flat, Iling steep slopes, moon alnous o er. In general, the majority of the property has slopes that range between 4 to 8%. Generally, the land slopes from the northeast corner of the site to the southwest. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The northeast corner of the Site has slopes that range between 9 to 16%. 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 soils on the Site are mapped in the Soil Survey of King County, Washington, prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and has classified the Site as Alderwood Series, slopes 6-15% (AgC), gravelly sandy foam. Additionally, see attached Geotechnical Report dated d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None to our knowledge. O 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 5 of 22 City of Renton Washington e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The purpose of the site grading will be to construct the subdivision roads, utilities and homes. Approximately 4,495 c.y. of cut and 36,888 c.y. of fill is computed for the Project. The net volume is approximately 32,393 c.y. of import. Select fill material will be imported as well as the possibility of exporting unwanted soils. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. There could be a short-term increase in the potential for on-site erosion where soils are exposed during site preparation and construction; however, the Project will comply with all applicable erosion control measures, short term and long term. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 53.3% of the Site will be covered by impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. A temporary erosion control plan will be implemented at the appropriate time. Erosion control measures may include the following: hay bales, siltation fences, temporary siltation ponds, controlled surface grading, stabilized construction entrance, and other measures which may be used © 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 6 of 22 City of Renton Washington in accordance with requirements of the City of Renton. 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, gen- erally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Short-term emissions will be those associated with construction and site development activities. These will include dust and emissions from construction equipment. Long-term impacts will result from increased vehicle traffic. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your Proposal? If so, generally describe. Off-site sources of emissions or odors are those that are typical of residential neighborhoods. These will include automobile emissions from traffic on adjacent roadways and fireplace emissions from nearby homes. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. The Washington Clean Air Act requires the use of all known, available, and reasonable means of controlling air pollution, including dust. Construction impacts will not be significant and could be controlled by measures such as washing truck wheels before exiting the site and maintaining gravel construction entrances. In addition, dirt -driving surfaces will be watered during extended dry periods to control dust. 02014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 7 of 22 City of Renton Washington 3. WATER a. Surface. 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. None to our knowledge. ii. 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. Not to our knowledge. iii. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from sur- face water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None iv. Will the Proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No, there will be no surface water withdrawals or diversions. V. Does the Proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Not to our knowledge. © 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 8 of 22 City of Renton Washington vi. 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, a public sanitary sewer system will be installed to serve the residential units. There will be no discharge of waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general de- scription, purpose, and ap- proximate quantities if known. No groundwater will be withdrawn. Public water mains will be installed to serve the development. No water will be discharged to the groundwater. ii. 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 chemi- cals....; 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 is proposed to be discharged into the ground. The Site will be served by public sanitary sewers and a public water system. © 2014 D, R. STRONG consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 9 of 22 City of Renton Washington C. Water Runoff (including storm water). i. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quanti- ties, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. See attached Level One Downstream Analysis Report. ii. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The proposed stormwater system will be designed to minimize or eliminate entry of waste materials or pollutants to ground water resources and/or surface waters. Oils, grease, and other pollutants from the addition of paved areas could potentially enter the groundwater or downstream surface water runoff. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. A City approved storm drainage system will be designed and implemented in order to mitigate any adverse impacts from storm water runoff. Temporary and permanent drainage facilities will be used to control quality and quantity of surface runoff during construction and after development. 02014 Q. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEP01 Checklist Page 10 of 22 City of Renton Washington 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, vine maple, black cottonwood other: (bitter cherry, pacific dogwood) x evergreen tree: fir, cedar, spruce, pine, other: x shrubs x grass (orchard grass) x pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, other: water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other. x other types of vegetation (Deer fern, blackberry, holly, scotch broom) b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Vegetation within the development area will be removed at the time of development. Landscaping will be installed in accordance with the provisions of the City of Renton Zoning Code. C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known or documented within the project area. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. None proposed at this time. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. C 2094 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 11 of 22 City of Renton Washington birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: crows mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, small rodents, raccoon, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish other: None to our knowledge. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None to our knowledge. C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Western King County as well as the rest of Western Washington, is in the migration path of a wide variety of non -tropical songbirds, and waterfowl, including many species of geese. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any. None proposed. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and/or natural gas will serve as the primary energy source for residential heating and cooking within the development. Any wood stoves incorporated into the new residential units will comply with all local and State regulations. O 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 12 of 22 City of Renton Washington b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. 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 required measures of the Washington State Energy Code and the Uniform Building Code will be incorporated in the construction of the residential units. Energy conservation fixtures and materials are encouraged in all new construction. 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. There are no known on-site environmental health hazards known to exist today and none will be generated as a direct result of this proposal. i. Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services will be required. ii. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. Special measures are not anticipated. © 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 13 of 22 City of Renton Washington b. Noise What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? The primary source of off-site noise in the area originates from vehicular traffic present on adjacent streets. ii. What types and levels of noise would be created by or as- sociated 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. Short-term impacts will result from the use of construction equipment during site develop- ment and residential construction. Construction will occur during the daylight hours, and in compliance with all noise ordinances. Construction noise is generated by heavy equipment, hand tools and the transporting of construction materials and equipment. Long-term impacts will be those associated with the increased use of the property by homeowners. iii. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. Construction will be performed during normal daylight hours. Construction equipment will be equipped with noise mufflers. O 2014 Q. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 14 of 22 City of Renton Washington 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? There are two single-family homes, out buildings and associated gravel driveways on the site. The current use of adjacent properties is listed as follows: North: Single Family Residential South: Single Family Residential East: Single Family Residential West: Single Family Residential b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Not to our knowledge. C. Describe any structures on the site. There are two single-family homes, out buildings and associated gravel driveways on the Site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes, all existing structures on Parcel No. 742305-9023 (single-family home, driveway, outbuildings) will be demolished. Structures on Parcel No. 1423059057 will remain. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The current zoning classification is Residential, R-4. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Residential Single Family (RSF) g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? NIA O 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 15 of 22 City of Renton Washington h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Not to our knowledge. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 79 individuals will reside in the completed residential development (31 units x 2.3 persons per household = 77.3 individuals). j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The existing residence that is to be demolished is not occupied, so no individuals will be displaced. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. None at this time. Proposed measures to ensure the Proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any. The proposed development is compatible with the prescribed land use codes and designations for this site. Per the City Zoning Code, the development is consistent with the density requirements and land use of this property. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The completed project will provide 31 detached single-family residential homes. Homes will be priced with a market orientation to the middle to high-income level homebuyer. a0 2014 b. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 16 of 22 City of Renton Washington b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. One middle-income home will be eliminated. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. None. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The maximum building height will conform to City of Renton Standards. b. What view in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Views in the vicinity are not likely to be enhanced, extended or obstructed by development of this project. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any? The location of the buildings adheres to or exceeds the minimum setback requirements of the zoning district. The landscaping will be installed at the completion of building and paving construction. A Homeowners Association will maintain the landscaping and common elements. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the Proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light and glare will be produced from building lighting. Light will also be produced from vehicles using the site. The light and glare will occur © 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 17 of 22 City of Renton Washington primarily in the evening and before dawn. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light and glare from the project will not cause hazards or interfere with views. C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your Proposal? The primary off-site source of light and glare will be from vehicles traveling along the area roadways. Also, the adjacent residential uses and streetlights may create light and glare. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. Street lighting will be installed in a manner that directs the light downward. The proposed perimeter landscaping will create a partial visual buffer between the proposed units and the surrounding neighborhood areas. 92. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Maplewood Heights Park (Approximately 0.37 miles east from the Site). Maplewood Neighborhood Park (Approximately 0.3 miles west from the Site) Cedar River to Lake Sammamish Trail Site (Approximately 0.3 miles west from Site) © 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA checklist Page 18 of 22 City of Renton Washington 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. Park mitigation fees will be paid to the City of Renton. 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. None known. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. There are no known impacts. If an archeological site is found during the course of construction, the State Historic Preservation Officer will be notified. 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. Access to the proposed project will be from '156th Avenue SE at two locations. O 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 19 of 22 City of Renton Washington b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The nearest public transit stop is approximately 0.12 miles south of the Site at the intersection of 156th Ave SE and SE 944th Street. C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project will have garage and driveway parking spaces. Each home will have a minimum of two -parking spaces per lot. The project will eliminate those associated with the existing residence that is to be demolished. d. Will the Proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including drive- ways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). 156th Avenue SE will be improved per City of Renton road standards. A new public subdivision road will serve the development in a looped configuration and will provide a stub to the south. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. 297 average daily weekday trips; 23 AM Peak Hour trips; 31 PM Peak Hour trips; Peak hours will generally be 7 AM — 9 AM and 4 PM — 6 PM. © 2014 R. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 20 of 22 City of Renton Washington g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. None. 15, PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes, the proposal will result in an increase for those services typical of a residential development of this size and nature. The need for public services such as fire and police protection will be typical for a residential development of the size. School age children generated by this development will attend schools in Renton #403 School District. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. In addition to payment of annual property taxes by homeowners, the proponent will mitigate the direct impacts of the proposal through the City's traffic and school mitigation programs, if required. @ 2014 Q. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Plat SEPA Checklist Page 21 of 22 City of Renton Washington 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: lectricll natural a wate efus ervic ele hon anitary sewe sep Ic system, other. 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. Electricity: Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy Water: Water District 90 Sewer: City of Renton Telephone: Century Link C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand the lead agency is re- lying on them to make its decision. Signature: DATE SUBMITTED Mader A. Joudi, P.E. -z'-2(,�' ,2014. © 2014 D. R. STRONG Consulting Engineers Inc. The Enclave at Bridle Ridge Preliminary Piat SEPA Checklist Page 22 of 22 City of Renton Washington PLAT NAME RESERVATION CERTIFICATE TO: JUSTIN LAGERS 9675 SE 36TH ST, SUITE 105 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 PL.AF RESERVATION EFFECTIVE DATE: February7, 2014 r The plat name, ENCLAVE AT BRIDLE RIDGE THE has been reserved for future use by PNW HOLDING LLO. 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 February 7, 2015, 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. r1"trltsl,j� w r� '.ink Cauntt - _NL 'ff�rrj4� Deputy Auditor Leroy Chadwid FEB 2 7 2 ?1 f 0, • M , , r F nerican Title Insurance Company ,''* 81_ .,_ewart St, Ste 800 Firstamerican Seattle, WA 98101 Phi -(206)615-3206 Fax - (425)551-4107 Title Team Four fax No. (866) 859-0429 Kristi K Mathis Title Officer (206)615-3206 kkmathisOFrstam.com Michelle Treherne Title Officer (425)635-2100 rntreheme@flrstam.com Note: Please send King County Recordings to 818 Stewart Street #800, Seattle, WA 98101 To: PNW Holdings LLC File No.: 4220-2206449 9675 SE 36th ST STE 105 Your Ref No.: Mercer Island, WA 98040 Attn: Justin Lagers Re: Property Address: 14004 156th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98059 FEB 2 7 2014 Fii&Amencan Title Form No. 1068-2 mitment No,: 4220-2205444 ALTA Plain Language Commitment Page 2 of 10 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued by FIRSTAMERICAN TITLEINSURANCE COMPANY Agreement to Issue Policy We agree to issue a policy to you according to the terms of this Commitment. When we show the policy amount and your name as the proposed insured in Schedule A, this Commitment becomes effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A. If the Requirements shown in this Commitment have not been met within six months after the Commitment Date, our obligation under this Commitment will end. Also, our obligation under this Commitment will end when the Policy is issued and then our obligation to you will be under the Policy. Our obligation under this Commitment is limited by the following: The Provisions in Schedule A. The Requirements in Schedule B -I. The General Exceptions and Exceptions in Schedule B -II. The Conditions. This Commitment is not valid without Schedule A and Section I and II of Schedule B. First American Title Insurance Company i-"� P4—�� Kristi Mathis, Title Officer First American TWe Form No. 1068-2 imitment No.: 4220-2206449 ALTA Plain Language Commitment Page 3 of 10 SCHEDULE A 1. Commitment Date: January 31, 2014 at 7:30 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: AMOUNT PREMIUM TAX Homeowner's Rate Standard Owner's Policy $ To Follow $ To Follow $ To Follow Proposed Insured: PNW Holdings LLC, a Washington limited liability company Simultaneous Issue Rate ALTA Extended Loan Policy $ To Fallow $ To Follow $ To Follow Proposed Insured: To Follow 3. (A) The estate or interest in the land described in this Commitment is: Fee Simple (B) Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: Sally Lou Nipert, as her sole and separate property 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: Real property in the County of King, State of Washington, described as follows: The land referred to in this report is described in Exhibit A attached hereto. FirstAmericall Trite Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment SCHEDULE B SECTION I REQUIREMENTS imitment No.: 4220-2206449 Page 4 of 10 The following requirements must be met: (A) Pay the agreed amounts for the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured. (B) Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy. (C) Documents satisfactory to us creating the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured must be signed, delivered and recorded: (D) You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make additional requirements or exceptions. (E) Releases(s) or Reconveyance(s) of Item(s): (F) Other: (G) You must give us the following information: 1. Any off record leases, surveys, etc. 2. Statement(s) of Identity, all parties. 3. Other: SCHEDULE B SECTION II GENERAL EXCEPTIONS PART ONE: A. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. B. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. C. Easements, claims of easement or encumbrances which are not shown by the public records. D. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. E. (A) Unpatented mining claims; (B) Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (C) Water rights, claims or title to water; whether or not the matters excepted under (A), (B) or (C) are shown by the public records; (D) Indian Tribal Codes or Regulations, Indian Treaty or Aboriginal Rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. F. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or materials or medical assistance heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, construction, tap or reimbursement charges/costs for sewer, water, garbage or electricity. H. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof, but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the escrow or interest or mortgage(s) thereon covered by this Commitment. RtstAmerrcan Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language commitment SCHEDULE SECTION II EXCEPTIONS PART TWO: timitment No,: 4220-2206449 Page 5 of 10 Any policy we issue will have the following exceptions unless they are taken care of to our satisfaction. The printed exceptions and exclusions from the coverage of the policy or policies are available from the office which issued this Commitment. Copies of the policy forms should be read. 1. Lien of the Real Estate Excise Sales Tax and Surcharge upon any sale of said premises, if unpaid. As of the date herein, the excise tax rate for the City of Renton is at 1.78%. Levy/Area Code: 2143 General Taxes for the year 2014, which cannot be paid until the 15th day of February of said year. Tax Account No.: 142305-9057-05 1st Half Amount: $ 626.30 Assessed Land Value: $ 62,000.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $ 79,700.00 2nd Half Amount: $ 626.29 Assessed Land Value: $ 62,000.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $ 79,700.00 Note: Taxes and charges for 2013 were paid in full in the amount of $1,255.68. 3. The taxes for the current year reflect an exemption as allowed under RCW 84.36 for senior citizens. Any curtailment of the exemption may result in an additional amount being due for the current year and for any re -assessment of land and improvement values. 4. Taxes which may be assessed and extended on any subsequent roll for the tax year 2014, with respect to new improvements and the first occupancy which may be included on the regular assessment roll and which are an accruing lien not yet due or payable. 5. Terms, conditions, provisions and stipulations of the Operating Agreement of PNW Holdings LLC. According to said Agreement dated May 01, 2012, Robert Gladstein, Michael Gladstein and Joel Mezistrano is/are the manager(s) thereof. Any amendments to said Agreement must be submitted. Any conveyance or encumbrance of the property must be executed by said manager(s) as provided for therein, subject to said amendments, if any. 6. Potential lien rights as a result of labor and/or materials used, or to be used, for improvements to the premises. The Company reserves the right to make additional requirements prior to insuring. An indemnity agreement to be completed by PNW Holdings LLC, is being sent to Closing Escorw and must be submitted to us prior to closing for our review and approval. All other matters regarding extended coverage have been cleared for mortgagee's policy. Items A through E and G and H on Exhibit B herein will be omitted in said extended coverage mortgagee's policy. The coverage contemplated by this paragraph will not be afforded in any forthcoming owner's standard coverage policy to be issued. First American Trtle Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment imitment No.: 4220-2206449 Page 6 of 10 The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "City of Renton, Washington Ordinance No. 5465" Recorded: November 05, 2009 Recording No.: 20091105000541 Fast American Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment INFORMATIONAL NOTES mitment No.: 4220-2206449 Page 7 of 10 A. Potential charges, for the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charge, as authorized under RCW 35.58 and King County Code 28.84.050. Said charges could apply for any property that connected to the King County Sewer Service area on or after February 1, 1990. Note: Properties located in Snohomish County may be subject to the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charges. Effective January 1, 1997, and pursuant to amendment of Washington State Statutes relating to standardization of recorded documents, certain format and content requirements must be met (refer to RCW 65.04.045). Failure to comply may result in rejection of the document by the recorder or additional fees being charged, subject to the Auditor's discretion. C. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upon it. D. The description can be abbreviated as suggested below if necessary to meet standardization requirements. The full text of the description must appear in the document(s) to be insured. PTN SEC 14 TWP 23N RGE 5E NW QTR SW QTR SE QTR, KING COUNTY APN: 142305-9057-05 E. All matters regarding extended coverage have been cleared for mortgagee's policy. The coverage contemplated by this paragraph will not be afforded in any forthcoming owner's standard coverage policy to be issued. The following deeds affecting the property herein described have been recorded within 36 months of the effective date of this commitment: NONE Property Address: 14004 156th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98059 NOTE: The forthcoming Mortgagee's Policy will be the ALTA 2006 Policy unless otherwise noted on Schedule A herein. NOTE: We find no judgments or Federal tax liens against the vestee herein, unless otherwise shown as a numbered exception alcove. NOTE: A FEE WILL BE CHARGED UPON THE CANCELLATION OF THIS COMMITMENT PURSUANT TO WASHINGTON STATE INSURANCE CODE AND THE FILED RATE SCHEDULE OF THIS COMPANY. FirStAmencan Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment CONDITIONS mitment No.: 4220-2206449 Page 8 of 10 1. DEFINITIONS (a)"Mortgage" means mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument. (b)"Public Records" means title records that give constructive notice of matters affecting the title according to the state law where the land is located. 2. LATER DEFECTS The Exceptions in Schedule B - Section II may be amended to show any defects, liens or encumbrances that appear for the first time in the public records or are created or attached between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Requirements (a) and (c) of Schedule B - Section I are met. We shall have no liability to you because of this amendment. 3. EXISTING DEFECTS If any defects, liens or encumbrances existing at Commitment Date are not shown in Schedule B, we may amend Schedule B to show them. If we do amend Schedule B to show these defects, liens or encumbrances, we shall be liable to you according to Paragraph 4 below unless you knew of this information and did not tell us about it in writing. 4. LIMITATION OF OUR LIABILITY Our only obligation is to issue to you the Policy referred to in this Commitment, when you have met its Requirements. If we have any liability to you for any loss you incur because of an error in this Commitment, our liability will be limited to your actual loss caused by your relying on this Commitment when you acted in good faith to: comply with the Requirements shown in Schedule B - SeccUon I or eliminate with our written consent any Exceptions shown in Schedule B - Section II. We shall not be liable for more than the Policy Amount shown in Schedule A of this Commitment and our liability is subject to the terms of the Policy form to be issued to you. 5. CLAIMS MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT Any claim, whether or not based on negligence, which you may have against us concerning the title to the land must be based on this commitment and is subject to its terms. cc: PNW HOLDINGS LLC. cc: Sally Lou Nipert First American Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment Cf ~ FirstAmerican ' FirstAmerican Ttle mitment No.: 4220-2206449 Page 9 of 10 First American Title Insurance Company 818 Stewart St, Ste 800 Seattle, WA 98101 Phn - (206)615-3205 Fax - (925)551-4107 Privacy Information We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Information In order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information - particularly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how we will utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with our subsidiaries we have adopted this Privacy Policy to govern the use and handling of your personal information. Applicability This Privacy Policy governs our use of the information that you provide to us. It does not govern the manner in which we may use information we have obtained from any other source, such as information obtained from a public record or from another person or entity. First American has also adopted broader guidelines that govern our use of personal information regardless of its source. First American calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values. Types of Information Depending upon which of our services you are utilizing, the types of nonpublic personal information that we may collect include: • Information we receive from you on applications, forms and In other communicatlons to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or any other means; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliated companies, or others; and • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Use of information We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any nonaffiliated party. Therefore, we will not release your information to nonaffiliated parties except: (1) as necessary for us to provide the product or service you have requested of us; or (2) as permitted by law. We may, however, store such information indefinitely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased. Such information may be used for any internal purpose, such as quality contral efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of nonpublic personal infarmation listed above to one or more of our affiliated companies. Such affiliated companies include financial service providers, such as title insurers, property and casualty insurers, and trust and investment advisory companies, or companies Involved in real estate services, such as appraisal eompanles, home warranty companies and escrow companies. Furthermore, we may also provide all the information we collect, as described above, to companies that perform marketing services on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies or to other financial institutions with whom we or our affiliated companies have pint marketing agreements. Former Customers Even if you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to apply to you. Confidentiality and Security We will use our hest efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those individuals and entities who need to know that information to provide products or services to you. We will use our hest efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your Information will be handled responsibly and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and First American's Fair Information Values. We currently maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. Information Obtained Through Our Web site First American Financial Corporation is sensitive to privacy issues on the Internet We believe it is important you know how we treat the information about you we receive on the Internet. In general, you can visit First American or its affiliates' Web sites on the World Wide Web without telling us who you are or revealing any information about yourself. Our Web servers collect the domain names, not the a-rnail addresses, or visitors. This Information Is aggregated to measure the number of visits, average time spent on the site, pages viewed and similar information. First American uses this information to measure the use of our site and to develop ideas to improve the content of our site. There are times, however, when we may need information from you, such as your name and email address. When information is needed, we will use our best efforts to let you know at the time of collection how we will use the personal information. Usually, the personal information we collect is used only try us to respond to your inquiry, process an order or allow you to access specific account/profile Information. If you choose to share any personal information wrth us, we will only use it in accordance with the policies outImed above. Business Relationships First American Financial Corporation's site and its affiliates' sites may contain links to other Web sites. While we try to link only to sites that share our high standards and respect for privacy, we are not responsible for the content or the privacy practices employed by other sites. Cookies Some of First American's Web sites may make use of "cookie' technology to measure site activity and to customize information to your personal tastes. A cookie is an element of data that a Web site can send to your browser, which may then store the cookie on your hard drive. FirstAm.com uses stored cookies. The goal of this technology is to better serve you when visiting our site, save you time when you are here and to provide you with a more meaningful and productive Web site experience. Fair Information Values Fairness We consider consumer expectations about their privacy in all our businesses. We only offer products and services that assure a favorable balance between consumer benefits and consumer privacy. Public Record We believe that an open public record creates significant value for sodety, enhances consumer choice and creates consumer opportunity. We actively support an open public record and emphasize its importance and contribution to our economy. Use We believe we should behave responsibly when we use information about a consumer in our business. We will obey the laws governing the collection, use and dissemination of data. Accuracy We will take reasonable steps to help assure the accuracy of the data we collect, use and disseminate. Where possible, we will take reasonable steps to correct inaccurate information. When, as with the public record, we cannot correct inaccurate information, we will take all reasonable steps to assist consumers in identifying the source of the erroneous data so that the consumer can secure the required corrections. Education We endeavor to educate the users of our products and services, our employees and others in our industry about the importance of consumer privacy. We will instruct our employees on our fair information values and an the responsible collection and use of data. We will encourage others in our Industry to coiled and use information in a responsible manner. Security We will maintain appropriate facilities and systems to protect against unauthorized access to and corruption of the data we maintain. Form 50 -PRIVACY (8/1/09) Page 1 of 1 Privacy Information (2001-2010 First American Financial Corporation) First American rtle Form No. 1068-2 imitment No.: 4220-2206449 ALTA Plain Language Commitment Page 10 of 10 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Exhibit "A" Vested Owner: Sally Lou Nipert, as her sole and separate property Real property in the County of King, State of Washington, described as follows: THE WEST 440 FEET OF THE NORTH 100 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14 TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Tax Parcel Number: 142305-9057-05 Situs Address: 14004 156th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98059 First Afnerican Title J_ hl, L'C-U IM 9 p 6i: Oh CO L COo 11L fV M cc ZET 10 cff aT CA 'T CC Lo F- u ch gm co uj fl) 0 LD -6000, 0 000e i'3 li ul 0 19 zr-- [T PECEIVED J_ hl, L'C-U IM 9 p 6i: Oh CO L COo 11L fV M r-4 10 cff aT CA 'T CC Lo F- J_ hl, L'C-U IM 9 p 6i: CO L COo fV M r-4 Lo co uj Ei LD -6000, 0 000e 0 19 zr-- [T PECEIVED FEe 2 7 Mf4 'o CITY P1 lrj� Ilk, U7 0 N EIAWH1994 UU, tf `W -CL -R '.F4 .... ... . .. . -------------- 0 0 U Oct 7-55 (nont-xble z��i2]�� ►`-V 9430 Sep &�•p J Qeorge ouimet and CEithleen M. Outlmet, htw{f to John C. NJ-pest and Sally Lou Njpert, h;vf t�h -9d, SAlly Lou NIpert being the daughtero:f fp ' as The W 440 ftof theN 1.00 ft of t1wTi4i of tiie swk of the S§i of sec 14,2345 ewT., exc the w GO ft throf. m n ok MI to j gde D Pr 129-56 Apr3-56 L & A (,Non tdbi 217535 George Ouimet andKathleen M Ouimet., hIW, to John C Nipert and Sally Atou NipSert, fit_ Cy andW R 30 ftorW 60 rtof N 100 ftoftheNwi,, of thft84 b` t LP of sec 14-23-5 ewm inKCW XCNOK M1 to -- F. UySTL 5121 i 5 K Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 South Grady 'Way Renton, WA 98057 �IIhI��WpNl��NI�I�� 20091105000541 CITY OF RENTON ORD 76.00 PACE -001 OF 015 11/05/2009 10:21 KING COUNTY, UA 20091105000541.001 Ple&iic nrint nr type information WASHINGTON STATE RECORDER'S Cover Sheet (RCw 65.04) Document Title(s) (or transactions contained thcrcin): (all areas applicable to your document must be filled in) 1. Ordinance #5465 2. 3. 4. Reference Numbers) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference Ws on page _ of document ~Grantor(s) (Last name first name, initials) I . City of Renton , 2. , Additional names on page of document. Grantees) (Last name first, then first name and initials) Z. 2. , Additional names on page _ of document. Legal description (abbreviated: i.e. lot block, plat or section, township, range) These portions of Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, & 24, all in Township 23 north, Range 5 East, W.M., and Sections 18 & 19, both in Township 23 North, Range 6 East, W.M., all in King County, Washington, more particularly described as follows... Additional legal is on page of document. _L Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Account Number ❑ Assessor Tax 4 not yet assigned 142305911901 and others The Auditor/Recorder will rely on the information provided on the form. The staff will not read the document to verify the accuracy or completeness of the indexing information provided herein. I am requesting an emergency nonstandard recording for an additional fee as provided in K(: W 36.18.010. I understand that the recording processing requirements may cover up or otherwise obscure some pare of the text on the original document. Signature of Requesting Party 20091105000541.002 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5455 AN ORDINANCE OF TETE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE FOR PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO AND/OR 13ENEFMING FROM THE CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR PHASE 11 AND ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF THE CHARGE UPON CONNECTION TO THE FACILITIES. TI It: CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAFN AS FOLL()WS: SECTION I. '1I►cre is hereby created a Sanitary Sewer Service Special Assessment District for the area served by the Central Plateau Interceptor Phase II project in the northeast quadrant of the City cif Renton and within King County, which area is more particula►rl) described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. A map of the service area is attached as Exhibit "13"I"lic rcc►►rding of this document is to provide notification of potential connection and intirest charges ill►ile this connection charge may be paid at any time, the City does not require paymew unlit such time as the parcel is connected to and, thus, benefiting from the sewer facilities. The property may be sold or in any other way change hands without triggering the requirement, by the City, of payment of the charges associated with this district. SECTION 11. Persons connecting to the sanitary sewer facilities in this Special Assessment District, and which properties have not been charged or assessed with all costs of the Central Plateau Interceptor Phase 11 as detailed in this ordinance, shall pay, in addition to the payment of the connection permit fee and in addition to the system development charge, the following additional fees: CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Renton, Washington, certify that this is a true and Oorrect copy of I C�rd,han« Ale. , J& Subscribed and sealed this l�p�Aim asf , 200 City Clerk — 20091105000541.003 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 A. Per Unit Area Charge. New connections of residential dwelling units or equivalents shall pay a fee of $351.95 per dwelling unit. Those properties included within this Special Assessment District and which may be assessed a charge thereunder are included within the boundary legally described in Exhibit "A" and which boundary is shown on the map attached as Exhibit "B". B. per Unit Frontage Charge. There is hereby created a sub -district within the Central Plateau Interceptor Phase Ii Special Assessment District consisting of properties fronting on the sewer, New connections of residential units or equivalents shall pay a fee of $5.810.34 per dwelling unit. The properties to be assessed for the per unit frontage charge are described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. A map identifying the properties within the sub -district is attached as Exhibit "B". The properties located within this sub- district are subject to both charges (Area and Frontage). SECTION III. In addition to the aforestated charges, there shall be a charge of 5.30% per annuity added to the Special Assessment District charge. The interest charge shall accrue for no more than ten (10) years from the date this ordinance becomes effective. Interest charges will be simple interest and not compound interest. SECTION IV. This ordinance is effective upon its passage, approval and thirty (30) days alter publication. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this _6_th day of JulY > 2009. 'j. L-IJQ.-4� Bonnie 1, Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 6th day of July , 2009. Denis Law, Mayor Approved as to form: 1,awrence J. Warren, City Attomey Date of Publication: 7/10/2009 (summary) OR1).1553 :512 1/09: scr 20091105000541.004 200919 05000541.005 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 EXHIBIT A CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA ASSESSMENT BOUNDARY LEGAL DESCRIPTION; Those portions of Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23 & 24, all in Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., and Sections 18 and 19, both in Township 23 North, Range 6 East, W. M., all in King County, Washington, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the southerly right of way margin of SE 12811i St (NE 4th Street) and the easterly line of the existing City of Renton Limits as annexed under Ordinance No. 5064, in the Northwest quarter of said Section 14; Thence easterly along said southerly right of way margin, crossing 155t1i Ave SE and 156`1i Ave SE, to the east line of the Northwest quarter of said Section 14; Thence continuing easterly along the courses of said southerly right of way margin, crossing 160"i Ave E and the west half of 164`1' Ave SE, to the section line common to said Sections 13 and 14; Thence continuing easterly along the courses of said southerly right of way, grossing the cast half of 164t1i Ave SE and 169'h Ave SE, to an intersection with the east line of the West quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 13; Thence southerly along said east line and the Urban Growth Boundary (UBG) line, to an intersection with the north line of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 13; Thence easterly along said north line and said UBG line, to the west line of the East quarter of said subdivision; Thence southerly along said west line and said UBG line, to the Northwest corner of Lot 1 of King County Short Plat S90S0040, as recorded in Book 101 of Surveys, Page 236, records of King County, Washington; Thence easterly along the North line of said Lot I and said UGB line, to the Northeast corner of said Lot 1, said Northeast corner also being on the west line of the Northeast quarter of said Section 1.3; Thence easterly along said UGB, crossing 172"d Ave SE, to the intersection of the easterly right of way margin of 172"d Ave SE and the southerly right of way margin of SE 132 d St.; EXHIBIT A — CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR BAD, AREA ASSESSMENT PAGE 1 of 6 20091105000541.006 ORDINANCE N0. 5465 Thence continuing easterly along the southerly right of way margin of SE 132"" St and said U613 line, crossing 173`' Ave SE, 175th Ave SE, 178th Ave SE and the west half of 1801" Ave SE, to an intersection with the east line of said subdivision, said east line also being the west line of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 18; Thence continuing easterly along said southerly right of way margin of SE 132¢ St and said IJGB line, crossing the east half of 1801h Ave SE, 181" Ave SE and 182"j Ave SE, to an intersection with the westerly right of way margin of 182"' Ave SE; "Thence southerly along said westerly right of way margin of 182"" Ave SE and said UGB line, to an intersection with the westerly extension of the northerly right of way margin of SE 134"i St; Thence easterly along said westerly extension and the northerly right of way margin of SE 130' St and said UGB line, crossing 182nd Ave SE, to an intersection with the westerly right of way margin of 184`' Ave SL in the Northwest quarter of said Section 18; Thence southerly along said westerly right of Nvay mawin of 184`3' Ave SE and its southerly extension and leaving said 1JGB line, crossing SE 134` St, SE 135" St, SE 136"' St and S£ 140"' St, to an intersection with the north line of Tract 23, Renton Suburban Tracts Division No. 4, recorded in Volume 61 of flats, pages 74-76, said records, in Government Lot 4 of said Section 18; Thence easterly and southerly along said north line and the east line of said Tract, to an intersection with the northeast corner of Renton -Suburban Tracts Division No. 8, recorded in Volume fig of flats, pages 74-76, said records, in said Government Lot 4 of said Section 19, said northeast corner also being on said UGB line; Thence southerly along the east line of said Plat and said UGB line, to the Southeast corner of said flat at the southeast corner of Government Lot 1 in said Section 19; Thence westerly along the courses of the south boundary of said plat and said UGB line, to an intersection with the south line of Renton- Suburban Tracts Div. No. 6, recorded in Volume 66 nt Plats, pages 33-35, said records, in the Northeast quarter of said Section 24; Thence westerly along the south line of said Plat and said UGB line, to the most Southwest corner of said Plat, said Southwest corner also being the Northeast corner of Government Lot 5 of said Section 24; Thence southerly along the east line of said Government Lot 5 and said UGB line, to the northeast corner of Lot 31 of Renton -Suburban Tracts Div. No.7, recorded in Volume 69 of Plats, pages 39-41, said records; Thence southwesterly and northwesterly along the south boundary of said plat and said UGB line:, to an intersection with the east line of Government Lot 10 of said Section 24, said east line also being the east line of Tract A of Briarwood South No. 6, recorded in Volume 97 of Plats, pages 68 and 69, said records; EXHIBIT A -CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAO, AREA ASSESSMENT PAGE 2 OF 6 20091105004541.007 i ORDINANCE NO. 5465 Thence northerly along said cast line of said Government Lot 10 and said Tract A and said UGB line, to the Northeast corner of said Tract A; Thence westerly along the courses of the north boundary of said Tract A, and said UGB line, to the Northwest corner of said Tract A, said Northwest corner also being a point on the east line of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23; Thence northerly along said east line and said UGB line, to the northeast corner of Tract C of Skyfire Ridge Div. No. 1, recorded in Volume 14I of Plats, pages 93-99, said records; Thence westerly along the coarses of the north boundary of said Tract C and said UGB line, to the Northwest corner of said Tract C, said Northwest corner also being a point on the east line of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23; Thence northerly along said east fine and said UGB line, to the Northeast corner of said subdivision; Thence westerly along the north line of said subdivision and said UGB line, to the Northwest corner of said subdivision, said Northwest corner also being the Northeast corner of Government Lot 7 of said Section 23; Thence continuing westerly along the north line of said Government Lot 7, to the Northwest corner thereof, said Northwest corner also being the Southwest corner of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 23; Thence northerly along the west line of said subdivision, to the Southeast corner of Lot 9, Briar Hills No. 3, recorded in Volume 107 of Plats, page 36, said records, said west lint also being the east line of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 23; Thence westerly along the south line of said Plat, to the Southwest corner thereof, Thence northerly along the west line of said Plat, to an intersection with the Southeast corner of Briar Ridge, recorded in Volume 113 of Plats, pages 60 and 61, said records; Thence westerly along the south Iine of said Plat, to the Southwest corner thereof, in Government Lot I of said Section 22, said Southwest corner also being a point on the west line of the East lialf of the East half of said Government Lot 1; Thence southerly along said east line, to the northerly bank of the Cedar River; Thence westerly along said northerly bank, to an intersection with the east line of Tract A, Cedar River Bluff, recorded in Volume 172 of Plats, pages 53-56, said records; Thence northerly along said east line, to the Northeast corner of said Tract A; EXHIBIT A - CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA ASSESSMENT PAGE 3 OF 6 20091105000541.008 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 "thence westerly along the north line of said Tract A, to an intersection with the east line of Maplewood Heights, recorded in Volume 78 of Plats, pages 1-4, said records; Thence southerly along said east line, to the Southeast corner thereof, Thence westerly along the south line of said plat, to the Southwest corner thereof, said corner also being a point on the east line of Government Lot 6 of Section 22; Thence South 01 °08'21" West, along said cast line, to a point 641.73 feet southerly of the Northeast corner of said Government Lot 6; Flicnce North 55°51'39" West, a distance of 391.81 feet; Thence North 26°45'23" West, a distance of 494.29 feet, to a point on the north line of said Government Lot 6, said point also being on the south line of the Southwest quarter of Section 15; Thence westerly along said south line, and along the existing City Limits of Renton, as annexed under Ordinance No. 3945, to the Southeast corner of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest cluarter of the Southwest quarter of said Section 15; Thcnce northerly along the east line of said subdivision and said City Limits, to the Northwest corner of Lot 21, Block 1 of said Maplewood Heights in said Southwest quarter of Section 15; Thence northeasterly along the north line of said Block 1 of said Plat, to an intersection with the west line of Lot 10, East Crest, recorded in Volume 87 o1' Plats, page 49, said records, in said SOL1111tvest quarter; Thence northerly along said west line, to the Northwest corner thereof, said Northwest corner also being a point on the south line of Tract A, Hideaway Home Sites, recorded in Volume 81 of Plats. pages 88 and 89, said records; Thence westerly along the south line of said Tract A, to the Southwest corner thereof; 'thence northerly along the west line of said Tract A and the northerly extension of said west line, and along the existing City Limits of Renton, as annexed under Ordinance No. 3143, to the south line of the Northwest quarter of Section 22; Thence westerly along said south line and along said existing City Limits and along the south line of Lot 14, Goe's Place, recorded in Volume 85 of Plats, pages 12 and 13, said records, to the Southwest corner of said Lot 14; Thence northerly along the west line of said Lot 14, to the Northwest corner thereof; Thence easterly along the north line of said Lot 14, to the Northeast corner thereof, E=XHIBIT A-- CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA ASSESSMENT PAGE 4 OF 6 20091105000541.009 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 Thence northerly along the east line of Lot 13 of said Plat and its northerly extension, to an intersection with the westerly extension of the north line of the South half of the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 15; Thence easterly along said westerly extension and said north line and along the existing City limits of Renton, as annexed under Ordinance No. 5074, crossing Duvall Ave NE, to its intersection with the west line of the Northwest quarter of said Section 15; Thence northerly along said west line crossing NE 2"d St, to the most westerly southwest corner of Alder Crossing, recorded in Volume 251 of Plats, pages 37 - 42, said records; Thence westerly along the south line of said plat, to the southeast corner thereof; Thence northerly along the east line of said Plat, to its intersection with the north line of the south half of the north half of the north half of the north half of said Section 15; Thence easterly along said north line of said subdivision crossing Hoquiam Ave NE and Jericho Ave NE: to the easterly right of way margin thereof; Thence southerly along said westerly right of way margin, to the Southwest corner of Tract 2, Black Loam Five Acre Tracts, recorded in Volume 12 of Plats, page 101, said records; Thence continuing easterly along said existing City Limits and the south line of said Tract 2, to the east line of the west half of said Tract 2; Thence northerly along said east line, to the south line of the north 150 feet thereof; Thence easterly along said south line, to the east line of the of the West half of the West half of the East half of said Tract 2; "Thence northerly along said east line, a distance of 8 feet; Thence easterly along the south line of the north 142 fee thereof, to the east line of the west half of the east half of said Tract 2; Thence southerly along said east line, to the south line of the Northeast quarter of said East half of said Tract 2; Thence easterly along said south line, to the westerly right of way margin of Lyons Ave NE; Thence continuing easterly along the easterly extension of said south line, crossing Lyons Ave NE, to the easterly right of way margin thereof; Thence northerly along said easterly right of way margin, to the southerly right of way margin of NE 4`h St. EXHIBIT A — CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA AssESSMENT PAGE 5 OF 6 20091105000541.010 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 Thence easterly along said southerly right of way margin, to the intersection with the easterly fine of the existing City of Renton Limits as annexed under Ordinance No. 5064, in the Northwest quarter of said Section 14 and the point of beginning. EXHIBIT A — CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA AssESSMENT PAGE 6 OF 6 20091105000541.011 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 EXHIBIT A CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR FRONTAGE ASSESSMENT PROPERTIES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot I and Tract B, Carolwood, recorded in Volume I 1 I of Plats, pages 99-100, records of King County, Washington; TO GETFIER WITH Lot 11, Carolwood No. 2, recorded in Volume 114, page 74, said records; and TO{ iETI lER WITH that portion of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of -Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington; and TOGETHER WITH the West 150 feet of the East 180 feet of the North 165 feet of the South hall' of said Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 14; and TOGETHER WITH the West 160 feet of the east 190 feet of the South 132 feet of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 14; and TOGETHER WITH the East 165 feet of the West 330 feet of said subdivision, EXCEPT the North 264 feet thereof, and EXCEPT the South 132 feet thereof; TOGETHER WITH the South 20 feet of the North 284 feet of said subdivision, EXCEPT the West 330 feet thereof, and TOGETHER WITH the North 120 feet of the South 252 feet of the East half of said subdivision, EXCEPT the West 150 feet thereof; and TOGETHER WITH the East half of said subdivision, EXCEPT the North 284 feet thereof and EXCEPT the South 252 feet thereof; and TOGETHER WI'ri I the East 230 feet of the South 132 feet of the North 264 feet of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 14; and TOGETHER WITH the West 165 feet of the East 195 feet of the North 132 feet of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 14; and TOGETHER WITH Lot 2 of King County Short Plat No. 481066, as recorded under Ding County Recording No. S 109100503, located in the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 14; LESS Roads. Exhibit A — Central Plateau Interceptor SAD, Frontage - Area A Page 1 of 1 20091105000541.012 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 EXHIBIT A CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR FRONTAGE ASSESSMENT PROPERTIES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA "B" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 1, 2, 3 and the 20 feet wide undivided interest parcel lying between said Lot 1 and Lot 2, of King County Short Plat No. 576015, recorded under King County Recording No. 7905170580, records of King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 and 2, King County Short Plat No. 677116, recorded under King County Recording No. 7905170582; and TOCiETHER WITH Tract A and Tract B of King County Short Plat No. 675021, recorded under King County Recording No. 7602040384; and TOGETHER WITH Tracts 4, 5, 6 and the West 150 feet of the North 80 feet of Tract 7, all in Block 3, Cedar Park Five Acre Tracts, recorded in Volume 15 (if Plats, page 91, records of King County, Washington. All situate in the Southeast quarter of Section 14 and the North half of Section 23, both in Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington, Exhibit A — Central Plateau Interceptor SAD, Frontage - Area B Page 1 of 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 EXHIBIT A CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR FRONTAGE ASSESSMENT PROPERTIES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA "C" LEGAL. DESCRIPTION 20091105000541.013 Lots I through 9 and Lot 17, Ridge Point Estates, recorded in Volume 165, pages 64-65, records of King County, Washington; TOGETI i1;R WITH that portion of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 5 North, W.M., King County, Washington, lying easterly and southerly of said plat of Ridge Point Estates and westerly of the w esterlJ- right of Nvay inargin of 154'x` PL SL (W,J, Orton Rd); and TOGETUR WIT11 the North 133 feet of the East 120 feet of said Northeast quarter of the North%vest quarter; and TOGFTI1ER W111-1 that portion of the North half of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of'the Northwest quarter, lying easterly and southerly of Linda I fomes, recorded in Volume 74, page 6, said records; and TO(il I'l FER WIT11 that portion of the South half of said Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter, and the south half of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter, both in said Section 23, lying westerly of the westerly right of way margin of 156`x` Ave SE (Co. Rd. 1049, August E. Gerber Rd.) and easterly of the northeasterly right ofway margin of 154th PL SE (W.J. Orton Rd.); LESS Roads. Exhibit A -- Central Plateau Interceptor SAD, Frontage - Area C Page 1 of 1 20091105000541.014 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 EXHIBIT A CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR FRONTAGE ASSESSMENT PROPERTIES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA `4D'> LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots i and 50, Briarwood West, recorded in Volume 93 of Plats, pages 91-92, records of King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 and 16, Marywood, recorded in Volume 90 of Plats, page 32, said records; and TOGETHER WITH the South 165 feet of the North 195 feet of the East half of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23; LESS the East 30 feet thereof; and TOGETHER WITH the west 150 feet of said East half of said subdivision, lying northerly of the South 365 feet thereof and southerly of the North 195 feet thereof; and TOGETHER WITH that portion of the West half of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington, lying northerly of the north line of Lot I of King Count), Short Plat No. 1286002, as recorded under King County Recording No. 8708140726; and TOCTETHER WITH Lot 1 and Lot 2 of King County Short Plat No. 1286042, as recorded under King County Recording No. 8708140726, said Lot 2 being later amended by Lot Line Adjustment No. 890718, as recorded under King County Recording No. 9010241356, said lots being a portion of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23; LESS Roads Exhibit A — Central Plateau Interceptor SAD, Frontage - Area D Page 1 of 1 AND * *WARNING* * PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING PRIOR TO CREATING THIS INDEMNITY AGREEMENT. You MUST obtain a signature from an Advisory Title Officer or Underwriter (as applicable in your state and/or county), on the bottom of this page, indicating their approval as to the form and content of the Indemnity Agreement PRIOR to delivery of the document to the Indemnitor for execution ; You MUST indicate, on the bottom of this page, if the basic provisions of the Indemnity Agreement form have been modified from its standard form. NOTE: If the Indemnitor requests or makes any modifications to the approved Indemnity Agreement, those modifications must be specifically approved by a State Underwriter. Prepared by: (print name) Standard Form: [ ] Yes [ ] No If No is checked, indicate the Paragraph Number(s) that contain the modified information: THIS INDEMNITY AGREEMENT FORM HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR DELIVERY TO THE INDEMNITOR THIS BY: DAY OF , 20, Authorized Signatory (print name) RETAIN THI' IGNED COPY OF THIS PAGE I YOUR FILE. THIS DOCUMENT IS FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY - -DO NOT SEND WITH INDEMNITYAGREEMENT Accepting Office: First American Title Insurance Company Address: 818 Stewart St, Ste 800, Seattle, WA 98101 OR: 4220-2206449 Filing Reference: INDEMNITY AGREEMENT I (Mechanics' Liens) THIS INDEMNITY AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made and entered into this Sixth day of February, 2014, by Sally Lou Nipert, (individually and collectively, the "Indemnitor"), in favor of First American Title Insurance Company, a California corporation and its agents and employees (collectively "First American Title Insurance Company"). RECITALS: A. Indemnitor is the owner of, and/or has, either directly or indirectly, an interest in, the Property or in a transaction involving the Property. B. Construction of certain improvements has or will commence on the Property. C. In connection with a contemplated transaction involving the Property, First American Title Insurance Company has been requested to issue one or more Title Policies in respect to the Property insuring against loss by reason of Mechanics' Liens. D. In connection with future transactions, First American Title Insurance Company may issue one or more Title Policies insuring against Mechanics' Liens and if First American Title Insurance Company, at its sole discretion, elects to so issue a Title Policy for the Property, it will do so in material reliance on each of the covenants, agreements, representations and warranties of Indemnitor set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: AGREEMENT: 1. DEFINITIONS: As used herein, the following terms shall have the following meanings: TERM: DEFINITION: Construction: Any and all work, construction and/or placement or segregation of materials which may give rise to the right for liens to be filed against the Property under the applicable statutes and/or equitable laws of the State. Construction All costs, fees, expenses and/or obligations for labor, materials and/or services for or Costs: in connection with, the Construction. Effective Date: The date this Agreement becomes effective in accordance with Paragraph 3 below. Mechanics' Liens All liens or rights to lien existing against the Property or which subsequently attach or are claimed against the Property due to Construction. Policy Date: The date of issuance of a Title Policy for the Property. Property: That certain real property as described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. State: The state in which the Property is located. Title Policy(ies): Policy or policies of title insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company with respect to the Property insuring against loss or damage due to Mechanics' Liens. 2. REPRESENTATIONS. WARRANTIES AND COVENANTS. As of the Effective Date, Indemnitor shall be deemed to represent, warrant and covenant to First American Title Insurance Company as to the Property that (a) all sums due and owing for Construction on the Property have been paid or will be paid promptly and in full before the respective times for filing Mechanics' Liens affecting the Property; (b) Indemnitor has funds sufficient to pay all Construction Costs applicable to the Property; and (c) there are no Mechanics' Liens or potential Page 1 of 8 October 2001 © 2001 First American Title Insurance Company All Rights Reserved Mechanics' Liens against the Pro / except as previously specified by Indem in writing to First American Title Insurance Company. All representations, warranties and covenants contained herein are material to First American Title Insurance Company decision to issue a Title Policy for the Property. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. Delivery of this Agreement by Indemnitor to First American Title Insurance Company shall not be deemed acceptance of this Agreement by First American Title Insurance Company or a commitment to issue a Title Policy for the Property. First American Title Insurance Company has no duty to Indemnitor to accept this Agreement or, in the future, to agree to issue a Title Policy for the Property. Upon acceptance of this Agreement by First American Title Insurance Company as evidenced by the issuance of a Title Policy, this Agreement shall remain in effect as long as First American Title Insurance Company has any possible liability under any Title Policy issued at any time in reliance on this Agreement. First American Title Insurance Company may rely on this Agreement to issue Title Policy at any time without notice to or further consent by Indemnitor. 4. MULTIPLE INDEMNITORS. 4.1 ]oint and Several. If there is more than one Indemnitor under this Agreement, all of the obligations contained in this Agreement shall be the joint and several obligations of each and every Indemnitor. Each Indemnitor shall be fully liable to First American Title Insurance Company even if another Indemnitor is not liable for any reason, including the failure of such Indemnitor to execute this Agreement. 4.2 Waiver and Release. First American Title Insurance Company has the right, in its sole and absolute discretion and without notice to or consent by Indemnitor, to (a) waive any provision of this Agreement as it relates to any indemnitor, at any time or from time to time, without providing the same or similar waiver for the benefit of any other Indemnitor, and/or (b) release any Indemnitor from any or all obligations under this Agreement at any time or from time to time, without releasing any other Indemnitor. S. INDEMNIFICATION OBLIGATIONS. 5.1. Payment of Construction_ Costs. Indemnitor covenants and agrees that all Construction Costs on the Property shall be paid promptly and in full before the respective times for filing Mechanics' Liens affecting the Property. 5.2. Indemnity. In addition to any other rights or remedies available to First American Title Insurance Company, at law or in equity, Indemnitor agrees to pay, protect, defend, indemnify, hold and save harmless First American Title Insurance Company from and against any and all liabilities, claims of liability, obligations, losses, costs, charges, expenses, causes of action, suits, demands, judgments and damages of any kind or character whatsoever, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs (including appellate fees and costs) incurred or sustained by First American Title Insurance Company, and actual attorneys' fees awarded against First American Title Insurance Company, directly or indirectly, by reason of, or arising under any Title Policy relating to Mechanics' Liens, or in any other action at law or in equity under any theory of recovery as a result of the existence of Mechanics' Liens. 5.3. Duty to Notify First American Title Insurance Company. In the event that (a) Indemnitor is in any manner notified of a claim which could affect the interests of First American Title Insurance Company under a Title Policy relating to Mechanics' Liens, or (b) any action is filed at law or in equity or any judicial or non -judicial proceeding (including arbitration) is commenced against the Property relating to Mechanics' Liens, Indemnitor agrees to promptly notify First American Title Insurance Company in writing of such claim, action or proceeding as soon as possible of Indemnitor's acquisition of knowledge thereof but, in no event, later than seven (7) days from receipt of said knowledge. 5.4. Rights and Obligations. Upon the filing of any action at law or in equity or the assertion of any claim, cause of action or judicial or non -judicial proceeding relating to Mechanics' Liens, or at any other time which First American Title Insurance Company shall, in its opinion, deem it reasonable to protect itself or its insureds) under a Title Policy, First American Title Insurance Company shall have the right, but not the obligation, (a) to take such action as First American Title Insurance Company deems reasonable to protect its interest and that of its insured under any Title Policy, and/or (b) to demand that Indemnitor, at Indemnitor's sole cost and expense, promptly do, one or more of the following: (a) Cause a properly executed release of the Mechanics' Lien to be filed of record in the proper governmental office. (b) Cause to be recorded with respect to the Mechanics' Lien a bond releasing the Property from the effect of the Mechanics' Lien, should such bond be available and effective in removing the effect of such Mechanics' Lien from the Property as a matter of law. (c) In situations where affirmative legal action or proceedings at law or in equity are necessary to discharge, eliminate, or remove the Mechanics' Lien with respect to the Property, Indemnitor shall cause (1) counsel selected by First American Title Insurance Company to institute such action or proceeding as is necessary to discharge, eliminate or remove the Mechanics' Liens as to Page 2 of 8 October 2001 © 2001 First American Title Insurance Company All Rights Reserved the Property, and (2) such counsel to deliver to First American Title Insurance Company a written representation in a form reasonably satisfactory to First American Title Insurance Company that such counsel (i) has accepted employment as counsel to commence and vigorously prosecute to conclusion such action or procedure, (ii) will promptly undertake any and all steps reasonably necessary to diligently prosecute such action, and (iii) will keep informed as to the status of such action or procedure as reasonably requested by First American Title Insurance Company, at no cost or expense to First American Title Insurance Company. Indemnitor may object to First American Title Insurance Company choice of counsel for reasonable cause. (d) If an action or proceeding concerning the Mechanics' Lien is instituted by a third party, Indemnitor shall cause (1) such action or proceeding to be timely defended and resisted by counsel selected by First American Title Insurance Company which counsel will protect First American Title Insurance Company and any and all insureds) to whom First American Title Insurance Company may have possible liability as a result of the issuance of a Title Policy; and (2) such counsel to deliver to First American Title Insurance Company a written representation, in a form reasonably satisfactory to First American Title Insurance Company to the effect that such counsel (i) has accepted employment as counsel to defend any such action or resist any such proceeding, (ii) will promptly undertake any and all reasonable steps to protect First American Title Insurance Company and its insured(s), and (iii) will keep First American Title Insurance Company informed as to the status of such action or procedure as reasonably requested by First American Title Insurance Company, at no cost or expense to First American Title Insurance Company. Indemnitor may object to First American Title Insurance Company choice of counsel for reasonable cause. (e) If the payment of a sum of money will discharge, eliminate or remove the effect of the Mechanics' Lien as to the Property, Indemnitor shall pay such sum as is sufficient to discharge, eliminate or remove the Mechanics' Lien in a manner legally sufficient to effect the release of the Mechanics' Lien of record and shall deliver documents to First American Title Insurance Company, in a form reasonably satisfactory to First American Title Insurance Company. (f) Indemnitor shall take such action with respect to the Mechanics' Lien as First American Title Insurance Company shall, in its discretion, authorize Indemnitor in writing to undertake, provided that any such authority shall not be a waiver by First American Title Insurance Company to require Indemnitor at any time to comply with the foregoing subparagraphs of this Paragraph above, within ten (10) days of First American Title Insurance Company written revocation of authority to take action other than that under any other subparagraphs of this Paragraph, and demand that Indemnitor comply with any other subparagraphs of this Paragraph. 5.5. Interest. Indemnitor agrees that any sums which might be advanced or incurred by First American Title Insurance Company pursuant to this Agreement or by its exercise of any rights hereunder shall be repaid by Indemnitor to First American Title Insurance Company within ten (10) days of Indemnitor's receipt of First American Title Insurance Company written demand, together with interest thereon at four percent (4%) above the reference rate as charged by Bank of America as of the date such sum was advanced by First American Title Insurance Company and continuing until it is repaid in full, but in no event, shall such rate of interest exceed the lesser of: (a) ten percent (10%) per annum, or (b) the maximum rate permitted by law. 5.6. Determination of Coverage. Any determination of coverage by First American Title Insurance Company shall be conclusive evidence that the matter is within the Title Policy coverage as to the Mechanics' Liens for purposes of this Agreement. If First American Title Insurance Company accepts the defense of a matter within the Title Policy as to the Mechanics' Liens with a reservation of rights, all costs, damages, expenses and legal fees incurred by First American Title Insurance Company shall be deemed within the terms and obligations of Indemnitor under this Agreement even if the matter is subsequently determined by a court to not be within the Title Policy as to the Mechanics' Liens. 6. REMEDIES. Indemnitor specifically acknowledges that upon any default by any Indemnitor under this Agreement after demand by First American Title Insurance Company, First American Title Insurance Company shall have the right to exercise any and all remedies available at law, in equity or under this Agreement against any or all of the Indemnitors, including, but not limited to, injunctive relief, specific performance, damages, self-help and/or resort to any collateral held by First American Title Insurance Company to secure the obligations of Indemnitor under this Agreement. Page 3 of 8 October 2001 pc 2001 First American Titre Insurance Company All Rights Reserved 7. SUBROGATION AND SUBI INATION. Indemnitor hereby unconditic r grants to First American Title Insurance Company any and all rights of subrogation Indemnitor may have with respect to the Mechanics' Liens and agrees to promptly execute any documents with respect to the Mechanics' Liens or any other matter relating to this Agreement request by First American Title Insurance Company with respect to such right of subrogation and to deliver same to First American Title Insurance Company. Indemnitor hereby subordinates any and all debts owed to any Indemnitor from any other Indemnitor to the obligations owed to First American Title Insurance Company under this Agreement. S. FINANCIAL INFORMATION. Each Indemnitor represents and warrants to First American Title Insurance Company as of the date of delivery of the financial statements that the statements delivered to First American Title Insurance Company with respect to that Indemnitor: (a) were prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP") unless otherwise noted therein; (b) are true, complete and correct in all material respects; (c) disclose all material financial information regarding Indemnitor; (d) fairly represent and present the financial condition and operations of Indemnitor; (e) if said statements were not prepared in accordance with GAAP, no GAAP statements and/or audited financial statements exist; and (f) since the date of the financial statements delivered to First American Title Insurance Company, there has been no material adverse change in the financial condition, operations, assets, liabilities, properties or business prospects of Indemnitor. Each Indemnitor agrees to promptly notify (but in no event later than ten (10) days after Indemnitor learns, by any means, of such event) First American Title Insurance Company in writing of any event which would reasonably be anticipated to, or which, in any event, would materially alter or in any material respect change said financial condition, operations, assets, liabilities, properties or business prospects. Upon request by First American Title Insurance Company, each Indemnitor further agrees to deliver to First American Title Insurance Company current financial statements and that by delivery of same, such Indemnitor shall be deemed to make all the same representations and warranties as to the new financial statements as set forth herein above except as otherwise disclosed in writing to First American Title Insurance Company concurrently with the delivery of the financial statements. Each Indemnitor hereby specifically grants to First American Title Insurance Company and its agents, representatives, and professionals, the right, at any time and from time to time, at the sole cost and expense of Indemnitor, to (a) examine the books, accounts, records and property of Indemnitor pertaining to the financial condition of Indemnitor, (b) furnish to First American Title Insurance Company for examination and copying all such books, accounts, records and other pertinent information, and/or (c) provide such further assurances as may be reasonably demanded by First American Title Insurance Company. In the event of more than one Indemnitor, each Indemnitor shall independently comply with this paragraph. 9. WAIVERS AND COVENANTS. In the event that Indemnitor is indemnifying First American Title Insurance Company with respect to a Property which is not directly owned by Indemnitor, Indemnitor understands and agrees that First American Title Insurance Company has no obligation to secure an indemnity from the owner(s) of the Property ("Owner"). Indemnitor agrees that the validity of this Agreement and the obligations of Indemnitor hereunder shall in no way be terminated, affected, limited or impaired by reason of (a) the assertion by First American Title Insurance Company of any rights or remedies which it may have under any other indemnity agreement or against any person or entity obligated thereunder or against the Owner, (b) First American Title Insurance Company failure to exercise, or delay in exercising, any such right or remedy or any right or remedy First American Title Insurance Company may have hereunder or in respect to this Agreement, (c) the commencement of a case under the Bankruptcy Code by or against the Owner or any person or entity obligated under the law or any other indemnity agreement, or (d) Indemnitor owning less than the entire interest in the Property. Indemnitor further covenants that this Agreement shall remain and continue in full force and effect as to any Title Policies issued at any time by First American Title Insurance Company with respect to the Property and that First American Title Insurance Company shall not be under a duty to protect, secure, insure, or enforce any rights it may have under any indemnity agreement or any other right against any third party, and that other indulgences or forbearance may be granted under any or all of such documents, all of which may be made, done or suffered without notice to, or further consent of, Indemnitor. First American Title Insurance Company may, at its option, proceed directly and at once, without notice, against any Indemnitor to collect and recover the full amount of the liability hereunder or any portion thereof, without proceeding against the Owner or any other person or entity. Indemnitor hereby waives and relinquishes (a) any right or claim of right to cause a marshalling of any Indemnitor's assets; (b) all rights and remedies accorded by applicable law to indemnitors or guarantors, except any rights of subrogation which Indemnitor may have, provided that the assurances and obligations provided for hereunder shall not be contingent upon the existence of any such rights of subrogation; Page 4 of 8 October 2001 © 2001 First American Title Insurance Company All Rights Reserved (c) notice of acceptance hereo, I of any action taken or omitted in reli hereon; (d) presentment for payment, demand of payment, protest or notice of nonpayment or failure to perform or observe, or other proof, or notice or demand; (e) any defense based upon and election of remedies by First American Title Insurance Company, including without limitation an election to proceed in a manner which has impaired, eliminated or otherwise destroyed Indemnitor's rights of subrogation and reimbursement, if any, against the Owner or any third party; (f) any defense based upon any statute or rule of law which provides that the obligation of a surety must be neither larger in amount nor in other respects more burdensome than that of the principal; (g) the defense of the statute of limitations in any action hereunder or in any action for the collection or performance of any obligations covered by this Agreement; (h) and any duty on the part of First American Title Insurance Company to disclose to Indemnitor any facts First American Title Insurance Company may now or hereafter know about the Owner, since Indemnitor acknowledges that Indemnitor is fully responsible for being and keeping informed of the financial condition of the Owner and of all circumstances bearing on the risk of nonperformance of any obligations covered by this Agreement. 16. NOTICE. Any notices, demands or communications under this Agreement between Indemnitor and First American Title Insurance Company shall be in writing, shall include a reasonable identification of the Property together with First American Title Insurance Company order number, and may be given either by personal service, by overnight delivery, or by mailing via United Stated mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to each party as set forth on the signature page of this Agreement. If the address for First American Title Insurance Company is not completed on the signature page, notice to First American Title Insurance Company shall be given to First American Title Insurance Company State office. All notices given in accordance with the requirements in this Paragraph shall be deemed to be received as of the earlier of actual receipt by the addressee thereof or the expiration of ninety-six (96) hours after depositing same in the United States Postal System. 11. MISCELLANEOUS. 11.1. No Waiver. No delay or omission by First American Title Insurance Company in exercising any right or power under this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof. A waiver by First American Title Insurance Company of a breach of any of the covenants, agreements, restrictions, obligations or conditions of this Agreement to be performed by the Indemnitor shall not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same or other covenants, agreements, restrictions, obligations or conditions under this Agreement. Furthermore, in order to be effective, any waiver must be in writing executed by First American Title Insurance Company. 11.2. No Third Party Beneficiaries This Agreement is only between Indemnitor and First American Title Insurance Company, and is not intended to be, nor shall it be construed as being, for the benefit of any third party. 11.3. Partial Invalidity. In any term, provision, condition or covenant of this Agreement or the application thereof to any party or circumstance shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term, provision, condition or covenant to persons or circumstances other than those as to whom or which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each term and provision of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. 11.4. Modification or Amendment. Any alteration, change, modification or amendment of this Agreement or any documents incorporated herein, in order to become effective, shall be made by written instrument executed by all parties hereto. 11.5. Execution in Counterpart This Agreement and any modification, amendment or supplement to this Agreement may be executed by Indemnitor in several counterparts, and as so executed, shall constitute one Agreement binding on all Indemnitors, notwithstanding that all Indemnitors are not signatories to the original or the same counterpart. 11.6. Qualification: Authority. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of an Indemnitor which is an entity, represents, warrants and covenants to First American Title Insurance Company that (a) such entity is duly formed and authorized to do business in the State, (b) such person is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of such entity in accordance with authority granted under the organizational documents of such entity, and (c) such entity is bound under the terms of this Agreement. 11.7. Merger of Prior Agreements and Understandings. This Agreement and other documents incorporated herein by reference contain the entire understanding and agreement between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties with respect to Mechanics' Liens for future transactions involving the Property and all prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations and statements, oral or written, shall be of no force or effect. Page 5 of 8 October 2001 © 2001 First American Title Insurance Company All Rights Reserved 11.8. Other. This Agreem ;hall be construed according to its fair m, ig as if prepared by all parties to this Agreement. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State and Indemnitor hereby agrees to submit to the jurisdiction of any state or federal court of First American Title Insurance Company choosing having competent jurisdiction, and to make no objection to venue therein should any action at law or in equity be necessary to enforce or interpret this Agreement. If any action at law or in equity is necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to have and to recover from the other party its reasonable attorneys' fees and other reasonable expenses in connection with such action or proceeding in addition to its recoverable court costs. Titles and captions are for convenience only and shall not constitute a portion of this Agreement. The recitals set forth hereinabove are incorporated into this Agreement. As used in this Agreement, masculine, feminine or neuter gender and the singular or plural number shall be deemed to include the others wherever and whenever the context so dictates. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind the personal representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. 12. SECURITY. Indemnitor has or will provide security for this Agreement to First American Title Insurance Company as follows: [ X ] None at this time [ ] Letter of Credit Agreement with Sight Draft Form [ ] Security Agreement* (Non cash) [ ] Control Agreement [ ] Security Agreement* (Cash) [ ] Deed of Trust [ ] Security Agreement (Letter of Credit) [ ] Mortgage A breach by an obligor, pledgor or debtor under any of the foregoing documents as well as any documents which may be referenced in such documents shall be deemed a breach by Indemnitor under this Agreement. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, any sums held by First American Title Insurance Company as security may be held by First American Title Insurance Company in its general accounts and not deposited into an interest bearing account. Indemnitor understands that as a result of maintaining its accounts with a financial institution and its on-going banking relationship with the specific financial institution, First American Title Insurance Company may receive certain financial benefits such as an array of bank services, accommodations, loans or other business transactions from the financial institution ("collateral benefits"), Indemnitor agrees that any and all such collateral benefits shall belong solely to First American Title Insurance Company and First American Title Insurance Company shall have no obligation to account to Indemnitor for the value of any such collateral benefits. If the funds are deposited into a special interest bearing account, all such interest shall be added to and retained in the account as part of the security for First American Title Insurance Company. Any such interest earned shall be attributed for tax purposes to the Indemnitor depositing same. (Note: If security is to be taken, additional forms must be executed. Please be advised that additional documents maybe needed to perfect a personal property security interest. Please follow directions on said forms as to additional requirements or consult your local underwriter.) 13. ESTOPPEL. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY POSSIBLE DIFFERENCE IN THE PARITY OF THE PARTIES HERETO, INDEMNITOR UNDERSTANDS THAT First American Title Insurance CompanylS UNDERTAKING A RISK SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER THAN THAT UNDERTAKEN IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF PROVIDING TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES AND RELATED SERVICES BY ENTERING INTO THIS AGREEMENT AND ISSUING POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE IN RELIANCE ON THIS AGREEMENT, AND, THEREFORE, INDEMNITOR HEREBY DECLARES ITS WILLINGNESS TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT AND TO INDUCE First American Title Insurance Company TO ACCEPT THIS AGREEMENT, REALIZING THAT INDEMNITOR'S BEST INTEREST, IN THE OPINION OF INDEMNITOR, IS BEING SERVED THEREBY. Page 6 of 8 October 2001 © 2001 First American Title Insurance Company All Rights Reserved NOTICE: THIS AGREEMENT CONTAINS PROVISIONS WHICH PERSONALLY OBLIGATE INDEMNITOR. IT IS STRONGLY RECOMMENDED THAT INDEMNITOR CONSULT LEGAL COUNSEL PRIOR TO EXECUTING THIS AGREEMENT. Sally Lou Nipert Name: SSN: INDEMNITOR: Name: SSN: ADDRESS FOR NOTICE TO First American Title Insurance Company: (If this information is not completed, please see Paragraph 10.) Notice Address: 818 Stewart St, Ste 800 Seattle, WA 98101 M Requires a UCC Financing Statement to be executed and filed. i ,411 persons/entities executing this Agreement shall be deemed namedparties to this Agreement as if their name also appeared in the introductoryparagraph on page I. Page 7 of 8 October 2001 © 2001 First American Title Insurance Company All Rights Reserved EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Order No. 4220-2206449 (REQUIRED) Legal Description: THE WEST 440 FEET OF THE NORTH 100 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14 TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., EXCEPT COUNTY ROAD. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Page 8 of 8 October 2001@ 2001 First American Title Insurance Company All Rights Reserved Fi - merican Title insurance Company First merican 816 Stewart Ste BOx Seattle, WA x Phn - (206)615-301206 8 Fax - (425)551-4107 ESCROW COMPANY INFORMATION• Escrow Officer/Closer: BRIE REGALIA SUDDERTH bregaliasudderth@firstarn.com First American Title Insurance Company 11400 SE 8th St, Ste 250, Bellevue, WA 98004 Phone: (425)455-3400 - Fax: (800)363-0756 Title Team Four Fax No. (866) 859-0429 Kristi K Mathis Michelle Treherne Title Officer Title Officer (206)615-3206 (425)635-2100 kkmathis@firstam.com mtreherne@firstam.com Note: Please send King County Recordings to 818 Stewart Street #800, Seattle, WA 98101 To: PNW Holdings LLC File No.: 4243-2195519 9675 SE 36th ST STE 105 Your Ref No.: Mercer Island, WA 98040 Attn: Justin Lagers Re: Property Address: 14038 156th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 SECOND REPORT RrstAmencan idle Form No. 1068-2 mmitment No,; 4243-2195519 ALTA Plain Language Commitment Page 2 of 9 COMMITMENT FOR TITTLE INSURANCE Issued by FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Agreement to Issue Policy We agree to issue a policy to you according to the terms of this Commitment. When we show the policy amount and your name as the proposed insured in Schedule A, this Commitment becomes effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A. If the Requirements shown in this Commitment have not been met within six months after the Commitment Date, our obligation under this Commitment will end. Also, our obligation under this Commitment will end when the Policy is issued and then our obligation to you will be under the Policy. Our obligation under this Commitment is limited by the following: The Provisions in Schedule A. The Requirements in Schedule B -I, The General Exceptions and Exceptions in Schedule B -II. The Conditions. This Commitment is not valid without Schedule A and Section I and II of Schedule B. FirstAmerican Title Insurance Company Kristi Mathis, Title Officer Fi+stAme&an Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Main Language Commitment SCHEDULE A -ommitment No.: 4243-2195519 Page 3 of 9 1. Commitment bate: January 29, 2014 at 7:30 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: AMOUNT PREMIUM TAX Homeowner's Rate with 10% Combination Discount Standard Owner's Policy Proposed Insured: PNW Holdings LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company Simultaneous Issue Rate with 10% Combination Discount ALTA Extended Loan Policy $ To Follow $ To Follow $ To Fallow Proposed Insured: To Fallow 3. (A) The estate or interest in the land described in this Commitment is: Fee Simple (B) Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET, PRESUMPTIVELY SUBJECT TO COMMUNITY INTEREST OF HIS SPOUSE ON OCTOBER 21, 2008, DATE OF ACQUIRING TITLE 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: Real property in the County of King, State of Washington, described as follows: The land referred to in this report is described in Exhibit A attached hereto. Fi StAmerican Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment SCHEDULE B SECTION I REQUIREMENTS _ommitment No.: 4243-2195519 Page 4 of 9 The following requirements must be met: (A) Pay the agreed amounts for the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured. (B) Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy. (C) Documents satisfactory to us creating the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured must be signed, delivered and recorded: (D) You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make additional requirements or exceptions. (E) Releases(s) or Reconveyance(s) of Item(s): (F) Other. (G) You must give us the following information: 1. Any off record leases, surveys, etc. 2. Statement(s) of Identity, all parties. 3. Other: SCHEDULE B SECTION II GENERA. EXCEPTIONS PART ONE: A. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. B. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. C. Easements, claims of easement or encumbrances which are not shown by the public records. D. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. E. (A) Unpatented mining claims; (B) Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (C) Water rights, claims or title to water; whether or not the matters excepted under (A), (B) or (C) are shown by the public records; (D) Indian Tribal Codes or Regulations, Indian Treaty or Aboriginal Rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. F. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or materials or medical assistance heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, construction, tap or reimbursement charges/costs for sewer, water, garbage or electricity. H. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof, but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the escrow or interest or mortgage(s) thereon covered by this Commitment. FirstAmerican T705? Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment SCHEDULE B SECTION II EXCEPTIONS PART TWO: commitment No.: 4243-2195519 Page 5 of 9 Any policy we issue will have the following exceptions unless they are taken care of to our satisfaction. The printed exceptions and exclusions from the coverage of the policy or policies are available from the office which issued this Commitment. Copies of the policy forms should be read. Lien of the Real Estate Excise Sales Tax and Surcharge upon any sale of said premises, if unpaid. As of the date herein, the excise tax rate for the City of Renton is at 3.78 %. Levy/Area Code: 2143 2. General Taxes for the year 2014, which cannot be paid until the 15th day of February of said year. Tax Account No.: 142305-9023-06 1st Half Amount: $ 2,699.94 Assessed land Value: $ 340,000.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $ 36,000.00 2nd Half Amount: $ 2,699.93 Assessed Land Value: $ 340,000.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $ 36,000.00 Note: Taxes and charges for 2013 were paid in full in the amount of $5,009.81. Question of identity of the spouse of George Richard Ouimet on October 21, 2008, date of acquiring title. In addition, title is subject to matters which the record may disclose against the name of said spouse. 4. Terms, conditions, provisions and stipulations of the Operating Agreement of PNW Holdings LLC. According to said Agreement dated May 01, 2012, Robert Gladstein, Michael Gladstein and Joel Mezistrano is/are the manager(s) thereof. Any amendments to said Agreement must be submitted. Any conveyance or encumbrance of the property must be executed by said manager(s) as provided for therein, subject to said amendments, if any. 5. Any and all offers of dedication, conditions, restrictions, easements, fence line/boundary discrepancies, notes and/or provisions shown or disclosed by Short Plat or Plat of King County Testamentary Division No. L08M0034 recorded under recording number 20080812900004. Fi,3tAmencan Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language commitment INFORMATIONAL NOTES mmitment No.: 4243-2195519 Page 6 of 9 A. Potential charges, for the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charge, as authorized under RCW 35.58 and King County Code 28.84.050. Said charges could apply for any property that connected to the King County Sewer Service area on or after February 1, 1990. Note: Properties located in Snohomish County may be subject to the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charges, B. Effective January 1, 1997, and pursuant to amendment of Washington State Statutes relating to standardization of recorded documents, certain format and content requirements must be met (refer to RCW 65.04.045). Failure to comply may result in rejection of the document by the recorder or additional fees being charged, subject to the Auditor's discretion. C. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upon it. D. The description can be abbreviated as suggested below if necessary to meet standardization requirements. The full text of the description must appear in the document(s) to be insured. LOT B, KING COUNTY TESTAMENTARY DIV. NO. L08M0034, REC. 20080812900004, KING COUNTY APN: 142305-9023-06 E. All matters regarding extended coverage have been cleared for mortgagee's policy. The coverage contemplated by this paragraph will not be afforded in any forthcoming owner's standard coverage policy to be issued. The following deeds affecting the property herein described have been recorded within 36 months of the effective date of this commitment: NONE Property Address: 14038 156th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 NOTE: The forthcoming Mortgagee's Policy will be the ALTA 2006 Policy unless otherwise noted on Schedule A herein. NOTE: We find no judgments or Federal tax liens against the vestee herein, unless otherwise shown as a numbered exception above. NOTE: A FEE WILL BE CHARGED UPON THE CANCELLATION OF THIS COMMITMENT PURSUANT TO WASHINGTON STATE INSURANCE CODE AND THE FILED RATE SCHEDULE OF THIS COMPANY. FirstAnx-ncan Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment CONDITIONS k-ommitment No.: 4243-2195519 Page 7 of 9 1. DEFINITIONS (a)"Mortgage" means mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument. (b)"Public Records" means title records that give constructive notice of matters affecting the title according to the state law where the land is located. 2. LATER DEFECTS The Exceptions in Schedule B - Section II may be amended to show any defects, liens or encumbrances that appear for the first time in the public records or are created or attached between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Requirements (a) and (c) of Schedule B - Section I are met. We shall have no liability to you because of this amendment. 3. EXISTING DEFECTS If any defects, liens or encumbrances existing at Commitment Date are not shown in Schedule B, we may amend Schedule B to show them. If we do amend Schedule B to show these defects, liens or encumbrances, we shall be liable to you according to Paragraph 4 below unless you knew of this information and did not tell us about it in writing. 4. LIMITATION OF OUR LIABILITY Our only obligation is to issue to you the Policy referred to in this Commitment, when you have met its Requirements. If we have any liability to you for any loss you incur because of an error in this Commitment, our liability will be limited to your actual loss caused by your relying on this Commitment when you acted in good faith to: comply with the Requirements shown in Schedule B - Section I or eliminate with our written consent any Exceptions shown in Schedule B - Section II. We shall not be liable for more than the Policy Amount shown in Schedule A of this Commitment and our liability is subject to the terms of the Policy form to be issued to you. 5. CLAIMS MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT Any claim, whether or not based on negligence, which you may have against us concerning the title to the land must be based on this commitment and is subject to its terms. cc: PNW Holdings, LLC cc: Richard Ouimet FirstAmerican TnYe Form No. 1068-2 -ommitment No.. 4243-2195519 ALTA Plain Language Commitment Page 8 of 9 First American Title Insurance Company 818 Stewart St, Ste 800 FirstAmerican Seattle, WA 98101 Phn - (206)615-3206 Fax - (925)551-4107 —r'1� �yj` FirstAirierican Title Privacy Information We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Information In order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information - particularly any personal or financial Information. We agree that you have a right to know how we will utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with aur subsidiaries we have adopted this Privacy Polity to govern the use and handling of your personal information. Applicability This Privacy Policy governs our use of the Information that you provide to us. It does not govern the manner in which we may use information we have obtained from any other source, such as information obtained from a public record or from another person or entity, First American has also adopted broader guidelines that govern our use of personal information regardless of its source. First American calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values. Types of Information Depending upon which of our services you are utilizing, the types of nonpublic personal Information that we may collect include: Information we receive from you on applications, forms and In other communications to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or any other means; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliated companies, or others; and • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Use of Information We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any nonaffiliated party. Therefore, we will not release your information to nonaffiliated parties except: (1) as neoessary for us to provide the product or service you have requested of us; or (2) as permitted by law. We may, however, store such information indefin]tely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased. Such information may be used for any internal purpose, such as quality control efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of nonpublic personal information listed above to one or more of our affiliated companies. Such affiliated companies inciude Financial service providers, such as title insurersr property and casualty insurers, and trust and Investment advisory companies, or companies involved in real estate services, such as appraisal companies, home warranty companies and escrow companies. Furthermore, we may also provide all the information we collect, as described above, to companies that perform marketing services on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies or to other financial institutions with whom we or our affiliated companies have joint marketing agreements. Former Customers Even if you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to appy to you. Confidentiality and Security We will use our best efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those individuals and entities who need to know that Information to provide products or services to you. We will use our best efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your information will be handled responsibly and In accordance with this Privacy Policy and First American's Fair Information Values, We currently maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal reguiatkms to guard your nonpublic personal information. Information Obtained Through Our Web Site First American Financial Corporation is sensitive to privacy issues on the Internet. We believe it Is important you know how we treat the information about you we receive on the Internet. In general, you can visit First American or Its affiliates' Web sites on the World Wide Web without telling us who you are or revealing any information about yourself. Our Web servers collect the domain names, not the e-mail addresses, of visitors. This information is aggregated to measure the number of visits, average time spent on the site, pages viewed and similar information. First American uses this information to measure the use of our site and to develop ideas to improve the content of our site. There are times, however, when we may need information from you, such as your name and email address. When information is needed, we will use our best effohtis to let you know at the time of coilectlon how we will use the personal information. Usually, the personal information we collect is used only by us to respond to your inquiry, process an order crallow you to access specific accountiprofile information. If you choose to share any personal Information with us, we will only use it in accordance with the policies outlined above. Business Relationships First American Financial Corporation's site and its affiliates' sites may contain links to other Web sites, While we try to link only to sites that share aur high standards and respect for privacy, we are not responsible for the content or the privacy practices employed by other sites. Cookies Some of First American's Web sites may make use of "cookie" technology to measure site activity and to customize Information to your personal tastes. A cookie is an element of data that a Web site can send to your browser, which may then store the cookie on your hard drive. rirstArruco uses stared cookies, The goal of this technology is to getter serve you when visiting our site, save you time when you are here and to provide you with a more meaningful and productive Web site experience. Fair Information values Fairness We consider consumer expectatiorhs about their privacy in all Our businesses. We only offer products and services that assure a favorable balance between consumer benefits and consumer privacy. Public Record We believe that an open public record creates significant value for society, enhances censumer choice and creates consumer opportunity. We actively support an open public record and emphasize its importance and contribution to our economy. Use We believe we should behave responsibly when we use information about a consumer in our business. We will obey the laws governing the collection, use and dissemination of data. Accuracy We will take reasonable steps to help assure the accuracy of the data we collect, use and disseminate. Where possible, we will take reasonable steps to correct inaccurate information, When, as with the public record, we cannot correct inaccurate information, we will take all reasonable steps to assist consumers In Identifying the source of the erroneous data so that the consumer can secure the required corrections. Education We endeavor to educate the users of our products and services, our employees and others in aur industry about the importance of consumer privacy. We will instruct our employees on our fair Information values and on the responsible collection and use of data. We will encourage others in our industry to collect and use Information. in a responsible manner. Security We will maintain appropriate facilities and systems to protect against unauthorized access to and corruption of the data we maintain. Farm 50 -PRIVACY (8/1/09) Page I of i First American Title Privacy Information (2001-2010 First American f nancia( Corporation) Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment ommitment No.: 4243-2195519 Page 9 of 9 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Exhibit "A" Vested Owner: GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET, PRESUMPTIVELY SUBJECT TO COMMUNITY INTEREST OF HIS SPOUSE ON OCTOBER 21, 2008, DATE OF ACQUIRING TITLE Real property in the County of King, State of Washington, described as follows: LOT B OF KING COUNTY TESTAMENTARY DIVISION NO.: L08M0034, RECORDED AUGUST 12, 2008 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20080812900004, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. BEING NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY WASHINGTON: LESS NORTH 100 FEET OF THE WEST 440 FEET. Tax Parcel Number: 142305-9023-06 Situs Address: 14038 156th Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 FirstAmenican Title A E—I'l—Lo �q Lf) V) u. :A 7 F9 f.7 9 C. 7 t`JrT '3*S 3/ V,3 I- £ c L 6, 77 O 7-2 11 CI ZD'—.7T 1) L 0 0 11090.0 1 LO 01 FEB 2 7 cl IU T-27-1:1 T K�v I Uf- '3"S3AV'Hi9si �4-4,-- v".��f N,JA� P - V: 2.3 FH 139-_._ M L �-," -GCT -o --- ------- Q9 oo ID Cl W. Cl 7, 20081021000150.001 Filed for Record at Request of & When Recorded Return To G.R.Ouimet 2923 Maltby Road Bothell, WA 98012 IWI��IM��NN 21000150 43.00 E2368093 10/21/2008 09.48 KING COUNTY, QA SALE510.00 50.00 PRGE001 OF Bel PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE'S DEED (Upon Distribution of Separate Real Property from Testate Estate) Grantors: GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET AND SALLY LOU NIPERT, Co-Personai Representatives of Estate of Kathleen M. Ouimet, deceased Grantee: GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET Abbreviated Legal Descr.: LOT B, KING COUNTY TESTAMENTARY DIVISION NO. L08M0034, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20080812900004, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. Parcel No.: 142305-9023 1. Grantors. We, GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET AND SALLY LOU NIPERT, are the duly appointed, qualified, and acting Co -Personal Representatives of the Estate of KATHLEEN M. OUIMET, Deceased, King County, Washington, Superior Court Case No. 08-4-01861-7 KNT. 2. Grantee. The Grantee is GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET, a married man, 3. Decedent's Estate. Decedent KATHLEEN M. OUIMET died testate on January 27, 2008. On February 29, 2005, Decedent's Will was admitted to probate and Grantors were appointed Co -Personal Representatives of Decedent's estate and granted Nonintervention Powers for the administration of Decedent's estate. 4. Will Provision. Article IV of Decedent's Will provides that the residue of Decedent's estate shall pass to Decedent's children. 5. Real Property. Among the assets of the residue of Decedent's estate is the following described real property located in Ding County, Washington: LOT B OF IAC TESTAMENTARY DIV OL08M0034 REC 20080512900004 BEING NW 114 OF SW 114 OF SE 114 OF STR 14-23-05 LESS N 100 FT OF W 440 FT LESS CO RD TAXABLE PORTION PARTIALLY EXEMPT UNDER RCW 84.36.381 THRU .359 Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Number: 142305-9023. CHICAGO TITLE INS, CO REF# 1,2 7 ? D -P-- /0 6. Consideration. This conveyance is made in consideration of Decedent's gift in her Will. 7. Conveyance. Grantors convey, grant, and quitclaim to GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET all of the interest of Decedent's estate in the real property described in this Deed (together with all after-acquired title of the Grantors to the real property), which interest represents Decedent's interest in the real property at her death. DATED Estate of KATHLEEN M, OUIMET, Deceased By. _ �ET, GERGERICHARDOU( Co-Personal Representative SALALOINIPERT, Co -Personal Representative STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET and SALLY LOU NIPERT, known or proved to me to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing Personal Representative's Deed, and acknowledged that they and each of them signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. GIVEN under my hand and official seal on; C r,3 4 t=, K, Sig ture Printed Name NOTARY PUBLIC for Washington Residing at: _2C 6NT-6M , w A My appointment expires on: Cy OFoW -2 o iRw� a a JAN - VW RAGE to Tw � tl� E, ., � x \. aM MINS, H i o � W E~, w , m � ao<x ai wi a O � .. .. .:"'•: }, Nok � ,,rya Er � d xu�Wti:�°oz � z�wW "': �� `•°c�, � � i a � a j �`�, cdsalt Egga �Q'd 0 v oz_zo c�iO w � vC� Fes'.'�^I ttlY Z �r g O�f.Sw 5",. CCI N4 �N qImon J' c tea tea. iGYS �.a zoo o z c rz D oa ®a= c..:�wn,ayi +I #� � Psis y f �f''�rr O � oYw�z= 3i ��i�z�, Yt� rxfp°:3�a'si xLL. aa„ Lzi Ss;, tii u'H a N o �o� J � � p = � O❑ QI4 ai= �z�a, '°5LL o� wu ? r � ve?i- �nTd' zaiz# o ° o � Yx 4, m.� K��w� c�:ao o�n �':�, '�:•,', •. ',�a-��'�z kw IW �3�K w z � 4 �o ��J zoxs a pox .. o==-�� a y �z a o O F#Qxc UO r1 v� c o1 tag p ua ro 5 y o' to 4 S 34 Un. rtraeeas c o 38.- � -y1g iF� r p IN - A 21 yeya! - 1 O I Z Q�a RAT. Y � ^tri pp�� a�� fWy ��a �e-� •�Wi � y � ES; 11 YJ V o�:{� x •�1"' �''`" 'yop.',4ajji - x��>,�:I �U 0 z m�&4 m• ��o i RM E too � o� o w .. z Wel �€F `1'yy Q C P, h0.$ �•.: _x � Sly yLy� WIN! �Jw x �v. z � z w /O, _• � 0.o �U�� Y:x'y� 34.2 '�. U, �L p0� fF� n mar- - sEEss 3.>:, sa xr+ !✓ (c 111*" . P6'E39& ry 03. OON - ociGii XN .YS VA HY9Sl CJ T unold h 1%�17 Age! z t u U x .qy Ip 5z z "To ZT,iL WNW. z AF - cam N, -- .0 9, 1 6 looms OMNI "UZI Malin Li _ o n V. MOD p ` S� dd' o a pQ s �} CO t�wI ze d{ V a o �N' 3� 80 ZZ t Q P4 tri cV E, W�aa w � F, a� _ a e , i ^r^/�I Lit/ F I w L tp y{�I I�.tli) rJ,h�_"v,'I'ial ]04II2 I �N tit m � 5 g q "��n I 115'�9J N.fi29L'. WS jig-, W � W}. R 0 i g ail _z_p,gp.. g'S —WAV JVJ9S� meq! iaex�� mertean Title Insurance company American 810 Stewart 5t, Ste 800 Seattle, WA 98101 Phn - (206)615-3206 Fax -(425)551-4107 ESCROW COMPANY INFORMATION• Escrow Officer/Closer: BRIE REGALIA SUDDERTH bregaliasudderth@firstam.com First American Title Insurance Company 11400 SE 8th St, Ste 250, Bellevue, WA 98004 Phone: (425)455-3400 - Fax: (800)363-0756 Title Team Four Fax No. (866) 859-0429 Kristi K Mathis Michelle Treherne Title Officer Title Officer (206)615-3206 (425)635-2100 kkmath!s@Frstam.com mtreheme@firstam.com Note: Please send King County Recordings to 818 Stewart Street #800, Seattle, WA 98101 To: PNW Holdings LLC 9675 SE 36th ST STE 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Attn: Justin Lagers Re: Property Address: To be determined, Renton, WA 98059 THIRD REPORT RrstAmerlcan Title File No.: 4243-2173612 Your Ref No.: FES? 2 7 Form No. 1068-2 mmitment No.: 4243-2173612 ALTA Plain Language Commitment Page Z of 10 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued by FIRS TAMERICAN TIT,.EINSURANCE CQMPANY Agreement to Issue Policy We agree to issue a policy to you according to the terms of this Commitment. When we show the policy amount and your name as the proposed insured in Schedule A, this Commitment becomes effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A. If the Requirements shown in this Commitment have not been met within six months after the Commitment Date, our obligation under this Commitment will end. Also, our obligation under this Commitment will end when the Policy is issued and then our obligation to you will be under the Policy. Our obligation under this Commitment is limited by the following: The Provisions in Schedule A. The Requirements in Schedule B -L The General Exceptions and Exceptions in Schedule B -II. The Conditions. This Commitment is not valid without Schedule A and Section I and II of Schedule 8. First American Title Insurance Company Kristi Mathis, Title Officer First American Title Form No, 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitmen ommitment No.: 4243-2173512 Page 3 of 10 SCHEDULE A 1. Commitment Date: January 29, 2014 at 7:30 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: AMOUNT PREMIUM TAX General Schedule Rate with 2013/0 combination discount Standard Owner's Policy Proposed Insured: PNW Holdings LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company Multiple Coverage Rate ALTA Extended Loan Policy $ To Follow $ To Follow $ To Follow Proposed Insured: To Follow 3. (A) The estate or interest in the land described in this Commitment is: Fee Simple (B) Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: SALLY LOU NIPERT, AS HER SOLE AND SEPARATE PROPERTY 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: Real property in the County of King, State of Washington, described as follows; The land referred to in this report is described in Exhibit A attached hereto. Fir3tAmerican Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment SCHEDULE B SECTION I REQUIREMENTS mmitment No.: 4243-2173612 Page 4 of 10 The following requirements must be met: (A) Pay the agreed amounts for the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured. (B) Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy. (C) Documents satisfactory to us creating the interest in the land and/or the mortgage to be insured must be signed, delivered and recorded: (D) You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make additional requirements or exceptions. (E) Releases(s) or Reconveyance(s) of Item(s): (F) Other: (G) You must give us the following information: 1. Any off record leases, surveys, etc. 2. Statement(s) of Identity, all parties. 3. Other: SCHEDULE B SECTION I1 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS PART ONE: A. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. B. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. C. Easements, claims of easement or encumbrances which are not shown by the public records. D. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. E. (A) Unpatented mining claims; (B) Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (C) Water rights, claims or title to water; whether or not the matters excepted under (A), (B) or (C) are shown by the public records; (D) Indian Tribal Codes or Regulations, Indian Treaty or Aboriginal Rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. F. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or materials or medical assistance heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, construction, tap or reimbursement charges/costs for sewer, water, garbage or electricity. H. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof, but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the escrow or interest or mortgage(s) thereon covered by this Commitment. flrstAmenrTw Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment SCHEDULE B SECTION II EXCEPTIONS PART TWO: mmitment No.: 4243-2173612 Page 5 of 10 Any policy we issue will have the following exceptions unless they are taken care of to our satisfaction. The printed exceptions and exclusions from the coverage of the policy or policies are available from the office which issued this Commitment. Copies of the policy forms should be read. Lien of the Real Estate Excise Sales Tax and Surcharge upon any sale of said premises, if unpaid. As of the date herein, the excise tax rate for the City of Renton is at 1.78%. Levy/Area Code: 2143 2. Facility Charges, if any, including but not limited to hook-up, or connection charges and latecomer charges for sewer, water and public facilities of City of Renton as disclosed by instrument recorded under recording no. 20091105000541. 3. General Taxes for the year 2014, which cannot be paid until the 15th day of February of said year. Tax Account No.: 142305-9122-06 1st Half Amount: $ 2,436.80 Assessed Land Value: $ 340,000.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $ 0.00 2nd Half Amount: $ 2,436.79 Assessed Land Value: $ 340,000.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $ 0.00 Note: Taxes and charges for 2013 were paid in full in the amount of $4,326.59. 4. Taxes which may be assessed and extended on any subsequent roil for the tax year 2014, with respect to new improvements and the first occupancy which may be included on the regular assessment roll and which are an accruing lien not yet due or payable. Terms, conditions, provisions and stipulations of the Operating Agreement of PNW Holdings, LLC. According to said Agreement dated May 01, 2012, Robert Gladstein, Michael Gladstien and Joel Mezistrano is/are the manager(s) thereof. Any amendments to said Agreement must be submitted. Any conveyance or encumbrance of the property must be executed by said manager(s) as provided for therein, subject to said amendments, if any. Potential lien rights as a result of labor and/or materials used, or to be used, for improvements to the premises. The Company reserves the right to make additional requirements prior to insuring. An indemnity agreement to be completed by PNW Holdings, LLC, is being sent to The Closing Escrow Company and must be submitted to us prior to closing for our review and approval. All other matters regarding extended coverage have been cleared for mortgagee's policy. Items A through E and G and H on Exhibit B herein will be omitted in said extended coverage mortgagee's policy. The coverage contemplated by this paragraph will not be afforded in any forthcoming owner's standard coverage policy to be issued. Rf5tAmerfcan Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment mmitment No.: 4243-2173612Page 6 of 10 7. Any and all offers of dedication, conditions, restrictions, easements, fence line/boundary discrepancies, notes and/or provisions shown or disclosed by Short Plat or Plat of King County Testamentary Division No. L08M0034 recorded under recording number 20080812900004. FrrstAmerican Ttle Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment I INFORMATIONAL NOTES mmitment No.: 4243-2173612 Page 7 of 10 A. Potential charges, for the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charge, as authorized under RCW 35.58 and King County Code 28.84.050. Said charges could apply for any property that connected to the King County Sewer Service area on or after February 1, 1990. Note: Properties located in Snohomish County may be subject to the King County Sewage Treatment Capacity Charges. B. Effective January 1, 1997, and pursuant to amendment of Washington State Statutes relating to standardization of recorded documents, the following format and content requirements must be met. Failure to comply may result in rejection of the document by the recorder. C. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upon it. D. The description can be abbreviated as suggested below if necessary to meet standardization requirements. The full text of the description must appear in the documents) to be insured. LOT A, KING COUNTY TESTAMENTARY DIV. NO. L08M0034, REC. 20080812900004, KING COUNTY APN: 142305-9122-06 E. The following deeds affecting the property herein described have been recorded within 36 months of the effective date of this commitment: NONE Property Address: To be determined, Renton, WA 98059 NOTE: The forthcoming Mortgagee's Policy will be the ALTA 2006 Policy unless otherwise noted on Schedule A herein. NOTE: We find no judgments or Federal tax liens against the vestee herein, unless otherwise shown as a numbered exception above. NOTE: A FEE WILL BE CHARGED UPON THE CANCELLATION OF THIS COMMITMENT PURSUANT TO WASHINGTON STATE INSURANCE CODE AND THE FILED RATE SCHEDULE OF THIS COMPANY. RrstAmeni-an Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS (a)"Mortgage" means mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument. (b)"Public Records" means title records that give constructive notice according to the state law where the land is located. mmitment No.� 4243-2173612 Page 8 of 10 of matters affecting the title 2. LATER DEFECTS The Exceptions in Schedule B - Section II may be amended to show any defects, liens or encumbrances that appear for the first time in the public records or are created or attached between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Requirements (a) and (c) of Schedule B - Section I are met. We shall have no liability to you because of this amendment. 3. EXISTING DEFECTS If any defects, liens or encumbrances existing at Commitment Date are not shown in Schedule B, we may amend Schedule B to show them. If we do amend Schedule B to show these defects, liens or encumbrances, we shall be liable to you according to Paragraph 4 below unless you knew of this information and did not tell us about it in writing. 4. LIMITATION OF OUR LIABILITY Our only obligation is to issue to you the Policy referred to in this Commitment, when you have met its Requirements. If we have any liability to you for any loss you incur because of an error in this Commitment, our liability will be limited to your actual loss caused by your relying on this Commitment when you acted in good faith to: comply with the Requirements shown in Schedule B - Section I or eliminate with our written consent any Exceptions shown in Schedule B - Section II, We shall not be liable for more than the Policy Amount shown in Schedule A of this Commitment and our liability is subject to the terms of the Policy form to be issued to you. 5. CLAIMS MUST HE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT Any claim, whether or not based on negligence, which you may have against us concerning the title to the land must be based on this commitment and is subject to its terms. cc: PNW Holdings, LLC cc: Sally Lou Nipert FirstAmerican rtle Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language COmmitmen tti~f s s x f , i Ci# FirstAmerican Mritment No.: 4243-2173612 Page 9 of 10 First American Title Insurance Company 818 Stewart St, Ste 800 Seattle, WA 98101 Phn - (206)615-3206 Fax - (425)551-4107 0F. ., y C* FirstArnerkan Title Privacy Information We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Information In order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information, We Understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information - particularly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how we w7l utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with aur subsidiaries we have adopted this Privacy Policy to govern the use and handling of your personal information. Applicability This Privacy Polity governs our use of the information that you provide to us. It does not govern the manner in which we may use information we have obtained from any other source, such as information obtained from a public record or from another person or entity, First American has also adopted broader guidelines that govern aur use or personal information regardless of Its source. First American calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values, Types of Information Depending upon which of our services you are utiizing, the types of nonpublic personal information that we may collect include: • Information we receive from you onapplications, forms and in other communications to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or arty other means; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliated companies, or others; and • Information We receive from a consumer reporting agency. Use of Information We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any nonaffiliated party, Therefore, we will not release your information to nonaffiliated parties except: (1) as necessary for us to provide the product or service you have requested of us; or (2) as permitted by law, We may, however, store such information Indefinitely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased, Such information may be used for any internal purpose, such as quality Control efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of wnonpubiic personal information listed above to one or more of our affiliated companies. Such affiliated companies Include financial service providers, such as title insurers, property and casualty e Cry, and bust and investment advisory companies, or companies involved in real estate services, such as appraisal companies, home warranty companies and escrow companies. Furthermore, we may also prootic all the information affi tion ore collect, as described strove, to companies that perform marketing services on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies or to other financial institutions with whom we or our affiliated companies have joint marketing agreements. Former Customers Even if you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to appy to you. Confidentiaiity, and Security entities who We will use our nest know that efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those individuals and handled sponeed bly and naccordancetwithto providethi Privvacy pity ndFroducts or irstAm ices to yicaan's a We lInformatioll Use Our nValues.We urrentlymantainphyscalorts to train and oversee our loyeledrondCaandproceduralsafegardsnthateomplyIwitbe h federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. Information Obtained Through Our Web Site First American Financial Corporation is sensitive to privacy issues on the Internet. We believe it is important you know how we treat the information about you we receive on the Internet. In general, you can visit First American or its affiliates' Web sites on the World Wide Web without telling us who you are or revealing any information about domain names, not the e-mail addresses, of visitors, This information is aggregated to measure the number of visits, average time spent on the site, a yourself. Our Web servers collect the American uses this information to measure the use or aur site and to develop ideas to improve the content of our site. p � Viewed and similar information. First There are times, however, when we may need Information from you, such as your name and email address. When information is needed, f o t efforts to let you know at the ti we will use our besme eol;ection how we will use the personal Information. usually, the personal information we collect is used only by us to respond to your inquiry, process es order or allow you to access specific o account/profile information, If you choose to share any personal information with us, we will Only use it in accordance with the policies outlined above. Business Relationships Rist American Financial Corporation's site and its affiliates' sites may contain links to other Web sites. While we try to link only to sites that share our high standards and respect for privacy, we are not responsible for the content or the privacy practices employed by other sites. Cookies Some of First American's Web sites may make use of "eoofde" technology to measure site activity and to customize information to your personal tastes. A cookie is an element of data that a Web site can send to your browser, which may then store the cookie on your hard drive. EIrstASppI uses stored cookies. The goal of this technology Is to better serve you when visiting our site, save you time when you are here and to provide you with a more meaningful and productive Web site experience. ---------- ------------------ - - ---------------------------- ------------------ Fair Information Values Fairness We consider consumer expectations about their privacy in all our businesses, We Only offer products and services that assure a favorable balance between consumer benefits and consumer Privacy. Public Record We believe that an open public record creates significant value for society, enhances consumer choice and creates consumer opportunity. We actively support an open public record and emphasize 4s importance and contribution to our economy. Use We believe we should behave responsibly when we use information about a consumer in our business. We will obey the laws governing the collection, use and dissemination of data. Accuracy We will take reasonable steps to help assure the accuracy of the data we collect, use and disseminate. Where When, as with the public record, we cannot correct inaccurate inforMUUnr we will take all reasonable steps to assist consumers ibled identifying the l take ource of theble se ro eo datanso that time cor su Imer can secure the required corrections. Education We endeavor to educate the users of our products and services, our employees and others In our industry about the importance of consumer privacy. We will instruct our employees on our fair Information values and on the responsible collection and use of data. We will encourage others in our industry to collect and use information in a responsible manner. Security We will maintain appropriate Facilities and systems to protect against unauthorized access to and corruption of the data we maintain. Farm 5D PRIVACY (8/1/09) Page 1 of 1 Privacy Information (2001-2010 First Afnerican Financial Corporation) First Rmencan Title Form No. 1068-2 ALTA Plain Language Commitment nmitment No.: 4243-2173612 Page 10 of 10 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Exhibit "A" Vested owner: SALLY LOU NIPERT, AS HER SOLE AND SEPARATE PROPERTY Real property in the County of King, State of Washington, described as follows: LOT A OF KING COUNTY TESTAMENTARY DIVISION NO.: L08M0034, RECORDED AUGUST 12, 2008 UNDER RECORDING N0, 20080812900004, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. BEING NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY WASHINGTON: LESS NORTH 100 FEET OF THE WEST 440 FEET. Tax Parcel Number: 142305-9122-06 Situs Address: To be determined, Renton, WA 98059 First American Title 4 5 6 7 ��ti- >a ry .. ue 42.0'2 1.13 A= o 9`0410 I IF 103`.a s 16:sc s - 122 w` X21' 27 3 ro9 - 16350 s lc3so sF z „yaw .-,x 23 0 2425 r - 0055 F' 59.1, 0030 0090 0050 0060 65.36 $ 5),41 P463s#n 4301<p n axasA °' sn' a �e 0140 0200 30230 A o �5 12544 S,14 0 �1�14 4224 D2� 316ti1P 3 �7F Q 292 90491St. L AµT 28 U: �J. �. 1dT�"�. PL. 7`F1V�� -, S". f12. 9.2.81 .50.7 S 0254 ,. _.= 0084 113.59 Qy. 0 73 3C0 Q°-ae E -95Y5 . _519 ------------- VOL.- ---. _ 88 -OF -90 i w 506{p' -i° ..57 63-69 _ ,� E9. 61 w 12 0F20 .- 55 .� m �°,° m. Q H �o9A 1 �O 75 N w� 112.30 4]3?1 9� 8 m w7 x-92.39 Lot 1 x s 1cts1 c? -1 0110 ,;7421 ass Eps. 3]57 •' 1 4696! 13 5e791 r A^ 95.37 ;"' n 0100 p4g4 4084 i4 1.c1 he 0070 o 16 � 15 'o.w 'o�„ 'OSA '».0 0134 � z].21 12 ''.�`r 5 43'1901 .. T n ' N' i3 11 r m. Re 5E 1 0057 17467 91' X 1aa 57 s w re�9 11633 s �0 14 0949 g 4160 4150 0140 1c<41 s 16973 sF 1o4s 0090 as.96 a °; •z � so 5 s < ,0 5 4130 0124 0110 1;975 SF N D104 293# CP 1 6051i�� ry�3195 em°20 21 66 1$ 4151 0�er 59.71 n v-055610 452CAm Ow0210 5 574001 86.97 y 0190 N 0200 © ry 97 v 17 wss ICE. 50 Bali mn 531-1# a �^ o i6 0160: F GI 18 ,.� 1858):p0 22 0150556501 s n� uro 422 �� 1o93C SF 10534 SF L6317 a; '091° SF 727 3IY. H] ..miesq� y ICI 9gpgd 9047 9044 16esa sF� N y a° ec 9090 a0 6a 9488 «„� S E 139TH PL '•� ^-x -116 Sa N m s oma � 1 N 66- � ,- �, _ 11I 1: q 55. s6 76 �'7-"`" : 5 XlCC5PgBiD66- s91,3d 92 aha a i'W a Woo 9814 SF w 3 942520 N ,9 4 )6 74.19 ] OOID LOT 1 I ` 1AM'S S INN~ SLO ES - 54 m 1.54 AC i wn 2 'ryRY H w zj 0064, :f .,nm 4 W n w n m ~�VOL. 73-7Jn 5 wa 10,61 g 18]09 VOs ]0384 5�, a0581 b_ :cs12 S c 0070 o f 4084 n o 2 2444 4412 30029 S; 10295 SIz 10809 S .� w S2•.G - �6 4434 4054 1 A AC 110 o�93H--'�'iMrr+b9.i•.r.�.6.. ':-.- 499 9411-d 8'tii6-- l Y! 0099 2' X 7- 9144 U " 6 3s-¢ev 'zl3-zz rl.vz sea -1 N t z on .s 07.62 ��+....+.��.�m......e 35 E 40938 IF 930 9057 wA 1.91 RC N69-18-1 W 4i .10 4062 149601 _ 0068 .00 110 T MN � o �N LOT A lea 249^9# a 300 0064 wso � p. ?16k) SF 23)64 SF ore.e z - V 9050 9037 24501 °APs ^+ 0067 1240069 64�' 16s 1s0 ISO1 -�- 4.27 AC f 1661021 r J 00 be-rtw�..lsy. 1 - - 9122 M N 84 20-F2 W ry85-28-C9:i 623.967 ry x v4as z � 0°a N 89 -31 -aa E � :� 110 ry Q rra V fa 2 3a LOT B Las4aA �,I � W A•'S-i9_,0 4^ 001 5 AC 1.19 AC 994 108 4 ]OS66f-�4� KCSP 475042 11x0805 ; 0020 TR G t /! 1a62991 TR 13 V�T 7RA n p •, �w loSooA s-----r--------��I �� 9023 X25 "V.! 1 �:a NBB-28-F 9N 624.12 1120w ! 1320 rl7C +/- S.P. 'v t-6) � t-67 � I'1�\.., La 9113 73 1p"" 5a o 516-�6 tel' wn a LU r 0078 0081m .. Y 5 - 1'j 9013 w tea e 4 a 43975 3f 750 37.. - i c._ . tip 10 9 TR.A B 7 ei 5 86-29- 9 E1296.4C 1p7 0479 300}31ty 150 �� S 16951 CAROL OOD�.o 5 4 4484 xn 96209 a i� 9a 0100 11911 bt' L5412 3F IO153 SF u�� W A n oow 12022 SF ... V) YOiL fi4/9y-700 n � w>., 0090 0074 15008 SFI o 15000 ste" 0075 -IF 99.24 332.06 11#.°0114 0480 a�'ps j 22^ 0060 0054 15081 SF Iso -- es.ee 4g• o' 87.64 11.91 1#4440 =60A.00 c o b ¢6-38 OT e N-- ------- !72.BF ..S.E. 149RD 5 1aHa.a`o-_---'--- _ - 3a 141 ".:. _8 - -- .-.._. -_-. 20081021000149:00 Filed for Record at Request of & When Recorded Return To Sally Nipert 14004 I56"' Ave. SE Renton, WA 9805900 CHICAGO TITLE Q PAGE001 OF 002 10121/2008 09:46 KING COUNTY, WA E2368092 43 10/21/2008 09:47 KING( COUNTY, WR SALE $10.00 x0.00 PAGE001 OF 001 PERSONAL REP'RESENTATIVE'S DEED (Upon Distribution of Separate Real Property from Testate Estate) Grantors: GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET AND SALLY LOU NIPERT, Co -Personal Representatives of Estate of Kathleen M. Ouimet, deceased Grantee: SALLY LOU NIPERT Abbreviated Legal Descr.: LOT A, KING COUNTY TESTAMENTARY DIVISION NO. L08M0034, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 20080812900004, IN KING COUNTY, 'WASHINGTON, .Parcel No.: 142305-9122 I. Grantors. We, GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET AND SALLY LOU NIPERT, are the duly appointed, qualified, and acting Co -Personal Representatives of the Estate of KATHLEEN M. OUIMET, Deceased, King County, Washington, Superior Court Case No. 08-4-01861-7 KNT. 2. Grantee, The Grantee is SALLY LOU NIPERT, a single woman. 3. Decedent's Estate. Decedent KATHLEEN M. OUIMET died testate on January 27, 2008, On February 29, 2008, Decedent's Will was admitted to probate and Grantors were appointed Co -Personal. Representatives of Decedent's estate and granted Nonintervention Powers for the administration of Decedent's estate. 4. Will Provision. Article IV of Decedent's Will provides that the residue of Decedent's estate shall pass to Decedent's children. 5. Real Property. Among the assets of the residue of Decedent's estate is the following described real property located in King County, Washington: LOT A OF KC TESTAMENTARY DIV #L08M0034 RFC #20080812900004 BEING NW 114 OF SW 114 OF SE 1/4 OF STR 14-23-05 LESS N I00 FT OF W 440 FT LESS CO RD Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Number: 142305-9122, CHOW TITLE INS, Wa REFS %a7d2S®? -le 2QM00.mss 6. Consideration, This corrveMce is made in consideration of Decedent's gift in her Will 7. Conveyance. Grantors convey, grant, and quitclaim to SALLY LOU NIPERT all of the interest of Decedent's estate in the real property described in this Deed (together with all after- acquired title of the: Grantors to the real property), which interest represents Decedent's interest in the real property at her death. DATED: STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ry Estate of KATHLEEN M. OUIMET, Deceased GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET, Co -Personal Representative SALLY LOU NIl°ERT, Co -Personal Representative On this day personally appeared before me GEORGE RICHARD OUIMET and SALLY LOU NIPERT, known or proved to me to be the individual described in and who executed the within and foregoing Personal Representative's Deed, and acknowledged that they and each of them signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed, mentioned. for the uses and purposes therein GIVEN under my hand arid official seal on: �,.....+►'''►.! Ile re y wco . 'rARYr4Rr I'rl 17 Z- nted Name NOTARY PUBLIC for Washington W p,5�'.` Residing at: &;. kj�r0 `'�"'1"„""� My appointment expires on: Ni w Cr 4 LL VO.L./PAGE w � w0� ~ dpi LLI C) V7 3mo q � V 2,4 54 O -O Q' rc�r fn = m z 4 z � w 0 , biro u2, F- �04o �s w 4ism5�.a,•``` � w0� ~ dpi LLI C) V7 3mo q � V 2,4 54 O -O Q' rc�r fn = m z 4 z � w 0 , :O 1Q. Elk da ZIP 1 od 14 9.1 sip v, lag ION 7 list X sit O -Q A E19 A, " 11 Many I do 2 XW ge. on EX 17' Ago - p7 c �j logw l v low off -09T29 K. OON on. own TV �q Wgq02'�qK��S/1 � Oz"S-91 77 ❑ rt5� �tJ4SSO E3U3�4}�a � wa�°�❑$}ori G "�I •:��wU��q��tai -Z 3M o l Lir jyU-jW NO�O1I� [ u vU.L /PABE Z AR f' � w •E4 = 3 N aE� . @y4�' •:m z r f 7jl O�� z z a 0 Jj2.492, z❑z rc vU.L /PABE a U z O •E4 = 3 N aE� . @y4�' •:m z r a U z O .00LZ6'[ 3 VF. QZ. GqN H ui ,•l �o 4 N ��nnnm h !0•J1p71 .06'6'99 an OF, ON � a W = -i SW 0 VOL. w gq,o' x mar road .� ®�#"b:•. H ui ,•l �o 4 N ��nnnm h !0•J1p71 .06'6'99 an OF, ON � a W = -i SW 0 VOL. S` H ui ,•l �o 4 N ��nnnm h !0•J1p71 .06'6'99 an OF, ON � a W = -i SW 0 Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 200911050 541 CITY OF RENTON ORD 76.$0 PAGE -801 OF 015 11/03/7009 10:24 KING COUNTY, 14A 20091105000541.009 Pleasc print or type information WASHINGTON STATE RECORDER'S Cover Sheet (RCW 65.04) Document Title(s) (or transactions contained therein): (all areas applicable to your document must be filled in) i. Ordinance #5465 2, 3. 4. Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference Ws on page _ of doctunent Grantor(s) (Last name first name, initials) I . City of Renton , 2. Additional names on page ____ of document. Grantee(s) (Last name first, then first name and initials) 2• , Additional names on page _ of document. Legal description (abbreviated: i.e. lot block, plat or section, township, range) These portions of Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, & 24, all in Township 23 north. Range 5 East, W.M., and RE Sections 18 & 19, both in Township 23 North, Range 6 East, W.M., all in King County, Washington, more particularly described as follows... FER Additional legal is on page _L of document. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Account Number ❑ Assessor Tax 4 not yet assigned./ -i 142305911901 and others The Auditor/Recorder will rely on the information provided on the form. The staff will not read the document to verify the accuracy or completeness of the indexing information provided herein. 1 am requesting an emergency nonstandard recording for an additional fee as provided in RCW 36.18.010. I understand that the recording processing requirements may cover up or otherwise obscure some pare of the text on the original document. Signature of Requesting Party 27'!4 20091105000541.002 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5465_ AN ORDINANCE OF TETE CITY OF RENTON, 'WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE FOR PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO ANWOR BENEFITTING FROM THE CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR PHASE H AND ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF THE CHARGE UPON CONNECTION TO THE FACILITIES. T[ IE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLL(}WS: tiECTION 1. 'there is hereby created a Sanitary Sewer Sen•ice Special Assessment District firr the area served by the Central Plateau Interceptor Phase 11 project in the northeast quadrant ❑f the City of Renton and within King County, which area is more particularl} described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. A map of the service area is attached as Exhibit "W'. The recording of this docurnent is to provide notification of' potential connection and interest charges While this connection charge may be paid at any time, the City does not require payment until such time as the parcel is connected to and, thus, benefiting front the sewer facilities The property may be soled or in any other way change hands without triggering the require[uent, by the City, of payment of the charges associated with this district. SECTION IL Persons connecting to the sanitary sewer facilities in this Special Assessment District, and which properties have not been charged or assessed with all costs of the Central Plateau Interceptor Phase 11 as detailed in this ordinance, shall pay, in addition to the payment of the connection permit fee and in addition to the system development charge, the following additional fees: CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned City Clerk of the City of Renton, Washington, certify that this is a true and correct copy of Subscribed and sealed this 1N day of Am,,sy , 20¢1 City Clerk 20091105000541,003 ORDINANCE NO. 5455 A. Per Unit Area Charze. New connections of residential dwelling units or equivalents shall pay a fee of $351.95 per dwelling unit. Those properties included within this Special Assessment District and which may be assessed a charge thereunder are included within the boundary legally described in Exhibit "A" and which boundary is shown an the map attached as Exhibit "B". B. Per Unit Frontage Charge. There is hereby created a sub -district within the Central Plateau Interceptor Phase II Special Assessment District consisting of properties fronting on the sewer. Nev,! connections of residential units or equivalents shall pay a fee of $5.810.34 per dwelling unit. The properties to be assessed for the per unit frontage charge are described in Exhibit `'A" attached hereto. A map identifying the properties within the sub -district is attached as Exhibit "B". The properties located within this sub- district are subject to both charges (Area and Frontage). SECTION 111. In addition to the aforestated charges, there shall be a charge of 5.30% per annum added to the Special Assessment District charge. The interest charge shall accrue for no more than ten (10) years front the date this ordinance becomes effective. Interest charges will be simple interest and not compound interest. SECTION IV. This ordinance is effective upon its passage, approval and thirty (30) days after publication. 2 ORDINANCE NO. 546.5__ PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 6th day of July , 2009. .4. wa&dt Bonnie I. Walton. City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 6th day of July , 2009. —ij"�— � Denis Law, Mayor Approved as to form: �;4 - ---1-14111r?wz'-�� Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Dale of Publication: 7/10/2009 (summary) ORD. 15 5 3 : 512110 9: scr 20091105000541.004 S 9+I11 -i ORDINANCE NO. 5465 EXHIBIT A CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA ASSESSMENT BOUNDARY LEGAL DESCRIPTION. Those portions of Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23 & 24, all in Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., and Sections 18 and 19, both in Township 23 North, Range 6 East, W. M., all in King County, Washington, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the southerly right of way margin of SE 1281h St (NE 41h Street) and the easterly line of the existing City of Renton Limits as annexed under Ordinance No. 5064, in the Northwest quarter of said Section 14; Thence easterly along said southerly right of way margin, crossing 155"t' Ave SE and 156"I' Ave SE, to the east line of the Northwest quarter of said Section 14; Thence continuing easterly along the courses of said southerly right of Garay margin, crossing 160"' Ave E and the west half of 164th Ave SE, to the section line common to said Sections 13 and 14; Thence continuing easterly along the courses of said southerly right of way, crossing the east half of 164th Ave SE and 169'h Ave SE, to an intersection with the east line of the West quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 13; Thence southerly along said east line and the Urban Growth Boundary (UBG) line, to an intersection with the north line of the Southeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 13; Thence easterly along said north line and said UBG line, to the west line of the East quarter of said subdivision; Thence southerly along said west line and said UBG line, to the Northwest corner of Lot 1 of King County Short plat S90S0040, as recorded in Book 141 of Surveys, Page 236, records of King County, Washington; Thence easterly along the North line of said Lot 1 and said UGB line, to the Northeast corner of said Lot 1, said Northeast corner also being on the west line of the Northeast quarter of said Section 13; Thence easterly along said UGB, crossing 172nd Ave SE, to the intersection of the easterly right of way margin of 172"d Ave SE and the southerly right of way margin of SE 132nd St.; EXHIBIT A — CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA ASSESSMENT PAGE 1 of 6 20091105000541.006 ORDINANCE N0. 5465 Thence continuing easterly along the southerly right of way margin of SE 132"d St and said UG13 line, crossing 173r1 Ave SE, 175th Ave 5E, 178th Ave SE and the west half of 180`' Ave SE, to an intersection with the east fine of said subdivision, said east line also being the west line of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 18; Thence continuing easterly along said southerly right of way margin of SE 132"d St and said UGB line, crossing the east half of 1801h Ave SE, 18 Pt Ave SE and 182"d Ave SE, to an intersection with the westerly right of way margin of 182nd Ave SE; "Thence southerly along said westerly right of way margin of 182"d Ave SE and said UGB line, to an intersection with the westerly extension of the northerly right of way margin of SE 134"' ,5t; `thence easterly along said westerly extension and the northerly right of way margin of SE 1314"' St and said UGB line, crossing 182nd Ave SE, to an intersection with the westerly right of way margin of 184"' ,Ave SE in the Northwest quarter of said Section 18; Thence southerly along said westerly right of way mawin of 184i11 Ave SE and its southerly extension and leaving said 1JG13 line, crossing SE 134' St, SE 135" St, SE 136"' St and SE 140"' St, to an intersection with the north line of Tract 23, Renton Suburban Tracts Division No. 4, recorded in Volume 61 of Plats, pages 74-76, said records, in Government Lot 4 of said Sectin11 18; Thence easterly and southerly along said north line and the east line of said Tract, to an intersection with the northeast corner of Renton -Suburban Tracts Division No. 8, recorded in Volume 69 of flats, pages 74-76, said records, in said Government Lot 4 of said Section 19, said northeast corner also being on said UGB line; Thence southerly along the east line of said flat and said UGB line, to the Southeast corner of said Plat at the southeast corner of Government Lot I in said Section 19; Thence westerly along the courses of the south boundary of said plat and said UGB line, to an intersection with the south line of Renton -Suburban 'tracts Div. No. 6, recorded in Volurne 66 of' Plats, pages 33-35, said records, in the Northeast quarter of said Section 24; Thence westerly along the south line of said Plat and said LJGB line, to the most Southwest corner of said Plat, said Southwest corner also being the Northeast corner of Government Lot 5 of said Section 24; Thence southerly along the east line of said Government Lot 5 and said UGB line, to the northeast corner of Lot 31 of Renton -Suburban Tracts Div. No.7, recorded in Volume 69 of Plats, pages 39-41, said records; Thence southwesterly and northwesterly along the south boundary of said plat and said UGB line, to an intersection with the east line of Government Lot 10 of said Section 24, said east line also being the east line of Tract A of Briarwood South No. 6, recorded in Volume 97 of Plats, pages 68 and 69, said records; EXHIBIT A -- CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA AssESSMENT PAGE 2 of 6 20091105000541.007 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 Thence northerly along said east line of said Government Lot 10 and said Tract A and said UGB line, to the Northeast corner of said Tract A; Thence westerly along the courses of the north boundary of said Tract A, and said UGB line, to the Northwest corner of said Tract A, said Northwest corner also being a point on the east line of the: Northeast quarter of said Section 23; Thence northerly along said east line and said UGB line, to the northeast corner of Tract C of Skyfire Ridge Div. No. 1, recorded in Volume 141 of Plats, pages 93-99, said records; Thence westerly along the courses of the north boundary of said Tract C and said UGB line, to the Northwest corner of said Tract C, said Northwest corner also being a point on the east line of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23; Thence northerly along said east line and said UGB line, to the Northeast corner of said subdivision; Thence westerly along the north line of said subdivision and said UGB line, to the Northwest corner of said subdivision, said Northwest corner also being the Northeast corner of Government Lot 7 of said Section 23; Thence continuing westerly along the north line of said Government Lot 7, to the Northwest corner thereof, said Northwest corner also being the Southwest corner of (lie Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 23; Thence nor(herly along the west line of said subdivision, to the Southeast corner of Lot 9, Briar Hills No. 3, recorded in Volume 107 of Plats, page 36, said records, said west line also being the east line of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 23; "Thence westerly along the south line of said Plat, to the Southwest corner thereof, Thence northerly along the west line of said Plat, to an intersection with the Southeast corner of Briar Ridge, recorded in Volume 113 of Plats, pages 60 and 61, said records; "Thence westerly along the south line of said Plat, to the Southwest corner thereof, in Government Lot 1 of said Section 22, said Southwest corner also being a point on the west line of the East half of the East half of said Government Lot 1; Thence southerly along said east line, to the northerly bank of the Cedar River; Thence westerly along said northerly bank, to an intersection with the east line of Tract A, Cedar River Bluff, recorded in Volume 172 of Plats, pages 53-56, said records; Thence northerly along said east line, to the Northeast corner of said Tract A; EXHIBIT A — CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA AssESSMENT PAGE 3 OF 6 20091105000541.008 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 Thence westerly along the north line of said Tract A, to an intersection with the east line of Maplewood Heights, recorded in Volume 78 of Plats, pages 1-4, said records; Thence southerly along said east line, to the Southeast corner thereof; Thence westerly along the south line of said plat, to the Southwest corner thereof, said corner also being a point on the east line of Government Lot 6 of Section 22,- Thence 2; "Thence South 01 °08'21" West, along said east line, to a point 641.73 feet southerly of the Northeast corner of said Government Lot 6; Thence North 55°51'39" West, a distance of 391.81 feet; Thence North 26°45'23" West, a distance of 494.29 feet, to a point on the north line of said Government Lot 6, said point also being on the south line of the Southwest quarter of Section 15; Thcnce westerly along said south line, and along the existing City Limits of Renton, as annexed tinder Ordinance No. 3945, to the Southeast corner of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of said Section 15; Thence northerly along the east line of said subdivision and said City Limits, to the Northwest corner of Lot 21, Block 1 of said Maplewood Heights in said Southwest quarter of Section 15; I'itence northeasterly along the north line of said Block 1 of said Plat, to an intersection with the west line of Lot 10, Bast Crest, recorded in Volume 87 of Plats, page 49, said records, in said Southwest quarter; Thence northerly along said west line, to the Northwest corner thereof, said Northwest corner also being a point on the south line of Tract A, Hideaway Home Sites, recorded in Volume 81 of Plats, pages 88 and 89, said records; Thence westerly along the south line of said Tract A, to the Southwest corner thereof; Thence northerly along the west line of said Tract A and the northerly extension of said west line, and along the existing City Limits of Renton, as annexed under Ordinance No. 3143, to the south line of the Northwest quarter of Section 22; Thence westerly along said south line and along said existing City Limits and along the south line of Lot 14, Goe's Place, recorded in Volume 85 of Plats, pages 12 and 13, said records, to the Southwest corner of said Lot 14; Thence northerly along the west line of said Lot 14, to the Northwest corner thereof, Thence easterly along the north line of said Lot 14, to the Northeast corner thereof; EXHEBIT A — CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA ASsESSMENT PAGE 4 OF 6 200911055000541.009 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 Thence northerly along the east line of Lot 13 of said Plat and its northerly extension, to an intersection with the westerly extension of the north line of the South half of the Southeast quarter of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of said Section 15; Thence easterly along said westerly extension and said north line and along the existing City limits of Renton, as annexed under Ordinance No. 5074, crossing Duvall Ave NE, to its intersection with the west line of the Northwest quarter of said Section 15; Thence northerly along said west line crossing NE 2n1 St, to the most westerly southwest corner of Alder Crossing, recorded in Volume 251 of Plats, pages 37 - 42, said records; Thence westerly along the south line of said plat, to the southeast corner thereof; Thence northerly along the east line of said Plat, to its intersection with the north line of the south half of the north half of the north half of the north half of said Section 15; Thence easterly along said north line of said subdivision crossing Hoquiam Ave NE and Jericho Ave NE, to the easterly right of way margin thereof; Thence southerly along said westerly right of way margin, to the Southwest corner of Tract 2, Black Loam Five Acre Tracts, recorded in Volume 12 of Plats, page 101, said records; Thence continuing; easterly along said existing City Limits and the south Iine of said Tract 2, to the east line of the west half of said Tract 2; Thence northerly along said east line, to the south line of the north 150 feet thereof; Thence easterly along said south line, to the east line of the of the West half of the West half of the East half of said Tract 2; "I'hcnce northerly along said east line, a distance of 8 feet; Thence easterly along the south line of the north 142 fee thereof, to the east line of the west halm of the east half of said Tract 2; Thence southerly along said east line, to the south line of the Northeast quarter of said East half of said Tract 2; Thence easterly along said south line, to the westerly right of way margin of Lyons Ave NE; Thence continuing easterly along the easterly extension of said south line, crossing Lyons Ave NE, to the easterly right of way margin thereof; Thence northerly along said easterly right of way margin, to the southerly right of way margin of NE 4" St. EXHIBIT A -- CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA ASSESSMENT PAGE 5 OF 6 20091105000541.010 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 Thence easterly along said southerly right of way margin, to the intersection with the easterly line of the existing City of Renton Limits as annexed under Ordinance No- 5064, in the Northwest quarter of said Section 14 and the point of beginning. EXHIBIT A -- CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR SAD, AREA ASSESSMENT PAGE 6 OF 6 20091105000541.011 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 EXHIBIT A CENTRALPLATEAUINTERCEPTOR FRONTAGE ASSESSMENT PROPERTIES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1 and Tract B, Carolwood, recorded in Volume 1 I I of Plats, pages 99-100, records of King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH Lot 11, Carolwood No. 2, recorded in Volume 114, page 74, said records; and TO(JETI11AR W ITH that portion of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington; and T06FTHER WITH the West 150 feet of the East 180 feet of the North 165 feet of the South half of said Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 14; and TOGETHER WITH the West 160 feet of the east 190 feet of the South 132 feet of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 14; and TOGETI IER WITH the East 165 feet of the West 330 feet of said subdivision, EXCEPT the North 264 fcct thereof, and EXCEPT the South 132 feet thereof; TOGETHER WITH the South 20 feet of the North 284 feet of said subdivision, EXCEPT the West 330 feet thereof; and TOGETHER WITH the North 120 feet of the South 252 feet of the East half of said subdivision, EXCEPT the West 150 feet thereof; and TOGETHER WITH the East half of said subdivision, EXCEPT the North 284 feet thereof and EXCEPT the South 252 feet thereof; and TOGETHER win I the East 230 feet of the South 132 feet of the North 264 feet of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 14; and TOGETHER WITH the West 165 feet of the East 195 feet of the North 132 feet of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 14; and TOGETHER WITH Lot 2 of King County Short Plat No. 481066, as recorded under King County Recording No_ 8109100503, located in the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 14; LESS Roads. Exhibit A — Central Plateau Interceptor SAD, Frontage - Area A Page 1 of 1 20091105000541,012 ORDINANCE NO. 5455 EXHIBIT A CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR FRONTAGE ASSESSMENT PROPERTIES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA "B" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 1, 2, 3 and the 20 feet wide undivided interest parcel lying between said Lot l and Lot 2, of King County Short Plat No_ 576015, recorded under King County Recording No. 7905170580, records of King County, Washington; TOGETHER WITH Lots I and 2, King County Short Plat No. 677116, recorded under King County Recording No. 7905170582; and TOGETHER WITH Tract A and Tract B of King County Short Plat No, 675021, recorded under King County Recording No. 7602040384; and TOGETHER WITH Tracts 4, 5, 6 and the West 150 feet of the North 80 feet of Tract 7, all in Block 3, Cedar Park Five Acre Tracts, recorded in Volume 15 of Plats, page 91, records of King County, Washington. All situatc in the Southeast quarter of Section 14 and the North hali'of Section 23, both in Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the City of Renton, King County, Washington, Exhibit A — Central Plateau Interceptor SAD, Frontage - Area B Page 1 of t 20091105000541.013 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 .EXHIBIT A CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR FRONTAGE ASSESSMENT PROPERTIES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA "C" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots I through 8 and Lot 17, Ridge Point Estates, recorded in Volume 165, pages 64-65, records of King County, Washington; TOGETI 11iR WITH that portion of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 5 North, W.M., King County, Washington, lying easterly and southerly of said plat of Ridge Point Estates and westerly of the westerly right of way margin of 154'' PL SE (W.J. Orton Rd); and TOGE'CHER WITH the North 133 feet of the East 120 feet of said Northeast quarter of the Northwest Quarter; and TOGETI IER WITI I that portion of the North half of the Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter, lying easterly and southerly of Linda Homes, recorded in Volume 74. page 6, said records; and `I'C)OETIIER WITH that portion of the South half of said Northeast quarter of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter, and the south half of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter, both in said Section 23, lying westerly of the westerly right of way margin of 156`' Ave SE (Co. Rd. 1049, August E. Gerber Rd.) and easterly of the northeasterly right of way margin of 154`h PL SE (W.J. Orton Rd.),- LESS d.); LESS Roads. Exhibit A — Central Plateau Interceptor SAD, Frontage - Area C Page 1 of 1 20091105000541.014 ORDINANCE NO. 5465 EXHIBIT A CENTRAL PLATEAU INTERCEPTOR FRONTAGE ASSESSMENT PROPERTIES SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AREA "D" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots i and 50, Briarwood West, recorded in Volume 93 of Plats, pages 91-92, records of King County, Washington; TOGETHER WI`T'H Lots 1 and 16, Marywood, recorded in Volume 90 of Plats, page 32, said records; and 'roGE'1 HER WITH the South 165 feet of the North 195 feet of the East half of the Northeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23; LESS the East 30 feet thereof; and TOGETHER WITH the west 150 feet of said East half of said subdivision, lying northerly of the South 365 feet thereof and southerly of the North 195 feet thereof; and TOGETHER WITH that portion of the West half of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., King County, Washington, lying northerly of the north line of Lot I of King County Short Plat No. 1286002, as recorded under King County Recording No. 8708140726; and TOGETHER WITH Lot 1 and Lot 2 of King County Short Plat No. 1286002, as recorded under King County Recording No. 8708140726, said Lot 2 being later amended by Lot Line Adjustment No. 890718, as recorded under King County Recording No. 90t0241356, said lots being, a portion of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of said Section 23; LESS Roads. Exhibit A — Central Plateau Interceptor SAD, Frontage - Area D Page 1 of 1 RECEIPT EGO0020176 City Of .'Ti Transaction Date: February 27, 2014 BILLING CONTACT Justin Lagers PNW Holdings LLC 9675 SE 36TH ST, 105 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME TRANSACTION PAYMENT AMOUNT PAID TYPE METHOD LUA14-000241 PLAN - Preliminary Plat Fee Fee Payment heck #10363 $3,970.00 Technology Fee Fee Payment Cheek #10363 $150.00 SUB TOTAL $4,120.00 LUA14-000241 PLAN - Environmental Review Fee Payment Check #40003 $1,004.00 PLAN - Preliminary Plat Fee Fee Payment Check #40003 $30.00 SUB TOTAL $1,030.00 TOTAL $5,150.00 (?FFI " ED FES 2 7 2014 1n1PJ!1yt; f)iVf�fQ,ti' Printed On: 2/27/2014 Prepared By: Jill Ding Page 1 of 1 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 j Justin Lagers, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: 1. On the 3rd day of February, 2014, 1 installed one public information sign(s) and plastic flyer box on the property located at 14038 156th Avenue Southeast, Renton, WA 98059 for the following project: 156th Ave SE Assembledge Project Name SaIIV Nipert G. Richard Ouimet Owner Name 2. 1 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 Informa�j -S-ibm nstallation" han"cka e. fI taller Signature DF SUBSCRIBED�i WgRN to before me this 3rd day of February, 2014. L v RC Z# 0-JAq`A ,' �'� NOTARY PUB IC in and f the State of Washington, residing at U80 0 or W► S�.�• My commission expires on -3 - U1, /7, /-�/ C:\Users\Justin\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IF5\FFHOQTX2\pubsign.doc 12/13 4 40 40P � . . �1J Is J�� 4W .� . . 40 40P � . .