Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA90-033 Vol 1 CITY OF RENTON ,.,5//' �`,�.,Z.;=�� o i � � t''''v�.�.rfiJjHS'�W�� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT { n �, AUG 2 '91 i t u z 9 ,,,, G .200 Mill Avenue South -Renton Wash ngton 98055 i 1 '! A NASH. ' F7. 162 * : . • PLANNING DIM/ON C17Y OF� N70n� AUG 131997 042800 016 -05 RE ; �4r ' .Combs. Norma J.:; : ,..,-. . • - MIcRoLME , 7. �'� 318V2f3A1130. 4 Wd 1 t ; it 1 i it # f1 - ION �:Lj le :! �t ! e��t t� eeea ' CITY OF RENTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT R�NTO, � -,U.S.rFs 9e ^'� `/ 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 AUG 2 9f ;+ ;. y -• TO/1I ,"' ASN• PSD@152 m n a lam ari END !fit x,-EA ardairned SON ail IEp �-It (�7 ins dresses u R,,,,c$ '�v ` G �o h sill.irese-_® -js J`0 O/G Nome G . ----7 nn got h off-et f� °�'eber`� o Y u J ��/J`/`r/ �►gail in thistenNQ & O4'O4' 66591=,o060096 . G.� •- < `¢'27 Johnson` Virgil � %� %:, •2208. Aberdeen AvA . , ,„ MICROFILMED .-.Reritori, .Va -95055 . ( - ��om wave «.erw ti . r� I CITY OF RENTON vz:• 0,1,• \� ��'' "�"-r� \ r"� U.S.PBSTtiSEb'{q n r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AUG 2 91 ..� I "'� § Er 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 k iC e�� * t MASH• j j 1 � E162 * * A • DIVISIO -- PLANNING C TY OF RENTONN AUG — 7 1891 j 042800-0225-03 i?h s n ftc and W. Q2 Bav1i kve S. #2A106 . 4.,,,,,.;.ft.„, . MICROFILMED ,:;,..-..0,:—-4., i • , . 102;;.--.,-, :it Mif113:: ' 05 r/ - • • , .,.,..- - • • • , , • 3,:: ::,1 3:19Vii3A11-. :`.12 . 1 ••9 . --;.i.--Litifothil„„1,1„1,1.,-* -,,r.-, _,..=,.7, •'•-•.'-‘,--..Y; "'' NOTICE OF PROPOSED REZONE AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION RENTON, WASHINGTON . A Rezone and Preliminary Plat Application has been filed and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Honey Creek Ridge ECF;PP;R-033-90 DESCRIPTION: Applicant seeks a rezone on a 21 acre portion of Honey Creek Ridge and a preliminary plat to subdivide a 51 acre site Into 96 residential lots. GENERAL LOCATION: : Between SE 96th PI on the north, Honey Creek on the west, SE 104th St on the south and 126th Ave SE on the east. PUBLIC APPROVALS: Environment IeyieW, ,.p r4,-z Rezone Apprffe�lf°Z�9 L � sd?. ' Preliminary Plat Approval Building Permit The application can be reviewed in the Development Services Division located on the third floor of Renton City Hall. Comments will be accepted anytime prior to Public Hearings, during Public Hearings, or prior to an administrative site plan approval. For further Information on the application, or if you wish to be made a PARTY OF RECORD and receive additional notifications, by mail, of the City's environmental determinations, appeal periods and/or the public hearing date(s) for this project, 'please contact the Development Services Division at 235-2550. Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. I •:^ga:I• I -. _ ld -- i5E 1 DATUM • ' •,mwa --5D r .[ ' _J L-- c'r OF pfNrd. mil. , M, tt * .J 7 }_ 1 1 2j` 4r ry f��S� 1 ,ryn r aa0• CC ' 1 1 irmWilli;j; u 5 1 ,yr � a.H--- _ —L a, Er sN� I ii D 1 nP m ;,Ll R • ,'I _— 1©' Cro 11 i [_�Ir_[]L"ll�-j,w. i. D W•_Ex.Kt 9 d10 p • -� I -deK,.r j dP,l i��©lad'7� A , T3 ,....i. • pr+da 4o� • lls a�,d„d,,4k y !o �p o d-ut r, I_� � o u,v.... tosPEli' i "": Y . r`' all e , I C'p.9 _ e II v,EC,... i<n�4�U,r 'F ., 2 as , , I I _ UI N - - _ !, n o©®rP %�,.:�,` �r r7PCa[5 , \ '--- x,fdc � f U 6 u,ab nxn `CO ' 2 j _ yy��©© A . 6._ 5 I 1-- , .� r 1 , `_i Pp EI61 1 . dy xu i wMQ V■ 1 NL HEI ii--- • 7- o ,� / A •-/- 5 .w t, b f o.no.,d 01 1 .t 9 VA,— ar o:o— 0 1 W I \ i iJ Fit genmelot LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT, INC. P.O. Box 146 RENTON, WA 98057 'JOB NO. DATE S..- 9f L J I ATTENTION/4 , n bt' (206) 228-9750 RE: /(/ 4 c7i! p �//Arc. ere 07 7-0:TC:4 4.77 E C E I V E ;�V;. 0 APe a J,Gve/0 o,4e/ cv�vrcis ` WE ARE SENDING YOU �I w si`:)t i7Fr► i if 4 the following: ❑ Attached ❑ Under separate cover via ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change order ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ COPIES DATE NUMBER DESCRIPTION /2 — ,5.4c-77.3-- / ."AP/z o I- o rc 2cv/s- �rc%%yi"iz7s�y.? -74 JG i-- S ./�X2i4- G7L<`i*/•0,aX-ter � ii :f,' "2 9/_!9G'i G/— /2-e.vi f.rc. //c.=9� THESE TRANSMISSIONS ARE: ❑ For your approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit with copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution As per your request ❑ Corrections noted ❑ Return corrected prints IllFor your review and comment(s) ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE 19 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS: M!CROFILMEfl �&. . �sy COPY TO: SIGNATURE: `�!%� ‘// FORM 705-2 MCBEE- 1055 EAST STAT ENS. OHIO 45701 To Reorder Call Toll-F a 1- -526-1272 IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS DESCRIBED,PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY EVALUATION OF THE MAGNETIC FIELDS NEAR THE PROPOSED HONEY CREEK SUBDIVISION ADJACENT TO THE PUGET POWER TALBOT-LAKESIDE TRANSMISSION LINE • A Report to Lakeridge Development Inc. P.O. Box 146 Renton, WA 98057 Robert G. Olsen School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Washington State University Pullman, WA 99164-2752 (509) 335-4950 April 10, 1992 FILMED r Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 II. Interpretation of the EMF Level Requirement 1 The Existing Transmission Line (Two Dimensional Model) 1 IV. The Proposed Transmission Line (Two Dimensional Model) 6 V. Observations 6 VI. A Refined (Three Dimensional) Model of the 12 the Existing Transmission Line VII. The Effect of Modifying the Electrical Phasing of 15 the Existing Transmission Line • VIII. Recommended Mitigations 27 IX. References 28 • • 1 • 1 DISCLAIMER The magnetic field predictions in this report are based on information about the existing and anticipated transmission line configurations and currents supplied by the Puget Sound Power and Light Co. Characteristics of the currents used for the predictions were derived from historical data and anticipated demand for electric power. These data were supplemented with estimates of current balance derived from experience with similar transmission lines. Further, the best available tools for predicting the magnetic fields from the currents have been utilized. All approximations made have been justified either by analytical considerations or judgment based on experience or both. It should be recognized that the final results are dependent upon the characteristics of the current which have been provided and the r assumptions made about the current which have not or cannot be measured. a 11 , I. INTRODUCTION The City of Renton has been asked to approve a plat for the Honey Creek Ridge project submitted by Lakeridge Development, Inc. Passing through this proposed development is the Puget Sound Power and Light Talbot-Lakeside electric power transmission line shown on the map in Figure 1. One of the requirements stipulated by the City is that the "EMF level at the building line of each parcel adjacent to the high tension lines is less than 10 mG prior to the project returning to TAC for reconsideration" [1]. Since the building setbacks are planned to be 20 feet from the .edge of the right of way and the right of way is 100 feet wide, the 10 mG requirement must be met at a distance of 70 feet to either side of the right of way centerline. II. INTERPRETATION OF THE EMF LEVEL REQUIREMENT Before evaluating the EMF (i.e. magnetic flux density or more commonly "magnetic field") levels, it is important to give the 10 mG limit further interpretation. This is necessary because the magnetic field is dependent upon power line current and this current varies significantly both during the day and the year [2]. Given this, a clear definition of the conditions under which the EMF level is equal to 10 mG must be stated. In this report the EMF Fi levels reported are the 50% and 95% levels of the annual magnetic field probability distribution. The former is the median value of the magnetic field during the year while the latter is the value which is exceeded only 5% of the time during the year. In both cases, normal operating conditions are assumed. Emergency operating conditions to insure continuity of service during the temporary outage of some transmission lines, are excluded since these conditions occur only a few hours during the year. The method by which the 50% and 95% values are calculated is outlined in a companion report [2]. III. THE EXISTING TRANSMISSION LINE (TWO DIMENSIONAL MODEL) The power line which presently exists consists of a pair of 115 kilovolt circuits which carry approximately identical currents [3]. A cross-section of the power line geometry is shown in Figure 2. For the initial calculations the conductors are assumed to be horizontal (i.e. two dimensional) and located at a height of 30 feet which is the "minimum normal ground clearance". This is the distance from the conductor to the ground at the lowest point of the lowest span on the line, under normal operating conditions. It is important to note that this assumption leads to a higher magnetic field than what will generally be measured for two reasons. First, the height of each conductor varies due to normal sag from approximately 54 feet above ground at each tower to 30 feet above ground at a point midway between the towers for a typical span over flat earth. Second, under less than maximum current conditions, the minimum height of the conductor will be greater than 30 feet. This occurs because conductors carrying more current are heated more and hence sag further toward the ground. The influence of these factors will be considered again later. To evaluate the magnetic fields the computer programs MAGFLD and EXPOSE both developed at Washington State University were used. The magnetic field calculated by these programs has the following characteristics. 1 1 - \28 lJ` i Ei S.E. 99TH STREET < \ i ' 27 1 \ 28 ,� v' N 32 N is [PD8-. �, � - _ ' 8 � Q ,10TH COURT S.E. 100TH STREET cto .( 1 ss 5313% 111 / a >: Oa i2 S.E. IOIST COURTila10O o m \, 0 ir ,.•• II A 60 . S.E. 101ST Si 10 4414M°I '4 ..... „es i 40 4\5� CI IV' 9L Q 4') 1 SI MIMI 10 va e lip It ti% Arkfi WI 12 �•\ y. AO ly7ittlir N 1S. litp• •F 0 a Se 14 s 4 i 0111 20 7FOISIOlz- 21 a \ t l ZONE :A • La. Al%/11. 0 --r--?-.;rt oil \ ...4popp low, oi A 0-- A WI Nopqr .R- Ea imi 0-. sw4 . . . . . . . .. . . a .0 Q y 28la" aft ws o / S.E. 104TH STREET �0 rF / G3 A / ((4 GLORIA w2 cox%. .1 d GERI QJ 042303033 5 1 303115 NEB N I 5 IFI EfOsrm ST. l Fig. 1. The Honey Creek Ridge Development and the Puget Power Talbot-Lakeside Transmission Line 1 41 ;1 J • Existing 115 kV H-frame Lines 11.5 ft: i 11.5 ft. } 14 I 4 ft. i , X57 ft. typ R/W 1 1 R/W 50 ft. 25 ft: d, ' South Line North Line • Fig. 2. The Existing Transmission Line Geometry - Minimum Conductor Height = 30 feet I • I f �9 The field amplitude is given as its root mean square (i.e. RMS) value (a) The value of the magnetic field is given as the RMS value along the direction of maximum magnetic field (b) In order to use the programs, it is necessary to know some characteristics of the currents on the power line. The following information has been assumed and is based on information provided by Puget Sound Power and Light. The annual maximum value of current on each conductor is 507 amperes RMS. This was the maximum current for the year 1990 [3]. The phasing of the currents from left to right in Figure 2 is ABC-ABC. The "phase" of the current refers to the time lag of the current on one of the three wires with respect to some reference phase. This concept is discussed in detail in [2]. The ratio of the annual maximum of the daily maximum (i.e. the annual maximum current) to the annual minimum of the daily maximum current was assumed to be 2. (c) The daily load curve for the Talbot-Lakeside line is that shown in Figure II 3. The piecewise straight line shown in the figure was used to approximate the daily load curve for use in predicting the probability distribution of the magnetic fields. (d) The currents were assumed to be balanced to within +l- 2% in amplitude and +/- 2 degrees in phase (e). The balanced condition refers to the condition that the currents in the three wires add identically to zero. This is defined more fully in the companion report [2]. Further, the power line is assumed to be in a "grounded wye" configuration so that unba 1 anced return current may flow in the earth. • (a) This measure of the field is universally accepted and is incorporated into all high quality instruments used to measure magnetic fields. (b) This is the measure specified by ANSI/IEEE Standard 644-1987 and represents the output of a single axis meter oriented in the direction of the maximum magnetic field [4]. Most commonly used three axis meters measure the "resultant" field which can be slightly different from the "maximum" field [4]. (c) Annual data from the Talbot-Lakeside transmission line provided by Puget Power. (d) Data from December 5, 1991, from the Talbot-Lakeside transmission line provided by Puget Power. (e) These values come from measurements of unbalance on the Puget Power Talbot-O'Brien line during the first part of 1991. The measurements were taken during a research project conducted jointly by Puget Power, the Bonneville Power Administration and Washington State University [5]. They are assumed to be representative of the Talbot-Lakeside line since no measurements of balance are available for that line. 4 t!.• 1. • I I I POWER FLOW - TALBOT-LAKESIDE LINE - DECEMBER 5, 1991 POWER FLOW (MEGAWATTS) 80 t • . . • / ACTUAL 60 - APPROXIMATE • . 40 7 . • . . • - • - 20 1— • — • . • • . . •0 t at a IR e • •ill , • ale I i tilt I I -I • 0 5 . • . 10 15 _ 20 25 - TIME - HOURS , • • • . . . Fig. 3. Power Flow on Each of the Two Talbot-Lakeside Transmission Lines - December 5, 1991 • • - . • . • - • • _ . • The results of a study of the magnetic fields from the existing line are shown in Figures 4 and 5. Figure 4 shows the magnetic field at 3.28 feet above the ground (waist level). Both 95% and 50% levels of the field are given. It is clear that the existing magnetic fields exceed the 10 mG limit regardless of which measure of the field is used. Figure 5 shows the magnetic fields at a height of 15 feet above ground to simulate the magnetic fields at second story level. These are expected to be somewhat larger than the waist height fields because the fields are measured at a point which is closer to the transmission line. Note, however, that the difference between _ Figures 4 and 5 becomes smaller as the horizontal distance form the line becomes larger. IV. THE PROPOSED TRANSMISSION LINE (TWO DIMENSIONAL MODEL) Puget Power has proposed replacing the pair of 115 kilovolt transmission lines with a double circuit 230 kilovolt transmission line on a single tower. The cross section geometry for this line is shown in Figure 6. Note that the phasing of the currents is ABC from top to bottom on the left and CBA from top to bottom on the right. In this configuration the transmission line is a "low reactance" •transmission line and is well known to have magnetic fields smaller than other double circuit lines which are phased differently. The annual maximum currents for this line were obtained from Puget Power plan for the year 2000 and are 693 amperes on each conductor. Despite the fact that these appear to represent only a modest increase from the 1990 currents assumed from the present line, the power flow on this line is significantly larger because of the rise in voltage. .The remainder of the parameters used to define the current on the line during the year are given in section III above on the existing line. As in section III, this line is assumed to be two dimensional and to be at the "minimum normal ground clearance" height. • The results of magnetic field calculations for this line are shown in Figures 7 and 8. Again, both 95% and 50% measures of the field are given. In Figure 7, the results are given for 3.28 feet above the ground. Clearly, the 10 mG limit is satisfied at the building setback even if the 95% level of the field is assumed. In Figure 8, the magnetic field at a height of 15 feet is given. Even though the field is slightly above the 10 mG level, for the 95% level, the conservative assumption on the height of the wires above ground will likely allow the actual magnetic field to satisfy the 10 mG criterion. V. OBSERVATIONS • 1. With the existing 115 kV line,the 10 mG standard at a 20 foot setback is not satisfied. This is true when using either the 50% or 95% level of the magnetic field probability distribution as the means to interpret the standard. If the 50% level is used, an additional 25 foot setback to a total setback of 45 feet would be required while 45 feet of additional setback would be needed if the 95% level is used. This conclusion will be modified later after a better three dimensional model of the line is considered in the next section. • • 1 1 ! -:1 t I Lam- `7 1 • • EXISTING LINE - 3 .28 FEET ABOVE GROUND MAGNETIC FIELD (MG) 80 i , ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ RIGHT OF WAY - X X 95% LEVEL - 1 150% LEVEL = SETBACK LINE SETBACK LINE - 20 10 MG -200 -100 . 0 100 200 DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET) {; Fig. 4. Magnetic Fields From the Existing Line - 3.28 Feet Above Ground EXISTING LINE - 15 FEET ABOVE GROUND MAGNETIC FIELD (MG) • 200 . „ RIGHT OF WAY X 95% LEVEL 50% LEVEL • 150 - • • SETBACK LINE SETBACK LINE • _ . • • • .1\) • 50 - - • - - • • •• 10 MG 46. •g‘p 16 • . 0 -200 - • -100 0 100 . , 200. DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET) . . . •". Fig. 5. Magnetic Fields From the Existing Line - 15 Feet Above Ground • • • • • • Double Circuit 230 kV Structure 22 ft. t j . 11121 ‘1 .417 16 ft. 16 ft. 8 ft. �I 90 ft. typ A M/w R/w 50 ft. Fig. 6. The Proposed Transmission Line Geometry - Minimum Conductor Height = 40 feet 4 • • PROPOSED LINE - YEAR 2000 CURRENTS - 3.28 FEET ABOVE GROUND - MAGNETIC FIELD (MG) • 80 n fii • RIGHT OF WAY • )( X 95% LEVEL -I---1- 50% LEVEL • SETBACK LINE SETBACK LINE • • 10 MG - 0 Is I a I lir -200 -100 0 100 200 _ DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET) 4: Fig. 7. Magnetic Fields From the Proposed Line - 3.28 Feet Above Ground • -- - . .... �. ---._., c:.—'--- `- - ._.:i ,..,....,..:.A ... __/ i' .+-:..LI ->) L-.-J L-.._'.:J i'. - .1 ,._-___J t-__—j L-__ .} ...-�. J . PROPOSED LINE - YEAR 2000 CURRENTS - 15 FEET ABOVE GROUND MAGNETIC FIELD (MG) 200 . . . , , , . • - RIGHT 6F WAY - *--X 95% LEVEL =}— -- -- -}- 50$ LEVEL 150 -- __._ . - _ SETBACK LINE SETBACK LINE - • . 1 . ?? 4 ' . . I )(jz-1T2C . . . . 50 ‘ - ; . ; IN - - . 10 MG ,� - I ilrili • �►..T.____..-._ z • -200 -100 0 100 . 200 • ' DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET) . w. Fig. 8. Magnetic Fields From the Proposed Line - 15 Feet Above Ground l2. With the proposed 230 kV line, the 10 mG standard at a 20 foot setback is satisfied. This is true when using either the 50% or 95% level of the magnetic field to interpret the standard. It is true despite the anticipated increase in maximum power flow from 200 megawatts in 1990 to 550 megawatts in 2000. The magnetic field reduction occurs because the voltage has been raised (with a corresponding decrease in current for constant power flow), because the lines have been moved closer. to the center of the right of way and raised higher above ground and because .the phasing scheme chosen for the proposed line causes additional magnetic field cancellation. VI. A REFINED (THREE DIMENSIONAL) MODEL OF THE EXISTING TRANSMISSION LINE It is clear that the magnetic field of the existing line exceeds the 10 mG requirement at the proposed building setback line (i.e. 20 feet from the right-of-way boundary) no matter what method is used to interpret the standard. Both the 50% and 95% probability levels exceed 10 mG at heights of either 3.28 feet or 15 feet. Given this result; it is reasonable to revisit the problem to determine �I if there is any reason why the model might be predicting a magnetic field greater than would actually exist. One possible reason is the assumption that the earth and the transmission lines are perfectly flat and that the transmission lines are located at a height equal to "minimum normal ground clearance." Clearly, a more accurate model would account for the sag in the line, normal line height and the nonuniformity of the ground level. Such a more realistic model is described later in this section. Once specified, the magnetic field from this new three dimensional model is calculated using a computer program (3DFLD) recently developed by the Southern California Edison Co. While the program does allow calculation of fields for three dimensional geometries, it does not allow a direct calculation of the magnetic field probability distribution as does the program EXPOSE which was described earlier and used to develop the magnetic fields reported in Figures 4, 5, 7, and 8. Instead, 3DFLD only allows calculation of _ the magnetic field due to specified currents. -• In light of this limitation, the result of the three dimensional field calculations are used in the following way. First, the magnetic field due to specified balanced currents for the full three dimensional geometry is calculated using 3DFLD. Then, again using 3DFLD, the magnetic field of the same currents is calculated but in a two dimensional geometry identical to that used earlier to obtain the results of Figures 4, 5, 7, and 8. The ratio of these two magnetic fields is then calculated at various locations on the proposed lots and is interpreted as the factor needed to convert the two dimensional magnetic fields of Figures 4, 5, 7, and 8 to the magnetic fields using a more accurate three dimensional geometry. The results of this study are given later in Table I. The three dimensional geometry of the problem is specified as follows. A top view of the geometry is shown in Figure 9. In this figure, the two (i.e. north and south) transmission lines are shown along with the location of the 12 J 1" 1 - , two tower groups near the proposed development and the locations of each proposed lot. The heights of the north and south transmission lines as a function of the distance along the path between the two towers are shown in Figures 10 and 11 respectively. The data used here are taken from a February 1992 survey provided by the Lakeridge Development Co. Beyond each tower, it is assumed that the conductor heights are constant and equal to the conductor height at the closest tower. It is further assumed that while the height of each of the three conductors for each transmission line is identical, the two lines are not at the same height as shown in Figure 10 and 11. Finally, the balanced currents are assumed to have magnitudes of 507 amperes and are phased ABC - ABC from south to north. Also plotted in Figure 9 is a set of paths, labeled 7-15, which connect the transmission line corridor with each lot which is adjacent to the right-of-way. In Figures 12-16, the ground profile along each path is plotted. In the three dimensional model the magnetic field along each of these profile paths is calculated. These results are then compared to those obtained along the same paths (i.e. perpendicular to the transmission line corridor and toward each lot) but assuming the earth and transmission line to be perfectly flat. The ratio of these two magnetic fields is tabulated in Table I. The ratios given in Table I can now be used to multiply the magnetic fields in Figure 4 to obtain a more precise estimate of the magnetic field from the existing line. The new magnetic field predictions at distances of 20, 30, and 40 feet from the right-of-way into each adjacent lot are given in Table II. For this calculation, the 50% level of the probability distribution (i.e. the annual median magnetic field) at 3.28 feet above the ground was used. It is clear that the magnetic field now is reduced to the 10 mG. level closer to the right-of-way than shown in Figure 4. 7 a 31 • , ' Profile & Lot # Distance from Edge Ratio of 3-d to 2-d Magnetic of Right-o f-Way Fields at Two He i ghts (feet 3.28 feet 15 feet 7 (lot 36) 20 .74 . 76 7 30 .79 . 83 7 40 . 83 . 87' 8 (lot 35) 20 .75 . 78 8 30 .79 . 83 8 40 . 82 . 86 9 (lot 34) 20 .64 . 66 9 30 .70 . 74 9 • 40 • .76 . 80 1 10 (lot 38) 20 .61 . 63 10 30 .68 . 70 _ 10 40 .73 . 76 11 (lot 21) 20 .61 . 63 11 30 .68 . 72 ! 11 40 .74 . 78 12 (lot 32) 20 .68 . 70 12 30 .74 . 78 1. 12 40 .79 . 83 1 13 (lot 22) 20 .59 . 61 13 30 .69 . 70 13 40 .72 . 76 13 (lot 31) 20 .67 . 69 13 30 .73 . 78 '' 13 40 .78 . 82 J 14 (lot 28) 20 .65 . 67 1 T 14 30 .71 . 75 1 _ 14 40 .77 . 81 15 (lot 27) 20 - . .75 . 75 i 15 30 .78 . 80 . 15 40 . 82 . 88 • 1 Table I Ratio of 3-d to 2-d Magnetic Fields Along Specified Profiles 14 1 a 1,,. 1 .l Lot # 3 -d Magnetic Field Predictions at Three Di s t ances from the Right-of-Way (mG) 20 feet 30 feet 40 feet 36 14 . 0 11 . 4 9 . 3 35 14 . 2 11 . 4 9 . 2 1 34 12 . 1 10 . 1 8 . 5 • .i 38 11 . 5 9 . 8 8 . 2 J 21 11 . 5 9 . 8 8 . 3 . 32 12 . 9 10 . 7 8 . 8 i 31 11 . 2 9 . 9 8 . 1 ji 22 12 . 7 10 . 5 8 . 7 31 i 28 12 . 7 10 . 8 9 . 1 27 14 . 2 11 .2 9 . 2 y ) Table II 50% Level Magnetic Field Predictions (mG) for the Three Dimensional Existing Transmission Line at 3.28 Feet Above Ground J , • [1 15 1 4 t \ \ ,, r t: /\ . , E 1 ° . ... A - ,' ` , v, , ` ' 4, 'POWER SITE i / ' ° Yr ` TAR SITE \ \ 141). V .v: gb e • , _..... _ ../ , • 1 c c. 01 . . _.: _ /is\ ... I. oe, •• ® .. s, ps co c4/ , / I A ? - • .. .:- - 0'4 v V 4 4 40* . :...., .. , -,_\ , 'Iii <c) b. / 4 CO \ le Ks.• . e4. Alp a go > \ . \:. ' • '...-*/41F ; ,,, ID, / ' /7)..... in /". N NORTH 1 •I // o \ TRANSMISSION 1 . •"0 + i1 � _ � Z� . \ LINE y ` y ,� .a '' •\\• :.•• ' 1 os- ' \/ 6 SOUTHTH :1 TRANSMISSION - C�• v O W .v �'. LINE . • -0 I t,e, .,# \ . ......, ��-/-J p`� .\\ • - IMEMIfti._ .4_ t ! 40° w' Ifli . /4:\ •17, 17::" • . N ,aYre fc, - . / / y 1 .. , t, ) A. . t all ®may, ' ), TOWER SITE O v �i i. 4 L -„. .,__.1_,,. isa • • as TOWER SITE . // ro Po -6 $. ,.. \ /1. ./ ,s4 k 1. •;`!% • 1 k ) 43:71 rp 1...\ '8 03\ , `. •74#\,6, - yy /1 1 _ • i 'ii Figure 9. Top View of Proposed Site with Transmission Lines, Tower Sites and Profiles from Edge of Right-of-Way to Each Lot , .. p¢ -_-_...--_ - :_:_:...,-, , --._J __J -._._..J -.__i y.L f., ,-s..J 1... i rirr 001 • 1 : . . . . I . . . . . . . . : . ' : . • : . t i I I -"OE... . I -: , . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . -r: . . . . . �.. . . . ;. " . • . • I I • zatizrseir• .„.................._kia"Eri iit • , �I.S_ _��_'_........_... : = :_....fl ximci .:. rver;..LI.G .: :.� I • ' •_SvrY. er4._L.� . . �_ r � �»oc.ofiv�. . • : . s : : : . . 6 , : : : : I Loco iew : 5'a: . . . . . . . . . - . o ; .. j . . . . . . . ! 4. . . : . . . i . - t, fib . . . . . .. I; I i4 : • . : : i ' �� i =i. l • • • is ; IS • • - • 4. - Figure 10. Height Profile of the North Transmission Line _ :.:... '... ...._. _. ;._: ' :_: . , . Between the Two Towers. Shown in Figure 9 : ► • br S0 I •.• • • •. : • • . . . . . . ... . . . i . . . . • . ies• •.ASS G . � 0/V - �CREL _ Q : : i i I ! i • : . • i f ........._, \ 1 • - , i ; : i i . 1 L o .otio/7 j • : . . . . . . . . i : . surveyed L:2c . . ' • - • 71f . . . I _..... _...•_.:. ._ . :_.Lacer �..�s.:. ._ .. ..__ _._ :_ • I ' _....._....._......_.... .• :_ V ... ..:....:_ :._..:. .. .. : _ •.... ....:...._ _ :.__ .._::__ �_:�_a • • • • • • V}\. i • : • : i : ��� i j i . . . . . . ' : : : - • b :' . . ..oaIt v • • : • � • - 111 i . i..)kt; . • ! ! i �. . . . . ; • • • • i • 1 • s $ H :• i • yso _ . :....:_ : .. . _. _ _... _ . O .. ..: . I . Figure 11. Height Profile of the South Transmission Line ' • Between the Two Towers Shown in Figure 9 . . . . , . • Y`fS • , • • . :.... .. .ci ,.. • • • . .. . . . . i 1 i , , . . . . . . . . . . .. .` \. T. ... - G n4� c/.Za .: .. .. • 10 - • • : : : : : : : : : : : . \:t : . . • . . . -..5�31J�_...._ _.__._... _._.._..._...._... - --._.... .._..... ....._......__. • \,,�� .le ,. • • • • .92. _:-__ __.. _.__._...._ _- __.._.._.._...._._..__..._.. :. •_....:. ........ .• _.. ... ......:. .O • • • • • . I - [ II. . . .970. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SECTION 3 . i Z i • • i _. . . __.._ ._._...... Ii , •Figure 12. Ground Height Profiles Along Sections 7 and 8 ; • : : : Lr3..90. -- I + . . . . : : :�_._• •_•. • • : : ZED . . � 0 a0 i . . . . . p op 2,�QD. . - i . : : • • O OD . : : : . : •/ OD - 1 I j i . . . ... . . . . . , • : . . . . . . . t. _:-LJ -� ' r„-''1 L-^_tx:-r ,N, �P�.-`=:"y-•'] _.5::! L:.:_ 1 z._,.1 !:...:sell i._:::_.'F-I =1 t:�___l .,_::J F..:C'.il_I . _..=1 `1 �l \ - 4, .I ..... • 45 ° .... . f.�1r.. 3 ...:.._...... _. _ . :_:. _.._.:.. ... : . ._ VI zo - , . • . ... .. ..... .. . ..... .... GcdedZof : . : . : : .• '4 l5 /(0...6. ro)Cie 'L&i c7cr!rc�o .._ .. _._._.._.. _.__...._.__... N . : .27 _ : : : : 410 -� ... .. ......__...._... ....___._ _..._..___.._._ O 4 .. - \ - ` 1 i • • 5ETIDV . • • 05 Io . . :_ • (Si-Q.' it SS) �` � SE6-7-j-04/. 0 . . -_. (S/c, 21,52) . . . : . : : : :S, ,a, : . • . . : . . . . . . ..... . :.__. . . . ... . • 34° . ___ . • Of-00 /t00.. : . . . ��n0 Of00 /tD4 : 1 . - 20Q:. _ . . . . 0:00. . 1 : :: i : . . w�MwaCRO•raoawu*.O away ' PLATE 3-FULML 55 SECT1ar14uu.DOT Figure 13.-, Ground Height Profiles .Along Sections 9 and 10 memo ` . > r`. , . . . . . . ..]I . • •• I1 • • •. . . . . . . .. . ... . i . . • . • ' ' . . ' • ' • ' I • . ' . .•• . . . . ' . 1 • • . . i • • . . . 4 • , '..,% ... , . . , • i " . . . . • , 1 . . . . -1, • • . • • . 1 • . • . . . . . . . . . .; . . . . • . . 1 . • • • . . • , . . . .. . . . . . j ! . . . . . . . . . (3 7 • . `. • 1 . • . . ., • • • I • • % • . • ' . . . • . . . . • -- N •• . , . • • .2 . . . . . . : 1 . .• . . . . . • . . . • • • . _ . •:,..., • 405: - . 0 . _ _ • i 0 / . . • ... . • , 0 . • 7 . . • . _• . . .. . . : 5L---e7r24/ c) , • • . • (s47 9,Log.) i • • 3ci 5 • . : • . . . . 1 .2 ••••• .. . . .. , 1 . . . 1 : . . . . •. . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . ; . . .• . . . i . . . . . . . . . . . ! . . . • . • . . . r. . . -. - • ! • 3 CI 0 • • • • ........, /I .. . 1 . . . • . : #00 . • • i . . . . . . .2&i0 •. • :: . . . . . . . . . , . . . _ .. , . . . . . . , . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . • ! . . . . ., 1 1 . . . . . .. ..1 ;- ) Figure 14. Ground Height Profile Along Section 11 . 1 . . . 4 -I - j _ . . . . II i I : I i ' • . • • t . . • . ,�. . . . . . . l_..._._. Z_ _. :._:_. �l.._1.Z.. _ . . :_..:_ i_ '.:1Q�' i • . i : : : � ; : • . . : . . . . . xifi�� ILO/ • I . : : : 1 I :: : : : : : : . r . . . . . . I . . . 1 x� L • : : v .s.bit • OZ.: • ' i • PPDfA . • � . 'p.� _ • • � I ' . . . •• • 1";..M...C.)‘•r• •• •••• ....• ••" "<:) . I 1 • • • • • • Sec. Cria41: ... t . :................, ......... ...a.....0: ......: . . •SE. ' : 1 0 • :.' -i • . " i .. • i ! a oo ; . . . . . . -MO : : • 2�: I ! i : : : : Figure 15. . Ground Height- Profiles Along Sections 12 and 13 : . . • . . I : : . : - : : . : : : : - • . i ; - - _.. . .... _ _._.. ....__. ..___._f _ • .._._. _.._ _..._._:.._._...._ ..--- —_._ ._ I_ • i • . • , • . i t • . v I ' : : : : • f7 I . LO j t O t � / •. : : : o � � : : : i . : : : . : : : . r j : : : : I • i • • • • . 1 -- •.. i i i , , i • (sue o� . .. I 7 $SECTION-FULL ooT •.'' • .• . '„E • Figure 16. . Ground Height Profiles Along Sections 14 and 15 r i , - VII. THE EFFECT OF MODIFYING THE ELECTRICAL PHASING OF THE EXISTING ' TRANSMISSION LINE In the process of preparing this report it was noted that the existing transmission line satisfies all geometric and electrical conditions specified in [5] for a "low reactance reduced magnetic field transmission line" except for the relative electrical phasing of the conductors. It was thus decided to study the effect of electrical phase modifications on the magnetic field. The new phasing is ABC - CBA instead of the existing ABC -ABC. The first phase mentioned is that of the southernmost conductor. It should be noted that this change requires only that connections to the A and C conductors of the north transmission line be interchanged. It is possible that this change could be made in the substation at each end the transmission line. If not, new transposition structures might be needed. The results of the study are shown in Figures 17 and 18. The conditions for these two figures are identical to those of Figures 4 and 5 respectively except that the electrical phasing has been modified as described in the last paragraph. It is clear that this simple change causes the magnetic field to be reduced well below the levels of the existing transmission line. .771 .ru . ti • -11 24 •. _ 1 = 1 L: :1- e,: . I t'. 1 i' ‘-‘1 c 1 t _._ I _I ! 1 b _:_ I I f --:I t.:•S.a•.1 kt :t .I EXISTING LINE - 3 .28 FEET ABOVE GROUND (ABC-CBA PHASING) MAGNETIC FIELD (MG) 100 RIGHT OF WAY X )( 95% LEVEL 1 50% LEVEL SETBACK LINE SETBACK LINE • - j 2 0 - _...... ;._... 10 MG I _ In OA' 0 i . . i I 1 I I a el - - -200 -100 0 100 - 200- : DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET) Figure 17. Magnetic Fields from the Existing Line Modified to ABC - CBA Phasing - 3.28 Feet Above the Ground G, .0 r -, 4 L::._._- _.1 1—....-1_ v...-. 1_ ,!..,si.1_ F_"....,-.- 1 F '•• 1 __. 1 1 .- _I 4:`IS_I _.._I — I .:....__I 1°• 1 {3=a ::1 ci ..,::.t ce4- _, I I EXISTING LINE - 15 FEET ABOVE GROUND (ABC-CBA PHASING) MAGNETIC FIELD (MG) (l� 200 . . . 1 1 1 - . RI = dF . Y 1 1 - I 1 1 1 . . • SETBACK LINE X X 95% LEVEL - 1 1 56% LEVEL 150 i - SETBACK LINE i 1 I 50 i ‘ _ 10 MG ,.. �� ��j� 1 0 .. - 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 -_-.r -200 -100 0 100 200 `- DISTANCE FROM CENTERLINE (FEET) i, Figure 18. Magnetic Fields from the Existing Line Modified to ABC - CBA . Phasing - 15 Feet Above the Ground • VIII. RECOMMENDED MITIGATIONS Based on the calculations reported in sections III-VII, several strategies can be proposed which can be used to meet the 10 mG magnetic field (or EMF) limit. Three of these are described here. It should first be noted that the interpretation of the EMF requirement used here is that the 50% probability level (i.e. the annual median) of the magnetic field at 3.28 feet above ground level should be less than 10 mG. If a more strict interpretation is to be used, then some changes in the recommended mitigations may be required. A. Use of the Existing Line With the existing line, additional building setbacks will be required in order to meet the 10 mG standard. The setbacks required for each lot can be inferred from Table II by interpolating the magnetic field between the levels reported for different locations within each lot. The resulting setbacks are given in Table III. Lot # Setback Re. uirement 36 37 feet 35 37 feet 34 30 feet 38 30 feet 21 30 feet 32 34 feet 31 30 feet 22 34 feet 28 35 feet 27 37 feet Table III Setback Requirements to Meet the 10 mG Limit B. Use of the Existing Line with Electrical Phase Change of the North Transmission Line from ABC (South to North) to CBA The magnetic fields for the conservative two dimensional model of the transmission line in this case are given by Figure 17. The 50% level of the magnetic field at the planned building setback of 20 feet is approximately 11 mG. A more accurate three dimensional analysis similar to the one described earlier shows that the actual magnetic field level at this point will be less than 10 mG. Hence, rephasing of the north transmission line is a mitigation which would allow the use of a building setback of 20 feet. 1 . 27 f! C. Use of the Proposed Puget Sound Power and Light 230 kV Double Circuit Transmission Line g As shown in Figures 7 and 8, the magnetic fields of the proposed 230 kV transmission line will meet the 10 mG limit at the 20 foot building setback regardless of which interpretation of the standard is used. Thus, if the proposed transmission line is constructed, a 20 foot setback is acceptable, IX. REFERENCES [1] M.R. Pywell, City of Renton, Letter to D. Casey, Lakeridge Development, October 17, 1991. [2] R.G. Olsen, Regulating Power Line Electromagnetic Fields (EMF): A Brief Tutorial, a report prepared for Lakeridge Development, Inc., December 20, 1991. [3] J. Kearnes, Puget Power, Letter to D. Sherrard, City of Bellevue, April �I t; 19, 1991, (revised December 11, 1991). [4] ANSI/IEEE Std. 644-1987, IEEE Standard Procedures for Measurement of Power Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields from AC Power Lines, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., New York, 1987. r, [5] R.G. Olsen, D.C. James, and V.L. Chartier, "The Performance of Reduced Magnetic Field Power Lines: Theory and Measurements on an Operating Line," to appear in the IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery. 28 0 ►l Fes; P R-o33-fibr 0 11 it li { o i CITY OF RENTON HONEY CREEK RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ii AND APPENDIX • Prepared By, David W. Casey LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT, INC. JUNE 28, 1991 PLANNING DIVISION CITY`OF RENTON li JUL 2 6 1991 . Ir it INDEX SECTION 1 Honey Creek Ridge Environmental Checklist June 28, 1991 SECTION 2 Appendix APPENDIX A Honey Creek Ridge Annexation Environmental Checklist, May 31, 1990 APPENDIX B Honey Creek Ridge Annexation Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated, September 27, 1990 APPENDIX C Issue Paper, Honey Creek Ridge Annexation 60% Petition/Rezone to R- 1/G-1, November 27, 1990 APPENDIX D Supplemental Issue Paper, Honey Creek Ridge Annexation, March 27, 1991 APPENDIX E, Geotechnical Evaluation Honey Creek Ridge, David L. Nelson Associates July, 1989 APPENDIX F Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation Honey Creek Ridge, David L. Nelson Associates, May 17, 1991 APPENDIX G Traffic Impact Analysis Honey Creek Ridge, Christopher Brown and Associates, February 15, 1991 APPENDIX H Power Transmission Line Information: April 2, 1990 Letter; David W. Casey, Lakeridge to Mel Walters, Puget Power April 30, 1990 Letter; Mel Walters, Puget Power to David W. Casey, Lakeridge August, 1988 B.P.A.; Electric Power Lines Questions and Answers on Research into Health Effects SECTION 1 HONEY CREEK RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST f CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ; HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 1 1. Name of proposal if applicable: HONEY CREEK RIDGE 2. Name of Proposer: LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT INC. 3. Address and phone number of proposer and contact person: DAVID W. CASEY LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT PO BOX 146 RENTON, WA 98057 (206) 228-9750 4. Date checklist was prepared: 6/24/91 5. Agency requesting checklist: CITY OF RENTON 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable) : SPRING/SUMMER 1992 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related,to or connected with this proposal? If yes explain. LAKERIDGE HAS OBTAINED COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR THE 60% ANNEXATION PETITION. THE NOTICE OF INTENT (N.I.) SUBMITTAL PACKAGE IS CURRENTLY BEING REVIEWED BY THE CITY OF RENTON PLANNING STAFF. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE N.I. SUBMITTAL WILL BE FINALIZED AND TRANSMITTED TO THE WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD IN MID JULY. A MAJORITY OF DIVISION II OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. I � LAKERIDGE HAS OBTAINED TWO ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES WITHIN KING COUNTY APPROXIMATELY 1/4 MILE TO THE EAST OF THE PROPOSAL (TAX LOTS #228 AND #219) . LAKERIDGE HAS EVENTUAL PLANS TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY INTO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WHEN SEWER SERVICE BECOMES AVAILABLE TO THE SITE. PRESENTLY, TAX LOT #228 IS VACANT AND CANNOT BE SUBDIVIDED DUE TO THE POOR QUALITY OF SOIL THAT PRECLUDES THE USE OF ON-SITE SEPTIC SYSTEMS. THERE IS ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ON TAX LOT #219. AS PART OF THE PLAT IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE HONEY CREEK PROJECT, LAKERIDGE PLANS TO DEDICATE AND IMPROVE A ROAD THROUGH THE TWO PROPERTIES AS PART OF THE OFF-SITE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE HONEY CREEK RIDGE ` .)IVISION. THE ROAD WILL EXTEND S.E. 100TH ST TO THE EAST A' _ SOUTH TO TIE INTO S.E.101ST AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE S.E. 101ST/ 130TH AVE S.E. INTERSECTION. THIS ROADWAY CONNECTION WILL PROVIDE A DIRECT ACCESS FROM THE SITE TO UNION AVE N.E. WILL MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF THE PROJECT ON THE EXISTING SIERRA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD. SEE EXHIBIT A - ATTACHED. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared,or will be prepared directly related to this proposal. THE FOLLOWING ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS PROPOSAL AND IS INCLUDED IN THE APPENDIX OF THIS CHECKLIST: A. AN FTTVTRONMENTAL (SEPA) CHECKLIST WAS PREPARED AND SUBMITTED TO THE ( i OF RENTON FOR THE HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION - 60% NOTICE OF INTENT AND IS INCLUDED AS APPENDIX A. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June. 28, 1991 PAGE 2 THE ANNEXATION SEPA CHECKLIST CONTAINED INFORMATION CONCERNING ' BOTH THE NONPROJECT ANNEXATION AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. THE DECEMBER 3, 1990 AND APRIL 1, 1991, 60% ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARINGS INCLUDED EXTENSIVE PUBLIC TESTIMONY CONCERNING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. IN REVIEWING THE j " ANNEXATION PROPOSAL, THE CITY OF RENTON STAFF HAS REVIEWED MANY ISSUES AND CONCERNS RELATING TO THE PROPOSED HONEY CREEK SUBDIVISION. • B. HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED ISSUED SEPTEMBER 27, 1990 IS INCLUDED IN APPENDIX B. I C. AN ISSUE PAPER - HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION, 60% PETITION/REZONE TO R-1/G-1 DATED NOVEMBER 27, 1990 IS INCLUDED IN APPENDIX C. D. A SUPPLEMENTAL ISSUE PAPER - HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION - DATED MARCH 27, 1991 WAS PREPARED AND PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL PRIOR TO THE APRIL 1, 1991 60% ANNEXATION PUBLIC HEARING IS INCLUDED AS APPENDIX D. THE ISSUE PAPER WAS PREPARED TO ADDRESS SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS RAISED BY THE CITY OF RENTON UTILITY COMMITTEE. THE ISSUE PAPER CONTAINS INFORMATION CONCERNING UTILITIES, STEEP SLOPES, TRANSPORTATION, AND PRESERVATION OF NATURAL AREAS. THE ISSUE PAPER IS CONCISE, NONTECHNICAL, AND PROVIDES A GOOD OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE MAJOR ISSUES RELATING TO POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL. E. A GEOTHECHNICAL STUDY BY DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES - DATED JULY 1989 IS INCLUDED AS APPENDIX E. THE GEOTECHNICAL STUDY ADDRESSES THE CONCERNS OF SOIL TYPES, SLOPE STABILITY, APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION METHODS, AND SETBACKS i ' FROM THE TOP OF BANK. THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOCUSED PRIMARILY ON THE STABILITY OF THE OF THE STEEP SLOPE REGION ADJACENT TO THE UPLAND AREA AND THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE LOCATION OF THE LOTS AND SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES WITHIN THE LOTS. F. A SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL STUDY BY DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES - DATED MAY 17, 1991 IS INCLUDED AS APPENDIX F. i -i THE SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL REPORT WAS REQUESTED BY LAKERIDGE TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN THE VICINITY OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 9 OF DIVISION I, 1 THROUGH 4 OF DIVISION III, AND THE AREA OF THE PROPOSED REGIONAL RETENTION FACILITY WITHIN TRACT A OF DIVISION I. THE REPORT CONCLUDED ON PAGE 5 THAT '" THE EVALUATED SITE SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL AND DETENTION (RETENTION) POND DEVELOPMENT". G. A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PREPARED BY CHRISTOPHER BROWN AND ASSOCIATES - DATED FEBRUARY 15, 1991 IS INCLUDED AS APPENDIX G. 1 I CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 3 THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS EVALUATED THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON THE EXISTING ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD ALONG THE VARIOUS ACCESS ROUTES FROM THE SITE OUT UNION AVE N.E. AND 95TH WAY S.E. THE PRIMARY ACCESS ROUTES ARE SHOWN ON FIGURE 2 OF THE STUDY. THE ANALYSIS FURTHER EVALUATED THE LEVELS OF SERVICE AT EACH INTERSECTION ALONG UNION AVE NE THAT WILL BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING THE UNION AVE NE/SUNSET BLVD INTERSECTION. THE ANNEXATION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST CONTAINED A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PREPARED BY CHRISTOPHER BROWN AND ASSOCIATES DATED JULY 3, 1989. LAKERIDGE OBTAINED THE NEW TRAFFIC STUDY CONTAINED IN APPENDIX G TO PROVIDE CURRENT TRIP GENERATION AND LEVEL OF SERVICE INFORMATION, TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS OF WESTERN HILLS, AND TO ANALYZE THE DISTRIBUTION OF INCREASED TRAFFIC WITHIN THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD. THE JULY 3, 1989 TRAFFIC STUDY IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE APPENDIX AS IT IS PRECLUDED BY THE FEBRUARY 15, 1991 STUDY BUT IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. H. POWER TRANSMISSION LINE INFORMATION IS CONTAINED IN APPENDIX H. THE POWER TRANSMISSION LINE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN APPENDIX H WAS OBTAINED AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO ADDRESS SPECIFIC CONCERNS RELATING TO THE POWER LINES THAT TRAVERSE A PORTION OF THE SITE. ALSO INCLUDED IS A PUBLICATION FROM BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION TITLED "ELECTRIC POWER LINES: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON RESEARCH INTO HEALTH EFFECTS" THAT GIVES A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE HEALTH CONCERNS RELATING TO ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN OBTAINED THAT RELATES TO THE PROPOSAL. I. A TREE PLAN PREPARED BY NATHAN R. HALE - DATED FEBRUARY 18, 1990. THE TREE PLAN SHOWS THE SURVEYED LOCATIONS OF THE TREES THAT ARE 6" OR GREATER IN DIAMETER. THE TREE PLAN ALSO SHOWS THE PROPOSED CLEARING, GRADING, AND AREAS WHERE NATIVE VEGETATION IS TO BE PRESERVED. THE TREE PLAN HAS BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PLAN SET AS SHEETS 5 AND 8 OF 8. J. A TRANSCRIPT HAS BEEN OBTAINED FOR THE APRIL 1, 1991 PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE 60% ANNEXATION. DUE TO THE LENGTH OF THE DOCUMENT (105 PAGES) , FOUR COPIES OF THE TRANSCRIPT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED SEPARATELY. THE TRANSCRIPT PROVIDES INFORMATION CONCERNING TRANSPORTATION, STORMWATER RUNOFF, STEEP SLOPES, OPEN SPACE, UTILITIES, FIRE SERVICE AND OTHER ISSUES RELATED TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. IT IS REQUESTF" "HAT THE TRANSCRIPT BE REVIEWED AS PART OF THE CITY'S ENVIROI ,•I'AL REVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL. K. A DRAFT NOTICE OF INTENT IS CURRENTLY BEING REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE FINAL COPY OF THE NOTICE OF INTENT CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 4 WILL ALSO CONTAIN VALUABLE INFORMATION RELATING TO COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, ZONING, AND UTILITIES. I i 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the geographic area covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. THE FOLLOWING GOVERNMENTAL PROPOSALS AND APPROVALS AFFECT THE PROPOSED PROJECT: A. THE CITY OF RENTON IS CURRENTLY PROCEEDING WITH THE DESIGN PHASE OF A SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (PROPOSED L.I.D. #335) THAT WOULD CROSS THE SOUTHERN AREA OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION. THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE L.I.D. WILL BE TO PROVIDE SEWER SERVICE TO SIERRA HEIGHTS DIVISION 2, AND EVENTUALLY TO OTHER PROPERTIES WHERE EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEMS ARE FAILING. MICHAEL BENOIT OF THE UTILITY ENGINEERING SECTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON IS THE KEY CONTACT WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE PROPOSED L.I.D. THE KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH RECENTLY CONDUCTED A SURVEY OF THE EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEMS WITHIN AND ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED L.I.D. THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT CONCLUDED THAT THE AREA WITHIN THE L.I.D. CONSTITUTED A "HEALTH HAZARD" THAT REQUIRES CORRECTIVE ACTION. THE PROPOSED L.I.D. WILL PROVIDE THE REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTION. B. THE CITY OF RENTON PARKS DEPARTMENT PLANS TO CONSTRUCT A TRAIL SYSTEM ALONG THE HONEY CREEK CORRIDOR AS PART OF THE MASTER TRAIL PLAN. HONEY CREEK IS AT THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY AND IS 300' +/- FROM THE AREA TO BE DEVELOPED. THE CITY OF RENTON PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS RECENTLY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH OF SE 104TH ST ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPOSAL. THE PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED FOR THE FUTURE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TRAILHEAD FOR THE HONEY CREEK TRAIL. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. THE FOLLOWING GOVERNMENTAL APPROVALS WILL BE NEEDED FOR THE PROPOSAL. A. APPROVAL OF THE NOTICE OF INTENT (NI) SUBMITTAL BY THE WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD IS REQUIRED FOR DIVISION II. B. APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSAL BY THE CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER. C. APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEERING DESIGN FOR THE PLAT IMPROVEMENTS BY THE CITY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) i THE PROPOSED HONEY CREEK RIDGE SUBDIVISION HAS TWO MAIN DIVISIONS. DIVISION I IS WITHIN THE RENTON CITY LIMITS AND i , CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 5 CONSISTS OF 36 LOTS ON 25.3 ACRES WITH 11.7 ACRES SET ASIDE AS GREENBELT. DIVISION II IS 56 LOTS, 6 LOTS ARE WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON AND 50 LOTS ARE CURRENTLY WITHIN THE PROPOSED HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION AREA IN KING COUNTY. THE PROPOSED 50 LOTS WITHIN KING COUNTY ARE A REPLATTING OF 53 EXISTING LOTS OF ALBERT BALCH'S SIERRA HEIGHTS DIVISION #5. THE REPLATTING OF THE 53 LOTS ALSO REDUCES THE NUMBER OF LOTS. DIVISION II IS 23.9 ACRES WITH 7.4 ACRES TO BE SET ASIDE AS GREENBELT. DIVISION III IS 4 LOTS ON 1.8 ACRES. THE TOTAL PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS 51 ACRES WITH 19.1 PROPOSED AS GREENBELT. SEE ATTACHED PLAN SHEETS 1 THROUGH 8. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposal, including a street address, if any, and section, township and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the boundaries of the site(s) . Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map,if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IN THE CENTRAL PORTION OF SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST. SEE THE VICINITY MAP (SHEET 1 OF 8 OF THE ATTACHED PLAN SET) THAT SHOWS THE EXACT LOCATION OF THE SITE WITH RESPECT TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS ALSO ON THE PLAN SHEET. 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one) : FLAT, rolling, HILLY, STEEP SLOPES, mountainous, other: THE UPLAND AREA ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK IS GENERALLY FLAT AND SLOPES TO THE SOUTHWEST. THE CREEK FLOWS FROM THE SOUTHEAST TO THE NORTHWEST AT THE BOTTOM OF A BROAD SWALE THAT TRAVERSES THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE. THE STEEP SLOPES ARE ON THE HILLSIDE AREA ADJACENT TO THE STREAM. SEE PLAN SHEET 2 OF 8 THAT SHOWS AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope) ? ON THE HILLSIDE AREA ADJACENT TO THE STREAM, THE SLOPES RANGE FROM MODERATE TO VERY STEEP, WITH THE STEEPEST SLOPES BEING IN EXCESS OF 100% IN LOCALIZED AREAS. (A 100% SLOPE REPRESENTS A 1' VERTICAL RISE FOR EVERY 1' HORIZONTAL RUN - OR A 45 DEGREE ANGLE) PLAN SHEETS 3 AND 6 SHOW THE SURVEYED TOP OF 40% SLOPE AREA. THE GEOTHECHNICAL REPORT RECOMMENDS A SETBACK OF 25' FROM THE TOP OF THE 40% SLOPE AREA WHERE NO SPECIAL FOUNDATION DESIGNS ARE PROPOSED. WHEN A SPECIAL FOUNDATION DESIGN IS PROPOSED, THE 25' SETBACK CAN BE REDUCES ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. MOST OF THE AREAS OF 40% OR GREATER SLOPES ARE PROPOSED TO BE PLACED IN A SEPARATE TRACT WHICH WILL BE DEDICATED TO THE RENTON PARKS DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME I OF RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay,sand, gravel, peat, muck) ? If you know the CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 6 classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. USING THE 1973 KING COUNTY SOIL SURVEY THE FOLLOWING SOILS ARE INDICATED AS BEING WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. 1. THE UPLAND AREA SOILS CONSIST PRIMARILY OF ALDERWOOD AgC AND ARENTS, ALDERWOOD AmC. THESE SOILS ARE MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS GLACIAL TILL. 2. THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE ANNEXATION AREA IN THE VICINITY OF THE STEEP SLOPES IS CLASSIFIED ALDERWOOD AND KITSAP AkF. ALDERWOOD AND KITSAP SOILS ARE COMMONLY FOUND 1 IN HILLSIDE AREAS. THE BOUNDARY OF THE SOIL APPEARS TO BE CLOSE TO THE TOP OF BANK. THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS INCLUDED IN THE APPENDIX CONTAIN SPECIFIC ON SITE SOILS INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM TEST PIT LOGS. THE LOCATIONS OF THE TEST PITS ARE SHOWN IN EACH OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS. THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS CONTAIN A GOOD OVERVIEW OF THE SITE. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe: THERE IS AN AREA ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY, BELIEVED TO BE ON TAX LOT #35 ADJACENT TO THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE SITE, WHERE A BURIED TELEPHONE CABLE PLACED DOWN THE HILLSIDE ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK IS ERODING. IT APPEARS THAT THE BACKFILL AND RESTORATION OF THE CABLE TRENCH WAS IMPROPERLY STABILIZED. SUBSEQUENT TO THE CABLE INSTALLATION, STORM WATER RUNOFF HAS CAUSED THE AREA TO ERODE. THE EROSION HAS CREATED A SMALL RAVINE THAT APPEARS TO HAVE STABILIZED. ADJACENT TO THE NORTHWEST PROPERTY BOUNDARY, A ROAD THAT IS CURRENTLY CLOSED TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC (120TH PL SE) HAS EXPERIENCED EROSION AND SLIDING PROBLEMS. SHEET M-1 OF THE GEOTECH REPORT SHOWS LOCALIZED AREAS OF SURFACE FAILURE DUE TO PAST GRADING ACTIVITIES. IT IS EVIDENT THAT ANY WORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OR ADJACENT TO THE HILLSIDE AREA WILL NEED TO BE PERFORMED WITH CAUTION. SEE THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR A MORE COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE. ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF HONEY CREEK THERE ARE INDICATIONS OF SLIPPAGE DUE TO LOCALIZES UNDERCUTTING BY THE STREAM DURING RECENT PAST LARGE STORM EVENTS (NOVEMBER 1990) . e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill: THE FOLLOWING GRADING ACTIVITIES ARE SHOWN ON PLAN SHEETS 3 AND 6 OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION: i. GRADING IS PROPOSED ALONG THE SOUTHERN EXTENSION OF 122Nr AVE S.E. . THE GRADING ACTIVITIES ARE NECESSARY TO PRDwlDE AN ACCEPTABLE ROAD GRADE UP THE HILL. ii. GRADING IS PROPOSED AT THE NORTHEASTERN PORTION OF DIVISION II. THE PROPOSED GRADING ACTIVITIES WILL SMOOTH OUT AN ABRUPT BENCH AND RENDER THE AREA SUITABLE FOR ROAD AND HOUSING CONSTRUCTION. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 7 iii. GRADING IS PROPOSED WITHIN TRACT A - THE STORM WATER RETENTION AREA. THE GRADING ACTIVITIES ARE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE ACCESS TO THE RETENTION POND AND TO CONSTRUCT THE POND BERM. iv. MINOR GRADING WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION TO ASSURE PROPER DRAINAGE AND TO REMOVE TOPSOIL AND ORGANIC MATERIAL WHICH IS UNSUITABLE FOR ROADWAY SUBGRADE. SHEETS 4 AND 7 OF 8 SHOWS THE PROPOSED ROADWAY PROFILES AND THE EXISTING GRADES OF THE ROADWAYS WITHIN THE PROJECT. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED GRADE INDICATES AREAS WHERE GRADING IS PROPOSED TO CREATE SMOOTH VERTICAL CURVES IN THE ROADWAYS. THE TOPSOIL THAT IS REMOVED FROM THE ROADWAY WILL BE RETAINED ON SITE TO BE PLACED ON AREAS THAT HAVE LITTLE OR NO TOPSOIL DUE TO PAST GRADING ACTIVITIES WHEN THE AREA WAS LOGGED. THE PROPOSED GRADING ON THE SITE IS PLANNED TO BE BALANCED - MEANING THAT THE MATERIAL GENERATED FROM THE CUT ACTIVITIES WILL BE CLOSE TO OR EQUAL TO THE MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR THE FILL ACTIVITIES. A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF MATERIAL IS EXPECTED TO BE IMPORTED OR EXPORTED. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction or use? If so, generally describe. THERE IS ALWAYS THE POTENTIAL THAT IMPROPER UTILITY INSTALLATIONS, AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES MAY CAUSE EROSION. MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WILL BE LIMITED TO THE EASTERN UPLAND AREAS AND AWAY FROM THE STEEP SLOPE PORTION OF THE HILLSIDE AREA ASSOCIATED WITH HONEY CREEK. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after the project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings) ? IT IS ESTIMATED THAT THE PROPOSED HONEY CREEK RIDGE SUBDIVISION WILL CREATE APPROXIMATELY 17% IMPERVIOUS AREA WHEN THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED. THE IMPERVIOUS AREA WILL BE LOCATED ALONG THE EASTERN UP-LAND PORTION OF THE SITE. THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE TO BE PLACED IN OPEN SPACE ( APPROX. 40%) WILL REMAIN UNCHANGED AS A RESULT OF THE PROJECT. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: WHEN THE ENGINEERING DESIGN IS PREPARED FOR THE PROPOSED PRO.CT, THE DESIGN WILL INCLUDE A SEPARATE PLAN FOR THE CONli._:. AND REDUCTION OF EROSION. THE PLAN WILL BE SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO ADDRESS THE PROPOSED GRADING ON THE SITE. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE PROPOSED RETENTION FACILITY IN TRACT A WILL BE UTILIZED AS A TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SETTLING POND. OTHER TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AND SETTLING PONDS WILL BE REQUIRED TO CONTAIN AND MINIMIZE THE EROSION POTENTIAL AT THE SOUTHERN AND NORTHWESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 8 THE CITY OF RENTON HAS RECENTLY ADOPTED THE NEW KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL. CHAPTER FIVE OF THE MANUAL CONTAINS EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN PRACTICES REQUIREMENTS THAT WILL BE PLACED UPON ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON. THE NEW KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL CONTAINS THE MOST UP TO DATE METHODS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTROLLING EROSION. THE ENGINEERING DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE WILL BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES WITHIN THE NEW DESIGN MANUAL. LAKERIDGE RECOGNIZES THAT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN EFFECTIVE EROSION CONTROL PLAN IS ESSENTIAL TO THE PROPER PROTECTION OF THE HONEY CREEK STREAM CORRIDOR. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the yp t proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. THERE WILL BE MINIMAL EMISSIONS OF DUST, EQUIPMENT EXHAUST,AND ODORS FROM PAVING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT. WHEN THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED, THERE WILL BE A SLIGHT INCREASE IN AUTOMOBILE, WOOD STOVE,AND FIREPLACE EMISSIONS. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so: THERE ARE NO OFF-SITE SOURCES OF EMISSIONS THAT WOULD AFFECT THE PROPOSAL. _( c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: NONE AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL, HOWEVER, AS THE AIR QUALITY CONTINUES TO BE IMPACTED BY INCREASED DEVELOPMENT, IT IS PROPOSED THAT THE CITY OF RENTON CONSIDER ALLOWING ONLY E.P.A. CERTIFIED WOOD STOVES OR FIREPLACE INSERTS IN NEW SUBDIVISIONS. 3. WATER a. SURFACE: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams,saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands) ? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. A SMALL YEAR ROUND STREAM (HONEY CREEK) TRAVERSES THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE. THE STREAM FLOWS GENERALLY FROM THE SOUTHEAST TO THE NORTHWEST, WHERE IT CONVERGES , MAY CREEK. MAY CREEK FLOWS INTO LAKE WASHINGTON. SEE SECTION 12 - RECREATION THAT FURTHER DISCUSSES THE STREAM. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 - PAGE 9 2. Will the proposal require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach plans. THE SITE WILL BE SERVED BY AN EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE THAT IS ADJACENT TO AND ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF HONEY CREEK. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT A TIE-IN TO THE EXISTING SEWER LINE WILL OCCUR AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE. THE TIE-IN AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER IS AT THE LOCATION THAT WILL BEST SERVE THE SITE AND THE AREA TO BE SERVED BY THE PROPOSED CITY OF RENTON L.I.D.#335. A TIE-IN TO THE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATION LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERN TIP OF THE "DEVILS ELBOW" WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SEWER SERVICE TO THE MAJORITY OF DIVISION I. SOME WORK MAY BE REQUIRED ADJACENT TO THE STREAM TO PROVIDE STABLE ENERGY DISSIPATING OUTFALLS FOR STORM WATER RETENTION SYSTEMS. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. NONE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. NONE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. ACCORDING TO THE KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THERE IS A 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN ASSOCIATED WITH HONEY CREEK. SINCE HONEY CREEK IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE HILLSIDE AREA, THE FLOODPLAIN ASSOCIATED WITH THE CREEK WILL BE FAR OUTSIDE ANY POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA. THE AVERAGE VERTICAL DISTANCE BETWEEN THE TOP OF BANK WHERE DEVELOPMENT WILL OCCUR, AND THE STREAM BED WITHIN THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS 100' . 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. NONE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL. b. GROUND: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. NONE PLANNED AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 10 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic chemicals. . . and agricultural; etc) . Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable) , or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. NONE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL. THE PROVISION OF SANITARY SEWERS TO THE AREA EAST OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION BY THE PROPOSED L.I.D. #335 WILL RESULT IN AN EVENTUAL REDUCTION IN CONTAMINATED DISCHARGES TO GROUND AND SURFACE WATER FROM FAILING ON SITE SEPTIC SYSTEMS IN SIERRA HEIGHTS DIVISION 2. c. WATER RUNOFF (including storm water) : 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities if known) . Where will this matter flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. RUNOFF FROM THE SITE GENERALLY SHEET FLOWS OVERLAND OR IN SHALLOW SWALES TO THE SOUTHWEST WHERE IT EVENTUALLY ENTERS HONEY CREEK. THE SOURCE OF WATER IS STORM WATER RUNOFF. THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ON SITE STORM WATER RETENTION FACILITIES, AND PRIOR TO DISCHARGE OF ANY ADDITIONAL STORM WATER INTO EITHER NEW OR EXISTING CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS, ALL STORM WATER WILL BE REQUIRED TO FLOW THROUGH OIL/WATER SEPARATORS AND BIOFILTRATION SWALES. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. ONCE THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED, AND THE RESIDENCES CONSTRUCTED AND OCCUPIED, ILLEGALLY DISCHARGED WASTE MATERIALS COULD ENTER SURFACE WATERS. THE PUBLIC IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE AWARE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF PROPER HOUSEHOLD WASTE DISPOSAL METHODS. THERE ARE STILL THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO DUMP WASTE MATERIALS INTO THE STORM DRAINS. THE NEW STORM DRAIN INLETS THAT HAVE THE STATEMENT "DUMP NO POLLUTANTS - OUTFALL TO STREAM" ARE A GOOD START AT MINIMIZING THE ILLEGALLY DISCHARGED WASTE MATERIALS. THE INSTALLATION OF THE SEWER LINE THAT WILL BE EXTENDED TO SERVICE THE L.I.D. WILL ELIMINATE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF UNTREATED SEWER OVERFLOW FROM FAILED SYSTEMS THAT ARE CURRENTLY DISCHARGING DIRECTLY TO THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM THAT CONVEYS THE UNTREATED SEWAGE DIRECTLY TO HONEY CREEK. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground and runoff ::..t.er impacts, if any: THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL PROVIDE ON SITE STORM WATER RETENTION FACILITIES. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THERE WILL BE THREE FACILITIES WITHIN THE SITE. PLAN SHEETS 3 AND 6 OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL PACKAGE SHOWS THE PROPOSED LOCATIONS OF THE RETENTION FACILITIES. ONE FACILITY IS PROPOSED AT THE WESTERN TERMINUS OF S.E. 97TH COURT, ANOTHER IS PROPOSED WITHIN TRACT A, AND THE THIRD IS PROPOSED AT THE SOUTHWESTERN END OF S.E.104TH COURT. CITY OF RENTON — ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 11 ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PORTION OF THE HONEY CREEK BASIN AREA THAT IS IN THE CITY LIMITS IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ON SITE DETENTION FACILITIES THAT ARE DESIGNED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECENTLY ADOPTED "1990 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL". THE NEW MANUAL CONTAINS THE MOST UP TO DATE DESIGN METHODS, TECHNIQUES, AND CRITERIA THAT IF PROPERLY IMPLEMENTED WILL ENSURE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE STREAM WILL HAVE LITTLE OR NO IMPACT TO THE HONEY CREEK/MAY CREEK SYSTEM. , 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site; XX deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other XX evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other XX---shrubs grass pasture crop or grain XX wet soil plants: ALONG AND ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK XX water plants: ALONG HONEY CREEK i other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? THE TREE PLAN (PLAN SHEETS 5 AND 8 OF 8) SHOWS THE CLEARING LIMITS WITHIN THE PROPOSED PROJECT WHERE VEGETATION IS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROADWAYS AND FOR THE PROPOSED GRADING. THE PLAN INDICATES WHICH TREES WILL BE REMOVED THAT ARE GREATER THAN 6" IN DIAMETER. THE OTHER TYPES OF VEGETATION THAT IS NOT SHOWN ON THE TREE PLAN THAT WILL BE REMOVED CONSISTS OF ALDER, MOUNTAIN ASH, VINE MAPLE, WILD CHERRY, MADRONA, CASCARA BUCKTHORN, SALLAL, OREGON GRAPE, FERNS, AND OTHER NATIVE UNDERSTORY VEGETATION. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. NONE d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measure to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: A TREE PLAN HAS BEEN PREPARED AND SUBMITTED AND IS INCLUDED AS PLAN SHEETS 5 AND 8 OF 8. THE TREE PLAN SHOWS AREAS TO BE CLEARED, AND AREAS TO BE PROTECTED. THE TREE PLAN SHOWS THAT THERE ARE MANY AREAS WITHIN THE PORTION OF THE SITE WHERE RESIDENCES ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED WHERE EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION IS PROPOSED TO BE PRESERVED. ONCE THE RESIDENCES ARE CONSTRUCTED THE LOTS WILL BE LANDSCAPED. THE ESTIMATED PRICE RANGE OF THE HOUSES TO BE CONSTRUCTED ($250, 000 TO $300,000) WILL DICTATE THAT IMMEDIATELY UPON COMPLETION OF THE HOUSING CONSTRUCTION THE LANDSCAPING WILL BE PROFESSIONALLY INSTALLED. MOST OF THE AREA THAT HAS SLOPES OF 40% OR GREATER WILL BE PE ''RVED AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE/GREENBELT WHICH WILL ENSURE THA`1 i:IIE EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION WITHIN THE GREENBELT AREAS WILL BE PRESERVED. ANY WORK WITHIN THE PROPOSED GREENBELT AREA REQUIRED FOR THE SEWER LINE OR STORM WATER OUTFALL INSTALLATION WILL BE REVEGETATED WITH NATIVE SPECIES CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 12 VEGETATION AFTER THE AREA IS STABILIZED AND THE EROSION POTENTIAL IS ELIMINATED. WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED ON THE RETENTION FACILITY WITHIN TRACT A , THE SIDES OF THE TRACT AREA WILL BE REVEGETATED WITH NATIVE PLANT SPECIES. THE BOTTOM OF THE RETENTION POND IS PROPOSED TO BE REVEGETATED WITH NATIVE WETLAND SPECIES VEGETATION TO ENHANCE THE HABITAT OF THE AREA'. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: HAWK, heron, eagle, SONGBIRDS, other Mammals: DEER, bear, elk, beaver, other RODENTS, MOUNTAIN BEAVER, COYOTE Fish: bass, SALMON, TROUT, herring, shellfish, other RESIDENTS WHO LIVE ADJACENT TO THE SITE HAVE STATED THAT COYOTE HAVE USED THE HONEY CREEK CORRIDOR. THE RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS A PROGRAM OF YEARLY STOCKING THE CREEK WITH SALMON FRY AS PART OF THE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be'on or near the site. NONE c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so explain. NO d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: THE PRESERVATION OF THE HILLSIDE AREA, INCLUDING THE CREEK, AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE, WILL ALLOW FOR THE CREATION OF A WILDLIFE CORRIDOR. THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL SET ASIDE A LARGE PROPORTION ( APPROXIMATELY 40%) OF THE TOTAL PROJECT ACREAGE AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE. THE PROPOSED TRACT A RETENTION FACILITY MAY END UP BEING DESIGNED AS A TWO CELLED WET POND. A RETENTION FACILITY THAT IS DESIGNED AS A WET POND TYPICALLY INCREASES WATER QUALITY AND PROVIDES ADDITIONAL HABITAT FOR SONGBIRDS. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electricity, natural gas, oil, wood stove,solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. ALL OF THE ABOVE RESOURCES MAY BE UTILIZED FOR HEATING OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES WITHIN THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION. b. Would your proposal affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. NO c. What kinds of energy conservation features are indicated in the plans for this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 13 THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDENCES WITHIN THE PROJECT WILL BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT CITY OF RENTON ENERGY CONSERVATION CODES. MANY OF THE LOTS HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR SOLAR ORIENTED HOUSE DESIGNS. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe. THE PUGET POWER BEVERLY TALBOT #1 AND #2 TRANSMISSION LINES TRAVERSES A PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA. THE POWER LINES ARE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST AREA OF THE AlBERT BALCH'S SIERRA HEIGHTS #5 SUBDIVISION. (SEE VICINITY MAP) THE POWER LINES ARE CURRENTLY OPERATED AT 115-kV WHICH RESULTS IN A MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH THAT RANGES FROM 8 TO 22 Mg AT THE EDGE OF THE POWER LINE EASEMENT (25' AWAY FROM THE LINE) . PUGET POWER PLANS TO REPLACE THE EXISTING LINES WITH A NEW LINE THAT WILL OPERATE AT 230kV. THE ANTICIPATED MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH FROM THE NEW LINE WILL BE IN THE RANGE OF 6 TO 12 Mg AT THE EDGE OF THE POWER LINE EASEMENT. THE PROPOSED POWER LINE WILL ACTUALLY REDUCE THE MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH AT THE EDGE OF THE EASEMENT. THERE IS A CONCERN ABOUT THE LONG TERM HEALTH EFFECTS OF LIVING ADJACENT TO POWER TRANSMISSION LINES. LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT CONTACTED MEL WALTERS, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST, FOR PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT TO INQUIRE AS TO THE POTENTIAL HEALTH RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH LIVING ADJACENT TO THE POWER LINES THAT TRAVERSE THE SITE. LAKERIDGE RECEIVED A LETTER ON APRIL 30, 1990 WHICH INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT: "AT THE PRESENT TIME THERE IS NOT ENOUGH SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT A SIGNIFICANT HEALTH RISK EXISTS. SCIENTISTS HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO ESTABLISH ANY EVIDENCE OF A CASUAL RELATIONSHIP. THESE ARE EXTREMELY SMALL ELECTRICAL FIELDS WHEN ONE CONSIDERS THE SIZE OF ELECTRICAL AND MAGNETIC FIELDS IN AN AVERAGE HOUSE. FOR EXAMPLE THE ORDINARY KITCHEN RANGE WILL PRODUCE A MAGNETIC FIELD OF 80mG." THE LETTER AND OTHER INFORMATION RELATING TO ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS IS INCLUDED IN APPENDIX H. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. N.A. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards if any. N.A. THE CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS, IN THE PAST, USED THE VALUE OF 100mG AT THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY LINE AS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE MAGNETIC FIELD WITHOUT FURTHER SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. THERE ARE 10 LOTS AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DIVISION II WHICH ARE ADJACENT TO THE POWER LINE EASEMENT. PLAN SHEET 6 OF 8 SHOWS A 25' BUILDING SETBACK LINE OUT FROM THE EDGE OF THE EASEMENT FOR ALL 10 LOTS. IT IS ESTIMATED THAT THE MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH AT THE EDGE OF THE 25' BUILDING SETBACK LINE WILL BE REDUCED TO A LEVEL THAT ELIMINATES THE CONCERN OF CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 14 POTENTIAL HEALTH RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE POWERLINES. b. NOISE 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your proposal (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other) ? NONE 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other) ? Indicate what hours noise would come from this site. IN THE SHORT TERM, THERE WILL BE SOME NOISE FROM CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT DURING THE DAYLIGHT HOURS, WHILE CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS. THE NOISE WILL BE PRODUCED BY EARTH MOVING EQUIPMENT, CHAIN SAWS, PORTABLE GENERATORS, AIR COMPRESSORS, NAIL GUNS, AND OTHER STANDARD EQUIPMENT TYPICALLY USED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS AND HOUSING CONSTRUCTION. IN THE LONG TERM, THERE WILL BE A SLIGHT INCREASE IN 1 NOISE AS A RESULT OF INCREASED TRAFFIC AND POPULATION. 1 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: THE PRESERVATION OF VEGETATION ON AND ADJACENT TO THE HILLSIDE AREA, WILL PROVIDE A NOISE BUFFER TO RESIDENTS LIVING ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE CREEK. THE PRESERVATION OF SOME OF THE ON SITE TREES IDENTIFIED AS BEING SIGNIFICANT ON THE "TREE PLAN" WILL AID IN CREATING A NOISE BUFFER FOR THOSE RESIDENTS LIVING ADJACENT TO THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE PROPOSED SITE. ADDITIONALLY,THE CITY OF RENTON PLACES LIMITS ON CONSTRUCTION HOURS. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the area and adjacent properties? THE SITE IS CURRENTLY VACANT. THERE ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES TO THE NORTH AND EAST. TO THE SOUTH THERE ARE SCATTERED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ON LARGE LOTS, AND TO THE WEST THERE IS A LARGE OPEN SPACE CREATED BY HONEY CREEK AND ADJACENT HILLSIDE AREAS. b. Has the area been used for agriculture? If so, describe. NO c. Describe any structures on the site. THERE ARE NO STRUCTURES ON THE SITE. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? NO i e. What is the current zoning classification of the area? i CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 15 SINCE PART OF THE AREA IS WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON AND PART OF THE AREA IS CURRENTLY WITHIN KING COUNTY, THERE ARE SEVERAL ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS WITHIN THE SITE. FOR A GOOD INDICATION OF THE ZONINGS SEE EXHIBITS 4 AND 5 OF THE 60% ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY THAT SHOWS THE EXISTING CITY OF RENTON ZONING ADJACENT TO THE ANNEXATION AREA AND THE EXISTING KING COUNTY ZONING WITHIN THE COUNTY. THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS COMPATIBLE WITH BOTH KING COUNTY AND THE CITY OF RENTON ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS. f. What is the current comprehensive plan, designation of the area? THE CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS TWO DESIGNATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION - SINGLE-FAMILY FOR THE UPLAND AREA AND GREENBELT FOR THE AREA ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK. SEE EXHIBIT 6 OF THE 60% ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY. THE KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA IS URBAN FOR THE UPLAND AREA. THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS IN CONFORMITY WITH BOTH THE CITY OF RENTON AND KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLANS. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? NOT APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. THE DECEMBER, 1990 KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO I I DESIGNATES THE FOLLOWING SENSITIVE AREAS TO BE ON THE SITE: 1. THE HILLSIDE AREA ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK IS IDENTIFIED AS AN EROSION HAZARD AREA; 2: THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE ALONG THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE STREAM IS IDENTIFIED AS A LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA; 3. HONEY CREEK IS IDENTIFIED AS AN UNCLASSIFIED STREAM. THE PREPARATION OF THE SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIOS TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE SOIL TYPES AND SLOPES WHEN CLASSIFYING AREAS AS EROSION AND LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS. TYPICALLY, ANY DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS ASSOCIATED WITH STEEP SLOPES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE BUILDING SETBACK DISTANCES FROM THE TOP OF 40% SLOPE. USUALLY, THE APPROPRIATE SETBACK DISTANCE IS DETERMINED BY A GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT WHO MAKES ON SITE SOILS EVALUATION OF THE SPECIFIC SITE PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT. THE SITE IS ALSO EVALUATED FOR EVIDENCE OF RECENT LANDSLIDE AND EROSION ACTIVITIES. THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SUBMITTED WITH THIS CHECKLIST EVALUATED THE FEASIBILITY OF THE PROPOSED . DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE STEEP SLOPE AREAS WITHIN THE SITE. PAGE 5 OF THE GEOTHECHNICAL REPORT STATED THAT "IN GENERAL, WE CONCLUDE THAT THE EVALUATED SITE AREAS SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT USAGE" PAGE 9 OF THE REPORT FURTHER INDICATES THAT AN APPROPRIATE BUILDING SETBACK FROM THE TOP-OF-BANK OF THE HILLSIDE AREA IS 25r . CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 16 i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? AT AN INCREASE OF 3 RESIDENTS PER ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLD, IT IS ESTIMATED THAT 288 PEOPLE WILL RESIDE IN THE COMPLETED PROJECT. j. Approximately how many people would the completed proposal displace? NONE k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: NO DISPLACEMENT IMPACTS WILL OCCUR AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: THE PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING CITY AND COUNTY ZONING,AND IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 9. HOUSING: Approximately m n a. how o many units would be provided, if any. Indicate whether high, medium, or low-income housing. N.A. THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WILL ADD APPROXIMATELY 96 ADDITIONAL RESIDENCES OF MEDIUM TO HIGH INCOME HOUSING. b. Approximately how many units would be eliminated? NO RESIDENCES WILL BE ELIMINATED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: NO KNOWN HOUSING IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM THE PROPOSED PROJECT. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure, not including antennas, what is the principal exterior building material(s)proposed. NEW RESIDENCES WITHIN THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION WILL MORE THAN LIKELY BE CONSTRUCTED OF WOOD AND BRICK TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 30' . ALL NEW RESIDENCES WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT CITY OF RENTON BUILDING STANDARDS WHEN THE RESIDENTIAL APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY THE CITY. b. What views in the immediate area would be altered or obstructed? NO FMOWN VIEWS WILL BE ALTERED OR OBSTRUCTED AS A RESULT OF FUTUL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DUE TO THE PRESERVATION OF SOME OF THE TREES ON THE SITE AS SHOWN ON THE TREE PLAN, THE PROPERTIES IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE i CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 17 PROPOSAL WILL SEE TREES AND RESIDENCES RATHER THAN TREES ONLY. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any? THE PRESERVATION OF THE CREEK AND ADJACENT HILLSIDE AS OPEN SPACE/GREENBELT WILL PRESERVE A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE PROPOSED SITE. APPROXIMATELY 40% OF THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE WILL BE PRESERVED AS OPEN SPACE. THE PRESERVATION OF THE HILLSIDE AREA WITH THE EXISTING TREES AND VEGETATION WILL GREATLY MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL AESTHETIC IMPACT OF THE PROJECT. ADDITIONALLY, THE PRESERVATION OF SOME OF THE ON SITE VEGETATION AS SHOWN ON THE TREE PLAN WILL FURTHER HELP TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL IMPACT. SOME OF THE RESIDENCES ADJACENT TO THE HILLSIDE WILL OBTAIN SMALL VIEW CORRIDORS THROUGH LOWER LIMB PRUNING AND SELECTIVE THINNING OF IMMATURE DECIDUOUS TREES (ALDER ETC.) . 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day? THE FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL HAVE STREET AND HOUSE LIGHTS. THE LIGHTS WILL BE ON PRIMARILY DURING THE EVENINGS AND NIGHT. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? IT IS NOT ANTICIPATED THAT HOUSE AND STREET LIGHTS FROM THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL CREATE A SAFETY HAZARD OR INTERFERE WITH VIEWS. c. What existing off site source of glare may affect your proposal? NO OFF SITE GLARE IS KNOWN TO EXIST THAT MAY IMPACT THE PROPOSED PROJECT. d. Proposed measures to control light or glare, if any? THE PRESERVATION OF THE VEGETATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE HILLSIDES, THE PRESERVATION OF SOME OF THE ON SITE VEGETATION, AND THE RISING GRADE ON THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE WILL GREATLY REDUCE ANY LIGHT OR GLARE THAT MIGHT BE NOTICED BY EITHER ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS OR THOSE WHO RESIDE ACROSS THE CREEK TO THE WEST. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? SIERRA HEIGHTS PARK IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1/8 MILE TO THE NC' 'EAST WHICH PROVIDES DESIGNATED RECREATION. HONEY CREEK IS ,TED TO THE WEST AND SOUTHWEST. THE SEWER LINE ACCESS RCA.. cDJACENT TO THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE CREEK PROVIDES CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 18 INFORMAL TRAIL RECREATION. TO THE NORTH IS THE MAY CREEK OPEN SPACE AREA. THERE IS A PROPOSED HONEY CREEK/MAY CREEK TRAIL SYSTEM WHICH WILL CREATE MORE FORMAL RECREATION ACTIVITIES UPON IT'S COMPLETION. THE TRAIL SYSTEM WILL PARALLEL HONEY CREEK AND WILL TRAVERSE THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE PROPOSED SITE. SOME OF THE RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY HAVE USED THE UPLAND PORTION OF THE SITE FOR INFORMAL RECREATION - STROLLING AND TREE FORT CONSTRUCTION. • b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? NO FORMAL EXISTING RECREATIONAL USES WILL BE DISPLACED BY THIS PROPOSAL. SOME INFORMAL RECREATION USE OF THE SITE WILL CONTINUE TO OCCUR WITHIN THE GREENBELT AREA PROPOSED TO THE WEST OF THE AREA DESIGNATED FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project of applicant, if any? THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE PROPOSES TO DEDICATE TO THE CITY OF RENTON PARKS DEPARTMENT THE MAJORITY OF THE AREA ON THE SITE THAT IS STEEPER THAN 40% ADJACENT TO THE CREEK. THE CITY OF RENTON PARKS DEPARTMENT PLANS TO CONSTRUCT A TRAIL ALONG THE HONEY CREEK CORRIDOR ADJACENT TO THE STREAM. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE TRAIL WILL EVENTUALLY BE TIED INTO THE HONEY CREEK/MAY CREEK TRAIL SYSTEM. AN ADDITIONAL TRAIL CORRIDOR WILL BE DEDICATED THAT PROVIDES ACCESS FROM THE MIDDLE OF THE PROJECT IN THE VICINITY OF THE EXISTING WESTERN TERMINUS OF S.E. 100TH ST DOWN TO THE HONEY CREEK TRAIL AT THE BOTTOM OF THE HILLSIDE AREA. THE PROPOSED TRAIL DOWN TO THE OPEN SPACE AREA/TRAIL SYSTEM FROM THE CENTRAL PORTION OF THE SITE WILL PROVIDE THE EXISTING RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT WITH ACCESS TO RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES WHEN THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED. CURRENTLY, INDIVIDUALS THAT WANT TO GAIN ACCESS TO THE CREEK HAVE TO EITHER HIKE DOWN THE STEEP SLOPE TO THE CREEK OR DRIVE NORTH TO THE WESTERN TERMINUS OF S.E.95TH AND WALK DOWN THE CLOSED ROAD. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE COMPLETED PROJECT WILL INCREASE THE RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE EXISTING RESIDENCES IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT. OF THE TRAIL 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for national,state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so describe. NONE KNOWN b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic,archeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. NONE c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any? N.A. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on - site plans, if any. SEE VICINITY MAP i CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 19 b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not ! what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? THE AREA IS NOT CURRENTLY SERVED BY PUBLIC TRANSIT. PUBLIC TRANSIT IS AVAILABLE APPROX. 1/2 MILE TO THE EAST ALONG UNION AVENUE N.E. THE FOLLOWING IS FROM THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS: "METRO TRANSIT ROUTE NO.114 TRAVELS ON 132ND AVE S.E. AND CONNECTS WITH OTHER ROUTES TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH CREATING A NETWORK FOR COMMUTERS AND OTHERS. THE NEAREST PARK AND RIDE LOTS ARE LOCATED TO THE SOUTH AT S.2ND ST AND LOGAN AVENUE NORTH, AND TO THE NORTH AT 112TH AVE S.E. AT I- 405." c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would it eliminate? USING A VALUE OF 4 PARKING SPACES PER RESIDENTIAL UNIT, THE COMPLETED PROJECT WILL PROVIDE A TOTAL OF 384 ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES. NO KNOWN PARKING SPACES WILL BE ELIMINATED. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets? If so generally describe (indicate whether public or private) . SHEET 2 OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE SHOWS THE ROADS WITHIN THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION THAT NEED TO BE DEDICATED AND IMPROVED TO SERVE THE LOTS. SOME OF THE OFF SITE ROADS THAT ARE CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTED TO HALF STREET STANDARDS WILL NEED TO BE IMPROVED TO FULL WIDTH STANDARDS. THE ROADS THAT NEED TO 'BE IMPROVED ARE S.E 100TH FROM THE WESTERN TERMINUS EAST TO 128TH AVE S.E., 128TH AVE SE FROM S.'E 100TH SOUTH TO S.E. 102ND ST., S.E. 104TH FROM THE WESTERN TERMINUS EAST TO 128TH AVE S.E. THE OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS LISTED ABOVE ARE ROADS THAT ARE CURRENTLY HALF STREETS WITHIN FULL WIDTH RIGHT-OF-WAYS. THE STREETS WILL BE IMPROVED TO FULL WIDTH IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS. e. Will the proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water,rail or air transportation? If so generally describe. NO f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed proposal. If known indicate when peak volumes would occur. THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE WAS EVALUATED BY CHRISTOPHER BROWN AND ASSOCIATES TO DETERMINE THE IMPACT OF THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ON THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND ON THE INTERSECTIONS ALONG 132ND AVE S.E. FROM SUNSET BLVD. NORTH TO S.E. 95TH WAY. THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WAS PREPARED AND IS INCLUDED WITH THIS CH: ''LIST THAT CONTAINS THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY. THE "'IP GENERATION FROM THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS PRESENTED IN TABLE I AND II ON PAGE 8 AND 10 OF THE STUDY. FIGURES 4, AND 5 SHOWS THE CURRENT A.M. AND P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES RESPECTIVELY FOR THE STUDY AREA. TABLE IV ON PAGE 15 PRESENTS THE CURRENT LEVELS OF SERVICE OF THE INTERSECTIONS STUDIED FOR THE CURRENT YEAR , THE HORIZON YEAR CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 20 (1993) WITHOUT THE PROJECT, AND THE HORIZON YEAR WITH THE PROJECT. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any? THE TWO PRIMARY TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL CREATE ARE: 1. INCREASED INTERSECTION TRAFFIC ALONG 132ND N.E. FROM N.E. SUNSET UP TO AND INCLUDING S.E.102ND ST.; AND 2. THE INCREASED TRAFFIC ACROSS EXISTING ROADS THAT CURRENTLY ARE AT SUBSTANDARD CONDITION. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT LAKERIDGE WILL NEED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING ROADWAYS IN THE AREA: 1. SE 100TH STREET WILL BE IMPROVED TO FULL WIDTH STANDARDS FROM THE WESTERN TERMINUS EAST TO 128TH AVE SE; 2. 128TH AVE SE WILL BE IMPROVED FROM SE 100TH SOUTH TO SE 102ND TO FULL WIDTH STANDARDS; AND 3. SE 104TH WILL NEED TO BE IMPROVED TO FULL WIDTH STANDARDS FROM THE WESTERN TERMINUS EAST TO 128TH AVE SE. ADDITIONALLY, LAKERIDGE PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A ROAD THROUGH TAX PARCEL #228. PARCEL #228 IS LOCATED TO THE EAST OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND SOUTH OF SIERRA HEIGHTS PARK (SEE VICINITY MAP) . THE ROAD WILL EXTEND S.E. 100TH ST TO THE EAST AND SOUTH TO TIE-INTO S.E. 101ST AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EXISTING 130TH AVE. S.E./ S.E. 101ST ST. INTERSECTION. LAKERIDGE HAS MEET WITH THE KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSAL AND THEY (KING COUNTY) DID NOT HAVE ANY MAJOR PROBLEMS WITH THE CONCEPT. LAKERIDGE INTENDS TO DEDICATE AND CONSTRUCT THE ROAD ON TAX LOT #228 AS PART OF THE OFF SITE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE HONEY CREEK RIDGE SUBDIVISION. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROAD WILL PROVIDE ANOTHER ACCESS TO THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION THAT WILL HAVE THE EFFECT OF SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCING THE INCREASED TRAFFIC FLOW FROM THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITHIN THE EXISTING SIERRA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOODS. THE ADDITIONAL ROAD WILL ALSO IMPROVE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION WITHIN THE SIERRA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the proposal result in an increased need for public services (such as fire protection, police protection, health care, schools,other? THE NEED FOR ALL OF THE ABOVE PUBLIC SERVICES WILL INCREASE SLIGHTLY. A CONCERN THAT USUALLY ARISES WHENEVER AN ACTION OCCURS THAT WILL RESULT IN NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD IS THAT OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACT TO SCHOOLS. THE RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT IS FORTUNATE BECAUSE THERE IS NOT A WIDESPREAD OVER CROWDING OF THE DISTRICT'S FACILITIES. TWO OF THE DISTRICTS' SCHOOL FACILITIES ARE CURRENTLY LEASED TO THE KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. THERE ARE OTHER EXISTING SCHOOL FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY THAT ARE NOT BEING USED. SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN THAT MOVE INTO THE AREA WILL GO TO THE FOLLOWING SCHOOLS WHICH HAVE A MAY 1991 ENROLMENT AND EXISTING CAPACITY OF: CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 21 SCHOOL ENROLMENT CAPACITY IMPACT SIERRA HTS. 495 481 526 McKNIGHT 808 1130 825 HAZEN 1066 1246 1081 THE SCHOOLS THAT WILL SERVICE NEW GROWTH WITHIN THE PROPOSED -- • SUBDIVISION AREA ARE CURRENTLY UNDER CAPACITY EXCEPT SIERRA HEIGHTS. THE 1980 DIME FILE CENSUS DATA DISTRIBUTION RATIOS OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN PER RESIDENTIAL UNIT IS AS FOLLOWS: GRADES K THROUGH 6 - .326, GRADES 7 THROUGH 9 - .153, AND GRADES 10 THROUGH 12 - .135. APPLYING THE DISTRIBUTION RATIOS TO THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 96 ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN THE PROPOSED PROJECT, RESULTS IN THE ENROLMENT SHOWN IN THE "IMPACT" COLUMN SHOWN IN THE ABOVE. THE ONLY NEGATIVE IMPACT WILL BE TO THE SIERRA HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY. IT SHOULD BE KEPT IN MIND THAT IT WILL TAKE SEVERAL YEARS FOR THE PROJECT TO BECOME "BUILT OUT", AND DURING THAT TIME SOME OF THE STUDENTS WILL HAVE MOVED UP TO McKNIGHT MAKING MORE ROOM AT SIERRA HEIGHTS. THE RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT IS CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING A DECLINE IN ENROLMENT. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any? THE ADDITION OF NEW RESIDENCES TO THE AREA WILL INCREASE THE TAX BASE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO OFFSET THE . INCREASED NEED FOR PUBLIC SERVICES. THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE WILL ADD 96 ADDITIONAL RESIDENCES TO THE AREA. AT AN ESTIMATED VALUATION OF $260,000 PER RESIDENCE, THE NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL INCREASE THE TAX BASE BY $24,960,000. THE INCREASED TAX BASE WILL RESULT IN INCREASED TAX REVENUE FOR THE STATE. SOME OF THE INCREASED TAX REVENUE WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE CITY OF RENTON WHICH WILL DETERMINE, THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, WHERE THE INCREASED RESOURCES WILL BEST, SERVE THE CITY. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT SOME OF THE INCREASED TAX REVENUE WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO MEET THE INCREASED DEMAND RESULTING FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE AREA. 16. UTILITIES • a. Circle utilities currently available at the annexation area: ELECTRICITY, NATURAL GAS, WATER, REFUSE SERVICE, TELEPHONE, SANITARY SEWER septic system, other? SEE EXHIBITS 7, AND 8 OF THE ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY FOR THE.LOCATIONS OF EXISTING WATER AND SEWER FACILITIES ADJACENT TO THE AREA. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE WATER SERVICE AVAILABLE AT THE SITE WILL NEED TO BE IMPROVED. THE AREA IS CURRENTLY SERVED BY A 6" LINE. LAKERIDGE PLANS ON INSTALLING A NEW 8" WATER LINE TO SERVICE THE AREA THAT WILL TIE-INTO THE EXISTING WATER LINE ALONG UNION AVENUE N.E. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE June 28, 1991 PAGE 22 AS PART OF. PROVIDING SEWER SERVICE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT, LAKERIDGE WILL BE CONSTRUCTING A PORTION OF THE SEWER SYSTEM THAT WILL BE EXTENDED TO SERVE THE LID #335. THE PORTION OF THE SYSTEM THAT LAKERIDGE WILL BE CONSTRUCTING REPRESENTS APPROXIMATELY 1/3 OF THE TOTAL PER HOUSEHOLD COST OF THE LID. I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge, the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it may issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. IN ADDITION, LAKERIDGE HAS MEET WITH MANY DEPARTMENTS AT THE CITY OF RENTON, (PLANNING, PARKS, SEWER AND WATER, STORM DRAINAGE, TRANSPORTATION, AND FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE) TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED HONEY CREEK RIDGE SUBDIVISION. THE INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THIS CHECKLIST ADDRESSES, TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, THE MAJOR CONCERNS AND ISSUES RAISED AT THE PRELIMINARY MEETINGS. ' / CiLt.t L%1/ . Date: 6 -Z DAVID W. CASEY LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT. L:\HONEYCRK\HCPRELIM.ENV SECTION 2 HONEY CREEK RIDGE • APPENDIX fj YAYI II APPENDIX A HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST MAY 31, 1990 • } ' 1 a qy 1 CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 • PAGE 1 • 1. Name of proposal if applicable: HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION { 2. Name of Proposer: LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT INC. , 3. Address and phone number of proposer and contact person: WM WAYNE JONES, PRESIDENT LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT PO BOX 146 RENTON, WA 98057 (206) 228-9750 - 4. Date checklist was prepared: 5/22/90 5. Agency requesting checklist: CITY OF RENTON - 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable) : SPRING/SUMMER 1990 Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or - further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes 1-explain. LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT INC IS CURRENTLY FINALIZING A SUBMITTAL PACKAGE FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE. HONEY CREEK RIDGE WILL BE A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ON APPROXIMATELY 51 ACRES OF LAND THAT CURRENTLY LIES IN BOTH THE CITY OF RENTON AND KING COUNTY. THE PLAT HAS TWO MAIN DIVISIONS. DIVISION I IS WITHIN THE RENTON CITY LIMITS AND CONSISTS OF 36 LOTS ON 25.3 ACRES WITH 11.7 ACRES SET ASIDE AS GREEN BELT. DIVISION II IS 56 LOTS, 6 LOTS ARE WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON AND 50 LOTS ARE WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. THE 50 LOTS ARE A REPLAT OF THE 53 EXISTING PLATTED LOTS OF ALBERT BALCH'S SIERRA HEIGHTS DIVISION #5. THE REPLATTING OF THE 50 LOTS TO THE CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS REQUIRES A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF LOTS. DIVISION #2 IS 23.9 ACRES WITH 7.4 ACRES AS GREENBELT. DIVISION III IS 4 LOTS ON { j 1.8 ACRES. THIS ANNEXATION PROPOSAL HAS THE POTENTIAL OF ALLOWING AN AREA TO DEVELOP THAT HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN CONSTRAINED DUE TO THE LACK OF ADEQUATE SEPTIC DISPOSAL FACILITIES. ALL OF THE PROPERTY - WITHIN WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA IS CURRENTLY UNDEVELOPED. A SMALL CREEK, (HONEY CREEK) , THAT TRAVERSES THE SOUTHERN PROPERTIES OF THE ANNEXATION AREA PLACES A DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINT ON A LARGE PORTION OF THE SOUTHERN AREA OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. IN ADDITION TO THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE, IT IS ESTIMATED THAT THE REMAINING AREA PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION WILL SUPPORT APPROXIMATELY 15 ADDITIONAL RESIDENCES. IN PREPARING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE, LAKERIDGE HAS OBTAINED INFORMATION RELATING TO SITE SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION. MOST OF THE ISSUES CONCERNING THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ARE RELEVANT TO THE REMAINING PROPERTIES WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. SINCE THE ' PROPOSED ANNEXATION WILL RESULT IN THE PROVISION OF SEWER AND __ I CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY 'CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 2 WATER, AND THE EVENTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE ANNEXED PROPERTIES, . THIS CHECKLIST WAS PREPARED WITH THE PURPOSE OF ADDRESSING THE • ISSUES RELATING TO: 1. THE NONPROJECT ANNEXATION; AND 2. THE EVENTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been - prepared,or will be prepared directly related to this proposal. THE FOLLOWING ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN PREPARED THAT RELATES TO THIS PROPOSAL: 1.THE CITY OF RENTON PREPARED AN ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY - HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION - 10% NOTICE OF INTENT - FOR THE ' 1 PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON FEBRUARY 19, 1990. THE ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY IS ATTACHED. SOME OF THE EXHIBITS IN THE REVIEW SUMMARY ARE REFERENCED IN THIS CHECKLIST. 2. A GEOTHECHNICAL STUDY BY DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES - DATED JULY 1989 THE GEOTECHNICAL STUDY ADDRESSES THE CONCERNS OF SOIL TYPES, SLOPE STABILITY, APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION METHODS, AND SETBACKS - - FROM THE TOP OF BANK. THE GEOTECHNICAL STUDY FOCUSED PRIMARILY ON THE EXISTING PLATTED AREA OF ALBERT BALCH'S SIERRA HEIGHTS DIVISION #5 AT THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. - 3. A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PREPARED BY CHRISTOPHER BROWN AND ASSOCIATES - DATED JULY 3, 1989. THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS EVALUATED THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA ON THE EXISTING INTERSECTIONS EAST OF THE ANNEXATION AREA ALONG 132ND AVE S.E. 9. bo you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the geographic area covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. THE CITY OF RENTON IS CURRENTLY EVALUATING THE FEASIBILITY OF A SEWER LATERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (PROPOSED L.I.D. #335) THAT WOULD CROSS THE ANNEXATION AREA. THE PURPOSE OF THE L.I.D.WILL BE TO PROVIDE SEWER SERVICE TO AN AREA WITHIN SIERRA HEIGHTS DIVISION 2. WHERE EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEMS ARE FAILING. MICHAEL BENOIT OF THE UTILITY ENGINEERING SECTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON IS THE KEY CONTACT WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE PROPOSED L.I.D. THE CITY OF RENTON PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS PLANS TO EXTEND THE HONEY CREEK TRAIL SYSTEM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. - 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION PROPOSAL BY THE CITY OF RENTON CITY COUNCIL, AND APPROVAL BY THE WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW -, BOARD. I-1 CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY 'CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 2 WATER, AND THE EVENTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE ANNEXED PROPERTIES, . THIS CHECKLIST WAS PREPARED WITH THE PURPOSE OF ADDRESSING THE ISSUES RELATING TO: 1. THE NONPROJECT ANNEXATION; AND 2. THE EVENTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA. ,8. List any environmental information you know about that has been - prepared,or will be prepared directly related to this proposal. THE FOLLOWING ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN PREPARED THAT RELATES TO THIS PROPOSAL: 1.THE CITY OF RENTON PREPARED AN ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY - HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION - 10% NOTICE OF INTENT - FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON FEBRUARY 19, 1990. THE ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY IS ATTACHED. SOME OF THE EXHIBITS IN THE REVIEW SUMMARY ARE REFERENCED IN THIS CHECKLIST. 2. A GEOTHECHNICAL STUDY BY DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES - DATED JULY 1989 - THE GEOTECHNICAL STUDY ADDRESSES THE CONCERNS OF SOIL TYPES, SLOPE STABILITY, APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION METHODS, AND SETBACKS FROM THE TOP OF BANK. THE GEOTECHNICAL STUDY FOCUSED PRIMARILY ON THE EXISTING PLATTED AREA OF ALBERT BALCH' S SIERRA HEIGHTS DIVISION #5 AT THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. � I 3. A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PREPARED BY CHRISTOPHER BROWN AND ASSOCIATES - DATED JULY 3, 1989. THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS EVALUATED THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA ON THE EXISTING INTERSECTIONS EAST OF THE ANNEXATION AREA ALONG 132ND AVE S.E. 9. bo you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the geographic area covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. THE CITY OF RENTON IS CURRENTLY EVALUATING THE FEASIBILITY OF A SEWER LATERAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (PROPOSED L.I.D. #335) THAT i WOULD CROSS THE ANNEXATION AREA. THE PURPOSE OF THE L.I.D.WILL BE TO PROVIDE SEWER SERVICE TO AN AREA WITHIN SIERRA HEIGHTS DIVISION 2. WHERE EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEMS ARE FAILING. MICHAEL BENOIT OF THE UTILITY ENGINEERING SECTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON IS THE KEY CONTACT WITHIN THE CITY FOR THE PROPOSED L.I.D. THE CITY OF RENTON PARKS DEPARTMENT HAS PLANS TO EXTEND THE i HONEY CREEK TRAIL SYSTEM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed ---for your proposal, if known. �_ APPROVAL OF THE ANNEXATION PROPOSAL BY THE CITY OF RENTON CITY COUNCIL, AND APPROVAL BY THE WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD. i CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 1 HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 3 • 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed useS and the size of the project and site. There are - several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) THE PROPOSAL IS FOR THE ANNEXATION OF 65 PARCELS OF PROPERTY TOTALLING APPROXIMATELY 44 ACRES. SEE ATTACHED VICINITY MAP SHOWING THE ANNEXATION AREA WITH RESPECT TO THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposal, including a street address, if any, and section, township and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the boundaries of the site(s) . Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map,if reasonably available. 1 While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. THE ANNEXATION AREA IS LOCATED NORTH AND EAST OF THE EXISTING RENTON CORPORATE LIMITS BETWEEN 123RD AV SE AND 129TH AVE SE, SE 107TH AND SE 100TH ST. SEE VICINITY MAP THAT SHOWS THE EXACT LOCATION AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. IN ADDITION TO THE STANDARD ITEMS SHOWN ON THE VICINITY MAP, THE TOPOGRAPHY IN THE VICINITY OF THE ANNEXATION AREA IS SHOWN. THE ADDITION OF THE TOPOGRAPHY , TAKEN FROM THE CITY OF RENTON AERIAL SURVEY, ALLOWS ONE TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE, IN GENERAL TERMS, WHICH OF THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA ARE CONSTRAINED TO DEVELOPMENT DUE TO THE HONEY CREEK AND ADJACENT HILLSIDE AREA. 11. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one) : FLAT, rolling, HILLY, STEEP SLOPES, mountainous, other: THE UPLAND AREA ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK IS GENERALLY FLAT AND SLOPES TO THE SOUTHWEST. THE CREEK FLOWS FROM THE SOUTHEAST TO THE NORTHWEST AT THE BOTTOM OF A BROAD SWALE THAT TRAVERSES PARTS OF THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. THE STEEP SLOPES ARE ON THE HILLSIDE AREA ADJACENT TO THE STREAM. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent = slope) ? ON THE HILLSIDE AREA ADJACENT TO THE STREAM, THE SLOPES RANGE FROM MODERATE TO VERY STEEP, WITH THE STEEPEST SLOPES BEING IN EXCESS OF 100% IN LOCALIZED AREAS. AS THE AREA DEVELOPS THERE WILL BE CONSTRAINTS PLACED ON DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THE STEEP SLOPES'. MOST OF THE AREAS OF 40% OR GREATER SLOPES WILL EVENTUALLY BE PLACED IN A GREEN BELT DESIGNATION. Ia CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY' CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990.. PAGE 4 c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for - example, clay,sand, gravel, peat, muck) ? If you know the - classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. USING THE 1973 KING COUNTY SOIL SURVEY THE FOLLOWING SOILS ARE INDICATED AS BEING WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. 1. THE UPLAND AREA SOILS CONSIST PRIMARILY OF ALDERWOOD AgC AND ARENTS, ALDERWOOD AmC. THESE SOILS ARE MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS GLACIAL TILL. 2. THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE ANNEXATION AREA IN THE VICINITY OF THE STEEP SLOPES IS CLASSIFIED ALDERWOOD AND KITSAP AkF. ALDERWOOD AND KITSAP SOILS ARE COMMONLY FOUND IN HILLSIDE AREAS. THE BOUNDARY OF THE SOIL APPEARS TO BE CLOSE TO THE TOP OF BANK. THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT CONTAINS SPECIFIC ONSITE SOILS INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM TEST PIT LOGS. THE TEST PITS WERE DUG IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe: THERE IS AN AREA ON TAX LOT # 35 WHERE A BURIED TELEPHONE CABLE PLACED DOWN THE HILLSIDE ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK IS ERODING. IT APPEARS THAT THE BACKFILL AND RESTORATION OF THE CABLE TRENCH WAS IMPROPERLY STABILIZED. SUBSEQUENT TO THE CABLE INSTALLATION, STORMWATER RUNOFF HAS CAUSED THE AREA TO ERODE. THE EROSION HAS CREATED A SMALL SWALE THAT APPEARS TO HAVE STABILIZED. NORTH AND WEST OF THE ANNEXATION AREA, A ROAD THAT IS CURRENTLY CLOSED TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC (120TH PL SE) HAS EXPERIENCED EROSION AND SLIDING PROBLEMS . IT IS EVIDENT THAT ANY FUTURE WORK ON OR ADJACENT TO THE HILLSIDE AREA WILL NEED TO BE PERFORMED WITH EXTREME CAUTION. e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill: NONE DIRECTLY RELATED TO THIS PROPOSAL. HOWEVER, SOME ROAD AND LOT GRADING WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE. MORE THAN LIKELY, SOME MINOR GRADING WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE OTHER PARCELS WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WHEN THOSE PROPERTIES DEVELOP. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction or use? If so, generally describe. NOT DIRECTLY BY THIS ACTION. AS THE AREA DEVELOPS, THERE IS ALWAYS THE POTENTIAL THAT IMPROPER UTILITY INSTALLATIONS, AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES MAY CAUSE EROSION. MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL BE LIMITED TO THE NORTHERN UPLAND AREAS AND AWAY FROM THE STEEP SLOPE PORTION OF THE HILLSIDE AREA ASSOCIATED WITH HONEY CREEK. THE CITY OF RENTON DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE PROTECTIVE OF STEEP SLOPE AREAS. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY' CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 • PAGE 9 • c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for • example, clay,sand, gravel, peat, muck) ? If you know the . classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. USING THE 1973 KING COUNTY SOIL SURVEY THE FOLLOWING SOILS ARE INDICATED AS BEING WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. 1. THE UPLAND AREA SOILS CONSIST PRIMARILY OF ALDERWOOD AgC AND ARENTS, ALDERWOOD AmC. THESE SOILS ARE MORE COMMONLY KNOWN AS GLACIAL TILL. 2. THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE ANNEXATION AREA IN THE VICINITY OF THE STEEP SLOPES IS CLASSIFIED ALDERWOOD AND KITSAP AkF. ALDERWOOD AND KITSAP SOILS ARE COMMONLY FOUND IN HILLSIDE AREAS. THE BOUNDARY OF THE SOIL APPEARS TO BE CLOSE TO THE TOP OF BANK. THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT CONTAINS SPECIFIC ONSITE SOILS INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM TEST PIT LOGS. THE TEST PITS WERE DUG IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe: • THERE IS AN AREA ON TAX LOT # 35 WHERE A BURIED TELEPHONE CABLE PLACED DOWN THE HILLSIDE ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK IS ERODING. IT APPEARS THAT THE BACKFILL AND RESTORATION OF THE CABLE TRENCH WAS IMPROPERLY STABILIZED. SUBSEQUENT TO THE CABLE INSTALLATION; STORMWATER RUNOFF HAS CAUSED THE AREA TO ERODE. THE EROSION HAS CREATED A SMALL SWALE THAT APPEARS TO HAVE STABILIZED. NORTH AND WEST OF THE ANNEXATION AREA, A ROAD THAT IS CURRENTLY CLOSED TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC (120TH PL SE) HAS EXPERIENCED EROSION AND SLIDING PROBLEMS. IT IS EVIDENT THAT ANY FUTURE WORK ON OR ADJACENT TO THE HILLSIDE AREA WILL NEED TO BE PERFORMED WITH EXTREME CAUTION. e. Describe the purpose, type and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill: NONE DIRECTLY RELATED TO THIS PROPOSAL. HOWEVER, SOME ROAD AND LOT GRADING WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE. MORE THAN LIKELY, SOME MINOR GRADING WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE OTHER PARCELS WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WHEN THOSE PROPERTIES DEVELOP. • f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction or use? If so, generally describe. NOT DIRECTLY BY THIS ACTION. • AS THE AREA DEVELOPS, THERE IS ALWAYS THE POTENTIAL THAT IMPROPER UTILITY INSTALLATIONS, AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES MAY CAUSE EROSION. MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL BE LIMITED TO THE NORTHERN UPLAND AREAS AND AWAY FROM THE STEEP SLOPE PORTION OF THE HILLSIDE AREA ASSOCIATED WITH HONEY CREEK. THE CITY OF RENTON DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE PROTECTIVE OF STEEP SLOPE AREAS. } I CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST II ' HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 • PAGE 5 g. About what percent of the site will be covered with . impervious surfaces after the project construction (for example, - asphalt or buildings) ? THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS ANNEXATION. IT IS ESTIMATED THAT FOR THE PROPOSED HONEY CREEK RIDGE SUBDIVISION THERE WILL BE 17% IMPERVIOUS AREA WHEN THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED. SINCE THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTIES AT THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA ALSO CONTAIN THE CREEK AND ADJACENT HILLSIDE AREA, IT IS ESTIMATED THAT WHEN THOSE PROPERTIES ARE EVENTUALLY DEVELOPED,THE TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA WILL BE LESS THAN WHAT WAS DETERMINED FOR THE HONEY CREEK RIDGE SUBDIVISION. li- h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: THE CITY OF RENTON HAS RECENTLY ADOPTED THE NEW KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL. CHAPTER FIVE OF THE MANUAL CONTAINS EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN PRACTICES REQUIREMENTS THAT WILL BE PLACED UPON EACH NEW PROPOSED I DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. THE NEW KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL CONTAINS THE MOST UP TO DATE METHODS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTROLLING EROSION FROM NEW DEVELOPMENTS. THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE WILL BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS IN THE NEW MANUAL. f 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. AS THE AREA DEVELOPS, THERE WILL BE MINIMAL EMISSIONS OF DUST, EQUIPMENT EXHAUST,AND ODORS FROM PAVING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF EACH PROJECT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. WHEN THE AREA IS EVENTUALLY DEVELOPED, THERE WILL BE A SLIGHT INCREASE IN AUTOMOBILE, WOOD STOVE,AND FIREPLACE EMISSIONS. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that -- may affect your proposal? If so: NONE THAT WOULD AFFECT THE PROPOSAL AND NONE THAT WOULD EFFECT THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE ANNEXATION AREA c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: NONE AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL, HOWEVER, AS THE AIR QUALITY CONTINUES TO BE IMPACTED BY INCREASED DEVELOPMENT, IT IS PROPOSED THAT THE CITY OF RENTON CONSIDER ALLOWING ONLY E.P.A. CERTIFIED WOOD STOVES OR FIREPLACE INSERTS IN NEW SUBDIVISIONS. CITY OF RENTON — ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY •CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 1 PAGE 6 3. WATER a. SURFACE: 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate •' vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams,saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands) ? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. A SMALL STREAM (HONEY CREEK) TRAVERSES FROM THE SOUTHEAST TO THE NORTHWEST PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. THE STREAM FLOWS GENERALLY FROM THE SOUTH TO THE NORTH, WHERE IT CONVERGES WITH MAY CREEK. MAY CREEK FLOWS INTO LAKE WASHINGTON. 2. Will the proposal require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please - describe and attach plans. NONE AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL. HOWEVER, NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL NEED TO TIE INTO AN EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE THAT IS ADJACENT TO AND ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF HONEY CREEK. ADDITIONALLY, SOME WORK MAY BE REQUIRED ADJACENT TO THE CREEK TO PROVIDE STABLE OUTFALLS FOR STORMWATER DETENTION SYSTEMS FOR THE SUBDIVISIONS THAT DEVELOP WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. NONE AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL, AND NONE KNOWN AS A RESULT OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or • diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. NONE AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL, AND NONE KNOWN AS A RESULT OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. • 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. ACCORDING TO THE KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THERE IS A 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN ASSOCIATED WITH HONEY CREEK. SINCE HONEY CREEK IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE HILLSIDE AREA, THE FLOODPLAIN ASSOCIATED WITH THE CREEK WILL BE FAR OUTSIDE • ANY POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA. THE AVERAGE VERTICAL l DISTANCE BETWEEN THE TOP OF BANK WHERE DEVELOPMENT WILL CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION • May 31, 1990 7 PAGE 7 OCCUR, AND THE STREAM BED WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA IS 10 0' . 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. NONE AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS ANNEXATION PROPOSAL, AND NONE AS A RESULT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA. b. GROUND: 1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. NONE AS A RESULT OF THIS ANNEXATION PROPOSAL, AND NONE AS A RESULT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA. I 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic chemicals. . . and agricultural; etc) . I'— Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable) , or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. 1 NONE AS A RESULT OF THIS ANNEXATION PROPOSAL, AND NONE KNOWN AS A RESULT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA. THE ANNEXATION WILL ALLOW FOR THE EXTENSION OF SEWER SERVICE TO AN AREA CURRENTLY SERVED BY SEPTIC SYSTEMS. c. WATER RUNOFF (including storm water) : � I 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities if known) . Where will this matter flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. RUNOFF FROM THE AREA GENERALLY SHEET FLOWS OVERLAND OR IN SHALLOW SWALES TO THE SOUTHWEST WHERE IT EVENTUALLY ENTERS HONEY CREEK. THE SOURCE OF WATER IS STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM RESIDENCES, UNDEVELOPED LAND, AND ROADS. THE PROPERTIES THAT DEVELOP WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ON SITE STORMWATER _I RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITIES, AND PRIOR TO DISCHARGE OF ANY ADDITIONAL STORMWATER INTO EITHER NEW OR EXISTING CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS, ALL STORMWATER WILL BE REQUIRED TO FLOW THROUGH OIL/WATER SEPARATORS AND BIOFILTRATION SWALES. THE APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS WILL BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME THE -CITY OF RENTON REVIEWS APPLICATIONS FOR NEW SUBDIVISIONS. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ; HONEY• CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 • PAGE 8 ILLEGALLY DISCHARGED WASTE MATERIALS COULD ENTER GROUND AND SURFACE WATERS. THE PUBLIC IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE - AWARE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF PROPER HOUSEHOLD WASTE DISPOSAL METHODS. THERE ARE STILL THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO DUMP WASTE MATERIALS INTO THE STORM DRAINS. THE NEW STORM DRAIN INLETS THAT HAVE THE STATEMENT "DUMP NO 1 POLLUTANTS - OUTFALL TO STREAM" ARE A GOOD START AT MINIMIZING THE ILLEGALLY DISCHARGED WASTE MATERIALS. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground and 1 runoff water impacts, if any: ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE HONEY CREEK BASIN AREA IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ONSITE DETENTION FACILITIES THAT ARE DESIGNED TO STORE A POST-DEVELOPED 25-YEAR STORM EVENT AND RELEASE THE STORMWATER AT A PREDEVELOPED 5-YEAR STORM RATE. ADDITIONALLY,THE CITY OF RENTON HAS RECENTLY ADOPTED THE NEW "1990 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL" . THE NEW MANUAL CONTAINS VERY RESTRICTIVE DESIGN CRITERIA THAT IF PROPERLY IMPLEMENTED WILL ENSURE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL HAVE LITTLE OR NO IMPACT TO THE HONEY CREEK STREAM. - 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site; XX deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other XX evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other XX shrubs 1 grass pasture crop or grain XX wet soil plants: ALONG AND ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK XX water plants: ALONG HONEY CREEK other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? • NONE AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS ANNEXATION PROPOSAL. HOWEVER, WITHIN THE AREA THAT CAN SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT, VEGETATION WILL BE REMOVED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROADS AND HOUSES. EACH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL BE REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF RENTON TO PREPARE A LANDSCAPE PLAN WHICH REQUIRES A FIELD SURVEY OF ALL THE TREES ON THE SITE OF A MINIMUM SIZE. THE PLAN ALSO SHOWS THE PROPOSED AREAS TO BE CLEARED. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. NONE d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measure to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: NONE AS A PART OF THIS ANNEXATION PROPOSAL. HOWEVER, A TREE PLAN HAS BEEN PREPARED AND SUBMITTED FOR THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE. DIVISION 2 OF THE -r •r CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY 'CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 9 PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA.THE TREE • PLAN IS TYPICAL OF WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. MOST OF THE AREA THAT HAS SLOPES OF 40% OR GREATER WILL BE PRESERVED AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE/GREENBELT. A LARGE PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST ANNEXATION AREA IS WITHIN THE STREAM CORRIDOR AND ADJACENT HILLSIDE AREA. THEREFORE, THE EXISTING NATIVE PLANTS AND VEGETATION IN THE AREA WILL CONSEQUENTLY BE PRESERVED. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, SONGBIRDS, other Mammals: DEER, bear, elk, beaver, other RODENTS, MOUNTAIN BEAVER Fish: bass, salmon, TROUT, herring, shellfish, other -fi ' b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or -" near the site. NONE KNOWN C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so explain. NONE KNOWN 1 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: NONE DIRECTLY BY THIS ANNEXATION PROPOSAL. THE PRESERVATION OF THE HILLSIDE AREA, INCLUDING THE CREEK , AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE, WILL ALLOW FOR THE CREATION OF A WILDLIFE CORRIDOR. THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE HAS SET ASIDE A LARGE PROPORTION (40%) OF THE TOTAL PROJECT ACREAGE AS OPEN SPACE. AS THE REMAINING SMALL UPLAND AREA WITHIN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION DEVELOPS, THE IDENTIFICATION AND PRESERVATION OF APPROPRIATE OPEN SPACE WILL OCCUR DURING THE CITIES REVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electricity, natural gas, oil, wood stove,solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. NONE DIRECTLY BY THIS ACTION ALL OF THE ABOVE RESOURCES MAY BE UTILIZED FOR HEATING OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AS THE AREA DEVELOPS. { b. Would your proposal affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. NO - , c. What kinds of energy conservation features are indicated in the plans for this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: NONE DIRECTLY BY THIS ACTION. II j ' CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 10 THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDENCES AS A RESULT OF DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA WILL BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT CITY OF RENTON ENERGY CONSERVATION CODES. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so describe. THE PUGET POWER BEVERLY TALBOT #1 AND #2 TRANSMISSION LINES 1 TRAVERSES A PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA. THE POWER LINES ARE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST AREA OF THE AlBERT BALCH'S SIERRA HEIGHTS #5 SUBDIVISION. (SEE VICINITY MAP) THE POWER LINES ARE CURRENTLY OPERATED AT 115-kV WHICH RESULTS IN A MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH THAT RANGES FROM 8 TO 22 mG AT THE EDGE OF THE POWER LINE EASEMENT (25' AWAY FROM THE LINE) . PUGET POWER PLANS TO REPLACE THE EXISTING LINES WITH A NEW LINE THAT WILL OPERATE AT 230kV. THE ANTICIPATED MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH FROM THE NEW LINE WILL BE IN THE RANGE OF 6 TO 12 mG AT THE EDGE OF THE POWER LINE EASEMENT. THE PROPOSED POWER LINE WILL ACTUALLY REDUCE THE MAGNETIC FIELD STRENGTH AT THE EDGE OF THE EASEMENT. I HERE IS A CONCERN ABOUT THE LONG TERM HEALTH EFFECTS OF LIVING ADJACENT TO POWER TRANSMISSION LINES. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. N.A. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards if any. N.A. ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA ADJACENT TO THE POWER LINES, WILL HAVE TO BE EVALUATED TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE BUILDING SETBACK LINES (BSBL) THAT MINIMIZES THE POTENTIAL IMPACT TO NEW RESIDENCES NEAR THE LINES. ` b. NOISE 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your proposal (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, _-- other) ? NONE 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other) ? Indicate what hours noise would come from this site. NONE DIRECTLY BY THIS ACTION DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA MAY RESULT IN SOME NOISE FROM CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT DURING THE DAYLIGHT HOURS, WHILE CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY •CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 11 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: NONE DIRECTLY BY THIS ACTION AS THE AREA DEVELOPS, THE PRESERVATION OF VEGETATION ON AND ADJACENT TO THE HILLSIDE AREA, WILL PROVIDE A NOISE BUFFER TO RESIDENTS LIVING ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE CREEK. THE PRESERVATION OF SOME OF THE ONSITE TREES IDENTIFIED AS BEING SIGNIFICANT ON THE "TREE PLAN" WILL AID IN CREATING A NOISE BUFFER FOR THOSE RESIDENTS LIVING ADJACENT TO PROPOSED PROJECTS. ADDITIONALLY,THE CITY OF RENTON PLACES LIMITS ON CONSTRUCTION HOURS. EACH PROJECT WILL HAVE TO BE INDIVIDUALLY EVALUATED BY THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME THE PROJECT APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the annexation area and adjacent properties? THE ZONING WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA IS SFR, HOWEVER MOST t OF THE PROPERTY IS VACANT. THERE ARE SOME SCATTERED SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES IN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE AREA. EXISTING LAND USES ADJACENT TO THE ANNEXATION AREA CONSIST OF SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS TO THE SOUTHWEST, EAST, AND NORTH. b. Has the annexation area been used for agriculture? If so, describe. NO c. Describe any structures on the site. THE STRUCTURES ARE SCATTERED RESIDENCES AND ASSOCIATED OUTBUILDINGS LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST AREA. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? NO e. What is the current zoning classification of the annexation area? SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING, RS-7200, IS THE PREDOMINANT KING COUNTY ZONING DESIGNATION WITHIN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA. THERE ARE TWO SMALL AREAS OF SC-P ZONING, ONE IS LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST AREA, AND THE OTHER IS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. SEE EXHIBITS 4 AND 5 OF THE ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY THAT SHOWS THE EXISTING CITY OF RENTON ZONING ADJACENT TO THE ANNEXATION AREA AND THE EXISTING KING COUNTY ZONING WITHIN THE COUNTY. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the annexation area? THE CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS TWO DESIGNATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA - SINGLE-FAMILY FOR THE UPLAND AREA AND GREENBELT FOR THE AREA ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK. SEE EXHIBIT 6 OF THE ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY. AS CAN BE SEEN ON EXHIBIT 6, MOST OF THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE • CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY •CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 12 •• T . ANNEXATION AREA IS DESIGNATED GREENBELT IN THE CITY OF RENTON 1 • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. T . g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N.A. T I h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. THE KING COUNTY SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIO DESIGNATES THE HILLSIDE AREA ADJACENT TO HONEY CREEK AS: CLASS III EROSION, SEISMIC, AND LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS.. THE PREPARATION OF THE SENSITIVE AREAS FOLIOS CLASSIFIED ALL HILLSIDE AREAS AS CLASS III EROSION, SEISMIC, AND LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS. TYPICALLY, ANY DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS ASSOCIATED WITH STEEP SLOPES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE BUILDING SETBACK DISTANCES FROM THE TOP OF 40% SLOPE. USUALLY, THE APPROPRIATE SETBACK DISTANCE IS DETERMINED BY A GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT WHO MAKES ONSITE SOILS EVALUATION OF THE SPECIFIC SITE PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT. THE SITE IS ALSO EVALUATED FOR EVIDENCE OF RECENT LANDSLIDE AND EROSION ACTIVITIES. THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT SUBMITTED WITH THIS CHECKLIST EVALUATED THE FEASIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. PAGE 5 OF THE REPORT STATED THAT "IN GENERAL, WE CONCLUDE THAT THE EVALUATED SITE AREAS SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT USAGE" PAGE 9 OF THE REPORT FURTHER INDICATES THAT AN APPROPRIATE BUILDING SETBACK FROM THE TOP-OF-BANK OF THE HILLSIDE AREA IS 25' . i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? NOT APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED ACTION DIVISION II OF THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE HAS 56 LOTS, 50 OF WHICH ARE WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. AT AN AVERAGE OF 3 PERSONS PER RESIDENCE IT IS ESTIMATED THAT 150 ADDITIONAL PEOPLE WILL EVENTUALLY RESIDE IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. THE MAJORITY OF THE BUILDABLE LAND WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA IS LOCATED IN DIVISION II OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE. THERE IS A SMALL PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE ANNEXATION AREA THAT IS LEVEL ENOUGH FOR SUBDIVIDING INTO APPROXIMATELY 10 RESIDENCES. ADDITIONALLY, A SMALL AREA AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TAX LOT #35 MAY SUPPORT 5 ADDITIONAL RESIDENCES. THEREFORE, THE ANNEXATION AREA HAS THE POTENTIAL OF PROVIDING 65 NEW RESIDENCES WITH AN ESTIMATED POPULATION OF 195 PEOPLE. I j. Approximately how many people would the completed proposal - displace? NONE k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N.A. .i , CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 • PAGE 13 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: NOT 1 APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED ACTION ANY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING AND PROJECTED CITY OF RENTON LAND USES AND PLANS. r 9. HOUSING: a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any. Indicate whether high, medium, or low-income housing. N.A. :i POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ANNEXATION AREA WOULD 1 RESULT IN THE ADDITION OF APPROXIMATELY 65 NEW RESIDENCES OF MEDIUM INCOME HOUSING. • b. Approximately how many units would be eliminated? NO KNOWN RESIDENCES WILL BE ELIMINATED BY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. ii c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: - NO KNOWN HOUSING IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION OR THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. I 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure, not including antennas, what is the principal exterior building material(s)proposed. NOT APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED ACTION NEW RESIDENCES WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL MORE THAN LIKELY BE CONSTRUCTED OF WOOD AND BRICK TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 30' . ALL PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCES WILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT CITY OF RENTON BUILDING STANDARDS WHEN THE APPLICATION IS SUBM' 130^U^^ OR REVIEW BY THE CITY. b. What views in the immediate area would be altered or obstructed? NOT APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED ACTION NO KNOWN VIEWS WILL BE ALTERED OR OBSTRUCTED AS A RESULT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any? NOT APPLICABLE TO THE PROPOSED ACTION THE PRESERVATION OF THE CREEK AND ADJACENT HILLSIDE AS OPEN SPACE/GREENBELT WILL PRESERVE A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA. APPROXIMATELY 40% OF THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE WILL BE PRESERVED AS OPEN SPACE. APPROXIMATELY 80% OF THE REMAINING AREA WITHIN THE ANNEXATION IS DESIGNATED AS GREENBELT ON THE CITIES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE SETTING ASIDE OF OPEN SPACE WILL CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST • HONEY .CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 14 GREATLY REDUCE POTENTIAL AESTHETIC IMPACTS AS A RESULT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA. • 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day? N.A. FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL HAVE STREET AND HOUSE LIGHTS. LIGHTS WILL BE ON PRIMARILY DURING THE EVENINGS AND NIGHT. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? NOT AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE PROPOSED ACTION. WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA, IT IS NOT ANTICIPATED THAT HOUSE AND STREET LIGHTS WILL CREATE A SAFETY HAZARD OR INTERFERE WITH VIEWS. c. What existing off site source of glare may affect your proposal? NO OFFSITE GLARE IS KNOWN TO EXIST THAT MAY IMPACT THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ANNEXATION AREA. d. Proposed measures to control light or glare, if any? THE PRESERVATION OF THE VEGETATION ASSOCIATED WITH THE HILLSIDES, AND THE PRESERVATION OF SOME OF THE ONSITE VEGETATION OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA, WILL GREATLY REDUCE LIGHT AND GLARE ASSOCIATED WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPOSED ANNEXATION. 12. RECREATION "a. What designated and informal recreational, opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? 1 SIERRA HEIGHTS PARK IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1/4 MILE TO THE NORTHEAST WHICH PROVIDES DESIGNATED RECREATION. HONEY CREEK IS LOCATED TO THE WEST AND SOUTHWEST WHICH PROVIDES INFORMAL RECREATION. TO THE NORTH IS THE MAY CREEK OPEN SPACE AREA. THERE IS A PROPOSED HONEY CREEK/MAY CREEK TRAIL SYSTEM WHICH i . WILL CREATE MORE FORMAL RECREATION ACTIVITIES UPON IT'S COMPLETION. THE TRAIL SYSTEM WILL PARALLEL HONEY CREEK AND WILL TRAVERSE THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing ry recreational uses? NO FORMAL EXISTING RECREATIONAL USES WILL BE DISPLACED EITHER BY THIS PROPOSED ANNEXATION OR BY ANY FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 [1, PAGE 15 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on • recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by `l, - ' the project of applicant, if any? NONE BY THIS ACTION. THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE PROPOSES TO DEDICATE TO THE CITY OF RENTON PARKS DEPARTMENT, A TRAIL CORRIDOR OF SUFFICIENT WIDTH, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TRAIL THROUGH THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ADJACENT TO THE CREEK. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE TRAIL WILL EVENTUALLY BE TIED INTO I THE HONEY CREEK/MAY CREEK TRAIL SYSTEM. AN ADDITIONAL TRAIL CORRIDOR WILL BE DEDICATED THAT PROVIDES ACCESS FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA IN THE VICINITY OF THE EXISTING WESTERN TERMINUS OF S.E. 100TH ST DOWN TO THE HONEY CREEK TRAIL AT THE BOTTOM OF THE HILLSIDE AREA. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for national,state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the annexation area? If so describe. NONE KNOWN b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic,archeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the annexation area. NONE c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any? N.A. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the annexation area, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on - site plans, if any. SEE VICINITY MAP b. Is the annexation area currently served by public transit? If not what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? THE AREA IS NOT CURRENTLY SERVED BY PUBLIC TRANSIT. PUBLIC TRANSIT IS AVAILABLE APPROX. 1/2 MILE TO THE EAST ALONG UNION AVENUE N.E. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would it eliminate? N.A. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets? If so generally __ describe (indicate whether public or private) . NOT AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS ACTION. NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE ACCESS TO SERVE THE ADDITIONAL RESIDENCES. THIS MAY INCLUDE THE UPGRADING OF EXISTING ROADS, WIDENING EXISTING ROADS, AND POSSIBLY THE DEDICATION a ' • --r CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY ,CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 • PAGE 16 _ OF NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY NECESSARY TO PROVIDE ACCESS ACCEPTABLE TO CURRENT CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS. e. Will the proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity } of) water, rail or air transportation? If so generally describe. NO f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed proposal. If known indicate when peak volumes would occur. NO ADDITIONAL VEHICULAR TRIPS WILL OCCUR AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE WAS EVALUATED TO DETERMINE THE IMPACT OF THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ON THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD. DUE TO PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS OF THE ANNEXATION AREA IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE IS THE ONLY MAJOR DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC ON EXISTING ROADS FROM SE 104TH ST NORTH TO SE 101ST ST. SINCE TRAFFIC WAS AN ISSUE RAISED AT THE 10% ANNEXATION HEARING, THE TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE HONEY CREEK SUBDIVISION HAS BEEN INCLUDED WITH THIS CHECKLIST AS ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION. THE CONCLUSION OF THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS THAT THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC FROM DEVELOPMENT OF THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS TO THE EXISTING ROAD SYSTEMS CONNECTING THE ANNEXATION AREA TO 132ND AVE SE. NO CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED TO THE AREA THAT WOULD EFFECT THE RESULTS OF THE TRAFFIC STUDY SINCE THE TIME THE STUDY WAS PREPARED. NO NEW DEVELOPMENT HAS OCCURRED WITHIN THE AREA WEST OF 132ND AVE SE, AND NO NEW ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED. • g: Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation Impacts, if any? NONE DIRECTLY BY THIS ACTION ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL BE REQUIRED TO PREPARE AN ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST THAT WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE CITY OF RENTON TO DETERMINE ADEQUACY OF EXISTING ROADS TO SERVE THE TYPE OF PROJECT PROPOSED. IF IT IS DETERMINED THAT THE EXISTING ROAD SYSTEM IS INADEQUATE, THE CITY MAY REQUIRE THE PROPONENT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO IMPROVE ROADS WITHIN EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAYS TO ACCEPTABLE STANDARDS, AND/OR DEDICATE AND IMPROVE ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAYS WHERE IT IS DETERMINED TO BE NECESSARY. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE PROPOSED HONEY CREEK RIDGE SUBDIVISION WILL HAVE TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING ROADWAYS IN THE AREA: 1. SE 100TH STREET WILL BE IMPROVED TO FULL WIDTH STANDARDS FROM THE WESTERN TERMINUS EAST TO 128TH AVE SE; 2. 128TH AVE SE WILL BE IMPROVED FROM SE 100TH SOUTH TO SE 102ND TO FULL WIDTH STANDARDS; AND 3 . SE 104TH WILL NEED TO BE IMPROVED TO FULL WIDTH STANDARDS FROM THE WESTERN TERMINUS EAST TO 128TH AVE SE. r CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY 'CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 17 15. PUBLIC SERVICES - a. Would the proposal result in an increased need for public . services (such as fire protection, police protection, health care, schools,other? NONE DIRECTLY BY THIS ACTION. WITH THE ADDITION OF NEW RESIDENCES AS A RESULT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT,NEEDS FOR ALL THESE SERVICES WILL INCREASE SLIGHTLY A CONCERN THAT USUALLY ARISES WHENEVER AN ACTION OCCURS THAT WILL RESULT IN NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD IS THAT OF THE POTENTIAL IMPACT TO SCHOOLS. THE RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT IS FORTUNATE BECAUSE THERE IS NOT A WIDESPREAD OVER CROWDING OF THE DISTRICT'S FACILITIES. TWO OF THE DISTRICTS' SCHOOLS ARE CURRENTLY LEASED TO THE KENT SCHOOL DISTRICT. SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN THAT MOVE INTO THE AREA WILL GO TO THE FOLLOWING SCHOOLS WHICH HAVE A MAY 1990 ENROLMENT AND EXISTING CAPACITY OF: SCHOOL ENROLMENT CAPACITY IMPACT > G SIERRA HEIGHTS 458 480 494 7 McKNIGHT MIDDLE 786 1000 803 ;krt HAZEN HIGH 1071 1250 1086 THE SCHOOLS THAT WILL SERVICE NEW GROWTH WITHIN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA ARE CURRENTLY UNDER CAPACITY. THE 1980 DIME FILE CENSUS DATA DISTRIBUTION RATIOS OF SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN PER RESIDENTIAL UNIT IS AS FOLLOWS: GRADES K THROUGH 6 - .326, GRADES 7 THROUGH 9 - .153, AND GRADES 10 THROUGH 12 - .135. APPLYING THE DISTRIBUTION RATIOS TO THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF 111 ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA AND THE PART OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE SUBDIVISION THAT IS CURRENTLY WITHIN CITY LIMITS, RESULTS IN THE ENROLMENT SHOWN IN THE IMPACT COLUMN ADDED TO THE ABOVE CHART. THE ONLY NEGATIVE POTENTIAL WILL BE TO THE SIERRA HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY. IT SHOULD BE KEPT IN MIND THAT IT WILL TAKE SEVERAL YEARS FOR THE AREA TO BECOME COMPLETELY DEVELOPED, AND DURING THAT TIME SOME OF THE STUDENTS WILL HAVE MOVED UP TO McKNIGHT MAKING MORE ROOM AT SIERRA HEIGHTS. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any? NONE DIRECTLY BY THIS ACTION. THE ADDITION OF NEW RESIDENCES TO THE AREA WILL INCREASE THE TAX BASE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO OFFSET THE INCREASED NEED FOR PUBLIC SERVICES. THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HONEY CREEK RIDGE WILL ADD 96 ADDITIONAL RESIDENCES TO THE AREA. AT AN ESTIMATED VALUATION OF $260, 000 PER RESIDENCE, THE NEW DEVELOPMENT WILL INCREASE THE TAX BASE BY $24, 960,000. THE 1989 MILL RATE FOR CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 18 • THE AREA NEAR THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION BOUNDARY, WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS WAS .0128, WHICH WILL RESULT IN A REVENUE INCREASE OF $3194880. SOME OF THE INCREASED REVENUE WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE CITY OF RENTON WHICH WILL DETERMINE, THROUGH THE BUDGET PROCESS, WHERE THE INCREASED RESOURCES WILL BEST SERVE THE CITY. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT SOME OF THE INCREASED TAX REVENUE WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO MEET THE INCREASED DEMAND RESULTING FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE AREA. 16. 'UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the annexation area: ELECTRICITY, NATURAL GAS, WATER, REFUSE SERVICE, TELEPHONE, SANITARY SEWER septic system, other? SEE EXHIBITS 7, AND 8 OF THE ANNEXATION REVIEW SUMMARY FOR • THE LOCATIONS OF EXISTING WATER AND SEWER FACILITIES ADJACENT TO THE AREA. I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge, the - above information is true and complete. It is understood that the __ lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it may issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my - part. • G14 ui( Lil/ Date: DAVID W. CASEY LAKERIDGE DEVELOPMENT 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to - water;emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? AS THE AREA DEVELOPS THERE WILL BE AN INCREASE IN STORMWATER RUNOFF, AND A SLIGHT INCREASE IN EMISSIONS TO THE AIR FROM AUTOMOBILES AND WOOD BURNING STOVES. .Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS WILL PROVIDE ONSITE STORMWATER RETENTION/DETENTION FACILITIES. THE FACILITIES WILL BE DESIGNED USING THE 1990 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL WHICH HAS BEEN ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF RENTON FOR ALL NEW PROJECTS. THE DESIGN METHODS IN THE NEW MANUAL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASES THE STORAGE REQUIREMENTS, AND DECREASES THE ALLOWABLE STORMWATER RELEASE RATE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS. PRIOR TO THE DISCHARGE OF ANY STORMWATER TO A NATURAL SYSTEM, THE STORMWATER WILL BE REQUIRED TO PASS THROUGH OIL/WATER SEPARATORS AND BIOFILTRATION. CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 19 THE USE OF CERTIFIED WOOD STOVES WOULD GREATLY REDUCE EMISSIONS . TO THE AIR: HOWEVER, THERE ARE NO EXISTING CODES AND/OR I ORDINANCES THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE USE OF CERTIFIED WOOD STOVES ONLY. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, ` I fish, or marine life? AS THE AREA DEVELOPS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SOME VEGETATION AND ANIMALS WILL BE DISPLACED. IT IS NOT ANTICIPATED THAT THE PROPOSAL WILL HAVE ANY IMPACT ON FISH OR MARINE LIFE. , Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: THE PROPOSAL WILL INCORPORATE A LARGE AREA INTO THE CITY THAT IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED GREENBELT IN THE CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE ANNEXATION WILL ENSURE THAT THE CITY WILL BE ABLE TO CONTROL THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GREENBELT AREA WITHIN CITY LIMITS. THE PRESERVATION OF THE GREENBELT WILL PROVIDE HABITAT FOR THE BIRDS AND SMALL MAMMALS THAT ARE DISPLACED WHEN THE UPLAND AREA DESIGNATED SINGLE FAMILY IS DEVELOPED. THE CITY OF RENTON IS CURRENTLY REQUIRING THAT ALL NEW DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDE A TREE PLAN AT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW STAGE. THE TREE PLAN IS TO SHOW THE AREAS WHERE VEGETATION IS TO BE PRESERVED WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION. THE PRESERVATION OF SOME OF THE EXISTING TREES WITHIN THE NEW RESIDENTIAL AREAS WILL REDUCE THE DISPLACEMENT OF SONGBIRDS AND SQUIRELS. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? ENERGY RESOURCES WILL BE REQUIRED TO SUPPORT RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS WHEN THEY ARE CONSTRUCTED, HOWEVER, NO ENERGY OR NATURAL RESOURCE DEPLETION IS ANTICIPATED BY THE PROPOSAL. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: - RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS COULD STRIVE FOR "SOLAR ORIENTATION", AND ALL CONSTRUCTION COULD BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT ENERGY CONSERVATION CODES. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, . historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? THE PROPOSAL WILL INCORPORATE INTO THE CITY A LARGE AREA THAT THE PARKS DEPARTMENT DESIRES TO DEVELOP INTO A TRAIL SYSTEM AND TRAIL HEAD. THE AREA IS WITHIN THE DESIGNATED "GREENBELT" IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST • HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 • PAGE 20 r WHEN THE PORTION OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA DESIGNATED . SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPS, MOST OF THE AREA THAT HAS SLOPES OF A SUSTAINED 40% OR GREATER WILL BE INCLUDED INTO THE GREENBELT DESIGNATION. MOST OF THE SENSITIVE AREAS WITHIN THE ANNEXATION AREA WILL BE PLACED IN OPEN SPACE OR WILL BECOME PART OF THE CITY OF RENTON PARKS DEPARTMENT. NONE OF THE AREA WITHIN THE ANNEXATION BOUNDARY IS KNOWN TO FALL UNDER GOVERNMENTAL PROTECTION. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: THE INCORPORATION OF THE GREENBELT AREA INTO THE CITY LIMITS 1 WILL HELP TO ENSURE IT'S PROTECTION AND INCORPORATION INTO THE PARKS DEPARTMENT TRAIL SYSTEM. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land. and shoreline use,including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? THE PROPOSAL IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND NO IMPACT TO LAND OR SHORELINE USES ARE ANTICIPATED. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: NO IMPACTS ARE ANTICIPATED. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? DEMANDS ON TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC SERVICES, AND UTILITIES WILL ALL INCREASE SLIGHTLY AS THE AREA DEVELOPS. 7 • Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: EACH DEVELOPMENT THAT OCCURS AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE WITH THE CITY IN THE SUPPLYING OF THE NECESSARY TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC SERVICES, AND UTILITIES TO SERVICE THE NEW RESIDENCES THAT CREATE THE INCREASED DEMANDS. SUCH MEASURES WOULD INCLUDE UPSIZING WATER MAIN LINES TO ENSURE ADEQUATE PRESSURE AND FIRE FLOW REQUIREMENTS, PARTICIPATING IN PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER L.I.D. PROJECTS,AND PROVIDING ADEQUATE AND SAFE ROADWAY ACCESS TO THE DEVELOPMENT AREAS.. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local,state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. NO KNOWN CONFLICT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED BETWEEN THE PROPOSAL AND f " LOCAL,STATE, OR FEDERAL LAWS OR REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT. r , CITY OF RENTON - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST r HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION May 31, 1990 PAGE 21 • r SIGNATURE r I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it .. might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. r Proponent: Name Printed: /. G2l,/�j1 Av I � L:HCANNEXW.ENV I . it li APPENDIX B HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED SEPTEMBER 27, 1990 I �% ' '" CITY OF RENTON mu. Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann, Administrator September 27, 1990 David W. Casey Lakeridge Development, Inc. PO Box 146 Renton,WA 98057 SUBJECT: Honeycreek Ridge Annexation Environmental Review ECF-083-90 Dear Mr. Casey: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee and is to inform you that they have completed their review of the environmental impacts of the above-referenced project. The Committee, on September 26, 1990, decided that your project may be issued a Determination of Non-Significance- Mitigated with the following conditions: The applicants shall covenant that all future development in the annexation area will conform to all City of Renton standards, including, but not limited to, utilities, roadways, 'the subdivision of land, and zoning as a condition of annexation into the City of Renton. Because the Environmental Review Committee imposed specific mitigation measures rather than issue a Determination of Significance, there is a required 15 day comment period during which comments are I solicited from various agencies, jurisdictions or individuals (including the applicant) who may have an interest in the Committee's decision. The comment period will end October 16, 1990. Following the end of the comment period, the City will finalize its Determination unless comments received require a reevaluation. Following the finalization of the Determination,there is a required 14 day appeal period. i Staff urges you to contact the various City representatives, as appropriate, (e.g., the Public Works Division) as soon as possible, to obtain more information concerning specific mitigation elements recommended for this project, if you have specific questions. This information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and Will enable you to exercise your appea! rights more fully, if you choose to do so. In addition, by the end of the comment period, we should be able to establish a tentative public hearing _4 date before the Hearing Examiner, should a public hearing be necessary. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call Mary Savela or me at 235-2550. the Environment I evi mittee, "ild . Donald K. Erickson, AICP Secretary ercdecsn/DKE/kac 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2631 ' I APPENDIX C ISSUE PAPER HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION 60% PETITION/REZONE TO R-1 / G-1 NOVEMBER 27, 1990 • CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: November 27, 1990 TO: City Council r• VIA: Mayor Cly er FROM: L4S61.t ann, Administrator Planning/ ilding/Public Works Department CONTACT PERSON: Rubin Yu, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ISSUE PAPER - Honey Creek Ridge Annexation 60% Petition/Rezone to R-1/G-1 I. ISSUE The proponent, Lakeridge Development Corporation, proposes the annexation of 65 parcels of property totalling approximately 44 acres. II. BACKGROUND 1. Location: The subject site is located north and east of the existing Renton corporate limits in the vicinity of 124th and 125th Avenue SE and SE 100th and 104th Streets (Exhibits One and Two).. 2. Purpose of Annexation: The applicant intends to develop single-family dwellings on approximately 47.2 acres of land that currently lies in both the City of Renton and King County. The eastern portion of the development site, approximately 18.61 acres, is in the proposed annexation territory. The proponent is seeking the annexation so that the project may be developed under one jurisdiction. Development of the site with single-family dwellings requires City Council approval of a plat application. 3. Assessed Value: The total assessed value of the property within the proposed annexation area for 1990 is $1,033,887. Signatures on the annexation petition and signed covenants to annex constitute 75.6% of,the total assessed value. (Exhibit Three). 4. Existing City Limits: The City limits in the vicinity of the proposed annexation were created by five different annexations dating back to 1957. Ordinance Number 4095, adopted on November 25, 1987, created the western boundary of • Memorandum to City Council November 27, 1990 i Page 2 • the proposed annexation. Ordinance Number 4070, adopted on June 1, 1987, created the southeastern boundary. Three ordinances created the southern border of the proposed annexation: Ordinance Number 1627 adopted August 6, 1957; Ordinance Number 1631 adopted August 22, 1957; and, Ordinance Number 3879 adopted on January 14, 1985. 5. Existing Zoning: City zoning adjacent to the border of the subject site is G-1, General Zone and R-1, Residence Zone (Exhibit Four). Single-family zoning, RS-7200, is the predominate King County zoning category in the proposed annexation territory (Exhibit Five). This zone provides for single-family residences on a minimum 7,200 square-foot lot size. The SC-P zoning category is designated for the western portion of the annexation territory in the general area of Honey Creek. This zone establishes a maximum density of one unit per acre with lot clustering. The P-suffix condition requires that when lot clustering occurs in the SC zone, the reserve tract should be dedicated or reserved as permanent open space rather than set aside for future re-subdivision. North and east of the proposed annexation territory is zoned RS-7200 and SR-15000 which allows single-family dwellings on 15,000 square-foot parcels. 6. Comprehensive Plans: The City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan land use map designates the subject site as Greenbelt and Single-Family Residential (Exhibit Six). The Plan designates the Honey Creek corridor as Greenbelt and the remainder of the area as Single-Family. Single family homes at a density of up to six units per acre are permitted in this Comprehensive Plan land use designation. 7. Existing Land Use: While a majority of the annexation area is vacant, scattered single-family homes are found in the southern portion of the annexation territory. Existing land uses adjacent to the annexation territory consist of single-family dwellings to the east and north. 8. Public Services: A franchise agreement with King County Water District 107 establishes that water service to the subject area will be provided by the City of Renton. Six- and four-inch City water mains are located at the north and east of the subject site serving the Sierra Heights neighborhood in King County. Water facilities in the vicinity of the annexation proposal are illustrated in Exhibit Seven. Upon development of the site the project proponent will have to extend water services. A twelve-inch City sewer line, the Honey Creek interceptor, traverses the southwest portion of the site. Upon annexation and development of the site, the project proponent will have to extend sewer services. Existing sewer lines in the vicinity of the subject site and the proposed LID are illustrated in Exhibit Eight. The subject area is in the area of the King County Fire District 25. Upon annexation the City of Renton's Fire Station 12 located at NE 9th Street and Harrington Avenue NE would provide initial response. Response time to the site from Station 12 is estimated by Fire Department personnel to be approximately six minutes. City of Renton police patrols regularly operate in the vicinity of the proposed annexation. Memorandum to City Council November 27, 1990 Page 3, III. ACTION TAKEN BY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE The City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the proposed annexation and rezone to R-1/G-1 that includes the following condition: The applicants shall provide a covenant that all future development within the Albert Balch's Sierra Heights No. 5 subdivision shall conform to all City of Renton standards, including, but not limited to, utilities, roadways, the subdivision of land, and zoning. IV. FISCAL IMPACT The fiscal impact analysis presented below is the average-costing fiscal impact method that has been traditionally used by the City to project the fiscal impact of annexations. For the purpose of this report, the traditional method of estimating the fiscal impact of the Honey Creek Ridge Annexation is used. The analysis indicates that the annexation could have a negative impact on the fiscal budget of the City. This has been true with all annexations that exclude commercial property or property with limited population in the annexation territory. The average costing fiscal impact assessment methodology used to evaluate the fiscal impact of the annexation area does not account for the tax revenues generated by the residents who shop in Renton commercial establishments and assumes a constant level of service ratio for all municipal functions while incremental annexations are occurring. Two alternative fiscal impact scenarios are presented below. The first scenario is an analysis of the fiscal impacts of annexing the proposed territory and having no development or significant change in land use occur. The six single-family dwellings in the annexation territory would not be increased and population and assessed value would remain the same. The second land use scenario assumes that the 55-single-family project contemplated by the applicant is constructed in the annexation territory. • Memorandum to City Council November 27, 1990 Page 4 Fiscal Impact Analysis • Honey Creek Ridge Annexation With No Development and With a 55 Unit Single Family Project Residential lands Residential without develop- lands with 55 ment including 6 additional existing single single family family homes homes Added Population 15 160 Overall Additional City Employees Required .18 1.98 Operating Costs $15,577 $183,253 Capital Costs $2,239 $30,421 Property Tax Return, $4,238 $25,010 Other Income $14,055 ' $139,120 Total Revenue $18,293 $164,130 Total Net Impact $4,955 -$49,544 Note: 1. •The Overall Additional Employees Required is computed on the basis of the ratio of employees per 1,000 population for all the City's service functions. 2. The Operating Costs are computed on the basis of the ratio of the City's operating.costs per employee by service function. Memorandum to City Council November 27, 1990 Page 5 ANALYSIS OF TIIE PROPOSED ANNEXATION 1. All of the City departments evaluating the proposed annexation found no significant problems relating to their responsibility as a result of this proposal. improvements on the existingroadways Transportation: Minimum to full width Y standards; dedication of right-of-way; new street name signs; and updated traffic counts and critical gap analysis should be provided when development occurs. Storm Water: The proposed annexation would place a minor impact on the storm drainage systems in the area. Improvement to the system would occur as the area is developed in the future. Sewer Utilities: An existing twelve-inch City sewer line, the Honey Creek Interceptor, traverses the southwest portion of the site. Sanitary sewer service could be extended from this line to serve the annexed area. The Wastewater Utility has expressed concern that a capacity problem exists in this interceptor, specifically, the Devil's Elbow Lift Station and the gravity line downstream from the force main. A study is being performed to determine the necessary improvements required to bring the system up to a level that can service the additional area. Upon development of the site, the project proponent will be required to construct and/or participate in the improvements to upgrade the service capacity. Furthermore, the project proponent will have to extend a new sewer line through the site to service the development and to allow for future service to neighboring areas. A portion of the collector lines required for the proposed development of the site coincides with an LID proposed to bring sanitary sewer to the Sierra Heights area (LID 1335) and, thus, would reduce the distance between the existing sewer and the proposed LID. This work would be addressed under future site plans in the annexation area. Existing sewer lines in the vicinity of the subject site are illustrated in Exhibit Eight. Water Utility: The annexation would place no impact on the existing water system. As the area develops in the future, the water system needs to be extended to serve the sites developed. Water mains, hydrants and meter service would be required to be installed by the developer as the area develops. Parks and Recreation: The proponent has indicated they will dedicate, to the City of Renton, a trail easement of sufficient width to construct a trail. Once the construction of the single-family residences are planned, then the proponent needs to address the off- site impacts. Police: Improvement of access and roadways should be required when the development occurs. Fire: Fire Department noted the response time to the annexation site is approximately five (5) minutes or less. However, the current six (6) minutes. The City's standard is f v King County Fire Protection District response time to the site is approximately 6.4 minutes. This represents an improvement of fire protection if the property is annexed to the City. Memorandum to City Council November 27, 1990 Page 6 2. All reviewing departments indicate that the proposed annexation represents a logical extension of the services provided by their respective departments. The Utility staff noted that the annexation may help provide funding for sewer improvements in the proposed LID 335. 3. The majority of the reviewing departments indicate that service to the annexation can be accommodated with existing facilities, staff, and budget resources. The Police and Parks Department noted that development of the site would increase demand on public services provided by those departments. 4. All of the departments generally support the proposed annexation. Honey Creek is identified in the Trails Master Plan as a hiking corridor. The Parks Department has noted that Honey Creek is a part of the Department's open space program for acquiring new lands. 5. City Council Resolution 2429 establishes policies for the evaluation of annexation proposals. The proposed annexation is consistent with the policies favoring the extension of existing public services; it falls within the City's identified sphere of influence; the entire length of the western and southern boundary is adjacent to the City's boundary; the proposal fills in a portion of an unincorporated peninsula on the City's boundary; and, it is within the City's general service area. 6. At the 10% Notice of Intent public meeting held on February 19, 1990, on the Honey e Creek Ridge Annexation, the Renton City Council was required by RCW 35A.14.120 to answer the following questions: (a) Will the City accept the 10% Notice of Intent Petition as an intent to annex? The Administration recommended that Council accept the 10% Notice of Intent to Annex as submitted and authorize the circulation of the 60% Annexation Petition. The Council concurred in this recommendation and authorized the circulation of the 60% Annexation Petition. (b) Will the City require simultaneous adoption of City zoning regulations on the property? The Administration recommended that the City Council require simultaneous imposition of City zoning on the property and the Council concurred. (c) Will the City require the property owners to assume their proportional share of the City's bonded indebtedness? The Administration recommended that this requirement be imposed and the Council concurred. Memorandum to City Council November 27, 1990 Page 7, RECOMMENDATION Based upon the foregoing analysis, the Administration recommends approval of the Honey Creek Ridge Annexation. If Council concurs in this recommendation, the Administration recommends that Council make the following motions: 1. Accept the Honey Creek Ridge Annexation as proposed by certifying the 60% Annexation Petition, and authorized the Administration to prepare a Notice of Intention package for submission to the King County Boundary Review Board; 2. Require the simultaneous imposition of R-1 zoning on those parcels designated entirely for Single Family Residential use and G-1 on those parcels having Greenbelt designation (for the entire parcel of a portion of the parcel) in the City's Comprehensive Plan within the Honey Creek Ridge Annexation (see Exhibit Nine); and, 3. Require the property owners to assume their proportional share of the City's bonded indebtedness. 4. Require the applicants to covenant that all future development within the Albert Balch's Sierra Heights No. 5 subdivision will conform to all City of Renton standards, including, but not limited to, utilities, roadways, the subdivision of and, and zoning as a condition of annexation into the City of Renton. The covenant shall be approved by the City prior to the final approval of the annexation. AF"hncrek60" i I I . . • • . „ --i I / Exhibit One rigi ' Li islii .._, . i '. iney Creek Ridge Annexation I act. t .\ ' \\i' Vicinity Map I -.-N, \ • 1 _ ( i/ v I 1 ____________T _ _ , :.N......... • AN I . 7. ..,-c--•\- . ••,...• 1 If I . • • • 1 1 \ I LAKE '• 10111101NNA .till, ,r,. . ,, ,,,..., .% ......45 ,..... • ‘ „,, , WASHINGTON g \ A......g\. . 1 1 A •01.1°' Arillemi r—j..., 1 in---::-. 1 pi'n 1 imp.41,4 . lit a-Lie -WO r Anglo 0 „ 1 . . lliNtho )11"1 ..—= ... \ I IINtsdirlja . 1 _ 41111Y .or \ 16 • II til LI Ir0•44 14". . . IMP • Illpdfi i_ _ Is . L• •. - ... . , .. • !: liar 1111 ..,.. ..:::: . .: •• .. .., , , • . . .... la . . . .. , . ... c • . I 111C ..::i:i: ., •. Li '" % • I •:•:•:•:.: ..... .,, RRA HE iGliT ELEMEHTXRY SCHL •"41.1 k„, 411 I I'd L j 144%/4. . 6isilille ' 4F' . I - 7• 1 , — .....:APO:......7 7 ., , 4 a 0 ) . . .r.-...... ::::• : ...”4 t . '\ . . • 1 IN: NI• ., '. . . 5......•.:. .-.r-0.- .....• g 1 , • •11 .. .. ........._..._ . ....:: ... -,, 2 ,,A._ ,, . . ! : a •,iii on. . I , :.‘:. ::.. .::so:. . • .:,?. •,-- -,- 1 \-.... - Ztiot :,..• , :-. ,e- . -,,,- • .-P1 1-'2- :1E1'11-.11: 1 . \•., irk ?a 1 . ,...:•:• • . •• . ,_.- .... , -7,- • •• - •" ••:•11c em,•••,., • - - " - - - • . .,;.• ..... , 71,11-1 ItY • - - I.:.*::.;;9./...:::::.::.::,::::':.:::::',7. •1 Iri \ . • 47------4-1. / •:••••:•?...:•.........:.:.:.:.:.. „ - _ . -- .,, ,,, ,::.::::::::::::::::::.:::::::: .. _ ,,, a , . r ,.—-— L II • -*-4 ,/,-). :::::-:•:•:•:•::::::::::.:.:.:! .1,..L.,_ 'Q.' ':':':':.:.:•:••:•:•:•:•:•:•:•cr.;• _ , .:..,... • ( ( :::•:•:•:-::::::•:•:•:-:-:•:•:. ..,,, . . .. 1 .. . t, , „. . . .. 1 • 1 ,/ / -,d II li '::: ":: .::::....:.:. : : :.:.:::i 71. ' ,' . , . I 1 _2_4- .. , - •. s„.. 1 •.:.: •:.•:.. :.:.:.:. -- •• • C I I , t. 1. . :::•:::: .:;:e.;•••••••• 1 1 .• ...: - - — li *--1 : .•i -..:•:•:.:•:i••:•:::5::::: ••••••:•., ..::•:•)-:•:. .....- , ., __7,c_ 1 1 ., ,:i., .•ii, .:. :••••••••••:.:, :......1..... / 1 : Y - - .. ilIP. • -::':':':%.'....-...... '': '1', I 1,, i..i. t I . ' 1 1 1 r.._ i, 1 , . . youlcs i 11 . IN 111 ..\:. •'..6 1 .•. 1 — II - v2,) \ . / I \ mu lim fuuj •� • :t r -` 8 S-7 r-V----1\)-- \ ) , ......:.:.:.:•:•....., I \\i . ...-MIN - -)_, I _ �� 100 � u��ii����u��ui��j T _.! •. .• : :-.- / .- Oil I _ •i:• Jr::Jr r fir • gig.::::::*..'; ..•.•r 1 I Jam.. -i J1 �` .i.51...._.... :.7:1 I LI j ^ r ,„--2 -fS ___. sk—IJI . . II .....„:„..,..„...:.:. ....:....:... ... �, , :... ,:...„,..... ...::: r •)(Y11 Sr Ill S E 1 S III l- I : - ------\ ..•.•.•.•..•.•.•...••... \ ...... SE 104 S . II::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: \ • .11 I: 1 1 1 . . i................:............... __r _ ; , ---- --- . - y / / / -.:r :. • .4 , , 1 I L f��`_ E 4[ Honey Creek Ridge Annexation Site Map i , N Exhibit Two 1 • Scale: I "=500' 7. 44-..-:ft..i.j..s...--....;.a..4--4. ....: ''''' ." -"L_'7 _ 1. 1 I --1- , 1 I \ - wit NIN II --/'. :i:i;:.*iiif:::.*:::... -- .' . . 1 - \ ma nu mu I • 100 T 7:... :........:1:1417.7.;:;....::::....:::. -- •;:.;.:,.,.-3 :::-:,... T 117•••••... ...:...11.;74,...::::::: .7:1• 0::•::::::i::ii- :::•'''''::`....,.t''''':...... :MIT.: - 1 111111Ag t , •::;i:i:i::::::::•:i. 1?.......*:.:.:'.i.APA 1:•;::::::..... N_ : N 1::.........„;:;:;*i*::i::. ...-:::k...-.- ::.*:::••••..., S.. :::;:kkm:::: • ••••••:m.K..10. ..........0..-,-. • ;i:iilii:i:i::::::., • ......::...•••••/... .......,, . . :::::*i::::i:iiiii.. • .....1.•• •••::N:....... ,.....,.:..........•••• 1 , •••.• ........ ......... i'::,i,..i-;A:m —:,....-.,...........,..... ......„.• .44 • jail-- C---- .:::::::;*::::::::::•:.rn:•le:.:::Z.:.::.::.: ::::,... 0 : .:::::::i*. if..:11::;:.•,::::::::::. .......,0 I. 1 [ --1 ::?:..iii:::i;i::iiiii::i is Ort '41:.:4-: 1 4 :...:.:.:;::2::•:•:•:: tia. .•••••a' •••••••••... i . iiii::::i.::i:i:::::>:*• 116"'" ::::::::.• •••.-.0--- ;—..... ...••.... ......•• .::::::::::.•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:, ....::IIIII:§: •.it •"" '''''-' , 1 ...... ..•••• .• •,..... i '------\ -''' ••- - •- ".."....... .......• .....-. ...„. ....... .......". .. I.... ," 11111 11.1 ' ...............:•••••:. r wa ... 1 — •:::::::::::::.;.'2.1:...................,:•_. - . SE 104 S ::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::•:•:.:•:•:.:.:•:'" 1E1 . INI • . . - ...., MI _ ; IIMI - , ;• :::•:::::::•:::::•::::::::::::::::•••::::::::::::it: JIM A i , ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-..::::::::::::•:: IIIII ' .::?.....................?....::...............;:::.:::::::::::::::::::.:— .„.„„„„.„.„................. .........................•••••••••••• ! .................................•.• ;:e.ifii.i6.,.,:.:.:::.:.:........:.:..:::::::•.:::•.:.•:•.:....: IIIIIIIIII I MINIUM - / _.....------ ........... ................":::::::..."......"'"%w"." f ........".. 1 , . .----- :, I — , _ • ‘ _-‹------' Ed------ - ' ____ 7 P4t. • : ____, . s . . i • NMI MI I------- 1- llim. mil.7---IL , • • .. _ Property Owner Consent • . •_• __ • • • • . -IL- Signed Covenant to Annex . .................:.:_:.: N . . _ . Signed Annexation Petition . Exhibit Three . •••• Scale: I "=5001 1 , ......=,... „..-.7=1""" . Yt.....".•"..".. ___..,,,„„..,.t.-"{"•'"N,''''. . i'. . - -.*-; .. .. _ •• , , ... ..,._.,. • 1 j ,... ...-- ti,/,... ..... ..!. /. until.. .......:11 •:::77::::::j...::.,:::•:::a.•::::::i "`... -- •••••_.„.3 E ... •••••••••••::••:::: ::.:•::::::.::::::::. 1 .., _ .'::::•::::....::::::::::::::::.......:.:1 . .., • 's ••;•:•'.....:•:•••..;.:•••........:•• . ...:.:•:::::::::•:•::::.:•:::::: .rio..!!......... •• • ':'::•:•::•:•:•::•:•;•;:•:•:•::•:•:•::•:•:•::•:•::•:•:•::•7.•:•.:•:•:•:: ,.. 100 \\ ' :::::......::..::::::: ::i•:::•:•::::•:•:•:;•:•:•.:.:•:•.:.:•:•.:•:•:. "''•••••••••••••................. ........... .....................\ :?.....*:•. .....:......::..?.:..... ....:.i::..?...:.::::....::::.:::':1:•,. .!:::.:::::.:.• ,.____) :::.:::•.::::::.::::::.::::::.;•::::.........::::....:•• ' I - . \\ ......:-.....::....i::....:::.:::.::::::: :::::::::::::::.::::::.::::::::::::.:::::::::.:•::::. ilitigiassassimiiiii..tt If T II - 4nAll ....:::;;.::::::.::;:::.:::::::::::::.:::::•:•• ..i '::::::*:':'::•:•::::•:•::::•:•:::••• lmimtillijll I ..„...„....„....• :::•::': OW ..t -s--, :-::•:•:••••:•:>, IOW ,., •..; s_ 0 ::.: :::•:•:.:•:••••••• • 0._,S; .., . ._ .. . .... • • • ; ... ,d ii 1.......:.::?:::::.••••••..::[::•: • ::... ••.......... .....'2:7 :::::•:•:••••••:•: . • ll'in- ' 0 • •••. .••. ...• •'1'.::::::. .4RIO od ri:i.....AH......................:'.1.. ....::::. ••••••.••••• . ....: . . • .. . . . •••••. '.. .......••••:::::::....*: rn SO Id .. .. , •• • •.*:::•.•••••••-• • , .•'._.,:::.*:::*:;•;•:•:*•:•:•:*•:::::•:::::•\.. •• •• •• •• • n ;::::::::.*;...*:••••••.......... ......1; : '.• MI. N::::::::::: ::::.:iii:.:.:iii::•;:::::;:::•:.:..*::: .. . . . ------ :::.........•••••. .: '..,•.'....'...1f .• ............... . i ••:•:•:•.:....:.:•:•••.:...:•................... .. ... .. ... •. • •. _ .....:.:.:........:....:........:.:•:•.......„.....:•.. • • •• • • . .. .. .. tiR .. .. . .. . . . .. . .. .• .• .• •• 7 :.:.........••••••:.:.::•:••••••............•••••••....:::•:... i . .:.:.•:.;.:.e....:%:•:.:..........:.::•:.:.....:.:.•:.• Will& a ••••.:...•.. •• ••.•::AV •• . . • . ... or g 11111: :, ......:....„..........„:„..:.:.:..:....:..:....:..:.:. re . . . .........:..:.:.:..:.:.:...:.:.::•:.:.::.:.:.::....„...:.: .......:.:.:........:,..:::.:.::, ois,...... .... ••••••:ft.. .... ......... ...•.. ,.......,-----,\___:, • 01 ............::::::. ow- as SEA •...:,..„...,.....::.....:.:.:...:....:....„.. :.......:1. . . . .• •• ••• •• s ,......„......„.: .:.-..„. ......:.... „ .::../21 : :.:-.:-.:.:...........:.::::.:.::::.:.:.::.:.:.::.:.... • •• •• •• •• ••.•• ••• •• •.......•• • • • • • • • •• •• •• •• .••• . . .•...•...•.•.•.... •.••• •.••••• ••.••.•• :•::•:::::::::::::.::::.: •••• ::::::::::::•.:::::::::::::::...m........ ' •. ••.....••...........••....•....•.....••....• . :::::,:.:.:.:..:.:.:..:.:.:..:.:.:.::.:.:.:.....:.:...........:........ ..............„....:.01::•::::....:::.:...........:........ . .:...:.:.::::.:.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.::.:.:.:.::.:.::::....:.:.:.:....................:..........::.: . •.••.•.•.•.•..•... . . .. ............ .. .. ••••.... ..• • . •...• • :::.:.:::.•:.:.:.......... .........- ....:......::.......... ..:.:.:.:..:.:.:.:..:.:.:, •::::.::::::::::::::::::::01:.•..:.....n...................... • - ... ..............:::: ....-...:„.............................„....::::::.:.:.::::.:.: , •• •• •• •• . .. .. .. . . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. ... ...„.:.:::::.:.:::::.: „.............„..„.... . . . • •• • •• •• .•• •• •• •• •.••.••.••.•• ••.••.• .••.•.. ••••••.•••• -:,:.:....L.J:..:: ...:::::. :,:::::::,„:,:,:„:,::,:.:::.:,:,:::.„:::.:.,.,•, . . . . • . • . .• . . . . . . .• .• • .•• •• .••.• . . . . .• •• •• • •• •• .••.•• •• •• • ••• . . .. .:::::::::... liti.:•••• ::i.:.:::.::::::: :: :.:.•••..::::::•••.:.•-::::...::: : . ). i;i::•::::•::•:•..• • 1 1 1 1 1 m 1 Ii0.4.filt.:::.......:::::.........: ::....;;,,..i....•:.:::.:..:1.....•:::;/..1•••:::/....:-..1:::•,....:::::•:i.::.,:.:..11.:::.:••...1.:Mal.M....:::::::::.*:,..1:::•.i.:::71:11.::.....:::....-•.,.::::::::'•::::.*::.:.,:.:7:1::.:1•1:..;:::.':......: •••••••••-•.....•::•::: :.:::.:::::.::•• .........•••••••••:::.:.:•:•• .....::::::::::.;.:.:.•::.:.. •• •••• ••••••••• ... ............ .. . . .. .. ... .... ..... . • ••...•.. .. .... .... .........................:...................... - _...........,:•.:.•••••:. ••••.•• ...::::.:.:......: I I 1 /(1 I -- :•...e.*:;•:•::•:•;:::.;••.:. :•••••••••:•••.•:•;:::::•:•:.::::::::::::::::::.:,:.:::: I - ::"::**•.%•• • % ............::.......:... • - — Rini I - .'.*••••.*:*•:•.....:•;•....:••:: - ••••••..• ..• . . :•.::••••••::: ......•....:::.ffm:is::::ii: _ ..•.......•..... . - "• •• ••• ".. .. •...• . _, •.::.::::.........:....... :.• :.................... . •••••••••• •••......•... ...... ................. =.__ :::::::::..:::::::::....::.: ..: •••...•...•• ............... •••. ••.• •• i iiiv .••••••••• .••••••••. .• ... MO .-- .. .... . . . •• ••••••••••••.• ........... __ ..........,....-........ .. •••••••••••••••••••••• ••••-••—• • - . ••• ••• ..•:•:••••••:::•:•:•• '. •:: ••;•:•*.• ..............:•;•: :::::•:•:•::::•:•:•:::: ••..In............: .... ..... • . . •• •. - ::::*•:':::*••••••:::•:::'••• •••••:•:•••...:.•:•::::::•:•:::::;•:•:•:: •:•::::::::.::::::::•;::E:::::. •• .. ..... ..... • • • INE .. .. . . .. ....... ••••••'•••••... ... • ' ' 'Ege ;•••••.;:::::::•••::: ' .'%':::".'•••••••••••:•••••••••:••• '.:' ;::::'-':"..••:••:•;•:•:;::•: :::•:•::::::•::::::•:•:: .:•:•:::::•:•:':';':".... si '.••::... .- •.•• ............• . .• .......... %H.... . ...... • • • . • • • • •- - ..••-..• - •.• •...• ••••....••••...... •.•............... . ...... •.•.• . ... . . .. .. _.• ...• _- .• ..„...•..••••••••••••••••.......... .. .. . . . . . . . .. ... ... . .... ... 7 ,_---7-----::_---- ::• :•:' •:':••••.'•...••:•••: ::::::::::'::::::::•:;:$;:a . ... •••••• 7 C--1-----1----:.--E77-.:::...:... '..'::•.'.:•,•.'::•....•.• :::•:•:..:::...::.:•.•00 L.-... :•:•Mal& •. .•••••,.I -. ...... _...- _ _.-.. • ••• ••••••••• • . .... ......e. -.. •-- - .--• • • ••.•.. ......• ........................ •. - --._-.- ..-.- ••• .:_.::_g_27.7.-. •.-=.--:-.t•-.-.:-..••:•:•.Sk• •-• .- ••••••• IM .-. ••-• _- •.• •• •• .•••••••• ...... ........ •• •• ••• •.• ..•.. .2• ••=:_;•..-•.; ••••:•••Aag•::ft, •••••••••••••:•••••••••••••••••• •• • Ar 1... UK •:.•.•.•:...:::::::4:NI•ii all •:::•:•:".•. no am lat.' ...•e....... :. .:•:•::::101:::•::::•:•:•:. 'Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii:... ( ' Zone :,.."•.: . ••• :•:-.•••lEgi . Zoning • .. •., ,• . ._ i_ of Renton _ 3 Residential City if..*.:....•• •••, R,..:::::::::::::::: l Zone :•::::•::::•••!.....:. .......... P— I Public Zone Four : 1 G— I • General _______ .________. Exhibit tial Zone :==-----' 0' Residential I il-:._5 0 1......:•••••••••.*:::::•••••••••.:- R— I R Scale: • ' Zone :-....-......:•:•••••••• ' p 2 Residential :::::::::::: , :.:::.::.:::.::.... -...-.:::::::::•-•.:.--- / - - -- ,iii _ LLI 1 Ji. L. -----/ ______, i:.:•*••.,:•.....4.1 f!!!!!! ; :.:z O O =- it {X1ttL: •:::••;::•: •' ▪Y' :r'• • I ccl :: ▪ {-r rS''• rY = 1 .v. . .. l l • .r.r. .v: r• ='( .•L : ; .��. r. :1: �L ▪ ''Y • :L▪• {, :r'� .v} i>. ';:: 1. :.}' •44.x :..•. •1•.•r: i f...r.:y ▪is ::},;. .. :,:-. ::.ti:::::: ;:•1�'.-;} .'r..' :•J r ' ,�:•y?':�.'•• .. .r-?. ': iL•. ::}�;•1;:'}'•:} :: ;:1 .* ti ▪ •:dt::}:•:'::::•:;c:?;:: v '; :1 .�:��} .: . •:4.:::•::'-'•'•�::::�:•:��} •.. ri tit. - • . //:•tea V •:;Y. l •:•:• 'L+ {r .r.. � .•r.• E� :Y r.0 • uv tip'•-.:. • •` ▪ • • i L r:r• I J_V.y• ti - :ice Isaffeit`a Fil .•a _ i I ' rY.iYr I : : \ •( I X v}: CD •_jifilairi�i iii iiiiii ' r� 1: t'• (n '•i . , Li -7-1 . 11.m .▪ •.•.•.•...•••..••.•. :„.. . ...........i.:.:.:....:*:,>:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,.:.:.:.:.::::::::::.:.:.:.:...............:::...-.....:::::::.....-.....--. it um. I:.{•: e ::.:▪:. .......... •••••.......„.:.:::::::.::::::::::::::::.:.:.:.::::::::::::::.....-...............-.......::::.-:::::::::::. , CD Z. LiI I I I 01 NM i 01 < I { ............. ..:...:...........,.:.:.:.:.:.:.::::::(:::::::::::::::.:.:::::::::::::::::::1.:::::::.:::.:::.::::::::::::::.:......... i .L. - II I I 1111111111119 eerc ▪ '. tip: KILL. tti .•.{titi1•: .�: I iiimos } t • , - . ..:.:., . I11'lil'I'I'I'I'I'I'I'I(li I I 1 r IIIIIIIIIIIII t''' I1(illlllllllll11111111111 I -..:::::: .v.•.•.' _ IIIIIIIIIIIII I �_ , (1111111111111111111111111 1 _ 0 IIIIIIIIIIIII .•...•.• . i. IIIIIIIIIIIIIll111111111111 ICI - -X O , illlllllllilll m ` 1---111111111111111111111111111 I I�hllllllllllllllllllllllllll l COe✓J IIIIIIIIIIIII --'�- IIIIIIIIIIIII IN I( 41 J 111(I(IIIIII(111111111(III 10 '_l0 — IIII111111111 v IIIIIIIIIIIII -- _ • I 1111111111111 -n IIIIIIIIIIIII w 1 1 •1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ---� -- IIIIIIIIIIIII IIIII11111111 C •• • IIIII11111111 • 111111111(111111III(I11111 . x Q� IIIIIIIIIIIII >_�� >t .'..'• • IIIIIIIIIIIII w Illilllllllll IIIIIIilllill • IIIIIIIIIIIII I , - -• :•di�� � I(111111111111111111111111 •:• ``� Jt U • I I I I I I I I I I I I I • • yy r�•". iillllllllllll - � IIIIIIIIIIIII I �. , )a: ;�) `El�9 Cl)r ' I T r I T I:111:1:1.1,111, 1, �'. ,; ',1J``,`•0.'a.,;..q; • i, -4•-) VJ at:•,Yr(C.` .J,:;;tail:Li`�;,"•-�.3.,• aZ.1�3 •c j, ,, .,t..J. ,, ' 1 `;;ti. j - ,.0 o .Li' ''o, ••"•% . ." .,. '•:a.t�,.ou o' Q.� t,ttl~ , '�1`• . O'�'' a. �t• .' — i.:; . ... — .. �.-vt=,i,-/C,'`'i..l\ o ^'4:'Jj C.t�,u.l ti,v(3.. f y� " . ' \s ,.- 6t, iiii C- _ `Y`:` ,1N-J '� v ,lr: • :, W +L� uLJ. � t- LJ > . . _ ,G:_i�•``'�` t Y Vi`�et!tj' i3 '4;' '.`;j;;• ., 111111111 IIII 1-. • "l ii �I ig IL, " '\ 1\ : lu Irwin ITIlYIEY ' °, i Cii�� 1111. �11��1 It 11 � � ( � J • gill e `.•''',5, : oa.`';`0[ — \ • \ W ,CS,L:,om/;0:4+:.n.'"Ci' ) ):; ri C CO \% / I I VE �: •y .,�:•LJi:t1. Ja) Vo.` .Jb•' I I 4--- l• '1• Lti 4„ 7 ••.iy ,• �t`''Et 1 CD L.l.. \ ! i i - •VJN 1 :,' 11.a ...., 'o ( 'L���L3 n )' I 1 \ _ _ I I 1.�L� - y ,- ••, _-,,-..Y1,. 1„ .ai +i1, J .i3 vn ,'', - f 1 \ Q� - I C .Q:;.Lti •( 1:":)). ',;�i•' :7 -,-,- tl••• �••I,Ai9;. ,,„tea y�,r(c <.'o'�q,---r.. ,},,�: :'•• [_ -� —I H I ••' •0 '•(J,,; • 1..(y ?•'L) L1' •'i. ').. 7 u , t•, .Q,3.v F:'• 'el. ' •:-`••,! 'n:�;1 • 'L�tiLW c• ;'(..i.•' `i\i t •.C(`n. 6.,4' Iti,' ( :.n 'tir' tn•,": 5 • C } I •'ry,.:•i•<,):•;.c`l .t.Ju,•.•.d.': 3 ' ,....7..'b`,+•IJ. ,a° .Ci•;V, LP AI•'-" C. a 0 Nr ., cn ..•ct. , ...,.tii.i,?.. :LCi' `•).`, . •.:, t,,o o''ri•p••r' '• C�4•'. r»' _1....L._—/----.:„. �',(,E ,e't4� '0.0...q, of]`C;.Y�all:,.Q ••\t• J•0-Q:-.YJ•,:)Ei:, . ..ti,••j ,t,'.• QIIIlI[1 .:�;Lia�`!`�utl ' t •< ;, )•` ° Gu▪ •vii..., u .�j. ,��' •ri:•: ... ... _ •' •••,•••••• U I. .. y , �' ' C {..i C .0 C,�, a L?.Lti), ',. J . ..i. .i . . CC -- Q�t rt,. • 4L}q :,,n: iZ;--C) ' -F� C • /'•y��C-ri [ L-•(. . . cu � <au '` Q)S •14—▪ :4 aD • J • !•• 1 (7 //'� �f. o` . i.'i1. ,a:ate LV� l' 1,• E•,,rig • (`.� WL+t• .l' 4'' ti�V.'n. r: +1L 1' [� ,t ...................... ._ .•...•. .0 ra, � •.I ...:.:::.:.: .::.:.::::::.::. ..,,..5,.,..., 1 .. F_ 1 U - �ti .•••,....• .. +faf' r' .I r:' •i" c. f•1, I I ....... ,• , , a :•••• :V7_• Ill1l 1 I!lh _ IIIIII }�5p^ il:.�. ,,.. : ...,._. -kV.:c:--]: .�� 'i\ \i"� _Ii_ I :. - Lf.......•t•.•.•.•1• �1111'1'Ni'1'111111t'I'1'I'I'll,Illi',',','!'i�i�'�!1- :\.•J... ,. •„cnea-t= - I] P."'' ';'' . .+s-.,i^ -.,, ' .- .. . - . ty:�c^-.��.I1iZt."1 a�.�a tag`_.;:5a":�:..�:...:..:.- �`*.c+cu"7'-1(3.�• 1i 7__a_si_ro,.ici,. a 77W j 1 > �/ f ~I i I ` S i mg/ �"r rim 1 ii \\:%\:::,1 , ::: — I.— \A \ — s 411 I urrrurrrrrrrrrrrr I I• 1 111 411 i 1 _____ -'il _____.:,1 \1 1IIJ .! i 10411P`mini it M 1 o VI.. \ MMO 1' ' ,, : , - . i r • I m.• • F City B s undary `— , r r♦� , Aik,h1/410: is IRA we,. SI , t. 1....1......j Iffilgraismingu r E . . x--1 4111.0 ---- Ii !VV& ii 1' '4,P.4,•,,,.. .,., Mama : i r _ _ .7. I t r MIIII I rrrrrrrrrr 1, jI _ , owl4 ._ i.--"------ I.t-- ,_ ...• -‹ Y T )416 . , .. I is � Jul11 .r• 1 City of Renton'Water Facilities 4— Inch N. i. ..isi 6 — Inch -- Exhibit Seven vomati 8 — Inch J Scale: I "-500' . mg mil 1 Mir . . ( ,,__ . :r E 9 T . IIIII Liri all• ow or- 111171111 , . • .11 ity Boundary a �1•�� • ; "_ ,u.uu..uu.uu, E 10I T 41 ■r / N'I1=--. WO .� fa , ,,,,, \\. \•I 1= r�r .. 0 r ....„ 1 • \ \ f......:::::::::: "PI j ° 1 ' . 110 t ; ::::::... ..•. •• • al r� , . , . .... •.• . \ IS '_' --- 17-r- \ \\A ; SE -1 •4 S G \ ,:::::::::: ---r . . , • 5 Lt1 ( ' .,Kt rin1r1n11r' — — / "4a I F —,,_ z. APC - // / '4. ; MI aillibill. . . City of Renton Sewer Facilities . r 8 — Inch Proposed LID 335 N 1 12 —Inch 1. Exhibit Eight IIIII "mini • Metro Trunk Line Scale: I "~500' --------- ""-----'—'" ..t=1.-...•• --- - —..,--- ei lijnirriallillak • •, 1, ii — / 1 i 7-Th ., , , . loolf 1,•K I i,K )(..r.X. —,..„,_.., , • U j:::':':'•.*:*:'..-I, .--___ . \. •••••.::::::::::,••••.;•.<, i - ' S E O 6 S T • .1 ?, ............ r;.1•.•...... ' r \ , •••••••• ••••••••••••••• ._ 0 '\ :•:•:•:•:•:•:••-< ,; \ , - ' 1,..• oft 1 i I . iiiiIiiiiiiiiiim..9: :::- la13 ....)-r • ..& , i ) 1 ..............:•::::.: •:::::::.....:::.........i. , . ...,:;..: •:......; ........ ...••.:...-..z.; A i , , 1--- ----I . . .. ............••••.;•::••••••;•:••••::: ••:•:•:-. •,+•-: •.••:•••••••••• •••••••••.•••••:••• •!-. :,:::.• •••••........ ....:.:::::.:,... ........::,.: , i , ...... .:.• 1-'.-",' r . 1 01.- ....... .......:-. - -DA ! • s01,. 1 •.•.• .... ...;;.stos:. ........:.......1 ... 11111111 , ,..,La_F 1 \ . ...... . 1.................: .......•• "..... . 56111.......................:.:....:...:::.::7,..„___ri -* •••:.•,..:•:•. i • • .. re ri ...i •• !,::::......;:;,., INNP.,.. • .:. 1-1 - 7 —) H ......, .....00%...:, ...•......a. ......e., . 1 . .,.....t ...f......+.00.• k \,.. ....„„a S E -10 :, Li .72 111111111 - r -----\___ 1(.1:•:-..1.j.....:-....„....:i,...: :::.! Ingo.,,,,„,•ff-a----.7_--... . we .... : .... . • • •• •. . 1.11111 __I - 1....4,.......-v:„....*:4,...4f..:::.t.:•:..•:::.:::::....:::::.:17::::........ . . "•-------- E 1 • ,' S ' - -, .'3 :*:• :••**..:4::+:••:f:•*1-:•;,.:•,:k:::F::•?: • . . , r 1:::1::+:5•:.+:11::+.:5:4:1).:*.: ::•i;:: • I. - , 1.. .1:•::1:••••4:::•1;:.1::11:.--4••••5::-):::1::-4-,:5. • • ,- 4-•:4.••::•:+:•;f:::f.•::f.::+:•;t:•4:•:i.:i:::t.,-.',. ' 1 .---- : • . '•-i'..i,...li::•;:•:i.:•-ir•:•:;.',,...,t::.::::F::•,„ :i :4; : ..-F•:+•••-f: -1:;i:--. . ;.71......-r:f:........i...1......f i.4...4.÷:::E.4....:::1::::.1:4:•..4.- •.:::1-.4.4::::::::.1•4:..4..''''. I:t:•• •••• t•.•F••:t:1'.....:•:F......+.:::+:•.:4`...:4..::-.....i:, .: ,y., I • ,'f'••-•.+•.+:44'9,;+;•.•f::'1:,-, 41 ;:4.4•::;i::4-:11::4::.i:4:::4::•4•.:•i_11:••_ :.',:i. .. r...r.......{ .-4:,....1,;.:fr::1;:.1::.-1:.:-.C.:1::+.*-....4:,:.!.•::.1..:.4.:-..t.....- .. '.'.4,.°;•..÷.1.÷:‘.•...'....' .. •:•:.•.• •.. ...fr ••••1 .1! •,.I.C.••. ... ..•.. . •. • ••.• •••. • j......i.,,..4;.....:::.::••••4-, ..,:ti:.÷:,......:;+.:::4,i4-....:):::-):::+::'4::'p.k:•;4•:,4:1:7:•4.4... :+....4.••••:-.1:.•".4-••st:A-:1••k••-t.:,-.-4.-k.rA .. ...,1...:,.. ...... A.....,..1. Iiiiiiiiml,...*:• -:•:,-...*.:•:)....iiiiti:.:4:::;......y..;+.::t:t.:.,. .......... :.... . . • • •• • - - • ' • • • •hiiit,...-,-;k•-,•:.7;..4...4.:.-i::},*.•:.i:::-.'.1:::1.......r..: :••••4.:.i:!:/....4.:•:i.::41::4.".•1•4:.:771;t:l4.7 it:. .___F _ 44* • .4.1.1-:•.-4.:4,::-F,:.4:,:ki:1::.i:::,•.:f.••:/:ii:•• :" • . • • • • . ..*:4:.•:1:::4:,4.1‘47.:17.?•7,1•:••••".t:••':•1:.- 4.4-::14-:4:1,•...k.'‘,..-C::1:114`..t.:: , I. —1 -----' •:/:•:4:.•:11• •:.:tii.*:•4,:::•1::i7.;!..". i . A....41:A':413;i:4•••••:!•••;1••••il:...':F.:•••.'1••••.* , - 1 - :Firis••:1":••4:..4.:4::P'itili•:.•1;•.4-:+:••t:: ,1::#.:k:4-:•V:4:4•:;f:-y.1:.-1:i:f:.i., : .------- . , Y / i ' . . .1:i. :Ial.....'...: ..4:: ..-..'.: •'., , . -411-- Proposed Zoning N i . . .. I General Zone Exhibit Nine -, -.-. + I . . .:::::':::::::::::: R — I Residential Zone ::.:.:.:.:.:.:::::: i ::::::::::::::•:•:. Scale : I "=-5001 1 • i • APPENDIX D SUPPLEMENTAL ISSUE PAPER HONEY CREEK RIDGE ANNEXATION MARCH 27, 1991 I, Ir CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: March 27, 1991 TO:. City Council i ' VIA: Mayor Clymer FROM: Lyrk GG ttmann, Administrator PlanniWBuilding/Public Works Department STAFF CONTACT: David Martin, Transportation Planning Supervisor SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL ISSUE PAPER - Honey Creek I Ridge Annexation I. ISSUES" The issue paper prepared by staff and transmitted to the City j Council on November 27, 1990 addressed the issues surrounding the Honey Creek Annexation itself. A number of issues were raised at the public hearing on December 3, 1990, which concerned anticipated development in the annexation area. This issue paper will address those development-related issues. II. UTILITIES Development of the Honey Creek site will affect the City's water system, storm water system and sanitary sewer system. The water system will be improved by construction of a loop between two water lines which are currently dead-ends. The storm water system will be improved by construction of a regional detention system which will collect runoff from existing development as well as the proposed development. Sanitary sewers will be extended into the annexation area. Part of the sewer line is coincident with the preferred routing for the Sierra Heights LID (along SE 104th Street. ) The cost to property owners in the LID area will therefore be reduced. Memorandum to City Council March 27,1991 Page 2 III. STEEP SLOPES A significant portion of the annexation area is on a steep slope which leads down to Honey Creek. There is already an erosion problem in several areas. The boundary of the steep embankment is shown on Figure 2. The current plat in King County gives no consideration to the terrain when laying out the lots. In contrast, the plat which the developer is proposing upon annexation to the City is planned to avoid the steep slope area. 4 The developer has had a geologic study performed for this development. The results of the study are that it is safe to build in this area if proper setbacks are maintained from the edge of the slopes. The City would require that these precautions be enforced when construction takes place. IV. TRANSPORTATION A total of 96 houses are planned for this area, including the part of the proposed development which is already within the city limits. This will generate approximately 960 additional trips per day, with 96 of those trips in the peak hour. This will increase the amount of traffic in the peak hour on SE 101st, 103rd and 104th Streets. There are a number of half-streets in the vicinity of the annexation area. These include portions of SE 100th St. and 128th Ave. SE. The developer has agreed to the City' s recommendation that these streets be widened to :1full standards. The easterly section of SE L04th St. contains insufficient right of way to widen the roadway and this section will remain as is. To mitigate the impact of the development on this street and also to provide acceptable access to the property, the developer is proposing to extend SE 100th St. to tie into SE 101st. The effect of this construction will be to encourage the added traffic to use 101st rather than 104th. A concern expressed at the hearing was the potential increase in traffic on a private raodway between SE 95th and SE 96th St. The developer is proposing to construct a roadway connecting SE 100th St. to 122nd Avenue SE, thereby giving a better alternative for traffic wishing to access SE 95th St. A traffic study prepared for the applicant estimates that traffic on SE 101st St. will increase by 42 vehicles in the peak hour, traffic on SE 104th St. will increase by 24 vehicles in the peak hour, and traffic on SE 103rd St. will increase by 1 vehicle in the peak hour. f7 Memorandum to City Council March 27,1991 Page3 An analysis of level of service at the intersections of these three roads with 132nd Avenue SE showed that all the intersections currently operate at LOS A. They will continue to operate at LOS A with construction of the project. The traffic study also analyzed the intersection of Sunset Blvd. and Union Ave. This intersection currently operates at LOS C and will also be at LOS C with the project. V. PRESERVATION OF NATURAL AREAS A fourth issue concerns the effect of the development on natural areas. Most of the annexation area is currently undeveloped. Staff have worked with the applicant to preserve the sensitive areas along the Honey Creek corridor. The developer intends to dedicate a 19 acre parcel of property * to the City as open space. This will provide an area for a trail head and access to the proposed Honey Creek Trail. It will also include the space for the trail which lies within the development boundaries. The City has recently purchased a parcel of park property which lies within the proposed annexation area. VI. ANALYSIS OF THE ANNEXATION PROPOSAL Staff has analyzed both the annexation proposal and the development which will accompany annexation. DISADVANTAGES: The major disadvantages of this development are: A. Residential development will increase the amount of traffic in the local area. The impact of this increase is offset by widening of existing half-streets and construction of a new east-west arterial. Existing levels of service at all intersections will remain the same after development. B. Fire response time is one minute below the City's standard . of five minutes. This is still an improvement over the current response time by King County. The long-term solution to the substandard response times is construction of a fire station closer to the area, as called for in the City' s Fire Master Plan. The City is currently working on a SEPA mitigation plan which would require contributions towards the cost of fire facilities. This development would be required to participate in that program. C. The November 27, 1990 staff report contains a fiscal analysis which shows a negative impact to the City of Memorandum to City Council March 27, Page'4 approximately $50, 000 per year. This analysis does not include the value of capital improvements which the development will construct. These improvements include new or widened streets and extensions and enhancements of existing water, storm water and sanitary sewer systems. ADVANTAGES: The major advantages of the annexation to the City are summarized as follows: A. The single-family development proposed for the annexation area conforms to both the current zoning and the existing land use of the surrounding properties. B. The proposal meets the criteria specified by City Council Resolution 2429 for review of annexations. The annexation meets the following requirements: 1. A logical extension of city services, including utilities, fire and police 2 . Located within the City's sphere of influence 3 . Logical boundaries which partially fill in a peninsula of King County which currently extends into the City. The western and southern boundaries of the annexation area are adjacent to the existing city limits. 4 . The property adjacent to the annexation area is currently developed and the likelihood is great that growth will continue in the surrounding areas in the next ten years. 5. The proposed development in consistent with the zoning and land use of the surrounding area. C. Annexation and development of the area would lower the cost of providing sewer service to the Sierra Heights LID area, due to a larger population to share the cost. D. An erosion problem currently exists along the bank. Construction of a regional detention facility and application of city development standards to the new development will solve this existing erosion problem. E. The sensitive area along Honey Creek is currently • threatened. The Honey Creek development will dedicate 19 acres of land along the creek to the City. This will help preserve this natural area. F. The new east-west street linking SE 101st, SE 100th, and 122nd SE will improve the transportation flow for both the Memorandum to City Council March 27, 1991 Page 5 development and existing residences. Police and fire service to the area will be enhanced by construction of this link. G. Annexation will allow the City to control the development process. The City will require construction of transportation and utility facilities which will both mitigate impacts of the development and improve the existing systems. VII. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Honey Creek Annexation proposal with the conditions included in the November 27, 1990 staff report. .- - —_. • ,----- — __ • • • • •. . . • • • • . . . . • I . ' • . . .: . • - . • - • . , . ..... • . • . . . . . 1 ' • . • • • • • , . • • . . , . . ' . . . . / (--)• .••••••XL11.1611in.I I Erig5111:35'" ',7,...,.•,c ltili, 4 \ 4 , •./.. 1 •Vi •ono.1•1•1•11.9.1 NW 4-23-5 ,__s. • illiE 1...., ,‘... It-, •CITY CONTROL OF DEVELOPMENT = . • ••... + • SCALE 1.•10D. ' "SAff i 4••••• ../ . .: .1 . I. Ir.f.:1.-11=7- •:::?-..1.---":-Ir;.0." 41...? .4:1 ...:: .....• k....1,no \ ,,.....,, .1 1 WITHIN SPHERE OF INFLUENCE . oil s or k., •••••• --- re.';1" •••''.... .1 ._t__._ ."-. 1.1NTY ASSESSOR .01.1...4.:11.....:••W •, ; -. Ili a...-•! • ‘ •••• k • • • ••••• - SATISFIES ANNEXATION POLICIES SW11.24-5 , .1.::1.• ' . ••' . UNS . . , . •.4. .0.... ... lk '.....!* )t:s' l''l' ''.';.:CONSIST ANT WITH HR2929 . , . .:•-•-•••••-•••-•::,_....!Pt.1", ,..A.. ••'' ':Gm • , . -.'."4..• v•A•. t-'41;1.....7...U.:•_.•:2.....,....... ' .'••) . .,.:..,...‘1":,,-‘,.1:•••• : ;,.....:". •• - 1, .-•• a a- ri ri • A • 1 ,,,, •-- .::::.::,..,....-64/-_-1"-....-11 . v •••••• '',..i '1,..10.`..-‘ ... ".:; ' •Iii- ,'''.f.' J..,.!1..11 '.. 1...• - • — . . . ./.. ' . .\___ . . • .?• ,1 • ! .s,k-\' "S7P-1,I,,.. •-.' 1..44 1 '‘:' li-C4-431•...."-v-r...'''' ... ••• 94"'•,•1.:',:.;..,.1' "-;••4',:Vil?:--t,'",-.-.••-'ieb.:"..‘. - • -1 . I I,;/.., „. a 4*1••• , ,,,. .-.PAP- • WATER/SEWER UTILITY IMPRV. • 'r; ..,'"• i :;:t ',... ..,..' .;••1 ;;11: li V Is :. •• rt• ,• :: ../:: "000.:t...f'•';:::::-.1: f.. , Itli ....,,.., . , ,... . • ,... .• ' TV- zel,DISE-• i.i'• .. .." 11 ,,,,,i..1,,O.0.11. '•;,.. . /..j.1 • ,11: ., •.i.f,.. ,,s. • .„ 1 L._ _. I, .9 1, -I. ..:;. „.1 . .. . '40• ' ' C.SIP-: 01/'/I ‘.1.-,. ,.,.. ! ps ,ti.4.,..4\ ,V,, .,t, •••:' .r... .11.: ':',...:••••., ,„,.. ....,'..'f• 1 'r• . 4:./.6,0.• ‘ 1.....:,tf.::,-,: 1 VII! i v • • I - I.. i ; .k. I/ '„--!•,--,t/..- ...:•-•,:--.: 1_.„.. ! ..,.. • ,, ::........;•;;;',7. i( 4 i. '. 1' 7s-;"'7, ;';':'=.:" k i•- •.-2";::: • • • k.1, ; ,',",;-,-=-; ' --- i)r c7,....„, • ,:,:.:• ...t ts ,..!, 1.,„ .-. a:. A .. 1!:" . lo;' i. .,, • r • •n . !---...- --,- .1,1. '---7-• ,-. ant air' •,. , '.....4- --7.-.1 r;,-- •— . , . . . v i AQUIFER PROTECTION 11 STORMWATER RUNOFF CONTROL SSITERRERAAMHPERIG0HTTESCTL1.0I.DN. ,P ..l. .111' • ' kris 1.- ...II ,...., ; 1,1 \'t.,,1,r.,::,;,j,,/,,•,:i...5*,.,..k,,,,,,. ,....,_ : /‘..111;•A',';Ir.."'• ••4% ; L. II;1 jf.::1 .;..7f.;.1 .. , .,-c*.-- . •.7,li; • ...t ::::, r.: at " . A /04>SENSITIVE AREAS SETASIDE •!,--N ....:.,\i I A %,.'llitfif? ./ ..•4. • t ----- . •••• : •_,. t 1 ..4 i / GREENBELT DEDICATION ., ...,1 • 'a .-... .1 4: ......k.......„.....ti it,,, •:...,:. . ...%. , ..,.. _..__ ., . —,.,, . il.• , .,, _.— , • " i -- c 7 PARKS TRAIL DEDICATION . •.. •tt ..‘•::.:::\.. ' •:.S.•%1:) , % • ... I I... 1, ge. Z i '^".4Mtlititif IMI IL° 1 \" ,v,......4.,..v.:.,..... .to:,••s.„ . • 1._-- ,-- il ,,, --.-. . ..,:.-.:. sy.. .- .0...:.a. i'" , .-. • .0' IS' f.'et :::." " . „ .. / I OFFSITE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS i .! ' \•••,. ":.!\......,',i.,,,,i'•,•:;` ..,ai''."....i.i.: "' ,•!..'Yr "11;1. ,.••• :, .".. -.., ' ' til 4, • ... ''e4 ' • 0. •._ (,, ._ •••''..=: .15. .21::: 11_.. -.. -2- -7.• _ 1 „(., g. ,:.'/:,i' . ' ) ...%•"••••• •::' '.. 0L.••. 1 . . • •:-•%;:,•• ii,,. y A s „;,, , .. %,,,...,•.•v•;;,‘..:‘,\‘',.„,.;. ,,,,s„ ,v.. 1:,,.••• ..,, _7., __ . .... .. 1 - '' ' ' 11' \•,.:•,,•••••,..m;,v„ ,,',•,1 i'',/-t--- ' i , .• i • 11 . .• , . .• •ii • \':.,Av.)1,‘.•4;,.,, ,.,s, i ., ; . • lk:,... . s. . ,_. . ... • .. '. •••-...il ....• :ce.•:• • ••• 1 \ ‘ ,,.,c,•,;, ,‘• •.. ,..•,.., , _,, , I, . .. • i \ .$'/gi 'ski'W;•$.:.Ns's:). % d',1,. , 1, ,.. -!. ....,.• 4 ••:" "i• /1 ifi ).... •!,•.t.,.. i 0 ill— A)...: ''Z -,..,.. 1 110:V.'iiPvt,'•.• s4,'-‘::.i ;'' ..41471t,, V.:.ss . , 0 s,• :-..,-- •,/ ' % '0, .. ::.... • •11..;Y5r- -1,'''''*1 . le,, I;. -iFf_l_.: 1 a.. ,cr ..1.,. .....„: )-s, :, ia ‘,„ . ... ..40 :',1 '•:*I I/ ....• ••••• LI ' ••••• T:F.: 0 .i'l•'4 \ Vi'l,11111P,iv,111.1M :-:_;-7 .,;i4)))'11 ,, ' . .1": I • • \ ... , El i..f.h.l...... 1 , ,,,,h,A,\,p.i ::..:::-_,.-i- .: ie.. ..,.,;..:;:.., t , . - T ' lg I :'.... •1•••ii .; 1 .. . . . \ \v,z‘4,.:41,i:,..tist..ir7. .t._ifi...7.1,.. . . ...i. t1... , t_.1.____ ,, 4 ,:‘ :w,\,.., ,'.,„......4. /1 . . c 's.... ' ;17:1'0 ..' . „... ....,..... .,, , . • , , ,..,i \ NIAV-;-:z..,t1.: ',';-.'-:-'4.-i'3'k %;>. A- ---)- - '''' '. ,i''''`'\ . ''''''' /.. t'..!'.. .:i-.. . .— :-=:•-v. ' t..,i ••;•,......1 ......; mi . ., e . .. a . ... .. , , „ El i —`"-...,. _\--4 NI •,:: ;•I .;-...1 ;,ik.11%;••••:41,1.'.: ,..:: ......\i \k -4 .. ,,t t -';‘-ict,-; /.:::: ..."-- • el' mrrms."" ... '....:: .'c k ...••:,l'•:.! \ ts !jii•.;.1,0A7M;;'....;••:•'; ' ,• \ 1 1 \ I "%1 ••". ;11' :- .VIP '-'.• "",i- f. '... ...f.il.,.•.'i ;i-N't{...):. ••••' ••••• ••••• ".• z: ••-•-•,-f•-t. ; , v„,,(,0;‘,...,(0'.',1,64%,,:i,•...ff ,. --L71,0—i•alt"'"'I-."---'1'-4.-..T.„,rk , n Pi \ . I‘"..' "r:0.,\--;•• •:: -,..q.;ti,‘‘,;;!,„%:;„,wkizs;1 -.,, Mr11;, t ,• • •..,-, -_____... ....4.;_...________. -• i. .4,,,,,:t.sse 4,. • • 1,(,, \\A ‘ ,4 ; \„„.,A.e.,4;..i.,. . •i.,. It - _ _ .L ,„,... . .. .Cim. IT . Z .511 '\'''' ‘!‘ I 1 \ \2C I j/ ' ‘ , :.N•72. " ' 111?,k:4 % ': .•1.. :_::: , in.IMP1111"2- & • •f • 4, -) p ‘... .., ,. . cl: •-•': : .. I • ,,.1 Vhe,t‘,101 \.1, . ..f.:, -4- - ••• s \ , A::- , . .:: .vitg ,. wow..,--7.:Ii r.....-:'; _ -•...: .,......-..::11 T! • •(•-, '11,ijiiritt'\'•:i:':::.. :-H-:;:-. . ,t,,,---.•i.;'7 1-• .,•/ • 1.- ...1". .. . I • . t• i,.., ',, ,a. ..•••. al A I a. .•t' ..,,. ..., ci iii ,, ‘,‘• ,,,..,,,.. . --.. ._ .._i,, „ ,,, , 1 , ltikr. .‘1•V4.4%i'l'n••:.:. • / ':•'::....-•,.- .,.., \ \ i \ ‘,1.9X,•:•:.V...• •:;,..;‘,.1:* ',• , te•.1, . ; ,. ' :••••1 . .012. _______..,„._•_.....,,,„, • 6., . .,IP; V:..•• _ •-••• • -" -2-N, T-- a •,*': i l• `-'\ y -.. .ti.-.-......is. ..,.., limp•Fa. liall. IYA 1 '''....1 ' . .'.. "I"•.*:.. 1 -:: .. . ''..0 „. 1 k • 01,14104-.1.6":::4 ill: '.0%'\: 's‘ %,V‘. 'islAW:s‘•\:...P:7;5-7V;i&::;:4:1' .11. '':\4.:' % /i .. .... as,. , -.,.....Ilitir.,• ••••,t.;,\-1 1 I \ -'..,,...--;-i WI= • - - ... ....:. -.4---. . IP .:1,: re•sl,..•, If., 7%I JP I•• SI I• •1 II , ; ... , ' ...-:::-11011. -• . •,...:, .:...'."tt: , is k'i: P•., ..',,.4 \‘‘,‘"•%•. c \ ik . --.. • i 1 s,1,.. ..,__ t. ,„....,. ...o, . . . li•ri •,.! '6) it:.•8 .1•4 l',../1..g ••,.•••t' -1.: III • . •.-\-:::_. -..,... . ':. .. ,..-L...... . .-.. ....._ ..,:. .::.:. ::: 0 .....t„,....i c') \,. s......,„:.;;I:: - . • I. -- .' . '.- ' ',.... ....I.. ....1-'2-‘-• :Er?1 - - -• . -IIC.' •" ..4,:„.:1"'PIP-171;••• - 2:- ••••:,----- -. ...-7_,.---==... . .- 1..n...'.i'.. .1:. -.-.''•-,1,7.', 'rr. ,.,.. my...Du ••SaXola ,---ms, .4.... :•Isi: :i ;0:4 .:•:, + ! _.... i• tr I ,‘IgAtikiks, . •• e ;'...ViIT':A''1. .- '• ,.. '...". , ••...11,1"- .144.•_- .. 1.'1....-=&...,. .....•; -•••••6,::11-.....1:'1-.:t 1--a-.".'.i. :. ; ,..t.4.;;;I, ' ''''‘'. 1.2'+! ':•.::: ....!...)..•;',....'''.' ' .: 'lit pl 1 V.i... , . s '••••i..-,': i?\,. :.,..;".....;....",',11‘ :,..f.?..:..,. A.. \II ,,,,,,i , : .. . ••,...; I ! :s14,---..%••• -----:: •, ,..9,'` ' ••, ..... '•:::• , 41 1. / .. •,.. ...•v.i ...sr! i i I ' -' ' -• Nk •S‘ I 1 ..`1., ,---..;•' -. -1"-----s,• .• ... U)• , \ I i • y e,„. f•• ......''•.::.-1, 1 R•Ct! C• .: . .. ....... ::.4 - ....0.;.!I ,, • a a.1$ -I• • .''..-N 'R,-.„.•:',•,„t..e..• •••• \•. ,-_t..la •• • •. - i •44%, I ... ,r ,Ikk. - ..., , -...:,-, _ .-- - , '.L._,.,2.•••'.....Lt•-•:_a,,-.. •••,____.• 1:1. . ..• .• •c,fi _ 1,t) ,,e,.. ...1.11:-, •.......? . ,, .: . ....., .;•,!J " i •-- •-• '''-I___,"'• ,•r3 a i,.,, ' . i' .‘.,:-., t:'•; ...• V.--... 1.-:-..:::.V1" • / W 4\lip, 'I',;‘IL IN ...;• ...• ,.,.....: .:3 -..,.;. ..,J ...,51 ____ .., ••,„ .... . - 1• .0 i!, I/.II,4171-:. 1 . //8 '' le M.k. • .,., 1:,, • . ..._;..:;„,... , .,:,1 \ • 1`•17.: . T..,.,.e .:1,:, ;01 1.1..3] 1 ••.'r - ' .,,..,••••••0".2..1 14.... • ... - i..-.6.--:I. H. .., '.. , ! .• pi —", il t.:;! •..- ...- .... 1,--'"'''. 1-- , . . •:;.:,? . :::'11. • -a ,kA,,,,, s i 1, •....-U111-ta.. ii 911 pia ./. ..,. ;,:•.00.-.-i •• 1 I 0 a ,:t., •:e ; • .i. , .,...gi--...-.., 1.--,.---) 1 fn. %.11111 ,. . “....:;•••=-....., aV97.1-....,)_i_ •••••4“--11-•••••••.-mmr-•-• • ' • 1 .''•'4 1:176 1.'"":;1•••Pi 1 ' .4.1-1-4.°) 1•ftf 1 g". AR..,.,, ..,„, • . .,,,p,-.., .--._-_----,-4,.._....•11 • , . -,. , . ....,...„,„ ;...,.... . r_.:„....,,,_,,. _,.... . ., .,,,11...i• I'll/. ...,,.;,,,,.,..,. . . .‘,.: „.14.'....1, ,,...1'..,.';''...1........5 ....._ „.,_.:-..1,-'1.,.),..,....'' ''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''':::',..::.,,,i'.°.'.."-',:u.,-:-.;,111.-11.1.1'.,.:•':,-.1....,°,.:71:...1,1j,.',h.:..11:_:;:...:11:.:...''',_t...:..E.111‘r__.-....-_-•;•.P.1.„..,„_@1:-.1..'"7.71.-';:s.':'''...1417zA'".:..': , .... ,. ,.,. .••• ...... i 2 '''':,,tr/.' • It';I: U"- IT:11:•";11c-f' -..;111.:;".f0:7\'`\‘.....::!-04112111, ,_.. ::: 1 . 0 • .. i •• ,,• :01°;:ls 7'..;': .:..,:i!..;1) 2 • 0 •.,...,1 .-- , .......% . !Il c)''''''''''''''' •,..i?.:- 7 I ., I I 471: 11117 ; :!..9 4, :•-"r..'1 :Ts;1 r" ' #7:;••;. "i' ; ... .. •""7• i - i • I— -, -- N.f ..*:;•••• ;', ::*1::"'"Tli\IEDNC)C":;,'"';'' !•F'.1•I‘lic I I , .. . . .41.11 .. *,..1..1,... b_...11,..',,... 1:1--'-'76t'...:;1:17,-1- 1:-....4:1:;•--:;;15::-..-'!..1/..:1, *; .4.11.(.79-4;,,' ,1' -.•i'A 1 •41,..,..i• .....••6.10.1. V ..'''....1...t \--•••-i; L-...f."........42k"..:2,1 . . -.:,-7,1 N2';;;Fialf.4.,.?„5.ris.-,11-.-......7.,--t?1„..:r-,-.1.•-•.,-•'1.4 4.14-4-41-,^ :,fey , ro - , Vill• '1, 'S eal. •-.7'411'.-.j1:-.' .;:i:....;:•:........ i 11-_,.. ',...' I. •;.;•'• 1. ,..,•;., ; l'-'-'11;•"?"-:::'' •.z. .,..: ( ). : -.'1 • „ . Am, . 1 'I 9 1 . '1!.:14:,,,, i 8 I 11, oaS •' . ••, ' ... ri.• i 11 i •-•• i I ''' -)/'s. :.::•.4'.. . 6.76 T:::', "; •.0 \ • 4% '61! "'• .•;....itt..0.,:4,::1 ..,.:it' .... ...l'..•••'':t • ',.,'.1,, ii•• •••:.:,. .t-i ••••••.- .1 • •-"'-'- .,„ . ,,\ \,„1,1 c',:l.ii. i.•,\-----t.ki -;,f*-fil•' '. 44-#y- .'-' ' • •..!.-till •:.,---•••_ •1•01 1 .•• . •? • • •_...*,:;•••• ••.;"..,.`‘4 , I:" ..: - ------tw---.+- `'.. v1/4. e.f•••:Pfi'''. ; .." .. ......,.... _;••,. F.-..:;:s:.•.....i,.:...„. .,,:.• •..: ; ..• .:- • .. e •,,, gz..,..,,.. . s• ..i•••:-.;t t...... ,.••....:1 • ..;.... I ..., ---,--1.:: ••-- .• ... •,..,...',•;::4,,.4it,..,I ;;.,,••• .1. ;i-"..-- '.• :. 1.... ,...:'; - ; .-,.......,-7,.'1._!., 1 . i,",;• •., ,...! ---....1.•-. tc--•.:Ti, ' .... I .,.;,, . •,-3,.......!.;„:,,.‘,.. ...... .1 f."--•• 1 .• r''''',, ....1 I.. ..".4 lk .•.e.a I F-""7,- —.---i ‘Z., ,Va". f,:.2.11ilf- r I 1 • F •• -...::-• ; •:-.)..,-•''• 1 "... :1 ... ..k, . at...;.; litip . ;.1v ..1 •..-....:*.•1!!..„ i' co zi: .•°. ..•I ':•• A ,.•••. .1 ' .":1 I:•• •*.i I ''I .!. ..-/ 1 .: 1 e F. . MI • - ••1; I .••••• , .,,,,,.....r.,1•,,.,. . . . ..., ,,,...j... ••• , ..... 1 ..::•;::.:•.••• • ' 4....,... . • ):•,. --.:14. '. 2 .a...f.. \Cri, •••• •• 11:.. .:it .... , ...• •:::!? , 4) ..•• i'Th:&11 ' I • •••• •• • .; .14! " .'d,' :. • ' ...!,00 ...: .' ,..''..:.:.'''''... -.4::''i' 1 i.....-....!:. •.,I 1, ••••;,;;-'---- : I- 4:1 t. •i k....ii;._ t •••••i 1 1 „:.it ....,•.• .... .:•;.•1* . ArVi- i,,,.. . . •.4.-gtat..1. 4 U 1 1 .C.T.7.41c1 di,`..._V..: ? • 1••••••:.,"%lr_., ,.. :.....,......t 7 . 'IN!11 4-7::;14"0.., ii•••. •••€'. ,V....,. ee''. ...7-74., . I *„.._.'" .. (1,:i .. 4.• s ra=1-4 - ••••1 Ini. ' • -.-1:1 ,.,,•.,•:4., 4.9 1.i I\ 1...•••• ''•-•4L....' •4L•i•..i.i.--_11141--_. 1_.I.,r..._, 2tr•t..." le ., •&•-) .1) * I :I .....-1 1 - 4?" 'a ......a • ...'V' ';',fl.. • .i.l.:', _ ... ,:.; ' 1.--• 6.....11-•- l'iLt.:•;:.6,,,••••'1*.•::.4.•:•!..ikl , •......-••::,' , i ..„....,i I 1,-::,....„-,.-• -77,',0:-- ._. .._ _).1-••••fr .- .•,•., --1---t-i--1- .. --•"--) el:i .„, I i ....•••• I,. 0 :-• ,I2 • ....:• i ._ . . _• ....:1.:),.- •.1.;-..,..;,.i...1••••21 ..' ._ t. 1, 1 . . ..-.... ......, . .,..__., •-.. ,Pv 1 ...- ..-,,./t •t•Pi • ,6!.11, 1 •-a- .•.:; x5'•'...:,,..f -----r- 1... .,.• .i _. e 1 - . - v , ...I f_. ,..• i. ...••• ...•. • J• 1, ---7\ . 1 18.. h It I i I '''.. !„ *. : ,H.e.7... il: . .. •; ;I z......:itt.:1 , ;,7 ' -----::- r II-.:"°--:-. : Ct'::.:-.--...;:-/0:1,14f7...,x,-r„....-1--.1i1."Al'- —4'121.i i 2t,-t--II- i • '1‘..' .-"!-1 r .. 11 ta-,. .... ! !: ::.' 1•••:•,. t• •• .•:::: • • ."•„r", :',.. 1 t I IF i•-- i P,7-"") .:,•••• •,;,.;• ••,••t•-• 1-• -•.1•••••1• ••••-•.:-. I.,- ••,....1....•• •,.$•1 •c,•' •,:„ ! " - .. • -...._ .1__.., _._... l',' __Ind:L. •••- ... t.. .. 5 ® :i •''''''' /1•• , °i• •••"1 . t .... .3.a 0 I ,.. ...• 1 • s"--:..,.: 8 ::: . .il, ... • ""1 0' ,..;. ....:.:•;• i I ,-'•" .Q.' \i. \ , ___L ,•L• I` 1. .. I...!1 -.7 .e ''':•••• ;:ij I. • ... ••.......; ..4. y•-.•'. .4.---- l'• .- :' ...--- ..t.,..,..:,•••••.i.• . , . : . . . , • " • , r . _ r • q, I PROPOSED HONEY CREEK ANNEXATION AREA , , :,r,,,-.,..41 P k., , • oo • - _. {•CITY • OF I N �=--- - , foi ., ; ► � 1 i _.. . r Jr. A ii • --w'S Aga ST . . MO • • - .rr 1 i„,..-_-_,iiiitz...., . ,,,,-, .. /! ,_ , •• R-1 I 1 _ __4 th • -.4,:■- _ -t\----vrk .;, I \-7••• �. l �l ,1. III -- -. 4e � %r OW I ium - ii5��•� 11 • ••..WOO 0., fill -- aint �p111111� , .�1,t - 7 - 2nd • 41W1V1 .I-.,_.Al.l,",.,Ai.......l 6o/0/f,f4ii.r:A.i:efffr,,,/e/zi ‘_, .. i'. .i":.I 101S.1 -..� :..III r,A1 II ': ._-. - h t 1 w101a1w.rass.i..&i.:?t.I.:A1m0.t.E..n1t0 o d 14o afr04gia,p';o l.a.=A.mM-WEiOol milw1/7 r =�, 1 i� .�i = w .:�� v • r Qro - a 3� .. r ILVA•1102 ..... . • , rn elltm,,..41i1411& .. = At!" A - " • 1 It 15 - lit. -lb„..'w-P•- , ,iii4ii., iiiii-41ti-) f :RV' , l 1 9 A :.a:...a^.;^:a°:SirF'"-- -'',....._.:- .-. 1 Y 1 1 lip ' II .:�::.1 [�111 �- ,tr5 � •� I II mi I .. 's -11 r_ - I - E - . v 1 1 'Malik > I P ■ 4 R 1 N I l -�� • th ..............• ............... ....: ::.::.:::::::: -::::::::::::::...::. . IL 1 . I .M.a 3. 'ill : v 1 J ENrF..-ilaal.Ii- _.r 1. _ .:::,•.::::;,•.:-::::.::_i:::.:::;.•,::::::.:i:::::::::.:::::::i..:.:::::K.::::.:•:::::::.:•:::::::.::•::::::::::i:.•:::-:::i::::::•i::::::.•:::•::::::::::i•::::::::• :::::•:.::•::-:::•::::•::::•:::::::::::::*..:.:::i.::i.:: V ::i::i:I..::i.:.„.::1:...5::.:1.::.:::.::.::.:..:...:.:.:...:.:.:..:.:..:.:„:.::...::.:.:.:.::.:.:..:.::.:.::.::... u __ AO I III °,1•4 - ..::.t:...:i.;1 '-'-:-1::;1:;':':.;::;::::!:-::-: • ram. ;;1El --( iit1114%i11 5-I-a-,_.. .. ::•:::... ........ ... M11s .............. li':.;Ii.::1424:.!-.t.'...:'"i...•: • .E{t. . 7{ :l yr,M9' "`v �` ..-.. _'"i?��,"�2x.n'..., x.� to V✓ • . -... � £ DM VICINITY MAP LEGEND10111 4. • •44,...:'*' - 4::: SYMBOL DISTRICT usE x . :•4`--1:: RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY ' OW " •.......... ..... .................. //a.� :.:..,..: ...:.:.::::::::...:::::::::::„. .:.:.:....:: ,d,.: Esi RESIDENTIAL - SINGLE-FAMILY �� • ;;o +o' ... . ................. . : Or ;q:.=}1 RESIDENTIAL - TWO-FAMILY ♦ =FR + - 0111111111/r. G, ..� otj - RESIDENTIAL - MULTIPLE-FAMILY / :,:, up _ PROPOSED ANNEXATION O G-1 ZONE N O � �^ ......... - 1 1---, PROPOSED ANNEXATION 0 R-1 ZONE :y ::;-::::::::`: iir _ ______. _ • CITY LIMITS DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS NAP & DRAVING BY P/B/PV TECHNICAL SERVICES SECTION • . APPENDIX E GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION HONEY CREEK RIDGE DAVID L. NELSON ASSOCIATES JULY 1989 Geotechnical Evaluation Honey Creek Ridge Renton, Washington July 1989 DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology 13424 Chain Lake Road • Monroe, Washington 98272 • 206/794-4332 • 206/788-5612 ti }; DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology 1{ f 206/788-5612 13424 Chain Lake Road Monroe, Washington 98272 206/794-4332 wimmummimmommilimogiamw July 7, 1989 Project No. 8689 Lakeridge Development P.O. Box 146 j Renton, Washington 98057 Attention: Mr. Wayne Jones Reference,: Geotechnical . Evaluation Honey Creek Ridge Renton, Washington Gentlemen; This is to serve as a report of geotechnical exploration and evaluation services performed within the above referenced project site, .as requested by you. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to present our findings, opinions, conclusions and recommendations for development within the site area as proposed. We understand that development is to consist of construction of single family residences within proposed lot areas, and of utility and roadway areas. The proposed lot areas and roadways are approximately shown on the enclosed location map. The scope of our services includes performance of sixteen (16) backhoe exploration test pits, and visual observation around the site area. Our services were concerned mainly with the stability of the steep slope area. Our explorations were located near the crest of the steep slope, and our site observations were mainly of the upper portions of the slope.. We have also reviewed available soils, geologic and coal mine maps of the general area. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on the enclosed location map. DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology July 7, 1989 Project No. 8689 Page 2 All elevations mentioned in this report refer to existing grade, and to the Jlot layout and topography shown on a map prepared by Townsend-Chastain & Associates, Inc., sheet 1 of 1 , dated May 11 , 1989. LOCATION & SITE DESCRIPTION j The investigated site area consists of approximately 48.94 acres, lying south and west of the intersection of SE 100th Street and 124th Avenue SE. The area is proposed for two divisions; the westerly portion (Div. 1 ) which is located within the City of Renton, and the easterly portion (Div. 2) which is mostly located within King County. The location and layout of the site is shown on the enclosed location map. . Presently, the site is undeveloped. The proposed development areas' are located within the upland areas of the site, above the westerly steep slopes. Topographically, the site is level to a relatively gentle slope down to the west (east of the steep slope).. The site then slopes steeply' down to Honey Creek. The upland portion appears to have been modified somewhat by past grading and logging operations:. These operations appear to include removal of the upper soil strata and placing it over the western portion of the steep ' slope. The steep slope areas are cut by two distinct drainage swale areas, shown on the central and south portions of the location map. A significant erosion feature was observed near the crest of the slope at the southern property boundary. This feature appears to be associated with. a telephone line that is routed downslope in this area;. We observed the telephone line extending out of the face of the erosion scarp about 3 to 4 feet below the ground surface and then routed downslope: We did not attempt. to trace the cable below this point. The northwest portion of the site slopes mostly down to a gently sloping bench area. This area is bounded by development on the 1 north and east-, and the steep slope' on the west. The current plan is to use this area for development. . Vegetation within the site generally consists of native vegetation, comprised jof small to large sized evergreen and deciduous trees and dense underbrush. .- 1_-' DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology ` July 7, 1989 Project No. 8689 I • Page 3 • The larger trees primarily occur within the steep slope areas; whereas, the I ' smaller to medium sized trees primarily occur within the upland portion. The large evergreen trees for the most part were straight and did not show signs of slope movement. The site conditions in the area of the evergreen and deciduous trees that were bent appeared to indicate shallow slope movement. i This movement is common on steep slopes that are in the. process of being stablized with vegetative covering. SOILS CONDITIONS The subsurface soils stratigraphy can best be seen on the enclosed test pit logs. In general, the site was found to be primarily underlain by dense glacial deposits; glacial till within the upland portion, and glacial outwash within the sloping portions. Fill was found scattered around the site area, generally located as shown on the location map. The test pits performed around the site area were primarily located near the top-of-slope areas. Across this area, we encountered basal deposits consisting of grey, dense to very dense, poorly sorted silty sand with gravel , _ considered glacial till,. It appears, through the test pit analysis and observation, that most of the upland portion of the site is underlain by the glacial till:, which continues down the upper elevations of the steep slopes a few to several feet. The dense glacial till deposits were generally encountered below about 2 to 4 feet below grade, where not covered with fill or shallow remnants of glacial outwash. Deposits of glacial outwash were observed on the steep slopes. The outwash generally consists of grey-brown to .I grey, medium dense to dense, poorly sorted slightly silty sand and gravel. Thi,s was determined through local soil exposures, including local surface failures and old roadway excavations along the slope areas.. I ' The surficial soils outside existing fill areas generally consist of 0 to 3 feet of grey-brown to red-brown, loose to medium dense, poorly sorted gravelly silty sand (weathered zone):, covered with 0.5 to 1 foot of topsoil and roots. 1 Much of the topsoil is not developed, and consists mainly of organics. 1 Ii i DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology July 7, 1989 • Project No. 8689 Page 4 Existing fill material was encountered sporadically throughout the site area. The fill areas encountered are shown on the location map, and generally consist of on-site soils (organics and glacial till) apparently placed during past grading operations. These fill areas generally occur near or just below the general top-of-slope, and appear to have been "pushed" into these areas. The fill thicknesses appear to range from a few to several feet, as indicated by TP-2, TP-9, and exposures along the slopes. The lack of developed topsoil and root zone in some of the test pits indicate that the fill consists of material previously stripped from the site. I, i HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS The ground water table was not encountered in any of the test pits performed around the site area. Some evidence of perched water above the dense glacial till was seen, as indicated by local mottling along the surface soil/glacial �I ? till interface. This is considered a normal condition within dense glacial soil areas. The surface precipitation and accumulated surface waters cannot readily penetrate the underlying dense glacial deposits, and flow laterally above -the glacial till. Some evidence of local outcropping ground water was observed within the lower elevations of the drainage swales and the steep slopes. This may be due to.the normal ground water occurrence within the jgranular soils, and its outcropping along the lower portions of the slope. A drainage swale enters the site from SE 100th Street. This water appears to pond on-site in the area north of the extension of SE 100th Street. The evidence of ponding was observed-, but surface water was not.present at the time of our visit.. Other than this area, it appears that the site is relatively well drained. We did not evaluate the eastern..portion of the site 3 for drainage. SLOPE STABILITY The general slope stability of the steep slope portions of the site was evaluated. Generally, this consisted of observation of surface conditions, 1 DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology ' July 7, 1989 Project No. 8689 Page 5 ■ vegetation, outcropping ground water and slope geometry. In general, we found a the slope areas to be relatively stable, with local areas of questionable or unstable conditions.. As shown on the location map, local areas of surface sliding or erosion occur in the area. Where these conditions occur within native ground, it appears the failures are due 'to surface slumping of the granular deposits due to outcropping ground water. The majority of slope • failures noted within the site appear to be related to the past grading and filling operations. Generally, the failures noted are surface failures and ' erosional features, generated through surface runoff, and the loose condition of the fill on the slopes. As observed, these noted failures occur downslope of the proposed development areas (see location map). Potential, or future, _ failures within the existing fill areas located on the slopes should be anticipated, due to the uncontrolled nature of the fill. The risk associated with these failures may be reduced by following grading and drainage guidelines set forth in this report. CONCLUDING OPINIONS General In general, we conclude that the evaluated site areas should be compatible with the proposed residential development usage. From a geotechnical standpoint, the area is considered capable of supporting the planned development. We conclude that project design and site preparation take into account the existing fill character of portions of the site noted, or which may occur, and that specific geotechnical evaluations should be performed within those lot areas at the time of development and construction. The I underlying undisturbed native glacial soils should provide a good quality subgrade for support of the anticipated structure improvements, provided' Th ■� recommended depths of footing placement, are performed.. In addition, roadway —�I preparation, earthwork, structural filling, drainage control 'and erosion control should be performed as recommended herein: Minimum building setbacks from the steep slope areas should be anticipated; with control of the earthwork and drainage within these areas. ✓ J ' ■ DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ..� Consulting Engineering Geology July 7, 1989 Project No. 8689 Page 6 ■ Areas underlain by the dense glacial deposits are considered suitable for "conventional" development and construction as discussed herein, where earthwork, foundation placement and drainage control are normally performed. Specific geotechnical evaluation and recommendations, other than those discussed herein-, are not anticipated. • We recommend that areas underlain by fill have a site specific geotechnical evaluation at the time of development. We expect that additional fill areas may exist on site. We should be retained during site clearing and grading work to identify the limits and boundaries of fill areas,:.so that they may be • recorded on the site map. • Excavation Considerations It is apparent that excavation and/or structural filling within most of the building areas will be required within the more sloping.portions of the site . to accommodate foundations and floors:. Finished floor elevations may result in earth cuts and structural fills along upslope building/wall lines and downslope building lines., respectively. Stability of open excavation cuts within the sloping portions of the site during construction will depend on the nature and consistency of the naturally occurring soils, as well as the presence of ground water seepage and runoff. For planning purposes, the following temporary cut slopes are expected to be 1 appropriate for their respective soil types: -1.5H to 1V for loose to medium dense weathered zone materials. -1H to 1V for medium dense to dense glacial outwash. -0.75H to 1V for dense glacial till with cut heights up to 8 feet. Ample slope protection and maintenance should be used during construction. Because of the many variables involved, the above values should be considered general guidelines. Unsupported permanent cut slopes in dense native or .11 compacted structural fill soils should be no steeper than 2H to 1V. Once specific plans are developed, and additional geotechnical studies are ✓ conducted, these areas could be refined if required. J a DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology July 7-, 1989 Project No. 8689 ' Page 7 Erosion potential should be considered moderate to severe for stripped areas with 15% or steeper grades. Erosion potential for areas in which the existing low ground cover is left intact, and surface water' is controlled, is expected to be unaffected by the proposed development. Construction phase erosion control could include, but not necessarily be limited to diverting all runoff away from the top of slope, the use of hay or jute netting to reduce erosion on barren slopes, geotextile barriers (silt fences) , and controlled surface grading. Storm water should not be allowed to concentrate near the top of slope. Storm water should be collected in a tight-line system, and routed off-site to an appropriate disposal area. • U- Structural Fill General : All fill placed beneath buildings, pavements, or other settlement sensitive features should be placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and standards, and is monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field monitoring procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in-place density tests to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. Materials: • Structural fill should consist of a good quality free-draining granular soil , free of organics and other deleterious material , and be well graded to a maximum size of about 3 inches.. Imported, all weather fill should contain no more that about 5% fines (soil finer that a U.S. No. 200 sieve). The on-site organic surficial and artificial fill soils are considered generally A undesirable for use due to their elevated moisture sensitivity and organic content. The glacial till and silty, granular weathered zone materials are considered marginal for use as structural fill ,, due to their difficulty for placement and compaction during wet weather conditions. Subgrade Preparation: Preparation of areas to be filled should include stripping of all uncontrolled fills and topsoil down to firm native bearing soils as identified by this DAVID L. NELSOND ASSOCIATES, AND.N , INC. Consulting Engineering Geology July 7, 1989 Project No. 8689 1 Page 8 i office. Slope areas with surface grades in excess of 20% which are to receive structural fill should be benched horizontally on 3 foot vertical intervals. The benching could be performed concurrently with placement of the fill. Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of the structural fill may proceed. All backfilling should be accomplished in 6 to 8 inch thick uniform lifts. II Each lift should be spread evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. A minimum relative compaction of 95% (ASTM D- 1557) should be achieved for all structural fill underlying the building areas, and extending horizontally outside the building areas equal to the depth of the fill below the foundation. Minimum values of 90% (ASTM D-1557) should be achieved for fills beneath sidewalks.,. and pavements. The moisture content of the soils to be compacted should be within about 2% of optimum so that a readily compactable condition exists.. It may be necessary to overexcavate and remove wet soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. Compaction and moisture content criteria should be 'II established using ASTM D-1557 compaction test procedures. All compaction should be accomplished by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of compaction. Embankments: . • . Permanent fill embankments are expected to stand at various slopes depending 1, _, on the material and compaction effort used.. . For structural fill., that is fill comprised of clean imported or on site soils with a relative compaction in excess of 90% (ASTM D-1557) , embankment slopes should be no steeper than 2H: 1V, and properly protected from erosion. All embankments placed adjacent to structural fill pads should be placed as structuralfill, . and follow the above criteria. • Common Fills: Fills used for landscaping (common fills) which are not settlement sensitive should be sloped no steeper than 3H:1V:.. It is presumed that such yard area fills will be comprised of stripping spoils or other poorer quality site fill ' materials, and will contain a sparse to moderate quantity of fine organic debris. Common fi.11,s should be placed in 1 to 2 foot lifts (maximum, loose DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology July 7, 1989 • Project No. 8689 Page 9 measure) and be nominally compacted using available spreading equipment. Common fills should be thoroughly compacted along slope faces.' We recommend that all fills be graded or otherwise dressed so that ponding, concentrated slope surface erosion, or other unstable conditions are avoided. Building Setbacks In general, we recommend using a minimum building setback of 25 feet from the surveyed top of 40% slope "line",. Protection of the setback and 40% slope ► area should be performed. Where the top-of-slope or setback areas occur within existing fil4 a specific geotechnical evaluation of the individual lot area should be performed to evaluate setback limits and foundation placements. Protection of the setback areas should be performed through..controi of fill placement-, drainage and vegetation removal. • Unless specifically recommended in further geotechnical analysis, absolutely no filling should be performed within the setback areas. This includes any "temporary" excavation materials from foundation 'excavation, or landscaping fill. Any fill placed within the setback areas would need to be structural fill , approved and accepted by the geotechnical consultant. Drainage control within the setback areas is recommended. Within the areas of downslope existing fill, this drainage control is 'considered very important to minimize potential or future instability of the' fill areas'. One approach to reduce surface water flow within the setback and slope areas would be to provide an interceptor/collector drain system just downslope of the foundation line along the setback, and direct all surface waters, foundation drains and ► roof drains to a tight-line system-, .which outfalls into the main drainage system, or to an approved outfall area downslope: Once specific design and plans of development are known, this drainage 'system. could be specifically designed. . �l Foundations . In our opinion-, the use of shallow spread footings founded on the native, 1 DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology t July 7-, 1989 Project No. 8689 Page 10 - undisturbed glacial soils should prove suitable for support of the proposed dwellings. An allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot (psf) could be used for design of shallow footings founded into the loose to • medium dense, weathered zone soils located below the surface organic materials-, or within structural fill placed over properly prepared basal glacial soils observed at the site.. An allowable bearing pressure of 4000 psf may be used for shallow footings founded into the native basal glacial soils encountered in our explorations.. Once specific building plans are developed, and additional geotechnical. studies are conducted in questionable areas, more definitive information could be provided. The suggested soil bearing capacities use a factor of safety of 2.5 and is based on the following: 1 . All footings should be founded into the native site soils or structural fill as described above. 2. All footing excavations should be prepared such that a 1dense, nonyielding-, uniform soil condition has been established prior to placement of footing concrete. 3. All footings should extend through any existing fill or modified zones and be placed to bear a minimum of 18 inches below finished adjacent grade. I 4. All footings should be sized according to the anticipated wall or column loadings, and the above soil bearing values. Minimum footing widths of 14 and 20 inches are recommended I for all continuous and isolated footings-, respectively. 5. All footings should be free of ponded water and sloughed It , or water loosened soils prior to placement of footing concrete. Ground settlements due to structural loads should be less than one (1 ) inch total and one-half (1/2) inch differential over the building area. An increased potential for differential settlement should be anticipated for footings founded on cut and fill. . We recommend that footing excavations within the questionable fill or modified areas be inspected by the consultant prior to placement of concrete to verify that bearing soil type and conditions are consistent,with the recommendations of .this report. 1 DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology July 7., 1989 Project No. 8689 Page 11 During periods of wet weather or in saturated soil conditions, special measures may be required to facilitate construction. Interim excavation grading should be sloped to prevent ponding. It should be noted that the on- site surface soils-, weathered zone materials and glacial till are considered highly moisture sensitive, and may tend to deteriorate if worked during rainy weather or in .a saturated condition. Delays in construction activity may result from a deteriorated soil condition. If necessary, the use of a covering of crushed rock or pit run gravel over the subgrade soils to minimize disturbance and softening of the bearing soils during construction. The thickness of the rock or gravel will be dependent on the -material being protected, and its use. Pavements Areas intended for placement of pavements should be prepared as discussed above for structural fills. We recommend that the surficial organic laden soils be removed down to firm native ground, prior to subbase placement. The weathered zone materials may make a suitable subbase if properly compacted as described earlier in this report. These materials are moisture sensitive and will require that earthwork be accomplished during the normally drier periods of the year. If soft or unsuitable subgrades are encountered, they should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill. Alternatives for removal may be appropriate for deep fills.. This should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis at the time of site grading. A conventional 4 inch thick crushed rock base, covered with a minimum 2 inch thick asphaltic concrete surfacing-, could be used as a design pavement section on a non-yielding prepared subgrade. Basements & Pressures On Subgrade Walls If basements are desired within the proposed residence areas., we suggest they be prepared, drained and founded as generally shown on the enclosed Subdrain & Backfill Scheme. . . . • The design lateral earth pressures acting on retaining walls are a function of the type of wall (for example,, yielding or non-yielding), the method of I '- Y DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology July 7, 1989 Project No. 8689 Page 12 6 construction, and the type of soil used behind the wall. For planning purposes for fixed or non-yielding walls, we recommend that the "at rest" condition should be assumed, and that an equivalent fluid pressure of 50 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) be used for design purposes.. For yielding walls, such as cantilever walls, the "active" condition may be assumed and an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf be used. To develop the "active" pressure condition, the wall must be allowed to yield about its base a distance of about 0.001 times its total height. For planning purposes-, design for lateral earth pressures acting on foundation walls could be resisted in the native glacial bearing soilsby use of a combination of foundation base friction and passive pressure. A base friction coefficient of 0.45 within the dense glacial till, for the anticipated foundation soils. A passive equivalent fluid pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used for structural fill, or 450 pcf within the dense glacial till. Where walls are located near slopes, the ground surface in front of the wall should be .level for a distance of at least 3 times the depth 1 - of burial of the footing., to allow the above passive pressures. Otherwise, a reduction of passive pressure will be required.. Specific reductions in 11—; passive pressure could be developed once the downslope .geometry and building designs are known. An appropriate factor of safety should be applied to the 1 above base friction value to resist sliding. 1 The above values assume the presence of the soils encountered in our explorations, and a free-draining material behind the subgrade wall. These I values do not take into account hydrostatic pressures-, sloping ground behind the wall, or surcharges due to equipment or adjacent structural loads. . These I values further assume the use of an effective drain system along the backside of the wall. We suggest the use of a free-draining sand and fine gravel backfill along the backside of the wall to reduce pressures on walls and to t reduce potential for moisture problems. The drainage blanket should extend to within about eighteen inches of finished exterior grade and have a minimum thickness of eighteen inches. The remaining eighteen inches should be II DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 41 Consulting Engineering Geology July 7, 1989 Project No. 8689 Page 13 I backfilled with low permeability on-site soils.. The drainage blanket should be underlain by a perforated drain pipe along the base of the wall. The pipe should be set such that a positive drainage gradient is established and access to an outlet provided. The use of ADS flexible type drain pipe is not recommended for greater than 4 foot embedment depths and/or where excavation and replacement type maintenance is not desired. - ADDITIONAL' NOTES • The erosion feature described near the south property line should be repaired. Our opinion is that the existing telephone line is at risk. The repairs may -include properly filling the area and covering the cable. We recommend that the municipality that owns the cable be contacted, and solutions to the area stabilization discussed with them. Roofs and pavements will reduce the surface area available for natural infiltration within the site. This will in turn increase surface runoff. We recommend that roof drains:, catch basins or other devices used to collect surface runoff be directed by tight line into the storm drain or other suitable system. Runoff should not be allowed to discharge onto sloping a ground or to saturate foundation areas. Surface drains should be maintained separately, and not interconnected with foundation or wall drains. 'I a Inspection of the drainage and earthwork phase of development, including excavation and structural filling", is recommended.. The geotechnical consultant should be contacted for observations, inspections and further review where required. Structural fill soils intended for use within the area should be approved by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement. USE OF THIS REPORT AND WARRANTY ' We have prepared this report for use. by Lakeridge Development, and their agents for their use in planning and preliminary design of a portion of this II project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors 1 i DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology 1' 1 July 7, 1989 • Project No. 8689 Page 14 for their bidding and estimating purposes, but our report conclusions and finterpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subgrade conditions. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget for our work, we warrant C that our work has been done in accordance with generally accepted practices followed in this area at the time the report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. If there are any questions concerning this t report, or if we can provide additional services, please call. Sincerely, DAVI NEL N OCIATES, INC. David L. Nelson, PG ' s ..:.... •Pa Professional Engineering Geologist s��;:` c wAs4;;�,-�c.o� ���,• �� cIt oy-Ai C(44Z9 $ Charles P. Couvrette, PE �e�'-F A��S:::•a'\r�' Geotechnical Engineering Consultant Ii J'/ANAL Er'" DLN:kmn • 41 .4I SLOPE OUTSIDE GRADE A WAY �J FROM STRUCTURE FOR DRAINAG /� • "~J- Z EXTERIOR RETAINING WALL E . , . . .re, . •,...7 • .. ... ... . PAVEMENT OR 15 INCH ' MIN. TAMPED TOPSOIL S S J ':P... ��� DAMP PROOFING 11 OR WPEIIVIous SOIL - ( ) �l) ' ( 18 . min. ;I GENERAL FILL - �5 S < •;p''-;;• V U A PO R BARRIER 470J ;:` CONCRETE SAND If 5. e •b.%:• FLOOR SLAB +! WEEP HOLES .:.' • •. :_:•• :: :.:.••,`' t SUS ORAIN PIPE • I. I • DRAINAGE SAND l GRAVEL iiinot, to scale gli . MATERIALS NOTES 1 . Drainage Sand & Gravel Beneath . 'I SUBDRAIN PIPE Floor Slab Should Be Connected 4" Minimum Dia. Perforated Or Slotted Hydraulically To Subdrain Pipe. Conerete, Metal, Asbestos-Cement Or Use Of 2" Dia. Weep Holes Is Plastic Pipe. Tight Jointed, Sloped To One Applicable Method. u Drain (4"/ 100' min. slope), With Clean-Outs. 2. Subdrain Pipe Should Be Bedded 'I Slotted Pipe-- 1/8" Max. Width Slots With A Minimum Of 6" Of Drainage �I Perforated Pipe-- 3/ 16" to 3/8" HolesSand & Gravel Surrounding The Pipe. , Slots Or Perforations Preferentially .I In Lower Half Of Pipe With Lower 3. Backfill Within 18" Of Wall Should i Quarter Segment Solid For Water Flow. Be Compacted With Hand-Operated . Equipment. Heavy Equipment Should J DRAINAGE SAND & GRAVEL Not Be Used For Backfill, As Such Tu Meet Washington State Specifications Operation Could Increase Lateral Or The Following Gradation. Earth Pressures And Possibly �f IlDamage The Wall. _1-_1 r2"SieveSiz_e Passing_ ' 100 B Weigh_t , — 4. All Backfill Should Be Placed In � Il . 3/4" 70-90 Layers Not Exceeding 6" Loose 1/4" 30-60 Thickness And Densely Compacted. I No. 8 20-50 Beneath Paved Or SidewalkAreas, • No. 30 8-30 Compact To At Least 95% Modified No. 50 3- 12 Proctor Maximum Density(ASTM: • No. 200 0- 1. 2 D1557. Method C). Otherwise To 90% Minimum. u (by wet sieving) (non-plastic) Compact SUBDRAIN BACKFILL SCHEME J1 BASEMENT WALLS WITH INTERIOR SLAB ON GRADE 1 t ` :..._.____ae...9e=6 S� y0p . . ,...,... ......, iiilk .,„......,,/, da rp .s...< LOCATION MAP its 4,s. _7 ;,. a; dlift 4 ,.,. 6 TEST PITS o �.� mei ar ...,.al i, P?'1oY.C-Yi STsNG FILL RIZEA Or m:12,-- — Lr 315 '1EQ� el ,zvc Awl SS /i:'� 1� 1 z 3 q 5 39) e.r.• Ls' 1,8,1-.• 1 / cal or, RE4ro,J f • 4 4 O m �a 7no ,� Or 1� v •:pia r SCALE-FEET 1 �' r. , (4 pi 1 1-54., ` • \\I flil / / i \ It . 31y (\--- -- r—\\______ i 3,,0 ors \ \''' ------------------- ---9/...----.----/ . izz ,Jk•E-i- ;‘' .• . yy5 J ..., I. , ':-..L.1:' 1.:, . ,r 4'11;e r E.,/7:00077.. \i ' ..,r ...1.. _.,,V .7_,---------:----7 Z x - f �� DAVID L.NELSON AND ASSOCIATES,INC. •••r: 11% Consulting Engineering Geology 206.788 S612 1�'•� 17424 Chain Lake Road • Marone,WA 98272 - 206 791.4132 1 Honey Creek Ridge ` ' I Renton, Washington y� o Z SCALE noted PROD. NO. 8689 / .Elr..".."ji DATE 7/7/89 SHEET M-1 RIM • DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology TEST PIT LOGS tmPit No. Depth-Feet Description Moisture Content TP-1 0-0.8 Topsoil & roots 0.8-4.5 Light brown, loose, poorly sorted gravelly silty sand (ablation till) 4.5-5.5 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) TP-2 0-7.5 Brown loose poorly sorted silty sand with scattered gravel (FILL) Damp 7.5-10.0 Brown to light-brown loose poorly sorted silty sand with scattered gravel (native) 10.0-11 .5 Grey-brown medium dense to dense silty sand with gravel (till) 1 • TP-3 0-0.5 Topsoil & roots 0.5-2.0 Grey-brown medium dense silty gravelly sand (outwash) 2.0-4.0 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) TP-4 0-0.8 Topsoil & roots 0.8-1 .5 Grey-brown loose poorly sorted gravelly silty sand Damp 1 .5-3.0 Grey-brown medium dense poorly sorted gravelly silty sand 3.0-4.5 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) TP-5 0-1 .0 Topsoil & roots 1 .0-3.0 Red-brown, loose-medium dense, poorly sorted gravelly silty sand Damp 3.0-5.0 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) TP-6 0-1 .0 Topsoil & roots 1 .0-3.0 Brown, loose-medium dense, poorly sorted gravelly silty sand 3.0-4.0 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till ) Honey Creek Ridge June 16, 1989 Renton, Washington Page 1 of 3 Project No. 8689 La • LIII • 11 DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology I TP-7 0-0.5 Topsoil & roots 0.5-2.0 Red-brown loose-medium dense gravelly .4' silty sand Damp 2.0-3.5 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till ) A TP-8 0-1 .0 Topsoil & roots 1 .0-1 .5 Red-brown loose-medium dense gravelly silty sand Damp 1 .5-2.0 Grey-brown medium dense-dense poorly sorted gravelly silty sand Damp 2.0-3.5 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) • TP-9 0-1 .0 Topsoil & roots (some fill?) 1 .0-2.0 Red/grey-brown, medium dense poorly sorted gravelly silty sand Damp 2.0-4.0 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) TP-10 0-1 .0 Topsoil & roots 1 .0-2.0 Red-brown .loose-medium dense poorly sorted gravelly silty sand Damp 2.0-3.0 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) TP-11 0-0.5 Topsoil & roots 0.5-1 .5 Grey-brown medium dense poorly sorted gravelly silty sand Damp 1 .5-3.5 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) A TP-12 0-0.5 Topsoil & roots 0.5-1 .0 Grey-brown medium dense poorly sorted gravelly silty sand Damp 1 .0-3.0 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) 1.1 Honey Creek Ridge June 17, 1989 Renton, Washington Page 2 of 3 Project No. 8689 La ta DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. IfConsulting Engineering Geology TP-13 0-0.5 Topsoil & roots • 0.5-3.0 Grey dense poorly sorted silty sand with ,�. gravel (till ) �. TP-14 0-0.5 Topsoil & roots 0.5-7.5 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) TP-15 0-0.5 . Topsoil & roots 0.5-7.0 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) • TP-16 0-0.7 Topsoil & roots J 0.7-2.0 Brown medium dense poorly sorted gravelly silty sand Damp 2.0-4.0 Grey very dense poorly sorted silty sand with gravel (till) J I I 1 Honey Creek Ridge June 17, 1989 • Renton, Washington Page 3 of 3 Project No. 8689 • • APPENDIX F SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION HONEY CREEK RIDGE DAVID L. NELSON ASSOCIATES MAY 17, 1991 'Mkt,. �� F.W:4„ DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. r` `' q Consulting Engineering Geology "-if,' ~o� ;�, 206/788-5612 ViVr..\:'416:;iV ` ' Vic, , - ,.,` 13424 Chain Lake Road Monroe, Washington 98272 206/794-4332 ..:s:®ar:a+te: -xsov+cmc-.•- May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Lakeridge Development P.O. Box 146 Renton, Washington 98057 Attention: Mr. Wayne Jones Reference: Geotechnical Evaluation Honey Creek Ridge Division 1 Lots 1 through 13 and the Detention Pond Located in Division 1 Renton, Washington Gentlemen; This is to serve as a report of geotechnical exploration and evaluation services performed within the above referenced project site, as requested by you. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to present our findings, opinions, conclusions and recommendations for the proposed Division 1 , Lots 1 through 13 and the detention pond also located within Division 1 of the Honey Creek Ridge plat. We have previously performed a geotechnical evaluation report, dated July 7, 1989, for the Honey Creek Ridge plat which addressed the steep slopes and development of Divisions 2 and 3. This previous report did not cover the Division 1 lots and the pond. The planned lots are located on the northwest portion of the plat and will include associated roads and utilities. The road design into the lower 10 lots incorporates a cut on the order of 10 to 15 feet in depth. The final grading of this cut will include rockeries and permanent slopes. The plan provided for our review indicates a 5 foot -high rockery will DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 2 be constructed. A 1 .5:1 (H:V) cut slope is shown rising to a maximum of about 25 feet above the rockery. The detention pond is proposed in a portion of Division 1 , downslope of Division 2, Lots 1 through 11 . The proposed additional lots roadways, and the proposed detention pond, are approximately shown on the enclosed Location Maps, sheet M-1 and M-2. The scope of our services includes performance of eighteen (TP-A through TP-R) backhoe exploration test pits, and visual observation around the site. We also performed shallow hand explorations using a shovel on the slopes above the planned detention pond. Our scope of services for this project mainly _ address the stability of the steep slopes, proposed cut slopes within roadway and lots, and geotechnical aspects of the proposed detention pond. Our explorations were located by field measurements off of known surveying points where possible, and by estimating location from topographic data. We have also reviewed available soils, geologic maps of the general area, and reviewed our previous geotechnical evaluation report. The approximate locations of the test pits are shown on the enclosed Location Maps. ' _i All elevations mentioned in this report refer to existing grade, and to the additional lot and detention pond layouts and topography shown on maps prepared by Townsend-Chastain & Associates, Inc. , dated May 11 , 1989, and March 14, 1990. LOCATION & SITE DESCRIPTION Division 1 , Lots 1 through 13 are located on the northwest portion of the Honey Creek Ridge plat. The plat is located south and west •of the intersection of SE 100th Street and 124th Avenue SE, in Renton, Washington. The proposed detention pond area .is located at the base of a moderately steep slope below Lots 1 through 11 of Division 2. The slope in this area is on the order of 40 percent. This area is a bowl type feature that empties into a 1 ' I DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 ' Project No. 3591 Page 3 drainage swale to the west. The layout and locations of these areas are shown on the enclosed Location Maps. Presently, both sites are undeveloped. Division 1 Lots 6 through 9 are located at the top of a western facing steep slope with a gradient in excess of 40 percent. The topography above the steep slope is gently to moderately. sloping down to the north and west. Vegetation consists mostly of mixed evergreen and deciduous trees, and underbrush. The bowl shaped area where the detention pond is planned has a relatively wide base at the proposed pond location. The base of the bowl slopes toward the west and narrows into a swale beyond the pond location. The swale eventually outfalls into Honey Creek downslope. At a significant distance down stream of the planned embankment the swale was observed to be down cutting and local erosion was evident. This down cutting and erosion should be expected to continue up the swale if drainage controls are not put into place. SOILS CONDITIONS The subsurface soils stratigraphy within each site location can best be seen on the enclosed test pit logs. In general, the site was found to be primarily i underlain by dense glacial deposits; glacial till within the upland portion, and glacial outwash within the lower elevation areas. Fill was found at 1 specific locations within the proposed detention pond area, apparently placed from old logging road development. Test pits TP-H and TP-I encountered dense glacial till to the depths explored which were 19.5 and 5.5 feet respectively. Till was also encountered in TP-J but the exploration penetrated through the till into advance outwash at a depth of 10 feet. The remaining TP-K through TP-P, excavated on the lower portion of this area, encountered the advance outwash at a shallow depth. The till, which was also found in our previous explorations in the upper portion DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 4 of the site, overlies the outwash. The till consists of a grey, dense to very dense, poorly sorted silty sand with gravel. The dense glacial till deposits where found were generally encountered below about 2 to 4 feet below grade. The advance outwash consists of medium dense to dense slightly silty sand with varying amounts of gravel. The test pits in the detention pond area also encountered the advance outwash deposit as described above. The outwash had local deposits of fill, made up , of about 4 to 5 feet of the outwash sand placed over organic debris. The surficial soils outside existing fill areas generally consist of 0 to 3 feet of grey-brown to red-brown, loose to medium dense, poorly sorted gravelly silty sand (weathered zone) , covered with 0.5 to 1 foot of topsoil and roots. HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS Ground water was not observed in any of the test pits for this investigation. Some evidence of perched water above the dense glacial till was seen, as indicated by local mottling along the surface soil/glacial till interface. This is considered a normal condition within dense glacial soil areas. The surface precipitation and accumulated surface waters cannot readily penetrate the underlying dense glacial deposits, and flow laterally above the glacial till. Some evidence of seasonal surface water flow was observed within the proposed detention pond area, but at the time of our investigation, no surface or ground water was encountered. We understand from you that surface water enters the site from the developments to the north and is eventually channelled into this area. SLOPE STABILITY The dense glacial soils observed at the site are considered stable with respect to deep seated slides or failures. These types of deposits will fail DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 5 in shallow slough type failures when exposed in steep slopes. We did not observe active failures of this type, except down stream of the planned pond where the evidence of active erosion was observed. Although the slopes above the pond and below Division 1 , Lots 6 through 9 are considered stable with respect to deep seated failures, these slopes should be considered marginally stable with respect to shallow failures for the weathered outwash sands. This is a reasonable risk if precautions are taken to minimize the impact of the development on the slopes. The risk may be minimized by not disturbing the vegetation and not routing additional water over the slopes. Regrading on the slope or routing of water over the slope could increase the risk of instability. Any disturbance of the vegetation on the steep slopes would lower the factor of safety with respect to sloughing failures. If vegetation is disturbed, it should be replaced and maintained until it is established. CONCLUDING OPINIONS General We conclude that the evaluated site areas should be compatible with the proposed residential and detention pond development. From a geotechnical standpoint, the area is considered capable of supporting the planned developments. The underlying undisturbed native glacial soils should provide a good quality subgrade for support of the anticipated structure improvements, provided recommended depths of footing placement and subgrade preparation, are performed. In addition, roadway preparation, earthwork, structural filling, drainage control and erosion control should be performed as recommended herein. Rockery construction and control of the earthwork and drainage within these areas should be performed as recommended. Areas underlain by the dense glacial deposits are considered suitable for f "conventional" development and construction as discussed herein, where DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 6 earthwork, foundation placement and drainage control are normally performed. Specific geotechnical evaluation and recommendations, other than those discussed herein, are not anticipated. LOTS 1 THROUGH 13 Excavation Considerations We expect that excavation and/or structural filling within most of the building areas will be required within the more sloping portions of the site to accommodate foundations and floors. Finished floor elevations may result in earth cuts and structural fills along upslope building/wall lines and downslope building lines, respectively. Stability of open excavation cuts within the sloping portions of the site during construction will depend on the nature and consistency of the naturally occurring soils, as well as the presence of ground water seepage and runoff. For planning purposes, the following temporary cut slopes are expected to be appropriate for their respective soil types: -1 .5H to 1V for loose to medium dense weathered zone materials -1.H to 1V for medium dense to dense glacial outwash. -0.75H to 1V for dense glacial till with cut heights up to 8 feet. Ample slope protection and maintenance should be used during construction. Because of the many variables involved, the above values should be considered general guidelines. Once specific plans are developed, and additional geotechnical studies are conducted, these recommendations could be refined if required. Erosion potential should be considered moderate to severe for stripped areas with 15% or steeper grades (King County Erosion Evaluation Matrix) . Erosion potential for areas in which the existing low ground cover is left intact, and surface water is controlled, is expected to be unaffected by the proposed development. Construction phase erosion control could include, but not DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 7 necessarily be limited to diverting-all runoff away from the top of slope, the use of hay or jute netting to reduce erosion on barren slopes, geotextile barriers (silt fences), and controlled surface grading. Storm water should not be allowed to concentrate near the top of slope. Storm water should be collected in a tight-line system and routed to an appropriate disposal system. Structural Fill General: All fill placed beneath buildings, pavements, or other settlement sensitive features should be placed as structural fill. Structural fill, by definition, is placed in accordance with prescribed methods and standards, and is ' monitored by an experienced geotechnical professional or soils technician. Field monitoring procedures would include the performance of a representative number of in-place density tests to document the attainment of the desired degree of relative compaction. Materials: Structural fill should consist of a good quality free-draining granular soil, free of organics and other deleterious material, and be well graded to a maximum size of about 3 inches. Imported, all weather fill should contain no more that about 5% fines (soil finer that a U.S. No. 200 sieve) . The on-site organic surficial and artificial fill soils are considered generally undesirable for use due to their elevated moisture sensitivity and organic content. The glacial till and silty, granular weathered zone materials are considered moisture sensitive. That is, they will be difficult if not impossible to compact when too wet or dry. We recommend that their use as structural fill only be considered during the normally dry periods of the year. Use under any other conditions will be contingent on achieving the desired compaction. This material will also be difficult to compact if it is too dry. The addition of water may be necessary to achieve compaction if it is too dry. DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 8 Subgrade Preparation: Preparation of areas to be filled should include stripping of all uncontrolled fills and topsoil down to firm native bearing soils as identified by this office. Slope areas with surface grades in excess of 20% which are to receive structural fill should be benched horizontally on 3 foot vertical intervals. The benching could be performed concurrently with placement of the fill. Fill Placement: Following subgrade preparation, placement of the structural fill may proceed. All backfilling should be accomplished in 6 to 8 inch thick uniform lifts. Each lift should be spread evenly and be thoroughly compacted prior to placement of subsequent lifts. A minimum relative compaction of 95% (ASTM D- 1557) should be achieved for all structural fill underlying the building • areas, and extending horizontally outside the building areas equal to the depth of the fill below the foundation. Minimum values of 90% (ASTM D-1557) should be achieved for fills beneath sidewalks, and pavements. The moisture content of the soils to be compacted should be within about 2% of optimum so that a readily compactable condition exists. It may be necessary to overexcavate and remove wet soils in cases where drying to a compactable condition is not feasible. Compaction and moisture content criteria should be established using ASTM D-1557 compaction test procedures. All compaction should be accomplished by equipment of a type and size sufficient to attain the desired degree of compaction. Embankments: Permanent fill embankments are expected to stand at various slopes depending on the material and compaction effort used. For structural fill, that is fill comprised of clean imported or on site soils with a relative compaction in excess of 90% (ASTM D-1557) , embankment slopes should be no steeper than 2H: 1V, and properly protected from erosion. All embankments placed adjacent to structural fill pads should be placed as structural fill, and follow the above criteria. 1-- DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 9 Common Fills: Fills used for landscaping (common fills) which are not settlement sensitive should be sloped no steeper than 3H: 1V. It is presumed that such yard area fills will be comprised of stripping spoils or other poorer quality site fill materials, and will contain a sparse to moderate quantity of fine organic debris. Common fills should be placed in 1 to 2 foot lifts (maximum, loose measure) and be nominally compacted using available spreading equipment. Common fills should be thoroughly compacted along slope faces. We recommend that all fills be graded or otherwise dressed so that ponding, concentrated i ' slope surface erosion, or other unstable conditions are avoided. Building Setbacks We recommend that all the structures intended for placement in the vicinity of the steep westerly slope for lots 6 through 9 be set back from this located top-of-slope a minimum of 25 feet. Uncertainties related to building along steep slopes are typically addressed by the use of setbacks. The purpose of the setback is to establish a "buffer zone" between dwelling areas and the slope margin so that if a slope failure were to occur, the likelihood of dwelling involvement would be minimized. In a general sense, the greater the setback, the lower the risk. From a geological standpoint, the setback dimension is usually based on certain physical slope characteristics, eg. , slope height, surface angle, material composition, hydrology, etc. Other factors such as historical slope activity, rate of regression, type and desired life span of the development are important considerations as well. Protection of the setback and steep slope areas should be performed as required by the City of Renton. Specifically, we recommend that the setback area not be used for placement or storage of fill materials, including "temporary" excavation spoils from building area preparation and excavation. Any development or encroachment into the setback areas should be evaluated by a specific geotechnical investigation. • DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 10 Decks and other light weight structures may encroach over the setback line. The economic value of these structures is considered minimal if they were to be involved with a slope movement. Foundations for such improvements within 25 feet of the top-of-slope may require specific design so that they do not reduce slope stability. It should be understood that the closer the structure is to the slopes, the more risk there is of future distress. Dumping of soil, sod, clippings or other matter onto the slope is not recommended. Foundations In our opinion, the use of shallow spread footings founded on the native, undisturbed glacial soils should prove suitable for support of the proposed dwellings. An allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per square foot (psf) could be used for design of shallow footings founded into the loose to medium dense, weathered zone soils located below the surface organic materials, or within structural fill placed over properly prepared basal glacial soils observed at the site. An allowable bearing pressure of 4000 psf may be used for shallow footings founded into the native basal glacial soils encountered in our explorations. Once specific building plans are developed, and additional geotechnical studies are conducted in questionable areas, more definitive information could be provided. The suggested soil bearing capacities use a factor of safety of 2.5 and is based on the following: j 1 . All footings should be founded into the native site soils or structural fill as described above. 2. All footing excavations should be prepared such that a dense, nonyielding, uniform soil condition has been established prior to placement of footing concrete. 3. All footings should extend through any existing fill or modified zones and be placed to bear a minimum of 18 inches below finished adjacent grade. 4. All footings should be sized according to the anticipated wall or column loadings, and the above soil bearing values. Minimum footing widths of 14 and 20 inches are recommended for all continuous and isolated footings, respectively. DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 11 5. All footings should be free of ponded water and sloughed or water loosened soils prior to placement of footing concrete. Ground settlements due to structural loads should be less than one (1 ) inch total and one-half (1/2) inch differential over the building area. An increased potential for differential settlement should be anticipated for footings founded on cut and fill. We recommend that footing excavations within the questionable fill or modified areas be inspected by the consultant prior to placement of concrete to verify that bearing soil type and conditions are consistent with the recommendations of this report. During periods of wet weather or in saturated soil conditions, special measures may be required to facilitate construction. Interim excavation grading should be sloped to prevent ponding. It should be noted that the on- site surface soils, weathered zone materials and glacial till are considered highly moisture sensitive, and may tend to deteriorate if worked during rainy weather or in a saturated condition. Delays in construction activity may result from a deteriorated soil condition. If necessary, the use of a covering of crushed rock or pit run gravel may be required over the subgrade soils to minimize disturbance and softening of the bearing soils during construction. The thickness of the rock or gravel will be dependent on the material being protected, and its use. Pavements Areas intended for placement of pavements should be prepared as discussed above for structural fills. We recommend that the surficial organic laden soils be removed down to firm native ground, prior to subbase placement. The weathered zone materials may make a suitable subbase if properly compacted as described earlier in this report. These materials are moisture sensitive and DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 12 will disturb easily when wet. It is preferable that these soils be worked in the normally drier periods of the year. Additional expenses will be encountered with respect to overexcavation and imported fill if work is attempted when the site soils are wet. If soft or unsuitable subgrades are encountered, they should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill. Alternatives for removal of soft areas may be appropriate-for deep fills. This should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis at the time of site grading. The subgrade surface should be crowned to promote drainage from under the pavement. A conventional 4 inch thick crushed rock base, covered with a minimum 2 inch thick asphaltic concrete surfacing, could be used as a design pavement section on a non-yielding prepared subgrade. This is a standard road section that incorporates some risk due to the effects of wet subgrade conditions and frost action. The effects of wet subgrade and frost action can be reduced by placing 6 inches of well draining pit run below the 4 inches of crushed rock and above the crowned subgrade. Basements & Pressures On. Subgrade Walls If basements are desired within the proposed residence areas, we suggest they be prepared, drained and founded as generally shown on the enclosed Subdrain & Backfill Scheme. The design lateral earth pressures acting on retaining walls are a function of the type of wall (for example, yielding or non-yielding) , the method of construction, and the type of soil used behind the wall. We recommend that fixed or non-yielding walls, be designed using an "at rest" equivalent fluid pressure of 50 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) . For yielding walls, such as cantilever walls, an "active" equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf should be used. To develop the active pressure condition, the wall must be allowed to yield about its base a distance of about 0.001 times its total height. For planning purposes, design for lateral earth pressures acting on foundation . walls could be resisted in the native glacial bearing soils by use of a DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 13 combination of foundation base friction and passive pressure. A base friction coefficient of 0.45 within the dense glacial till, for the anticipated foundation soils. A passive equivalent fluid pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) may be used for structural fill, or 450 pcf within the dense glacial till. Where walls are located near slopes, the ground surface in front of the wall should be level for a distance of at least 3 times the depth of burial of the footing, to allow the above passive pressures. Otherwise, a reduction of passive pressure will be required. Specific reductions in passive pressure could be developed once the downslope geometry and building designs are known. An appropriate factor of safety should be applied to the above base friction value to resist sliding. The above values assume the presence of the soils encountered in our explorations, and a free-draining material behind the subgrade wall. These values do not take into account hydrostatic pressures, sloping ground behind the wall, or surcharges due to equipment or adjacent structural loads. These values further assume the use of an effective drain system along the backside of the wall. We suggest the use of a free-draining sand and fine gravel backfill along the backside of the wall to reduce pressures on walls and to reduce potential for moisture problems. The drainage blanket should extend to within about eighteen inches of finished exterior grade and have a minimum thickness of eighteen inches. The remainingeighteen inches should be 9 9 backfilled with low permeability on-site soils. The drainage blanket should be underlain by a perforated drain pipe along the base of the wall. The pipe should be set such that a positive drainage gradient is established and access to an outlet provided. The use of ADS flexible type drain pipe is not recommended for greater than 4 foot embedment depths and/or where excavation and replacement type maintenance is not desired. Roofs and pavements will reduce the surface area available for natural infiltration within the site. This will in turn increase surface runoff. We DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 14 recommend that roof drains, catch basins or other devices used to collect surface runoff be directed by tight line into the storm drain or other suitable system. Runoff should not be allowed to discharge onto sloping ground or to saturate foundation areas. Surface drains should be maintained separately, and not interconnected with foundation or wall drains. Inspection of the drainage and earthwork phase of development, including excavation and structural filling, is recommended. The geotechnical consultant should be contacted for observations, inspections and further review where required. Structural fill soils intended for use within the area should be approved by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement. Roadway Cut Slopes and Rockeries We understand that grading for the roadway within the area of lots 1 through 13 will include cuts and rockeries. Cuts faced with rockeries 4 feet and lower are usually considered low risk, and do not commonly require the review needed for higher rockeries. The type, placement, construction techniques and inspection requirements as specified by the City of Renton for rockery construction should be used. Rockeries higher than 4 feet are commonly required to be reviewed by a geotechnical engineer as being appropriate for the site soil conditions. We expect that subsurface materials to be exposed in the excavations for the rockeries will be the dense glacial till. In our opinion the till is well suited to be faced with the rockeries as planned. The backslope above the proposed rockeries is desired to be at slopes no steeper than 1 .5H:1V. These cut slopes should be stable within the dense glacial till, but will ravel and slough over time unless protected from erosion. Common erosion protection methods include jute netting, hydro- seeding and vegetation planting. The vegetation will have to be maintained until it is well established. An alternative to the low rockery and the potential maintenance of a 1 .5:1 slope is to raise the height of the rockery DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 15 1 1 and use a flatter cut slope. Rockeries in excess of 10 to 12 feet in height are not uncommon for facing dense till cuts. Cut slopes in materials other than till should be no steeper than 2H:1V. Rockery construction is an art, and should be attempted only by a contractor skilled in rockery construction. We recommend the following guidelines be followed for installation. It. should be noted that rockery slope protection should not be considered a retaining structure. 1 ) Use of 4 to 5 man rock within the lower 2/3rds of the wall height, gradually decreasing to 3 man rocks above this level. 2) Base rock should extend into the slope at least 1/3 of the rockery height, with 2 foot minimum width. 3) Found base rock into dense soils, at least 12 inches below grade.- 4) Rocks should be fresh, durable and free of defects. 5) Rocks are to be placed with their long axis toward the slope, with their bases inclined downward toward the slope face. 6) Face batter should be no steeper than 6V to 1H. 7) A minimum 4 inch perforated drain pipe to be installed behind base. 8) Drain pipe to be sloped to drain into appropriate drain system. 9) Free draining backfill to be placed at least 18 inches wide above the pipe behind the rocks to within 12 inches of the top of the rockery. 10) Rockery to be chinked to prevent backfill from ravelling through the { l holes between the rocks. 11 ) The top 12 inches of backfill should consist of on-site soils. 12) The drain backfill, and other backfill of on-site soils,' should be brought up with the rock placement and be well compacted. . 1 13) Rockeries greater than 4 feet in height should be monitored by the L- geotechnical consultant or his representative, to determine compliance with cut stability and rockery placement considerations. DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 16 14) The ground surface at the base of the rockery should be level in front of the rockery for a minimum distance of 3 feet, or 1/2 the rockery height, whichever is greater. DETENTION POND Exploration and evaluation of the proposed detention pond and berm area indicates that the intended area is suitable for development as proposed. The existing conditions indicate that the near surface deposits will not require dewatering to perform the earthwork phase of construction. The presence of the underlying glacial outwash sand deposit is not expected to provide a low permeability base for the desired retaining function of the pond berm area. Lining of the pond area is anticipated. A properly prepared and constructed berm as recommended herein should provide for low permeability retainage. For preparation of the berm area, we recommend that the surficial native soils and fill soils be stripped and removed down to the native glacial outwash deposits from the proposed berm structural fill areas. Prior to attempts at compaction and dike fill placement, the soil surface should be dried to a compactable condition. The excavated areas should be compacted and then scarified prior to any structural fill placement. The berm structural fill should consist of structural fill type soils, as discussed in the STRUCTURAL FILL section above. The fill should be placed in 6 to 8 inch lifts, and compacted to 90% of ASTM D-1557, modified proctor. A controlled moisture content is recommended during structural filling to allow the desired compaction. The soils should be within 2% of optimum moisture content. The surface of each lift should be scarified prior to placing the next lift to help prevent the development of preferential drainage paths. If the soils intended for use as structural fill are water sensitive, they can readily break down when the moisture content is over optimum. Care should be taken to protect these soils, by filling only during times of normally fair weather or by drying the material prior to use. DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 17 The berm structural fill will require erosion protection. This will be most important if the native sand is used on the embankment face as it is very susceptible to erosion. We suggest that this could be accomplished through either hydro-seeding, jute netting, rip-rapping, vegetation planting, or ii combinations of these to protect the exposed soil faces. The vegetation must be maintained until it is well established. Due to the presence of the relatively permeable glacial outwash sand, we recommend that the pond and berm inside faces be lined to prevent infiltration. The liner could consist of a suitable geomembrane or a soil/bentonite layer. The liners should be covered with a minimum of 1 foot of soil for protection and to allow topsoil for the vegetation. When comparing the relative costs of the liners the following items should be kept in mind about the use of bentonite liners as each item can significantly influence the liner cost: 1 . Some laboratory testing is necessary to determine the correct amount of bentonite for a proper lining. The total cost of bentonite cannot be determined until this testing is completed. 2. When bentonite is exposed to water it swells and cannot be worked with. The bentonite has to be evenly spread, thoroughly mixed and the liner compacted before it is exposed to wet weather or other water source. 3. Moisture content control is required during compaction of the liner in order to achieve an effective liner. 4. Liners that are in place but not compacted and are exposed to rain will most likely have to be removed and the process started over. 5. If the soil bentonite liner is used, we recommend that a toe drain be installed in the embankment. The toe drain is intended to reduce DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 18 seepage and instability at, the toe of the embankment. The toe drain should be constructed along the outer one-third of the berm fill area. The drainage material should consist of 2 inch - crushed rock (railroad ballast), be at least 24 inches thick, and placed directly upon the prepared glacial till subgrade. A non-woven geotextile, specifically designed for use as a filter, should be placed over the crushed rock. The toe drain should be exposed at the fill toe. When using a geomembrane, the joints should be clean and overlapped following manufacturers recommendations. Field welding is not considered necessary unless desired. Leakage .from this type of system should not be significant. We recommend that all outfall areas of the detention pond system be very well protected from erosion, due to the potential high erosivity of the sand deposits. This erosion protection could consist of rock spall blankets, gabion baskets or other devices to disperse the energy of the flowing water and to reduce erosion potential. This protection should also be installed further down the swale where the down cutting and erosion was observed. The alternative would be to pipe the outfall to Honey Creek. Inspection of the drainage and earthwork phase of the detention pond development, including excavation and structural filling, is recommended. The geotechnical consultant should be contacted for observations, inspections and further review where required. Structural fill soils intended for use within the area should be approved by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement. USE OF THIS REPORT AND WARRANTY II We have prepared this report for use by Lakeridge Development, and their agents for their use in planning and preliminary design of a portion of this DAVID L. NELSON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineering Geology May 17, 1991 Project No. 3591 Page 19 project. The data and report should be provided to prospective contractors for their bidding and estimating purposes, but our report conclusions and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subgrade conditions. The scope of our work does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions. We recommend that we be retained to review the final plans and specifications for the project to evaluate whether they follow the intent of our recommendations. The major areas of concern to be covered in this review would be the pond embankment and seepage control and the rockery with the associated slopes. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget for our work, we warrant that our work has been done in accordance with generally accepted practices followed in this area at the time the report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. If there are any questions concerning this report, or if we can provide additional services, please call. Sincerely, DAVI . NELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. efa7 David L. Nelson, PG �• S P. CQ 4 Professional Engineering Geologist �, Opte 4 0. r •: (1-> k mini • . • s E GeotechnicaloEngineering Consultant t���'r �%`�ffO ••'S . g g 1 f w.... 4i DLN:CPC:kmn ill'PONAI 1,l1/4•� iI APPENDIX G TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS HONEY CREEK RIDGE CHRISTOPHER BROWN AND ASSOCIATES FEBRUARY 15, 1991 Christopher Brown C4 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Fax 772-4321 • • HONEY CREEK RIDGE • • A Single Family Residential Development Renton King County • • TRAFFIC STUDY February 15, 1991 D. ` s`G ,, ` •... was . • y ;f 9 • • cc.1 /STERN .�44 A vl Traffic Engineers Transportation Planners HONEY CREEK RIDGE A Single Family Residential Development Traffic Studv TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 . Location 1 . Purpose 1 . Access 3. Project Description 3. Road System 5. Traffic Data 5. Data References and Sources 5. Background Traffic 8. Trip Generation 8. Traffic Assignment 10 . Horizon Year Traffic 12. E Levels of Service 12 . Discussion 15. Western Hills 16. Mitigating Measures 17 . Conclusions 17 . LIST OF FIGURES 1 . Vicinity Map 2 . 2. Site Access 4. 3. Site Plan 6. 4. Current Traffic Volumes 7 . 5 . 1993 Traffic Volumes Without Project 9 . 6. Trip Distribution 11 . 7 . 1993 Traffic Volumes With Division 1 . 13 . 8. 1994 Traffic Volumes With Division 2 m 14. LIST OF TABLES I Trip Generation, "Honey Creek Ridge" . 8. II Trip Generation, Total 10 . III Levels of Service Definitions 12. IV Levels of Service 15 . + 1 APPENDIX Capacity Calculations Input and Results HONEY CREEK RIDGE, DIVISIONS 1 & 2 Renton King County TRAFFIC STUDY Introduction The implementation of a suburban single family residential plat will produce an increase in vehicular traffic demands on the adjacent highway and local collector and arterial road system due to added vehicular traffic associated with the new residents. If projected traffic volumes are large and/or if i projected increases in traffic demands due to the new land use associated with the proposed project are large, then the traffic operating ability of the highway and access road system may be impacted. Accordingly, it is appropriate to review both current traffic and future traffic conditions to determine what the possible traffic impacts might be from such a land use and, in concert with the potential development, define the appropriate mitigating measures in order to ensure the continuation of adequate traffic operations. Location The location of the "Honey Creek Ridge" plat is generally north of S.E. 104th Street and west of 132nd Avenue S.E. in the north ' end of the City of Renton. Division 1 is located generally north of S.E. 100th Street and Division 2 generally south of S.E. 100th Street. The subject plat is west of and adjacent to the existing plats of "Western Hills" and "Sierra Heights" . The site is noted on Figure 1 , the Vicinity Map. Purpose The purpose of this study was: o to gather a data base of current (1991 ) traffic operations on the adjacent key arterial and access streets serving a proposed single family residential project, "Honey Creek Ridge"; -1- ( ^ Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., &uite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 , ..___—..____ _.. 1 ...—_ �..` 1,.fj ' ' .I,JR NII Ili JJ• I' L '�y • , rl i c v r L �• N d `C. crtior.el r 1 L'•�;LE % - Ofi PAID. '��,, t IT ! 7MIT • I .VAT ST if .•. IlDu.0 IT."'"... • ,f P° t f COLMAN � rye.. y� -•-•—'-•- ? n -- I "- ---- "[ �I� 1� r^•' . 'pry-sE'AMAA L • . 3i ``1 •`•S'A. - - • - — CI N I4TN'S ,.L.a., i S.E. ICOTN ST ' 71 I. 1•R 1u� N[ .• ST , i I M SE.00T. ST \1tH ' I • tl. .1 i x ,Z• 11[T ..1. NI ..""' N i n g t o n _ M• •R ►E� SEISMDA i . iti W i =t .N[-- • • ,11 ht '�SE:;lrN T A 4, : v S iE i IT� �3T >. .__ l NE 5 - .•,,. N.'M , C��.'`�--4s[tom. >; a1 r � rs,.,..... _ '_� y NCI TN_, ; , .r �.- I 11TN:sr it', .L.1 L ._ Ls'e lafTN sr' .,eGo I•_ S L _Li,.I 1_�:_> M IrT. . T „i u fT,S SST _Ii1R 2' . iL t• fell VV 10.7 LAUNCH b i:....* ft L 1 •of n.N s, SE • MEMOAIAI .;•ter t, 1 : CCC r I y: i I �(f '• ` BEACH PAR! • ;. a W�f NL C: t' MI •3T �: CJ�.` • • ' z '! NE 17111 ST •�N .I.• 1� I f ' Tl1•'� ♦ .re ippiki F 11 :JI \IIMIL \ 'MAR ' will-1 \IIT 7 v • 1 NA? OR --. + K• it. i ',.'tn. � :1. 11 NS SE I I.T MIZIW we ro,N a F3`' NL.r•1� nTw a' ®®: 11 1 • r IAImcH 4 V. G :. r;'`T-tll:ll.1 rpm.I MIN i. TN•V f f37 S\ I , f MN ST v •' , t. Ile N N ST fLNi(W �Y�. ' Nf ITN 'Ja _ •f _ 9• _ �- __ • 117TN •y' _.:Ilt N rl S--'-PC..r- i -'- - -- . y�IT1„, . .0 • ;I rwb, .— •c-- n_ > :Tr, > Q ®E N��.: IMR iiii 1`n > 11 .....‘i... `• `P - wJ FI!ITQ�C • rs 1M' 'TEEL .,—.L .•. I :; : , 1 to..��ii NL b w ST _AL_ 1mrN sr 1 1 T T� •,� •/+r N[f„t NI TTN S, , nN. I n. . N E I! T Si i N^ 4 i [y • / l v 1 � '11� .7r a� NI ITN C, eT I ST i ww YOIN[.S< r� d =w TTN •` ��jj i N W,e I \ R • 13 . N it , d.,. : , - t.�• .II •CJCJCJCJ I fi © 41 NSl — 1 - —EI. .N. {di i'. . I 1 Scull,�t �]� : 1 j1i1•s -• CM Cr N5 47H ST I fE ! • Nv i1f.►L f V _ ,�� • � , nw•PAARI lL! I • • .1. I 1 4 e ,rub SE 171TN 1 . E •..,` ' a 6r CllfyMfpT• a NE p IL- - .�. 1 N 1� .s N ` •AIRPORT W.. �Ail 1 � r.e { NGIN01•,. . a }l__11147„LIT.. L F - caws �_—_{1�11— _Nr•• sT .p 'N. •I', :,�" r.m tura 1 C t I.r 3 is�IN=4171111, pp . • yr'• • _: . I I In f 111'�f.8 s, ' . , , ,.. 1. 1N�1,,, e°N �• ` •� 4, ,,..,_ Flrt!!n I ,D c�.�.rii, 11 i-All,' 7 ,,,1 Glfr'G�e ';9--i--------- ls-;------ . -► •^ 15 -^-i 1. :IAA...trrliiiilfrl A1N1fli e. �P�1111 P1 ,-: pm d ., /� •l' 4. a dd __- _ .� T .se, IN S' Y ,•. t OP �. •1 lL 1 T ;;C. 11. • V R s • 7TN LIT • - 1 MI • • FIGURE 1 Vicinity Map • --, _2_ Christopher Brown 4Associates { II 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 - (206) 772-1188 1 I , ' o to estimate the daily and peak hour trip generation for the site: to assign generated traffic to the road and highway • system serving the site: o to derive a traffic forecast for the base line condition, 1993 without the project: o to define the horizon years for the project, in this • case 1993 and 1994: o to assess the impacts upon the .immediately adjacent neighborhoods. o to quantify the existing and horizon year levels of service (LOS) both with and without the project at the key intersections and access driveways serving the project under present street and traffic control systems. Further, given that the development may immediately proceed, a secondary function of the study is to also identify any possible changes or modifications in access driveways, street, intersection and traffic control systems to ensure the maintenance of adequate traffic operations in the future when the project will be completed and occupied. Access Access to Division 1 of "Honey Creek Ridge" will be from several new public roads connecting to 122nd Avenue S .E. and S.E. 100th Street. Access to Division 2 will be from the extension of 124th Avenue S.E. and S.E. 104th Street. Traffic from Division 1 will have access to 132nd Avenue S .E. via S.E. 101st Street and S.E. 95th Way. Traffic from Division 2 using these new roadways will have access to 132nd Avenue S.E. via S.E. 101st Street and S.E. 104th Street. The three main access routes are shown on Figure 2 . Proiect Description For the purposes of this traffic study, Division 1 will contain 36 single family lots and Division 2 will contain 56 single -3- (/111111111Christopher Brown CAS Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 / Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • I . 1-• c.'. . • . . ...?• cfrik \ -t.'....' ;:.:: . C3 • • "Vik SE 95Tr4 Pt ut '''IP4. 4 !IS r �:::r7 • — • SE •u '•..� �`� .�.�..�.—. _ --2 —•. — yam,� ; ,� ! n 7 1 � -i�. :.:.u� .•'�. •NSE 7L�� S. 9��.SIERR/L HoaL,ur4 .— �• _ . _ ��- , � .._ N N .0 E PARK Al �- Yji o • , ` > £ SE 99TH:ST ' •:: _ '.. NE W z. <` • IE LA; z ` Si. !00TH ST ,, SE _. 2S111 SE !00. IE u. • ST I < : sa• 101 S T ► j}i 1a�T1/r- Nl rn --•, r 7 1,,�. - W NE 138e PL t1TE SE !Gi.' � 7a11g • - <1•CO ST 11. co V u, SE 3R0 ST .< ��• tE ur =. of "+ SE Iti1TH ST .r Ne �i R > I N �NQ�z • L23. 1.40 �•�E� ' >' MTH A ~I 41 SE IOETH I N!o ;•11 T �q�-� (, �� SE 105TH = •H ST j x $.. ST, _ n. - cc x iTr 'H ST i� y� ... —. t 19TH ►▪ z �'.-ST W z`^ 1.- NE SE 106TH ST z = ►� , �` L�' L • - rTHcTC-r Ti4 • .. Q u+ aI t 14. NE 'STH ST �� J ▪�' W C� ?C G1 C 2 z i,fTH u+ z 34 z' ST N NE 14TH ST > S 0 ,1R HS ...L.. �� .0 wE . NE ,+.STt4 ST' 'I' (nOEPT OF S i • 13TH US •� Y UCFNSlNG Z Z �T >! NE 12TH d r ST _ a • W .4ua O z t o '•'�0 is r-P0, ,�•Z' NE 11TH•'z Pt z o z z r �» < "I1 OLIVE z NE11TH�3,. ST I NAZF1' ? z• ' :::.:;iii! E `1 u� NE 11TH ST < oz r gF I , i HS i 4 4T 0? = NE 10TH Pl. a ME 1 �. • � � - i 71 N Z<� IA, NE 10TH s i. G Nl E '.OTH it PL 41 L �' Ez PIERCE y U W 1 r CT .4e $ `0TH 1.t1 Q > N Z 11 i T y <CLI � � W ; SE 118TH i Vp~4.W� WI z > 52 ..� ..4. -- '1 1 = V OM. FIGURE 2 Site Access -4_ Christopher Brown i Associates 879 12ainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 ' 1.2enton. WA 98055-1380 / (206) 772-1188 family lots. . The proposed site plan for "Honey Creek Ridge" is shown on Figure 3 . Road System In the vicinity of the site 132nd Avenue S.E. is a, two lane roadway from S.E. 95th Street to about N.E. 17th Street. From that point south 132nd Avenue S.E. becomes a four lane roadway. All other roadways in the vicinity of the site are two lanes wide. Several sections of roadway in the vicinity of the site are constructed as half-streets. These include S.E. 104th Street and 128th Avenue S.E. These half-streets, especially N.E. 104th yStreet, are not intended for use as main site access points. Current roadway geometric conditions including the number of lanes, grades and traffic control devices are contained in the Appendix as a part of the Level of Service (LOS) analysis . computer input. Also included with this data are truck, bus and pedestrian parameters. Traffic Data Traffic data was collected between January 31st and February 12th, 1991 to provide both vehicle and pedestrian data was well as the key intersection peak hour turning movements. The period was fair; no weather constraints were in effect. The current p.m. peak hour data along with the daily traffic estimates are shown on Figure 4, Current Traffic Volumes. Average weekday traffic (AWDT) volumes are estimated from p.m. peak hour volumes using a 'k' factor, which relates peak hour volumes to daily volumes. In this case the 'k' factor is taken at 0. 10. Data References and Sources Data resources used in this study include; population and employment forecasts published by the Puget Sound Council of Governments (PSCOG) in the document Population and Employment -5- Christopher Brown Cc Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 E. Ifi ._ --\ i ' _ r 1 11 • j C,ts v • g6 N PLACE S.E. 0 S.E. 2 \ \ 1 1 ) < -- 1 /1 Ir - 1 iffilik ti� �ti i 5 e e 4 3 2 I 1 DIV.; 3 V \ 1 lot97TN COURT 1 g E• S.E 99TN STREET . _: \ 141O D 3 WGRUDE96A/09LEr balm 1011 0 • O�ZJ092& I iQ . Z ili\\ I Vo 3e sHii 5111 IPr — \ I co • 1e SE (OOTH COURT S.E.100TH STREET < 1 19 - • 24 1 ee ee e4 J /•• _ y R I ZONE40 o 2 S.E. 101ST COURT OP. ��� 0 m G1 , \\ t"). -. 10•••• zlitNItiti a M • Olk ' 11 ila r . ... .... midi OCIL ,•.....4.. trillilalPIPIP 4' Air A a . I ZONE i �___ ,.. �P Sv 14 u : .0 ti;/ :.... 1 14 \1 if It;I‘ d:2.4 14,4 WAVIII I I 16 ,0 ZO W111101 � R J ZOINE i g A e 1 41 1 I I 1 6. : ,---1 ot ck cm rivi 1.1i y Z''0- ) VI la C -144 © yvc 0 // TE S.E.IOMTH STREET )_i_S, i r FIGURE 3 • Site Plan . -6- 7— Christopher Brown g Associates 879 12ainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 \ Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 N 0 C N C N M e-1 SE 95th Way , 38 6 37 r36- SE 100th St. ZS Zb • 2 SE 101st St. .L (2-11),0 C SE 103rd St. CO IZ \ [11. • S� SE 104th St. 111 • / 63 41° Sunset Blvd. 451 drigmw 44� let 2'3 Average Daily Traffic Volumes 31 14 Z1;;; ku Peak Hour Traffic Volumes FIGURE 4 Current Traffic Volumes • -7- Christopher Brown c Associates\ l N 8T9 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 Forecasts, 1988, trip generation statistics published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the document, Trip Generation, 4th edition, and the Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, published by the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. For the latter item, reference is also made 'to the computer program CAPCALC 85, Version 2.2, published by Roger Creighton and Associates, New York and used under license for this study. Background Traffic Development of concurrent projects as well as normal growth in population and employment will cause commensurate growth in background traffic volume. Background traffic volumes are based on the projected growth in population and employment between 1980 and 2000 as forecast by the Puget Sound Council of Governments (PSCOG) for the Renton FAZ Group. The 20 year growth rate is nearly 2 percent per year. This growth rate is used to determine the 1993 p.m. peak hour traffic volumes without the project shown on Figure 5 . Trip Generation The trip generation data for the site is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (I.T.E. ) Land Use Code 210 which applies to single family residences of this type. The expected trip generation data is shown on Table I. TABLE I Trip Generation, Honey Creek Ridge, Division 1 Time Interval Volume A.W.D.T. * 362 trips per day A.M. Inbound 7 vehicles per hour A.M. Outbound 20 vehicles per• hour P.M. Inbound 23 vehicles per hour P.M. Outbound 13 vehicles per hour * Average Weekday Traffic Volume II _8_ Christopher Brown a Associates 879(206)Rainier772-1188 Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 in al c o 12 c N M SE 95th Way 40 27 SE 100th St. 29 r27 5 N SE 101st St. W 6 N 2 0,..2....67.)0 3.4) .7.1 a' SE 103rd St. 5 03 N e-1 1 2� 4 , 5") SE 104th St. 1 IS 2322- zo 4 55 /85 1 60 Sunset Blvd. a __ /29G 41v 32 222 � , ftc Average Daily Traffic Volumes41:10 /7/ ' - — Peak Hour Traffic Volumes FIGURE 5 _ 1993 Traffic Volumes Without Project u_g_ Christopher Brown 4Associates Q 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 I Table 1 cont. Trip Generation, Honey Creek Ridge, Division 2 • Time Interval Volume A.W.D.T. * 563 trips per day A.M. Inbound 11 vehicles per hour A.M. Outbound 31 vehicles per hour P.M. Inbound 35 vehicles per hour P.M. Outbound 21 vehicles per hour + I * Average Weekday Traffic Volume The combined trip generation for Divisions 1 and 2 of "Honey Creek Ridge" is shown on Table II. TABLE II Trip Generation, Honey Creek Ridge, Total Time Interval ' Volume A.W.D.T. * 926. trips per day A.M. Inbound 18 vehicles per hour A.M. Outbound 51 vehicles per hour P.M. Inbound 58 vehicles per hour P.M. Outbound 34 vehicles per hour * Average Weekday Traffic Volume Traffic Assignment . Site generated traffic is assigned to the network on the basis of 1990 PSCOG employment forecasts for this area of King County. This distribution model was verified from the turning movement volumes noted at the S.E. 101st Street/132nd Avenue S.E. and S.E. 104th Street/132nd Avenue S.E. intersections. The distribution, shown as a percentage of the total site generated traffic is shown on Figure 6. . -10- (A® Christopher Brown t Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 ___ __ T 1 �n1 1 6.0% • • }. 1. 1 • 1 � �.YM iW f_ F:190TN 11 '11.J,4. s' `• .w v 1. : 11:•ALE 0\s! � 1 V. _ ,��..OST 3-r • Ip l,ll[..,.,•'r;• 1 " . G ^l [ [fn �. . .. fie ' AVM SOTH Si 1 1."�.' :.•'►,.' -. ..dr. k r 1•.-.�,� • -`� (�' 1lTH 1" Yet V calbw•• � / ':. :'POW '% , .c:., r. • i' S� l __ . PLL[FY • oss. .. • J _—f�—__ 11 _ •�ly - T_ Cl z .. 1� ♦:11[1157 J Ia` _ NEll W �-._ _ a I I o Y IOOiw ST.: i n g t o n :ral j • �� �^ ��F1�-, PI- : =; Erb' ` 5 L 2 it ' R. ,.. - --— . ' •Ala ■ 3[1��1. z .� t W r �� sr ' 1[f�. Tt -. ., HE I M I�i s [ 0 �, R, mf R .,.. HE .- "sf IpTH 1T r�f _ . . . rsM � Fe � IrfH� , r �[• 1 ..„ Z u 1TH ST ..v,,L_i=1 L-.� r•• -.i [oAr LAUNCH?•$ b CO w1H 4.. 1T.' il ,�•1 $E , MElIORIAI r'i- I H 'I L•I 3 11 r 14CN PARR 1 a • _I •Na 1.1 fT 1. olio. - J • • l Z 'e NE ITTH • ST �� �• _ +\`yam" "EIS'' a. .`4°./ •� ©'fat b =u 9• rift.11- SI I • ®� 11 ;C HAII7r MUMik • g EMI , Ns i SE I.4T /�1^ [wr uurvcN '•v'�_ ` I+r•r1�_F11 a IorH 3 .T I IN! r 1H f .0[IHG \, � 'l • k 1 I. N T. lai % ST l a .'s m H rp, S --nrHr--Y I QJ B�E�II - .1•;.- S—; 11 I191H C S ! k7. )111k J JA�1 ••"221 Mn �JL"•�� 1 rMr� `f =-a i. �o - Q t M[fly 1rN S7 ,5 - M I . F 1713T !f z ■^ ❑G Q5T C'YW 1 � H RN,^ son cr 7r .arNas • / itie . p �►�� SIN I ' T-S ? p/ ••'W\ . .u. �ARrr-•• __ 1' Stilikt4 •'���t - I ...�_'0 .'"FT '' en on . '� .L', .v rl[ - 5, N. I MTh t lar, # .: i -6::. ..,,... r- :IT 1 p et sa 7�E+'P Tom' [ J� 1� z ,, __ ; f■•HI. i a [ t r1HOHIR hl'LLS � I. ,I 1 Ian .as • = _ _ J ' c!r i Vr aH PE ti' . AiRpo r: W'' \,lilt ::,h1 9Ail 4'r0+, 1.... ooSevf.•-} am -n.� �a+ Nu rNA• flip • • -__ fFM4 / i • 1 FT7 /;'� 11 i , n,.r .LT Ol/rIr I N MIT 1 - ; /...n fsaWaRr itikeil "i 1 . I aFufn o�oio. ma fIr { 71N IT _ g '\,. I - / r,1'R.•. 9oi-. I .!. .. I' 13.670 • FIGURE 6 Trip Distribution ; i -11- �i Christopher Brown Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. &uite A-201 1 ............ Renton. WA 98055-1380 1 (206) ZTZ 1188 • Horizon Year. Traffic With Division 1 of the project built, including increases in , i background traffic that will be produced by normal growth, the '__' 1993 daily and p.m. peak hour demands for the five major intersections are shown on Figure 7 . The 1994 daily and peak hour demands with Division 2 are shown on Figure 8. Since the p.m. peak hour traffic volumes include both the home based work trip as well as shopping and social-recreation trips, they tend to be greater than the a.m. peak hour. As a consequence, the p.m. peak hour is used for the design hour. i Levels of Service The level of service (LOS) describes the quality of traffic flow. This ranges from the best or highest level, 'A' , usually denoted by an ability to select ones' own speed or the ability to change lanes or overtake at will, down to the lowest or worst level 'F' . This LOS is the lowest possible level and is one where traffic is severely constrained. It is usually denoted by "jam" conditions and attendant long traffic delays. Table III I shows the level of service in terms of average vehicular delay. Capacity computations were performed in accordance with Special Report 209, the Highway Capacity Manual, using the computer program CAPCALC 85, Version 2 . 2 published by Roger Creighton and Associates. Signalized intersection analysis was done with the f "Operations and Design" methods which are more rigorous than the "Planning" method. STOP sign controlled intersections used parameters for arterial roads with speeds of 35 m.p.h. As noted • earlier, all input data• is listed in the appendix, along with • computer output. TABLE III Level of Service Definitions • Signalized intersections Level of Service Delay Per Vehicle (Seconds) A Under 5 seconds • B 5. 1 - 15 .0 seconds C 15 . 1 - 25 .0 seconds D 25 . 1 - 40.0 seconds E 40 . 1 - 60. 0 seconds F Greater than 60 sec. -12- Chri8topher Brown A88ociate8 879 Rainier Avenue N., suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 �_/ (206) 772-1188 w N CU c > Q -a . c N fM SE 95th Way 41 ZS 47' \ 3. b SE 100th St. 34 26 2 b2) n SE----\...._101st St. w /8 "‘ ki CA9 a, ZSBo = o a SE 103rd St. 39 co /2� II. 511 SE 104th St. yy 22 n 15 CD 225 5S 1,0 Sunset Blvd. 571 /29 4430" \ N/'�2 3Z 171 Average Daily Traffic Volumes l _` V Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 2 0 1 FIGURE 7 1993 Traffic Volumes With Division 1 -13- zAillijk_.e Christopher Bw c o 879 Rainier Avenue N.Ass Suite A-ciates201 y.,...) Renton6) 772-11. WA88 98055-1380 (20 N Q1 Q -o N M r--1 SE 95th Way 41 29 48 (08 SE 100th St. 336 SE 101st St. d • W w 20 o N N F/0) cu SE 103rd St. - d- CO N •N s 13 -1) SE 104th St. 37� N 237o 57/le)/ \\41;41- Sunset Blvd. , 53o 1321T 47� 0;2-6 • Average Daily Traffic Volumes 33 �_ 23630 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes FIGURE 8 • 1994 Traffic Volumes With Division 2 -14- tit Christopher Brown 0 Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 TABLE III cont. Unsiqnalized intersections Level of Service Reserve Capacity Expected Delay A 400 or more Little or none B 300 to 399 Short delays C 200 to 299 Average delays D 100 to 199 Long delays E 0 to 99 Very long delays F none failure, extreme congestion When reviewing the appendix data, it may be noted that each set of data has its' own file reference number. This is located at the top right of each data sheet. The title and other descriptive material is on the upper left corner. • Level of service data for unsignalized intersections is reported for the movement with the lowest LOS, this is generally the left turning movements from a minor roadway onto a major roadway. Levels of service for the four conditions, Current or 1991 traffic, 1993 without the project, 1993 with Division 1 and 1994 with Division 2 of the project are shown below. TABLE IV Levels of Service Current 1993 W/O 1993 W/ 1994 W/ Intersection Year Project Div. 1 Div. 2 Sunset Blvd. /Union Ave. SE C C C C SE 104th St. /132nd Ave. SE A A A A SE 103rd St. /132nd Ave. SE A A A A SE 101st St. /132nd Ave. SE A A A A SE 95th Way/132nd Ave. SE A A A A Discussion The road system immediately adjacent to the site is in need of improvement, due to the abundance of half-streets. In order to provide the most suitable access to the site it is necessary to -15- _ Christopher Brown C1 Associates 8T9 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-201 Renton. WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 construct a new section of roadway and complete several half-streets. The new roadway would consist of the extension of S.E. 100th Street to the east to connect with the existing S.E. 101st Street, (as shown on Figure 2) this would provide a high quality access to 132nd Avenue S.E. from Division 1 and from the northern section of Division 2. As a part of this improvement it will be necessary to complete several short stretches of half-street, on S.E. 100th Street and on 128th Avenue S.E. It is recognized that a percentage of the site generated traffic will utilize S.E. 104th Street. This street presents a problem due to its length and the number of individual property owners each retaining a portion of the necessary right-of-way. Given the availability of S.E. 100th Street/S .E. 101st Street and the access gained to the north along 122nd Avenue S.E. it is estimated that 26. 1 percent of the total site generated traffic will utilize S.E. 104th Street. In 1993, given the implementation of Division 1 , little if any site generated traffic will utilize this roadway. Not until 1994 and the implementation of Division 2 will site generated traffic on S.E. 104th Street rise town appreciable level. Western Hills, and Adiacent Neighborhoods The residents of "Western Hills", an adjacent single family plat, have expressed some concern that traffic from "Honey Creek Ridge" will travel through "Western Hills" and utilize a narrow private driveway that runs from S.E. 96th Place to S.E. 95th Way. The main routes from the northern portion of the site are wide residential, streets proceeding directly to the main arterials. The alternative route is a narrow curvilinear street leading to a private driveway. The driveway is extremely narrow and is not easily accessed from S.E. 96th Place. It seems unlikely that traffic from this project will divert from either of the two major routes (122nd Avenue S.E. and S.E. 100th Street) to utilize this narrow driveway. It seems more likely that traffic from "Western Hills" will benefit from the { implementation of the extension of S.E. 100th Street, as this I will provide a less circuitous route to 132nd Avenue S.E. , and from the extension of 122nd Avenue S.E. which connects to S.E. 95th Way. The neighborhood to the north of the site on 122nd Avenue S.E. • will also benefit from this project. The extension of 122nd Avenue S.E. to the south will provide a secondary emergency access to the neighborhood. -16- Christopher Brown CAS Associates 879 Rainier Avenue .N., Suite A-201 Denton, WA 98055-1380 __(206) 772-1188 Mitigating Measures All intersections in the study area will operate at acceptable levels of service given project completion. The mitigation measures recommended are merely the completion of two short stretches of half-street on S.E. 100th Street and 128th Avenue S.E. and the construction of a connector road between S.E. 100th Street and S.E. 101st Street. It is recognized that S.E. 104th Street, as presently constructed, is very narrow and that completion of the half-street is necessary to provide full accessibility to the adjacent property. However, this roadway will only serve as a secondary access to the site. It should also be noted that it is not within the power of any developer to condemn property. Conclusions With the implementation of "Honey Creek Ridge", the following conclusions may be drawn; 1 . Division 1 of the project will generate about 362 vehicles per day, with about 36 of these in the p.m. peak hour. 2. Division 2 of the project will generate about 563 vehicles per day, with about 56 of these in the p.m. peak hour. 3 . The inclusion of the project's traffic does not lower the level of service at any of the intersections in the study area. All levels of service are 'C' or better ; through 1994. 4. In the vicinity of the site there are several half- streets including portions of S.E. 100th Street, 128th Avenue S.E. and S.E. 104th Street. In order to provide a suitable access to the site it will be necessary to complete the half-streets on S.E. 100th Street and 128th Avenue S.E. and construct a the connection between S.E. 100th Street and S.E. 101st Street. -17- Christopher Brown c Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N., Suite A-201 Renton, WA 98055-1380 .i (206) 772-1188 5 . Until Division 2 is completed S.E. 104th Street will not be impacted. At the time Division 2 is completed S.E. 104th Street will be utilized as a secondary • access. • 6. The residents of "Western Hills" have expressed concerns regarding the use of a private driveway running between S.E. 96th Place and S.E. 95th Way. Given the completion of the S.E. 100th Street connection and the extension of 122nd Avenue S.E. it seems unlikely that any site generated traffic will utilize this driveway. • • • _1 g_ _ Christopher Brown a Associates 879 Rainier Avenue N.. Suite A-2O1 Renton, WA 98055-1380 (206) 772-1188 • HONEY CREEK RIDGE A Single Family Residential Development • Traffic Studv APPENDIX Capacity Calculations Intersection File No. Current (1991 ) Operations Sunset Boulevard/Union Avenue S.E. HON001 S.E. 104th Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON002 S.E. 103rd Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON003 S.E. 101st Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON004 S.E. 95th Way/132nd Avenue S.E. HON005 Horizon Year ( 1993) Operations Without Project Sunset Boulevard/Union Avenue S.E. HON101 S.E. 104th Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON102 S.E. 103rd Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON103 S.E. 101st Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON104 . S.E. 95th Way/132nd Avenue S.E. HON105 Horizon' Year ( 1993) Operations With Division 1 Sunset Boulevard/Union Avenue S.E. HON201 S.E. 104th Street/132nd. Avenue S.E. HON202 S.E. 103rd Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON203 S.E. 101st Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON204 S.E. 95th, Way/132nd Avenue S.E. HON205 Horizon Year (1994) Operations With Division 2 Sunset Boulevard/Union Avenue S.E. HON301 S.E. 104th Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON302 S.E. 103rd Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON303 S.E. 101st Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON304 S.E. 95th Way/132nd Avenue S.E. HON305 HONEY CREEK RIDGE A Single Family Residential Development Traffic Study APPENDIX Capacity Calculations f Intersection File No. Current ( 1991 ) Operations Sunset Boulevard/Union Avenue S.E. HON001 S.E. 104th Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON002 S.E. 103rd Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON003 S.E. 101st Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON004 S.E. 95th Way/132nd Avenue S.E. HON005 Horizon Year (1993) Operations Without Project Sunset Boulevard/Union Avenue S.E. HON101 S.E. 104th Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON102 S.E. 103rd Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON103 S.E. 101st Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON104 S.E. 95th Way/132nd Avenue S.E. HON105 Horizon Year (1993) Operations With Division 1 Sunset Boulevard/Union Avenue S.E. HON201 S.E. 104th Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON202 S.E. 103rd Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON203 S.E. 101st Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON204 S.E. 95th Way/132nd Avenue S.E. HON205 Horizon Year (1994) Operations With Division 2 Sunset Boulevard/Union Avenue S.E. HON301 S.E. 104th Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON302 S.E. 103rd Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON303 • S.E. 101st Street/132nd Avenue S.E. HON304 S.E. 95th Way/132nd Avenue S.E. HON305 i ': CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON001 4TERSECTION : SUNSET BOULEVARD @ JION AVENUE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD?N ACTUATED SIGNAL TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE 'EB 0 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 .0 3 WB 0 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 .0 3 NB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 .0 3 SB 0 2 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 .0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 196 1245 31 L 1 12.0 TR 2 24. 0 WB 164 499 53 L 1 12.0 TR 2 24. 0 NB 44 108 213 LTR 2 24.0 SB 58 81 130 LT 2 24.0 R 1 12. 0 SIGNAL PHASING APP PHASE 1ST MV 2ND MV 3RD MV PROT PMSV G Y+R --- ---- ---- -- --- EB 1 L TR L R 28 72 EB 2 TR R 22 78 WB 2 TR R 22 78 WB 3 L TR L R 26 74 NB 4 LTR LR 24 76 SB 4 LT R LR 24 76 1 2/13/1991 CHRISTOPHER BROWN INTERSECTION HON001 ' • W -+- E I S • • • •• SB TOTAL UNION AVENUE A 53 269 N/S STREET I I WB TOTAL 499 716 ` > 130 I 58 V . 164 81 v 1 2 SUNSET BOULEVARD E/W STREET <* A <*-- 2 *--- 1 { V /\ A \/ • 2 --*> V A <*> SUNSET BOULEVARD E/W STREET • 2 108 196 ^ 44 I 213 EB TOTAL I I 1472 1245 • > UNION AVENUE N/S STREET NB TOTAL 31 365 V _AGE 1 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON001 1TERSECTION : SUNSET BOULEVARD @ 1ION AVENUE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD ? N ACTUATED SIGNAL VOLUME ADJUSTMENT ?PROACH LANE GROUP FLOW RATE LANE UTIL ADJ FLOW PROP OF TURNS MVM VOLUME IN GROUP FACTOR RATE LT RT --- ---- ---- ---- -3 L 196 218 1 .00 218 1 . 00 0 . 00 TR 1276 .1418 1 . 00 1418 0.00 0 .02 r."3 L 164 182 1 .00 182 1 . 00 0. 00 TR 552 613 1 . 00 613 0 .00 0. 10 NB LTR 365 406 1 .00 406 0 . 12 0 . 58 SB LT 139 154 1 .00 154 0. 42 0 .00 R 130 144 1 . 00 144 0 .00 1 .00 SATURATION FLOW IDEAL # OF ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ADJ. ?P MVM SAT FLOW LANES WIDTH H.V. GRADE PARK BUS AREA RT LT FLOW ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- EB L 1800 1 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 0 .95 1710 TR 1800 2 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 3600 10/13 L 1800 1 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0.95 1710 TR 1800 2 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0.98 1 . 00 3528,. 3 LTR 1800 2 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .91 0.94 3079 3 LT 1800 2 1 . 00 0 .99 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0.74 2637 R 1800 1 1 .00 0 .99 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 0.85 1 . 00 1515 ..AGE 2 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON001 ITERSECTION : SUNSET BOULEVARD @ F lION AVENUE ;EKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD ? N ACTUATED SIGNAL CAPACITY ANALYSIS LN GR ADJ FLOW PMSV ADJ SAT FLOW GREEN LN GR V/C APP MVM RATE LT FLOW FLW RT RATIO CRIT ? RATIO CAPACITY RATIO L 218 0 1710 0 . 127 N 0 .280 479 0. 455 TR 1418 0 3600 0 .394 Y 0.500 1800 0.788 I L 182 0 1710 0. 106 Y 0 .260 445 0. 409 TR 613 0 3528 0. 174 N 0. 480 1693 0.362 l 1 LTR 406 0 3079 0 . 132 Y 0 . 240 739 0. 549 "1 LT 154 0 2637 0 .058 .N 0 .240 633 0 .243 R 144 0 1515 0. 095 N 0.240 364 0 .396 ('VCLE LENGTH : 100 . 0 SUM OF CRITICAL LANES' FLOW RATIOS : 0.632 )SS TIME PER CYCLE : 12 INTERSECTION V/C : 0 . 718 LEVEL OF SERVICE LN GR V/C GREEN CYC 1st LN GR 2nd LN GR LN GR APP APP MVM RATIO RATIO LEN DELAY CAP DELAY PF DELAY LOS DELAY LOS hti L 0.455 0.280 100 22 .6 479 0. 5 1 . 00 23 . 1 C TR 0.788 0 .500 100 15.7 1800 1 .7 0 .85 14.8 B 15 .9 C Li L 0. 409 0 .260 100 23 .3 445 0 . 4 1 . 00 23 . 7 C TR 0.362 0 . 480 100 12.4 1693 0. 1 0.85 10 .6 B 13 .6 B 1 LTR 0 .549 0 . 240 100 25 .3 739 0. 7 0.85 22 . 1 C 22 .0 C 3 LT 0. 243 0.240 100 23 .3 633 0.0 0 .85 19 .8 C R 0. 396 0 .240 100 24. 3 364 0 .4 0 .85 21 . 0 C 20. 3 C INTERSECTION DELAY : 16.5 secs/veh LEVEL OF SERVICE : C CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON002 1TERSECTION : SE 104TH STREET @ 72ND AVENUE SE =EKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD?N Ur SIGNALIZED MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR ►PP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 2 0 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0. 0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0. 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 1 0 14 LR 1 9.0 NB 21 152 0 LT 1 12.0 SB 0 111 5 TR 1 12.0 i CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON002 FTERSECTION : SE 104TH STREET @ 2ND AVENUE SE EKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD?N SIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED C R I T I CAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5.50 NB 5.50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L -T R L T R EB 1 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 21 152 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 111 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED 1 APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY 918 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 944 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY LEVEL OF SERVICE 1, JOR STREET - NB/SB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON003 1TERSECTION : 103RD STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE MKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD?N ISIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 2 0 N 0 0 0. 90 0 N 0 . 0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 . 0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 . 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 0 0 4 LR 1 12. 0 NB 12 142 0 LT 1 12 . 0 SB 0 107 3 TR 1 12 . 0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON003 NTERSECTION : .E 103RD STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD?N NSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6. 50 --- 5 .50 NB 5.50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 12 142 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 107 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY 968 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY . 959 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE AJOR STREET - NB/SB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON004 NTERSECTION : E 101ST STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD?N NSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 2 0 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 .0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 .0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 2 0 2 LR 1 12. 0 NB 6 89 0 LT 1 12.0 SB 0 119 5 TR 1 12.0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON004 INTERSECTION : JE 101ST STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE IEEKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD?N INSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5 . 50 NB 5 . 50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 6 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 119 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY 812 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 950 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE [AJOR STREET - NB/SB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON005 NTERSECTION : E 95TH WAY @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD7N NSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS EAST / WEST TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE --- --- ---- ---- ---- EB 0 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 . 0 3 WB 0 2 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 . 0 3 NB -2 2 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 . 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 0 26 28 TR 1 12 . 0 WB 26 38 0 LT 1 12. 0 NB 37 0 35 LR 1 12. 0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON005 1TERSECTION : 95TH WAY @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1991 CBD?N JSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS EAST / WEST UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB --- --- --- WB 5 . 50 --- --- NB 6. 50 --- 5 . 50 VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 0 26 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 WB 26 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 37 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE WB RESERVE CAPACITY 1006 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 843 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A WOR STREET - EB/WB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON101 1TERSECTION : .,JNSET BOULEVARD @ UNION AVENUE SEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD7N 'TUATED SIGNAL TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 0 1 • N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0. 0 3 WB 0 . 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 NB -1 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0.0 3 SB 0 2 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 204 1295 32 L 1 12.0 TR 2 24. 0 WB 171 519 55 L 1 12.0 TR 2 24. 0 NB 46 112 222 LT 1 12 .0 TR 1 12. 0 SB 60 84 135 LT 1 12.0 T 1 12. 0 R 1 12 .0 SIGNAL PHASING APP PHASE 1ST MV 2ND MV 3RD MV PROT PMSV G Y+R --- ---- ---- -- --- EB 1 L TR L R 28 72 EB 2 TR R 22 78 WB 2 TR R 22 78 WB 3 L TR L R 26 74 NB 4 LT TR LR 24 76 SB 4 LT T R LR 24 76 /13/1991 CHRISTOPHER BROWN INTERSECTION HON101 N W -+- E S SB TOTAL UNION AVENUE A 55 279 N/S STREET I I 519 WB TOTAL 745 < ' ` > 135 I 60 171 V 84 1 1 1 SUNSET BOULEVARD E/W STREET *> <* V V A <*-- 2 *--- 1 V /\ A \/ 1 ---* 2 --*> A A <* *> SUNSET BOULEVARD I I E/W STREET 1 1 112 A , 204 A 46 I 222 < . . > EB TOTAL I I 1531 1295 > UNION AVENUE N/S STREET NB TOTAL 32 380 V D1GE 1 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON101 4TERSECTION : .,JNSET BOULEVARD @ UNION AVENUE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD ? N CTUATED SIGNAL VOLUME ADJUSTMENT APPROACH LANE GROUP FLOW RATE LANE UTIL ADJ FLOW PROP OF TURNS MVM VOLUME IN GROUP FACTOR RATE LT RT - --- ---- ---- ---- EB L 204 227 1 .00 227 1 . 00 0 . 00 TR 1327 1474 1 .00 1474 0 .00 0 .02 WB L 171 190 1 .00 190 1 .00 0. 00 TR 574 638 1 .00 638 0 .00 0. 10 riB LT 158 176 1 . 00 176 0 .29 0.00 TR 222 247 1 .00 247 0 . 00 1 .00 _B LT 60 67 1 .00 67 1 .00 0.00 T 84 93 1 .00 93 0 .00 0.00 R 135 150 1 .00 150 0 . 00 1 .00 SATURATION FLOW IDEAL # OF ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ADJ. APP MVM SAT FLOW LANES WIDTH H.V. GRADE PARK BUS AREA RT LT FLOW ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -B L 1800 1 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .95 1710 TR 1800 2 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 3600 B L 1800 1 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 0 .95 1710 TR 1800 2 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .98 1 . 00 3528 B LT 1800 1 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 0 .88 1584 TR 1800 1 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 0 .85 1 . 00 1530 B LT 1800 1 1 . 00 0 .99 1 : 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 . 46 820 T 1800 1 1 . 00 0 .99 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1782 R 1800' 1 1 .00 0.99 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 0 .85 1 .00 1515 kGE 2 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON101 1TERSECTION : INSET BOULEVARD @ UNION AVENUE MKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD ? N :TUATED SIGNAL CAPACITY ANALYSIS LN GR ADJ FLOW PMSV ADJ SAT FLOW GREEN LN GR V/C ?P MVM RATE LT FLOW FLW RT RATIO CRIT ? RATIO CAPACITY RATIO 3 L 227 0 1710 0 . 133 N 0 . 280 479 0 . 474 TR 1474 0 3600 0. 409 Y 0 . 500 1800 0.819 ' 3 L 190 0 1710 0 . 111 Y 0 . 260 445 0. 427 TR 638 0 3528 0 . 181 N 0 . 480 1693 0 . 377 NB LT 176 0 1584 0 . 111 N 0 . 240 380 0 . 463 TR 247 0 1530 0 . 161 Y 0 . 240 367 0. 673 SB LT 67 0 820 0 .082 N 0 . 240 197 0.340 T 93 0 1782 0 . 052 N 0 . 240 428 0 .217 R 150 0 1515 0 . 099 N 0 . 240 364 0 . 412 CYCLE LENGTH : 100 .0 SUM OF CRITICAL LANES' FLOW RATIOS : 0 . 681 TOSS TIME PER CYCLE : 12 INTERSECTION V/C : 0 . 774 LEVEL OF SERVICE LN GR V/C GREEN CYC 1st LN GR 2nd LN GR LN GR APP APP APP MVM RATIO RATIO LEN DELAY CAP DELAY PF DELAY LOS DELAY LOS 3 L 0 . 474 0 . 280 100 22 . 7 479 0 . 6 1 .00 23 . 3 C TR 0 .819 0 . 500 100 16. 1 1800 2 . 2 0 .85 15 . 6 C 16. 6 C 3 L 0 .427 0 . 260 100 23 . 4 445 0 . 4 1 . 00 23 .8 C TR 0 . 377 0 . 480 100 12 . 5 1693 0 . 1 0 .85 10 . 7 B 13 . 7 B 3 LT 0 . 463 0 . 240 100 24 . 7 380 0 . 7 0 .85 21 . 6 C TR 0 . 673 0 . 240 100 26. 2 367 3 . 3 0 .85 25 . 1 D 23 . 6 C 3 LT 0 . 340 0 .240 100 23 .9 197 0 . 4 0 .85 20 .7 C T 0 .217 0 . 240 100 23 .2 428 0 . 0 0 .85 19 . 7 C R 0 . 412 0 . 240 100 24. 4 364 0 . 4 0 .85 21 . 1 C 20 .6 C INTERSECTION DELAY : 17 . 2 secs/veh LEVEL OF SERVICE : C CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON102 1TERSECTION : 104TH STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD?N JSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE --- --- ---- ---- ---- EB 2 0 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 . 0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 . 0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 . 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 1 0 15 LR 1 9 .0 NB 22 158 0 LT 1 12.0 SB 0 115 5 TR 1 12.0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON102 1TERSECTION : ..S 104TH STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD?N !ISIGNALI ZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5 . 50 NB 5 . 50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 1 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 22 158 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 115 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY 914 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 938 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE rkJOR STREET - NB/SB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON103 JTERSECTION : 103RD STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE 3EKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD?N JSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE --- --- ---- ---- ---- EB 2 0 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 .0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0. 0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 . 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 0 0 4 LR 1 12 .0 NB 12 148 0 LT 1 12 . 0 SB 0 111 3 TR 1 12 . 0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON103 'TERSECTION : �+. 103RD STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE .EKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD?N I iSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5 . 50 NB 5 .50 --- --- SB --- ---V O L U M E ALLOCATION TO LANES . LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 12 148 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 111 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED• APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY 964 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 955 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE OOR STREET - NB/SB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON104 MERSECTION : 101ST STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE .EKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD?N (SIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE --- --- ---- ---- ---- EB 2 0 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 . 0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0. 0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0. 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 2 0 2 LR 1 12 . 0 NB 6 93 0 LT 1 12 . 0 SB 0 124 5 TR 1 12. 0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON104 TERSECTION : 101ST STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE 1 TKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD?N 1 [SIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 =-- 5 .50 NB 5. 50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 1APP L T R LITR L T R EB 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 6 93 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 124 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB • RESERVE CAPACITY 805 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 945 --- • - LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE kJOR STREET - NB/SB I • CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON105 1TERSECTION : ..s 95TH WAY @ 132ND AVENUE SE 3EKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD?N JSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS EAST /WEST TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 0 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 WB 0 2 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0. 0 3 NB -2 2 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 .0 3 GEOMETRICS / V O L U M E S LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 0 27 29 TR 1 12.0 WB 27 40 0 LT 1 12.0 NB 38 0 36 LR 1 12.0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON105 1TERSECTION : 95TH WAY @ 132ND AVENUE SE 22EKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/O PROJ. CBD?N 4SIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS EAST / WEST UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB --- --- --- WB 5.50 --- --- NB 6.50 --- 5. 50 VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 0 27 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 WB 27 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 38 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE WB RESERVE CAPACITY 1002 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 838 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A WOR STREET - EB/WB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON201 iTERSECTION : INSET BOULEVARD @ UNION AVENUE :EKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD?N , :TUATED SIGNAL TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR HPP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 0 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0. 0 3 WB 0 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 NB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 . 0 3 SB 0 2 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 . 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 225 1295 32 L 1 12 . 0 TR 2 24. 0 WB 171 519 55 L 1 12 . 0 TR 2 24. 0 NB 46 112 222 LT 1 12 . 0 TR 1 12 . 0 SB 60 84 147 LT 1 12 . 0 T, 1 12 .0 R 1 12 . 0 SIGNAL P H A SI N G APP PHASE 1ST MV 2ND MV 3RD MV PROT PMSV G Y+R --- ---- ---- -- --- EB 1 L TR L R 28 72 EB 2 TR R 22 78 WB 2 TR R 22 78 WB 3 L TR L R 26 74 NB 4 LT TR LR 24 76 SB 4 LT T R LR 24 76 2/13/1991 CHRISTOPHER BROWN INTERSECTION HON201 • W -+- E S • SB TOTAL UNION AVENUE ^ 55 291 N/S STREET I I 519 WB TOTAL 745 < ' ` > < 147 I 60 171 v 84 v 1 1 1 SUNSET BOULEVARD E/W STREET *> <* v v A <*-- 2 *--- 1 v /\ A \/ 1 ---* 2 --*> v A A <* *> SUNSET BOULEVARD I I E/W STREET 1 1 112 A 225 A 46 I 222 ' < . . > EB TOTAL I I • 1552 1295 > UNION AVENUE N/S STREET NB TOTAL 32 380 • AGE 1 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON201. NTERSECTION : SUNSET BOULEVARD @ "NION AVENUE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD ? N LCTUATED SIGNAL VOLUME ADJUSTMENT PPROACH LANE GROUP FLOW RATE LANE UTIL ADJ FLOW PROP OF TURNS MVM VOLUME IN GROUP FACTOR RATE LT RT --- ---- ---- ---- "B L 225 250 1 .00 250 1 .00 0. 00 TR 1327 1474 1 . 00 1474 0.00 0. 02 WB L 171 190 1 . 00 190 1 .00 0.00 TR 574 638 1 . 00 638 0. 00 0. 10 NB LT 158 176 1 .00 176 0 . 29 0.00 TR 222 247 1 .00 247 0 .00 1 .00 SB LT 60 67 1 . 00 67 1 .00 0 .00 T 84 93 1 .00 93 0 .00 0 .00 R 147 163 1 .00 163 . 0 .00 1 .00 SATURATION FLOW IDEAL # OF ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ADJ. PP MVM SAT FLOW LANES WIDTH H.V. GRADE PARK BUS AREA RT LT FLOW EB L 1800 1 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .95 1710 TR 1800 2 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 3600 ..B L 1800 1 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .95 1710 TR 1800 2 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .98 1 .00 3528 B LT 1800 1 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 0 .87 1566 TR 1800 1 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 0.85 1 . 00 1530 B LT 1800 1 1 . 00 0.99 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 0 .46 820 T 1800 1 1 .00 0.99 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 1782 R 1800 1 1 .00 0 .99 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 0.85 1 . 00 1515 • PAGE 2 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON201 INTERSECTION : SuTNSET BOULEVARD @ 1 ION AVENUE L._.EKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD ? N ACTUATED SIGNAL CAPACITY ANALYSIS LN GR ADJ FLOW PMSV ADJ SAT FLOW GREEN LN GR V/C APP MVM RATE LT FLOW FLW RT RATIO CRIT ? RATIO CAPACITY RATIO ...3 L 250 0 1710 0 . 146 N 0 . 280 479 0 . 522 TR 1474 0 3600 0 . 409 Y 0 .500 1800 0 .819 s ' 3 L 190 0 1710 0 . 111 Y 0 . 260 445 0 . 427 TR 638 0 3528 0 . 181 N 0 . 480 1693 0 . 377 LT 176 0 1566 0 . 112 N 0 . 240 376 0 . 468 TR 247 0 1530 0 . 161 Y 0 . 240 367 0 . 673 3 LT 67 0 820 0 . 082 N 0 . 240 197 0 . 340 T 93 0 1782 0 . 052 N 0 . 240 428 0 . 217 R 163 0 1515 0 . 108 N 0 . 240 364 0 . 448 fCLE LENGTH : 100 . 0 SUM OF CRITICAL LANES' FLOW RATIOS : 0 . 681 )SS TIME PER CYCLE : 12 INTERSECTION V/C : 0 . 774 LEVEL OF SERVICE LN GR V/C GREEN CYC 1st LN GR 2nd LN GR LN GR APP APP ?P MVM RATIO RATIO LEN DELAY CAP DELAY PF DELAY LOS DELAY LOS --- --- --- --- -- --- EB L 0 . 522 0 . 280 100 23 . 1 479 0 .8 1 . 00 23 . 9 C TR 0 .819 0 .500 100 16. 1 1800 2 . 2 0 .85 15 . 6 C 16.8 C WB L 0 .427 0. 260 100 23 . 4 445 0 . 4 1 . 00 23 .8 C TR 0 . 377 0 . 480 100 12 . 5 1693 0 . 1 0 .85 10 . 7 B 13 . 7 B NB LT 0 . 468 0 . 240 100 24 . 7 376 0 . 7 0 .85 21 . 6 C TR 0 . 673 0 .240 100 26 . 2 367 3 . 3 0 .85 25 . 1 D 23 . 6 C Da LT 0 . 340 0 . 240 100 23.9 197 0 . 4 0 .85 20 . 7 C T 0. 217 0 . 240 100 23 .2 428 0 . 0 0 .85 19 . 7 C R 0 . 448 0 . 240 100 24 . 6 364 0 . 6 0 .85 21 . 4 C 20 .8 C INTERSECTION DELAY : 17 . 3 secs/veh LEVEL OF• SERVICE : C 1 ,GE 2 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON201 ITERSECTION : bJNSET BOULEVARD @ UNION AVENUE 1 EKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD ? N ] !MATED SIGNAL CAPACITY ANALYSIS LN GR ADJ FLOW PMSV ADJ SAT FLOW GREEN LN GR V/C A-,2P MVM RATE LT FLOW FLW RT RATIO CRIT ? RATIO CAPACITY RATIO ] I L 250 0 1710 0 . 146 N 0. 280 479 0 . 522 TR 1474 0 3600 0 . 409 Y 0 .500 1800 0 .819 1---I L 190 0 1710 0 . 111 Y 0 . 260 445 0.427 TR 638 0 3528 0 . 181 N 0 . 480 1693 0. 377 NB LT 176 0 1566 0 . 112 N 0. 240 376 0 . 468 TR 247 0 1530 0 . 161 Y 0 . 240 367 0 . 673 SB LT 67 0 820 0 . 082 N 0 . 240 197 0 .340 T 93 0 1782 0 . 052 N 0 . 240 428 0 .217 R 163 0 1515 0 . 108 N 0 . 240 364 0 . 448 CYCLE LENGTH : 100 . 0 SUM OF CRITICAL LANES' FLOW RATIOS : 0 . 681 ] SS TIME PER CYCLE : 12 INTERSECTION V/C : 0 . 774 LEVEL OF SERVICE LN GR V/C GREEN CYC 1st LN GR 2nd LN GR LN GR APP APP APP MVM RATIO RATIO LEN DELAY CAP DELAY PF DELAY LOS DELAY LOS - - --- --- --- -- --- ] L 0. 522 0 . 280 100 23 . 1 479 0 .8 1 .00 23 .9 C TR 0.819 0. 500 100 16. 1 1800 2 . 2 0 .85 15 . 6 C 16.8 C V L 0 . 427 0 . 260 100 23 . 4 445 0. 4 1 .00 23 .8 C TR 0 .377 0.480 100 12.5 1693 0. 1 0.85 10 .7 B 13 . 7 B 1 LT 0 . 468 0 . 240 100 24.7 376 0 .7 . 0 .85 21 . 6 C TR 0 . 673 0 . 240 100 26.2 367 3 . 3 0 .85 25 . 1 D 23 . 6 C LT 0 . 340 0. 240 100 23 .9 197 0 . 4 0.85 20 . 7 C T 0 . 217 0 . 240 100 23 . 2 428 0 .0 0 .85 19 . 7 C R 0 . 448 0 . 240 100 24 . 6 364 0 . 6 0.85 21 . 4 C 20 .8 C INTERSECTION DELAY : 17 . 3 secs/veh LEVEL OF SERVICE : C CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON202 NTERSECTION : ..E 104TH STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD?N NSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH ' TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 2 0 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 . 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 t GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 1 0 15 LR 1 9.0 NB 22 179 0 LT 1 12.0 SB 0 127 5 TR 1 12.0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON202 1TERSECTION : 104TH STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK • 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD?N JSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH } UNSIGNALIZED C R I T I CAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5.50 NB 5.50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R : EB 1 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 22 ' 179 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 127 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED ' APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 ' EB RESERVE CAPACITY 899 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 926 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A ' ; SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE OOR STREET - NB/SB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON203 4TERSECTION : 103RD STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE 3EKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD?N 1SIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 2 0 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 . 0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 . 0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 .0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 0 0 4 LR 1 12.0 NB 12 169 0 LT 1 12 .0 SB 0 123 3 TR 1 12.0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON203 1TERSECTION : 103RD STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD?N JSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED C R I T I CAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5.50 NB 5.50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE. 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 12 169 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 123 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY 952 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 942 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE kJOR STREET - NB/SB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991. HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON204 1TERSECTION : 101ST STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD?N vSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE --- --- ---- ---- ---- EB 2 0 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0. 0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 . 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS . WD EB 2 0 9 LR 1 12 .0 NB 18 102 0 LT 1 12 . 0 SB 0 129 6 TR. 1 12. 0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON204 JTERSECTION : 101ST STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD?N vSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5.50 NB 5 .50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE .1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R . L T R EB 2 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 18 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 129 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 1 1 _ EB RESERVE CAPACITY 869 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 927 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE AJOR STREET - NB/SB 1 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON205 1TERSECTION : 95TH WAY @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD?N [SIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS EAST / WEST TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 0 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0. 0 3 WB 0 2 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 .0 3 NB -2 2 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 0 28 34 TR 1 . 12.0 WB 28 41 0 LT 1 12. 0 NB 47 0 36 LR 1 12.0 1 I 1 i CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON205 NTERSECTION : E 95TH WAY @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1993 W/DIV. 1 CBD?N NSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS EAST / WEST UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB --- --- --- WB 5.50 --- --- NB 6.50 --- 5 . 50 i VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 0 28 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 WB 28 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 47 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE WB RESERVE CAPACITY 995 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 811 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A. AJOR STREET - EB/WB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON301 NTERSECTION : .„UNSET BOULEVARD @ UNION AVENUE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD?N CTUATED SIGNAL TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE --- --- ---- ---- ---- EB 0 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0. 0 3 WB 0 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0. 0 3 NB -1 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 .0 3 SB 0 2 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0 .0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 262 1321 33 L 1 12.0 TR 2 24. 0 WB 174 530 57 L 1 12.0 TR 2 24. 0 NB 47 115 226 LT 1 12.0 TR 1 12.0 SB 62 86 170 LT 1 12.0 T 1 12 . 0 R 1 12.0 SIGNAL PHASING APP PHASE 1ST MV 2ND MV 3RD MV PROT PMSV G Y+R EB 1 L TR L R 28 72 EB 2 TR R 22 78 WB 2 TR R 22 78 WB 3 L TR L R 26 74 NB 4 LT TR LR 24 76 SB 4 LT T R LR 24 76 2/13/1991 CHRISTOPHER BROWN INTERSECTION HON301 N W -+- E • SB TOTAL UNION AVENUE A 57 318 N/S STREET I I 530 WB TOTAL 761 < ' > 170 I 62 174 v 86 v 1 1 1 SUNSET BOULEVARD E/W STREET *> <* V V A <*-- 2 *--- 1 V /\ 1 ---* 2 --*> A A <* *> SUNSET BOULEVARD E/W STREET 1 1 115 262 ^ 47 I 226 . < . . > EB TOTAL I I 1616 1321 > UNION AVENUE N/S STREET NB TOTAL 33 388 V P,GE 1 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON301 dTERSECTION : -JNSET BOULEVARD @ UNION AVENUE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD ? N 7.TUATED SIGNAL VOLUME ADJUSTMENT RPPROACH LANE GROUP FLOW RATE LANE UTIL ADJ FLOW PROP OF TURNS MVM VOLUME IN GROUP FACTOR RATE LT RT EB L 262 291 1 .00 291 1 . 00 0. 00 TR 1354 1504 1 . 00 1504 0 . 00 0.02 WB L 174 193 1 .00 193 1 .00 0 .00 TR 587 652 1 . 00 652 0 .00 0 . 10 NB LT 162 180 1 . 00 180 0. 29 0 . 00 TR 226 251 1 . 00 251 0. 00 1 . 00 -3 LT 62 69 1 . 00 69 1 . 00 0. 00 T 86 96 1 . 00 96 0. 00 0. 00 R 170 189 1 . 00 189 0 . 00 1 . 00 SATURATION FLOW IDEAL # OF ADJUSTMENT FACTORS ADJ. hPP MVM SAT FLOW LANES WIDTH H.V. GRADE PARK BUS AREA RT LT FLOW ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- L 1800 1 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 0 .95 1710 TR 1800 2 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 3600 3 L 1800 1 1 .00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .95 1710 TR 1800 2 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0.98 1 . 00 3528 3 LT 1800 1 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .85 1530 TR 1800 1 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .85 1 . 00 1530 3 LT 1800 1 1 . 00 0 .99 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 0 .45 802 T 1800 1 1 . 00 0 .99 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 .00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1 . 00 1782 R 1800 1 1 .00 0 .99 1 . 00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 00 0 .85 1 .00 1515 ?,GE 2 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON301 iTERSECTION : OJNSET BOULEVARD @ UNION AVENUE EKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD ? N TUATED SIGNAL CAPACITY ANALYSIS. LN GR ADJ FLOW PMSV ADJ SAT FLOW GREEN LN GR V/C .PP MVM RATE LT FLOW FLW RT RATIO CRIT ? RATIO CAPACITY RATIO B L 291 0 1710 0 . 170 N 0 .280 479 0 .608 TR 1504 0 3600 0 . 418 Y 0 . 500 1800 0 .836 B L 193 0 1710 0 . 113 Y 0. 260 445 0.434 TR 652 0 3528 0 . 185 N 0 . 480 1693 0 .385 *'B LT 180 0 1530 0 . 118 N 0 . 240 367 0 . 490 TR 251 0 1530 0. 164 Y 0 . 240 367 0 .684 SB LT 69 0 802 0.086 N 0 . 240 192 0 .359 T 96 0 1782 0 .054 N 0 . 240 428 0 . 224 R 189 0 1515 0 . 125 N 0 . 240 364 0 .519 CYCLE LENGTH : 100 .0 SUM OF CRITICAL LANES' FLOW RATIOS : 0. 695 - 3SS TIME PER CYCLE : 12 INTERSECTION V/C : 0 .790 LEVEL OF SERVICE. LN GR V/C GREEN CYC 1st LN GR 2nd LN GR LN GR APP APP APP MVM RATIO RATIO LEN DELAY. CAP DELAY PF DELAY LOS DELAY LOS -- --- --- --- -- --- B L 0. 608 0. 280 100 23 .7 479 1 . 6 1 . 00 25 . 3 D TR 0.836 0 . 500 100 16. 3 1800 2 . 6 0.85 16. 1 C 17 . 6 C L 0 . 434 0. 260 100 23 . 5 445 0 . 4 1 . 00 23 .9 C TR 0. 385 0. 480 100 12 . 6 1693 0 . 1 0.85 10 .8 B 13 .8 B B LT 0. 490 0 . 240 100 24.9 367 0 .9 0.85 21 .9 C TR 0. 684 0 . 240 100 26. 3 367 3 .6 0.85 25 . 4 D 23 .9 C B LT 0 . 359 0 . 240 100 24. 0 192 0. 5 0 .85 20 .8 C T 0. 224 0 . 240 100 23 . 2 428 0. 0 0 .85 19. 7 C R 0. 519 0 . 240 100 25 . 1 364 1 . 1 0 .85 22. 3 C 21 . 3 C INTERSECTION DELAY : 17.8 secs/veh LEVEL OF SERVICE : C CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON302 JTERSECTION : 104TH STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD?N DTSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE --- --- ---- ---- ---- EB 2 0 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0. 0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0. 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 1 0 24 LR 1 9.0 NB 37 201 0 LT 1 12.0 SB 0 141 . 5 TR 1 12.0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON302 NTERSECTION : _'E 104TH STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD?N NSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5.50 NB 5.50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 1 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 37 201 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 141 5 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY 882 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 896 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A ' SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE , AJOR STREET - NB/SB I i CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON303 NTERSECTION : . E 103RD STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD?N NSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 2 0 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 .0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0.0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0. 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 0 0 4 LR 1 12 . 0 NB 12 191 0 LT 1 12 . 0 SB 0 137 3 TR 1 12 .0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON303 4TERSECTION : -2 103RD STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD?N !SIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5 . 50 NB 5 . 50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 12 191 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 137 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY 937 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 928 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE kJOR STREET - NB/SB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON304 TTERSECTION : -A 101ST STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE ,EKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD?N 1SIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE EB 2 0 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 NB 1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 SB -1 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0.0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 APP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 3 0 20 LR 1 12.0 NB 37 103. 0 LT 1 12.0 SB 0 131 7 TR 1 12.0 1 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON304 TERSECTION : __ 101ST STREET @ 132ND AVENUE SE Vi EKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD?N I. SIGNALIZED - MAJOR. STREET RUNS NORTH / SOUTH UNSIGNALIZED CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB 6.50 --- 5. 50 NB 5 . 50 --- --- SB --- --- --- VOLUME ALLOCATION TO LANES LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 3 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 37 103 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SB 0 131 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY 864 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 904 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A SB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE h JOR STREET - NB/SB CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON305 C 'ERSECTION : L 95TH WAY @ I32ND AVENUE SE V; :KDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD?N 1 iIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS EAST / WEST TRAFFIC & ROADWAY CONDITIONS GRADE HV ADJ. PKG LN. BUSES CONF. PEDS PED BUTTON ARR APP (%) (%) Y/N Nm (Nb) PHF (peds/hr) Y/N SEC TYPE B 0 1 N 0 0 0.90 0 N 0. 0 3 WB 0 2 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0. 0 3 dB -2 2 N 0 0 0 .90 0 N 0 . 0 3 GEOMETRICS / VOLUMES LANE GROUPS VOLUME 1 2 3 DPP LT TH RT MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD MVM LNS WD EB 0 29 35 TR 1 12 . 0 WB 30 41 0 LT 1 12.0 NB 48 0 38 LR 1 12. 0 CHRISTOPHER BROWN 2/13/1991 HONEY CREEK RIDGE HON305 NTERSECTION : .�E 95TH WAY @ 132ND AVENUE SE EEKDAY PM PEAK 1994 W/DIV. 2 CBD?N NSIGNALIZED - MAJOR STREET RUNS EAST / WEST - U N S I G N A L I Z E D CRITICAL GAPS CRITICAL GAPS (SEC) APP LEFT TURN THROUGH RIGHT TURN EB --- --- --- WB 5.50 --- --- NB 6.50 --- 5 .50 VOLUME ALLOCATION , TO LANES ,. LANE 1 LANE 2 LANE 3 APP L T R L T R L T R EB 0 29 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 WB 30 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NB 48 0 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 UNSIGNALIZED APP LANE 1 • LANE 2 LANE 3 EB RESERVE CAPACITY --- --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE WB RESERVE CAPACITY 990 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A NB RESERVE CAPACITY 807 --- --- LEVEL OF SERVICE A AJOR STREET - EB/WB 1 1? APPENDIX H POWER TRANSMISSION LINE INFORMATION r ' 1,1 ' 1i LA{<ER I DGE E EVEL.QPh'1Eh1T ., I I IG - P.O. Box 146 Renton, Wa 98057 (206) 228-9750 • April 2, 1990 • Mel Walters Environmental Scientist Puget Power Puget Power Building OBC-06N Bellevue, WA 9B009 - Dear Mr. Walters: Lakeridge Development Inc. recently submitted a preliminary plat for a residential subdivision to the City Of Renton. The subdivision is adjacent to the Puget Power Talbot Lakeside No. 1 and No. 2 transmission lines. The City Of Renton Planning Department has requested the following information conncerning the Magnetic Field associated with the lines: 1 . The existing and proposed future transmission capacity of the lines 2. The anticipated Magnetic Field of the existing and proposed transmission lines at: a. R.O.W. centerline, b. R.O.W. edge, c. 100' out from R.O.W. centerline, and d. 200' out from the R.O.W. centerline. 3. A statement concerning the anticipated long term impacts to the adjacent property owners health. The person at the City of Renton requesting the information is: (T Don Erickson, A. I.C.P. Chief , Current Planning Division City Of Renton ii Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Thank you for your willingness to respond to the above concerns Sincerely; David W. Casey • Lakeridge Development Inc. L:MWALTERS.42 PUGET P® April 30, 1990 Mr. David W. Casey Lakeridge Development Inc. P. 0. Box 146 Renton, WA 98057 Dear David: As requested in your letter dated April 2, 1990, I am supplying you with information concerningthe Electrical E ectr cal and Magnetic fields of the transmission lines adjacent to your proposed project. � I The existing transmission line is operated at 115-kV the magnetic field from this line has been calculated to fall in the range of 8 to 22 mG at the edge of the right of way (25 ft from the line) . The proposed new transmission line will operate at 230-kV the magnetic field from this line has been calculated to fall in the range of 6 to 12 mG at the edge of the right of way. The magnetic fields will actually decrease has a result of the new line configuration. Puget Power has not calculated the fields out to 200 feet from the line because the fields are very low at this distance. The calculated values 100 feet from the line are under 5mG. At the present time there is not enough scientific evidence to indicate that a significant health risk exist. Scientist have not been able to establish any evidence of a causal relationship. These are extremely small electrical fields when one considers the size of electrical and magnetic fields in an average house. For example the ordinary kitchen range will produce a magnetic field of 80 mG. I hope this supplies you with the necessary information for your proposed project. If you have any questions you can contact me at 462-3089. Sincerely, \(— kj (JJ M. L. Walters Environmental Scientist/ Terrestrial Biologist MLW/cmf Encl . 5-DC-4777 The Energy Starts Here® Puget Sound Power&Light Company P.O. Box 97034 Bellevue,WA 98009-9734 (206)454-6363 ,I POWER LIDES.•ELECTRIC Questions and Answers on Research into Health Effects AUGUST 1988 Bonneville POWER ADMINISTRATION I ' 1 :.' `-,- i''.- '7 .r` - ; "1\ties �•- S, y �tp r\,, — 4 ; s r r- :40 k I ::. ''',-..-,. ' itaiq _ -,•':f.t•,;...,t...,,„•. • . J p 5 ..',: ,.:'.•4-', *. c.; '�+,.j ''.,7 fin`, ?`�``r'',- 4 +r v ,-' z=; "� � k eta } -_` f.._ � - =� = . , Li- aw .Y, + I .I ,,. ' l' 1 jp,`' t-''X'._..*,. e ":.N.,,, :,yi31 I 1' 61ftr. ' 7 T '` ,/ii , t 9: 7 i Tli I 3: u Ai.:`, 3...A...... r \ ..) ..1 r O � . n r ir ^t' ri,‘); � 4 • of e s RR{ 4' 1 1ki ) } ` . r t _ Js� 5. , .tw n 4,.1.:, .. _-t ry !.A�^y' ,a j kk ,.,, • ,�t4rt`• �a1.:s.°7 * 4 a s• t \L 1'' vcp •r-� ' K ,A.K �1p it_. ..... I c.".•a.f — d iyt `.' # "+; x. ,t b r- k�' '. r', 1.`r=F'ri.v -%x, .4...k _f' 'ram-.' • - ",'`. e y \\ 1 11►I I 4i e ki".. • ' 'fir .. ,-h ,r, '_ ...-• .. '., n w�a: ' �� • • .�;y`*.. - , ,, ,. I + •k+ y r' ] , ,__ f K{. ,'r .r,;:r,.,,r.,4 44' 1. ^ _-9¢. �r,. sc +Alp 11It `s! 3 - d c_ — >+':.-... '�,, c•-•( ',; :1 Nit y yey E r .— ey.: ^[;.�� .�.� FL � I •� �'� ) `', Ss•.. , ..�r.y(.„try�•�J+'rA���j "'l•i,:iii „4•� r�•�:^- III '_ ! .s.`� ;.,.,,. ' .Jf, r }iA 3' - 4 ..,. ,31,ry;tv�.{cat.5',dTi^. $ •-i;:.S;:•>c_ s -isa 'Y•..,+ir.. f �.\ ,„ t q_ :+. -,y Y:1. r• R1rt.gois f- j3:h"y p- r`.-.j9� 133n i. ,+4 .: _. :3s 5: '.1:'w'..r$ii.,�''•'T :•.:i.•4%:`Z;+.. Electric power lines are a familiar sight.They come in a wide the most commonly asked questions,focusing on what is variety of shapes and sizes.Although few of us know how these known about the possible effects of these lines on health: lines work, most of us know what they're for:they bring well-being through life,freedom from illness.The last section electricity to our homes and businesses. Most people also provides a list of sources of more detailed information. The know that power lines,like the wiring in our homes,can cause information in this pamphlet is only a summary. — serious electric shocks if we're not careful. Scientists have Answers to the questions are based on BPA's extensive also begun to look more closely into any possible long-term experience in operating a large electric power transmission effects of power lines on human health. system. They also take the latest scientific research into To address your questions about power lines and health, this consideration. Since 1974, a special BPA team of scientists pamphlet reviews scientific studies from past years and and engineers has continually reviewed research on this highlights recent developments in the field. First, some subject. We want to keep employees and the public informed technical terms are defined and facts about safety and power of the latest research, and of the known and potential risks. lines are summarized.Then,the pamphlet provides answers to That is the purpose of this pamphlet. 1 , Summary High-voltage transmission lines bring electric power from the generation plants to cities and towns. Lower-voltage power lines are then used to distribute this power to homes ' and businesses. Both transmission and distribution lines have basic electrical properties similar to the wiring in your home.This includes the potential for serious electric shocks if basic safety precautions are not taken.By following these precautions, people can safely live and work near electric power lines. Safety risks associated with electric shock are generally well understood. However, questions have been raised about possible long-term health effects caused by power lines and other electrical devices. Power lines, like all electrical equipment and devices, produce electric and magnetic fields (E/MF). It is these fields that some scientists believe may have the ability to cause long-term effects on human health. Since the early 1970s, a large number of studies of E/MF has been conducted throughout the world. Most involved studies of laboratory animals. Although some laboratory studies have reported various effects of E/MF, none of the effects has been confirmed as being hazardous. A smaller number of studies has been done of people living near power.lines.These epidemiological studies have also not confirmed any health effects of E/MF. However, much interest is currently focused on results of a few studies, �. which have suggested a possible association between power lines and cancer. Two of these studies were done in Denver, Colorado, in 1979 and 1987.They found that children with cancer were more likely to have lived near major distribution lines.The weak magnetic field produced in homes by these lines was suggested as a factor influencing this finding. It is also possible that the results were only due to chance, or that other factors were involved. Other studies have reported that people who work around electrical equipment may also be at higher risk of cancer. These studies are also not conclusive. No cause and effect relationship has been established between E/MF and cancer. In general, cancer researchers and the public health community have not indicated much concern over E/MF, • compared to the wide range of other health issues which exist. However, several scientific review groups have concluded that the results of E/MF studies should not be dismissed,and further research is warranted.Some of these groups have recommended precautionary measures to limit E/MF exposures. Considerable research on the possible health effects of E/MF is ongoing.In the United States,most of these studies • are sponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute and by the U.S. Department of Energy. BPA will continue to monitor closely the results of this research. ' I 7 230-kV Transmission Line III I ._w .s.Ai II 1 jI Transmission r.P1fi .x' Mivv� Substation Zit ImoeA r,- Electrical �' 1M J_ Generator A1. :I,�. 12-kV Distribution Line -1 . 111111alwa...—.1 _"1"111111.1.1111.11111°.11,11 — Pole Transformer ,' . _—11rolik, . 110/220 Volts -1,-1,- _ of• i 0 PA , - I, Distribution 1, �� , _ Substation , IF ,' [i III- - , V I, Figure 1. Simplified electric power system. BPA is responsible for transmission shown here in red. . Basics of Electric Power This pamphlet uses five basic terms about electricity — hydroelectric dams or fossil-fuel plants) to substations near conductor, current,voltage, load, and circuit.We also urban areas. BPA uses mostly alternating-current(ac) '__., talk about two kinds of power lines:transmission lines and transmission lines at voltages of 115 kV, 230 kV, and 500 distribution lines. kV(1 kV or kilovolt = 1000 volts). In North America, The conductor is the wire you see between poles or towers; the ac frequency is 60 cycles-per-second(60 Hertz). BPA it carries the electricity. Current is the movement of also operates one direct-current-(dc)transmission line. (Dc electrons in the conductor. It is measured in units called lines are discussed in another BPA publication — see the amperes (or just amps). Voltage is the electrical force that last section.) causes current to flow in a conductor.It is measured in volts. Utilities use lower-voltage ac distribution lines to bring the Load is the electric power consumed by homes and power from substations to homes and businesses. Distribu- businesses. If a conductor energized with voltage is tion lines operate at voltages such as 25 kV and 12 kV.These connected to a load, a circuit is completed and current levels are further reduced to 110/220 volts to serve will flow individual homes and businesses. Figure 1 shows how the •e Transmission lines are high-voltage power lines.The high power is brought over transmission and distribution lines to • voltage allows the electric power to be carried efficiently your home. over long distances, from the generating facilities (such as 1 • Power Lines and Safety Can you receive shocks from objects • near power lines? When electric utilities refer to safety near power lines,they . mean prevention of shocks which could seriously injure or Alternating-current lines induce voltages into nearby kill people or animals.Safety risks are well understood and conducting objects — anything from trees and fences to can be managed two ways: designing lines to minimize people and animals. One effect associated with some public exposure to these risks, and educating people who transmission lines (usually with voltages greater than live or work near the lines about the hazards. 230 kV) is the s"nuisance" shock. For instance, suppose a voltage is induced in wire fencing mounted on dry wood Is it safe to live near power lines? posts (which insulates it from ground). If a person were to Peopletouch the fence,he or she could receive an annoying shock, can live safely around power lines so long as basic much like the shock sometimes felt touching a doorknob precautions are taken. Some'of these are taken by BPA and after walking across a rug.To prevent nuisance shocks, the local utility; some must be taken by the public. fences and metal buildings or equipment near transmission BPA designs and builds transmission lines in accordance lines are grounded if they pose a problem. with the National Electrical Safety Code.The code specifies how far transmission line conductors must be from the ground or from adjacent buildings or trees. BPA usually • determines how wide its rights-of-way* must be on the basis of those safe clearance distances.For safety purposes, buildings should never be located within transmission line rights-of-way. (If a homeowner is not sure where the edge of the right-of-way is,he or she should check with the utility i that owns the line.The homeowner should also check with local planning or zoning departments before starting to build anything close to transmission lines. A publication from BPA, called Landowner's Guide to Use of BPA Rights-of-Way, may be helpful in learning about rights-of-way.) However, the National Electrical Safety Code alone cannot guarantee complete safety. People must be careful around power lines.They can cause serious electric shocks if a • _ person or anything he or she is carrying (such as an irrigation pipe)comes too close to the line.If this happens, the high voltage on the line could cause the electricity to "arc"over to the nearby object,and you would be seriously _ injured or killed. A BPA booklet, Living and Working • Around High Voltage Power Lines, describes safe • practices near power lines. (See the last section to request information.) • • *The right-of-way is a strip of land for which a utility acquires a - permanent easement from the owner.This easement allows the utility to build,operate,and maintain its transmission lines safely and reliably ana to keep the right-of-way clear of trees,structures,and fire hazards.(In some cases the fand is purchased outright.)The right-of-way is usually a • specified amount of feet wider than just the towers and lines themselves, depending on the size and number of power lines. 2 i Power Lines and Potential - ' Health Effects AL . , Electric Field Only Li Power lines, electrical wiring, and appliances produce Lamp low-frequency, low-energy electric and magnetic fields.* t 1 1 1 1 -- E/MF are invisible lines of force that exist in the area ' surrounding a power line or any electrical device — a ii / I H toaster or a lamp. (See Figure 2.)These fields have been the 110 Volts No Current subject of much research focusing on potential long-term health effects. In the 1970s, scientific interest first focused I2, on effects of electric fields. More recently, that interest has expanded to include possible effects of magnetic fields. Lamp Electric and Magnetic Field On What are electric fields? • 100 Watts j r'� i`t i'% i`% �`� ...,_ 1 ; 1 ', 1 i ;t• I ! 1 I t : 1, 8 ; i , i 1` 1 1 , 11 , , 1 The voltage on a conductor causes electric fields in the air 1 1 around the conductor. Electric field strength is described in 110 Volts and 1 Ampere ® • units of voltage existing between two points in the air, 1 ' meter(39 inches) apart. Electric fields may be stated in Figure 2. Electric fields(due to voltage)and magnetic fields • volts per meter(V/m), or, for stronger fields, in kilovolts (due to current) occur around household wiring and per meter(kV/m). appliances, as well as around power lines. Beneath the largest BPA transmission lines (500-kV), the The amount of current flowing in a power line varies as the maximum electric field near the ground is typically less than demand for electric power changes throughout the day.This 9 kilovolts per meter(9 kV/m).The strength of the field means that the magnetic field strength also varies over a decreases rapidly as you move away from the line. At the wide range. edge of the right-of-way, the field is reduced to around 2-3 kV/m.Maximum electric field strengths for 230-kV and Magnetic field strength decreases rapidly away from the line. 115-kV lines are around 3 kV/m and 2 kV/m respectively. On the rights-of-way of the largest transmission lines, these Fields produced by 12-kV distribution lines are usually less levels may reach 300 mG beneath the conductors,and around than 1 kV/m. Figure 3 shows some typical electric field 100 mG at the right-of-way edge. (The earth's magnetic levels at various distances from BPA transmission lines. field is about 500 mG.However,it is a direct-current field.) Figure 3 shows some typical levels of magnetic fields at -- The appliances and wiring in your home create electric various distances from BPA transmission lines. fields,too.They are generally much weaker than those close to power lines.Throughout the home, electric field The wiring and appliances in your home also create strengths are typically less than 10 V/m(0.010 kV/m). magnetic fields. Very close to electrical appliances, Levels of 100 V/m(0.100 kV/m) or higher can be magnetic fields can reach tens or even hundreds of found very close to appliances such as electric ranges and milligauss. However, the fields decrease rapidly away from electric blankets. the appliances.Throughout a home, maximum magnetic field strength is usually only a few milligauss or less.Power Electric field levels inside most houses are not affected very line magnetic fields can significantly contribute to the fields much by power lines.This is because trees, shrubs and found inside homes near the lines. Unlike electric fields, building material greatly reduce the strength of electric magnetic fields are not weakened by trees or building fields (as does distance from the line). ' materials.They do decrease with distance, however. What are magnetic fields? . The current in a conductor creates magnetic fields. a -- Magnetic fields are stated in units of gauss or milligauss • (mG, 1/1000 of a gauss).This is a measure of the amount of magnetic force existing in an area. *In this pamphlet,E/MF is used as an abbreviation for electric and magnetic fields.In some cases, the two fields are discussed separately. . 3 i I i i i 115 kV Edge of Right-of-way I / I . �,ifi:r _,`:'u`.r. .,`fie• .'io c,=t-.: - • nr 4,:!`.• �,:6, - 3 „.,.,;•:,, .Maximum.„W.- ;r«,r;z ...„,. ,, , >�;:•,„00'ft.,;,�,-R.,,,-, '.ar•,„:. °"s,1:1A: ,, ,-,,rs200it-a,,,��+�r'0 ..J., • ?l'+.,,.- .. ..9:. ;.:t...,ir .. c,-.i v. �.. , t. r. ,,...,�,.a.f1 r;:S..Y_'Y"• i .Jsy:r@b.,;.t‘—r--.f,Z.1` . Electric Field(kV/m) 1.5 0.4 0.07 0.01 Magnetic Field(mG) 35 7 • 2 0.5 ►I %. Ir 230 kV o rAv Edge of ' M TA Right-of-way AV riff VA . • , 11 1 ;,r _�, �"Maxi".-•um •s'=;,�_ �_:.,':Cp.$,��.:,., z:-��::.;'�100iL =>.:,,''; .:;., .. ,:;�,.,r ,,:�,-�.. 20 ��'.�ra"r•,, - �K:,=Li^: 'V _.. ., ;.i:.u. ... ., w}};•:c:.i•;r.•>_d.i.'.a.•,v.y.....r:,'.,,.ar%:.,,�r ';.,.. . .. .. .... .. .'es^.. _-:r_..,".,+.•.,,..-..?... ,.. tom,""•'�' Electric Field(kV/m) 3.3 1.5 0.2 0.03 . Magnetic Field(mG) 97. 33 9 2. kvAVA A I i . i'' if . � - 500 kV Ito, Edge of • .1 Right-of-way 1 . rVV 1 1 . _ �yi-sip.:: - ^sr� d.r,._:p::- . . _ �. =ia?- ";rr �:i;.^t:•�: ':1:4:.i'.uxy?:.',d::: �tl:;,�"?,-.: : '�'r. ::: ;,•>.uLt;'i ;V•: y.c. „c., a',`x. :ur:�;•'rxwq:r • :i. 'j•'^" '�.,. -Wsflilaiclmuri�im`:•��,: `;� .BS>tt:���;. '�100•ft:s°.. a:v�:u:•.•�„r";:�.�. �,�, .��. ..20Q,�R:•-,� -tt•.'e:':,- ..., �-. ..s-.:c.'_:...,,''�+�=r s ._... .. ,ca-s.�tZir,�;tl:c... ......:,«:;�.;;?':.�:.:,.r�:•?�r-;�.�s-,,.z.r,;.x�!;r::+2'�%'•G :X d�z•.- nry.. Electric Field(kV/m) 7.5 3 1 0.03 Magnetic Field(mG) 176 61 25 • 6 1 • • Figure 3. Typical electric and magnetic field strengths at various distances from BPA transmission lines.Actual V . field strength and right-of-way width depend on line design, and voltage and current levels. r 4 How are E/MF measured? Are there regulations for E/MF? Before BPA transmission lines are built, Bonneville There are no national standards or regulations specifically engineers use computer programs to predict the E/MF that for power line E/MF.The National Electrical Safety Code would be produced by the lines. We also have instruments specifies the distance needed between power line conductors to measure E/MF produced by transmission lines and other and the nearest house or building to meet safety(electric electrical sources. (See Figure 4.)However,where there are shock) requirements.That limitation indirectly results in multiple field sources,it is difficult to determine how much upper limits on E/MF for transmission lines as well. each one contributes to the overall level. BPA has design standards which set limits for electric fields. Magnetic field measurements can be especially difficult to These limit the field to a maximum of 9 kV/m on the interpret. Not only are there multiple sources for the right-of-way, and 5 kV/m at the edge of the right-of-way. magnetic fields in your home,but each of these sources can Lower levels (2.5 to 3.5 kV/m) are specified for certain vary greatly over time. For example, the magnetic field areas such as vehicle parking lots. from appliances and home wiring will change, depending Six states have standards or guidelines for electric fields. on which appliances and lights are turned on or off. 'lino (Montana and Oregon) are in the BPA service area.* Similarly, the magnetic field from nearby power lines will Montana limits electric field strength at the edge of the vary, depending on changes in power demand throughout right-of-way for new lines to 1 kV/m in developed or the day.The magnetic field in your home can even depend subdivided areas(subject to waiver by the landowner).This partly on how much electricity is being used in your is the lowest level set by any state. At road crossings, the neighbor's home.Thus, spot measurements in your home electric field in Montana is not to exceed 7 kV/m. Oregon may not be representative of your overall magnetic field allows a maximum field of up to 9 kV/m on the right-of-way exposure level. Also, it is not known what, if any, E/MF (no edge-of-right-of-way level is specified). levels are of concern in terms of health effects (see later discussions). For all these reasons, measurements of E/MF No state has established standards for magnetic fields, in your home are not very meaningful at this time. although both New York and Florida are in the process of developing such standards. 2T c .'`. / ; t -`'' 1 r T- • „-ir- I , ; 14 ., , 1 .. r ' i/ 9{mot i i : t .,f ,' ' - r- ' S 't '; :Ahki ., , t ! . : _ i_ __ ,, l. , + 1' �Kt ] Ia.'.} ' y;vs-`fir# rs Q t, - ,,. 1 1 ' 1. 1; ,... . _ ..„ r All J , ;, - + ... , r 1 • i m� <y 1 - - .'a k n t «r r y. 4 ." Jyy'. 'Tt # "J +�1 ;:iv' :1,5r1':,:.'+�dl .`.w%I;':--:-y w_' • „*•��^S .. .`+Y °73 `, ::�N _-yam:erm,„'...rS::s et......aw9 ",. ,.i..•c ,€u'.' •. ':;....— _ .. 1a1 Figure 4. (Left)Electric fields are measured with the meter placed on the end of a long insulated handle(to avoid the distorted field close to the body—see Figure 5).(Right)A hand-held coil is connected to the meter to measure the magnetic field (the magnetic field is not distorted close to the body). . 1 *The other states include Minnesota(8 kV/m maximum);New Jersey (3 kV/In at edge of right-of-way);New York(1.6 kV/m at edge of right- of-way);and North Dakota(9 kV/m maximum). 5 I ELECTRIC MAGNETIC animals and on cells and tissues. Epidemiological studies FIELD FIELD involve people in communities near power lines, or people who work around electrical lines or equipment. . 001J , Have laboratory studies shown any effects of E/MF? IIMuch research has been done on laboratory animals , 1 I II I . exposed to electric fields.These studies have often used 1 II i very strong fields in an effort to simulate maximum human I_ exposures from the largest transmission lines. More 1 1 i / recently, research on magnetic fields has increased.The 1 1 ; results provide no consistent evidence that E/MF affect the I I ' health, growth, or reproduction of laboratory animals. l However, the researchers have found several effects from / 1 1 electric fields and some effects from magnetic fields on I animals. Effects attributed to one or both of these fields ! j include changes in behavior and activity,biological I rhythms, certain hormone levels, bone fracture healing, i i response to drugs and learning abilities.' Overall, these I_ effects have been small, and very specific laboratory Figure 5. Electric and magnetic fields from electrical conditions were required for them to be detected. appliances and from power lines induce weak electrical I currents in people and animals.Solid lines represent invisible Scientists have also studied the effects of E/MF on isolated field lines. Dotted lines indicate direction of induced current cells and tissues.They have reported effects such as changes flow. Figure depicts person standing directly under a power line. in cell growth rates,intercellular communication,movement I of calcium ions and activity,and levels of various enzymes. 2 A few controversial studies suggest that both electric and Can you feel E/MF? magnetic fields may promote the growth of tumors.3.4There I is evidence that some of these effects on cells and tissues Alternating current E/MF induce weak electrical currents in depend on very precise combinations of field strength people and animals. Currents from the two fields are and frequency. distributed differently within the body. (See Figure 5.)The In thinking about the effects found in laboratory studies,we I_. amount of this current—even from the strongest transmis- are faced with two problems.First,the scientific community sion line—is extremely small:millionths of an ampere.By does not agree on the biological significance of these contrast, touching exposed household wiring can subject effects. Second, it is not clear how E/MF cause these you to potentially lethal currents of tens of amperes. effects.Therefore,the results of the laboratory studies have The currents induced inside a person by E/MF from not answered questions about possible human health 1 , household wiring or by power lines are too weak to be felt. effects.Scientists conducting laboratory studies believe that (Some people can detect the ac electric field on transmission their research can provide clues about how E/MF interact line rights-of-way through the vibration of hair on the head with basic biological processes. . or arms.)The induced currents are also weaker than the electrical currents which occur naturally in your body — What have studies of people living such as the electrical activity of the brain and heart.This near power lines shown? • } does not mean,however,that because they are so small it is impossible for these induced currents to produce effects. Research on the statistical occurrences and possible causes of diseases in human populations is called epidemiology. When did scientists begin to study The first community epidemiological study in the U.S. E/MF and health effects? involving power lines was conducted by Nancy Wertheimer and Ed Leeper in Denver, Colorado.5 This exploratory Beginning in the early 1970s, concerns surfaced about study (published in 1979) involved childhood cancer.The possible long-term health hazards caused by E/MF. results suggested that children who had died of leukemia Hundreds of studies have been conducted on this topic and other cancers were two to three times more likely to throughout the world over the last 15 years.These studies have lived near certain kinds of power lines than children fall into two categories. Laboratory studies focus on who did not develop cancer.The study focused on major I 6 distribution lines which were assumed to carry high currents _'..;_ and therefore to produce elevated magnetic fields in nearby !` y: homes. (See Figure 6.)The study was widely criticized, -Relative vs.-Absolute Risks-'' a mainly because actual measurements of magnetic field °,.�'• levels in homes were not made. Instead, the researchers When thinking about cancer risk lye must keep-,-- .,';a ;`3 • mind how epidemiologists.use thisl term. For •;• :- classified the power lines by their physical appearance, ; example,suppose a study reported a"relative risk"'of ` assuming that lines with larger conductors carried .2 for the incidence of childhood cancer.This means?; :: higher currents. :, that children exposed to the.factor under study were;LL'::; <z Soon after, a similar study was done in Rhode Island.6 twice as likely'to develop cancer as those.who-were`-, r''s Researchers studied the same type of power lines as the =.'not exposed:However, relative risk does not tell us'.' '•,'A Colorado study.They found no increased risk of leukemia how many children might actually develop cancel.ifs': (the only cancer type studied) for children who lived near the factor were found to be the cause of the cancer._';: those lines. _a 7 To estimate"absolute risk;"you have to know the ;i-";;_- In 1982,Wertheimer and Leeper published a study on adult cancer:rate in,the population.The incidence rate for', - cancer in the Denver area.? Relative risks for certain types childhood canceri.n the U.S.is-about 1 per 10,000 pef;.=; of cancer(not including leukemia) appeared higher for ; person-year.Therefore, if•exposure to the‘factor-:':':-,---.•,i adults living near high-current power lines.The 1.4 risk -"`doubled the risk;then 2 in 10,000 exposed children level was lower than those reported earlier for children- (rather than 1)would be expected to develo this Y--" . P P P . disease each year. `:; ` These studies prompted researchers in other countries to <`_., begin looking at a possible cancer/power line association. , In terms of mortality, the leading cause of death for ..; A Swedish study suggested that childhood cancer cases childien,ages.1-14 is accidents..These account for. ,;>': ' (primarily nervous system tumors) were found twice as about,10,000 deaths Per year half of the.total ':,•:,-::'' i often in homes near 200-kV transmission lines.s An English childhood deaths.Cancer is second,with about 2,000. i study, however, found no association between childhood :. ,however, found no association between childhood :. "deaths per year.About half of these are.due :': s' =.i cancer and power lines.9'Pwo other British studies to leukemia. • . • ; " -`' ;.•, also found no association between adult cancer and =` power li.nes.lo,u ,The National Cancer Institute reported that,front,, w,!:,r; ;1950"to .1985 the death.:rate for children-with"cancer:==w decreased:by 56 percent::This-was due to improved a: ;A ,:treatments::However,:the incidence rate mcreased by_F ; 32 percent:overtese same period._ 2,I • SOURCES:B..-Silverbergarid'J.A. Lubera: 1983.`''=r'�:°,' A,Review of:Amencan Cancer:SocietyEsttmates_of ._� _ �'. Cancer'Ca§es.and Deaths - Ca-A'Cancer.Journal,-,„ '� - .-for Clinicians 33:5-25,;and National Cancer v' -- ..,...:7- •„ - Institute. 1.988•..'Annual Cancer Statistics Review <` '� "1 `s: - Trends Including Cancerends :1950- '.'1985. Nationale < ' y _ Cancer'Institute: Bethesda, Maryland: ', - . ` What about the recent New - ''i Y ' York State-sponsored I :, M ._a_ __ -1..„_ epidemiological studies }-` In 1987, another study of all types of childhood cancer in Figure 6. Typical power lines in a residential neighborhood. the Denver area was completed.Part of the New York State Recent epidemiological studies have looked for a statistical Power Lines Project, the study by David Savitz was association between"high-current"power lines and the designed to use essentially the same basic methods as the occurrence of cancer in people living near such lines. 1979 Wertheimer and Leeper study.12 However, the study used more recent cancer cases. - The study design was also improved.This time,electric and magnetic fields were actually measured in study homes,first when most electric appliances were on,and then when they • were off. E.1.1 7 I I The measurements verified a key assumption in the earlier example,some have suggested that if high-current lines are study.That is,the average magnetic field strength in homes usually located near main roads,perhaps air pollution from i near high-current power lines (mostly major distribution vehicle traffic could be a factor influencing cancer risk. lines)was higher than that in homes near low-current lines. Unlike the childhood study, another recent New York- Researchers found that, on the average, magnetic field sponsored study found no statistical association for adults strength in homes near the highest-current lines was around between acute non-lymphocytic leukemia and power lines. 2 to 3 mG. These measurements varied considerably It was conducted by Richard Stevens in the Seattle area.13 among individual homes,however.About 20 percent of the However, like Savitz, Stevens found that external sources power lines in the study were of the high-current type. Only 10 out of 700 homes in the study were close to (rather than wiring and appliances) can be the major contributors to the magnetic field found throughout homes transmission lines. near high-current lines. - Savitz suggested that his findingsprovided additional .,. ,, . 7..;"•=•:,.<: g '•.i r ` ".;:: support forapossible association between childhood cancer • '``'$'`> ' PP :The==Savitz Study: 1 and proximity of homestop• w `;'certain types of power lines.He J. .;;;:.;.�; ,,4 found that children living near high-current lines were about ,• t;: to contract cancer compared to those • ''' 1.5 times more likelyp • e.,e4:. livingnear low-current 5;a ';.�: .:., ,- ;k::-''a lines.This relative risk level was Statistical Siggnificance` {`_°-,�,.... smaller than the 2-to-3 • 1;,= `" '"'times increase found in the • .,.;_ Wertheimer-Lee per study. It also indicated onlya weak � "` _`e >,.""`' ` P ",'I'he'�Savitz'"ctuldhood cancer study focused on•three:�� r,3 • statistically significant association — slightly greater than , e s; ��.kinds of E/NIF.exgosure estimates:high=current lines;�;.;:1i would be expected by chance. (See Figure 7.) Savitz also `'`'.magnetic fields:above 2mG;-measurediwith•home;,'>`V,A found a similar relative risk level(1.4)if cancer cases were '.appliances'off;;and those-fields withhome'appliances"y categorized on the basis of homes with an average measured • P i ,!:F„s`c' ',on:`Figure''1'sliows'_Savitz's findings'on�potential':h;<'w�;;.s�x: magnetic field of above 2 mG.This risk level was not cancer risk;associated:;with'each of these conditions f. -..u3 • statistical) significant, however. No statistical as UP` i associations ��'"``;i risk levels•f `�````'""Tlie;dots:show'ielatiye found in the:=` 5_;ers were found related to measured electric fields. .w :Savitzstudl �s:�,a� it«i5.'.:i-.J. :'��,• sM.. Savitz's study created much scientific and public interest. '. ; w . <<; a -,...A,Ievel;of:i,would'mean`no inoreased=risk;•••• .:. u'',,,� , However, both Savitz and the scientific panel that oversaw • The bar on which the�dotlies re resents a'95%;`,: q-`�{M: the New York project cautioned that no cause-and-effect • d n ein.era t m: s P _...• •:?;,: `°f�r,••:confidence interval:this means that:ttusan e Basta� :'`���;;' association was established between magnetic fields and v_' .s .,. '• ,• g w � .,i cancer.Theyalso felt that there was no reason forpublic ' ';95 percent probability_=of wri •ts mg'th .true;riik;:f;s v ecause most studies;.involve only am le ,the alarm.The statistical association between power lines and 'tr i = . y Y P . ,, =,� =truerisk'ui the;population is never•known:)". ;•:;.:�'��t...� an increase in cancer cases might have been due to chance = ` The:lei of the bar shows how variable:the:::::;) R",:gs•: or to some factor(s)other than the magnetic field. For es :. . s,>i _.• --1 g -e'stiinate`is�'�"rtfie'shoiterthe 6ar,;the`moreprecise. �==i Measured Magnetic Fields _ ... es ,,..... e.;. v` r. t- a;. •z\, 4.:,,,-�n,c , Above g .. -..es.. ,, te: fT,;-.>":',..`i '4' ,,It, ti:z- 1rs , J bo e 2 mG 4.n ;.F ..- :;;�� :.r,.aa"•'do-Y ,5�� - :•.C_.:r.�'w::`:�o•w. .3;d t' Q (Appliances Off) • 3 ;The;-1 5;risk'estlmate0.(high'currentlines)is onthe: ,:po., c W Line Configuration Measured Magnetic - ...':.:i .:,•'.e. : ._.. .•< : r f boidei lii e°•df:statistical significance.:the..;;vertical:ba 4 r•41 Hi h-Current Lines) Fields Above 2 mG "' s,'.>":•.' .,•�•:;>-` r- ," ,ri-. t Y z ust;barel extends:'above:"the'level`�haine•. 1.04 -Tl a 0, W (Appliances On) _}!. ( . n � ;�:,;.,..; a-•x.�•:: :.s ,.:. .. . -.. ... �; - �t.� . CC v :.other.viro-liarsv(rrieasured magnetic•;fields)s:extOcji.:='::�:81 Z «;.:..� :-. ,., r.y: ,j. >,� nT sir'' ,S`1;`'.. "r� w w 2 — -Below=the'level )`'line}Since`ttie"true:risk';could {:`~ =r - :r r�_r- ;in' i...z ii :�:Ly,•r,.-d y,..... :.,.,.... .„;."•r.<. .,z�- g `tlierefore:be.'1, •k` °F;z its :associated wiih'tlie;measured „-; : 1 (1.5) fields:is:not'statistically- "zr'`''-� w significant-:'Tt esefindings::' CCU -sseem';to be:,inconssistent.The.B arent>inconsistenc. "•`v ,• e (1.04) has to differing'.interpretations of the Savitz study. =:'E_i ' cm Some scientists think that because'measuied ma' etic t j fields-showed no,statistical g Y. •ce'wi ir4'` �.. significance�with'cancer,�i',,�;;;r, .5 •Y;risk;:some other environmental factor:that happens"to" ' , • be associated.With high-current lines'•winfluencing_ - V r the risk estimate:.'However,'`others.(includin Savitz). M Figure 7. Results of the Savitz childhood cancer study(1987) believe that`classifying`power,lines by,their assuinect..:,:;:Ni current-carrying abiliry,.is..a•better indicator of . ::•;::,-; • *The Very High-Current Configuration(VHCC)included homes that were: • ' ,"' : �o' ° ,'I,. 1)within 50 feet of a transmission line or a large three-phase primary long-term field e7CPOS11re,thaI1 SPOt measurements.`SO, .r: distribution line, or 2)within 50 feet of six or more primary distribution r`-magnetic fields may still be'the importaiit factor What ;f, t$3 - conductors,or.?)within 25 feet of a small three-phase primary distribution is'really happening;Can:onl be determined by '• '" ''`=" line.Four other configurations below VHCC were used to classify homes - . _ _ conductin more.research: 1 that were at greater distances from overhead power lines. g . _:. .`:`::'&:' 8 r • What about the health of people ;_ �. who work around power lines , .. •and substations? :-! ;••.. �•sib,'•�: - - . ✓ ', K'^ + 7'. NJ' `, P Tab,I :WI: '- 4t Much of the early interest that developed about possible �� � ; 3k `�`' } health.effects of E/MF was due to reported effects of :7:17...0- �® = '' ..>_.z ez ;„F� �� , :' electric fields on Soviet substation workers. A 1972 report , �� it ,_,!— -!�i tsuggested that the Soviet workers experienced a variety of ; � i� largely subjective ailments such as headache and fatigue.14 ` rt ,, •; , , �' Over the last 15 years, health studies of electrical workers ''.-a. }' i ~' (usually linemen or substation operators)have been done in "Yw ' several countries. (See Figure 8.) Overall, there is no 'r --. consistent evidence to indicate that the general health of ,- f to 'rh+ '' , ; workers is noticeablyaffected byE/MF. (Scientists think ``'-'- '• 4 • ,141,,,‘,11V / that the earlier effects reported by the Soviets may have ,- ''' y' � ;. -. , IV .t been related to electric shocks.)These studies were ; . v 4 . ,� generally not designed to be able to detect possible f, ,= s}x eit e +� • \ k increases in rare diseases such as leukemia. Other studies, _ '� : .: _. %, • .. L_s;' 1 reported below, have since looked at cancer potential. Figure 8. The occurrence of cancer among persons who In 1982, Sam Milham, an epidemiologist for the state of work in various"electrical occupations"has been studied by Washington,published a brief report on leukemia in certain several researchers. occupations.15 His report was based on an analysis of a large number of death certificates.Together, workers in 10 Is there more work beingdone on occupations with assumed higher exposure to E/MF showed a statistically significant 1.4-times increase in deaths due to cancer and power lines? leukemia,as compared to all other occupations.This group of so-called"electrical workers"included such diverse jobs The work is far from over. Research is continuing all over as electronic technicians, electricians, linemen, aluminum the world.The Electric Power Research Institute(EPRI)has workers,motion picture projectionists,streetcar motormen, begun another study of childhood cancer and power lines, and others. Because this preliminary study was based only this time in Los Angeles. Power line epidemiological on job titles and cause,of death, it was not possible to studies are also being done in Sweden and Great Britain. determine whether the men in the electrical occupations The National Cancer Institute is considering a large-scale really had significant exposure to E/MF.Also,the study did childhood cancer study in the U.S. to investigate several not look at actual mortality rates. environmental factors, including exposure to E/MF. EPRI has also recently begun studies of cancer among electrical Several other epidemiologists did similar statistical studies. workers.Unlike previous studies,this research will include In 1987, David Savitz and Eugenia Calle reviewed eleven actual measurement of occupational E/MF exposures. A of these reports.16 When results of the reports were large study of Canadian and French workers on high- combined, men in a group of twelve"electrical voltage facilities is also just beginning. occupations" were 1.2-1.5 times more likely to have died from various types of leukemia than those in other Does exposure to E/MF increase occupations. Savitz and Calle concluded that the reports have some consistency among them.However,the cause of the risk of developing cancer? •the statistically significant elevated relative risk can't be determined until more definitive research is done. As of spring 1988, most authorities who have publicly commented on this question conclude that the available Other studies suggest that various"electrical occupations" evidence is far too weak to establish a cause-and-effect link may also be associated with increased risk of brain cancer.17 between E/MF and cancer.They feel that the evidence only But they have the same problem: No actual measurements suggests that such a link is possible.A 1987 report by the of E/MF and other occupational exposures had been made. New York State Science Advisory Panel concluded that Until this is done, the issue cannot be resolved. actual cancer risk estimates for the general population • cannot be made because so few power line studies have • been done. . . What is your risk of developing cancer?Americans are exposed to a large number of known and suspected 9 I cancer-causing or promoting agents. Nearly three-quarters Should anything be done to limit of all cancers in the U.S. are thought to be attributable to OSure to E/M�'? diet, smoking, occupation, natural radiation and alcohol eX p (see sidebar). Because most of these factors involve " - voluntary actions, many cancers may be preventable.To To date, exposure to E/MF results in no confirmed health date,cancer researchers and public health officials generally hazard, so no one can identify"unsafe" levels for power have not indicated much concern over E/MF, compared to line E/MF. Similarly,no one has shown a scientific need to the wide range of other existing health issues. make changes in the way people use electrical appliances. Many factors may contribute to increased risk of cancer.For However, some studies have suggested the possibility for instance, studies have suggested that diagnostic x-rays of adverse effects of E/MF. So, some groups have • pregnant women may have doubled the risk of developing recommended precautionary measures for limiting E/MF cancer in their children.18 Radium contamination of exposures.An example is a 1984 World Health Organization report, which focused primarily on electric fields.23 The drinking water may also double the risk of leukemia.19 Smokers have at least a 10-fold increased risk of lung report suggested that field levels be kept as low as can be • 20 reasonably achieved and unnecessary exposures be cancer. Even non-smoking spouses of smokers may, on average, have a 1.3 times increased risk of lung cancer.21 avoided. However,the 1985 Florida Science Panel found no One study suggested that children with one smoking parent, scientific reason for limiting E/MF exposures.24 had a 1.7 times increased risk of leukemia.22 If both parents In 1987,the New York Science Panel's report recommended smoked, the risk increased to 4.6. research on means of power delivery and use that would • We live in a culture with many factors which contribute to reduce magnetic field exposures.25 The second(1987) increased risk of cancer. Scientists cannot now conclude Florida Science Advisory Panel also recommended general that E/MF are among them. routing and design measures for reducing E/MF exposures from new transmission facilities.26 This panel further �.,.,. ._ , n.,� ` : y,,--,,,_. .,,Y recommended that utilities not consider modifying existing , 4_:'.' 'r;w r 1 power facilities unless science were to demonstrate a'clear Cancer •Risk F4 .. },,,, :.„.; aCtO�$:== h .„ %: �.: health hazard from E/MF. LAY- � V'-'• ..T,..c, �'.F•r.'• `�:� _ '..nF. : :::;' :`°�"":�':r.:x',; "0-: y:;?sr,: i.: ,,,;t..?:t•L.».s • ro •ti it '_. `""''c - <'_ � , A recent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) -''+��`Possible�proporti .�'�:;;ons;of°:USr'caace .cIeatIs':�':',r• ....:..*,, ,,, • ..,.0.-.;:,,",,,y ;::„p„tp,cifi;r,factors: • report on indoor air polution also addressed E/MR27 It ., thought tcflie`associated wiih specific factors 4 :i:.trQ5-:a;rw fit • ,�kV-^tr,,, ¢f^j , Ml ,,:;v.Y 4 - acknowledged that E/MF have not been shown to be a = w ;r. Diets , ;", ' ` ^l' F ;/o ,`: health hazard, but'suggested caution before increasing - e r, '.::;s-;r „� `!�'' 0 ,4 `e E/MF exposures of the public. (EPA's position on E/MF is r . Tobacco_7 :"',!•:, �. =.;:; :;fir ';30%:: �,. ;Infection(Vi c er a "` - ' not clear, however, as that agency recently discontinued its rUses,,'Ba t i b.; r,..a1Q%a^°:�;R':��. fi'i ;..,.;' i�, ;:;.., E/MF research program.)RSexual'Betiavior =r,; . ;r� :r ;-`%-r:::•t.°A. V.:�Occ�jpation q.. T• .,w:;-...0 N y. .s . ,/,,,d�: ;, .,,;$,,,,: r ;:a , Where can I n (Asbestos, :` , find more information 0,. 4Chemicais},;��M���: �'�° .:e._..,p..t,,;� 4,; :.ai6or;oii aciia' , .:„ ,,w,K:;:,; :: :s.:,,:, , power lines r .:• onand health and ,. ffiaturai'Radiatloi µ`g,0,*r �_: f7.-:-S%;' 4: r: - �°yr s w�.re-y=,,r=..;N safety considerations? . „ ,(surillght,Radon)::, r,:,�r., _.. .:.,..;s�:i .:,:,;::.. -,p+ ✓ `J "A,..r " ..t5�•AY.,,,N,• "..TS", 1 ^.ii 4:w', zit 73 ;'Food�Additives industrial>�''..,,�, 're3/o' -r-rk;1 <,r uct '_ii;f;l ; -r,W. '<:. ,:1 'Itvo other reports - _�, ._ .. . -F x:;:;,_k.iL%+Wit::.=;�:,*:��,� 1<<a,�, are available free from BPA: - :Products`"Meth ,aFT t cal,; �+ r$L'.% °a^.:: �•-'✓?f�.:`Si'ti.I.', es,'�;i,�r.tlh,;�t'>„✓ ?isb ru.,s''X-rays)„�-�:<` giia ;t;` -»� 'h::.=�,_�•; - °.,; ; .(. 9 . Y) `�>f T <`' :j Electrical and Biological Effects of Transmission • h•'2 1986. �• ,. ::�. ;- o •' rrss� Lines: A Review. -: : ,;-iX: : -ram; ..'.; `::sr.:a:..y� ..: 13 ` Unknown: >k . ,.u- : ;, fi; 4 .,Y �•: �'�.„ ,�; -^,T^M *,,N, w, �, ,, • :rtrwS< This booklet covers the E/MF research in-greater detail, • e SOURCESA.C:'Dol ';; i�'`u' `1:and`lotto Nati ':The:-;;. :°N':-- -' and includes other, non-health-related ^ Caws,of ''.+4,,,'r a effects such as Cancer:.:;Jauriiat'of thee"Nallorialy:.; =�-� .-.;1: `"•�,•:• -"•' television reception interference. It _�. .��•,b��� audible noise, and `CaRcer�lastitute66:119I=1308;and S:`Devesa^'::�;;:r•;� ;�� p eral.1987:;'•'Can''cerIncidenceandMortalin Tie 4:s}°3 also covers both ac and do transmission lines. (This "Amon•Whites at the;United States;947-84."; ` F'- '." booklet is currently being updated.) ,- 1987.'Journal-of the`National�Cancer,.S`'a,,>> r.WV,.`„ti i' Institute 79:70L�770.-..< ,.c, �:,;. %.; ,;;,-' '-: "'`"'-`s t '; Living and Working High-Voltage Pbwer �,;:_ •t= -.�: ' Orkin Around _..;?F; =x:< `;a' _ ,. ,r w :,fit_:. { Lines. 1987. This pamphlet discusses safety issues.It tells you how to take the right precautions when you operate equipment, live, or play near electric power lines. r i 10 • For a copy,contact your nearest BPA Area or District Office 9. Myers,A., et al. 1985.Overhead Power Lines and Childhood (see back page for listings), or: Cancer. Pages 126-130, in, International Conference on Electric and Magnetic Fields in Medicine and Biology.The Public Information Center Institution of Electrical Engineers. London and New York. Bonneville Power Administration 10. Coleman,M., et al. 1985. Leukemia and Electromagnetic Fields:A Case-Control Study. Pages 122-125, in, P.O. Box 3621 International Conference on Electric and Magnetic Fields in • Portland, OR 97208 Medicine and Biology.The Institution of Electrical (503) 230-7334 Engineers. London and New York. 11. McDowall,M.E. 1986. Mortality of Persons Resident in the 1bvo other reports may be of interest to you: Vicinity of Electricity Transmission Facilties. British Journal of Cancer 53:271-279. EMF the Debate Over Health Effects. 1987. 12. Savitz,D.A. 1987. Final Report Case-Control Study of EPRI Journal Vol. 12 No. 7 pp. 4-15 Childhood Cancer and Residential Exposure to Electric and Magnetic Fields.Available from: New York State Power This article summarizes research that has been done on Lines Project,Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and E/MF and describes the Electric Power Research Research.Albany, NY 12201. • Institute (EPRI)research program. 13. Stevens,R.G. 1986. Epidemiological Studies of Cancer and Residential Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields.Available For a copy, contact: from:New York State Power Lines Project,Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and Research.Albany, NY 12201. Electric Power Research Institute 14. Knickerbocker,G.G. 1975. Study in the USSR of Medical P.O. Box 10412 Effects of Electric Fields on Electric Power Systems. Palo Alto, CA 94303 Translations from Russian.Special Publication No. 10. Power Engineering Society.The Institute of Electrical and (415) 855-2411 Electronics Engineers. New York. Biological Effects of Transmission Line Fields. 1987. 15. Milham,S. 1982. Mortality From Leukemia in Workers Exposed to Electrical and Magnetic Fields. New England Edwin L.Carstensen.Elsevier Science Publishing,Co., Journal of Medicine 307:249. Inc. 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017. 16. Savitz,D.A.,and E.E. Calle. 1987.Leukemia and This 397-page book describes the technical properties of Occupational Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields:Review of Epidemiologic Surveys.Journal of Occupational E/MF, and summarizes most of the published literature Medicine 29:47-51. on the potential biological effects of these fields. 17. Lin,R.S., et al. 1985. Occupational Exposure of Elec- Additional information on the specific studies mentioned in tromagnetic Fields and Occurrence of Brain Tumors. Journal of Occupational Medicine 27:413-419. this pamphlet can be found in the publications listed in the section below 18. Harvey,E.B., et al. 1985. Prenatal X-ray Exposure and Childhood Cancer in Twins. New England Journal of Medicine 312:541-577. . REFERENCES CITED 19. Lyman,G., C.G.Lyman,and W.Johnson. 1985.Association of Leukemia with Radium Groundwater Contamination. 1. Ahlbom,A.,et al. 1987. Biological Effects of Power Line Journal of the American Medical Association 254:621-626. Fields. New York State Power Lines Project Scientific 20. Wynder,E.L.,and D.Hoffmann. 1982.Tobacco. Pages Advisory Panel Final Report.Available from:New York 277-292,in,D.Schottenfeld,and J.F.Fraumeni,Jr.,Cancer State Power Lines Project,Wadsworth Center for Epidemiology and Prevention.W.B.Saunders, Co. Laboratories and Research.Albany, NY 12201. Philadelphia. 2. Adey, W.R., et al. 1986.Tissue Interactions with Nonionizing 21. Ammann,H. et al. 1987. EPA Indoor Air Quality Implementa- Electromagnetic Fields. Final Report to Department of tion Plan Appendix A: Preliminary Indoor Air Pollution Energy(DOE/ET/29078 -T2).Washington, DC. Information Assessment.PB87-210738.U.S.Environmental 3. Phillips,J.L.,W.D.Winters,and L.Rutledge. 1986. In Vitro Protection Agency.Washington, DC.Available from Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields;Changes in Tumor Cell National Technical Information Service. Springfield,VA Properties. International Journal of Radiation Biology • 22161. 49:463. 22. Sandler,D.P. 1985.Cancer Risk in Adulthood from Early Life 4. Byus, G.V.,S.E.Pieper,and W.R.Adey. 1987.The Effects of Exposure to Parents Smoking.American Journal of Public Low-Energy 60-Hz Environmental Electromagnetic Fields Health 75:487-492. Upon the Growth-Related Enzyme Ornithine Decar-. 23. World Health Organization. 1984. Environmental Health boxylase.Carcinogenesis 8:1385-1389. Criteria 35. Extremely Low Frequency(ELF) Fields.World 5. Wertheimer,N.and E.Leeper. 1979. Electrical Wiring Health Organization.WHO Publications Center. Configurations and Childhood Cancer.American Journal of ' 49 Sheridan Avenue.Albany, NY 12210. Epidemiology 109:273-284. 24. Graves,H.B.,et al. 1985. Biological Effects of 60-Hz Power 6. Fulton,J.P., et al. 1980. Electrical Wiring Configuration and Transmission Lines.Report Submitted to Department of Childhood Leukemia in Rhode Island.American Journal of Environmental Regulation.Tallahassee, FL.32301. Epidemiology 111:292-296. 25. (See Reference No. 1) 7. Wertheimer,N.,and E.Leeper. 1982.Adult Cancer Related to 26. Parker,J.H.,et al. 1987. Report of the Florida Electric and. • Electrical Wires Near the Home. International Journal of Magnetic Fields Science Advisory Panel.Available from: Epidemiology 11:345-355. State of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, 8. Tomenius,L. 1986.50-Hz Electromagnetic Environment and 2600 Blair Stone Road,Twin Towers Office Building, the Incidence of Childhood Tumors in Stockholm County. • Tallahassee, FL 32301. Bioelectromagnetics 7:191-207. 27. (See Reference No.21) 11 -For further information, contact your nearest BPA Area or District Office,listed.You may also call BPA's Public BPA OFFICES Involvement Office at(503) 230-3478 in Portland; 1-800-452-8429 toll-free from Oregon outside Portland; or Lower Columbia Area - 1-800-547-6048 from California,Idaho,Montana,Nevada, 1500 NE.Irving Street, Rm.288 Washington, and Wyoming. P.O. Box 3621 Portland, OR 97208 (503)230-3490 Upper Columbia Area Room 561, U.S. Court House W.920 Riverside Avenue Spokane,WA 99201 • (509)456-2515 • Eugene District Federal Building, Rm.206 • 211 East 7th Street Eugene, OR 97401 (503)687-6952 Wenatchee District 301 Yakima Street, Rm.307 P.O. Box 741 Wenatchee,WA 98801 (509)662-4377 • Idaho Falls District 531 Lomax Street • Idaho Falls, ID 83401 • (208)523-2706 Oakland Office 2101 Webster Street Suite 1700 Oakland, CA 94612 (415)446-7706 Puget Sound Area 210 Queen Anne Avenue North, Suite 400 Seattle,WA 98109-1030 (206)442-4130 • Snake River Area 101 W. Poplar Walla Walla,WA 99362 (509) 522-6226 Montana District 800 Kensington Missoula, MT 59801 (406)329-3060 Boise District • Federal Building 550 W. Fort Street P.O. Box 035, Rm.376 Boise, ID 83724 (208)334-9137 Bonneville Power Administration Forrestal Building Rm. 8G033 1000 Independence Ave.,SW. Washington, D.C. 20585 r (202)586-5640 - • 12