Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 4539 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 4539 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE NORTHEAST RENTON PARK MASTER PLAN WHEREAS,the City began the process of developing a plan for the Northeast Renton Park in the fall of 2023; and WHEREAS, much of the land comprising the Northeast Renton Park site was acquired with grants from the State Recreation and Conservation Office in the early 1990s,which require timely development of outdoor recreation facilities; and WHEREAS, the plan was developed with extensive public outreach and in conjunction with residents and other stakeholders; and WHEREAS, the plan identifies implementation strategies to facilitate the redevelopment of the site to support outdoor recreation; and WHEREAS, the plan aligns with the goals of the May Creek Basin Action Plan which aims to conserve and restore habitat and to provide passive trail access along the May Creek Greenway between Lake Washington and Coungar Mountain Wildlands Park; and WHEREAS, the plan aligns with the May Valley Urban Separator purpose and intent as further described in RMC 4-3-110; and WHEREAS, the plan is in alignment with the recommendations of the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan adopted by City Council through Resolution No. 4398; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 1 RESOLUTION NO. 4539 SECTION I. The above recitals are found to be true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. The Northeast Renton Park Master Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A, is adopted by the City of Renton. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL the 28th day of October, 2024. Jason A. Seth, C Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 28th day of October, 2024. Armon Pavone, Mayor Approved as to form: Shane Moloney, City Attorney `,•` y OF RFA,NO �%,, 01-1 RES- P&R:24RES020:08/28/2024 =` * = SEMI.. = ORA+ED,SEQ` 2 RESOLUTION NO. 4539 EXHIBIT A Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 3 L'. •�� � ,j_ ��• *,Yrl�.. ,r:s�� '� s't� f ¢:f•.�vr 1 fie' ,'���tS +n� ¢��'rS7i 1_ ° '���.� .. ;I i ,., -c� �•'. f c t .yy i• �^y o f ' w ir:• � r ,,v '`r �� r A i � t � r , �' + r�^1�+� •t(R�` Y 'Y�'t� '�r�yj '+11. .1 [fb1- •'� �I tt' ,+Wc ;f� t, � -,� r li:, -`\1 lr \ '` _ ,. ,.c.. .� .a.y.,�ti '11;•,-t��t�.c/ ��42ir c�.' •R. •"'�n't<',,��''L/P(! aaaCCC�d .•y,� ��.-r..i; i^41. ff'':'�L'1{.,•i•�• bj4t,}r11i�' 3 ��� .,rf'1r2' T �j /�� •Y, tt. � -.•,� �; �1} i��\hr� 7 1 7' Fi'x�.`t• f �•1 � � ` I ;• / \ T �d '#� t� `t ,rlAti•.Si rla .4v'4, ''�t. �� �Dl [ {•,'/ p' _ r \ l'? ° .. \f ,a/, a ," * �;, �,• - • ,if� ';'. •b '6' .gin. ,�,'}�'� `+�' Al - _ _17 �dt /� � * �• a ;L q k � �% .S� •� _�'*S�M �t x` •Y ��t� }>r• �t�, �,. ��'fr'i�r -/�',�� ��I , �Y �"6�r. <eI It PF �'fk 4 � -'ft ��� ;r••/,�b�1�!'� •< 'r'l1��• s� 1�•_��.sr�t.� �'(��It r'� ,�:4' i+�„ � 1, + /� •t'1' - lr�. a � .•1 f+_.y,'�r��� � y.% V� � � � � r� 'i• ,.rt',t f�i �J.rt t� ;� 1�•pj.�T• 1��,. 1N cv.. b �; ..�, 'e�: 1_ 11 k '�- �' �y�1y1/Cp���J� i• ,�a •1 .^ � , RYA, �'t�"1•. ° /�f. ;�•' `i�'L i, ��� �•'If 'lyre ' ,vr I�w'! � � )� �. a•' '�. '' C•t \. • ,�.. i p , , ``M 111 ��,� � •: f. U'T'' ..� , ����' �.•v. �j iti' ,r •v, .W '+'a Ytr 1 �, �,_ 'v. A 1 _i+��� 1,1" ,i r .. ,,{���,,, f. 1�'� � ) r 1 r� � L►, !•J� •�, , 9 '•" rr r.,,�rr �,44r, ,M4�'��V�� ',� ��•�'; +.�, _,i 1 1 J,C•'. � � 1..; ,'Ii � `r 1 '�\ ;'• ' \`, ,l - ,, � c. + Its•• _ .ay � i T~,•��' ,Y r` •y,'., � �, ''►►�ii� a r` •t-.. ,.�t ,, r 4��-. � '1 �� j �•q� 1 Y ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The City of Renton gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the following individuals and groups who have made this Master Plan possible: City of Renton Parks and Recreation Community and Economic Development Maryjane Van Cleave, Parks and Recreation Alex Morganroth, Principal Planner Administrator Nathan Janders, Development Engineering Cailin Hunsaker, Parks and Trails Director Manager Jennifer Spencer, Acting Recreation Director Samuel Stolmeier, Construction Engineer Jason Lederer, Parks Planning Manager and Project Manager Public Works Betsy Severtsen, Capital Project Coordinator Joe Farah, Surface Water Engineering Manager Ian Gray, Urban Forestry and Natural Resources Joe Stowell, Wastewater Utility Manager Manager Ellen Talbo, Transportation Planning Manager Steve Brown, Parks Maintenance Manager Bryce Goldmann, Parks Maintenance Supervisor Executive Services David Peterson, Parks Maintenance Supervisor Angel Laycock, Communications Manager Rhemy King, Neighborhood Programs Samuel Severson, Communications Specialist Coordinator Gabriela Golzarian, Inspecting Arborist Mikaela Goodwin, Community Engagement Leader Claire Wilkinson, Community Engagement Leader Master Planning Consultant Team Anchor QEA (Prime Consultant) Clearway Environmental Anna Spooner, Principal Landscape Architect Chad Durand, Environmental Manager and Project Manager Rachel Crowley, Environmental Scientist Rachel Andersen, Landscape Architect Jim Hearsey, Environmental Scientist Zheng Fang, Senior Graphic Designer Ann Costanza, Principal Planner Reid Farnsworth, Landscape Designer Cat Wallace, Technical Editor Colleen Burner, Technical Editor Northeast Renton Park Master Plan August 2024 Future Connection to ■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■rv■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■.■■■■■■■■ : Newcastle Trail Network ■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■�■■■■/■■ ■■■ ,, \� ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■ ���_ ■■■■■� ■■■■■■■ ■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■! Existing Stormwater Facility ■■■■■■■■■■■ Park Boundary I I � I • I I � � Potential Future I 1 • Acquisition I •:' I • r' • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Over the last 30 years, the City of Renton has acquired an 18.5-acre assemblage of parcels with the intent to develop a new park in Northeast Renton. Located along May Creek and within the May Valley Urban Separator, this new park will support the broader May Creek Greenway vision and action plan, which aims to conserve and restore habitat, and create a trail corridor extending from the mouth of May Creek at Lake Washington eastward to King County's Cougar Mountain Regional Wildland Park. Situated within the City's East Plateau planning area, this new park will fill a notable gap in a community currently underserved by parks, where many residents lack easy access to recreational spaces within a quarter-mile or even half-mile of their homes. The new Northeast Renton Park offers the City a unique opportunity to act on its mission to provide exceptional parks and recreational opportunities that enrich the health, wellness, and quality of life for all Renton residents while ensuring equitable access and the preservation of its natural resources and history. The master planning process, which initiated in the fall of 2023, was strategically timed following the recent acquisition of a new park parcel. Initial outreach and engagement efforts aimed to a refine a park vision and develop a design to meet a variety of goals and needs. The effort also aligned with both new and longstanding obligations, including those tied to grants from the Washington State Northeast Renton Park Master Plan i August 2024 Recreation and Conservation Office dating back to the early 1990s, which require timely development of outdoor recreation facilities. The master planning process also drew upon the 2020 Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan, which had outlined an early concept for the park featuring conserved forested upland, riparian, and wetland areas, winding trails, and a central amenity space. k> o From fall of 2023 through spring of 2024, the City engaged stakeholders and the community , to gather input on opportunities and design concepts for the new Northeast Renton Park. The result is a park Master Plan and concept design that honors the unique landscape and offers a blend of active and passive recreation, including a comprehensive trail network through restored and enhanced habitats. The Master Plan not only advances goals for Trail concept at the Northeast Renton's new park habitat conservation and trail connectivity but also addresses the broader needs of the community and fulfills long-term grant obligations. Guided by Renton Parks and Recreation's commitment to sustainability, the plan balances three core priorities: enhancing community health and wellness, fostering environmental resilience, and promoting social equity. These principles are woven into the park's design and development, ensuring it meets today's recreational needs while contributing to a sustainable and inclusive future for all Renton residents. Furthermore, it aligns with key goals from the 2020 Parks, Recreation, and Natural Area Plan, including Filling Gaps in Service, Creating a Connected System, and Protecting and Conserving Natural Resources. The design concept includes parking for vehicles, accessible pedestrians and cyclist access points, restrooms, picnic shelters and seating, and a large nature play area. A network of paths and trails— featuring paved, soft surface, and raised boardwalks—will guide visitors through diverse landscapes and habitat areas, including forested slopes, wetlands, and scenic viewpoints of May Creek. Future parcel acquisition may allow for additional amenities such as sports courts, an off-leash dog area, and environmental education opportunities. The estimated total project cost for the design, permitting, and implementation ranges between $5,200,000 and $6,700,000. The low-end cost reflects the installation of portable toilets with a custom enclosure structure and does not include park improvements on the future parcel. The high-end cost reflects the installation of a restroom with a sewer connection and a full build out of the future parcel. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan ii August 2024 CONTENTS EXECUTIVESUMMARY......................................................................................................................i INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................1 1 VISION ..........................................................................................................................................5 2 ENGAGEMENT ............................................................................................................................7 2.1 Community and Stakeholder Groups..........................................................................................................7 2.2 Community Engagement.................................................................................................................................8 2.3 City Stakeholder Engagement..................................................................................................................... 11 3 PARK ELEMENTS ......................................................................................................................13 3.1 Access................................................................................................................................................................... 16 3.2 Trails, Boardwalks, and Nodes..................................................................................................................... 17 3.3 Public Safety.......................................................................................................................................................21 3.4 Habitat Enhancement.....................................................................................................................................21 3.5 Recreation and Amenity Areas....................................................................................................................22 3.6 Additional Park Features...............................................................................................................................23 3.7 Future Potential Expansion Area................................................................................................................25 4 COST SUMMARY..................................................................................................................... 26 4.1 Construction Costs...........................................................................................................................................26 4.2 Design, Permit, and Management Fees...................................................................................................29 4.3 Cost Escalation..................................................................................................................................................29 5 IMPLEMENTATION ..................................................................................................................31 5.1 Permit Feasibility.............................................................................................................................................. 31 5.2 Phasing Considerations................................................................................................................................. 34 5.3 Funding Opportunities................................................................................................................................... 35 6 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................. 37 TABLES Table 1 Key Stakeholders, Community Groups, and Staff.........................................................................8 Table 2 Master Plan OPCC Summary...............................................................................................................27 Table 3 Park Development and Habitat Enhancement OPCC Summary.........................................27 Northeast Renton Park Master Plan iii August 2024 Table 4 Design, Permit, and Management Fee Summary......................................................................29 Table 5 Total Master Plan Cost with Escalation Summary......................................................................30 Table 6 Environmental Permitting Requirements......................................................................................32 Table 7 Potential Grant Funding Sources.......................................................................................................35 FIGURES Figure1 Future Park Location..................................................................................................................................2 Figure 2 Park Planning Area Boundary and Adjacent Properties.............................................................3 Figure 3 Community Engagement Summary....................................................................................................9 Figure 4 Community Engagement Summary.................................................................................................10 Figure 5 Preferred Concept Plan..........................................................................................................................14 Figure 6 Preferred Concept Sections.................................................................................................................15 Figure7 Trail Map.......................................................................................................................................................18 APPENDICES Appendix A Existing Information Summary Report Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives Appendix C Community Engagement Data Appendix D City Stakeholder Meeting Notes Appendix E Opinion of Probable Costs Northeast Renton Park Master Plan iv August 2024 ABBREVIATIONS ADA Americans with Disabilities Act City City of Renton CPTED Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design CWA Clean Water Act CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act DAHP Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Department City of Renton Parks and Recreation Department Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency Greenway May Creek Greenway JARPA Joint Aquatic Resources Permit Application LID Low-Impact Development Master Plan Northeast Renton Park Master Plan NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NFWF National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System OPCC Opinion of Probable Construction Costs Park Northeast Renton Park PEM palustrine emergent marsh PFO palustrine forested wetland PSS palustrine scrub shrub RCO Recreation and Conservation Office RCW Revised Code of Washington SEPA State Environmental Policy Act USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Northeast Renton Park Master Plan v August 2024 y c INTRODUCTION The City of Renton (City) intends to develop a new park in Northeast Renton. Led by the City's Parks and Recreation Department (Department), which has facilitated acquisition of the land comprising the planning area since the early 1990s, the Northeast Renton Park (Park) Master Plan (Master Plan) is an early step to develop a vision and concept design for the future Park. Nestled between May Creek to the north, Duvall Avenue NE to the southwest, and Renton's East Plateau neighborhood to the south and east (see Figure 1), the proposed Park presents a unique blend of landscapes—forests and clearings, wetlands and streams, two previously developed home sites, and rolling topography— and the Master Plan presents an opportunity to restore and enhance these landscapes while also expanding Northeast Renton's recreation options. The City's 1978 Comprehensive Park& Recreation Plan identified the May Creek Greenway(Greenway), extending from the mouth of May Creek at Lake Washington east to King County's Cougar Mountain Regional Wildland Park. The Greenway includes May Creek and its adjacent riparian setback. Over the last nearly 40 years, the cities of Renton and Newcastle, as well as King County, have acquired lands along the Greenway with a vision to conserve and enhance the corridor's ecological function, develop a pervious trail system to connect communities with nature and provide opportunities for Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 1 August 2024 environmental access and education, and support the broader water quality and conservation goals of the May Creek Basin Action Plan. Portions of the Greenway's trail have been developed, and there are plans to connect this trail to the to the Eastside Rail Corridor(City of Renton 2024). The Master Plan offers a distinct opportunity to support the Greenway vision in Renton with outdoor recreation and to create a stronger connection between the Renton community and the surrounding ecosystem. Notably, the future Park is located in an area of Renton that is currently underserved by parks and open space (City of Renton 2020), and the Master Plan provides the City the opportunity to support its growing and diverse population through the development of a new park. Figure 1 Future Park Location x 'Seattle ,A F. FUTURE NORTHEAST RENTON PAR44 /Qf 17405 1-5 v J ► T?Y. Renton t e s East Plateau + Neighborhood .`':3 } t �:BLda• r�1 ft 't�d 9'ty. Immediately to the north and west of the Park and along Duvall Avenue NE and Coal Creek Parkway SE is the City of Newcastle boundary and its May Creek Park (Figure 2).This existing park encompasses 3,100 acres and includes a trail system within the Greenway. Both Newcastle's May Creek Park and the planned City of Renton Park fall within the Lake Washington/Cedar River/Sammamish River watersheds and Water Resource Inventory Area 8. May Creek is the third largest tributary to Lake Washington, draining the area west of Issaquah Creek and north of Cedar River, flowing through both Newcastle and Renton.The Park is located approximately 4 miles from Lake Washington. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 2 August 2024 The Master Plan considers the entire 18.5 acres identified for a future park. As shown in Figure 2, most of this area is owned by the City of Renton, with a 1.7-acre parcel in the northwest corner still in private ownership. The City is discussing a future acquisition with the current owner of the parcel. The City also owns the parcel to the northwest of the future Park. Managed by the City's Surface Water department, this 6.4-acre parcel includes a stormwater pond, access road, and open space. Figure 2 Park Planning Area Boundary and Adjacent Properties City of Newcastle May Creek Park ace"ater Facility, _ - < b 4 ac,c Future Acq—,tion' Parcel m . City of Renton k ,` _J i �Y Park Planning Area Q Project Area - y, Municipal Boundary r-s Trails and Paths ` -_++��`!e'�,.Z �'• -i 'M . -- May Creek • �' i 0 125 250 S00 Parcel Boundary t, !, , Feet Note:Map provided by the City of Renton This Master Plan defines the future Park's vision (Section 2). Heavily informed by community and City stakeholder input (Section 3),the Master Plan describes proposed Park elements (Section 4); provides a comprehensive summary of the Park's construction costs (Section 5); and outlines an implementation strategy including permit feasibility, phasing considerations, and funding opportunities (Section 6). The Master Plan is supported by five appendices capturing specific input and technical documentation, including the following: • Appendix A: Existing Information Summary Report summarizes the existing information gathered to inform the Master Plan and to identify data gaps. This includes data layers for the Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 3 August 2024 Park basemap at neighborhood and site scales, desktop geotechnical and cultural resource technical assessments, and a natural resource inventory. • Appendix B: Conceptual Design Alternatives provides an overview of the Park's opportunities and constraints analysis and reviews, describes the design criteria matrix used for decision-making, and reviews two design alternatives considered during master planning. • Appendix C: Community Engagement Data summarizes methods used to reach out to the community to hear input on the future Park design. • Appendix D: City Stakeholder Meeting Notes provides a summary of the discussion between the Master Plan team and City stakeholders that informed decision-making and the ultimate design. • Appendix E: Opinion of Probable Costs provides a breakdown of the probable costs as shown on the current preferred design. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 4 August 2024 r . s r q ♦.., - s+ mot,,� �i'i • S- fi 1 VISION The planned new Park in Northeast Renton provides an opportunity to contribute to the Department's vision to foster a vibrant, inclusive, and sustainable community through the enhancement of Renton's parks and recreational services, promoting history, health, equity, and environmental stewardship. Located within the defined Greenway and along May Creek's riparian corridor, adjacent forest canopy, and wetland resources, there is a unique opportunity to harmoniously conserve, enhance, and steward these natural resources while thoughtfully balancing development of an accessible, inclusive, and safe park with defined recreation facilities and trails that provide a connection with nature for all Park goers. The future Park's location in the East Plateau planning area is underserved by parks; residents do not have a park within a quarter mile or even half mile of their homes that is easily accessible (City of Renton 2020). Through a continuous engagement process focused on supporting design and programming for a new Park, the Department actively listened to stakeholders, partners, and, notably, Renton residents and future Park users, in support of the Department's mission to provide exceptional parks and recreational opportunities that enrich the health, wellness, and quality Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 5 August 2024 of life for all Renton residents while ensuring equitable access and the preservation of its natural resources and history. In addition to the new Park in Northeast Renton, the City is currently planning park expansion and renovation projects in other neighborhoods, including a new park in south Renton. The neighboring City ofj� � 1 Newcastle is also considering new — u- , 4 f I recreation amenities near its border with Renton, including a new recreational sport court facility and athletic fields along ,`_"� SE 95th Way,just a half mile from the Master Plan's Park site. City Neighborhood Program coordinator, Rhemy King,presents design concepts to the community. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 6 August 2024 po of . Hous Repa Assis• Progr �. and sal repa, Y, -�- Nay Nort f Ri,us roe .i - !� � w•,,:tip• f 2 ENGAGEMENT During early stages of the master planning process, the City sought to develop a plan to equitably engage stakeholders, staff, and the community in order to incorporate feedback into the design process and inform the Park design. The City developed an adaptable communications framework for reaching stakeholders, staff, and community members who are invested in the Master Plan process. This section reviews the engagement strategy and summarizes what the City heard from the community and stakeholders. 2.1 Community and Stakeholder Groups The Master Plan team identified stakeholder and community groups who may be invested in the future Northeast Renton Park (Table 1). For each identified group, the City identified a method for outreach: stakeholder group meetings, community outreach through participation in local events and gatherings, and staff-to-staff engagement. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 7 August 2024 Table 1 Key Stakeholders, Community Groups, and Staff OutreachStakeholder Community Staff-to-Staff Group Engagement City of Newcastle • King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Funding • Local sporting groups • Environmental Science Center • Naturalist/environmental groups • Water Resource Inventory Area 8 • Renton School District • Renton Senior Citizens Advisory Board • Renton Community Services Committee • Renton Parks Commission • Renton Adaptive Recreation Program • East Plateau neighborhood groups • Renton City Council members and Mayor • Coal Creek Utility District • Renton Urban Forestry and Natural Resource • Renton Public Works • Renton Community and Economic Development • Renton Police Department • Regional Fire Authority • The City then identified a three-touchpoint approach to structure the engagement. Each touchpoint is defined by a design milestone. At each touchpoint, the City planned to participate in community events, to attend a stakeholder meeting, and to engage with committees and groups to provide Master Plan information and review Master Plan developments. The three touchpoints included the following: • Touchpoint 1 — Review Site Analysis and Site Opportunities and Constraints— February 2024 • Touchpoint 2 — Review Conceptual Design Alternatives— March and April 2024 • Touchpoint 3 — Review Draft Preferred Design Concept—June 2024 2.2 Community Engagement To provide equitable engagement, the City utilized a multipronged approach to engage a wide and representative cross section of the community. All messaging directed the community to a dedicated project website serving as a central information sharing and community engagement platform with Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 8 August 2024 surveys, message boards, polls, and other tools to communicate directly with City project staff. As an initial engagement approach, direct mailings were sent to over 4,000 addresses within a quarter mile of the future Park site. The City identified key community events to attend and share Master Plan information. Master Plan representatives from the City set up tables and Master Plan information boards at local events. This included setting up at the Renton Community Center on Saturdays during Youth Basketball season and participating in Adaptive Recreation meetings on Thursdays at the Senior Center. The City was present on weekends at the Highland Neighborhood Center, set up a Master Plan booth at the City's Sustainability Event, and was present at two farmers markets. Throughout the Master Plan, the City has also maintained a consistent online presence, posting updated Master Plan information such as conceptual design alternatives and polls for regular feedback on a dedicated project website, shared information in City newsletters and utility billings, and posted to City social media platforms. Figure 3 graphs the engagement over time, noting spikes during each touchpoint (a larger version of this figure is included in Appendix Q. Between February 2023 and June 2024, the City's project website received more than 7,000 page views (each time the website was visited including repeat views) and recorded over 3,000 unique visitors. Figure 3 Community Engagement Summary Dis la Board at Email.sent to Display eoartls p y This Week in Renton Surtaina0ilit Fair/ intlivitluals who posted at Senior Center y about ewsk+tter(2/27) P.rbor Day Event a[ contact us directly (2/2}3/1) p roject on di RCC(4/20) wiN comments/ i Imetlie Engagement questions Event at Highlands Poatcartl Direct Posted on Social Neighborhood Center Portetl Ported in TWIR pop up a[ Mailing(2/20) Media(2/28) (4/5) Mede(5/t) newsletter Marke[s Display Boardlands Pop up at Famnrs Display Rwrda at rt Highlands RCC(2/16-2/23) Neighborhood!Center Market-preliminary 1,438 (3/2-3/tt) Preferred akernetive 986 1034 1058 781 365 75 14 17 792 212 77 160 181 145 161 44 29 140 Page views F!1-Y Falbu Ftli -13 Marla-20 Mv21-2)Mar28-April AW4-10 Ap,FV 4pr1 " May2Y2 "n- Janb 595 524 473 591 398 18 3 flol 71 57 44 54 41 61 58 17 17visitor$ Ftl 1-) Ftla-1! re 1Mr14-20 Mr 21-2)W28-Apr3 Aq NO April-17 Apta-24 y2-a Mry2}29 a Jun 6-12 Jun 1}19 2o-2A Community engagement during Touchpoint 2 presented two design options. Design Option 1 maximized ecological enhancements such as wetland and wetland buffer enhancements and provided trails and a central recreation node. Design Option 2 proposed more recreation including sport courts, more trails, and a larger central recreation area. During this Touchpoint, the City asked the community how much value they placed on a variety of Park elements, on a scale of"strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." Figure 4 summarizes the feedback (a larger version of this figure is included in Appendix Q. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 9 August 2024 The public overwhelmingly supported additions such as trails and boardwalks, neighborhood and regional trail connections, access and views to May Creek, rain gardens and native plantings, and open lawn space. The responses were more neutral for elements such as an environmental education shelter, amphitheater, public art, cultural garden, and the addition of traditional park facilities. Responses were variable for elements such as tennis, pickleball, and basketball courts. Figure 4 Community Engagement Summary Q Trails throughout park Q Future trail connections to Newcastle trail network and city access... O Loop trail providing views of natural areas O Trail network through forest,wetland,and riparian habitats Q Boardwalk with viewing platform on wetlands Q Trail access to May Creek O Rain garden and native plants near entrance Q Future connection to adjacent neighborhood and Duvall Ave NE sidewalk O Viewpoints of May Creek O Trail nodes with public art,benches,and/or interpretive signage O open lawn areas Q Large shelter for environmental education programming O Public art features throughout park Q Stewardship/cultural garden Q Natural but with a higher concertation of traditional park facilities O Amphitheater for serve as an outdoor classroom Q Tennis/pickleball courts Q Basketball court O Minimal traditional park infrastructure and limited trail access 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percent of Respondents O Park Design 1 Q Park Design 2 ■Strongly Agree ■Somewhat Agree ■Neutral ■Somewhat Disagree ■Strongly Disagree 2.2. 7 Summary of Public Comments Throughout community engagement, participants commented on key themes. The following provides a high-level summary of the comments received. Appendix C provides a comprehensive summary of the engagement feedback. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 10 August 2024 2.2.1.1 Nature and Trails Engagement results indicate the public overwhelmingly supports trails and access to nature as a focus of the Park. Participants commented on the desire for green spaces and natural areas to be preserved and for the development of walking trails and boardwalks connecting the new Park to City of Newcastle trails and other nearby trails. Participants also favorably commented on stewardship and environmental education, in the form of an environmental education center, outdoor classroom, and educational signs. This theme extended to a nature play area for children, as well. However, there was some concern expressed about the nearby stormwater pond attracting mosquitoes, built trails affecting wetlands, and some expressed concern that introducing lighting to the Park may disturb the existing wildlife along the adjacent Greenway corridor. 2.2.1.2 Recreation Facilities Engagement results yielded mixed opinions for what recreation facilities should be included in the Park. The public expressed that they would prefer a permanent restroom over portable toilets, picnic shelters, grills, outdoor exercise equipment, and public art. They also wanted a children's nature play area with swings, rock climbing, and a zipline. Sports facilities, including pickleball and basketball courts, a skatepark, disc golf, pump track, and an open sports field were also requested. The idea of an off-leash dog park was met with both approval and concern, with some expressing that this was an important necessity and amenity for the community, and others were concerned about pet feces accumulating and the fear that a dog park would attract additional dogs to an otherwise sensitive natura area. 2.2.1.3 Parking and Access The public had some concerns about the proposed parking and access and requested additional parking spaces, as well as safe crossings along Coal Creek Parkway. They expressed the importance of being able to connect new Park trails to the existing network of trails east and west of the Park. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant trail access was an important element to the public, as well as public transit access and bicycle access including bicycle parking. 2.2.1.4 Safety Safety concerns were brought up frequently and were of high importance to the public. Concerns about vandalism and the potential for homeless encampments were expressed, as well as fear about car break-ins, graffiti, and other crime. The public had a strong desire to make sure the Park was welcoming, maintained, and safe for their families and children. 2.3 City Stakeholder Engagement As discussed previously in this section, the City created a stakeholder group and held a meeting at each touchpoint to review the Master Plan and seek input. Stakeholders included City representatives Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 11 August 2024 from Renton Parks and Recreation, Neighborhood Programs and Urban Forestry, Community and Economic Development, and Public Works. At each of the stakeholder group meetings, Anchor QEA led with a presentation including updates to the Park master planning process along with details on Park elements, programming, and design criteria and included a summary of collected data from community outreach events. A discussion followed with time for questions and concerns. Appendix D provides meetings notes summarizing each meeting and discussion. In addition to the City stakeholder meetings, there were also presentations to the Parks Commission and Community Services Committee throughout the Master Plan process. All meetings were open to the public. Parks Commission presentations occurred on October 17, 2023; March 12, 2024; and June 11, 2024. Community Services Committee presentations occurred on January 8, 2023, and June 10, 2024. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 12 August 2024 {: 9 ram, .1 � . a'K..,. * Q l- Y W-4- i. �i• .' / #" ��/ '�C � AAL 3 PARK ELEMENTS The proposed Park conceptual design combines a large network of trails through forests, wetlands, and along view corridors, while being careful to minimize disturbances to wetland and stream buffers as much as possible. Future trail connections are identified to the east. Areas for habitat restoration and enhancement are called out along May Creek, throughout wetlands and buffers, and throughout forested and riparian areas. A large central area contains all active recreation, including a large nature play area, portable toilets, a picnic shelter, parking for 20 vehicles in a paved lot, along with up to 12 parallel-parking spaces along the Park access road. The current privately-owned parcel contains a potential off-leash dog park and an open space that could be developed with additional Park amenities in the future. The design also includes lighting in the parking area, public art, wayfinding, trailhead kiosks and educational signage, and rain gardens. The following sections provide an overview of the proposed design elements including specific design criteria for each element, an important tool for decision making during the master planning process. Refer to Appendix B for details on the design process that led to the proposed conceptual design. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 13 August 2024 Figure 5 Preferred Concept Plan w > LEGEND Newcastle's Y Future connection to Enhance stream riparian area with diverse May Creek Park a Newcastle trail network native vegetation and install large woody debris 1 Potential future acquisition parcel and trail system ; v for in-stream habitat as recommended in L-J j Nature play area with climbing structures, 2008 May Creek Drainage and Restoration Plan May Creek R zipline,sand pit,and parent seating Nor v ■■ �.! - - --- Existing seasonal drainage feature i Picnic shelter with Or-` � L- Existing wetland habitat g mwater facility .■- �■� g Existing stor seatingand rills ■■ ��� 3' g Existing extent of wetland and stream buffer man, Future potential park expansi'pn area Trail access to May Creek aligned to utilize Existing heritage tree (refer to Master Plan Report for """■'•"• existing remnant trail and access corridors; u■uom 9 otential ro ra min ¢ tions) ■■■■■■■■■• ADA access maybe challenging due to steep Tree canopy p P 9 9 P 000■■oM> ■■uuouur i ■■■■■■.■■■■�-::� grades;trail access may incorporate stairs Future pot ntial park �` to reduce earthwork Native forest and understor restoration expansion area.enclosed Flexible open ■ lawn space (invasive species removal and native planting) 1/3 acre off leaslh dog area Protect heritage trees Diverse native riparian vegetation 3 Gated Eity access to ' ----- Wetland enhancement area Storm'water pond 1 z� .,. In-stream habitat logs Entry sign` I Y Open lawn r Existing sidewalk j �,•' Paving for access road and parking connection to,Newcastle trail network via Duvall Ave • r Footbridge(ADA accessible) NE and Coal Creek PKWY Potential opportunity to ______ i provide future trail connection - 5'wide boardwalk(ADA accessible) (2)Portable toilets to east using Langley Ridge at May Creek access easement Wildlife viewing deck with enclosure • g 25'Wide access road,crushed \ I Boardwalk with 5'wide crushed gravel pervious trail(ADA accessible) gravel shoulder accommodates viewing platform and parallel parking(up to 12 spaces) interpretive signage 5'wide ravine and hillside trails with stairs bike parking \ along steep terrain(not ADA accessible) Parking for 20 vehicles 5'wide paved trail(ADA accessible) and firetruck turnaround Future trail connections Low-impact development stormwater treatment at parking such as rain gardens or swales Trail node with seating and opportunityfor signage Low-impact lighting to limit light pollution Picnic shelter with tables and grills and emergency beacons to provide security p - 4�d� M Portable toilet enclosure Trailhead kiosk with wayfinding �y and education signage GP7 Bike parking Path junction/node with interpretive \GP�F Lighting signage,benches,and wetland views Monitor and steward existing, 0 Public art features Trail connection to adjacent neighborhood —_ healthy forested areas 0 and Duvall Ave NE sidewalk �`` Wayfinding and interpretive signage Existing sidewalk along east side of Duvall Ave NE 0 200 Future crossing improvementsat Feet NE 24th Street and Duvll Avenue NE \�� Connection to existing sewer at NE 25th Street Sewer conveyance Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 14 August 2024 Figure 6 Preferred Concept Sections WETLAND WETLAND BUFFER TRAIL WETLAND BUFFER WETLAND BOARDWALK WETLAND " Ak 2 2' UNPROGRAMMED OPEN LAWN&FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SPACE PAVED ZIPLINE NATURE PLAY PAVED 1 LAWN TRAIL LAWN FORESTED EDGE PATH PATH Ak R''It�l A I � f1 �� w 3 7 7 FORESTED HILLSIDE TRAIL FORESTED HILLSIDE WILDLIFE/CREEK FORESTED FLOODPLAIN CREEK FORESTED HILLSIDE '3' VIEWING DECK Note:Figure shows section cuts. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 15 August 2024 3.1 Access Access Design 0 Connect to existing May Creek Greenway trails 0 Provide trail connections to Renton neighborhoods Provide parking o Avoid impact to adjacent properties Future trail connections to the east and west are proposed as separate potential developments, with hope for access to Newcastle's May Creek Park and associated trail network. This connection would likely consist of a trail connection to the west under the Coal Creek Parkway SE bridge. A trail connection to the east via a series of land tracts associated with the Langley Ridge subdivision, all having a 15-foot-wide easement specifically for the development of a public trail (refer to Langley Ridge at May Creek Plat— Recording No. 20080212000465), provides additional options for access and routes to the nearby King County trail network. These trail connections encourage regional access in alignment with the 2019 Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan (City of Renton 2019) by connecting the Park to the Greenway and offering users the opportunity to access trails that stretch from Lake Washington to Cougar Mountain. The Master Plan provides direct access to the neighborhood just south of the Park site, adjacent to Duvall Avenue NE using a walkable route from the dense residential area to the Park. In addition, the Master Plan identifies the need for a new safe crossing at 24th Street and Duvall Avenue NE to improve safety and allow pedestrians to access the existing sidewalk on the west side of Duvall Avenue NE as they walk north to the Park entry. Vehicular access is provided in the Master Plan through an improved access road and a new parking area with space for 20 vehicles, including two ADA stalls, and a firetruck turnaround. The access road includes a crushed gravel shoulder wide enough to accommodate 12 additional parallel-parking spots during peak visiting time. In addition, bike parking is provided near where the access road terminates near the Park's proposed trailhead. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 16 August 2024 To treat stormwater generated within the 1 Park, Low-Impact Development (LID) elements are proposed. Rain gardens and vegetated swales run along the proposed access road and the Park area to intercept, = convey, and treat stormwater runoff from the proposed impervious surfaces. The LID features will also reduce flooding and ----- erosion during large rain events. There is _ also the opportunity to use permeable paving such as permeable pavers or Photograph 6 permeable asphalt as the surfacing for trails and the parking area. Rain gardens along parking area 3.2 Trails, Boardwalks, and Nodes developmentTrail Design Criteria 0 Maximize trail o Consider permit feasibility addition to increasing access to the Park, an extensive trail system is proposed within the Park. The trail system includes a mile of trail loops and segments with access to the site's wetlands, riparian forest and down to the May Creek floodplain (Figure 7). Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 17 August 2024 Figure 7 Trail Map W � • , w � , V ; '••. I i .07mi -------------- I Alni Duvall Avenue NE .......... *� •. �.•� Crossing connects to' ii ♦�� ••.•�� .�•. '• May Creek Park Trail • •..•.� '•♦ System to west �\ •.•...•....•.••.•�•�• • ♦ ♦ LEGEND cr mi --- May Creek Access Trail Wetland Loop Trail --- Forest Trail • . ng Trail WetlandlC ossingTrail `DU'd//A�PnoP OF '''�.•• z3mi- --- Future Trail Connections "` �•• --- Boardwalk Bridge Trail connection to • neighborhood •�••Wildlife Viewing Deck East Plateaunei B ��•'••..••.� •.•..� • Trail Intersection with Seating - -- -_—_-: O Trail Marker Existing sidewalk along east side of Duvall Ave NE * Trailhead Kiosk o zoo Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 18 August 2024 The Wetland Loop Trail is approximately 0.4 mile long. It begins near the active recreation area at the trailhead kiosk and loops along and through a series of wetland ' complexes. The trail alternates between a4. 5-foot-wide crushed gravel trail and a raised ' 5-foot-wide composite boardwalk in 'Y wetland areas, both ADA-accessible. The MIX boardwalk would be built on enclosed floatation-filled recycled tires and treated _ - timber sleepers and joists to minimize impacts to the sensitive habitat.The trail Example of wetland boardwalk design is intended to maximize views of the wetland's reeds, cattails, and native animals and birds. The May Creek Access Trail begins near the active recreation area and is approximately 0.08 mile long. This trail is a 5-foot-wide permeable gravel trail with sections of stairs where slopes are too steep to accommodate a gravel trail. The trail loops away from the active area along a section of historical roadway, alongside a steep slope, eventually declining into a flat floodplain of mossy trees, ferns, and skunk cabbage. The trail terminates at a large viewing area oriented toward May Creek. Though this trail is not ADA-accessible due to existing steep terrain, all efforts would be made to make it as user-friendly as possible. The Forest Trail starts at the alternative Park entrance at the southwest corner of the Park and ends at the main trailhead near the parking area. This trail is approximately 0.23 mile long with an elevation change of approximately 60 feet. This trail is also a 50-foot-wide gravel trail with sections of stairs. It loops through a forest of mixed deciduous and conifer trees with a native understory of ferns, salmonberry, and vine Photograph 8 maple. Similar to the May Creek Access Trail, Example of permeable trail through a restored habitat the Forest Trail is not ADA-accessible due to existing steep terrain; all efforts would be made to make it as user-friendly as possible. Paved Park trails provide ADA connections between the Park entry and parking area to all active areas including the play area, trailhead kiosk, picnic shelter, and future development area. These trails are hard-surface trails and 5 feet wide. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 19 August 2024 Trail nodes are widened gathering spaces that have been placed A at regular intervals and at intersections of the proposed trails. These nodes provide a place to rest on a bench, take in the views, reorient, or read through cultural or environmental information provided by interpretive signage. Nodes take the form of both surface-level, gravel spaces and elevated boardwalk viewingOA — platforms. Trailhead and wayfinding signage will be placed strategically along the trail system. A large entry trailhead kiosk is proposed near the parking area. This kiosk may include a map of the Park ` with distances and directional information, along with relevant information about the history and ecology of the Park. Smaller Photo fraph • trailhead portal post signs will be placed at the beginning of each trail loop or section and atjunction points along the trails. These Example of a trailhead kiosk portal posts will provide wayfinding for visitors to use to orient themselves and select a walking route. Interpretive signage will be placed at nodes and viewpoints to give visitors a deeper understanding of and appreciation for the history and ecology of the site. h� y All trails have been proposed to provide access to a variety of 4;, habitats and views while minimizing negative impacts to critical wetlands, O' j � Ib streams, slopes, and buffers. This will 1 ; also increase permit feasibility and A � decrease costs. In addition, all trails proposed within buffers are pervious or natural surfacing such as crushed `��� ��'� stone or wood chips. Sketch of potential portal post in the Park Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 20 August 2024 3.3 Public Safety Public Safety Design Criterion Maximize public safety Several safety elements are proposed including the use of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). This concept is based in the idea that crime can be prevented through the use of strategic design of buildings and public spaces. It involves simple, preventive steps that designers can take to reduce crime in parks and neighborhoods. These steps include guiding how people enter and leave a space to decrease opportunities for criminal activity, natural surveillance and clear sight lines, defined property lines and clear distinctions between private and public spaces, regular maintenance to encourage the appearance that the Park is valued, and regular activity to keep the Park activated and in use (CPTED 2024). In addition to CPTED design integration, the design for the Park includes safety lighting and emergency beacons. Timed or motion-sensor light poles are placed in each of the eight corners of the parking area to discourage crime and increase safety. The lighting will be cast down to minimize light pollution impacts to neighbors and wildlife. Two solar-powered alert beacons are also proposed for high-traffic areas near the parking area. These beacons allow Park visitors to easily connect to emergency services. When someone presses the beacon's large red button, the visitor is automatically connected to an emergency dispatch center. At the same time, the beacon's strobe light activates, which helps emergency responders locate the visitor in need. 3.4 Habitat Enhancement Habitat Enhancement Design habitat0 Maximize restoration and 0 Maximize forest . habitat In-stream and riparian enhancement and restoration is proposed along 280 linear feet of May Creek. In the early 2000s, as part of the May Creek Drainage and Restoration Plan recommendations, King County consulted with Anchor QEA to develop the May Creek Erosion Stabilization Report to identify conceptual stabilization actions within a portion of the ravine reach of May Creek between Coal Creek Parkway and 148th Avenue SE. The plan included a detailed site observation and evaluation to identify conceptual project sites and actions to reduce erosion and restore habitat (Anchor QEA 2010). Based off the recommendations made in this report, large woody debris will be placed along the creek edges to increase bank stability and create varied habitats within the creek for spawning Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 21 August 2024 salmon. Invasive species will be selectively removed and replaced with appropriate native riparian species such as willow, dogwood, and salmonberry. Nearly 7 acres of wetland and wetland Y buffer enhancement and restoration is - `A r7_, proposed.This will take the form of invasive species removal and the installation of 'i appropriate native species to improve habitat : function and value. Habitat enhancement •� = - r — Example of nearby May Creek instream habitat techniques and plantings will be informed by the types of wetlands including palustrine emergent marsh (PEM), palustrine scrub shrub (PSS), and palustrine forested wetland (PFO). Buffer plantings will include native shrubs, groundcovers, and trees. Approximately 6.1 acres of upland forest and understory enhancement and restoration is proposed along the site's forested areas. Mature and desirable trees will be protected, and invasive species, primarily Himalayan blackberry and English ivy, will be removed. Native species will be installed to increase habitat and improve resiliency, including a diverse palette of Example of nearby May Creek trail naturalization deciduous and conifer trees and shrubs. 3.5 Recreation and Amenity Areas Recreation and Amenity Area Design Criteria Provide 0 Provide Park facilities space for e Consider value cost 0=9 bI A proposed large nature play area will include play spaces to encourage exploration and adventure for a variety of ages. Climbing, swinging, and spinning equipment, along with a large zipline and sand pit, are proposed for a mix of activity types. Weather-resistant and easy to maintain materials such as metal, concrete, and robinia wood are proposed. The play area design also includes parent Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 22 August 2024 seating around the perimeter. Engineered wood fiber surfacing will protect children from falls while a selection of trees placed around the playground will provide shade from the sun. A large picnic shelter with room for _ several picnic -- tables and Example of nature play area ample gathering is proposed close to the play area and parking.This shelter i will be designed with open walls and a rustic style to fit the intended natural Park aesthetic. Picnic tables and seating will be provided in and adjacent to the shelter along with grills and trash receptacles (see "Site Furnishings" in the next subsection). A large open lawn space is provided near the entry, • ' " " parking, and play area. This unprogrammed space could Large rustic picnic shelter be used for picnics, gathering, parties, frisbee, orjust relaxing and exploring. It is relatively flat, with a perimeter of native trees and shrubs to provide shade and privacy from the neighborhood. Future active recreation has been considered and may take place on the adjacent parcel when it is acquired. This may be in the form of sports courts, including tennis, pickleball, and basketball courts. A cultural propagation garden or outdoor classroom were also considered. 3.6 Additional Park Features Design Criteria for Additional Park Features • Provide environmental education and stewardship • Provide public art and placemaking Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 23 August 2024 Wr Durable environmental education and interpretive signage is proposed with a trailhead kiosk, interpretive and educational signage, and portal _ posts. Interpretive signage could speak to the area's history and culture and placed in areas of historical significance. Educational signage on the plant and animal species found in the Park could be placed at nodes and viewing decks. These signs could include Photograp QR codes to find additional information online. Example of Interpretive signage Public art throughout the Park will add a sense of place. The City could commission local and Tribal artist to create site specific art work. Potential art themes could focus on the site's long ecological, cultural, and historic timeline. There fi is a potential for an art walk program in the Park where permanent plinths provide a foundation for temporary sculptural displays. I-Site furnishings will be provided throughout the Park in a variety of settings. Benches made from durable, appropriate materials will be 1 laced along trails and at nodes to allow for resting sots at regular p g g p g intervals. Picnic tables and grills will be provided in and adjacent to the picnic shelter and open lawn space for gatherings and picnicking. Trash cans and dog waste receptacles will be provided at the parking area, trailheads, dog park enclosure, and at the picnic shelter to encourage disposal of waste and for the convenience of visitors. A proposed comfort public art station may take the form of two portable toilets within a toilet enclosure. Although this feature is not a fully plumbed restroom, it increases convenience and comfort for visitors, and the enclosure shields the toilets from - view while improving the appearance with a sense of permanence. Portable toilet with toilet enclosure Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 24 August 2024 3.7 Future Potential Expansion Area A potential sewer connection and Portland Loo may take the place of a portable comfort station. This option would provide greater convenience for visitors but would require additional clearing of vegetated and forested areas (including the removal of mature trees) for the installation of a sewer line that would connect to the existing system south of the Park. A lateral line routed along the steep slope would provide an opportunity to provide a new permanent restroom facility. The Portland Loo is an easy to clean, stand-alone bathroom designed to prevent problems that are commonly experienced with public toilets.The design discourages crime with graffiti-proof wall panels and open grating. A 1/3-acre enclosed off-leash dog area is proposed for the site on the future acquisition parcel. This location was chosen to provide separation from other site programming and environmentally sensitive areas while still maintaining close proximity to the entry and parking lot. This location is also flat and previously disturbed, making it a preferred location within the planning area. Secure double gated entry and dog waste receptacles along with seating will be provided. Trees and shrubs will provide areas of shade and exploration while open grassy areas will be provided to allow access to large sunny areas for running. Sports courts are an amenity that could be included in the future expansion area. The public has expressed interest in tennis, pickleball, and basketball courts. These courts may be individual, but the pickleball and tennis courts could be a combined feature. They would be placed in a flat, previously developed area to avoid further disturbance to environmentally sensitive areas. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 25 August 2024 �. Vic, �' � ••* �• , �'� _�-�,�y�.�• ��,, �,_it ,�� �, �� 4 -- .,. �, -� � t�}.,�' ;�� � .,,�f' • `:��.�,,�� ;`�[[� :�-� _ 41 `. � "• '7t ti� +'� ' � �T♦ �t w�f � �i.4'd� r:i� •) qy >-�.:�•.r#Sr C�- �•�` :-, '�l.av�.�r� 1� \/� �`\ . . '`��..} ♦ t '� R,-'r,�ti,�.1�I��h,`P t�'r l'.�a •'f+# AL 4 r� �' � •1 1 '�� `.� ��''(.r' a-. A SF.14 •� - - fit, '''+� •� �-]... '�. � ., s 4 COST SUMMARY The total project cost to implement the Master Plan ranges from $6,820,000 to $8,130,000 (rounded and in 2024 dollars). This total project cost includes the construction costs to implement the Master Plan vision and the fees to design, permit, and manage the work. The low end of the range assumes that a portable toilet enclosure is provided and a sewer connection is not installed. The low end of the range also assumes that proposed improvements on the future parcel are not included. The following provides additional details on the total project cost including a summary of the City's escalation planning. 4.1 Construction Costs The Opinion of Probable Construction Costs (OPCC) provides rough order of magnitude costs for the construction of proposed Master Plan elements. Table 2 summarizes the costs based on the following categories: Park development and habitat enhancement costs are for all proposed design elements within the currently-owned City boundary; the custom toilet enclosure cost includes the cost to construct a structural enclosure to accommodate two portable toilets (and assumes there is no sewer connection); the sewer connection and restrooms costs assume that a new sewer Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 26 August 2024 connection is provided to the Park site with a connection to the existing mainline south of the Park (it also includes the construction of a Portland Loo); finally, the Park expansion area presents a construction costs that accommodate future potential uses on this parcel as described in Section 4. See Appendix E for cost details. Table 2 Master Plan OPCC Summary Master Plan Design Elements OPCC 1 Park Development and Forest Enhancement $5,195,660 2. Potential Custom Toilet Enclosure $243,353 3. Potential Sewer Connection and Portland Loo $959,432 4. Future Potential Park Expansion Area $592,112 Total OPCC Low(Items 1 and 2) $5,439,013 Total OPCC High (Items 1,3 and 4) $6,747,204 Table 3 provides a summary of the cost items included in the Park Development and Forest Enhancement OPCC. This does not include a restroom option (a custom toilet enclosure or Portland Loo). Table 3 Park Development and Habitat Enhancement OPCC Summary Element Cost Site Demolition and Clearing in Park Development Area $68,740 Temporary Facilities During Construction (e.g.,Access, Fencing) $134,050 Earthwork $267,610 Utility Improvements(Stormwater, Electrical, Lighting and Communications) $343,920 Asphalt Paving and Pavement Markings $148,196 Trails, Bridges,and Viewing Areas $520,677 Site Furnishings and Signage $401,187 Play Area Surfacing and Equipment $229,982 Planting in Park Development Area $209,009 Irrigation in Park Development Area $165,000 In-Stream and Riparian Habitat Enhancement $105,084 Wetland and Wetland Buffer Enhancement $434,999 Forest Enhancement $85,914 Park Development and Habitat Enhancement Subtotal $3,114,367 Mobilization (10%)' $311,437 Design Contingency(25%)2 $856,451 Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 27 August 2024 Element Cost Construction Contingency(10%)3 $428,225 Sales Tax(10.3%)4 $485,179 Total Park Development and Habitat Enhancement OPCC $5,195,660 Notes: 1. Mobilization is applied to the subtotal. 2. Design contingency is applied to the subtotal with mobilization. 3. Construction contingency is applied to the subtotal with mobilization and design contingency. 4. Sales tax is applied to the subtotal with mobilization,design contingency and construction contingency.The sales tax rate is the City of Renton's 2024 sales tax rate. The OPCC for the Future Potential Park Expansion Area costs the multiple opportunities that could be constructed on the 1.7-acre parcel. This includes a new dog park, trail connection, open lawn area, and Park plantings, as well as two tennis courts (accommodating four pickleball courts). The ultimate cost for the Future Potential Park Expansion Area will depend on which Park amenities and features are included. The OPCC assumes 2024 dollars and does not include future inflation. The OPCC does include the following markups: • 10% Contractor mobilization • 25% design contingency • 10% construction contingency 10.3% sales tax The design contingency reflects the early level of design and level of uncertainty. For example, a site survey has not yet been completed, and the design may need to be revised to adapt to actual site conditions based on a survey. These changes could result in additional construction costs. During design development and final design, the design contingency will go down. At the time of bidding, the design contingency will be at zero. The construction contingency reflects that certain changes or refinements to the design may need to be completed during construction to reflect new information identified by the Contractor in the field. For example, the Contractor could uncover buried debris that needs to be removed and hauled off site. It is recommended that the City retain sufficient budget as a construction contingency for the duration of the Master Plan's design. The OPCC does not include costs related to design/engineering, design phase Master Plan management, survey, planning and design review, bidding, construction phase Master Plan management and administration, construction inspection, environmental permitting, permit related monitoring, and property purchase. These fees are summarized in the following Section 4.2. The current OPCC also does not include water connection utility connections, portable restroom toilet Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 28 August 2024 units, public art, signage design, demolition of the existing houses and accessory buildings, or demolition of existing foundations. The OPCC assumes no contamination is encountered on the site and does not include costs for environmental cleanup. In providing OPCCs, the Client (City of Renton) understands that the Consultant (Anchor QEA, Inc.) has no control over the cost or availability of labor, equipment, or materials, or over market condition or the Contractor's method of pricing, and the Consultant's opinions of probable construction costs are made on the basis of the Consultant's professional judgment and experience. The Consultant makes no warranty, expressed or implied, that the bids or the negotiated cost of the Work will not vary from the Consultant's opinion of probable construction cost. 4.2 Design, Permit, and Management Fees In order to develop the Master Plan to a bid-ready project, the City will need to design, permit, and manage the work. Table 4 summarizes the expected fees for planning purposes. Table 4 Design, Permit, and Management Fee Summary Service Estimated Fee Survey and Investigations $105,000 Design and Engineering $600,000 Environmental and Construction Permitting $200,000 Master Plan Management $150,000 Bidding and Construction Management $325,000 Total Fees $1,380,000 N ote: Costs are rounded to nearest 1,000. 4.3 Cost Escalation As noted above, the total project cost is in 2024 dollars and does not account for future inflation. Inflation is variable based on external economic factors. Over the past 5 years, inflation has ranged considerably; between October 2022 and October 2023, inflation in the construction industry was 7.76% in the Seattle region (Basnet 2024). Since that time of high inflation, rates are more moderate, ranging between 4% and 5% (Minnick 2024). The City is budgeting for moderate cost escalation in the near term, with a 5% escalation rate per year to account for inflation. Table 5 applies a 5% escalation rate to the total project cost over the next 5 years. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 29 August 2024 Table 5 Total Master Plan Cost with Escalation Summary Total Master Plan Cost with 5% Inflation per Year Year Low End High End 2024 $6,820,000 $8,130,000 2025 $7,160,000 $8,540,000 2026 $7,520,000 $8,970,000 2027 $7,900,000 $9,420,000 2028 $8,300,000 $9,890,000 N ote: Costs are rounded to nearest 1,000. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 30 August 2024 e- t �T�11 P/ 1 a .,� _ .]�. .��e rh^�wr� -, �' qfs�t 1�� at.�_fy�.. _ .Y �� � -�,� � �•�s M� '1 Y' �,aCr'L: i- ems _ �:. ..ai•� -, \ ,�s`�_ .ir+i' FfCFa �3 g W ',a ,19' t� k,UP Vy T - � _ P{'•� ^-f► �� aP��`v•.f 1z�/`f'A f � �:',w� ,Y�1�e•,"� - � i 051 1t.�1.��:�. 5 IMPLEMENTATION 5.1 Permit Feasibility This section summarizes anticipated Master Plan environmental permitting requirements. Table 6 lists environmental permits anticipated to be required, along with the trigger for each. In addition to the environmental permits, the Master Plan would need to go through the City's Site Plan Review process, including a pre-application, application, and application review to identify required construction permits such as the following: • Building permits • Trade permits (i.e., electrical, plumbing, mechanical, or fire suppression) • Street use or right-of-way permits • Utility, demolition, or air quality permits • Permits for geotechnical, potholing, or excavation work that is performed in support of the design process prior to construction • Additional permits for off-site staging associated with the future Master Plan Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 31 August 2024 Table 6 Environmental Permitting Requirements Permit or Estimated Approval and Permit Lead Agency Trigger Timeframe Notes _JE SEPA Review Any proposal that Schematic A SEPA checklist is anticipated to be prepared by City of Renton requires a state or local Design the City for public review and comment.The agency decision to (30%design) checklist will include Master Plan background license,fund, or information and an evaluation of impacts to undertake a project, or environmental elements including earth,air,water, the proposed adoption plants, animals, energy and natural resources, of a policy, plan,or environmental health, land and shoreline use, program can trigger housing,aesthetics, light and glare, recreation, environmental review historical and cultural preservation,transportation, under SEPA. public services, and utilities. The SEPA checklist may need to be supported by additional technical reports and/or technical memoranda to address specific disciplines. NEPA Review Projects that receive Schematic The Master Plan will likely meet requirements for a Federal Funding federal funding Design Documented Categorical Exclusion. It may Agency' and potentially instead require an Environmental USACE Assessment. Note that USACE will also complete their own internal NEPA review during the Section 404 Individual Permit process for elements of the Master Plan under their jurisdiction—for example, filling of waters of the United States(wetlands). The Categorical Exclusion form may need to be supported by additional technical reports and/or technical memoranda to address specific disciplines. National Activities that may Concurrent A qualified archaeologist will be required to Historic affect archaeological, with NEPA or prepare a cultural resources memorandum that will Preservation Act cultural, or historic CWA support NEPA documentation and be provided to Section 106 resources or sites Section 404 USACE as part of the Section 404 permit package. Compliance review Preparation of the memorandum will require a DAHP and review of the Master Plan plans, areas, and Native American depth/extent of ground-disturbing activities. Tribes ESA compliance Section 7 review is Concurrent Federal funding or permits will require compliance NMFS and required for federal with NEPA or with Section 7 of the ESA. ESA-listed aquatic USFWS actions(funding, permit, CWA species are known to use downstream portions of or approval)that may Section 404 May Creek.The Master Plan will require either a affect any ESA-listed review no-effect letter or a biological evaluation. species or their critical If the Master Plan has federal funding,the funding habitat. agency will be the lead agency for ESA compliance. If the Master Plan does not have federal funding, USACE would be the lead agency for ESA compliance if a CWA Section 404 permit is required. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 32 August 2024 Permit or Estimated Approval and Permit Lead Agency Trigger Timeframe Notes Critical Areas Alteration of a site with Concurrent A Critical Areas Exemption authorizes work in Exemption and a critical area or buffer with SEPA streams,wetlands,and buffers.A Land Use Permit Other Permits (RMC 4-3-050) review Master Application is submitted to City of Renton City of Renton Community and Economic Development.The same application will also be used to obtain a Flood Hazard Permit.A completed tree retention work sheet must be included in the application. Note:The Master Plan is not within shoreline jurisdiction or aquifer protection areas. CWA Section A discharge of dredged Schematic If the Master Plan has 0.5 acre or less of fill in 404 Individual or fill material into Design wetlands, it will likely require coverage under Permit or waters of the United Nationwide Permit 42 Recreational Facilities. If a Nationwide States, including larger amount of fill in wetlands is required,a Permit wetlands 404 Individual permit will be required. USACE A JARPA form would be submitted to USACE. CWA Section A 401 Water Quality Schematic For work within federally regulated wetlands 401 Water Certification is required Design (i.e., adjacent to May Creek or within its floodplain), Quality for all projects that issuance of the 401 Water Quality Certification Certification require a USACE demonstrates that the Master Plan will comply with Ecology Section 404 permit. state water quality standards and other aquatic resource protection under Ecology's regulatory authority. Procedurally, Ecology issues the 401 Certification before USACE can issue the Section 404 Individual Permit. Administrative An Administrative Order Schematic For work within non-federally regulated wetlands Order is required for work Design (i.e., at wetlands not adjacent to May Creek and Ecology within non-federally without a surface water connection to May Creek), regulated waters. an Administrative Order is required. Ecology determines whether the proposed work,as conditioned by the Administrative Order,will comply with the applicable provisions of 90.48 RCW and other applicable requirements of state law. CZMA Triggered by projects Schematic Issuance of the CZMA Consistency Determination Consistency that contain a federal Design occurs as part of coordination with USACE and Determination nexus proposed within Ecology for the CWA Sections 404 and 401 Ecology any of Washington's processes described above. No separate 15 coastal counties. application is required. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 33 August 2024 Permit or Estimated Approval and Permit Lead Agency Trigger Timeframe Notes Section 402 Soil disturbance of Issued for Bid An NPDES Construction Stormwater General permit NPDES 1 acre or more during contract is required for construction activities with any soil Construction construction documents disturbance of 1 acre or more of total land and Stormwater have a discharge of stormwater into surface waters General Permit or into storm drainage systems that discharge to a Ecology surface water. The permit will trigger need for a construction stormwater pollution prevention plan with a Best Management Practices plan that is linked to erosion and sediment control drawings and specifications in the construction Contract Documents. Hydraulic Permit Work that uses,diverts, 45 days from Approval obstructs,or changes SEPA WDFW the natural flow or bed determination of state waters (i.e., issuance work waterward of the ordinary high water mark) N ote: 1. Federal funding agency(if any)has not been determined yet. 5.2 Phasing Considerations The City has considered phasing strategies to implement the Master Plan. Based on current ownership, the City has identified proposed Park development on the currently privately-owned 1.7 acre parcel as a future phase. This allows the City flexibility in the design approach for that future parcel as well as the opportunity to phase design and construction costs. The comfort station could also be phased. The City could provide a lower cost portable toilet restroom facility to the public in the Park's first phase and then plan a future sewer connection and Portland Loo construction project in order to phase design and construction costs. Within the proposed Park Development and Habitat Enhancement areas, there could be opportunities to phase implementation if needed. This could include: • Trail Development—develop a phased strategy to build out the trail network within the Park and connections beyond the Park boundary. • Habitat Enhancement— implement habitat mitigation to offset Master Plan impacts and then phase future habitat stewardship such as invasive vegetation removal, native planting, and streambank and in-stream enhancements. Stewardship activities could be implemented on a Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 34 August 2024 separate schedule by a local organization such as the Washington Conservation Corps or with volunteers. 5.3 Funding Opportunities The City utilized the State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO; formerly the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation) to acquire much of the land composing the future Park. The RCO administers numerous grant funding programs that may be appropriate for supporting future development and/or parcel acquisition within the Park boundary. The City has successfully utilized grant funding from the King County Conservation Futures grant program on nearby parcels elsewhere along the Greenway.This grant has funded the protection of nearly 100,000 acres of land in the county, including lands at Cougar Mountain Regional Wildlands Park.The City's focus on restoring and protecting the sensitive stream, riparian, wetland, and buffer habitats while also providing passive-use recreation in an underserved community has been considered and maintained throughout the master planning process to be consistent with the funding source. Looking to the future, King County Parks Levy funding source may be an option for design and implementation funding. Additionally, the Master Plan's unique opportunity to improve the environment while also improving public access to the outdoors and public health will position it well for other local, state, and federal funding. Table 7 outlines funding mechanisms that could be applicable to various aspects of the Master Plan design and implementation. Table 7 Potential Grant Funding Sources Agency and Grant Program Eligible Project Types and Summary of Program Cooperative Watershed The grant supports projects targeting salmon recovery Management Grant and watershed health that can be focused on restoration, research, or education and outreach. This funding program could support site stabilization Local King Count Conservation Futures costs including fencing, signage,and structure y demolition implemented shortly after acquisition. 2020-2025 Parks, Recreation, The voter-approved program includes funding for Trails and Open Space Levy capital and open space,open space and river corridors,and healthy communities funds. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 35 August 2024 ProgramAgency and Grant . . Aquatic Lands Enhancement Grants may be used for acquisition, improvement, Land and Water Conservation conservation,and stewardship in Washington for Wildlife and Recreation Program protection of aquatic lands, natural areas, and wildlife RCO habitats as well as promoting recreational Recreational Trails Program opportunities for public purposes. Project types State include conservation planning, habitat enhancement, Salmon Recovery and Puget p g, Sound Acquisition and shoreline restoration,water quality improvement,trail Restoration development,and stewardship opportunities. Ecology Terry Husseman Account Grants support locally sponsored projects that restore or enhance the environment. Building Resilient Infrastructure The program aims to shift funding to proactive FEMA and Communities Program investment in community resilience and pre-disaster mitigation activities. The program supports expanding access to the NFWF America the Beautiful Challenge outdoors, particularly in underserved communities, in conservation and resiliency projects. Puget Sound Action Agenda— The program supports protection and restoration of EPA Climate Resilient Riparian Systems riparian areas, including those supporting salmon Lead recovery,to promote climate resiliency. Federal The program supports projects that sustain, restore NFWF National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and enhance our nation's fish,wildlife and plants,and their habitats. The program supports projects that protect, restore USFWS North American Wetlands and enhance wetlands and associated uplands Conservation Act habitats for the benefit of all wetlands-associated migratory birds. National WaterSMART Aquatic Ecosystem The program supports aquatic ecosystem restoration Wildlife Restoration and protection projects west of the Mississippi River. Federation Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 36 August 2024 a. -�' f�� h. � - X ..� 1t > ,- - .�' xLe ►a. � 4 a �4y,� ..(F ar' - ''tgin�a � _,j,,. P:dG+ Tr'# '� • pwl i y r qgp- dd y l cm 6 REFERENCES Anchor QEA, 2010. May Creek Erosion Stabilization Draft Report. Prepared for King County. January 2010. Basnet, N., 2024. "Construction Costs in Seattle Outpace Rest of the Country." Puget Sound Business Journal. January 17, 2024. Accessed August 7, 2024. Available at: https://www.biz*ournals.com/seattle/news/2024/01/17/construction-costs-seattle.html. City of Renton, 2019, Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan. Adopted January 28, 2019. City of Renton, 2020. Renton Parks Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan. Adopted January 27, 2020. City of Renton, 2024. May Creek Greenway. City Website. Accessed July 2, 2024. Available at: https://www.rentonwa.gov/city hall/parks and recreation/parks and trails/find a park or tra it/may creek greenway. CPTED (The International Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Association), 2024. Primer in CPTED. Accessed July 8, 2024. Available at: https://www.cl2ted.net/Primer-in-CPTED. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 37 August 2024 King County and City of Renton, 2001. May Creek Basin Action Plan. Adopted April 2001. Minnick, B., 2024. "Skanska Shares Its Outlook on Construction Cost Escalation." Daily Journal of Commerce. February 27, 2023. Accessed August 7, 2024. Available at: https://www.dic.com/news/co/l 2154881.html. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 38 August 2024 PHOTOGRAPHS Cover Photograph — Northeast Renton Park, summer 2023. Source: Anchor QEA. Photograph 1 — May Creek tributary, spring 2024. Source:Anchor QEA. Photograph 2— Northeast Renton Park foliage, summer 2023. Source:Anchor QEA. Photograph 3 — Public engagement, spring 2024. Source: Jason Lederer. Photograph 4— Public engagement, spring 2024. Source: Jason Lederer. Photograph 5— May Creek, early spring 2024. Source: Jason Lederer. Photograph 6— Rain gardens along parking area. Source: Anchor QEA. Photograph 7— Example of wetland boardwalk. Source: Anchor QEA. Photograph 8— Barbee Mill — May Creek Trail outfall to Lake Washington. Source: Jason Lederer. Photograph 9— Example of trailhead kiosk. Source: Anchor QEA. Photograph 10— Example of nearby May Creek instream habitat. Source:Jason Lederer. Photograph 11 — Example of nearby May Creek trail naturalization. Source: Jason Lederer. Photograph 12— Philip Arnold Park in Renton, Washington. Source: Jason Lederer. Photograph 13 — Large rustic picnic shelter. Source: Anchor QEA. Photograph 14— Example of interpretive signage. Source: South Australian History Network; https://www.flickr.com/photos/communityhistorysa/21271092130. Photograph 15 — Public art. Source:Anchor QEA. Photograph 16— Portable toilet with toilet enclosure. Source: Anchor QEA. Photograph 17— Northeast Renton Park, early spring 2024. Source: Clearway Environmental. Photograph 18— May Creek, early spring 2024. Source: Jason Lederer. Photograph 19— Northeast Renton Park foliage, summer 2023. Source: Anchor QEA. Northeast Renton Park Master Plan 39 August 2024 APPENDIX A EXISTING INFORMATION SUMMARY REPORT 53 �y - rA �' • r• NI r ��J� Ct � rN ,* t W", t id 0`1 AN CL LU a .f • ) 1 a 'J Vo January 2024 May Creek Park Master Planning Project Existing Information Summary Prepared for Prepared by City of Renton Anchor QEA, LLC 1055 South Grady Way, 1201 3rd Avenue, Suite 2600 Renton, Washington 98057 Seattle, Washington 98101 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Project Location .........................................................................................................................2 2.1 Basemap.................................................................................................................................................................4 2.2 May Creek Greenway.........................................................................................................................................6 3 Summary of Existing Documents...........................................................................................9 3.1 Ownership..............................................................................................................................................................9 3.2 Grant Funding.......................................................................................................................................................9 3.3 City Planning Documents.............................................................................................................................. 10 3.4 Regional Planning Documents.................................................................................................................... 15 4 Geotechnical Technical Assessment....................................................................................17 4.1 Existing Geological Conditions................................................................................................................... 17 4.2 City Geological Critical Areas....................................................................................................................... 17 5 Cultural Resources Technical Assessment.........................................................................19 5.1 Environmental and Cultural Context......................................................................................................... 19 5.2 Archaeology.......................................................................................................................................................20 5.3 Historic Resources............................................................................................................................................22 5.4 Traditional Cultural Properties and Cultural Landscapes..................................................................22 6 Site Reconnaissance and Natural Resource Inventory.................................................. 23 6.1 FLAT Assessment..............................................................................................................................................23 6.2 Wetland Reconnaissance..............................................................................................................................26 6.3 May Creek Conditions....................................................................................................................................27 6.4 Landmark Trees.................................................................................................................................................27 6.5 Land Cover and Site Features......................................................................................................................28 7 Data Gaps.................................................................................................................................. 30 8 References.................................................................................................................................31 Existing Information Summary i January 2024 TABLES Table1 Vicinity Map Data Sources......................................................................................................................4 Table2 Parcel Acquisitions......................................................................................................................................9 Table3 Critical Area Buffer Widths...................................................................................................................15 Table 4 Landmark Tree Inventory......................................................................................................................28 FIGURES Figure1 Project Location...........................................................................................................................................2 Figure2 Project Vicinity Map...................................................................................................................................3 Figure3 Project Basemap..........................................................................................................................................5 Figure 4 City of Newcastle's May Creek Park and Trail.................................................................................7 Figure 5 Trail Locations for Cougar Mountain Regional Wildlife Park...................................................8 Figure 6 2020 Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan Concept......................................................11 Figure 7 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map................................................................................................12 Figure 8 Statewide Predictive Model for Precontact Archaeological Potential..............................21 Figure 9 Forest Landscape Assessment Tool (FLAT) Analysis.................................................................24 Figure 10 Forest Landscape Assessment Tool (FLAT) Map........................................................................25 APPENDIX Appendix A Site Photographs Existing Information Summary ii January 2024 1 Introduction This report summarizes existing information that will be used to support the May Creek Park Master Planning Project (Project). The Project is an initial step taken by the City of Renton (City) to develop a new neighborhood park. The information summarized in this report will be used to support site planning, the development of conceptual design alternatives, and the selection of a preferred conceptual design alternative. To inform a baseline understanding of the Project's context and site conditions, the Project team has reviewed all existing documents provided by the City and known documents gathered from other publicly available sources, including a review of Project site ownership, grant funding, City planning documentation, and regional planning documentation. The report provides a narrative summary as well as a vicinity and site basemapping. As part of the existing information review, the Project team also conducted technical assessments to document geotechnical and cultural resources conditions and considerations. In addition, this report summarizes a site reconnaissance and natural resources inventory conducted in December 2023. The site reconnaissance focused on identifying and characterizing existing natural resources present at the sites including wetlands, May Creek, buffers, forest canopy, and other land covers. In addition to a narrative summary, the site reconnaissance findings are also presented in a site analysis and Project opportunities graphic. Finally, this report identifies data gaps that will need to be filled in future phases of May Creek Park design, permitting, and implementation. Existing Information Summary 1 January 2024 2 Project Location May Creek Park (Park), located in Renton, King County, Washington, within the City's East Plateau neighborhood, is an 18.5-acre assemblage of parcels acquired by the City over the last three decades (Figure 1). It is bordered by May Creek to the north, Duvall Avenue NE to the west, and residential neighborhoods to the south. To the northwest is the City's Surface Water Utility Facility. The current Park boundary includes the most recently acquired property, a 1.8-acre parcel with an existing home, but does not include the adjacent 1.7-acre parcel with a single-family home that is immediately to the west. The City has plans to acquire the single-family home and property when it is available and to include that area within the future Park. Figure 1 Project Location me an� W. Y :r .} z w P. Issaquah Lake A. Was[ . . I f.1-5 - =t Fast Plateau Neighborhood .:kll ` .. Immediately to the north and west of the Park is the boundary of the City of Newcastle (Figure 2). Just across Coal Creek Parkway SE in Newcastle is a 3,100-acre park and trail system also called May Creek Park (City of Newcastle 2019). Both Newcastle's May Creek Park and the new Park fall within the Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed and Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 8. May Creek is the third largest tributary to Lake Washington, draining the area west of Issaquah Creek and north of Cedar River, flowing through both Newcastle and Renton. The Park is located approximately 4 miles from Lake Washington. Figure 2 maps the Park boundary and vicinity and is at the neighborhood scale. Following Figure 2, Table 1 provides the data sources for the Project vicinity map. Existing Information Summary 2 January 2024 Figure 2 Project Vicinity Map �l. �y � ,,D� .. �•eI I / a M6_- -F 1♦ 1,, _[r END: / I <_ , - / Mey Creek PA PI.—g Bwndery City of Newcastle City of Newcastle P _ I :- ��� a ,�'^c f o y Cougar Mountain W.J City of Renton eound.ry May Creek Park May Creek Park Greenway F •� 1 w ' Regional Wildland Park Patcd 1I �`�•` • 4V a _. Pdmary corrcour nw-n mtervaft Future Park at 95th Site / �' � r-eti r .� `• y4 Im MdiateCc-urao-rti Wml) t - J�I� , � ♦ r" ==Designated Neighb—od • •• �'' •�• ./ } P IF _ R,Residential t dWac fi ♦ •I /+*�• * ` PA Residential 4 dWac '• • yi i Cl ty O f �• it •'�� ' xr R it R6 Reside i,l 6 DU/AC SE95th WO J I ent�� I or Fill-Peilltid ill Dd./ Bo�•r R,D.R.sid I DdWac `� J Y n ary_•� -_ 1 RMF Reid t IM la Family A.Islf Lity of Renton - - _ u-egmm.d.laeri.l ,.• /��'r. �� storm water utility lam_ May Creek~ SE Valley - -•mot '�- Parks and Recreation 1 r, , •',i I �� May a �• Part 1R: ►/ 9r� -� Rod Opm Sp.ce ice.-.�.�.�. �.-.�-• -•_•_••� .��_.-_. p ��• �� �' • �•� Critical Areas 1 -..$. <. - ❑ ° � -- ' L o ,o F rr/j�f/( 1 npe>,sxa<_zsx ❑ ❑ oTu� _ $$ ♦ slope>zsxa<_aox,sa:ieya) $rf 1 1 77`/ vove>aorea<_soxlaoenedl MAY CREEK" ,1,, R-1 :... 1 ." �SlW.>Box ce P W) I__-- *: P,LANNING J; IF-.. O CeYMeppdWelend 1 ,.---- n , r.. 1• ... _ J., ... ..... 1 .. / •: .... 1 Sierra Heights Ir ❑� tl FFMAPgulatwy ZonezA AE AN.AD — .. _. :. '•: Fish Stream t Park F ° R-6 Non Fish stream i I R-4 II NE2Sth S.— Pi °if Coe n - //� -I �"' ' 1 —NPPFish6.aoelsneem 1 IC` J a I 1� \ �-? 1 1 Transportation _ _ _- °� a� o° R-1 '❑- t• f'�'O �'o a� I � I I I � Roadwaywnhlawervehidewlume/speedand/orwideshoulder Langley�Rid ge_¢ __� n I ` I I I $ S—light ° li3 I O P.d..man w.h Runnn Glencoe i� N@Ighborkgod --- -I --- t _ Utilities ::. R-6• ° I----� -� Park �. ❑,, ? � f (y •J •(�C} —❑®=- ° ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Flu C J'•t}-co- — •:•1J I ❑ —UbargmurM Fiber Cable 1 4 ° ❑ I ° �❑ ' -----r �� R-4 I`��❑ I I F —wedeadFbereable L — _ -- - -' - �° ° ❑ R_4 - , R-1 ° ❑ I Surface Water System ,� o 01. a ❑ A J1_�-�-- - - ———— �� n I ° I rfPbli<A—R:er I �i— ❑ I❑ c� �-tia0.-a ^-^ rta I ,'z I a Pumi<lPlet tea❑ °_ b II -�* ❑I ❑• -v-❑-m-°-Nb-v-v�d�� 1 °" o R 6 Stonegate ® Public .,h.l. Ll 0 ° 13P 0 16 1 +NE'23rd St v } -,•.-._.1 $ I y Public Cl...ow \ "°�� o ❑ ❑ 1 ❑ , I Neighborhood a Public Dadurg.P.. Public Dell—FadYty I I1 I I ❑ II� �/ �? b an - 1 `3 ❑ ❑� Q' I ° ; j -Publicsmrm..atarvipe ° �E(?_o ❑ m m p ° ❑� ❑ �. A I~ ° - ❑ 4<. ❑'A�'O •-II J I + e Public Cuba,. i -�o • �II�4 tnJ�❑ m W Glenc ° ❑I R-6 ❑ , ° 4❑ I� I i —oPeeDam, R7 I� ❑� ❑ a I b I Facirnyo dine R-6 a ' Neighborhood ql °❑ o,P a _ -----_ ° c 7 Drinking Water System ° R 6 J❑ 9 $ ° ❑° B � d I ❑ jjj i Water Man ) °❑ ❑ I . �j r i Renton F're Hydrant �� A? I °❑ - - $� I �° } I sy:mmvaNeoP ned j e � �� ❑ '*� „� F}❑�ri Su irnerwh Wastewater System ❑ ° b ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑d° �ii--7 } 4y1 3 Yt❑ ti � $ I '► B stem, 1 v -- ❑ Mai) a CreekQ N<el hborhood I t °°a' ° e + Wastpvate Manhole 4�N1 ��' eF _ ❑ o ° ° 'T T �`� i A Nelghbol'h00'd014. tP o g $ ❑d$ i -� i 1 ❑ sen eeonnenon .�' I �2 I �' �7.❑ I Y i•�.—.�. .. Prersudsd Main ❑ c. 8 j o u�4° R-6 I }J `� rl, a I •v 1 NOTE: ° °� Py� I _ I Horizontal Datum-NAD 1983 HARN State ° q$° ° ❑�a n ° _ I 'y, ❑ ° ° `+ I ii ❑°t R4 I Plane Washington North FIPS 4601 (US Feet) ❑ W1II�: II ° ❑ ❑❑ ° ❑0 I °r 11 I ° . $ ❑ I ❑ I SOURCES: / ..>ti►o R�6 m �o � u�u ° ❑ I I $❑❑ ❑ ? e. ❑ t 1 _; .p. F City of Renton COR Maps ❑ � g 11 ^+ ly I U i I $ 1r• d� P R-6 I ❑4 ❑ ❑ a o ° "❑ ❑ o =-a E-� a. CQ I b C:J R, ° I „ '} I I $ a } -- S ringtree ------- I ° 0 600 P .« :' RM F ~ ' `1 $_ } m ,laxa cl ft' R-10 ' Neighborhood R-,io --❑ � R-s ��� I Y Feet Note:Map elements provided by the City of Renton. Existing Information Summary 3 January 2024 Table 1 Vicinity Map Data Sources Data Layer Data Source Aerial imagery Esri World Imagery(Bing Maps 2023) Parcels King County Parcel Viewer(King County 2023) Site boundary City boundary Property Districts and boundaries Parks and Recreation Land Use and Zoning Critical Areas Telecommunications Transportation Elements City of Renton COR Maps (City of Renton 2023a) Utilities Trees Erosion Hazard Floodway Regulated slopes Streams Wetlands Topography Site Survey Record of Survey for City of Renton (Pace 2023) 2.1 Basemap Figure 3 presents a Project basemap. The data compiled for this map were taken from Esri World Imagery (Bing Maps 2023), City COR Parcel Data, City COR Maps (City of Renton 2023a), the Record of Survey for City of Renton (Pace 2023), and many of the same data sources as summarized in Table 1. The map also includes the following data collected by Clearway Environmental (Clearway) during the site reconnaissance in December 2023 (Section 6): • Photo points • Trails • Wetland 0 Invasive species threat (low, medium, high) • Paved surfaces • Tree composition (low, medium, high) • Landscaped surfaces • Tributaries and ditches • Landmark trees 0 Points of interest The basemap will be used for master planning and conceptual design. In future phases of Project design and permitting, a site boundary and topography survey will need to be completed. Specific survey needs are noted as data gaps in Section 7. Existing Information Summary 4 January 2024 Figure 3 Project Basemap ♦ j '� - L�� LEGEND: •♦ c r �_ j / __ 0�Or May Leek Park Planning Boundary R-- � enron`B ti...e Potential Future Acquisition I j �r �Un� � City of Renton Boundary ->,• ary •-r-, , � 0 Parcel � ••• e spec Right of Way(Survey) f •• • •♦I �j�/� r 1•• Easement(Survey) • f y/ Tr I ' •• Primary Contour(10-k interval) J I,,//��� ;�_� •r•r ��•..•C •• \ \� ��i• • •••• Intermediate Contour(2-ft interval) s,!• 1 j - - \. I'•�.• '��/�/ ••••••••• H—K Wood Fencing(Survey) City of Newcastle s'�1 ( `.�.� , ee f�O Chainlink Fencing(Survey) May Creek Park J .•; � t� City Mapped Open Space Greenway E � • City Mapped Tree v \ •r ( r �� ^ -• j o Site Features Identified During . .� Site Reconnaissance — 10-TT o — I _ �� -••• .- Site Reconnaissance Wetland r.V Wetland Buffer(75-k) r s Type F Stream Buffer(115-ft) Type F Stream Buffer Structure Setback(15-k) 1 ' I /���• � Temporary bridge � Hardscapirg '� \ A / �� --• Ditch \ 1t pen wood shed s o t --• Tributary to May Creek s\\ l n ••. Small wooden footbridge traki / Trail • • Landmark Tree ■ Footbridge 01-IQ�� '� , ' - ♦ - • Photo Point \ o �� — ••, ,c Trail 1 City Mapped Critical Areas } i, n o e �- Y pp r • - Slope>15%&<-25% �� � - � �• '•- _ ,= Slope>25%&<-40%(Sensitive) +4 ¢ 4�a ` •.����_ i.f%�' '••�_ •. _ Slope>40%&<=90%(Protected) • �--- �/'�_� ' ` y�r����•� �� V"/ -- •--.........• _ .. •..'•• _Slope>90%(Protected) �•�� • • �� / - /-�� \ •• ® Erosion Hazard Area el. ��-_- ' `•.\ \ I \�� � `�\\ rri de of dri•v .. . �� • � �� / City Mapped Wetland�� ap09p .. .l• d, .....••� �sU, G7 Fkwdway � a I ion _ .... %// FEMA Regulatory ones A,AE O Acce sand `\ y •" •• V • � /.....::: '..• ..'.' - ' '•-•' ..... .... ....,.1 Fish Streamlato,. Z AH A utility asement • r f-. - - I well &d; l I ' ' Mapp _ etla tisj _ City Mapped Transportation . :`... Bicycle Lane `��• . . :....1. r •• Ill Guardrail Ir, Streadight .1. �rI •`iY .. ,y, \'Yy i•_�• . .L"•,1r,- -.^:. . s .. � O Pedestrian Push Button 11 I .� l ... . City Mapped Utilities Within I I \. \ crcck'nrnr� north �• f-- .. III -ft of Planning Area -- 1 \ `� / /- •�' !•••• � �� •• � � 2 ,r,ie _ �r, Underground Fiber Cable +•• � _ Overhead Fiber Cable I I AII,���• • \<� `\ -�`- •••� • ® Surface Water System Public Inlet WX 00— V• L e �� `•® � _ _� • �•• • �i _ ® Surface Water System Public Manhole — _ _ ___ _ I O+ a �� \� - — ~ ••r., .•� -=—� - — Surface Water System Public Discharge Point "i��Al7 I�I! A� `� • • —_ _ � ---^;``� - Public Stormwater Pipe NQTII —— Private Stormwater Pipe P I z_� • 1.HorIZo a Surface Water System Public Culvert ' �\ \ \`_ f----_Wa5f11t19t0 Surface Water System Open Drain ;` f `$QtJRCE Surface System Water Virtual Drainline ` `\` `` 1 •�Ity Q Surface Water Facility Outline i 0 1 ;``\`` ` ` —\ •$Ile T Renton Fire Hydrant Clearwa `ON \ q Survey O.Drinking Water ng Water Sys em Water Mem Val" ain Note:Map elements provided by the City of Renton. Existing Information Summary 5 January 2024 2.2 May Creek Greenway The 1978 Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan recognized May Creek Greenway as a valuable natural corridor. This corridor stretches across 8 miles from Cougar Mountain Regional Wildland Park and west to creek mouth on Lake Washington. Beginning in 1980, the cities of Renton and Newcastle, along with King County, began to acquire land along the May Creek Corridor in hopes of eventually creating a multijurisdictional soft-surface trail system. The vision is to create a large greenway system with an uninterrupted network of pervious trails, interpretive and educational opportunities, and habitat for spawning salmon and other native species. The greenway would also serve as flood and slope protection (City of Renton 2023d; Washington Trails Association 2023). 2.2. 7 City of Newcastle's May Creek Park May Creek Trail is located in May Creek Park in the City of Newcastle immediately west of the Park. It stretches from I-405 to Coal Creek Parkway and will share a border with the future section of the Park. The parkland surrounding the trail spans more than 3,100 acres (Figure 4). May Creek Trail is a 3.5-mile, roundtrip, soft-surface trail winding through a historical woodland that was once the workplace of coalminers. The trail follows the historical footprint of the Seattle-Walla Walla Railroad. The trail follows along the northern bank of May Creek, falling and gaining more than 585 feet in elevation and occasionally looping through clearings, crossing bridges, and even passing by a vintage rusted out van, but primarily staying within dense wooded areas. Terrace Trail and a greenbelt network of other trails can be accessed by crossing Coal Creek Parkway from May Creek Trail, which allows hikers to continue into Cougar Mountain Park (City of Newcastle 2019; Washington Trails Association 2023). Existing Information Summary 6 January 2024 Figure 4 City of Newcastle's May Creek Park and Trail Roil jrinc:i; i —— _ - _ .. ,a• oa r ' .fie +i r �•'. . . .� 1 7... ` k yam* ti ka � .itt L RENTON y r h _ , - ....... RENTON r ........ � 9.9•r•..wsri�a r•r.�•r..� ♦rrr • 0 Cr/m m 4M$[met% NeKadle 041 camw S&vmk We Type C'r kv,�z,y r7 L k s - - T,al p4mm —5X%Sham GrMM1ayS Pafk Am&% ."' &ke$?ix ' Sda Source:https:Hdata-newcastlewa.opendata.arcgis.com 2.2.2 Cougar Mountain Regional Wildlife Park The King County-owned, 3,000-plus acre Cougar Mountain Regional Wildlife Park is located in an area known as the Issaquah Alps in Renton. It is a short hike or bike ride from May Creek Park. Cougar Mountain Regional Wildlife Park is home to more than 35 miles of trails that wind through dense second-growth forests and wetlands, along streams, and include landmarks such as cliffs and caves. The park boundary and trail locations are identified in Figure 5. Many of the trails feature viewpoints of nearby lakes, mountain ranges, and city skylines, while others are deep in the wilderness with no hint of nearby urban living (King County 2023a). The trails closest to the Park are Terrace Trail and Newcastle Highlands Trail, the De Leo Wall Loop and De Leo Wall Trail, Indian Trail, and Ballybunion Trail (AIITrails 2023). Cougar Mountain Regional Wildlife Park is connected to Squak Mountain and Tiger Mountain, which adds up to more than 5,000 acres of protected public land. These trails and natural areas can be reached from May Creek Park by hiking or bicycling along the Crosstown Trail and Terrace Trail in conjunction with short distances on city streets. Existing Information Summary 7 January 2024 Figure 5 Trail Locations for Cougar Mountain Regional Wildlife Park 1 Coal Creek ' Pines Natural Area_ Newcastle em,i Issaquah _ w ' a, s r' Cougar Mountain Tradition Plateau _ Regional Wfldland Park Natural Resource', nydale © - , Mn�ea' .MEADOWS�� Conservation Area, `© `© May Creek Park :Cougar`flSq`uak Corridor'-',,;' SquakMUTiger-, -- Mt COrrl d' or T1 Source:AIITrails 2023 Existing Information Summary 8 January 2024 3 Summary of Existing Documents The Project team reviewed relevant background materials provided by City staff, which are publicly available. This section provides a summary of these materials. 3.1 Ownership Table 2 summarizes parcels acquired by the City for the future Park. The list totals 18.22 acres of land currently acquired and a trail easement connecting to the parcel assemblage across privately owned adjacent parcels to the east. Table 2 Parcel Acquisitions Parcel/Recording Parcel Name Number Year Acquired Acreage McAskill Parcel 032305-9287 1994 10 Langley Ridge Trail Easement 20080212000465 2008 15-foot easement area undefined Property Exchange Conversion N/A 2012 0.06 Donated parcel 3424059164 2013 2.5 Donated parcel 0323059005 2015 4 2718 Duvall Avenue NE Parcel 032305-9164 2023 1.66 N ote: N/A:not available 3.2 Grant Funding The City has applied for and won several grants to acquire land for and complete improvements to the Park. The following grants were awarded: • RCO Grant, 1991, May Creek Trail (RCO Project No. 91-259): $169,200 (50% of total cost) through the State of Washington for the acquisition of approximately 19 acres of land (six separate parcels) to adjoin the May Creek/Honey Creek Green Belt in North Renton (May Creek Trail 1991) • RCO Grant,1994, May Creek Trail (RCO Project No. 92-298): $90,573.96 (50% of total cost) through the State of Washington for the acquisition of 10 acres of land (six separate parcels) to adjoin the May Creek/Honey Creek Green Belt in North Renton (May Creek Trail 1994) These grants came with long-term obligations that the projects be completed in a timely manner and for outdoor recreation purposes (Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office 2023). For acquisition grants, property must be obtained within a required period of time. For recreation Existing Information Summary 9 January 2024 projects, grant recipients must maintain public outdoor recreation opportunities in a safe and attractive manner and at reasonable hours and times of the year. 3.3 City Planning Documents 3.3. 7 2020 Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan The City's Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan is a 6-year plan, adopted in January 2020. This report is an update of the previous plan that was adopted in 2011. The purpose of the plan is to provide a long-term vision and goals for the City's parks, recreation, and natural areas over the next 20 years. The plan lays out current and future needs and community interest for parks and recreation, identifies policies and strategies to enhance and sustain parks, provides a framework to guide priorities and funding sources, and responds to the needs of the community as well as state requirements for grant eligibility (Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office 2023). This plan ties in with the City's Comprehensive Plan, the Trails and Bicycle Master Plan, and the Downtown Civic Core Vision and Action Plan. This document includes recommended park amenities that were created using community input regarding recreation and valuable natural areas. The draft plans were reviewed by the public, the Project Steering Committee, Parks Commission, Planning Commission, and the Council Committee of the Whole. These concept plans were well-received and are intended to be a vision of possibilities to use as a starting point and inspiration for future planning and design work. Specifically for the Park, this plan includes a concept that maintains much of the natural forested areas, with a long winding interpretive loop trail along the creek and through the wetlands, trail connections on both sides of the park, parking, play areas, and sports courts grouped into a cohesive active recreation area. This plan is based on the distinct identity and character of the surrounding community and considers existing recreation opportunities as well as natural features (City of Renton 2020). Existing Information Summary 10 January 2024 Figure 6 2020 Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan Concept Creek ViewIN ' Loop Trail Interpretive Trail Sign Ocinnection Picnic + Retain Extsting Retain Trees Where Existing Feasible Restroom Basketball Parking Lot (20-30 spaces; Wetland Buffe avg. 100' min. 50' Sculptural Bike Rack Trailhead Into/Tools Existing Picnic .` - Wetland i Grove Swing Playy Structure \ (C11rr)Ing,Slide%) \ Retai Interpretive r Play Area Existing Sign \ Trees I Future Secret Bamboo Forest Pedestri and Music Area �••�.._..� Trail Connecti yam•-.+w. - - — -- +r ♦` — Sea. A Source:City of Renton 2020 3.3.2 Comprehensive Plan The City's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 201 S and must be updated by 2024. This long-term plan focuses on goals for growth and development within the City of Renton. This plan is a guide for land use, transportation, housing, economic development, parks and recreation, community planning, utilities, capital facilities, environment, climate change, and resiliency. These are all requirements of Washington's Growth Management Act. The updated plan will take into consideration feedback from all stakeholders, including residents, business owners, property owners, City staff, City Council, and the planning commission. This input will be essential to creating a plan that reflects the vision and needs of those who live in Renton. Existing Information Summary 11 January 2024 3.3.2.1 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (Figure 7) shows that the Park falls within the designations for Residential Low Density (RLD) and Residential Medium Density (RMD). All adjacent properties to the north and south fall within these same designations (City of Renton 2018b). Figure 7 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map as CMU N e Land Use Designations m RLD-Residential Low Density RMD-Residential Medium Density c RMD - RHD-Residential High Density EA-Employment Area CMU-Commercial Mixed Use COR-Commercial Office Residential St Q Renton City Limits RHD i NE 27th St NE 4rF St NE 23rd PI RLD RLD Ki g County I r RLD Z NE 19rh St i 16 RHD a I 4� 1 SF m 1 ESunser811d RHD N �o F E'�Moort OtN ��� RHD a RHD Z NE 1 Oth Sr 1 NE to h St p •� m z Source:City of Renton 2018b 3.3.3 Trails and Bicycle Master Plan The 2019 Trails and Bicycle Master Plan was developed through a joint effort between Renton Parks and Recreation, the Parks Planning and Natural Resources Division, the Public Works Department, the Transportation Systems Division, the Community and Economic Development Department, and the Long Range Planning Division. This plan lays out a vision for a nonmotorized bike and walking path network for the next 20 years and is a requirement for grant funding eligibility. The plan includes a brief introduction describing the benefits of walking and cycling, the relationship to other plans, the planning process, and the master plan of trails. It then lays out a framework of how the final plan comes to be—from vision, goals, and objectives to community involvement, demand and needs analysis, guiding principles, plan elements, and implementation. Because the Park is intended to be part of this large network of soft-surface trails, this plan and the concepts within are relevant. Existing Information Summary 12 January 2024 This plan is a framework that can help guide the City in establishing priorities during the planning and design process of the Project (City of Renton 2019). 3.3.4 Renton Downtown Civic Core Vision and Action Plan The City's Downtown Civic Core Vision and Action Plan was adopted in January 2018. This plan provides a descriptive vision, with relevant photographs and graphics, of future opportunities for Renton's downtown and civic core. Active civic core projects include The Renton Connector, Pavilion Market & Food Hall, Downtown Streetscapes, Arts &Culture Space, and Downtown Wayfinding. The plan includes an introduction of the downtown civic core and necessary context, followed by solutions and visions suggested by the community. The plan also includes themes, strategies, and ideas for implementation. Though May Creek is not part of the downtown civic core, the strategies and concepts for improving urban design and encouraging the use of urban outdoor spaces can be applied to this Project (City of Renton 2018A; MIG 2018). 3.3.5 Urban Forest Management Plan 2022-2033 Rooted in Renton is the City's Urban Forest Management Plan (City of Renton 2022). The plan is a 10-year update to the previous plan and includes a brief introduction and description of the history and benefits of urban forests, followed by a description of the current state of Renton's urban forests. The 10-year plan describes the City's Urban Forestry Program, and the program's current needs and challenges, as well as an implementation schedule. As the City grows and becomes denser, the importance of maintaining and enhancing tree canopy throughout the city limits becomes a greater priority. Established forests, such as those in the May Creek greenbelt, are a valuable asset, providing habitat, beauty, and physical and emotional wellbeing to residents. May Creek and the surrounding areas are a vital part of the City's mission to proactively manage public trees, grow and expand a healthy tree canopy, maintain public safety, and optimize urban forest benefits (City of Renton 2022). 3.3.6 Development Regulations Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Title IV— Development Regulations is a set of compiled and revised City ordinances related to development regulations. It consists of 11 chapters, including Administration and Enforcement,Zoning Districts, Environmental Regulations, City-Wide Property Development Standards, Building and Fire Prevention Standards, Street and Utility Standards, Subdivision Regulations, Legal Nonconforming Structures, Uses and Lots, and Definitions (City of Renton 2023f). 3.3.6.1 City of Renton Critical Areas Regulations RMC 4-3-050 is the City's chapter on Critical Areas Regulations. Its purpose is to protect riparian habitat, which in turn protects the stability of banks and channels and decreases erosion. It also addresses maintaining a clean water supply, flood storage, and sediment and pollutant filtering. Existing Information Summary 13 January 2024 Other functions that are important to fish and wildlife, such as recruitment of woody debris and nutrients, shade, shelter, and other habitat elements, are discussed and provided for in this section (City of Renton 2023b). 3.3.7 Zoning The City zoning map shows that the Park falls primarily within zoning designation R-1, with the surrounding areas zoned R-4 and R-6 (City of Renton 2023g). According to the RMC, these zones are described as follows (City of Renton 2023e): • R-1 (Residential 1 DU/Acre): Established to provide and protect suitable environments for residential development of lands characterized by pervasive critical areas where limited residential development will not compromise critical areas. The R-1 zone designation provides for suburban estate single family and clustered single family residential dwellings at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per net acre and allows for small-scale farming associated with residential use. • R-4 (Residential 4 DU/Acre): Established to promote urban single family residential neighborhoods serviceable by urban utilities and containing open-space amenities. It is intended to implement the RLD Comprehensive Plan designation. The R-4 zone designation allows for a maximum density of four dwelling units per net acre and serves as a transition between rural designation zones and higher density residential zones. It is intended as an intermediate lower density residential zone. • R-6 (Residential 6 DU/Acre): Established for single family dwellings and is intended to implement the RMD Comprehensive Plan designation. The R-6 zone designation allows for a range of three to six dwelling units per net acre. Development in the R-6 zone is intended to be single family residential at moderate density. Preliminary review of the RMC shows that only wetlands of 1,000 square feet (sf) or less (and their buffers) may be exempt from impact mitigation and/or some permitting obligations if they meet certain conditions. The City follows the 2014 updated Washington State Department of Ecology wetland rating system. Under RMC 4-3-050-G.2, exempt activities permitted within wetlands and streams (and associated buffers) include construction of new trails and temporary wetland impacts (see Section 6 for wetland and buffer descriptions). For buffer analysis, it was presumed that the Project would be considered Low Intensity Land Use, which is defined in RMC 4-3-05OG as: "unpaved trails, low intensity open space (hiking, bird-watching, preservation of natural resources, etc.) and utility corridor without a maintenance road and little or no vegetation management." Existing Information Summary 14 January 2024 Under RMC 4-3-O5OG.2, the following critical area buffer widths are defined (see Section 4 for descriptions of geologic critical areas). These areas are based on habitat function and low impact land uses: Table 3 Critical Area Buffer Widths Critical Area Category or Type Critical Area Buffer Width Wetlands6 Low Impact Land Uses:? Moderate High Habitat Low Habitat Habitat All Other Function Function Function Scores (8-9 points) (5-7 points) (3-4 points) Category I—Bogs& 175 ft NaturalHeritage Wetlands Category I—All Others 175 ft. 125 ft. 75 ft. 75 ft. Category II 150 ft. 100 ft. 75 ft. n/a Category I I 100 ft. 75 ft 50 ft. n/a Category IV 40 ft. n/a Streams and Lakess Type F 115 ft. 15 ft.' Type Np 75 ft. 15 ft.' Type Ns 5o ft. 15 ft.' Source:City of Renton 2023f In defining landmark trees for inventory, RMC 4-11-200 defines them as: "A tree with a caliper of twenty-four inches (24") or greater, except for big leaf maples, black cottonwoods, and red alder trees, which qualify as landmark trees with a caliper of thirty inches (30") or greater." 3.4 Regional Planning Documents 3.4. 7 2007 May Creek Action Plan The May Creek Action Plan is an outline and plan for the steps that can be taken to reduce and correct adverse conditions in the May Creek Basin resulting from urban growth and development in the surrounding areas. The outline includes background information on the historical conditions of the May Creek Basin, potential funding sources for improvements, and possible solutions for mitigation. These details are followed by a list of both near- and long-term recommendations for Existing Information Summary 15 January 2024 four subareas of May Creek Basin. Because of the urban location of the creek, planning and recommendations focus on improving the quality of surface and groundwater, protecting habitat for salmon and other species, reducing flooding and flood damage, stabilizing banks and preventing erosion, and preventing existing problems from becoming worse (Shapiro and Associates, Inc. 2023). 3.4.2 May Creek Drainage and Restoration Plan King County Water and Land Resources Division and the Mid-Puget Sound Fisheries Enhancement Group completed the May Creek Drainage and Restoration Plan in 2008. In this plan, consultants GeoEngineers and OTAK developed a Conceptual Restoration Plan for the May Valley Subarea located within the May Creek Basin near Renton. The Conceptual Restoration Plan is a study of this long, narrow floodplain consisting of rural and agricultural land, which has been flooding more frequently and severely in recent years. This plan summarizes the past, current, and projected conditions of the May Creek Basin and provides 33 recommendations for conceptual projects to address flood control issues, degraded habitat, and other associated issues (King County 2023b). 3.4.3 May Creek Erosion Stabilization Report As part of the May Creek Drainage and Restoration Plan recommendations, King County consulted with Anchor QEA to develop the May Creek Erosion stabilization Report to identify conceptual stabilization actions within a portion of the ravine reach of May Creek between Coal Creek Parkway and 148th Avenue SE.The Plan included a detailed site observation and evaluation to identify conceptual project sites and actions to reduce erosion and restore habitat.This report describes the site setting, approach, assessments, findings, and the resulting list of potential projects (Anchor QEA 2010). 3.4.4 Park at 95th Master Plan The Park at 95th Master Plan is a plan for a new park in Newcastle with a focus on athletic fields. It was prepared for the City of Newcastle in 2009 by a local landscape architecture firm and a team of subconsultants. The desire for new athletic fields was first recognized in the City of Newcastle Comprehensive Plan update adopted in 2003. The master plan seeks to guide future development in a 13.5-acre portion of Newcastle's May Creek Park at SE 95th Way, which is three-quarters of a mile from the Park. The plan walks through the steps taken to determine a possible design solution, from describing existing conditions, opportunities, and constraints to developing a preliminary program and collecting results from public outreach. Four alternatives were worked through and revised, along with a cost estimate for each. The end result was a conceptual plan with a focus on soccer and baseball fields, a large natural area, parking, picnicking areas, restrooms, and viewpoints (MacLeod Reckord 2009). The future Park at 95th is in close proximity to the Park and has the potential to serve residents of both Newcastle and Renton. Existing Information Summary 16 January 2024 4 Geotechnical Technical Assessment 4.1 Existing Geological Conditions The U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA NRCS; 2003) classifies the surface soils in the site as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam with 8%to 30%slopes, along with a small portion of Everett very gravelly sandy loam with 8%to 15%slopes, likely silty sands, and silty gravels.The Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) provides a classification of Pleistocene till and outwash clay, silt, sand, gravel, cobbles, and boulders deposited by or originating from continental glaciers locally and includes peat, nonglacial sediments, modified land, and artificial fill. No subsurface explorations were made available for analysis. 4.2 City Geological Critical Areas This section describes the Park's mapped geologic hazards in accordance with the definitions provided in the RMC 4-3-050G. 4.2. 7 Flood Hazard Assessment Flood hazard areas are defined as the land in the floodplain subject to a 1% or greater chance of flooding in any given year by the RMC. The northernmost portion of the Park site is located in an area mapped as a Zone AE FEMA regulatory floodway. By definition in the RMC, the portion of the site within the floodway is classified as a high flood hazard area. 4.2.2 Steep Slope Hazard Assessment The City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas displays both sensitive slopes and protected slopes on the Park site. Sensitive slopes (a slope defined as having an average slope lying between 25% and 40% or greater than 40%with a rise below 15 feet) lie on the southern edge of the site, adjacent to Duvall Avenue NE, and the northern portion of the site, surrounding the protected slope. The protected slope (defined as having an average slope of 40% or greater for a minimum vertical rise of 15 feet) is located on the northern portion of the site, south of May Creek. 4.2.3 Erosion Hazard Assessment All surface soils in the Project area are characterized by the USDA NRCS (2023) as having slight erosion potential; therefore, as defined by the RMC, the site is considered a low erosion hazard in areas where the slope grade is under 15%. Erosion control measures should be considered in areas where the slope grade is over 15%, including the areas surrounding the protected slope on the northern edge and the area adjacent to Duvall Avenue NE on the southern edge of the site. Existing Information Summary 17 January 2024 4.2.4 Landslide Hazard Assessment The protected slope is in a high landslide hazard area. Sensitive slopes and surrounding areas are likely medium landslide hazards as they are anticipated to be underlain by competent soils. Geotechnical investigation of the site may reveal the sensitive slopes and surrounding areas to be high landslide hazard areas. Most of the site falls outside these two critical areas and is therefore classified as a low landslide hazard. There have been no historical landslides identified by WDNR (2023); therefore, no portion of the site should be classified as very high landslide hazard. If evidence of previous landslides is discovered in any future geological investigation, the landslide hazard assessment classification may change. 4.2.5 Seismic Hazard Assessment The Park is in a high seismic region. The seismic hazard analysis defined by the RMC is based on the International Building Code classification system. Based on available data, the site is expected to behave as a low seismic hazard area. Geotechnical investigation may potentially reveal less competent soils, resulting in a change to the site rating. 4.2.6 Coal Mine Hazard Assessment The Park has a low coal mine hazard designation by RMC definition. No mines have been identified by the WDNR (2023) in the Project area. Although no mines have been identified in the Project area, undocumented mining is known to have occurred. Any discovery of or evidence of a mine in or surrounding the site may affect the coal mine hazard rating. Existing Information Summary 18 January 2024 5 Cultural Resources Technical Assessment Cultural resources are defined as archaeological, historic, and culturally meaningful sites, structures, objects, or districts, generally those that are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places or state or local preservation registers. Inventory and evaluation of cultural resources, and assessment of impacts, is required by state and federal law. This section describes recorded and potential cultural resources in the Project area. 5.1 Environmental and Cultural Context The Park is located in the Puget Trough physiographic province, a valley system that extends from Puget Sound south through the Willamette Valley and separates the Olympic Mountains from the Western Cascades (Franklin and Dyrness 1988). During the last glacial advance, glaciers extended as far as Centralia. Glaciers began to recede about 15,000 years ago, leaving behind a rapidly changing landscape of proglacial lakes, meltwater streams, and other alluvial features. This process created the thick layer of Pleistocene glacial outwash underlying Holocene sediments across much of the Puget Sound region. Land formerly depressed by the weight of the ice began to rebound (Dragovich et al. 1994) forming the distinctive north-south trending hills and valleys of the Puget Trough physiographic province. Numerous sites have been identified across the region dating to the period after 5,000 BP. The planned Project area is in an upland that slopes to the north toward May Creek. The Park vicinity is in the traditional territory of the Sammamish (scababs) and Stkehlmish (sacakalabs) Tribes that occupied the area around Lake Washington, Lake Sammamish, and the Sammamish River; and the Snohomish (sduhubs� and Kwehtlmamish (dxwkwiYababs� tribes, whose territory included the Snohomish and Pilchuck Rivers (Suttles and Lane 1990; Ruby and Brown 1986).The Tribes are Lutshootseed-speaking Southern Coast Salish peoples.At the time of Euroamerican contact, Southern Coast Salish tribes occupied the Puget Sound area from the Skagit River in the north to the Deschutes River near Olympia in the south, reaching inland to the Cascade Range crest. Salish peoples lived in winter villages of cedar plank houses and seasonally harvested shellfish and anadromous fish runs, supplemented by upland game hunting and plant gathering (Suttles and Lane 1990). The Washington Territory was organized in 1853 by its first governor, Isaac Stevens, who assisted with Euroamerican settlement and the creation of a Northern Pacific Railway route by displacing regional Native American tribes and relocating them to reservations under a series of treaties in 1855. Washington eventually achieved statehood on November 11, 1889 (Kirk and Alexander 1990). Stevens negotiated several treaties with Native American groups between 1854 and 1856. Upon the signing of the Point Elliott Treaty in 1855, tribes in the Lake Washington area were assigned to the Port Madison Reservation on the Kitsap Peninsula; however, many returned to their homeland. Some tribal members settled on the Muckleshoot Reservation, while others chose not to live on a reservation (Ruby and Brown 1986). Today their descendants belong to the Snoqualmie Tribe, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Existing Information Summary 19 January 2024 Suquamish Tribe, and Tulalip Tribes, among others. Native American populations fell victim to epidemics of malaria, tuberculosis, and smallpox carried by Euroamericans in the late 1700s through the middle 1800s (Cole and Darling 1990). Shortly thereafter, settlers expanded across the Oregon Territory, spurred by the Donation Land Act of 1850. King County grew quickly after the passage of the Homestead Act in 1862, as Euroamericans began farming and logging. The discovery of coal at Newcastle in 1863 accelerated growth in the area east of Lake Washington (Lange 1998) and coal fields were located both north and south of May Creek. Mining and associated railroadsjoined logging as the region's primary economic activities and drew workers from Europe and Asia. According to historical aerial photographs and maps, the park planning area was undeveloped until the early twentieth century and was probably logged several times. By 1907, maps show property owned by private individuals and lumber companies. In 1936, an aerial photograph shows two farmsteads just north of the park planning area in the area of current residential development. Associated cleared fields extend into the northern part of the Park planning area. Subdividing of the farmsteads appears to have begun in the 1960s. The two structures in the southwestern portion of the Park planning area were constructed at that time. The retention pond in the Park planning area was constructed in 2006. Most of the Park planning area has been undeveloped and forested throughout the historical and modern periods. Native vegetation in the vicinity consists of Douglas fir, Western red cedar, Western hemlock, red alder, and big-leaf maple, with an understory of bracken fern, sword fern, Oregon grape, salal, and berry vines (Franklin and Dyrness 1988). Historically, deer, elk, black bear, cougar, and coyote lived in the Project vicinity. Riverine and upland habitats in the vicinity also supported a diverse array of smaller mammals, fish, shellfish, and birds (Eder 2002). 5.2 Archaeology There are no recorded archaeological sites or isolates in the Park planning area. There are three sites within a mile, as follows: • 45KI821 is a historic cesspool structure located about 0.5-mile northwest of the Project planning area, along Coal Creek parkway. It has not been evaluated for listing on preservation registers. • 45KI1330 is a collapsed wood shelter and portable sawmill remains located about 0.7-mile west of the Project planning area, along an unnamed intermittent tributary to May Creek. It has been determined not eligible for listing on preservation registers. • 45KI1557 is the remains of a mobile home and garage located 0.9-mile south of the Project planning area, along Coal Creek Parkway. It has been determined not eligible for listing on preservation registers. Existing Information Summary 20 January 2024 There has been one archaeological survey that included a portion of the Park planning area, for a roadway widening project along Coal Creek Parkway SE that constructed the existing retention pond (Chambers 2006). Subsurface tests conducted in the retention pond area revealed Alderwood soils over glacial till. The soils appeared to have been disturbed by logging and land-clearing. The Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's statewide predictive model for precontact archaeological potential shows that the Project planning area contains Low Risk, Moderately Low Risk, and Moderate Risk areas for archaeological resources (Figure 8). Figure 8 Statewide Predictive Model for Precontact Archaeological Potential r ' 1 S�Maylv811e ►'�Rd_� a - D %Y Creek A m Moderate Risk �' f Project Planning Area Low Risk Moderately Low Risk Source:Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation In general, for planning purposes ground-disturbing work in the Moderate Risk area, closer to May Creek, should be considered more likely to impact archaeological resources. Any planned ground-disturbing work would likely require archaeological survey. Existing Information Summary 21 January 2024 5.3 Historic Resources There are two structures older than 45 years in the Project planning area, both residences. A single family residence at 2718 Duvall Avenue NE was built in 1963 and a single family residence at 2712 Duvall Avenue NE was built in 1964. Neither has been evaluated for listing on preservation registers. None of the other Project parcels have structures listed in the King County Assessor's records. There is one structure within a mile that has been determined eligible for preservation registers: the Red Barn/Colasurdo Barn (DAHP Resource ID 48530), which is located about 0.9-mile east of the Project planning area. 5.4 Traditional Cultural Properties and Cultural Landscapes There are no recorded Traditional Cultural Properties or Cultural Landscapes in the vicinity. Generally, the process of identifying and evaluating cultural resources requires consultation with Native American tribes and other consulting parties. Existing Information Summary 22 January 2024 6 Site Reconnaissance and Natural Resource Inventory Anchor QEA's partner, Clearway, conducted a site reconnaissance on December 14 and 15, 2023. Clearway completed a natural resource inventory documenting forested conditions using the Forest Landscape Assessment Tool (FLAT), potential wetland conditions and locations, stream conditions, landmark trees, land cover, and other site features including trails and ditches. The field crew documented field notes with site observations, captured photographs, and collected GIS data. Field data, including numbered photo points, are shown the basemap (Figure 3). The following provides a summary of the site reconnaissance. Site photographs are included as Appendix A. 6.1 FLAT Assessment A FLAT assessment was performed to characterize forest health based on the presence of native, coniferous, and deciduous trees (value) as well as the presence of invasive vegetation (threat). The FLAT is a tool used to assess landscape conditions (values and threats) that can help identify site-specific stewardship and restoration actions. Developed by Green Cities Research Alliance (in coordination with the U.S. Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station and in partnership with King County, Forterra, and the University of Washington), the FLAT provides a "rapid, systematic, flexible, and inexpensive environmental evaluation" (Ciecko et al. 2016). During the assessment, field staff identified forest values and threats, using the Green Seattle Partnership Tree-iage Matrix. As shown in Figure 9, the Tree-iage Matrix defines forest value by tree composition, including native canopy, conifer canopy, and opportunity for new canopy. Threats are defined by invasive vegetation cover. Existing Information Summary 23 January 2024 Figure 9 Forest Landscape Assessment Tool (FLAT) Analysis canopy cover Monitoring Major >25% native tree and Invasive plant reduction invasive plant > 50%evergreen stewardship reduction W D Q Major canopy cover Invasive plant > invasive plant Z < 50%evergreen planting r>25% native tree Planting reduction and z eduction and 1-- planting 7 0 Major a Evaluation Invasive plant 2 canopy cover invasive plant 0 <25% native tree and major reduction and u reduction and w planting major planting major planting w W H invasive cover invasive cover invasive cover <5% 5 to 50% >50% THREAT Note:Original version was developed by Green Seattle Partnership showing City of Seattle acreages(Ciecko et al.2016). Figure 10 maps the values and threats identified during the site reconnaissance. Tree composition value is based on native tree canopy cover, with emphasis on percent cover of conifers within the native canopy. The majority of the site was mapped as medium cover. Areas of high value were mapped where the topography changes and the site slopes up on the south side of the site and where it slopes down towards May Creek. The lawns of the two residential properties on site were mapped as low canopy cover. Threat is based on invasive cover and the areas of highest threat mostly overlapped with the medium tree composition cover in the middle of the site (Photographs 4 and 15). Invasive vegetation was composed primarily of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), with some cut-leaf blackberry (Rubus lacinatus). Reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) was also present and most prominent in open wetland areas but did extend under the tree canopy at times. Areas of low invasive cover mostly overlapped with high and low tree composition value. Existing Information Summary 24 January 2024 Figure 10 Forest Landscape Assessment Tool (FLAT) Map r,; `• • •• go• • �• LEGEND: •.�•�� ': ~ • •• It.OfReht�•' May Creek Park Planning Boundary go I • ` On a Is�• City of Renton Boundary -�• �' • • - s►•• •nd aYy 111111111111 — — Right of Way •.� '•,'. Type F Stream �•�`. ,, �.��- Primary Contour(10-ft interval) ��•.• ---- •','�• '••., Intermediate Contour(2-ft interval) ------- `.��, Site Reconnaissance Wetland I ,4 May Cr'iepJc•• City Mapped Wetland .�•,•• ±�::: Type F Stream Buffer(115-ft) r •;� '••.' ,.::: Type F Stream Structures Setback(15-ft) I • 6 •�'`.'• • Site Reconaissance Landmark Tree - • • '''' • City Mapped Tree `.`.• '. I •.;.,•. - • • FLAT Values I ''• ..... - - ••,'• - 1(High Tree Composition,Low Threat) .,� ■ ■ ' -- 3(High Tree Composition,High Threat) l '�'•.•. :: 4(Medium Tree Composition,Low Threat) ' '`. _ _ .'•• 5(Medium Tree Composition,Medium Threat) \ I0 •0 JV 0. 0 0 0 0 , --• �••• 6 Medium Tree Composition,High Threat ♦♦♦ j •t • • y`. •• •• ••• : • 7(Low Tree Composition,Low Threat) \ t ♦ • • ••.• i •• • • • �••• 9(Low Tree Composition,High Threat) *41110 O 7 �� \\ l 9 7" ,H ilV�etand.3... ` •� • '�••,�• 04 \ ............... --- • ------- ,. ,., , •. ''.,• NOTES: \ \ \ \ : •.. •�''` �::..::. •. •••••...::I:•:.s;..•. :'• ...y. .. •. ter-\ ''•. 1.Horizontal DatumNAD 1983 HARN \ ,----�, „�1,,, .. '_. :•.•.. ..... „.1,,. `• Washington North State Plane 1983 RIPS 1603 \ Gravel Acc ` ..... S�, ..... li\ \\\ a Road .� 6 1,•• :....... ..:1.••• .••••• .... . 2.Forest Landscape Assessment Tool(FLAT) 2 ...... 1 .... :.•• .1. .. \ .... � •• . values from 1 t 9.Conditions or values,�. ,... .1. , . u range f m o i \ • , :::: . . ..... and 8 were not identified on site. Wetland2 t ..........Wgtl�lld::f.....:.......:::°... : .i, City Mapped Wetlands ■ • • � •• are,. -::::.... ,ly.... .... ■ ..::::.... ,tl4 ..... .... .- JIB. .... ,1 ... ...:... ......... .1. .. '' ';.ii, I.City of Renton COR Maps .... ' "' "' �•..""' � 1. ""' � 2.Site reconnaissance and FLAT field data •• ,,,,, .1.. }I,, ••• -�• captured by Clearway Environmental,December 2023 • • 0 ' 08 00 08 0 0 -en"A- 0 \ \ 0 200 \ 1 Feet Existing Information Summary 25 January 2024 6.2 Wetland Reconnaissance Field staff identified three potential wetlands through visual assessment. Field staff did not collect soil or hydrology data. The following summarizes the potential wetlands (refer to Figure 3 for locations). Potential Wetland 1 Potential Wetland 1 is presumed to be a palustrine, forested, depressional wetland (Photographs 1 and 17). It is the only wetland collected in this field effort that is mapped in the City GIS data. Its boundary starts roughly in the middle of the site and continues eastward, out of the study area (Photograph 2) and connects to the larger wetland shown on the City's GIS data. Within the study area, it is approximately 2.7 acres in size, and has a mix of open field and forested areas. Combined with portions of the City-mapped wetland outside of the study area, the total area of this wetland is roughly 6 to 8 acres. The preliminary rating is Category III, with a moderate habitat score of 7. With Low Impact Land Use, this wetland would be assigned a 75-foot buffer by RMC 4-3-050G.2. Within potential Wetland 1, near Photo Point 1, plant species identified included reed canary grass, creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), sedge (Carex species), small-fruited bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus), Himalayan blackberry, red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus tricocarpa), and willow (Salix sp). Near Photo Point 2, salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), American skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanus), lady fern (Athyrium felix-femina), and horsetail (Equisetum species) were identified. No conifers were identified within the wetland near this location. One inch of surface ponding was noted. The soil had possible hydrogen sulfide odor. At the toe of slope on the southern side of the site, a patch of reduced iron at the surface was observed. Within the study area, near the wetland's northern border, there is an excavated, artificial drainage ditch that drains the wetland, likely flowing to the east. Potential Wetland 2 Potential Wetland 2 is presumed to be a small, palustrine emergent, slope wetland, approximately 1,600 sf(0.04 acre) in size (Photograph 5). It is densely covered in reed canary grass, with some Himalayan blackberry. The soil showed strong, shallow redoximorphic features, indicative of a depleted matrix. Its preliminary rating is Category III, with a moderate habitat score of 5. With Low Impact Land Use, this wetland would be assigned a 75-foot buffer by RMC. The canopy directly above it and nearby is composed mostly of black cottonwood and big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum). Potential Wetland 3 Potential Wetland 3 is presumed to be an approximately 0.41-acre, palustrine emergent (PEM), depressional wetland. It is covered primarily in creeping buttercup and field grasses (Photographs 7 and 18), with salmonberry along its borders. Its preliminary rating is Category III, with a moderate Existing Information Summary 26 January 2024 habitat score of 6. With Low Impact Land Use, this wetland would be assigned a 75-foot buffer by RMC. Several natural and artificial drainages and short bridges are situated throughout the wetland. 6.3 May Creek Conditions May Creek is Stream Type F. It has a 115-foot critical areas buffer width and a 15-foot structure setback beyond buffer. The northern lobe of the study area encompasses May Creek on both sides of the channel. Between the southern side of the creek and the slope up to the main area of the site lies a broad, relatively flat area (Photograph 11). It has abandoned, relic river channel features, such as oxbows and gravel deposits. It is lightly forested, with mature, second-growth, deciduous trees such as red alder, big-leaf maple, and black cottonwood, with an understory of salmonberry, sword fern, blackberry, and reed canary grass, and includes many downed trees. The topography is hummocky, and the underlying soil is mostly well-drained rock, gravel, and sand over clay. Riparian vegetation at the site does not provide much direct, low-lying cover, though the surrounding canopy provides adequate shade and leaf/organic detritus input. Within view of the study area, the channel is fairly well incised. At the western end, there is a sharp bend to river-right (Photographs 8 and 9), which has exposed a vertical, mostly clay, cliff face about 10 to 15 feet tall. To the north (across the creek) is a steep slope up to residences, mostly covered in Himalayan blackberry and English ivy (Hedera helix, Photograph 10). The gradient at the site is fairly constant and the creek has no large woody debris or large rocks within the study area.This may be the reason no pools have formed, and the creek within the site is mostly one long run. At lower flows, small pools may appear, particularly near the sharp right bend at the western end of the study area.Again, likely due to constant flow, little deposition appears to occur and when exposed, the shore shows only minor signs of erosion.When the creekbed or shore is exposed, it appears to be composed mostly of clay,which may be controlling erosion.The substrate is cobble and large gravel, with little to no fines or appropriately sized salmon spawning gravel. At the time of the field efforts, water depth in the thalweg upstream of the deeper section near the sharp bend appeared to average approximately 10 to 12 inches. 6.4 Landmark Trees While not intended to be a comprehensive survey, Clearway staff identified 21 landmark trees within the study area to help the City update its current landmark tree inventory of the site. Of these, 15 were coniferous and six were deciduous (Photograph 14). Table 1 provides tree data collected including common name, diameter at breast height (dbh), and general condition. Existing Information Summary 27 January 2024 Table 4 Landmark Tree Inventory Tree Notes No. Species Common Name DBH Condition 1 Western red cedar 40 Good No ivy 2 Western red cedar 42 Good No ivy 3* Western red cedar 30 Good No ivy;*mislabeled as second Tree No.4 4 Western red cedar 30 Good No ivy 5 Western red cedar 40* Good No ivy;*two stems about 30 inches dbh each 6 Western red cedar 26 Good No ivy 7 Douglas fir 31 Good No ivy 8 Western red cedar 35 Good No ivy 9 Western red cedar 29 Good No ivy 10 Douglas fir 32 Good No ivy 11 Big-leaf maple 34 Fair Dense moss on trunk 12 Big-leaf maple 30 Fair Dense moss on trunk 13 Douglas fir 37 Good No ivy 14 Douglas fir 30 Good No ivy 15 Douglas fir 34 Good No ivy 16 Big-leaf maple 33 Fair No ivy, dense moss on trunk 17 Big-leaf maple 67 Fair No ivy, dense moss on trunk 18 Big-leaf maple 82 Fair Moss on trunk, multistemmed 19 Douglas fir 48 Good No ivy 20 Western red cedar 40 Good No ivy 21 Big-leaf maple 45 Fair Dense moss on trunk 6.5 Land Cover and Site Features Vegetation Types Across the study area in general, the vegetation ranges from managed lawns near residences to the west (Photograph 19), and north across May Creek, to a mix of sparsely treed herbaceous patches (Photograph 16) and more densely forested areas in the more steeply sloped areas (Photograph 3). In general, most mature trees appear in good condition, except for big-leaf maple, which are generally performing poorly and are densely covered in moss. The most predominant invasive plant species identified on the site included cut-leaf and Himalayan blackberry, reed canary grass, English ivy, and English holly (Ilex aquifoiium). English ivy was present on trees only on the north side of May Creek and holly was mostly confined to sloped areas at the south side of the site. Existing Information Summary 28 January 2024 Hardscaping An approximately 6,800-sf(0.16-acre) area to the south of the driveway at 2718 Duvall Avenue NE (Photograph 5) has been mapped and contains compacted gravel under the duff layer, which is not obvious without close inspection. Removal of the gravel would help restore plant communities and natural hydrology. It may provide a location for staging during construction, reducing the need to create further compacted surfaces. Near the southeastern end of this relic gravel pad, there is a roughly 400-sf by 600-sf artificially excavated pit (Photograph 6), which displays some wetland indicators but would likely be exempt from City regulations due to its size and the fact that it may have been the gravel/fill source or a livestock watering hole. Existing Trails Trail 1 A wide, semi-maintained trail (Photograph 13) provides access east to west, roughly from the parking area of 2718 Duvall Avenue NE to the eastern end of the study area. It was fairly saturated during the site visit near its western terminus, and a large, downed tree obstructed the trail about one-third of the way eastward from 2718 Duvall Avenue NE. Several small bridges provide egress across the drainage ditch that runs along its southern edge. Their condition and safety vary. Trail 2 Leading northward from the adjacent residence at 2718 Duvall Avenue NE, starting near a fire pit, a wide, steep trail leads to the largest bridge on the site (footbridge No. 2; see Figure 3 for location). The bridge crosses a tributary flowing north to May Creek. This tributary becomes steeper and more incised until it reaches the flat area on the south side of the creek. The trail meanders eastward, mostly staying close to the top of the slope. It becomes less defined as it goes downhill (Photograph 12) and heads north, following contours down to the open, flat area adjacent to the south side of May Creek. It is mostly easy to follow and traverse, except for one short section that is very steep. Ditches Several artificially excavated ditches are located within the site. Often, the source, outlet, or continuous path was not observable. When accessible, the centerlines of visible ditches were mapped. Existing Information Summary 29 January 2024 7 Data Gaps As discussed previously, the background information summarized in this report will inform the development of the Project's master plan for the Park. The information will be used to develop and analyze alternatives and ultimately select a preferred alternative concept design. Following this master planning phase, there are multiple data gaps that will need to be closed prior to the development of a complete construction-ready and permit-approved design. The following provides a summary of identified data gaps. Other data gaps may be identified during the alternative analysis and preferred alternative selection. • Topography and Boundary Survey — Survey in Washington State Plane coordinates — Survey provided in international feet — Boundary survey reflecting all City acquisitions and easements — Site topography (1-foot contours) — Utilities (surface and buried) — Surface conditions (gravel, hardscape, soil) — Vegetation limits and tree locations — May Creek ordinary high water mark (OHWM) — Wetland boundaries • Geotechnical investigation for work within geologically critical areas and to inform potential structural design elements such as footings and foundations • Wetland delineation with functional ratings and buffer analysis • OHWM delineation • Landmark tree survey Existing Information Summary 30 January 2024 8 References AIITrails, 2023. Best Trails in Cougar Mountain Regional Wildland Park. Accessed December 22, 2023. Available at: www.alltrails.com/parks/us/washington/cougar-mountain-regional-wildland- ap rk--2. Ames, K.M., and H.D.G. Maschner, 1999. Peoples of the Northwest Coast: Their Archaeology and Prehistory. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd. Anchor QEA, 2010. May Creek Erosion Stabilization Draft Report. Prepared for King County. January 2010. Bing Maps, 2023. World imagery. Accessed December 22, 2023. Available at: https://services.arcgisonline.com/ArcGIS/rest/services/World_lmagery/MapServer. Ciecko, L., D. Kimmett, J. Saunders, R. Katz, K.L. Wolf, O. Bazinet, J. Richardson, W. Brinkley, and D.J. Blahna, 2016. Forest Landscape Assessment Tool (FLAT):Rapid Assessment for Land Management. U.S. Department of Agriculture. September 2016. City of Newcastle, 2019. Newcastle G/S Pedestrian Routes 2079. Accessed December 22, 2023. Available at: https://data-newcastlewa.opendata.arcgis.com/. City of Renton, 2018a. Civic Core Vision &Action Plan. Accessed December 18, 2023. Available at: https://rentondowntown.com/wp-content/uploads/Final-Renton-Plan-011718.pdf. City of Renton, 2018b. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Accessed December 13, 2023. Available at: https://eiq smaps.rentonwa.gov/GISIMAGES/STATICMAPS/Comprehensive%2OLanduse%20PIa n.pdf. City of Renton, 2019. Renton Trails and Bikeways Map. Accessed December 18, 2023. Available at: https://cdnsm5- hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server 7922657/File/City%20Hall/Community%20Servi ces/Parks%20Planning%20and%20Natural%20Resources/Trails%20and%20Bicycle%20Master %20Plan/Renton%20Trails%20Plan mayl9.pdf. City of Renton, 2020. Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan. Accessed December 26, 2023. Available at: www.rentonwa.gov/city hall/parks and recreation/parks planning and development/parks recreation and natural areas plan. Existing Information Summary 31 January 2024 City of Renton, 2022. Rooted in Renton Urban Forest Management Plan 2022-2032.January 2022. Accessed December 13, 2023. Available at: https://cdnsm5- hosted.civiclive.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server 7922657/File/City%20Hall/Community%20Servi ces/Parks%20Planning%20and%20Natural%20Resources/Urban%20Forestry/Urban%20Fores t%20Ma nag ement%20Plan/Renton%20WA%20Urban%20Forest%20Ma nag ement%20PIan%2 01-31-22.pdf. City of Renton, 2023a. City of Renton COR Maps. Accessed December 15, 2023. Available at: https://maps.rentonwa.gov/Html5viewer/Index.html?viewer=cormaps. City of Renton, 2023b. Critical Areas Regulations - Section 4-3-050. Accessed December 21, 2023. Available at: https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Renton/html/Renton04/RentonO4O3/RentonO4O3O5O.h tml. City of Renton, 2023c. Maps& GIS Data. Accessed December 15, 2023. Available at: https://www.rentonwa.gov/city hall/executive services/Information technology/maps g i s data. City of Renton, 2023d. May Creek Greenway. Accessed December 18, 2023. Available at: www.rentonwa.gov/city hall/parks and recreation/parks and trails/find a park or trail/may creek greenway. City of Renton, 2023e. Section 4-2-020. Accessed December 22, 2023. Available at: www.codepublishing.com/WA/Renton/html/Renton04/RentonO4O2/Renton0402020.html. City of Renton, 2023f. Title WDEVELOPMENT Regulations. Accessed December 21, 2023. Available at: https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Renton/html/Renton04/RentonO4.html. City of Renton, 2023g.Zoning Map. Accessed December 18, 2023. Available at: https://gismaps.rentonwa.gov/GISIMAGES/STATICMAPS/Zoning.pdf. Cole, D., and D. Darling, 1990. "History of the Early Period." Chapter in Northwest Coast, Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 7, edited by Wayne Suttles. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution,119-134. Dragovich, J.D., P.T. Pringle, and T.J. Walsh, 1994. "Extent and Geometry of the Mid-Holocene Osceola Mudflow in the Puget Lowland-Implications for Holocene Sedimentation and Paleogeography." Washington Geology 22(3):3-26. Eder, T., 2002. Mammals of Washington and Oregon. Edmonton: Lone Pine Publishing. Existing Information Summary 32 January 2024 Ficken, R.E., and C.P. LeWarne, 1988. Washington:A Centennial History. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Franklin, J.F., and C.T. Dyrness, 1988. Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW-8. Galster, R.L., and W.T. Laprade, 1991. "Geology of Seattle, Washington, USA." Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists 28(3):235-302. Gustafson, C.E., and C. Manis, 1984. The Manis Mastodon Site:An Adventure in Prehistory. Sequim, Washington: Manis Enterprises. King County, 2023. King County Parcel Viewer, Accessed January 2, 2024. Available at: https://e iq smaps.kingcounty gov/parcelviewer2/. King County, 2023a. Cougar Mountain Regional Wildland Park. Accessed December 20, 2023. Available at: https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/dnrp/nature-recreation/parks-recreation/king- county-parks/parks/cougar-mountain. King County, Washington, 2023b. May Creek Sub-Basin Environment. Accessed January 3, 2024. Available at: https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/dnrp/nature-recreation/environment-ecology- conservation/stormwater-surface-water-management/capital-services-unit/may- creek#:-:text=Plan%20adopted%20in%202001%20to,and%20wildIife%20habitat%20and%20 water. Kirk, R., and C. Alexander, 1990. Exploring Washington's Past. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Lange, G., 1998. Surveyors discover coal at Newcastle (east King County) in October 1863. Updated: November 3, 1998. Cited: March 2009. Available at: http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file id=149. MacLeod Reckord, 2009. Park at 95th Master Plan. Prepared for the City of Newcastle. MIG, 2018. Renton Downtown Civic Core Vision and Action Plan. Prepared for City of Renton. Accessed December 21, 2023. Available at: https://www.rentondowntown.com/wp- content/uploads/Final-Renton-Plan-011718.pdf. Pace, 2023. Record of Survey for City of Renton. Prepared for City of Renton. Portion of: NW Quarter Section 3, T23N, R5E & SW Quarter Section 34, T24N, RSE, W.M. Ruby, R.H., and J.A. Brown, 1986.A Guide to the Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest. Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press. Existing Information Summary 33 January 2024 Shapiro and Associates, Inc., 2023. Proposed May Creek Basin Action Plan. Prepared for King County Department of Natural Resources, Water and Land Resources Division.Accessed December 21, 2023. Available at: https://your.kingcounty.gov/dnr/dnrp/library/2001/kcr726/Plan.pdf. Sletten, R.S., D. Snyder, L.C. Lee, D. Booth, and D.J. Marrett, 2008. Soils and Land Use in the Puget Sound Basin. Presentation at the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of 86th America Annual Meeting. Seattle. 1994. Suttles, W., and B. Lane, 1990. Southern Coast Salish. Chapter in Northwest Coast, Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 7, edited by Wayne Suttles. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 485-502. Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office, 2023. Grant Requirements. Accessed December 21, 2023. Available at: https://rco.wa.gov/recreation-and-conservation-office- g ra nts/g ra nt-req u i re ments/. Washington Trails Association, 2023. May Creek Trail. Accessed December 21, 2023. Available at: https://www.wta.org/go-hiking/hikes/may-creek-trail. Wildlife Recreation and Coalition, 2023. May Creek Trail, 1991. Accessed December 21, 2023. Available at: https://wildliferecreation.org/projects/may-creek-trail-1991/. Wildlife Recreation and Coalition, 2023. May Creek Trail, 1994., Accessed December 21, 2023. Available at: https://wildliferecreation.org/projects/may-creek-trail-1994/. Existing Information Summary 34 January 2024 Appendix A Site Photographs Photograph 1 Potential Wetland 1, Facing West � +r 1 t 1 .Si ¢ y a Photo Point 1:Toward potential Wetland 1.Creeping buttercup groundcover, approximately 1 inch of standing water. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 2 Potential Wetland 1, Facing East f:� � •"t 'ter + . Photo Point 1a:Toward potential Wetland 1 and continuing off site to adjacent property to the east. Dense reed canary grass.Himalayan blackberry in foreground. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 3 Forested Area, Facing North w Photo Point 2:Positioned from upland forested area at southeast corner of site.Open area of Wetland 1 is visible downhill through brush.Low invasive cover in forested area. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 4 Forested Area, Facing South T }..,� 1 �' Photo Point 3:Typical habitat and vegetation for triangular area at west side of site.Dense Himalayan blackberry throughout.Some conifers toward Coal Creek Parkway at concrete wall. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 5 Potential Wetland 2, Facing North Asti I Photo Point 4:Potential Wetland 2.Small emergent wetland with reed canary grass. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 6 Depression with Perched Water, Facing East Photo Point 5:At edge of vegetation-covered gravel pad area.Possible human-made depression with perched water,approximately 20 by 30 feet. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 7 Potential Wetland 3, Facing East r, Photo Point 6:Looking toward potential Wetland 3 near parking area.Start of Trail 1 in background. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 8 May Creek, Facing East Photo Point 7:From overlook down to May Creek.At left side of photograph is a residential lawn on the north side of the creek. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 9 May Creek, Facing West R� I _ 1 Photo Point 8:Looking from the left bank of May Creek.Erosion present at curve of creek. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 10 May Creek, Run Section, Facing North 'Y I 1 ; Photo Point 9:Looking across May Creek in"run"section of the creek.No large woody debris present. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 11 May Creek Floodplain, Facing Northwest Photo Point 10:Representative of low area/floodplain on south side of May Creek.Some invasives such as Himalayan blackberry and reed canary grass throughout. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 12 Embankment, Trail 2, Facing South Photo Point 10a:From low area/floodplain looking uphill to landscape surrounding Trail 2. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 13 Trail 1, Facing East Photo Point 11:Trail 1 is a semi-maintained trail running east to west from parking area to east border of study area. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 14 Landmark Tree Photo Point 12:Example of landmark tree—very large,big-leaf maple. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 15 Medium Canopy Cover, Facing North 1 ;( Photo Point 13:Example of Forest Landscape Assessment Tool(FLAT) designation—medium canopy cover,high threat level. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 16 Potential Wetland 1, Facing West Photo Point 14:More open/emergent area of potential Wetland 1.Rushes, juncus species,small-fruited bullrush,alder saplings. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 17 Potential Wetland 1, Facing North Photo Point 14a:Looking toward edge of potential Wetland 1.Red alder saplings and Himalayan blackberry on the border. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 18 Park Border, Trail 2, Facing Northeast Photo Point 15:Lawn/grass near 2718 Duvall Avenue NE property and parking area.Edge of potential Wetland 3.Trail 2 to May Creek past structure is seen on left side of photo. Source:Clearway Environmental Photograph 19 Park Border 2, Facing West AM Photo Point 17:Lawn/grass in front of 2718 Duvall Avenue NE property. Source:Clearway Environmental APPENDIX B CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ALTERNATIVES DESIGN PROCESS The Project team developed two conceptual design alternatives to communicate different approaches to developing the Park. The following sections provide a summary of the design process and the alternatives developed for the City of Renton's (City) May Creek Park Master Plan Project (Project). First, the site was thoroughly explored and analyzed, both in person and through reviewing currently available literature, documentation, and GIS data. Project opportunities and constraints were identified, and a list of criteria was developed to support the alternative analysis and decision-making. Next, two preliminary alternatives were developed following this initial research and initial community and stakeholder feedback. The first alternative focused on passive recreation and limited access. The second alternative focused on park recreation and trail access. The two concepts were scored against each other and each Park element ranked on how well it met the criteria. Both conceptual design alternatives were presented to shareholders and at public events, received feedback, and were then honed to ultimately lead to a final preferred design. Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 1 July 2024 OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS The Project team developed identified the opportunities present on the site, and also any constraints. The site provides many opportunities, including access to nature and views, including May Creek, wetlands, and forested areas, which also allowed for restoration stewardship opportunities for the creek, wetlands, forests, and riparian habitats (Figure 1). The current habitats include a creek with stable banks that can support salmon migration and forests with an abundance of large, mature heritage trees. The site has existing access and safe crossings at the entrance, as well as nearby public transportation. It also has opportunities to connect in the future to nearby trails in Newcastle to the west and a network of neighborhood trails to the east, completing a connection of trails from lake Washington to Cougar Mountain. An additional parcel is potentially available in the future. Acquiring this parcel would provide the opportunity for additional upland open space that could be developed near the entrance of the Park. On the other hand, the site also comes with some challenges and constraining factors (Figure 2). The wetland and stream habitats, their buffers, and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood zones take up a large portion of the site, limiting development in these areas. Steep forested slopes also limit what can be developed and prevent easy access to large portions of the Park. A busy street and private property surround the Park, and sewer and other utility access is limited. Existing structures and old concrete pads, fences, and debris must be removed prior to development. Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 2 July 2024 Figure 1 Project Site Opportunities A ij •�'�•�•�� LEGEND I I• PROVIDE VISUAL/PHYSICAL MAY CREEK NEWCASTLE'S I� ACCESS TO MAY CREEK AS IT MAY CREEK PARK i t I� RUNS THROUGH THE SITE i� SEASONAL DRAINAGE FEATURE PROTECT AND ENHANCE \ cc I� TRIBUTARY TO MAY CREEK STABLE BANKS is I• SLOPE >15%-<_25% Ile it ALONG MAY CREEK V' i� ENHANCE RIPARIAN HABITAT I SLOPE >25%-<-40%(SENSITIVE) WITHIN STREAM BUFFER i I' ' ENHANCE SALMON MIGRATING SLOPE >40%-<-90%(PROTECTED) VISUAL ACCESS OR PHYSICAL ACCESS TO MAY CREEK ` AND SPAWNING HABITAT I� WITH OVERHANGING VEGETATION ■ SLOPE >90%(PROTECTED) LOCATE UPLAND IMPROVEMENTS, - AND PLACEMENT OF HABITAT LOGS - LANDMARKTREES AND CANOPY BUILDING FACILITIES,GATHERING SPACES, I� SPORT COURTS, PLAY SPACES,OPEN LAWN II; L I WETLAND HABITAT ENHANCEMENT � J CONNECT PARKTRAILS TO NEWCASTLE'S MAY CREEK PARK -,- [ SURFACE WATER UTILITY r POTENTIAL (�FUTURE POTENTIAL UPLAND IMPROVEMENT AREA �. �: ACQUISITION - - WETLAND AND STREAM BUFFER- SAFE CROSSINGS WIDTHS MAY ACCOMMODATE PEDESTRIAN TO NEWCASTLE'S CONNECT PARK TRAILS` R% ACCESS TRAILS THROUGH BUFFER AVERAGING MAY CREEK PARK " " ' ••• TO HIGHLANDS TRAIL :' AND/OR BUFFER ENHANCEMENT ��:f•; ANDTERRACETRAIL GRAVEL ACCESS ROAD - y AND UTILITY EASEMENT �` < ENHANCE WETLAND LOCATE UPLAND IMPROVEMENTS, ENTRY,WAYFINDING,AND TRAILHEAD ENHANCE WETLAND ENHANCE WETLAND BUFFER �` ! ENHANCE WETLAND BUFFER 0 200 Feet SMALL SEASONAL CREEK �\\� t 1.NOTE: izontal Datum NAD 1983 HARN Washington North State Plane 1983 FIPS 1603 SOURCES: 1.City of Renton COR Maps KING COUNTY METRO re � �� 2.Site reconnaissance field data captured by ROUTE 240 PROTECT EXISTING TREES; Clearway Environmental,December 2023 \� ENHANCE AND EXPAND FORESTED HABITAT 3.Survey data by PACE,June 2013 Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 3 July 2024 Figure 2 Project Site Constraints LEGEND MAY CREEK I II FEMA FLOOD SEASONAL DRAINAGE FEATURE I• ZONE LIMITS USES � i; STREAM BUFFERS ' SLOPE >15%-<_25% c LIMIT DEVELOPMENT I O I. SLOPE >25%-:540%(SENSITIVE) I 1� I. ■ SLOPE >40%-:590%(PROTECTED) SEASONAL DRAINAGE FEATURE MAY CREEK CARRIES A ■ SLOPE >90%(PROTECTED) i LARGE VOLUME OF WATER it EXISTING STRUCTURES r. REQUIRE DEMOLITION - IN WINTER AND SPRING :` SURFACE WATER UTILITY EXISTING DEVELOPED ` PROPERTIES LACK WETLAND AREA SEWER CONNECTION WETLAND AND STREAM BUFFER NEIGHBORING iii �0 MODERATE INVASIVE THREAT PRIVATE PROPERTY STEEP SLOPES MAKE ACCESS ' HIGH INVASIVETHREAT TO MAY CREEK CHALLENGING BUSY STREET �•� AND INTERSECTION \ ,/ WETLAND AND STREAM BUFFER LIMITS DEVELOPMENT LIMITED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, WETLAND HABITAT NO STOPS AT PARK ENTRANCE LIMITS DEVELOPMENT 0 WETLAND AND WETLAND BUFFER HABITAT LIMITS DEVELOPMENT 0 200 EXISTING SITE FEATURES REQUIRE Feet ATTENTION PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT: NOTE: STRUCTURES,MAN-MADE DEPRESSION SEASONAL t 1.Horizontal Datum-NAD 1983 HARN DRAINAGE FEATURE Washington North State Plane 1983 RIPS 1603 WITH STANDING WATER,POTENTIAL SOURCES: FOR BURIED OBSTRUCTIONS 1.City of Renton COR Maps 2.Site reconnaissance field data captured by SURFACE WATER FACILITY LIMITS USES, Clearway Environmental,December 2023 POTENTIAL BURIED OBSTRUCTIONS 3.Survey data by PACE,June 2013 Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 4 July 2024 DESIGN CRITERIA The design criteria are based on the discussions with the City, stakeholders, and the community, as well as information gathered during the Project's existing information review task. The following preliminary criteria were used to compare the alternatives and will guide the development of a preferred alternative. These criteria are preliminary and likely to be refined as the Project progresses. Maximize Trail Development Within the Park • Maximize trail connections to the diverse landscapes within the Park. • Maximize trail loops and opportunities for hiking/walking/running within the Park. • Provide a trail connection to May Creek. Connect to Existing May Creek Greenway Trails • Connect the Park to adjacent trail corridors along May Creek. Provide Trail Connections to Renton Neighborhoods • Connect the Park to adjacent neighborhoods with safe Duvall Avenue NE crossings and a safe route to the Park entrance. • Connect existing bus stops to the Park entrance with a safe route. • Provide bike pathways and bike parking in the Park. Provide Park Development for Families • Provide a play area. • Provide picnicking areas. • Provide sport courts (pickleball, tennis, and basketball courts). Provide Park Facilities • Provide a restroom facility. • Provide a heated restroom facility with sewer connection. • Provide drinking fountains (water bottle fill stations, dog drinking fountains). • Provide trash receptacles. Maximize Open Space for Unprogrammed Recreation • Maximize lawn space for picnicking, informal gathering, and unprogrammed play. Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 5 July 2024 Maximize Restoration and Habitat Enhancement • Remove invasive vegetation. • Install appropriate native vegetation. • Maximize improvements to May Creek riparian area. • Improve May Creek stream habitat with the placement of wood to provide interstitial habitat niches for migrating salmon use. • Restore wetland and wetland buffer habitat function. Maximize Forest and Habitat Preservation • Protect existing landmark trees. • Protect existing canopy. • Protect existing wetland habitat. Provide Environmental Education and Stewardship • Provide areas to assist with future stewardship programs (trails, gathering areas, signage). • Provide an indoor gathering area for a larger environmental education facility. • Provide interpretive signs and kiosks. • Provide a native plant nursery for hands on education opportunities. Provide Public Art and Placemaking • Identify prominent areas to integrate public art. • Provide trailhead kiosk for Renton's May Creek Greenway. • Locate entry signage at key location to identify Park location and entry prominent. Provide Parking • Provide sufficient parking for visitors. Avoid Impacts to Neighbors • Avoid locating high-use area directly adjacent to residential neighbors. • Protect secured access point for City to access the stormwater pond. • Maintain offset from the stormwater pond fence to deter users from trying to access the pond. Maximize Safety and Accessibility • Provide open sightlines between all Park development areas. • Maximize Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access to Park development areas. Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 6 July 2024 Consider Value to Cost • Maximize value gained for construction cost. Consider Permit Feasibility • Avoid impacts to regulated wetland, stream, and buffer habitats. • Avoid code variances for proposed work. • Design a self-mitigating project with overall net ecological benefit. Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 7 July 2024 DESIGN PROGRAM This preliminary design program is the starting point for the Project design and consists of a list of the design assumptions and elements and that are included in the Project's alternative designs. Park Development Facilities • Restroom (indoor plumbed or portable toilet enclosure) • Environmental education center (building) • Play area • Sport courts • Open lawn Trails • Pervious trails • Impervious trails Recreation Amenities • Drinking fountain • Outdoor water filling station • Interpretive signage • Benches • Picnic tables • Trash and recycling receptacles in the Project area Art and Placemaking • Environmental education signage and kiosks • Public art integration • Entry signage Parking and Access • Vehicle parking • Bike parking • Fire truck access and turnaround • Gate for secured stormwater pond access Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 8 July 2024 Utilities • Water • Electrical • Sewer • Stormwater Restoration and Habitat Enhancement • Invasive plant removal • Native planting • In-stream wood placement Forest and Habitat Preservation • Tree protection • Understory planting (for diversity, vegetated strata, habitat) Design Considerations • 50-year design life • Potential future acquisition property to the west is likely. Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 9 July 2024 SUMMARY OF CONCEPTUAL ALTERNATIVES Alternative 7 Alternative 1 has a focus on passive recreation and limited access. This design includesjust a few traditional park elements; a small footprint for active recreation, and a large area dedicated to habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement activities. The existing access driveway has been used and improved upon, with a parking lot at the end for 18 cars. A small comfort station and trailhead kiosk are included along with a large natural play area and open lawn. A small picnic shelter is included as well as a small amphitheater/stage on the future parcel. The trail corridors for this alternative are simplistic, allowing for many areas to remain protected. Pervious trails loop from the active recreation area through wilder parts of the Park, providing views of May Creek and wetlands while minimizing disturbances to creek and wetland buffers. Access to future trail connections exist on the east side of the Park, as well as areas for interpretive signage along the trails, public art, and opportunities for placemaking. This alternative includes a crosswalk south of the Park at NE 24th Street and Duvall Avenue NE to increase foot traffic to the Park as well as safety. See Figure 3 for plan graphic. Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 10 July 2024 Figure 3 Alternative 1 - Focus on Passive Recreation and Limited Access � I LEGEND Newcastle's May Creek Park i u., and trail system a i --- potential future acquisition I � I j Y i May Creek � m I , a I i --- seasonal drainage feature I u � o ' potential views of May Creek ❑ wetland habitat trailhead kiosk � ..... wetland and stream buffer I heritage tree nature play area viewshed loop trail with parent seating tree canopy covered space and seating picnic shelter with protect heritage trees open tree canopy gated access to seating and grills stormwater ppnd 'I ` I i . elrtry signage and pubtjc - � open lawn art to establish par�C impervious pavingfor access road and parking identify,andwayftndin6 --" p footbridge sidewalk connection to I Newcastle Trail`network via Duvall Ave NE --- boardwalk and Coal Creek ParkWaY • _____i • trail node with public art, wetland viewing deck enclosed off-leash benches,and wayfinding soft surface trail dog area paved trail comfort station trail node with seating and opportunityfor signage parking for 18 vehi les and firetruck turnaround`, picnic shelter with tables and grills low impact development W comfort station stormwater treatment at parking bike parking open lawn with native planting at edges • public art features and wayfinding trail network through forested, 04 - lighting wetland,and riparian habitats ` `O7 native forest and understory restoration t monitor and steward existing, N (invasive species removal and native planting) � healthy forested areas riparian corridor and stream enhancement 0 0 zoo �� � existing sidewalk along east side of Duvall Ave NE wetland enhancement area Feet Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 11 July 2024 Alternative 2 Alternative 2 has a focus on park recreation and trail access. The existing access was used and expanded upon. Various Park amenities are centralized in an existing flat, clear opening outside of wetland buffers and wooded areas. Because a portion of this area is currently privately owned, this alternative design may need to take place in phases, with a second development phase starting when the additional parcel is acquired by the City. At the end of the access road is a parking lot with space for 24 cars, as well as an additional small lot with 4 ADA parking stalls off the large environmental education building (open air rustic shelter). Nearby is a small comfort station and trail head, along with a picnic shelter, seating, and a natural play space. In addition to these features, a basketball court and tennis/pickleball court are part of this alternative, along with a native propagation nursery area and a small, enclosed dog park. This design also includes two large open lawn spaces and a pervious trail network connecting all active recreation and amenities with the wilder areas of the Park. These pathways wind through woods and wetlands to viewpoints and to the creek. At trail intersections, wide nodes accommodate benches for resting and interpretive signage. A switchback trail leads up the hill to the nearby neighborhood to the south and another leads down the hill to provide creek access to the north. These trails would be as accessible as possible and may include stairs but would not likely be ADA-accessible. An opportunity exists for stormwater treatment from the parking lot in the form of raingardens, and there is an ongoing need for invasive species removal and stewardship throughout the park. A crosswalk south of the Park at NE 24th Street and Duvall Avenue NE is recommended for this alternative to allow for safer neighborhood access to the trailheads. See Figure 4 for plan graphic. Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 12 July 2024 Figure 4 Alternative 2 - Focus on Park Recreation and Trail Access i I '. I Newcastle's i LEGEND May Creek Park UJ and trail system T i --- potential future acquisition I � I Y May Creek YI future connection to --...._,.__ Newcastle Trail network --- sea sonal drainage feature I y I V I ❑ � o wetland habitat i nature play area I u ; with parent seating .•, � wetland and stream buffer picnic shelter with ®® heritage tree stewardship/i ulturil garden seating and grills trail access to creek a e,ADA access may be challenging due to grade change;pathway could large shelter for environmental tennis(2)/pickleball(4) incorporate stairs to reduce earthwork ORtree canopy education programming,additional and basketball courts protect herita a trees open tree canopy and ADA parking for four,vehicles p g gate,d access to I -- -------------i I I stormwater pond j I I ■ open lawn entry sign' ir impervious paving for access road and parking footbridge sidewalk connection to I • j path junction/node NewcastleTrail'network I ' with interpretive signage -- via Duvall Ave NE I . - _ and benches - boardwalk and Coal Creek Parkway I — ---- • � wetland viewing deck soft surface trail rain gardens future trail connection and native plantings utilizing city access easement paved trail comfort station \ trail node with seating and opportunity for signage and trailhead kiosk boardwalk with viewing gtpla form and M picnic shelter with tables and grills parking for 24 vehicles n and firetruck turnaround W comfort station low impact development bike parking stormwater treatment at parking lighting enclosed off-leash dog area �4 e� \ native forest and understory restoration (invasive species removal and native planting) 2� monitor and steward existing, ❑ wetland enhancement area healthy forested areas 0 200 trail connection to adjacent neighborhood existing sidewalk along east side of Duvall Ave NE and Duvall Avenue NE sidewalk Feet L J Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 13 July 2024 DESIGN CRITERIA COMPARISON MATRIX The below matrix ranks each criterion on a scale of low to high for each alternative, with "low" meaning that the alternative least meets the criterion and "high" meaning that it most meets the criterion. High Most meets criterion Medium Moderately meets criterion Low Least meets criterion Criterion Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Maximize Trail Development Within the Park Low High Connect to Existing May Creek Greenway Trails Medium High Provide Trail Connections to Renton Neighborhoods Medium High Provide Park Development for Families Medium High Provide Park Facilities Medium High Maximize Open Space for Unprogrammed Recreation Medium High Maximize Restoration and Habitat Enhancement High Medium Maximize Forest and Habitat Preservation High Medium Provide Environmental Education and Stewardship Medium High Provide Public Art and Placemaking High Low Provide Parking Low High Avoid Impacts to Neighbors High Medium Maximize Safety and Accessibility Medium High Consider Value to Cost High Medium Consider Permit Feasibility High Medium Appendix B Conceptual Design Alternatives 14 July 2024 APPENDIX C COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT DATA Ole 1` gs AO � ry.1 w•;�.i ::: Vi \ yI • •�F r ~ ly, Al 'r t/ ^. �„y,-;' �' f •may�,�M ,,��� }. � � L� ..•. 71 47 AM F: ti .•sir ,��'' ; + i z+M ,. � , �'' -`.��'f��� ... t_�':� , `• ;eti'-:_-� � :� � ;art'q t� •7 x*. 7 �l�.. r,:'. Y •fir ,�qh f ��4! 'E 1'►�yv C ...I + ;,�I'T y{`7tl'••f�l 4 Ai �� F• 4 �.Dr � � - vt� y� e- r rm 1 rl'nw ••� 1 �F.• vdr I„ A'��: `!!t %J.� IL Lu � r 4 EE ':+ . :. irk .n '. /1�• '�„�c �� z W t�Ylf,� rye`,•� �rI ;-`� 4 `�` ' � � � ��y\�, Q `/ 4_0 Q 9- , , O O 141 c: 1 - Engagement Results C.'r .7, February • , ear' . -� * :. 'r �� �" r' .;�^ y•'-,� � - Input on site opportunities and constraints 01 - March to April 2024 - Input on design concepts Touchpoint - Input on draft preferred design " - fq Tµ 1 d � - ��! a ,� • .. '`�- �_ r. -.� c--.. _ Community Engagement — Touchpoint # 1 February 2024 ® Home AIIProjects Renton Citywebsite QSearch Signin Register rF ,. d � Potential ture Ssf� City Acquisition Creek V and Park Area Y ood« '���.•.� NEW PARK AV& G' PLANNING AREA! i _ Postcard Mailer — Sent over 4,000 postcards to DULL°9� r •,all mailing addresses within 1/2 mile of site 2 LanalRidge� - p (Feb. 20, 2024) NON earfleMonPark.Mast Plan Northeast Renton Park-Master Plan Display Boards — Posted community 0 V a M a Welcome to the Northeast Renton Park MastarPWn Project an initiative led by Renton Parks and Recreation to bring a new neighborhood engagement boards on rotation at Renton park to the north end of the East Plateau neighborhood.Situated on approximately 18.5 acres of land,this park will address a critical need STAY INFORMED in the neighborhood. Subscribe for project updates Facilities (Feb. 16, 2024—present) Nestled between the May Creek Greenway to the north,Duvall Avenue to the southwest,and developed and undeveloped residential neighborhoods to the south and east the proposed park site presents a unique blend of landscapes—forests,wetlands and streams,steep Your mail address... slopes,previously developed parcels.While this diversity may pose planning challenges,it also offers distinctive opportunities for recreation,relaxation,and a profound connection with nature. � Our main objective is to create a comprehensive master plan defining the vision, and priorities for this new neighborhood park. ,,,� City Newsletter — Distributed project „. iu„o,nao aK Balancing natural landscapes with carefully selected features,we envision a park that caters to a spectrum of passive and active 0 recreational activities,including: st men.orra� information in "This Week in Renton" Newsletter Play areas and sport courts (Feb. 28, Gatherin gg s spaces Wltos Lls[enl 2024) Trallsrinpaceatls n9 •Access to nature Jason Lederer Park Planning Manager JL UtilityBillings — Distributed project Community!nvolvement is an Important part of our park planning process! City of Renton This is your opportunity to help shape a new park to meet the current and future needs of the East Plateau neighborhood.During Me park Ernail lledarer@rentonwa.gov planning pros want to hear what's important to you.A park that becomes a source of pride and joy for generations to come—a o information in monthly utility bill mailings testament to the collaborative spirit and shared vision of our vibrant community. (Feb. 2024) Join us in this exciting endeavor! Rhemy king Neighborhood Program Coordinator ® ® City of Renton Email neighborhaodpmgram@remonwa.gav ® Social Media — Posted project information on Park Opportunities and Constraints 0� City social media (Feb. 2024-present) F1 v ® M Videos 16 Feb 2024 The images below showcase potential opportunities for future park development alongside constraints that must be carefully Northeast Renton Park considered during the master planning process.For a more detailed overview,a comprehensive exlsting InformationsMaster Plan Website — Created a website to serve as a mary report with additional details is also available. ov�o Park Opportunities: central engagement hub to share information and There are abundant opportunities to establish a new park and natural area,with a focus on providing engaging play experiences while preserving and enhancing key natural features such as wetlands,streams,floodplalns,and forests.These gather feedback (Feb. 2024) natural elements not only offer opportunities for passive enjoyment and relaxation but also serve vital habitat functions. In addition to the preservation efforts,the park could prioritize the integration of new trails and trail connections within and FAQs beyond Its boundaries,facilitating exploration and connectivity for visitors.Furthermore,Incorporating traditional park enities such as gathering spaces,diverse play areas,open lawns,and sport courts will be crucial for enhancing the overall appeal and utility of the space,encouraging active recreation and social interaction. 0 Why are we planning a park in location? What features would you like to see Incorporated Into this new park?Your Input Is Invaluable,please share your thoughts with us. 0 What is a Park Master Plan? parksiteop p Is the future en to the ublic? Community Outreach : Online Engagement New Park Facilities Environmental Education Open lawns, sport court, • Information kiosks and environment and play areas educational programming displays Art and culture WHAT DO YOU ' , Art programs, gardens, WANT TO SEE and public art displays IN YOUR NEW PARK? Circulation and Environment Connections 27010 Wetlands, native trees, Bike and walking trails and forests r ANCHOR QEA IR What Kinds of New Features/Facilities Do You Want? Here's What We Heard : Sports Nature Playground Connection to Facilities Dog Park Preservation and Amenities Trail Networks Requests for Requests for an Concerns and Requests for a Requests for pickleball courts, off-leash dog park requests to protect revamped sidewalks and including dedicated wildlife habitats and playground with infrastructure Suggestions for a courts, multiple dedicated area for May Creek facilities for various improvements to courts, permanent dogs Desire for walking age groups enhance access to nets, and lighting trails through Desire for covered the new park Desire for basketball forested areas bench seating, and tennis courts Suggestions to restrooms, a paved Suggestion for a eradicate invasive walking loop, and disc golf course plants and preserve parking Mention of turf surrounding Mention of an sports fields environment obstacle course, RC course, and with lights water activities Community Engagement — Touchpoint #2 March and April 2024 Community Outreach : Online Engagement New Park Facilities Environmental Education Open lawns, sport court, 3% Information kiosks and environment and play areas educational programming displays Art and Culture � � Art programs, gardens, WHAT DO YOU and public art displays WANT TO SEE IN YOUR NEW PARK? Circulation and Environment Connections 27% Wetlands, native trees, Bike and walking trails and forests C ANCHOR 16 J QEA�` UR Community Outreach : In - Person Engagement Q Trails throughout park Q Future trail connections to Newcastle trail network and city access... O Loop trail providing views of natural areas Q Trail network through forest, wetland, and riparian habitats Q Boardwalk with viewing platform on wetlands Q Park Design 1 Q Trail access to May Creek © Park Design 2 0 Rain garden and native plants near entrance Q Future connection to adjacent neighborhood and Duvall Ave NE sidewalk ■ Strongly Agree Q Viewpoints of May Creek ■ Somewhat Agree Q Trail nodes with public art, benches, and/or interpretive signage 6&j Neutral Q Open lawn areas Q Large shelter for environmental education programming ■ Somewhat Disagree Q Public art features throughout park ■ Strongly Disagree Q Stewardship/cultural garden Q Natural but with a higher concertation of traditional park facilities Q Amphitheater for serve as an outdoor classroom Q Tennis/pickleball courts Q Basketball court 0 Minimal traditional park infrastructure and limited trail access 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percent of Respondents Community Outreach : Online Engagement WOULD YOU LIKE THE NEW PARK TO INCLUDE A SMALL OFF-LEASH DOG AREA? Yes _A 8 1 53% No 7147% AMU kzANCHOR QEA '� Open Ideas ANCHOR r QEA We need a splash park or water Beautiful location and I really LOVE the idea of the trail connection to sidwalk near I'm concerned with the access to Provide trail access from the south park for kids to run through! the adjacent neighborhood. the park, along with pedestrian or east for people and kids in -Shannon safety. That curve on Coal Creek Summerwind and Newcastle I am disappointed that the sport courts (pickleball specifically) did not make it into Parkway that the park is proposed terrace. I want to make sure this park is this design. to sit adjacent to is a known danger -Ryan ADA accessible. Disabled people zone, where speeds routinely deserve to enjoy the outdoors and I am disappointed that there is not a plan to include the connection to the Newcastle exceed 45-50 mph, and accidents The radio control hobby has trail network from the outset. I have concerns about traffic and safety at the sidwalk are common. By what method are be a part of the experience as well. grown immensely. My son and I Especially disabled children. I hope connection to the Newcastle trail network instead. Coal Creek Parkway was originally pedestrians to safely cross Coal have gotten involved with this fun all walkways, playgrounds, and a county road and had a speed limit of 50mph. Since the City of Renton has had the Creek Pkwy to access the trail past time in the rock crawling part road, it's speed limit has been reduced to 35mph, but no design elements of the connection on the west side of the amenities are wheelchair of it, but it has been difficult to accessible. road were changed to reflect that. The road still feels like one you can go 50mph on road? find courses. We live very close to -Monisho and people do + much faster. Right now, almost no one uses that intersection -BL where this park will be developed crosswalk on foot and that is good because the folks ripping down Coal Creek Pkwy and would love for it to include a approaching from the south are coming around a nearly blind curve. If the park great space to build a park and 1/10th scale rc crawler course with The image shows side walk on the results in increased foot traffic at that intersection, I have serious concerns about allow the public to access a green varying terrain, bridges, ramps, off west side of coalcreek as folks getting hit by these cars as well as the affect that will have on North/South e " space area. My hope is that it is a camber obstacles and the like.The existing";that sidewalk doesn't traffic. That section of Coal Creek Pkwy already backs up significantly at certain times park that reflects and retains the closest course I know of like. exist today. As a lot of people of day. Adding delays to the movement of N/S traffic (longer and more frequent red natural space while also providing Remote Control Hobbies in at point out, there needs to be lights due to foot traffic between new park and Newcastle trail network) may the aspects of a park where people Covington. Please consider this as imporovements on being able to significantly worsen the problem. Could we not include the connector trail from the can gather and play in nature. part of the development. n son appreciate access this Park. People do like to outset of the project and/or design the part of the connect that crosses Coal Creek -is and I would greatly aciate speed down Duvall, there needs to as an underground passage or overhead walkway (my strong preference being the Renton citizen since ppre be safe side walks. I have seen underground option). 996. -Patrick atleast a dozen accidents. Hi! Please leave park bathrooms -Dags This concept includes a future outdoor environmental education area. Without a open year round! Child and senior specific plan for its use, I worry that it will go unused. I have seen those structures sit Please add a dog park, pickleball, mostly unused in many parks. I would much prefer to have a sport court of some residents need them. It was a and basketball. Why in the world would we put in kind over this. challenge with them closed 2023- -Tony portable toilets? 2024. Revise your toileting plan! It's -Bourbonisgood Please engage the Langley Ridge Community about the potential use of the trail tacky at best to close them. They easement on the tracts north of their development. I am sure residents there will be are an essential service. I see deer and bobcats in this area keen to understand the likelihood that the easement will be used and what measures -DMR frequently. How does this project will be taken to ensure that those using them do not venture off the trails and onto ensure that these animals will their properties. continue to have sufficient habitat to survive? I'd love to see at least one bike rack incorporated into the parking lot or elsewhere. -Stephen LaP(ante There are a lot of neighborhoods at a medium distance from the park and I could easily imagine folks wanting to have the option to ride their bikes there instead of 13 walking or driving. ANCHOR .• -Stephen LoP(ante Q E A` �D Hello, 1.Would love to see dedicated pickleball courts Please do not allow access to May Creek. Foot No off leash dog area. There is Me and several friends would love to see that or part of with lights for the evening time. The demand is traffic would disrupt both the residents and enough noise in this area already. that be a disc golf course. It's so much fun and very, very high and the number of public courts wildlife.Also, there were numerous bear sightings There are deer and bear who afterward we usually go out somewhere to eat. I hope in Renton is few. last year. Have you considered the potential frequent the area and it would not you would consider making it a disc golf course because 2.An off leash dog park is a much needed space encounters between wildlife and people/dogs if be good for them. I know there would be a lot of people that would use it that Renton also doesn't have very many of. you add trails? -Sue and enjoy it. 3.Walking trails through shaded forest areas to -Karissa_alana Thank you, connect with nature. Please don't allow physical access Maxine Nagel We need pickleball courts with lights please! As to may Creek. -Maxine The PB courts and dog park can be further away from housing and the creek, closer to the road. many courts as possible ! There is a huge -Sue -PhilT demand in Renton Lighted pickleball courts in this neighborhood park? -Scott Maybe a dog park would be good. I do not think so. -MA Play area for kids? YES The idea of open spaces are needed but worry More pickleball courts please. At least 6 Sheltered picnic area? YES. about tax dollars being spent on outlay and Soft trails? YES. upkeep. Where is funding coming from? -Joy Please include access to creek and Pickleball? NO! -Connected Neighbor some water activities. Basketball and tennis courts dog park walking -MA It's a semi-rural area; part of the May creek Greenway; The city of Renton needs to put in turf sports trails are what are needed inthis area home to loads of wildlife. fields with lights.-Thersident -Yasmin Ali Having a basketball court is a must. Which means subdued & minimal lighting. -MA -MB I think a new park is a nice idea. Parks are Pickleball courts with lights important. But what about finishing the sidewalk -Susan Pickle ball court with lights. Disc I feel it would be a great place for a disc golf course. It's refresh project in Maplewood Glen? Our golf baskets. a fun sport that will bring a lot of people to this area to driveway entrances are sunken and get flooded Pickleball! Four courts would be awesome. These -Hellopeanutpoms play and to visit local restaurants and stores. It will also everytime it rains. But 2 doors down is fresh, tennis courts get built and get no use. We play help keep people who live here playing here and not new, non -flooding. year round and there's a huge community of having to travel 15 plus miles to spend money in other -Astreiss players Basketball court areas. Renton deserves the economical boost from this SeyL491 Obstacle course park. Being a resident who lives in the near the park site. Soccer field I would love to see a place for our community members Lit up tennis courts please! Coulon Park and -Ali Gil to congregate and play and have fun. Liberty Park fill up so quickly on nice days. Please install dedicated pickleball courts with -Woo dyB -Maria lights -David More trails that are NOT paved! Soft surface! Hiking/jogging forested —Shannon Gifford 14 ANCHORkz • 0EA`� Renton desperately needs PICKLEBALL courts!! It would be great to have a disc golf course. What is your plan to protect the wildlife that Pickleball courts would be so appreciated. There are times where the wait is HOURS to play -Beelaroo currently frequents those properties? Their Please consider putting in several courts as at the current parks. A great option is to build current habitat has already been shrunk there is a shortage in the Renton highlands. tennis court with pickleball lines so community significantly by housing projects. -Joyful members can bring their own nets or for the city Please have lots of covered bench seating, and a -Karen to provide nets (similar to Seattle). play area that can be used for many different t o provide e nets dle age groups of children, restrooms, a paved It would be great if there was an off leash walking loop, and a parking lot. Wonderful to hear about this park!! We are dog park included. The nearest one is -Blackberry right across Duvall Ave., but don't have a downtown (I only went once because it was 3 more dedicated pickleball courts sidewalk on our side of the Duvall Ave bend to dismal) and the nearest good dog park is on -Kofucious get safely to the new crosswalk for the park, Mercer Island. In contrast, the nearest park Can we please get tennis and basketball courts here? please add one!! with a play area and sport courts is at Lske :) Boren, a couple miles down the road. I would love to have more pickleball courts with -Joyce Also +1 to off leash dog park! -MuttsRule permanent nets & lights so we can play after -Laura work. I see many empty tennis courts that are not This is an incredibly exciting project! We live being used. Please create more pickleball courts I would love to see New PICKLEBALL COURTS closer to Jay Berrys and there are hardly any for us. Thank you! sidewalks or good biking trails. Quality parks are May Creek is an important wildlife corridor. on this community with Renton have very few -PBFanatic Please save as much of the trees/vegetation as areas to play I think it would really build the needed in this community. Selfishly, I would love possible. A viewpoint would be nice, so we can community and help develop strong to see pickleball courts. However, I know wildlife see May Creek down below. relationships. Also a revamped playground Please add at least 3 Pickleball courts. Currently continues to be pushed out as humans develop we have 250 pickleball players for one court. more. In an ideal world, it would be great to -Maria Wolcott distance to this park and would with fun for kids. My family is walkingto see it be Thank you have the majority of this area used for nature through! t -Fernando trails, preserve the surrounding environment for followed owed 4 plants and animals, eradicate invasive plants like Dedicated pickleball courts would be amazing I'd love to see more pickleball courts with decent blackberries, and maybe squeeze some to have and an efficient use of space since you lighting for the evenings. pickleball courts in closer to the road where can fit 4 in the same space as 1 tennis court. Connecting to the Terrace and Highland PD human impact already exists. I would be open Nearby Lake Boren Park has blended courts trains will be a fantastic feature!. to volunteer opportunities to help. I am hesitant that are poor for pickleball because the net is a -eytrenton about allowing dogs due to their potential different height for tennis and the courts have impact on wildlife, and irresponsible owners faint red lines for pickleball on a green surface who may not clean up after them. that are difficult to see even for non-colorblind —ewebbwilson people. An area of the park sectioned off for an off- leash dog area would also be welcome. -PicklelessinRenton 15 ANCHOR • QEA`� r A lot of parking spots in Concept#1 0 Concept#2 is the version that seems to invite 1 Pool 1 Make parking space sizes generous in size so cars 0 more interaction! Dog park area 0 can fit well Love this. Can be used by any age grout 0 The closest true fenced in dog park is in downtown More parking is better- Definitely ADA Move some trail connections & loops from Renton. So many people end up going to the 0 concept 2 to concept 1 and boardwalk 0 baseball field at Honey Dew elementary to run their A structure to picnic or gather, a paved loop or dogs. Would be nice to have a dog area. boardwalk to walk. No pool, no art work it will 0 Combine the Viewshed Loop w/the access to creek 0 Emergency/safety pillars or some alert in the just get tagged, pis working bathrooms I really like#2 for the trails (seems to be more than park to ensure safety of visitors 3 Keep it simpi, r) #1)Also -future connection to Newcastle trail 0 ADA Accessible trails/bridges (and they don't network. I love that! Emergency alert pillars - see Bellevue Park trails 0 need to be paved) 2 Need access from Glencoe neighborhood to Security & safety gate keeping cars out & drug 0 Art installations throughout the park - use park without having to backtrack on sidewalks 2 users natural or plants to create beautiful moments 0 & crosswalks @ 24th & Duvall Signage needs to be by the road & visible when 0 along trail Crosswalks w/light on Duvall 0 people drive by Public Art is great ideas 0 Need crosswalk @ 24th & Duvall I Sidewalks! Signs of what to do if you see a bear, unhoused, 0 Big playground 3 other animals, etc Little house for baby and kid and a big house for Off leash dog area, and dog leash walking trails 4 It would be great to add some open paved older kids 0 please! spaces embedded throughout the park for 0 A big dog park rollerskating Metal slide so people don't get electric charge 0 Cat park/Dog park/ Nature trail/ziplines /Thanks! 0 It's a great activity for kids & adults both, but a Play house 0 Dog Park 0 learning curve. So having paved areas in open Seesaw/ Swing / Soccerfield 0 Yes Dog Park! 0 space is nice. People use tennis courts to learn but 0 Slide 0 we don't want to ruin those courts. There's indoor Outside class 0 courts but people get nervous about learning with Tube Slide 0 Education center w/outdoor classroom (example, 0 more experienced skaters :) Two swings 0 Tiny Trees outdoor preschool)Yes, playground 0 Large playground, with covered area and splash Nature club, meets on Saturdays at 1 pm for wild 0 pool. Both examples do not look like there is 1 Climbing Wall 5 Zip line, Swing, Garden 0 animals and plants to help the environment enough interaction for children and families Wi-Fi 0 More areas for families use ropes and protection. Climbing wall with various difficulties and ability to 5 Please visit the Lewis & Creek park in Newcastle More trails -the better 0 Great idea! area Bellevue. That park has wetlands, steep 0 areas and it's got trails. Emulate that park. May I suggest the perfect park? 0 16 ANCHORtZ • QEA`� . - FIRW Provide some covered play area (like in We need an amazing destination NM for example) 7 playground. Covered play areas are so important- Water features for splash play. Bouncy 3 Kids can use in rain &when really hot too! 0 flooring not wood chips. Covered picnic Kids need a place to play in the rain and area. very hot weather. Something that works 7 Playground ideas 3 with the log play ground idea. Thanks! Yes to bouncy flooring! 0 Sand pit/digging area. 0 Working telescope 0 There is a sand pit at the Lake Yes! Love telescope! Goes along with Sammamish park and also one in a park Darksky.org principles and keeping a 0 in capitol hill. Really huge. Kids love to dig 0 natural space and it would be great to have an area Zipline 3 where they can just go do that. Yes, zipline 0 Skate park/ Face painting 0 Zipline! 0 Ball pit 0 Grand Total 40 Skate park! 0 Snack area, tent for sunny days 1 A nice bbq place 0 A picnic area where the sun hits 0 A place to do birthday parties 0 Sport general running, soccer 1 1 like concept 2 WITHOUT sport fields 0 No pickleball we have in other parks. No 0 to basketball. No playing field. For wild animals and 0 plants Soccer field / basketball court/ Garden 0 Sunset viewing opportunities 1 Trails that connect under the bridge 2 from May Valley to Newcastle Highlands One long trail system! 2 17 ANCHOR 0EA� Community Engagement - Touchpoint #3 June 2024 httr)s:Hinthelooio. rentonwa .gov/northeastrentonpark? tool = guest book#tool tab , �4 ANCHOR httr)s://intheloop. rentonwa.gov/northeastrentonpark?to. of = guest book#tool tab 20 , �Q ANCHOR https:HintheIoop. rentonwa .gov/northeastrenton park?tool = guest book#tool tab , �4 ANCHOR CommunityEngagement Summary Display Board at Emails sent to Display Boards This Week in Renton Sustainability Fair/ individuals who Posted at Senior Center about newsletter(2/27) Arbor Day Event at contact us directly (2/23-3/1) project on RCC(4/20) with comments/ social media Engagement questions Event at Highlands Postcard Direct Posted on Social Neighborhood Center Posted Posted in TWIR Pop up at Mailing(2/20) Media(2/28) (4/5) on Social newsletter Farmer's Media(5/1) Market Display Boards Display Boards at at Highlands Pop up at Farmers RCC(2/16-2/23) Neighborhood Center Market-preliminary — F 1,438 (3/2-3/11) preferred alternative 986 1034 1058 lk 781 75 24 771 365 192 212 77 160 181 145 161 44 29 140 Page views — • Feb 1-7 Feb 8-14 Feb 1}21 Feb 22-28 Feb Ma?6 �1arT-13 Mar 14-20 Mar 21-27 Mar 28-Apr 3 Apr 4-10 Apr 11-17 Apr 18- ay 2-8 May 23-29 M���o- Jun 6-12 Jun 13-19 Jun 20-24 595 524 591 473 ;gg 18 3 11 �142 71 57 44 54 42 61 58 17 17 59 Visitors • ay 30- Feb 1-7 Feb 8-14 Feb 15-21 Feb 22-28 FMe?� ar 7-13 Mar 14-20 Mar 21-27 Mar 28-Apr 3 Apr 4-10 Apr 11-17 Apr 18-24 ay 2-8 May 23-29 MJun 5 �Un fi- n 13-19 U Community • •• •mmunity Touchpoint 2 Community • •• 22 ANCHOR • OEA`� Survey Results Very Happy - , ' Very Unhappy HOW DOES THE PRELIMINARY FINAL PARK DESIGN MAKE 12% Unhappy YOU FEEL? Happy - ' , ' , Neutral 23 ANCHOR 16 J kz 0EA 7 SurveyResults : How Does the PreliminaryFinal Park Design Make You Feel ? Grand Total Very Happy 1 1 1 4 13 5 3 11 1 1 1 42 Happy 8 8 10 4 15 1 46 Neutral 1 2 1 1 9 14 Unhappy 2 1 2 10 15 Very Unhappy 1 1 1 3 6 Grand Total 1 1 1 14 26 18 10 48 1 1 1 1 123 24 ANCHOR tz QEA Summaryof Favorite Things Nature and Trails Recreation Facilities Parking and Accessibility • Beautiful boardwalks, views, green Desire for dog parks (potentially • More parking spaces and natural spaces, and off-leash); playgrounds with a • Provide access including environmental stewardship variety of activities; sports facilities ADA-accessible pathways and • Desire for environmental education such as skateparks, disc golf transit access and clear signage course, and volleyball; and picnic . Need for pedestrian bridge or • Some concerns about mosquitos in and exercise areas with public art tunnel across Coal Creek Parkway stormwater ponds; suggestion for displays bat houses/natural repellent Community and afety General Feedbact. • Desire for the park to be a • Excitement about a new park welcoming and safe place for . Appreciation for features like picnic families and kids areas, emergency beacons, and • Concerns about vandalism and the trailhead kiosks with wayfinding potential for parks becoming • Maintain natural landscape: balance homeless encampments natural areas with new access Summary of Least Favorite Things Nature and TrailF- Recreation racilitieF- Parking and Accessibility • Concerns on trails affecting • Disappointment that pickleball • Concerns about car break-ins and existing wetlands courts were removed increase in crime • Opposition to park lightning that • Feel there is a lack of sports courts • Site is difficult to access without car may disrupt wildlife • Desire for playgrounds, splash • Need additional parking due to • Uncertainty on how stormwater parks, and permanent restrooms potential park expansion ponds will affect mosquitos • Suggestion for sports facilities and • Suggestion of adding bike racks a pump track for bikes • Concerns for safe crossing across Coal Creek Parkway • Important to connect to other trails Community and Safety �UL, lark Specific • Concerns about vandalism and the • Mixed opinions on including an potential for parks becoming off-leash dog area homeless encampments • Concerns on pet feces • Concerns about park to becoming • Requests for a larger (separate?) an attractive nuisance dog park for pet owners rather than in the park Social Media Comments : June 16, 2024 • "An exciting concept for the new Northeast Renton Park. Numerous opportunities for recreation proposed for the new park. Congratulations to the Renton Parks and Recreation, consultants, stakeholders, and the public for an amazing new park for the Renton community."—Alan Wyatt • "How about fixing what's broken, and paying off some debt before buying a new set of rims for our car?"—Robert Henderson • "How about some nice soccer fields in Renton or fixing up the horrible ones at Ron Regis."—Julie K. • "Looks great. What address is this near" - Response was provided - "The city re built the Kiwanis park next to Honeydew elem. It's beautifully done. The ball field behind Honeydew was relandscaped nicely and gets a lot of use. When will the huge new Sunset project apts open? I hope Joannes will stay open. And who will move in the old Dicks bldg? We want trader Joes! Renton rocks!"—Nora Williams Cottrill - Reply to above: "In talking with the mayor of another city, I learned it's the stores/company people need to talk to when they want a store in a certain area if they hear a lot of voices saying they want their brand in a certain spot, they're more likely to want to move there."—Angela Noon 27 ANCHOR QEA OR City of Renton, WA--Government's Post X Monica Moore Socia M e I a Wou d love a spray park please! moot Kearney 'd Like Reply Hide ,O Add a skate park Nish Darr r Like Reply Hide Comments, 1 submitted feedback but my main point was I hope this park is accessd,a for al I comm,ir ty members including the disabled.The walkways,playground,and amenities. Mark Arnold p ease bui d a rew skateboard park!the Liberty Park skatepark is 24 years o d and has 'J Like Reply Hide • beer ore of the most used park features over the years...Evertua ly need rg Leslie Marquardt Keller rep-acemert,P ease g ve the youth and families Of Renton a new skateboard park to June 23 , 2024 Spray park p ease. recreate gather and make rew friendships'n Northeast Renton! 21h Like Reply Hide Sheelah Doherty Like Reply Hide CO To g ve feec oack clink on the link. Chns Swartson ,, Like Reply Hide Mark Arnold _ Breanna Martinez We Ce`r te;need more skateboard parks.And we rave few empty lots around Splash park!!! trot car, be made into skateboarc parks. td Like Reply Hide Sahada Dance Like Reply Hide More areas with no arIni and with foot traffic only. Like Reply Hide Vlkki Pavone Mascho Mark Arnold call the Mayor!!!Lol V Samantha Marie Peltier Pease a splash pad/soray park!! _ Like Reply Hide 1d Like Reply Hide Diane Dobson Kathie Elizabeth Have y'o.i beer to OlympT.a and seer the magn ficert parks there???Skate parks Splash pad please!I don't think Renton has a single ore isorreore correct rre if I'm wrong.)we have to drve to crossroads in.Bellevue. ii tr Cog parks with waterways and tra s..... •t's the most magnificent b°end of 1tl Like Reply Hide 0 meet rg a i the varous reeds while sti preserving the eiements of rature. OPrescilla Ruiz Valdez Like Reply Hide O Kathie Elizabeth I do the same thing either there or the park next to Bellevue scuare and or we go to auburn as well Reply to Mark Arnold 0 © C Like Reply Hide 0 i Kathie Elizabeth • presalla Rutz Valdez Prescilla Ruiz Valdez yup!Having one in Rentor wowd be amazing(► Splash pad/spray park 1�b Like Reply Hide A outdoor racket bal or fenced soccer area ® Prescilla Ruiz Valdez A kids game and or bke trail(West findwick park:n Kent has those for p•c reference) Kathie Elizabeth right but I wonder why the don't consider that maybe it's because of Herry Moses don't want to rose t_ Kids scavenger hunt around the park(Philip Arno d park has a small one on the smaller 16h Like Reply Hide playground) `v Reply to Prescilla Ruiz Valdez (2) 12 ED A sip line Jacque McDaniel Dempster Id Like Reply Hide 0 Kathie Elizabeth Kert has ore .. Like Reply Hide Social Media Comments : June 23 , 2024 Cont. Overall, public opinion was very positive, especially about keeping the forested and natural aspects of the site • Liked paths, especially ADA paths Liked plan to connect to other existing • Liked signage, interpretive information trails outside the park • How many miles of pathways will there be? The kids' play area was also well received • Will unleashed dogs be allowed on the Liked zip line paths? What about a splash pad? • Will there be garbage and recycling cans Would like baby swings on paths and educational signs? Liked more natural climbing structures • Liked preserving heritage trees like the ones that look like logs • Liked erosion and lighting mitigation Monkey bars • Do want good lighting on paths 29 ANCHOR kZ QEA '� Social Media Comments : June 23 , 2024 Cont. One of the most popular features was the dog park—lots of excitement about that! • Want to make sure it is enclosed • How will rules be enforced? Infrastructure questions • Plumbed bathrooms vs. porta-potties? • Picnic benches in the shelter? • Fireplace in the shelter? Community gardens were popular • Covered classroom area? Picnic shelter as option? • Just demonstration or also available for residents to rent garden plots? Safety issues • Really busy road with lots of speeders • Dangerous to cross • Parking is not visible from street 30 ANCHOR kz QEA '� Social Media Comments : June 23 , 2024 Cont. • "Dog park would be great. Boardwalks and viewpoints are beautiful." • "More parking! Connection to nearby neighborhoods. Love nature." • "Bathrooms or access to are needed" • "[Smiley face]" • "Outdoor exercise equipment (stretching, etc)" • "Public art displays. Educational signs about nature during walk." • "Love the trails. More enviro areas:' • "Love the dog park — not enough in Renton. Trails [checkmark]" • "Keep it natural, excited to see more parks in Renton" • "Always love parks" • "Skatepark" • "Nature [smiley face]" • "Love the trails/nature. Too many parks/places are concrete:' • "It seems like a nice addition to the nearby neighborhoods. Since it is a wetland area, what is the mosquito population like? It's hard to enjoy the park if you're too busy slapping at them. Maybe an addition of bat houses in the trees or natural spray or plants to ward off mosquitos, no-see-ums, etc." • "Feedback from kid: Rock climbing, swings" tzANCHOR QEA� Vwl APPENDIX D CITY STAKEHOLDER MEETING NOTES IsZANCHOR QEA Meeting Notes Stakeholder Meeting #1, Community Outreach Series 1 Northeast Renton Park Master Planning Project 2:00 to 3:00 p.m., January 24, 2024, Renton City Hall Attendees Name Organization Title Jason Lederer Renton Parks and Recreation Parks Planning Manager Anna Spooner Anchor QEA Project Manager Rachel Andersen Anchor QEA Landscape Architect Betsy Severtsen Renton Parks and Recreation Capital Projects Coordinator Samuel Stolmeier City of Renton Water System Engineer Joe Stowell City of Renton Wastewater Utility Manager Ellen Talbo City of Renton Transportation Planning Manager Alex Morganroth City of Renton City Planner Joe Farah City of Renton Surface Water Engineering Manager Meeting Notes Representatives from the City of Renton (City) and Anchor QEA gathered on Wednesday, January 24, 2024, for the first of a series of stakeholder meetings for the Northeast Renton Park(Park) Master Planning Project (Project).Anna Spooner, Anchor QEA Project Manager, provided a short presentation to review the findings of the site inventory and analysis and to present known opportunities and constraints.The meeting participants then had an open forum to discuss the Project and to review additional opportunities and constraints relevant to the Project.The participants discussed how the design concepts could address these items in the next stages of Project development.The following provides a summary of the meeting discussion. Neighborhood Park Through a Natural Lens The discussion started with the Parks Planning Manager emphasizing that we would like to approach the design of this Park as a neighborhood park but through a natural lens, integrating access to nature and restoration and working with the constraints of the site. Meeting Notes January 24,2024 Page 2 Urban Separator Overlay Alex Morganroth brought to the attention of the group that a portion of the Project site is within an area with Urban Separator Overlay Regulations. This designation provides a distinction between permanent low-density lands that protect resources and environmentally sensitive areas and the surrounding communities. Details on this can be found here: https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/ Renton/#!/Renton04/RentonO4O3/RentonO4O3110.html. Wetland and Stream Buffers Alex Morganroth also discussed with the group how the Park wetland and stream buffers, though serving an important role in protecting critical habitats, generally allow for passive recreation and pathways. He offered his assistance with permitting for these types of additions when the time comes. Meeting Sewer Requirements During the presentation, one of the constraints listed was the lack of sewer services to the site, which would be necessary in the future if the Project includes restroom facilities. Joe Stowell, Wastewater Utility Manager, led an in-depth conversation on the complexities of bringing City sewer lines to the site, with the assumption that King County would not allow a septic system to be used as an alternative. He presented two potential options: 1. The first would be to extend the City sewer line to the most suitable location in the Park, which would require that it extend the full frontage of the Park and travel a long distance uphill. This would require a grinder system with a pump. 2. A second solution would be to tie into the sewer lines at the subdivision, Crystal Ridge,just south of the Park; however, this system was installed with a temporary sewer agreement with Coal Creek. The City would need to modify that service agreement with Coal Creek. Jason Lederer suggested a third possibility: to phase the sewer connection, waiting to take on that work when the adjacent private property potentially becomes available. Other options would be to not include restroom facilities at the site at all or to consider portable restrooms. Park Access The discussion then turned to the subject of access, led by Ellen Talbo. She pointed out that the intersection at SE 95th Way and Coal Creek Parkway is within the City of Newcastle. It is owned by King County with a contract with Newcastle, who maintains it. The City of Renton owns and maintains the lighting on Coal Creek Parkway/Duvall Avenue starting at the City's sign. There may be a maintenance agreement between the Cities of Newcastle and Renton. When the Project gets underway, signal modifications may be necessary. The protected left turns on Duvall Avenue will improve safety and be a desirable feature at the entrance of the Park, as well as planned/striped bike lanes. However, the bike lane on Duvall Avenue is currentlyjust a narrow Meeting Notes January 24,2024 Page 3 shoulder as Duvall Avenue travels southbound. Moving south toward NE 24th Street, the shoulder becomes narrower on the west side of Duvall Avenue. There is no sidewalk on the west side of Duvall Avenue at this location. Improving these bike lanes sooner may be a nice addition to the plan.The topic of site entry prompted Anna Spooner to describe the reasons why the intersection it Duvall Ave NE and SE 95th Way would make a desirable main entry, including its proximity to the intersection, relatively flat topography, open clearing with few trees, existing gravel driveway, and lack of critical/protected spaces. Secondary Access Both the discussion on restrooms and access prompted the question of whether a secondary access point, presumably at the southwest corner of the Park, would be desirable. This would reduce the distance that sewer lines would be required to travel and offer an additional access point for users. However, this corner of the site includes surface water facilities and is surrounded by steep slopes and wetland buffers, separating it from the rest of the Park. It would be a challenging place for a Park entry or Park development including a restroom. However, this is a possibility that may be considered the concept development phase of the Project. Adjacent Stormwater Facility The next topic was led by Joe Farah, Surface Water Engineering Manager. The group posed questions on how the adjacent stormwater facility could potentially be used or incorporated into the Project, if at all. Joe emphasized that the preference would be for this facility to be off-limits and avoided by Park users. It will remain fenced for safety; however, the main drive could potentially serve as a dual entrance into the Park. Screening the stormwater facility from the Park could be a possibility, but any other use or access would be unlikely. Attempting to treat the water from the stormwater facilities by introducing it into the wetlands would not be a possibility. Self-Mitigating The discussion moved on to the topic of mitigation and treating other stormwater and runoff. The discussion revolved around the benefits of the Project being self-mitigating and how the treatment of on-site stormwater may offset the installation of any impervious surfaces or other low-impact development. Restoring and enhancing the site's natural resources, specifically wetlands and buffers, may also provide an opportunity for banking credits. Other Considerations Betsy Severtsen mentioned that she has seen school buses stopping near the Park recently and mentioned that as a consideration because of the possibility of parents wanting to use the future parking lot as a pick-up area. Meeting Notes January 24,2024 Page 4 Ellen Talbo followed up by email expressing an interest in potentially incorporating educational or demonstrative areas throughout the Park, such as a native medicinal garden or native foraging gardens, that could possibly be managed by local scouts or community groups. Closing The meeting ended with an overview of the next steps, including the plan for completing and presenting initial concept alternatives in March. IsZANCHOR QEA Meeting Notes Stakeholder Meeting #2, Community Outreach Series 2 Northeast Renton Park Master Planning Project 3:00 to 4:00 p.m., March 12, 2024, Renton City Hall Attendees Name Organization Title Jason Lederer Renton Parks and Recreation Parks Planning Manager Ian Gray Renton Parks and Recreation Urban Forestry and Natural Resources Manager Rhemy King Renton Parks and Recreation Neighborhood Programs Coordinator Steve Brown Renton Parks and Recreation Parks Maintenance Manager Samuel Stolmeier Community and Economic Development Civil Engineer Alex Morganroth Community and Economic Development Senior Planner Ellen Talbo Public Works Transportation Planning Manager Joe Farrah Public Works Surface Water Engineering Manager Anna Spooner Anchor QEA Project Manager Rachel Andersen Anchor QEA Landscape Architect Meeting Notes Representatives from the City of Renton (City) and Anchor QEA gathered on Tuesday, March 12, 2024, for the second of a series of stakeholder meetings for the Northeast Renton Park(Park) Master Planning Project (Project).Jason Lederer and Rhemy King provided an overview on the community outreach results, and Anna Spooner provided a PowerPoint presentation to go over the two alternative designs and their features, as well as the criteria used to guide the designs.The meeting participants then had an open forum to discuss the alternatives and ask questions.The following provides a summary of the meeting discussion. Community Outreach The discussion started with the Neighborhood Programs Coordinator, Rhemy King, emphasizing how well the public outreach process worked and how much feedback and information had been provided by those who participated. She gave a brief description of the online engagement app, multiple widgets, a video introducing the Project, maps, photographs, a timeline for the Project, and an option to subscribe to receive additional information on the Project in the future. All of these items were meant to familiarize the public with the Project and encourage their involvement. Meeting Notes March 12,2024 Page 2 Jason Lederer, the Parks Planning Manager, went on to describe the large postcard mailer that went out and how it drove a tremendous amount of traffic to the website. In addition, the City's social media post was shared on the "I Love Renton" Facebook page, which also increased traffic to the Project website. He described how the display boards were posted in community centers and the senior center for community members to view in person, as well as in the Highlands Neighborhood Center during basketball weekend and after-school events. All of these boards and interaction opportunities directed viewers to the website and an online poll. Design Criteria Anna Spooner, Anchor QEA Project Manager, started the discussion on design criteria by reiterating that community feedback consistently pointed to an interest in environmental restoration, interpretive and nature trails, and recreation development. This feedback helped to develop the following list of criteria: 1. Maximize trail development within the Park. 2. Connect to existing May Creek Greenway trails. 3. Provide trail connections to Renton neighborhoods. 4. Provide Park development for families. 5. Provide Park facilities. 6. Maximize open space for unprogrammed recreation. 7. Maximize restoration and habitat enhancement. 8. Maximize forest and habitat preservation. 9. Provide environmental education and stewardship. 10. Provide public art and placemaking. 11. Provide parking. 12. Avoid impacts to neighbors. 13. Maximize access. 14. Consider value to cost. 15. Consider permit feasibility. Conceptual Plan Alternatives The discussion then moved on to a slideshow of the alternatives, with Anna Spooner presenting. Two alternatives were presented, with the first one focusing on recreation and Park development and the second focusing on natural resource protection, restoration, and enhancement. Anna pointed out Meeting Notes March 12,2024 Page 3 that they both had overlapping program elements despite these very different themes and that the final design would likely be a combination of elements for both alternatives. She went on to present the alternatives, as follows: Alternative 1 Alternative 1 had a focus on recreation development. The existing access was used and expanded upon.Various Park amenities were centralized in an existing, flat, clear opening outside of wetland buffers and wooded areas. Because a portion of this area is currently privately owned, she pointed out how the design may need to take place in phases, with a second development phase taking place when the additional parcel is acquired by the City. At the end of the access road was a parking lot with space for 24 cars, as well as an additional small lot with four Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-accessible parking stalls off the large environmental education building (open air rustic shelter). Nearby would be a small comfort station and trail head, along with a picnic shelter, seating, and a natural play space. In addition to these features, a basketball court and tennis/pickleball court were part of this alternative, along with a native propagation nursery area and a small, enclosed dog park. The design also included two large open lawn spaces and a pervious trail network connecting all active recreation and amenities with more wild areas of the Park. These trails winded through the woods and wetlands to viewpoints and to the creek.At trail intersections, wide nodes accommodated benches for resting and interpretive signage. A switchback trail led up the hill to the nearby neighborhood to the south, and another led down the hill to provide creek access to the north. These trails would be as accessible as possible and may include stairs but would not likely be ADA-accessible. Anna also discussed the opportunity for stormwater treatment from the parking lot in the form of raingardens and the need for ongoing invasive species removal and stewardship throughout the Park. A crosswalk south of the Park at NE 24th Street and Duvall Avenue was also recommended to allow for safer neighborhood access to the trailheads. Alternative 2 Alternative 2 had a focus on restoration, habitat enhancement, and protection. This design included fewer traditional park elements, a smaller footprint for active recreation, and more square footage of protection, restoration, and enhancement activities. The same access driveway was used and improved upon, with a parking lot at the end for 18 cars. A small comfort station and trailhead kiosk were included along with a large natural play area and open lawn. A picnic shelter was included, as well as a small amphitheater/stage on the future parcel. The trail corridors for this alternative were more simplistic, allowing for more areas to remain protected. Pervious trails looped from the active recreation area through wilder parts of the Park, providing views of May Creek and wetlands while minimizing disturbances to creek and wetland buffers. Access to future trail connections on the east were discussed, as well as areas for interpretive signage along the trails, public art, and opportunities Meeting Notes March 12,2024 Page 4 for placemaking. This alternative also included a crosswalk south of the Park at NE 24th Street and Duvall Avenue to increase foot traffic to the Park as well as safety. Comparison Matrix Anna reminded the group of the list of 15 criteria items and presented a matrix, which ranked each criteria item (low, medium, high) for each alternative side by side to use as a comparison. The end goal would be to develop a final design where every criterion was met. Alternative 1 scored higher for trail development, connections to existing trails, neighborhood access, Park development, Park facilities, lighting, open space, environmental education and stewardship, parking, and access. Alternative 2 scored higher for maximizing restoration and habitat enhancement, maximizing forest and habitat preservation, public art and placemaking, avoidance of impact to neighbors, cost efficiency, and permit feasibility. Next Steps Anna reminded the group of where we were on the process, with site inventory and analysis and opportunities and constraints completed and community outreach ongoing. The next step of the process will be crafting a preferred alternative to present in April and then moving on to the final master plan in the summer. Group Discussion Following the presentation, there was an open group discussion. The following summarizes key topics discussed: • A question was asked on how the value was determined, and Anna responded that a holistic approach was used, based off of the perceived value of each element by the community, rather than a quantified approach. Anna added that a rough order of magnitude costs would be developed later in the process. • The discussion moved on to how to balance pleasing the greatest number of community members while balancing the cost of maintenance, system gaps, utilities, and stormwater. Jason pointed out that the uncertainty of whether water would be able to be brought to the site limited being able to offer restrooms and drinking fountains. Portable toilets might be the best option. Anna pointed out that these could include an enclosure to make them more appealing. • Jason questioned whether we should utilize existing trails and potentially historic access roads for future trail systems. • The group discussed taking another trip to the site to walk along existing paths and slopes to determine the most appropriate trail alignment and location for some of the Park features. • Another attendee brought up a concern with lighting, stating that we should be very careful about how we approach lighting to prevent light pollution. Meeting Notes March 12,2024 Page 5 • The interpretive shelter was the next item of discussion. The group talked about what this might look like, how large it might be, and if it would have walls or just a roof. Options for precedents were discussed, such as the shelters at Seward Park and Lincoln Park in Seattle. • This was followed by questions about the amphitheater and if it was an item that the City and community members valued and would use. It was agreed that it would be unlikely that this would be a suitable location for large events like weddings, but a smaller informal stage might be useful for smaller informal gatherings or educational opportunities. • The attendees were in favor of keeping the sports courts in the design for the moment to attract a variety of visitors, and one attendee mentioned that if there was limited space, pickleball might be the best option since it required less room. It was pointed out by another attendee that a combination court that allowed for pickleball and tennis might be a good option. • Another group member threw out the idea of having an environmental science center on the site. The stewardship garden was discussed as well, including questions on what type of garden this would be (a P-patch, demonstration garden, foraging garden, cultural garden, medicinal garden, or something else). Anna clarified that the intent was for it to be demonstration or native plant propagation garden, with opportunities for signage or education. In the future, it may also be possible to use these native species elsewhere in the Park for restoration work. • One attendee expressed surprise that Alternative 2, which focused on a more natural approach and restoration efforts, did not have a more expansive trail network, and they would appreciate the more natural approach but with more trail opportunities. • A comment was made on the crosswalk and how it would probably need to be a signalized crosswalk with potentially a median refuge, but this could be discussed at a later date. • Lastly, Jason pointed out that we needed to remember how this future Park was part of a trail network and consider how it would fit into the rest of the system but also how it could be used to provide Park elements that were not easily found elsewhere in Renton. It was decided on that the group should take a while to consider the designs and provide additional feedback or questions at their leisure. Next Steps and Closing The meeting ended with an overview of the next steps, including the plan for completing and presenting the preferred alternative in April. IsZANCHOR QEA Meeting Notes Stakeholder Meeting #3, Community Outreach Series 3 Northeast Renton Park Master Planning Project 1:00 to 2:00 p.m., May 21, 2024, Renton City Hall Attendees Name Organization Title Jason Lederer Renton Parks and Recreation Parks Planning Manager Rhemy King Renton Parks and Recreation Neighborhood Programs Coordinator Ian Gray Renton Parks and Recreation Urban Forestry and Natural Resources Manager Cailin Hunsaker Renton Parks and Recreation Parks and Trails Director Betsy Severtsen Renton Parks and Recreation Acting Capital Project Manager Steve Brown Renton Parks and Recreation Parks Maintenance Manager Alex Morganroth Community and Economic Development Senior Planner Anna Spooner Anchor QEA Project Manager Rachel Andersen Anchor QEA Landscape Architect Meeting Notes Representatives from the City of Renton (City) and Anchor QEA gathered on Tuesday, May 21, 2024, for the third of a series of stakeholder meetings for the Northeast Renton Park (Park) Master Planning Project (Project).Jason Lederer and Rhemy King provided an overview on the community outreach results, and Anna Spooner provided a PowerPoint presentation to go over the preliminary Draft Preferred Concept design and its features. The meeting participants then had an open forum to discuss the design and ask questions. The following provides a summary of the meeting discussion. Community Outreach The meeting started with Anna Spooner presenting an overview of community outreach efforts, along with a timeline of public events and traffic surges to the Project website. She also presented a series of succinct visuals of the results of all public outreach up to date, showing that the public was most interested in new Park facilities, followed by biking and walking trails and access to wetlands, trees, and forests. Environmental education, art and culture, and sports courts received less interest, and people were generally neutral when it came to an off-leash dog park. She followed with a brief overview of the previous two alternatives. Meeting Notes May 21,2024 Page 2 Preliminary Design Program Anna presented the following list of design program features and relevant details: • Trails - Loops through diverse habitats - Boardwalks and viewing areas - Access to May Creek corridor - Connections outside of Park - Trailhead kiosk • Open lawn space • Play area with the following: - Climbing structure - Swings - Shelter • Large shelter for environmental education and outdoor classroom • Ecological restoration areas • Rain gardens • Public art • Stewardship/cultural gardens • Environmental educational and wayfinding signage • Sport courts - Pickleball - Tennis - Basketball • Park infrastructure - Access road and parking - Fire turnaround - Portable toilet enclosure - Lighting • Park maintenance facility/storage Meeting Notes May 21,2024 Page 3 Preliminary Draft Preferred Concept Anna continued on to present the preliminary Draft Preferred Concept. This concept was a combination of the previous two design alternatives, edited to reflect the needs and wants of the community. It combined a large network of paths through forests and wetlands and along view corridors, while being careful to minimize disturbances to buffers as much as possible. Future trail connections were highlighted to the east and west and adjacent to neighborhoods. Areas for restoration and habitat enhancement were called out along May Creek throughout wetlands and buffers and throughout forested and riparian areas. A large central area contained all active recreation, including a large nature play area, stewardship and cultural gardens, a covered outdoor classroom, portable toilets, a picnic shelter, and parking for 20 vehicles. The private parcel contained potential Phase 2 amenities, including an off-leash dog park, a City maintenance shed, and sports courts. This option also included minimal lighting, public art, wayfinding, trailhead kiosks and signage, and swales/raingardens around the parking lot. Three section graphics followed, depicting a more detailed view of the active recreation area, a section of wetlands and buffers, and the forested slope and floodplain leading down to May Creek. These graphics included indications of where paths, boardwalks, viewing decks, and other amenities would be located within the landscape. Anna presented a series of precedent imagery to give a feel for the scale and materials of structures and amenities that may be found in the design. The precedent photographs covered subjects such as amenities, play areas, low-impact development features, trails and boardwalks, habitat restoration, signage, and public art. Group Discussion Following the presentation, there was an open group discussion. The following summarizes key topics discussed: • Betsy Severtsen asked for clarity on Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access.Anna described the different types of trail surfaces and routes.The paved trails within the active recreation would be ADA accessible along with the gravel loop trails and boardwalks throughout the wooded and riparian areas. However, the trail leading south to the adjacent neighborhood and north to the May Creek neighborhood would likely not be ADA accessible and would include stretches of stairs. However, efforts could be made to make these paths as user friendly and walkable as possible. • A question was asked about trail access to the east and if it was possible to create a future connection to other nearby trails and possibly up to Cougar Mountain.Jason Lederer elaborated on the fact that the City has an access easement to the east,which allows for a future trail connection. Meeting Notes May 21,2024 Page 4 • Derek expressed his excitement at seeing the option of a zipline in the play area, knowing that this is a popular feature in other parks. However, when it came to the cultural gardens and dog park, he had a question of where these would be most appropriate. He mentioned that the privately-owned parcel is already flat and disturbed, making it the perfect location for these amenities, but it may be many years before the City could purchase and develop these spaces. If an amenity like a dog park is in high demand, it might be wiser to plan it for a parcel that the City already owns. • The discussion of signage came up, with Derek suggesting signage similar to Newcastle's but with Renton's color palette. In addition, small signs with distances and trail names such as "wetland loop" at trail nodes were something that might be useful. An attendee asked about the trailheads and if the signage at the south neighborhood trailhead would be large and attention-getting or subtle because they did not want traffic stopping along Duvall Avenue NE and parking on the side of the road to access this trail.Anna clarified that only one entrance and trailhead would have larger signage,with all other trailheads and trails having more subtle signage. Next Steps and Closing The meeting ended with an overview of the next steps, including the plan for further community outreach and completing the preferred alternative concept design and master plan development in June and July, followed by Community Services Committee, Parks Commission, and City Council engagement, and grant funding and implementation in the future. APPENDIX E OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS Northeast Renton Park Master Plan July 2024 Opinion of Probable Construction Cost(OPCC) - Concept Design Item Qty. Unit Unit Cost Subtotal 1.Site Demolition and Clearing a. Clear and grub site vegetation 9,000 SF $ 0.30 $ 2,700 b. Estimated tree removal 52 EA $ 770.00 $ 40,040 c. Remove asphalt paving 15,000 SF $ 1.40 $ 21,000 d. Miscellaneous demolition and debris removal 1 LS $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000 Subtotal Demolition&Clearing $ 68,740 2.Temporary Facilities Temporary construction fencing(chainlink)for site a, security,tree protection,and native plant protection 3,500 LF $ 15.00 $ 52,500 b. Temporary access and staging 1 LS $ 11,550.00 $ 11,550 c. Temporary erosion and sediment control 1 LS $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000 Subtotal Temporary Facilities $ 134,050 3.Earthwork Excavate to subgrade and stockpile for trails and park a. development area 6,200 CY $ 13.00 $ 80,600 b. Place and compact on-site stockpiled fill 6,200 CY $ 16.00 $ 99,200 c. Haul excess and unsuitable excavated fill material 725 CY $ 43.00 $ 31,157 Place import topsoil (6"average depth,all new d. planting bed areas) 725 CY $ 55.00 $ 39,853 e. Finish grading (3-inch depth) 168,000 SF $ 0.10 $ 16,800 Subtotal Earthwork $ 267,610 z 4.Utility Improvements a. Stormwater(incl LID elements, rain gardens) 1 LS $ 200,000.00 $ 200,000 LU b. Electrical 1 LS $ 42,400.00 $ 42,400 o c. Site Lighting(25' light poles with concrete bases) 8 EA $ 9,750.00 $ 78,000 d. Communications including emergency beacons 2 EA $ 11,760.00 $ 23,520 Subtotal Utility Improvements $ 343,920 5.Asphalt Paving and Pavement Markings a. Install asphalt paving (2"on crushed aggregate base) 23,340 SF $ 5.00 $ 116,700 b. Install crushed gravel shoulder(6"depth) 60 CY $ 163.00 $ 9,780 c. Thickened asphalt edge 450 LF $ 16.00 $ 7,200 d. Install parking stall striping 32 EA $ 28.00 $ 896 e. Install cross hatching (firetruck turnaround) 2,500 SF $ 3.40 $ 8,500 f. Install concrete wheel stops in parking area 20 EA $ 256.00 $ 5,120 Subtotal Asphalt Paving and Pavement Markings $ 148,196 6.Trails, Bridges,and Viewing Areas Install 5'wide boardwalk composite decking, bullrail, substructure,and pre-cast concrete pier blocks and a. attachment hardware 1 LS $ 125,760.00 $ 125,760 b. Install 5'wide concrete paving for pathways 764 SY $ 210.00 $ 160,347 c. Install 5'wide crushed gravel for pathways(6"depth) 510 CY $ 163.00 $ 83,130 Install trail steps(pressure-treated 6- x 6-foot posts d. secured with rebar stakes) 66 EA $ 1,400.00 $ 92,400 Install 5x12'footbridge with composite decking, framing,foundations,supports,guardrail,and e. concrete abutment 1 LS $ 59,040.00 $ 59,040 Subtotal Trails, Bridges,and Viewing Areas $ 520,677 Northeast Renton Park Master Plan July 2024 7.Site Furnishings and Signage a. Furnish and install benches 12 EA $ 3,418.00 $ 41,016 b. Furnish and install grill 4 EA $ 1,800.00 $ 7,200 c. Furnish and install picnic tables 6 EA $ 8,159.00 $ 48,954 d. Furnish and install trash receptacles 4 EA $ 2,800.00 $ 11,200 e. Furnish and install bike racks 4 EA $ 6,300.00 $ 25,200 f. 24'x 34'custom wooden picnic shelter 1 EA $ 170,000.00 $ 170,000 g. Park entry signage 1 EA $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000 h. Trail wayfinding portal post 8 EA $ 2,820.00 $ 22,560 i. Primary trailhead kiosk 1 EA $ 21,000.00 $ 21,000 j. Interpretive signs and supports 5 EA $ 5,000.00 $ 25,000 k. Split rail fencing 461 LF $ 37.00 $ 17,057 Subtotal Site Furnishings $ 401,187 8.Play Area Surfacing and Equipment a. Furnish Robinia"Jungle Dome" large climber 1 EA $ 70,430.00 $ 70,430 b. Furnish Robinia"Crawling Pyramid"small climber 1 EA $ 5,610.00 $ 5,610 W c. Furnish "Spinner Plate" spinner seats 3 EA $ 1,380.00 $ 4,140 od. Furnish Robinia Up and Over Net 1 EA $ 3,240.00 $ 3,240 e. Furnish Carousel with seats 1 EA $ 10,730.00 $ 10,730 W f. Furnish Robinia Entry Seesaw for 4 persons 1 EA $ 4,080.00 $ 4,080 0 �.e g. Furnish Robinia Zip Line for Flat surroundings,82' 1 EA $ 15,090.00 $ 15,090 a h. Install play area equipment 1 LS $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000 i. Furnish and install sand pit (24"depth) 57 CY $ 114.00 $ 6,443 j. Furnish and install engineered wood fiber(12"depth) 7,136 SF $ 3.05 $ 21,765 I. Furnish and install play area underdrain pipe 1 LS $ 17,510.00 $ 17,510 m. Install concrete curb 180 LF $ 60.80 $ 10,944 Subtotal Play Area Surfacing and Equipment $ 229,982 9. Planting a. Import and place topsoil (average 12"depth) 2,000 CY $ 55.00 $ 110,000 b. Park plantings 15,000 SF $ 3.00 $ 45,000 c. Lawn hydroseed 40,000 SF $ 0.65 $ 26,000 d. Mulch(Y depth) 509 CY $ 55.00 $ 28,009 Subtotal Planting $ 209,009 10. Irrigation a. Irrigation 55,000 SF $ 3.00 $ 165,000 Subtotal Irrigation $ 165,000 Park Development Subtotal $ 2,488,371 Northeast Renton Park Master Plan July 2024 11. In-stream and Riparian Habitat Enhancement a. Remove invasives 17,208 SF $ 2.45 $ 42,158 Large woody debris- place salvaged on-site logs with b. rootwads 15 EA $ 436.00 $ 6,540 c. Soil preparation (6" amendment) 319 CY $ 58.00 $ 18,482 d. Planting -trees(5 gallon) 70 EA $ 142.00 $ 9,940 e. Planting -shrub(1 gallon) 400 EA $ 48.00 $ 19,200 f. Install mulch (Y depth) 159 CY $ 55.00 $ 8,763 Subtotal In-stream and Riparian Habitat Enhancement $ 105,084 12.Wetland and Wetland Buffer Enhancement a. Remove invasives 128,510 SF $ 0.26 $ 33,734 LUb. Soil preparation (6" amendment) 2,380 EA $ 58.00 $ 138,029 LU c. Jute fabric in planting areas with 4:1 or steeper slope 860 SF $ 5.25 $ 4,515 Q d. Planting -trees(5 gallon) 260 EA $ 142.00 $ 36,920 z e. Planting -trees(2 gallon) 600 EA $ 78.00 $ 46,800 w Q f. Planting -shrub(1 gallon) 1,650 EA $ 48.00 $ 79,200 m g. Planting emergent plug 4,130 EA $ 7.35 $ 30,356 = h. Install mulch (Y depth) 1,190 CY $ 55.00 $ 65,445 Subtotal Wetland and Wetland Buffer Enhancement $ 434,999 13. Forest Enhancement a. Remove invasives 14,993 SF $ 0.26 $ 3,936 b. Soil preparation (6" amendment) 278 EA $ 58.00 $ 16,103 c. Jute fabric in planting areas with 4:1 or steeper slope 6,000 SF $ 5.25 $ 31,500 d. Planting -trees(5 gallon) 70 EA $ 142.00 $ 9,940 e. Planting -shrub(1 gallon) 350 EA $ 48.00 $ 16,800 f. Install mulch (Y depth) 139 CY $ 55.00 $ 7,635 Subtotal Forest Enhancement $ 85,914 Habitat Enhancement Subtotal $ 625,996 Northeast Renton Park Master Plan July 2024 14. Potential Custom Toilet Enclosure a. 8' x 14' custom toilet enclosure 1 EA $ 145,870.00 $ 145,870 Potential Sewer Connection and Restroom Subtotal $ 145,870 15. Potential Sewer Connection and Restroom Clear and grub vegetation at proposed sewer a. conveyance(assumes 10-ft wide corridor) 6700 SF $ 0.30 $ 2,010 Estimated tree removal within proposed sewer b. conveyance(assumes 10-ft wide corridor) 17 EA $ 770.00 $ 13,090 c. Grinder pump station 1 EA $ 16,000.00 $ 16,000 d. Force main (to existing sewer) 820 LF $ 30.00 $ 24,600 e. Directional drilling 820 LF $ 20.00 $ 16,400 f. Connection to existing system 1 LS $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000 d. Install Portland Loo 1 LS $ 500,000.00 $ 500,000 Potential Sewer Connection and Restroom Subtotal $ 575,100 16. Potential Park Expansion Area a. Clear and grub site vegetation 68,000 SF $ 0.30 $ 20,400 b. Estimated tree removal 10 EA $ 770.00 $ 7,700 c. Remove asphalt paving 910 SF $ 1.40 $ 1,274 5'wide crushed gravel trail within park expansion d. parcel only 62 CY $ 163.00 $ 10,106 e. Dog park area fencing (5'tall chain link) 492 LF $ 53.00 $ 26,076 f. Pea gravel at dog park area (6"depth) 260 CY $ 74.00 $ 19,240 g. Sport courts(2 tennis courts/4 pickleball courts) 1 LS $ 96,000.00 $ 96,000 h. Sport courts fencing (5'tall chainlink) 600 LF $ 53.00 $ 31,800 i. Hydroseed mix for lawn 40000 SF $ 1.05 $ 42,000 j. Park plantings 15280 SF $ 2.00 $ 30,560 k. Irrigation 15280 SF $ 3.00 $ 45,840 Future Potential Park Expansion Area Subtotal $ 330,996 Northeast Renton Park Master Plan July 2024 Subtotal Park Development and Habitat Enhancement $ 3,114,367 Mobilization (10%) $ 311,437 Subtotal Construction + Mobilization $ 3,425,804 Design Contingency(25%) $ 856,451 Subtotal Const. + Mob. + Design Cont. $ 4,282,255 Construction Contingency(10%) $ 428,225 Subtotal Const. + Mob. + Design Cont. +Const.Cont. $ 4,710,480 Sales Tax(10.3%) $ 485,179 TOTAL OPCC FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT AND HABITAT ENHANCEMENT(2024 Dollars)* $ 5,195,660 Subtotal Toilet Enclosure $ 145,870 Mobilization (10%) $ 14,587 Subtotal Construction + Mobilization $ 160,457 Design Contingency(25%) $ 40,114 Subtotal Const. + Mob. + Design Cont. $ 200,571 Construction Contingency(10%) $ 20,057 Subtotal Const. + Mob. + Design Cont. +Const.Cont. $ 220,628 Sales Tax(10.3%) $ 22,725 TOTAL OPCC FOR TOILET ENCLOSURE OPTION (2024 Dollars)* $ 243,353 Subtotal Sewer Connection and Portland Loo $ 575,100 Mobilization (10%) $ 57,510 Subtotal Construction + Mobilization $ 632,610 Design Contingency(25%) $ 158,153 Subtotal Const. + Mob. + Design Cont. $ 790,763 Construction Contingency(10%) $ 79,076 Subtotal Const. + Mob. + Design Cont. +Const.Cont. $ 869,839 Sales Tax(10.3%) $ 89,593 TOTAL OPCC FOR SEWER CONNECTION AND RESTROOM OPTION (2024 Dollars)* $ 959,432 Sutotal Future Potential Park Expansion Area $ 330,996 Mobilization (10%) $ 33,100 Subtotal Construction + Mobilization $ 364,096 Design Contingency(25%) $ 91,024 Subtotal Const. + Mob. + Design Cont. $ 455,120 Construction Contingency(10%) $ 45,512 Subtotal Const. + Mob. + Design Cont. +Const.Cont. $ 500,631 Sales Tax(10.3%) $ 51,565 TOTAL OPCC FOR FUTURE POTENTIAL PARK EXPANSION AREA(2024 Dollars)* $ 552,196 Northeast Renton Park Master Plan July 2024 NOTES: 1)All costs are in 2024 dollars. 2) In providing opinions of probable construction cost,the Client(City of Renton)understands that the Consultant(Anchor QEA L.L.C.) has no control over the cost or availability of labor,equipment or materials,or over market condition or the Contractor's method of pricing,and the consultant's opinions of probable construction costs are made on the basis of the Consultant's professional judgment and experience. The Consultant makes no warranty,expressed or implied,that the bids or the negotiated cost of the Work will not vary from the Consultant's opinion of probable construction cost. 3) Not Included(Construction Related): Design/Engineering Fees, Project Management,Survey, Planning&Design Review, Bidding, Construction Phase Project Management&Administration,Construction Inspection, Environmental Permitting, Property Purchase, Water Connection Utilities,and Permit Related Monitoring. 4) Not Included(Construction Items): Environmental Cleanup, Portable Restroom Units, Public Art,Signage, Demolition of Existing House and Accessory Buildings,and Demolition of the Foundations Associated with Site Buildings.