No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1Denis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator August 28, 2017 Mark Travers Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 SUBJECT: "Final' Notice Renton Subdivision / LUA16-000981, PP, ECF Dear Mr. Travers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the above subject application is expired. According to RMC 4-8-100C.4 — Expiration of Complete Land Use Applications, the application submitted on March 30, 2017 has been inactive for ninety (90) days or more and an administrative decision has not been made and/or has not been reviewed by the Hearing Examiner in a public hearing. According to our records, an "On -Hold" notification (enclosed) was mailed on May 2, 2017, stating additional information was necessary in order to continue processing the submitted application. As of the date of this letter, the requested information has not been received. Therefore, this is your final notice, if the City of Renton Planning Division does not receive a written request to continue processing the application and the requested information within six (6) months of the date of this letter the application shall be null and void. If you have any questions, please contact me at (425) 430-6598. Sincerely, •�� Jill Ding Senior Planner Enclosed: "On -Hold" Letter —dated: May2, 2017 cc: George and Frances Subic / owner(s) Party(ies) of Record 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor May 2, 2017 Community & Economic Development C. E, "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Mark Travers Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 SUBJECT: "On Mold" Notice Renton Subdivision / LUA16-000981,PP, ECF Dear Mr. Travers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on March 30, 2016. After completion of our first round of review, it has been determined that additional information is required before we can continue processing your application. Please revise the proposed dead end street to a through street with an emergency access turnaround as shown in the attached layout. Once the preliminary plat layout has been revised, please submit 5 copies, 1 reduced (8 '/:" x 11") copy, and one CD with an electronic version of a revised Technical Information Report, Density Worksheet, Drainage Plans, Preliminary Plat Map, Street Profiles, Generalized Utility Plans, conceptual landscape plan. Pending the receipt of these additional items, we are putting the review of your project "on hold". The public hearing scheduled for June 1P, 2017 has been cancelled and will be reschedule upon receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 or via email at (ding@rentonwa.gov if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner cc: George and Frances Subic / Owner(si Party(ies) of Record Enclosure 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa,gov .................. .-' '"- �+ o it It LLL9. o b oAn y .. Tt in T 1 fB7.63' y , E 1BBs.' 7 (112 1Ln _- I , - = I / Y N 01'47 19- E I .2 1.10 (C)281.20'(P '�"i5R •m%-'�•d1 /� ^� �-. qe�` 1� �^i _ ire^+ "�'� l -� '°"a.§ � pig jl/' s8 m 4 V ! s4.14• I y � � 'y/ �v �I1 �tu�� /! ��'1 , /�` ,.� i�r� l� �'l' � �9R� uMi to14I r c9osn M 91'4 71417' u�$ Y oi'III �� s. I„• _ \l \ --� CL'4ilE'�'138.0D: n� 4 + c4a�'m' �! � $ •4�2�'s�� Z —; V �, I � � h'o22.129'E rs 23.13'WE 1'♦ '19' E 90.60' �� J � N. 41 I i v1 1 0 Ii; m'B 1 1 I =� �nr ' 10 Nr o0.a2 Al1elC $ 14I s0.00 ' so 0a' w l m ro w C. r,. 5-077; N M-12 (c) 2s;_1o'(p) - a CL cl 108TH AVE SE - 1375.03'(Y) 1371.24'(Pl Z - �`S a } � 13 rlgo ��m -o an1n ,' o oCcafrcgn n �� �� ❑ $�' #s�� ' � obi ' �.. CA v>x o & 1ISTHAVE SE wA - Z — (ers;s OF eEwlhcs) — G 101 On the 2nd day of May 2017, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ON - HOLD LETTER documents. This information was sent to: Mark Travers, Mark Travers Architects AIA Applicant Myloan Nguyen, Mark Travers Architects AIA Contact George and Francis Subic Owners Jay Newton Party of Record (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON } } SS COUNTY OF KING } I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Gillian 5yverson signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be ' er t4it+ free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: i Notary (Print): My appointment expires: Renton Subdivision LUA16-000981, PP, ECF Public in and for the State of Washirigtorb —Vj -'/ k aqf C'�oa�- Denis Law Mayor May 2, 2017 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Mark Travers Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315EPike St Seattle, WA 98122 SUBJECT: "On Hold" Notice Renton Subdivision / LUA16-000981,PP, ECF Dear Mr. Travers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on March 30, 2016. After completion of our first round of review, it has been determined that additional information is required before we can continue processing your application. Please revise the proposed dead end street to a through street with an emergency access turnaround as shown in the attached layout. Once the preliminary plat layout has been revised, please submit 5 copies, 1 reduced (8 %" x 11") copy, and one CD with an electronic version of a revised Technical Information Report, Density Worksheet, Drainage Plans, Preliminary Plat Map, Street Profiles, Generalized Utility Plans, conceptual landscape plan. Pending the receipt of these additional items, we are putting the review of your project "on hold". The public hearing scheduled for June 13tf', 2017 has been cancelled and will be reschedule upon receipt of the requested information. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 or via email at edin rentonwa. ov if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner cc: George and Frances Subic / Owner(s) Party(ies) of Record Encfosure 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov w M n ....... ............ - n+: . _ IOOTH AVE SE _ N 01143'32' E 1275.03'(M) 1274.2 ,',) I I STH AVE SE MMIS P% BE401N[S) w _ N 01'a1'DO- E 2660-65- n r� ....--------------- _I Fri Q Z . pi '(R21SE ees,&4.(p) .. mu R z 6 AIR p� r10 eE AEMovEo) I�� g 7'WE ' 70 SM&O' m L a y p S ' ❑ n fi I 2a i A 511. one x�m a $0 - z 4oz oy� zY -- — —��--fie 00 PLEASE SEE ATTACHED PAGE FOR POSTING OF NGA DNS LUA 16-0009 S 1 / R�- 'S C c U J: V; 'S r—n ,-) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING hereby certify that _� copies of the above document were posted in conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: �j r'1 Signed: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certifythat I know or have satisfactory evidence that Y signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and volun ary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: _�- (_ -zo/} kLIJ , Notary alic in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print):a�� A :141y appointment expires: y y maw A0, CT �1�fi WASN� CITY OF .t enton NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) A Master Application has been fled and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 30, 2017 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA16-000981, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: Renton Subdivision PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of an existing 84,263 square foot (1.93 acre) parcel into 11 parcels and one Storm Water tract for the eventual construction of single family residences. The subject property is located within the Residential-8 (R-8) zoning designation. The proposed lotswould range in area from 5,100 square feet to7,200 square feet. Access to th a site is proposed via a new 47- foot wide public street, which would terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. Storm Water facdl tles, proposed to store and treat additional Storm Water runoff generated, would be located within Tract A. Two existing single family residences and associated detached accessory structures would be removed. No critical areas are mapped on the projectsite. PROJECT LOCATION: 17018 10bth Ave SE, Renton, WA 98055-5431 OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determinedthatsignificantenvironmental impactsareunlikelytoresult from the proposedproject.Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is usingthe Optional DNS processto give notice that DNSis likelyto be issued. Comment periodsforthe projectand the proposed DNSare integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold DeterminationofNon-Significance(DNS). This may betheonlyopportunityto commentontheenvironmental impactsoftheproposal. A14dayappealperiod will followthe issuance ofthe DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: March 23, 2017 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: March 30, 2017 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Myloan Nguyen, Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St,Seattle, WA 98122 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Approval Building Other Permits which may be required: Building Permit, Construction Permit Requested Studies: GeotechnicalReport,Arborist Report, Drainage Report Location where application may be reviewed: DepartmentofCommunity & Economic Development (CED} -Planning Division, Sixth FloorRerton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Public Hearing: Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for June 13, 2017 before the Renton Hear_tng_Examiner in Renton Council Chambers -at 11:00am on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: The subject site is designated Comprehen sive Residential Medium Density (COMP-RMD) and Residential (R-8). Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Proposed Mitigation Measures: None are recommended at this time. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, CEP — Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by S:00 PM on April 13, 2017. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on June 13, 2017, at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. Ifyou are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at {425) 430-6578. Following the issuance of the SFPA Determination, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments regarding the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision onthis project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6598; Email: jding@rentanwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION On the 30th day of March 2017, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Acceptance submittal documents. This information was sent to: George & Frances Subic I Owners Sanders Subic I Owner I Mark Travers/Mark Travers Architects, AIA I Applicant Myloan Nguyen/Mark Travers Architects, AIA I Contact 1 (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTOW ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that 1 know or have satisfactory evidence that Gillian 5yverson signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: j}1«. .1y 3C. �64T ; ' Q1- ��if Notaryblic in and for the State of Washing i i Notary (Print):' My appointment expires: *4BIA"t� all Renton Subdivision LUA16-000971, ECF, PP 1�,a, �rAE Plan Number: LUA16-000981 Site Address: 17018 106TH AVE SE f CITY OF Renton 0 Plan Review Routing Slip Name: Renton Subdivision Description: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of an existing 84,263 square foot (1.93 acre) parcel into it parcels and one stormwater tract for the eventual construction of single family residences. The subject property is located within the Residential-8 (R-8) zoning designation. The proposed lots would range in area from 5,100 square feet to7,200 square feet. Access to the site is proposed via a new 47-foot wide public street, which would terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. Stormwater facilities, proposed to store and treat additional stormwater runoff generated , would be located within Tract A. Two existing single family residences and associated detached accessory structures would be removed . No critical areas are mapped on the project site_ Review Type: Community Services Review- Version 1 Date Assigned: 03/27/2017 Date Due: 04/10/2017 Project Manager: Jill Ding Fnvirnnmental Imnact Earth Animals Light/Glare Historic/Cultural Preservation Air Environmental Health Recreation Airport Envi ronmenta I 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet Water Energy/Natural Resources Utilities Plants Housing Transportation Land/Shoreline Use Aesthetics Public Service Where to enter your comments: Manage My Reviews Which types of comments should be entered: Recommendation - Comments that impact the project including any of the Enivornmental impacts above. Correction - Corrections to the project that need to be made before the review can be completed and /or requesting submittal of additional documentation and/or resubmittal of existing documentation. What statuses should be used: Reviewed - I have reviewed the project and have no comments. Reviewed with Comments - I have reviewed the project and and I have comments entered in Recommendations. Correction/Resubmit - I have reviewed the project and the applicant needs to submit and/or resubmit documentation and I have added /Z Signature of ireaororAutho ed Representative Date ...-.::.. V IIEIE - On the 30th day of March 2017, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Application (NOA) & DNS documents. This information was sent to: Please see attached for complete mailing list 1 300 sq. ft. surrounding property (Signature of Sender):- r / STATE OF WASHINGTQX' ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Gillian Syverson signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated:? �..._.� ✓ +�������t1�1►tit�ll+rl Not r Public in and for the State of VIE$5hi rrrr (W Notary (Print): tic,�� ; -� ` • • My appointment expires: Renton Subdivision LUA16-000971, ECF, PP r I P CV, Mi�''s ( C 11-C ii WILL. F S �ARLES D BE'RG GENET PITTS GARFIELD W 25603 LK `4VILDERNESS DR SE P.O. BOX 946 17013 - 106TH SE MAPLE VALLEY,WA,98038 OR4NGE,CA,92666 RENTON, WA 98055 BLUMENTHAL G H MILLER BARBARA L SWEANEY DARREN+BOBBIE 16830 -105TH AVE SE P.Q. BOX 75 17004 - 105TH AVE 5E RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 KAIMAKIS II LLC MCMULLIN WALLACE C+ KIMMIE RENTON SPECIAL CARE COMMUNI P.O. BOX 34 17030 - 106TH AVE SE 2731- 77TH AVE SE, #203 SEATTLE, WA 98199 RENTON, WA 98055 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 TEUNG YAOTA MARVIN GARDENS TOWNHOMES CHRISTIANSON DAVID B P. 0. BOX 59252 10034 SE 218TH PL 16815 - 106TH AV SE RENTON, WA 98058 KENT, WA 98031 RENTON,WA,98055 CRAMPTON BARRY+DAWN L TRAN CAM V+PHILLIP TRAN+ ET TEKESTE SIMON 16820 - 105TH AVE SE 459 FERNDALE AVE NE 13765 - 56TH AVE 5 RENTON,WA,98055 RENTON, WA 98056 TUKWI LA. WA.98168 NGUYEN TOAN T+THIEN T MIDGETT ROBERT L JR ALVARADO ALEXANDER+FLORENCE 16839 -106TH AVE SE 17012 - 105TH ST SE 17016 - 105TH AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 SUBIC GEORGE & FRANCES PHU LEEWOOD NGY MORANY P.O. BOX 89 2462 SCHADT DR 24203 - 36TH AVE S RENTON, WA 98057 MAPLE WOOD, MN 55119 KENT, WA 98032 PHU LEEWOOD KINOSHITA KYM LEE JAMES K & DU KIET 3311- 112TH PL SE 17022 - 105TH AV SE P.O. BOX 358 EVERETT,WA,98208 RENTON,WA,98055 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 LANZ VANN+JAMIE NGUYEN HY V NEWTON JEFFRY M+JAY H 4118 - 96TH AVE SE 16824 - 106TH AVE SE P.O. BOX 58213 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON,WA 98058 NGUYEN SON T+MAI P NEWTON JAY N+BARBARA B SUBIC FRANCES SANDERS 16836 -106TH AVE SE 28938 - 218TH AVE SE P.O. BOX 89 RENTON, WA 98055 BLACK DIAMOND, WA 98010 RENTON, WA 98057 BERC 'NE T- P.O. 51�X 9Z6 ORANGE,CA,92666 MEYER DAVID 16839 - 108TH AV SE RENTON,WA,98055 RADTKE MICHAELT+JULIANNE 17024 - 106TH AVE SE RENTON,WA,98055 MILLER JERALD S+ANA L 10622 SE 172NDST RENTON,WA,98055 WWWW" DEPARTMENT OF CON iMTY CITY OF MM AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPTRentonG MA3 ? 17 `ianning Division LAND USE PERt'1 `1T MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: GEORGE W. and FRANCES M. SUBIC ADDRESS: 17022 106th AVE SE CITY: ZIP: RENTON 98055 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425-255-9923 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: E MARK TRAVERS COMPANY (if applicable): MARK TRAVERS ARCHITECT ADDRESS: 2315 E. PIKE ST 1 CITY: ZIP: SEATTLE 98122 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 206-763-84% CONTACT PERSON NAME: MYLOAN NGUYEN COMPANY (if applicable): MARK TRAVERS ARCHITECT ADDRESS. 2315 E PIKE ST CITY: ZIP: SEATTLE _ 98122 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: 206-763-8496 ext 105 myloan@marktraversarchitect.com PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECTOR DEVELOPMENT NAME: RENTON SUBDIVISION PROJECTIADDRESS(S}!LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 17018 & 17022 10e' AVE SE RENTON, WA 98055 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): LOT 10: 008700-0265 LOT 11: 008700-0270 EXISTING LAND USE(S): RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED LAND USE(S): RESIDENTIAL EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) EXISTING ZONING: R-8 PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): R-8 SITE AREA (in square feet): 84,360 SF (COMBINED LOTS) SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: 10,530 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: 580 SF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) 6.54 NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) 11 NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 11 C:rUsers\Skattum\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\ContentAutlook\QV71XWAV\I_W-Application_SLISIC.docRev: 08/2015 PROJECT INFORMAI NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 2 (ONE/EA LOT) SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): TBID AT BUILDING PERMIT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 0 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 0 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 0 NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 0 NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): 0 ION ..-Ainued PROJECT VALUE: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. ❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. ❑ SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES sq. ft. [3 WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Attach le al description on separate sheet with the following information included SITUATE IN THE SW QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23, RANGE 5, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) GEORGE and FRANCES, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) ® the current owner of the property involved in this application or ❑ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signatu of Owner epresentative Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that CT- 4 FJ NCE5 sti OX signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. 1 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington J18 1l Notary (Print)_ My appointment expires: 2 C:\Users\Skattum\AppData\Local\Microsoi't\Windaws\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\QV71XWAV\1_LU-Application_SUSIC.docRev. 08/2015 +1Y1Oil Mark Travers Project Narrative Project Title: Renton Subdivision Architect 17018 & 17022 106"' Avenue SE, Renton WA 98056 Project Information: Addresses: 17018 106''Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Lot 10, Tax ID # 0087000265 17022 106tn Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Lot 11, Tax ID # 0087000270 Permit Requirement: The proposal would require Preliminary Plat approval in accordance with RMC 4-7-070C2, which states "No application for a subdivision shall be approved if the land being divided is help in common ownership with a contiguous parcel that has been subdivided in a short subdivision within the preceding five (5) years. Such applications shall be processed as preliminary plat, rather than a short plat". SEPA review is required. Zoning: Properties are currently zoned R-8 (Residential Medium Density) Adjacent properties zoning are Residential zones unless specified in the attached Vicinity/zoning map Current use: The subject sites are currently occupied by two existing single family residences and associated outbuilding proposed for removal. _Special Site Features: No wetland or stream were identified on or immediately adjacent the site. This determination is based on the wetland report and investigation, no hydrophytic plant communities, hydric soils, or evidence of wetland hydrology were observed. Consultant's field investigation taken throughout the site revealed high chroma, dry, non-hydric soils and there was no evidence pf ponding or prolonged soil saturation anywhere of the property (Wetland report dated 5/21/2016) Proposed Use: To subdivide the project site into a total of 11 lots for future construction of Single Family Residence. Lot 10: subdivided into (6) lots. Lot 11: subdivided into (5) lots and a tract for storm drainage. Density: (RMC 4-2-1i 10A): Minimum Net Density for proposed shot plats or subdivision: 4 units/acre Maximum Net Density for proposed shot plats or subdivision: 8 units/acre Proposed: 6.54 units/acre (lot area(s) varies from 5100 SF to 7203 SF Site Improvements: A public limited access residential street of Right -Of -Way proposed with 20 feet wide pavement driveway, 6 inches wide cubs, 8 feet wide landscape planters, 5 feet wide sidewalk, drainage improvements, and street lighting to be provide on public. Proposed driveway with hammerhead turnaround to serving 10 interior lots. One lot in the North-West corner will be accessed from 10V Ave SE. Construction cost, market value, materials will be determined at the time construction phase and building permit. Landscaping: Approximately (8) landmark trees to be removed (72.73% of 11 landmark trees total) and (34) significant trees to be removed (58-62% of 58 significant trees total) Development Standards: The project is subject to RMC 4-2-114A Lot Dimension: Minimum lot size: 5,000 sq.ft Minimum lot width: 50 ft Minimum lot depth: 80 ft Set Back: Minimum Front Yard: 20 ft. except when all vehicle access is taken from an alley. Minimum Side Yard: 5 ft Minimum Rear Yard: 20 ft Min. Side Yard along street: 15'-0" Building height: max, 24'-0" and two stories. 206 / 763-8496 P 2061328-3238 F Why Too Que Building 2315 E. Pike Street Seattle, WA 98122 marktraversarchitect.com I ILD � ❑ R- 4 4-Flex ple i R-8 I g R-8 I R 1 4-Flex � L I _ I❑❑� R-14 R-8 I — I LOT 10 PROJECT R-8 R-14 I SITES I $) PR-14 14 J LOT 11 J w. L. �I R-8 too [ J EI QI 1 R-14 ( I i� j 0 R-8 R-8 ICI ' R-14 r-` IR-8R-UR� i . SE 172nd St. ------- _-- VICINITY/ZONING MAP Scale: 1 "=200' ............. ... ............................. ..... .. ....." .............. ........... 2315. �t pike Stte�t . Te1; ".206-7f>3996.. Mark Travel s Architect,-AlA . wwwmgrktraverwchitect:co�n �seatna; ... ... ... ... .. ....................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................... y Mark Travers Project : Renton Subdivision — Pre Plat #Pre 16-000550 17018 & 17022 106t'' Avenue SE, Renton WA 98055 Architect V i r' Construction Mitigation description Proposed construction dates (begin and end dates). Approximate June 2017 Construction duration typical is 120 days, subject to change at the time of construction and bid process. Hour and days of operation: Typical 7:00 am — 3:30 pm Proposed hauling 1 trans ortation routes: To be determined by General Contractor at the time of construction, per City of Renton transportation ordinance. Measure to be implemented to minimize dust traffic and transportation impacts, erosion mud noise and other noxious characteristics: . Site fence, plastic cover, catch basin inserts, construction access. Any special hours proposed for construction or hauling (i.e weekend, late nioht): . As necessary, to be determine by General Contractor at the time of construction. Prelimina traffic control Ian: Flag, construction entrance, route typical. Plan and details to be determined at the time of construction. 2061763-8496 P 2061328-3238 F Why Too Que Building 2315 E. Pike Street Seattle, WA 98122 marktraversarchitect.com Mark Travers Architect T: 206.763.8496 TRANSMITTAL NOTICE F: 206.328.3238 DATE: March 20, 2017 2315 E Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 PROJECT: Renton Subdivision LUA16-000981 TO: Jill Ding Senior Planner City of Renton — Planning Division Hi Jill, Please have the enclosed the revised Landscape plan (full size and reduced size) for the Renton Subdivision project. Thanks, Myloan Nguyen Mark Travers Architect AIA 1�.7:1��9i�1�>r��f1�11:1t1��ittFtll NO. OF COPIES DATED DESCRIPTION 1 3-20-2017 Reduced Landscape plan 5 3-20-2017 Revised Landscape plan 1 3-20-2017 Digital copy of the plans OF January 10, 2017 Myloan Nguyen Mark Travers Architect 2315 E Pike Street Seattle, WA 98122 ,4 Denis Law Mayor IWO Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Subject: Notice of Incomplete -Application Renton Subdivision LUA15-000981, ECF, PP Dear Ms. Nguyen: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is incomplete according to submittal requirements and, the following items will need to be submitted by April 10, 2017, in order to continue processing your application: • Title Report for parcel 008700-0265: A title report was submitted with the project application for parcel 008700-0270, however no title report was submitted for parcel 008700-0265. Please submit 3 copies of a complete title report of 008700-0265. • Affidavit of Ownership: The Affidavit of Ownership on the Master Application was signed by Stein Skattum, however the submitted title report for parcel 008700-0270 identifies George Subic and Frances Subic as the vested owners of the property. Please submit either 12 copies of a Master Application signed by George and Frances Subic or 3 copies of a revised title report identifying Stein Skattum as the vested property owner. As the subject application was not deemed a complete preliminary plat application, as was required to be submitted prior to January 2, 2017 to vest to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual, the subject application will be required to comply with the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. Please submit 5 copies of a revised Drainage Report and Drainage Plans in compliance with the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. �D Based on an initial review of the propose preliminary loplat layout, it appears that the proposal does not include legal access to Lots 5 and 8. Per RMC 4-6-060J.1.b shared 0 CP (!D 1055 south Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. rentonwa.gov taste driveway access is not permitted for lots created by a subdivision of ten (10) or more lots. In addition, in accordance with RMC 4-7-170G, pipestem lots are not permitted for new plats, unless needed to achieve minimum density. Wherefore, the proposed preliminary plat layout will need to be revised to provide public street frontage access for all lots within the proposed preliminary plat. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 if you have any questions. Sincerely, i Jill Ding Senior Planner cc; Stein Skatturn / Owner(s) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 - rentonwa.gov 1"R Denis Law Mayor January 10, 2017 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Myloan Nguyen Mark Travers Architect 2315 E Pike Street Seattle, WA 98122 Subject: Notice of Incomplete Application Renton Subdivision LLIA16-000981, ECF, PP Dear Ms. Nguyen: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is incomplete according to submittal requirements and, the following items will need to be submitted by April 10, 2017, in order to continue processing your application: o Title Report for parcel 008700-0265: A title report was submitted with the project application for parcel 008700-0270, however no title report was submitted for parcel 008700-0265. Please submit 3 copies of a complete title report of 008700-0265. Affidavit of ownership: The Affidavit of Ownership on the Master Application was signed by Stein Skattum, however the submitted title report for parcel 008700-0270 identifies George Subic and Frances Subic as the vested owners of the property. Please submit either 12 copies of a Master Application signed by George and Frances Subic or 3 copies of a revised title report identifying Stein Skattum as the vested property owner. As the subject application was not deemed a complete preliminary plat application, as was required to be submitted prior to January 2, 2017 to vest to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual, the subject application will be required to comply with the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. Please submit 5 copies of a revised Drainage Report and Drainage Plans in compliance with the 2017 City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual. Based on an initial review of the proposed preliminary plat layout, it appears that the proposal does not include legal access to Lots 5 and S. Per RMC 4-6-060J.1.b shared 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov driveway access is not permitted for lots created by a subdivision of ten (10) or more lots. In addition, in accordance with RMC 4-7-170G, pipestem lots are not permitted for new plats, unless needed to achieve minimum density. Therefore, the proposed preliminary plat layout will need to be revised to provide public street frontage access for all lots within the proposed preliminary plat. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner cc: Stein Skattum / Owner(s) 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov PREAPPLICATION MEE i ING FOR Renton Subdivision 17018 & 170221061" Avenue SE PRE 16-000550 CITY OF RENTON Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division September 15, 2016 Contact information: Planner: Jill Ding, 425.430.6598 Public Works Plan Reviewer: Rohini Nair, 425.430.7298 Fire Prevention Reviewer: Corey Thomas, 425.430.7024 Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell, 425.430.7290 Please retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving copies of it to any engineers, architects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submittal, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager to have it pre-screened before making all of the required copies. The pre -application meeting is informal and non -binding. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and policies in effect at the time of review. The applicant is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations in effect at the time of project submittal. The information contained in this summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision -makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). Fire & Emergency Services - City of . Department....��.� -►-► `.' M E M O R A N D U M DATE: 8/24/2016 12:OO:OOAM TO: Jill Ding, Senior Planner FROM: Corey Thomas, Plan Review/inspector SUBJECT: (Renton subdivision) PRE16-000550 1. The fire flow requirement for a single family home is 1,000 gpm minimum for dwellings up to 3,600 square feet (including garage and basements). If the dwelling exceeds 3,600 square feet, a minimum of 1,500 gpm fire flow would be required. A minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 300-feet of the proposed buildings and two hydrants if the fire flow goes up to 1,500 gpm. There is one existing hydrant within 300-feet of the some of the proposed homes, but not all. A water main extension and at least one new fire hydrant will be required. A water availability certificate is required from Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. The fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $495.10 per single family unit. This fee is paid at building permit issuance. Credit will be granted for the removal of two existing homes. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required to be a minimum of 20-feet wide fully paved, with 25-feet inside and 45-feet outside turning radius. Fire access roadways shall be constructed to support a 30 -ton vehicle with 75-psi point loading. Access is required within 150-feet of all points on the buildings. An approved turnaround is required for all dead end streets exceeding 150-feet in length. Proposed hammerhead turnaround is acceptable. Page 1 of 1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY Citynf AND ECONOMIC DEVE,wPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: TO: Jill Ding, Senior Planner FROM: Rohini Nair, Plan Reviewer SUBJECT: (Renton subdivision) PRE16-000550 NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non -binding and may not subject to modification and/or concurrence by official city decision -makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. I have completed a preliminary review for the above -referenced proposal. The following comments are based on the pre -application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. 1 have completed a preliminary review for the above -referenced proposal. The following comments are based on the pre -application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. WATER • The subject development is within the water service area of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. ■ The applicant shall obtain a water availability certificate from the District and submit a copy of the certificate to the City with the land use application. • A copy of the water main improvements plans, approved by the District, shall be submitted to the City as part of the City's Utility Construction permit_ • The number and location of fire hydrants shall be determined by the City of Renton Fire Department as part of the review of the project plans. SANITARY SEWER • The subject development is within the sewer service area of 5oos Creek Water and Sewer District. • The applicant shall obtain a sewer availability certificate from the District and submit a copy of the certificate to the City with the land use application. • A copy of the sewer main improvements plans, approved by the District, shall be submitted to the City as part of the City's Utility Construction permit. SURFACE WATER 1. A drainage report complying with the City of Renton adopted 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Amendment to the 2009 King County Surface Water manual will be required. Based on the City's flow control map, the site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Site Conditions). The project is required to use the Flow Control Duration Standard (forested conditions) as the existing pre -developed condition. Refer to Figure 1.1.2.A— Flowchart, for determining the type of drainage review required in the City of Renton 2009 Surface Water Design Manual Amendment. Stormwater BMPs applicable to the individual lots must be provided and information should be included in the drainage report provided with the land use Page 1 of 3 application. The drainage report must account for all the improvements provided by the project. Stormwater improvements based on the drainage report st ' fill be required to be provided by the develo 2. The requirements of the new stormwater manual based on the 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual will be applicable from January 2, 2017. 3. A geotechnical report based on RMC 4-8-120.D.7 containing information shown in Table 18, separated into sections is required. Information on the water table and soil permeability, with recommendations of appropriate flow control BMP options with typical designs for the site from the geotechnical engineer, shall be submitted with the application. The geotech report must include information whether the soil is suitable for infiltration. 4. The current surface water system development (SDC) fee is $1,485.00 (2016 rate) for each lot. The rate that will be applicable on the issuance day of the utility construction permit will be applicable on this project. S. Construction Storm Water General Permit from the Department of Ecology is required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. TRANSPORTATION 1. Existing right-of-way width in 106th Ave SE fronting the site is 60 feet. Street frontage improvements including paved travel roadway width of 26 feet or paved width to match existing paved width along the corridor (the larger number is required), 0.5 feet wide curbs, 8 feet wide landscaped planters, 5 feet wide sidewalks, drainage improvements, and streetlights are required to be provided on 106th Ave SE. Right of way of the public streets should extend to the back of the sidewalk. Depending on the location of existing paved street within the right of way, right of way dedication may or may not be applicable — subject to survey information. As per RMC 4-6-060, half street frontage improvements will be required to be built on 106th Ave SE frontage by the developer. Final determination of specific right-of-way dedication will be confirmed when the survey and preliminary engineering design is complete. 2. Internal site access. Looking at the project elements, the project will have to be developed as one plat. A public limited access residential street of ROW width 47 feet and pavement width of 20 feet is required as the internal access. 0.5 feet wide curbs, 8 feet wide landscaped planters, 5 feet wide sidewalks, drainage improvements, and street lighting are required to be provided on public streets. Streets and driveways shall be designed as per RMC 4.6.060, RMC 4.4.080, and RMC 4.7.150. 4. Payment of the transportation impact fee is applicable at the time of building permit issuance. The current transportation impact fee rate for single family house is $2,951.17 per home. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied, payable at issuance of building permit. 5. Traffic impact study is required for projects that generate 20 or more new peak hour trips. A development of 11 single family houses is not expected to generate 20 new peak hour trips. Therefore, a traffic study may not be required. 6. Street lighting on the frontage and internal public streets is required to be provided by the development. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. All construction or service utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. When utility plans are complete, please submit four (4) copies of the drawings, two (2) copies of the Page 2 of 3 drainage report, the permit a 'cation, an itemized cost of construction estir--'p, and the application fee at the counter on the sixth floo . 3, All utilities serving the site are required to be undergrounded. 4. Any proposed rockeries or retaining walls greater than four feet in height will be require a separate building permit, structural plans, and special inspection. Page 3 of 3 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY ]TV OF AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ention M E M O R A N D U M DATE: September 8, 2016 TO: Pre -Application File No. 16-000550 FROM: Jill Ding, Senior Planner SUBJECT. Renton Subdivision, 27028 & 17022106t' Avenue SE General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre -application for the above - referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting Issues are based on the pre -application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision -makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or online at vjww.rcntonwa.xcy Project Proposal: The subject property is located on the east side of 106th Avenue SE and north of SE 17211 Street and is addressed as 17018 & 17022 10Vh Avenue SE. The proposal is to subdivide the project site (comprised of two lots) into a total of 11 lots for the future construction of single family residences. The subject property totals 84,360 square feet (1.94 acres) in area, and is zoned Residential-8 (R-8). Access to the new lots would be provided via two shared driveways off of 106th Avenue SE, which terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. No critical areas are mapped on the project site. Current Use: The site is currently occupied by two existing single family residences and associated outbuildings proposed for removal. Zoning/Density Requirements: The subject property is zoned Residential-8 (R-8), the density range allowed in the R-8 zone is a minimum of 4.0 to a maximum of 8.0 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). The area located within dedicated right-of-way, private access easements/tracts, and critical areas would be deducted from the gross site area to determine the "net" site area prior to calculating density. After the deduction of the 9,822 square foot shared driveways, the proposal would have a net site area of 74,538 square feet (1.71 acres). The proposal for 11 lots on the 1.71 net acre site would result in a net density of 6.43 dwelling units per acre (11 lots / 1.71 acres = 6.43 du/ac), which is within the density range permitted in the R-8 zone. Development Standards: The project would be subject to RMC 4-2-110A, "Development Standards for Single Family Zoning Designations" effective at the time of complete application (noted as "R-8 standards" herein). h:\ced\planning\current plann1ng\preapps12016 preapps`prel6-000550.jill\15-000550 (r-8 11 lot plat).doc Renton Subdivision, 6-000550 Page 2of6 September 8, 2016 _Minimum Lot Size, Width _and _De Depth —The minimum lot size permitted in the R-8 zone, is 5,000 square feet for parcels being subdivided. Minimum lot width is 50 feet for interior lots and 60 feet for corner lots; minimum lot depth is 80 feet, All lots appear, to comply with the minimum lot size requirements. No dimensions were included for the proposed lots, therefore staff was unable to verify compliance with the minimum width, and depth requirements. Buildiniz Standards — The R-8 standards allow a maximum building coverage of 50% of the lot area. Accessory structures are also included in building lot coverage calculations. The proposal's compliance with the building standards would be verified at the time of building permit review. Building Height — The maximum wall plate height is 24 feet and 2 stories. Roofs with a pitcl equal to or greater than 4.12 may project an additional six (6) vertical feet from the maximurr wall plate height; common rooftop features, such as chimneys, may project an additional foul (4) vertical feet from the roof surface. Non-exempt vertical projections (e.g., decks, railings, etc. shall not extend above the maximum wall plate height unless the projection is stepped bacE one -and -a -half (1.5) horizontal feet from each facade for each one (1) vertical foot above the maximum wall plate height. Building height would be verified at the time of building permit review. Setbacks — Setbacks are the minimum required distance between the building footprint and the property line. The required setbacks for the R-8 zone are: Front yard: 20 feet for the primary structure. Rear yard: 20 feet. Side yards: 5 feet. Side yards along streets: 15 feet Setbacks would be verified at the time of building permit review. Lot Configuration — One of the following is required in lots created through the Preliminary Plat process: 1. Lot width variation of 10 feet (10') minimum of one per four (4) abutting street -fronting lots, or 2. Minimum of four (4) lot sixes (minimum of 400 gross square feet size difference), or 3. A front yard setback variation of at least five feet (Y) minimum for at least every four (4) abutting street fronting lots. It appears that the proposed plat would comply with Option 2 above. Building Design Standards — The proposed structure would be subject to the Residential Design Standards outlined in RMC 4-2-115. The proposal's compliance with the residential design standards would be verified at the time of building permit review. Access/Parking: Access to the lots is proposed via two 20-foot wide shared driveways, which abut each other off of 1061h Avenue SE. Shared driveways may be allowed for access to four (4) or fewer residential lots, provided: a. At least one of the four (4) lots abuts a public right-of-way with at least fifty (50) linear feet of property; and h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\2016 preapps\prel6-000550.jill\16-000550 (r-8 11 lot plat).doc Renton Subdivision, PRE16-000550 Page 3 of 6 September 8, 2016 b. The subject lots are not created by a subdivision of ten (10) or more lots; and c. A public street is not anticipated by the City of Renton to be necessary for existing or future traffic and/or pedestrian circulation through the short subdivision or to serve adjacent property; and d. The shared driveway would not adversely affect future circulation to neighboring properties; and e. The shared driveway is no more than two hundred feet (200') in length; and f. The shared driveway poses no safety risk and provides sufficient access for emergency vehicles and personnel. Shared driveways shall be within a tract; the width of the tract and paved surface shall be a minimum of sixteen feet (16'); the Fire Department may require the tract and paved surface to be up to twenty feet (20') wide. The shared driveway may be required to provide a turnaround per RMC 4-6-060H. No sidewalks are required for shared driveways; however, drainage improvements pursuant to City Code are required (i.e., collection and treatment of stormwater), as well as an approved pavement thickness (minimum of four inches (4") asphalt over six inches (6") crushed rock). The maximum grade for the shared driveway shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%), except for within approved hillside subdivisions. It appears that the proposal would exceed the maximum of 4 lots accessing off of the shared driveway; therefore dedication of a public street may be required. Ailey Access: Alley access is the preferred street pattern for all new residential development except in the Residential Low Density land use designation (RC, R-1, and R-4 zones). All new residential development in an area that has existing alleys shall utilize alley access. New residential development in areas without existing alleys shall utilize alley access for interior lots. if the developer or property owner demonstrates that alley access is not practical, the use of alleys may not be required. The City will consider the following factors in determining whether the use of alleys is not practical: a. Size: The new development is a short plat. b. Topography: The topography of the site proposed for development is not conducive for an alley configuration. c. Environmental Impacts: The use of alleys would have more of a negative impact on the environment than a street pattern without alleys. d. If site characteristics allow for the effective use of alleys. Driveways: The maximum driveway slopes cannot exceed 15%, provided that driveways exceeding 8% are to provide slotted drains at the lower end of the driveway. If the grade exceeds 15%, a variance is required. The maximum width of single loaded garage driveways shall not exceed nine feet (9') and double loaded garage driveways shall not exceed sixteen feet (16'). Landscaping — Except for critical areas, all portions of the development area not covered by structures, required parking, access, circulation or service areas, must be landscaped with native, drought -resistant vegetative cover. The minimum on -site landscape width required along street frontages is 10 feet. Where there is insufficient right-of-way space or no public frontage, street trees are required in the front yard subject to approval of the Administrator. A minimum of two (2) trees are to be located in the front yard prior to final inspection. Please refer to h:lced\planning\current pianning\preapps\2016 preappslprel6-00O55O.jill\16-000550 (r-811 lot plat).doc Renton Subdivision, 6-000550 Page 4 of 6 September 8, 2016 landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) for further general and specific landscape requirements. A conceptual landscape plan shall be submitted at the time of formal land use application and prepared by a registered Landscape Architect, a certified nurseryman or other certified professional. Storm drainage facilities are required to comply with the minimum 15-foot perimeter landscaping strip on the outside of the fence unless otherwise determined through the site plan review or subdivision review process. Please refer to landscape regulations RMC 4-4-070 for further general and specific landscape requirements. Significant Tree Retention: If significant trees (greater than 6-inch caliper or 8-caliper inches for alders and cottonwoods) are proposed to be removed, a tree inventory and a tree retention plan along with an arborist report, tree retention plan and tree retention worksheet shall be provided with the formal land use application as defined in RMC 4-8-120. The tree retention plan must show preservation of at least 30% of significant trees, and indicate how proposed building footprints would be sited to accommodate preservation of significant trees that would be retained (RMC 4-4-130Hl.a). When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, replacement trees, with at least a two-inch (2") caliper or an evergreen at least six feet (6') tall, shall be planted at a rate of twelve (12) caliper inches of new trees to replace each protected tree removed. The Administrator may authorize the planting of replacement trees on the site if it can be demonstrated to the Administrator's satisfaction that an insufficient number of trees can be retained. In addition to retaining 30 percent of existing significant trees, each new lot would be required to provide a minimum tree density of 2 trees per 5,000 square feet of lot area onsite. Protected trees that do not contribute to a lot's required minimum tree density sham be held in perpetuity within a tree protection tract. Significant trees shall be retained in the following priority order: Priority One: Landmark trees; significant trees that form a continuous canopy; significant trees on slopes greater than twenty percent (20%); Significant trees adjacent to critical areas and their associated buffers; and Significant trees over sixty feet (60') in height or greater than eighteen inches ( 18") caliper. Priority Two: Healthy tree groupings whose associated undergrowth can be preserved; other significant native evergreen or deciduous trees; and other significant non- native trees. Priority Three: Alders and cottonwoods shall be retained when all other trees have been evaluated for retention and are not able to be retained, unless the alders and/ or cottonwoods are used as part of an approved enhancement project within a critical area or its buffer. The Administrator may require independent review of any land use application that involves tree removal and land clearing at the City's discretion. A formal tree retention plan would be reviewed at the time of formal land use application. Fences/Retaining Walls: If the applicant intends to install any fences as part of this project, the location must be designated on the landscape plan. A fence taller than six feet (6') requires a building permit. A fence shall not be constructed on top of a retaining wall unless the total combined height of the retaining wall and the fence does not exceed the allowed height of a standalone fence. New or existing fencing would need to comply with the fence requirements of the code (RMC 4-4-040), h:\ced\planning\current plan ning\preapps12016 preappslprel6-OOOS50.jill\16-000550 (r-8 11 lot plat).doc Renton Subdivision, PRE16-000550 Page 5 of 6 September 8, 2016 Retaining walls shall be composed of brick, rock, textured or patterned concrete, or other masonry product that complements the proposed building and site development. There shall be a minimum three-foot (3') landscaped setback at the base of retaining walls abutting public rights -of -way. Please refer to retaining wall standards (RMC 44-040) for additional information about fences and retaining walls. Environmental Review: Environmental (SEPA) Review would be required due to the proposal to subdivide the site into more than 9 lots. Permit Requirements: The proposal would require Preliminary Plat approval in accordance with RMC 4-7-070C.2, which states "No application for a short subdivision shall be approved if the land being divided is held in common ownership with a contiguous parcel that has been subdivided in a short subdivision within the preceding five (5) years. Such applications shall be processed as preliminary plat, rather than a short plat." Environmental (SEPA) Review would also be required. All land use permits would be processed within an estimated time frame of 10- 12 weeks. The 2016 Preliminary Plat Review application fee is $4,500. The 2016 application fee for SEPA Review (Environmental Checklist) is $1,000. A 3% technology fee would also be. assessed at the time of land use application for a total application fee of $5,665. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal is provided in the attached handouts. Construction of residential structures would follow installation of infrastructure and recording of the Final Plat. Public Information/Public Outreach Signs: The applicant is required to install a public outreach sign and a proposed land use action sign on the subject property per the specifications provided in the accompanied sign handouts. The applicant is solely responsible for the construction, installation, maintenance, removal, and any costs associated with the signs. Public Meeting: Please note a neighborhood meeting, according to RMC 4-8-090, is required for: a. Preliminary plat applications; b. Planned urban development applications; and c. Projects estimated by the City to have a monetary value equal to or greater than ten million dollars ($10,000,000), unless waived by the Administrator. The intent of this meeting is to facilitate an informal discussion between the project developer and the neighbors regarding the project. The neighborhood meeting shall occur after a pre - application meeting and before submittal of applicable permit applications. The public meeting shall be held within Renton city limits, at a location no further than two (2) miles from the project site Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction fees, impact fees would be required. Such fees would apply to all projects and would be calculated at the time of building permit application and payable prior to building permit issuance. The fees for 2016 are as follows: • Transportation impact Fee - $2,951.17 per new single-family house; • Park Impact Fee - $1,887.94 per new single-family house; and • Fire Impact Fee - $495.10 per new single-family house. h:\ced\planning\current plan ning\preapps\2016 preapps\prel6-000550_jill\16-000550 (r-811 lot plat).doc 4 Renton Subdivision, 6-000550 Page 6 of 6 September 8, 2016 A handout listing the impact fees is attached. A Renton School District Impact Fee, which is currently $5,643.00 per new home, would be payable prior to building permit issuance. A handout listing all of the City's Development related fees is available on the City's website. Note: When the formal application materials are complete, the applicant is strongly encouraged to have one copy of the application materials pre-screened at the 6th floor front counter prior to submitting the complete application package. Please call or email Jill Ding, Senior Planner at 425-430-6598 or jding@rentonwa.gov for an appointment. Expiration: Upon approval, preliminary plat approval is valid for five years with a possible one- year extension if requested in writing prior to the expiration of the preliminary plat. h;\cedlplanninglcurrent planning\preapps\2016 preapps\prel6-000550.jill\16-000550 (r-8 11 lot plat).doc y DEPARTM ENT OF ujM M UNITY R eiTY ° AND B30NOM I C DEVELOPM ENT erg onle WAIVER OF SUBM ITTAL REQU I REIVI BUTS FOR LAN D USE APPLJCAl10NS Planning Division 1055 SDuth Grady Way-Fbnton, WA98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 1 www. rent onwa.goy LAND USE PIT SUBM ITTAL R�U I RH1/1 BUTS WAIVED BYBY MODIFIED OOM M BVTS Arborist Report 4 Biological Assessment 4 J . {DaIculations, Colored Maps for Display 4 Construction Mitigation Description 2AN❑4 Deed of Right -of -Way Dedication Density Worksheet 4 Drainage Control Plane Drainage Raport 2 Bevations, Architedural 3AND4 Environmental Checklist 4 Existing Covenants (Pecorded Copy), AND4 E)asting Easements (Feoorded Copy) 1 AW4 Rood Hazard Data4__ Floor Rarns3MD4 Geotedmical Report 2AND3 Grading Devations&Plan, Clonceptual 2 Grading Bevations& Ran, Detailed2 Habitat Data Report 4 Improvement Deferral 2 Irrigation Plan 4 DATE HAC EO\DatalForm&Templates\-%lf-Help HandoutslRan ningMaiversubmittalregs.doax F;bv: 0812015 LAND USE POW IT SUBMITTAL FEQUI FEM BUTS WAIVED MODIFIED: BY OOM M BVTS Ding Ebunty Assessor's Map Indicating Ste4 Landscape Ran, Conceptual 4 Landscape Ran, Detailed 4 Legal Descript=4 Letter of Understanding of Geological Rsk 4 Map of Bdsting Ste Conditions4 Master Application Form Monument Cards (one per monument) , Neighborhood Detail Map 4 Overall Rat Plan 4 Parking, Lot Cbverage & Landscaping Analysis Plan Fbductions (F MTs) 4 Fast Office Approval 2 Plat Name Fbservation 4 Plat Plan 4 Reapplication Meeting Simmary 4 Public WorksApproval Getter 2 Fehabilitation Ran 4 Screening Detail 4 ShorelineTracking Worksheet 4 Ste Ran 2MD4 Stream or Lake Study, 4andard4 grearn or Lake audy, Supplement al 4 Stream or Lake Mitigation Ran 4 Street Profiles2 Title Import or Rat Certificate, aNm4 Topography Map a Traffic gudy z Tree Cutting/ Land Clearing Ran 4 Urban Design Fegulations Analysis4 Utilities Ran, Generalized 2 Wet I ands M it i gat i on Ran, Final 4 Wetlands Mitigation Ran, Preliminary 4 HACH.xData\Forms-TemplateslS�lf-Help HandoutslRanning\Waiversubmittalregs.docx Fbv: 0812015 PEW IT SUBM ITTAL F�UI FEM BVTS WAIVED A,.USE A,. MODIFIED BYOOM M BVTS Wetlands Ibport/Dal heat ion 4 Wireless: Applicant Agreement Statement 2AN❑3 I nventory of Exist i ng 9tes 2 AND 3 Lease Agreement, Draft 2AND 3 Map of Bdsting Ste Cbnditions 2AN❑3 M ap of V ew Area 2 AND 3 PhotAmulations2AND 3 This Fbquirement may be waived by: 1. Property S�rvioes 2 Development Engineering Ran Review 3 Building 4 Ranning HACED Data\ Forms -Templates\ Self -Help Handouts\ Planni ng\ Waiversubmittal regs.docx Fbv: 08/ 2015 .. City of r r r i March 30, 2017 Randy Matheson Department of Transportation Renton School District 420 Park Avenue N Renton, WA 98055 Subject: New Project / "Renton Subdivision" tUA16-000981, ECF, PP The City of Renton's Department of Community and Economic Development (CED) has received an application for a Preliminary Plat Approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of an existing 84,263 square foot (1.93 acre) parcel into 11 parcels and 1 stormwater tract for the eventual construction of single family residences. Location address is 17018 1061n Ave 5E, Renton WA 98055-5431. Please see the enclosed Notice of Application for further details. In order to process this application, CED needs to know which Renton schools would be attended by children living in residences at the location indicated above. Would you please complete the list below and return this letter to my attention, City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98057 or fax to (425) 430-7300, no later than April 10, 2017, Elementary School: Middle School: High School: Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the impact of the additional students estimated to come from the proposed development? Yes No Extra Comments: Thank you for providing this important and helpful information. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me at (425) 430-6598. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner Denis Law Mayor March 30, 2017 Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Mark Travers Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 Subject: Notice of Complete Application Renton Subdivision, LUA16-000981, ECF, PP Dear Mr. Travers: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on May 1, 2017. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. In addition, this matter is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing on June 13, 2017 at 11:00 AM, in the Council Chambers, 7th Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. The applicant, or representative(s) of the applicant, are required to be present at the Public Hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you one week before the hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-6598 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jill Ding Senior Planner cc: George & Frances Subic/ Owner(s) Sanders Subic/Owner Stein Skattum/Applicant Myloan Nguyen/Mark Travers Architect AIA/Contact Mark Travers/ Mark Travers Architect AIA/Contact 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov NOTICE R APPLICATION AND PRvPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: March 30, 2017 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA16-000981, ECF, PP PROJECT NAME: Renton Subdivision PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the subdivision of an existing 84,263 square foot (1.93 acre) parcel into 11 parcels and one Storm Water tract for the eventual construction of single family residences. The subject property is located within the Residential-8 (R-8) zoning designation. The proposed lots would range in area from 5,100 square feet to7,200 square feet. Access to the site is proposed via a new 47-foot wide public street, which would terminate in a hammerhead turnaround. Storm Water facilities, proposed to store and treat additional Storm Water runoff generated, would be located within Tract A. Two existing single family residences and associated detached accessory structures would be removed. No critical areas are mapped on the project site. PROJECT LOCATION: 17018 10611 Ave SE, Renton, WA 98055-5431 OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non -Significance (DNS). This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal. A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which maybe required Requested Studies: December 30, 2017 March 30, 2017 Myloan Nguyen, Mark Travers Architect, AIA 2315 E Pike St, Seattle, WA 99122 Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat Approval Building Permit, Construction Permit Geotechnical Report, Arborist Report, Drainage Report Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearinp is tentativeIV scheduled for June 13 2017 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers at 11:00 am on the 7th floor of Renton City Hall located at 105S South Grady Way. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: The subject site is designated Comprehensive Residential Medium Density (COMP-RMD) and Residential-8 (R-8). Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-110A, 4-4-070, 4-4-130, 4-6-060, 4-7-080 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: None are recommended at this time. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Jill Ding, Senior Planner, CED — Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5.00 PM on April 13, 2017. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on June 13, 2017, at 11:00 am, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-6578. Following the issuance of the SEPA Determination, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments regarding the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the project manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Jill Ding, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6598; Email: jding@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION RECEIPT EGO00632 BILLING CONTACT Stein Skattum CITY OF Renton s 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Transaction Date: December 30, 2016 Nir"li Is REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME TRANSACTION PAYMENT AMOUNT PAID TYPE METHOD LUA16-000981 PLAN - Environmental Review Fee Payment Check #16483 $1,000.00 PLAN - Preliminary Plat Fee Fee Payment Check #16483 $4,500.00 Technology Fee Fee Payment Check #16483 $165.00 SUB TOTAL $5,665.00 Printed On: December 30, 2016 Prepared By: Mona Davis Page i of 1 M t Mark Travers November 1, 2016 Architect Re: Neighborhood Meeting Notice Project Title: Renton Subdivision 17018 & 17022 1061h Avenue SE, Renton WA 98055 Meeting to be held at: Library room in Benson Hill Elementary School 18665 116th Ave SE, Renton, WA 98058 Time: November 17, from 3:30pm — 5:30pm City of Renton Contact: Jill Ding, Senior Planner Email: JDingQRentonwa.gov Applicant Information: Owner: Stein Skattum 10350 Rainier Ave S, Seattle WA 98178 Email: Skattum(cDcomcast.net Architect. Mark Travers Architect 2315 E. Pike St — Seattle, WA 98122 Phone: 206.763,8496 Email: mark _.marktraversarchitect.com Project Information: Addresses: 17018 1061h Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Lot 10, Tax 0 # 0087000265 17022 10611 Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Lot 11, Tax ID # 0087000270 Scope of Work: Lot 10: Short Subdivision of one parcel into (6) lots. Lot 1 1: Short Subdivision of one parcel into (5) lots and a tract for storm drainage. Lot Area(s): varies, from 5031 SF to 6855 SF, for both parcels. A public limited access residential street of Right -Of -Way proposed with 20 feet wide pavement driveway, 6 inches wide cubs, 8 feet wide landscape planters, 5 feet wide sidewalk, drainage improvements, and street lighting to be provide on public. Proposed driveway with hammerhead turnaround to serving 5 interior lots of each lot and one lot in North-West corner as proposed will be accessed from 106th Ave SE. Zoning Analysis: Properties are currently zoned R-8 (Residential Medium Density) Density: (RMC 4-2-11OA): Minimum Net Density for proposed shot plats or subdivision: 4 units/acre Maximum Net Density for proposed shot plats or subdivision: 8 units/acre Proposed: 6.98 units/acre Lot Dimension: Minimum lot size: 5,000 sq.ft Minimum lot width: 50 ft Minimum lot depth: 80 ft Set Back: Minimum Front Yard: 20 fit. except when all vehicle access is taken from an alley. Minimum Side Yard: 5 ft Minimum Rear Yard: 20 ft Side Yard along a Street: 15 ft Minimum Design Standards For Public Street and Alleys: (RMC 4-6-060F) Average Daily Vehicle Trips: 0-250 Right -of -Way: 1 lane - 45' Sidewalks: 5' both sides Planting Strips: 8' between curb & walk both sides Curbs: both sides Parking lane: 6' one side Paved Roadway Width, not including parking: 1 lane 12' Intersection Radii: 25' turning radius Sincerely, Mark Travers AIA 206 ! 763-8496 P 206 ! 32"238 F Why Too Que Building 2315 E. Pike Street Seattle, WA 98122 maMraversarchitectoom + . '4 Project Title: Renton Subdivision (of combined lots) Addresses: 17018 106th Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Parcel number 0087000265 17022 106th Avenue SE Renton, WA 98055, Parcel number 0087000270 Neighborhood Meeting - Mailing List: 1. Parcel number: 0087000260 Address: 17006 106TH AVE SE, RENTON 98055 2. Parcel number: 0087000302 Address: 10708 SE 170TH ST RENTON 98055 3. Parcel number: 0087000301 Address: 10707 SE 170TH ST RENTON 98055 4. Parcel number: 0087000300 Address: 17015 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 5. Parcel number: 0087000298 Address: 17019 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 6. Parcel number: 0087000295 Address: 17023 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 7. Parcel number: 0087000296 Address: 17025 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 8. Parcel number: 0087000291 Address: 17029 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 9. Parcel number: 0087000293 Address: 17033 108TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 10. Parcel number: 0087000275 Address: 17024 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 11. Parcel number: 0087000281 Address: 10622 SE 172ND ST RENTON 98055 12. Parcel number: 0087000282 Address: 10618 SE 172ND ST RENTON 98055 13. Parcel number: 0087000283 Address: 17030 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 14. Parcel number: 0087000213 Address: 17029 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 15. Parcel number: 0087000203 Address: 17023 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 16. Parcel number: 0087000198 Address: 17019 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 17. Parcel number: 0087000194 Address: 17013 106TH AVE SE RENTON 98055 DEPARTMEN F COMMUNITY 11rDF AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1enton AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone:425-430-7200 1 www.rentonwa.gov STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) rh� ' , certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct, and duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: On the IL (- , day of f4oM I�0�, 20), I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing a neighborhood meeting notice, pursuant to Renton Municipal Code section 4-8-090A Neighborhood Meetings to property owners within three hundred feet (300') of the property for the following project: Renton Subdivision - 106th Ave SE Project Name Stein Skatttum Owner Name This notice was sent to the addresses in the attached list, which was created based on the most recent property tax assessment r Ifs of King County Department of Assessments. 1 Sender Signature SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this —day of %`%"%J 111111111" PAY Pus -&NTHIA J JON£S . COMM. EXPIRES DEC 26, z018 �• O A1, 20/--(- . NOTARY PUBLIC in nd for the State of as ngton, Printed name: /AJ7- �I � " J 6' My commission expires on: _ � A / 6,If H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Neighborhood Meeting Pasting and Mailing Affidavit.docx Rev. 08J2016 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY CITY °P AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT '"�I�I�Ren on AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING MEETING LOCATION SIGN FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone:425-430-7200 1 www.rentonwa.gov STATE OF WASHINGTON j ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I ►'`T�l�'-- certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct, and duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: 1. On the +"H day of 00 V-MA�0 I ( , I installed X Meeting location sign(s) on the main entrance of the building located at for the following project: Renton Subdivision - 9 06th Ave SE Project Name Stein Skatttum Owner Name 2. 1 have attached a copy of the meeting location sign(s). 3. This/these meeting location s'gn(s) was/ -cf3rrstructed and installed in locations in conformance with the require "ent 0,Veritle 4 of Renton Municipal Code. Signature of person posting SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this %J day of ����f -� 20. 11J1 rrrrr4 PJJ '�.• � tYNTHIA �• NOTAR UBLIC in and for e State of Washington, 10ME5• . - Printed . COMM. EXPIRES = name: •� DEC. 26, 2ola �• p. My commission expires on; ri Z-Z,�zLfy�•' H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Neighborhood Meeting Posting and Mailing Affidavit.docx Rev. 08/20I6 LI r..r do a + 17 01'`1 i r ')-- *17- 1 • iav 7 V24 L i¢. !• .fr. JF a^' .. - Neighborhood Detail Map Scale: 1 "=100' A l WWI ow 11 , C 46 L S 3 r4 'Y w At 2315 East Pike Street Tel: 2M-763-84% Mark Travers Architect, AlA www.marktraversarc�itect.com keattle,WA 9B122 IFax: 206-328-1238 106th Ave. SE. Subdivision RENTON WA 98006 CURB CJf"-` I ? -D ' LANOSCHPINC PL 85.09 PL 60.00' PL 60.00' PL 95.00' LOT B o 5031 SF o i j LOT D 0 i r I f 7200 SF LOT E 6680 SF a -1 (6729 SF) _P.L 85.ff.-- f LUFI 6864 SF I A CDLOT ra 5031 SF jl i IQr _ PLBS 00� !I PL 58.67' CL . 5� / P I o O m n LOT F CL 6674 SF I 3L 95.00' • PL 85 00 PL 60A a LOT IF 6680 SF € _€ .� �ra LOT A I i F I I I o 5031 SF �.03 � a LOT r 6855SF LOT I TRACT �I LOT E Lnn (LOT B) II EL i .i ! (6390 SF) o rn 6680 SF ' o STORM DRAINAGE � I I I-- -. _.... J L_---...- CL� I TRACT PER C— f _ _. _ , , o I Lo J PL 85.00' PL 60.00' PL 60.00' PL 95.00' v SE 172ND ST-- So PiarS �d N PRQ AM] ,L ):+SrN SIT S RDgoH. WA 58055 o 0, 5mR WTN. PO R01 161 Rprr^ W 9M57 h ax�mUW cT� VEN svx Arm,. 0:HQ T.;AW a TRAWr A WECT 23", E ST SEAML W22 i:UNr Lr W4M TR,@�rxs ZED R-A oT 3LE' i,'JIA mNn WT wf . M. SNI w.R. (I R / + nR l NR:3IF,T CEti[.'WWh'. 4UNtAoE A (O.EINED !AT -F 15, PA(Y FLti TO 5 "o ifi) SHGa F-L, PSP„ps -* o vRr&Wm TW7 ON Promed !rn(ormation L^.r sizE - +z.,e^, s:.Fr. 'Da, h:.*Es; LUAL lr;CP WA yaps FM.S j5 1 T ©LLIV 1 P, r UM i; I.RM-D%zh-�v ti JR. 1. 06TH Ar[ 2 LOT W-E 12 iqa S rr ;`F'REEl� lLi L DpI:R@`Ikh: AVER FARYF, #5 PLAY franc 4 RLIT W^T I I Legal NseRption H pig Al '.4dPW.'PoP PsSkWlf090F ice, lR4l.YY! varyi�Slva•Pat'RY a�4+dP:11>0 '�� Bl�hF9�M1lS9FY.Si N11645RYM k6'HYhT+! gJt �Ylmw'y43+u`S Mr'� L` 34i^YNf9il I6 _ � � vrt�.wt �tY imteYxsx _ A3118 GYdb`H90d01 a+v:�raaroruunmrmsn,;.xry�e,nF�YHoanrr+�iraw:aarearNlns �aunspuejpauri00 }ul', k y` A s_ kIM a v Jat U A' �i 4r ♦;' � � U w �t r. qq h 99 I DI Renton Subdivision - Pre 16-000550 Preliminary Plat -Neighborhood Meeting Meeting Date: November 17, 2016 Meeting Time: 3:30 pm -- 5:30pm Location: Library room - Benson Hill Elementary School 18665 116"` Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 Attendee Address Signature 1 17006 106TH AVE SE 2 10708 SE170TH ST 3 10707 5E170TH 5T 4 17015 108TH AVE SE 5 27019 108TH AVE SE 6 17023 108TH AVE SE 7 17025 108TH AVESE 8 17029 108TH AVE SE 9 17033 108TH AVE SE 10 �, 17024 106TH AVE SE � e 11 ���622 SE 172ND ST 12 10618 SE 172ND ST 13 17030 106TH AVE SE 14 17029 106TH AVE SE �;? 15 i 1 f e je_- 'S 17023 1061 H AVE SE : 16 17029 106TH AVE SE 17 kA) VN F P,7n 17013 106TH AVE SE 18 LIAq A j K 10• f' Meeting Minutes Renton Subdivision - Pre 16-000550 Preliminary Plat -Neighborhood Meeting Meeting Date: November 17, 2016 Meeting Time: 3:30 pm — 5:30pm Location: Library room - Benson Hill Elementary School 18665 116I" Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 Presenters in attendance: Development and Project Contact: Stein Skattum 10350 Rainier Ave. S Seattle, WA 98178 Architect: Mark Travers Architect Dustin Hoffman 2315 E. Pike St 2315 E. Pike St Seattle, WA 98122 Seattle, WA 98122 Public Attendees: Wayne P. Pitts Jerry Miller 10517 SE 166" St 10622 SE 172"' St Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Simon Tekeste Dan Palmer 17023 106th Ave SE 16638 106th SE Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 Meeting Synopsis: 11/18/2016 Stein Skattum discussed his goals with the subdivision. As the representative for his in-laws, whom currently live on the site, it is the goal to subdivide the property into (12) separate lots and provide initial site work, sidewalk improvements and street improvements, preparing for future sale within 5 years. The subdivision of 12 lots over 1.94 acres, and composing 11 houses with one lot for storm drainage, is consistent with current zoning (R-8), Public Concerns: 1. There was considerable concern about traffic impacts on the existing streets and surrounding area. Recent projects were discussed and there is doubt whether the prior traffic impact studies were sufficient to address added vehicles and needed infrastructure. The attendees voiced concern about additional traffic from this subdivision and whether it will be significantly detrimental to traffic loads. Overall Meeting Minutes 11/18/2016 relevant points of discussion were the need for stoplights and other measures to slow traffic and the need for the city to address dangerous access points. While not intimately familiar with traffic studies on other projects, the design team's opinion is that additional traffic from this subdivision will be small. 2. There was a concern about street and sidewalk improvements and specific requirements were discussed, including improvements to roads and in the Right of Way affecting the development of sidewalks and planting strips. The attendees were told that these improvements are only required from lot line to lot line and don't extend across neighboring properties. For context, it was discussed that the improvements to Right of Way will occur over the existing, road side ditch. The attendees' concerns included the need for sidewalks along the entire block to better provide a safe environment for pedestrians and in particular neighborhood children and the dangerous conditions that are developing with added traffic load. Hazards to children was a recurring theme throughout the afternoon's discussion. 3. The attendees were concerned about the feasibility of 11 houses on these 12 lots. Zoning was extensively discussed and relative to the R-8 zoning designation, the planning for 11 houses on this 1.94 acre subdivision is well under the allowable maximum. 4. There is a concern for changes to the rural character of the neighborhood. These included the desire to see future development that is "traditional and inviting" and integrative to the rest of the area. This included aesthetic concerns and building character, as well as consideration of building orientation resulting in frontal views of buildings from the street and direct pedestrian access from the sidewalk. 5. There is a concern about displacement of wildlife and changes to landscape and habitat. The understanding is the existing wildlife in the area contributes to the well-being for residents and care should be given for future development and design. 6. Lighting levels from the subdivision and road improvements were discussed. The attendees' concerns is that undesirable light pollution will grow with too much light, affecting their perception of privacy at darker lighting levels. These Meeting Minutes prepared by Dustin Hoffman DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY t11T11FF 0�.M AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --,....���"""""Ren.on AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION OAF 3 0 201; PUBLIC INFORMATION SIGN Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-43G-7200 I www.rentonwa f?4V STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING y I being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: 1, On the d40— day of 1��--- J 20I installed public infotmation sign (sl i n(s) the property located at 17Oi 11U L for the following project; Renton Subdivision - 1 06th Ave SE Project Name Stein Skatttum Owner Name 2. 1 have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an "X" to indicate the location of the installed sign. 3, This/these public information sign(s) was/were constructed and installed in locations in conformance with the requirements hapter S Title of Renton Municipal Code and the City's "Public Information Sign In Ilatio ' han pac ge. ins tier Signature SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 6 day of iv 611tthL6W 20 N RRY PU C in nd for the ate of Washington, Notary Public residing at State of Washington NICOLE M SILVEA 1 1 e My Appointment Expires HDa 16, 201 My commission expires can 7 H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\Pub Info Sign Handcut.docx Rev. 04/2016 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY CITY OF AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - Renton AFFIDAVIT OF INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC OUTREACH SIGN Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone:425-430-7200 1 www.rentonwa.ko� STATE OF WASH I NGTON j ) SS COUNTY OF KING J .._ �2 sworn on oath, deposes and says: ,a i. On the - -day of20 /��P . I instaile outreach signs on he property `70 ( 37 0 oG for the following project: being first duly d public located at Renton Subdivision - 106 th Ave SE Project Name Stein Skattum Owner Name 2. 1 have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail trap marked with an "X" to indicate the location of the installed sign. This/these public information sign(s) was/were constructed and installed in locations in conformance with the requirements of pter 7 Title 4 of Renton Municipal Code and the City's "Public Information Signs sta tion" ando ck Installer Signature SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me th'sJi- day of A )4z . 20LlIeLl. NO ARY PUBLIC in and for the Stat of Washington, Notary Public residing at 30 Slate o! Washmglon NICOLE M SEWER My Appointment Expires Nov 16, 2017 My commission expires on H:\CED\DaMNForms Ternplates\Self Help Handouts\Planning\Pub Outreach Sign Handout,dacx Rev.02/2016 Filed for Record at the request of SODS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 14616 SE 192nd St P 0 Box 58039 Renton, Washington 98058-1039 c-a cri r-- CD Document Title(s) WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE #112 Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released N/A Additional reference numbers on page T of document(s) T- t� Grantor(s) NIA �Additional names on page. of document Grantee(s) SODS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT Additional names on page of document Legal Description N/A Additional legal is on page 1� of document Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number(s) See Exhibit "B" 0 SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 1887 W A RESOLUTION of the Board of Commissioners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, King County, Washington, establishing Special Connection Charge #112 due Soos Creek Water and Sewer District for Contract 17-96W WHEREAS, water mains and facilities have heretofore been installed as part of the project commonly known as Contract 17-96W, and WHEREAS, said water facilities will provide benefits and services to the properties described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which is made a part hereof by this reference thereto, and WHEREAS, it is the policy of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District to require reimbursement for any facilities built by the District and/or by an individual when said facilities provide benefit and r.'-> service to other properties, and r_. ~� WHEREAS, the District engineer has determined the properties beriefitted and computed LM the value of said benefit as applied to said properties, and ;- WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners finds said benefits and the cost thereof to be f-� reasonable, and the Special Connection Charge Rate based thereupon to be a fair allocation of such `'' benefits and costs, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District as follows SECTION 1: That Water Special Connection Charge No 112 is hereby established for the properties and in the amounts shown in Exhibit "A", which is incorporated herein by this reference Said rate does not include cost of connecting, stub service, permits or inspections, general facilities charges, or other latecomers that may be due on the properties RESOLUTION NO. 1887 W SUBJECT: Establishing Water Special Connection Charge #112 Due SCWSD Pertaining to Contract 17-96W PAGE -1 C-4 Cn c� w-- SECTION 2. That no service shall be promded to any of the property descnbed in Exhibit "A" pnor to payment to the District of the above established charges for all property held by the applicant which ties within the area descnbed in Exhibit "A" SECTION 3: That a Notice of the adoption of this Resolution as Special Connection Charge shall be recorded with the King County Division of Records and Elections ADOPTED by the Board of Commissioners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, King County,, Washington, at a regular open public meeting th eof on t 1st day of April, 1999 S 7-U Pmrifidept _i CLEME QUANRUD, etary , Commissioner AN, Commissioner RESOLUTION NO. 1887-W SUBJECT: Establishing Water Special Connection Charge #112 Due SCWSD Pertaining to Contract 17-96W PAGE-2 Commissioner EXHIBIT A -r Exhibit "A" SOOS CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT WATER SPECIAL CONNEC11ON CHARGE NO. 112 Contract 17-96W, Aker"s Farm No. 5 Water Main Replacement Base Maps B-2, 3 & C-2 SIZE ON FROM TO 8" Benson Road Intersection of Benson Intersection of Benson Road Road and S. 27th Street and S.E. 31st Avenue 8" 106th Avenue S.E. Intersection of 106th Intersection of 106th Avenue S.E. and Benson Avenue S.E. and S.E. 166th Road Street 8" S.E. 166th Street Intersection of S.E. 166th Intersection of S.E. 166th Street and 106th Avenue Street and 104th Avenue S.E. S.E. 8" 105th Avenue S.E. Intersection of 105th 200 +/- feet North of the Avenue S.E. and S.E intersection of 105th 166th Street Avenue and S.E. 172nd Street 8" 106th Avenue S.E Intersection of 106th 100 +/- feet North of the Avenue S.E. and S.E. intersection of 106th 166th Street Avenue and S.E. 172nd Street F 11 M144031SM 12a doe - 03/25/99 Exhibit "B" SOOS CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE NO 112 Contract 17-96W, Aker's farm No 5 Water Main Replacement Base Maps 8-2, 3 & C-2 All properties benefited by new water service connections and/or rneters, and which Ire within 150 feet of the existing water mains as described in Exhibit "A", arxl which Ile within the following described parcels of land Base Map 13-2 Those portions of the Southeast quarter of the Northv4est quarter at Scoot) 29r Townshtp 23 North, Flange 5 East, W M , in icing County, Washington described as follows Lot 14, Olympic View Terrace, according to the plat thereof as recorded rn V011J nc 64 of Platsr Page 69, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the Southwesterly 150 feet of Lots 6 through 9, Block 1, Aker's Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington as measured parallel with the Southwesterly tine thereof, TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 arxJ 2, Block 8, Aker's Farrn No 5, according to the plat thereof as retarded in Volume 40 of Plats. Paqu 27 records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the North 100 feet of the East 100 feet of Pie Southwr:st quarter of said Northwest quarter of Section 29 and also Ole North 700 feet of that portion of the Southeast quarter of said Northwest quarter of Section 29 lying Westerly of Benson Road, cam+ Cn TOGETHER WITH the Northeasterly 150 feet of Lots 1, ' 4, 5, Block A, Aker', F,iwi No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorder/ in Voic3nre 40 of P!ais. Page 27, J records of King County, Washington as measured pivaltpl with the Norilwastr•rly Ime r� �t thereof, �- TOGETHER WITH the Southerly 150 feet of Lots 2, 4 and 5, Block A, Aker's Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, rer,oiris r- of King County, Washington as measured parallel with the Southerly lirte thereof TOGETHER WITH Lot 3, Block A, Aker's Fami No 5, arcording to tho plat thetcof as r- z iecorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, W,ishi1tc21ur1, TOGETHER WITH Lot 1, Block 2, Aker's Farrn No 5, ,iccording to the plat thereuf as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of icing County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the East half of Lots 2 through 5, Block 2, Aker's Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 through 5, Block 3, Aker's Farris No 5, according to tho plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the West 150 feet of Lots 1, 3, 4 and 5, Block 4, Aker's Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington, Page 1 of 2 r 1M100V;Cc1121;t4,, 04l06;39 TOGETHER WITH the Northeasterly and Easterly 150 feet of Lots 2, 23,24 and 25, Block 4, Aker's Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 44 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington as measured parallel with the Northeasterly and Easterly lure thereof, Base Map 0-3 Those portions of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W M , in King County, Washington described as follows The Westerly 150 feet of Lot 8, Block 8, Aker's Farm No 6, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 42 of Plats, Page 15, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the Westerly 125 feet of the North 104 4 7 feel of Lot 7, Block 8, Aker's Farm No 6, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 42 of Plats, Page 15, records of King County, Washingtor, Base Map C-2 Those portions of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 Edst, W M , in King County, Washington described as follows The East half of Lots 5 throughl2, Block 2, Aker's Firm No 5, acrartfuut io the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, tucords of Kmg Courtly, Washington, TOGFTHER WITH Lots 5 through 12, Block 3, and the North 75 feet of the East 140 feet of Lot 13, Block 3, Aker's Farm No 5, .ic,cording to the plat thereof cv as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of Kinq County, Washinrttorr, cr7 TOGETHER WITH the West 150 fetA of Lets 5 throurlft 12, Block 4, 'imi th,. North 60 feet of the West 130 feet of Lot T3, Blm k 4, Aki-r' , Farm No 5 according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, P,rrgc 27, records ur King County, Wasl)sngton, r- SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE S37 79 per Front Foot Page 2 of 2 awev99 \ rr� 9 � I �- r , i j KELSE1'I--," f o` bbL I � .UFFt-, US = 1ST • t5 I ! _ i This map/plat is being furnished as an aid in locating the herein described land in relation to adjoining streets, natural boundaries and other land, and is not a survey oFthe land depicted. Except to the extent a policy of title insurance is expressly modified by endorsement, if any, the to mpany dges not insure dimensions, distances, location of easements, acreage or other (natters shown thereon. geoAdvanagE SUBDIVISION Issued By: 0- Fidelity National Title' Insurance Company Guarantee/Certificate Number: 611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation, herein called the Company GUARANTEES Stein Skattum herein called the Assured, against actual loss not exceeding the liability amount stated in Schedule A which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. 2. The Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amount of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall the Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth in Schedule A. Please note carefully the liability exclusions and limitations and the specific assurances afforded by this guarantee. If you wish additional liability, or assurances other than as contained herein, please contact the Company for further information as to the availability and cost. Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3600 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Countersigned By: Authorized Officer or Agent Fidelity National Title Insurance Company By: Attest: President Secretary Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.27.16 @ 09:27 AM Page 1 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.61005S-SPS-1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TIT__ INSURANCE COMPANY Gw,RANTEEICERTIFICATE NO. 611148918 ISSUING OFFICE: Title Officer: Bill Fisher / Mike McCarthy / Terry Sarver Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Phone: (425)771-3031 Main Phone: (425)771-3031 Entail: Unit2@fnf.com SCHEDULE A Liability Premium Tax $1,000.00 $350.00 $34.30 Effective Date: December 21, 2016 at 08:00 AM The assurances referred to on the face page are: That, according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matter relative to the following described property: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Title to said real property is vested in: George W. Subic and Frances M. Subic, husband and wife subject to the matters shown below under Exceptions, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority. END OF SCHEDULE A Subdivision GuaranteWCertificate Printed: 12.27.16 @ 09:27 AM Page 2 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-sPS-1-16-611148918 EXHIBIT *'A" Legal Description For APNIParcel IQ(s). 008700-0270-09 LOT 11, BLOCK 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 40 OF PLATS, AGE 27, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON- SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.27.16 Q 09:27 AM Page 3 WA-FT-FTMA-01530,610051-SPS•1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TIl INSURANCE COMPANY SCHEDULE B GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: C RANTEEfCERTIFICATE NO. 611148918 H. Reservations and exceptions in United States Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: Covenants, conditions, restrictions, recitals, reservations, easements, easement provisions, dedications, building setback lines, notes, statements, and other matters, if any, but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those based upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, or source of income, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law, as set forth on the Plat of Aker's Farms No. 5, Recording Number: 3436169 2. Notice of Water Special Connection Charge #112, and the terms and conditions thereof: Recording Date:November 14, 2000 Recording No.: 20001114000732 3. Rights of the public to make necessary slopes for cuts or fills upon the Land in the reasonable original grading of streets, avenues, alleys and roads, as disclosed in the Plat. 4. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year (amounts do not include interest and penalties): Year: 2016 Tax Account Number: 008700-0270-09 Levy Code.- 2128 Assessed Value -Land: $190,000.00 Assessed Value-lmprove ments: $123,000.00 General and Special Taxes: Billed: $4,247.89 Paid: $4,247.89 Unpaid: $0.00 5. The search did not disclose any open mortgages or deeds of trust of record, therefore the Company reserves the right to require further evidence to confirm that the property is unencumbered, and further reserves the right to make additional requirements or add additional items or exceptions upon receipt of the requested evidence. END OF EXCEPTIONS Subdivision GuaranteelCertificate Printed: 12.27.16 @ 09'27 AM Page 4 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANC_ COMPANY GUARANTEE/C—. _ _1FICATE NO. 611148918 SCHEDULE B (continued) NOTES The following matters will not be listed as Special Exceptions in Schedule B of the policy. There will be no coverage for loss arising by reason of the matters listed below because these matters are either excepted or excluded from coverage or are not matters covered under the insuring provisions of the policy. Note A: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per Amended RCW 65.04.045. Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description within the body of the document: LT. 11, BLK. 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5 Tax Account No.: 008700-0270-09 Note 8: The Public Records indicate that the address of the improvement located on said Land is as follows: 17022 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 END OF NOTES END OF SCHEDULE B Subdivision GuaranteelCertificate Printed: 12.27.16 @ 09:27 AM Page 5 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 1 ER'S FARMS NO. i%T3HENEV40rTIRE SWJ4AND THE S60FTHE %WV47S_L 29,1nNP5E.WV OCTOEEA.�944 SCALE ZQOFEET 70 i INCH JxaLAT TLD W)y 3. STOREY CIV%, EW6iNEER DESCa �t •+ 1 PJ• ;I A•!.'3 1 AYJ YD 1 GDIEJ 1 L 0D IW-LGE1•LL Cf r.[ KO*T+EA,e 9PWLI OF'( 1(+. T.WF1T 7:IRTEP YFI:T:DN JITgk P11 Y0I4.'M, f iLA31A4.13LEP{.n!ifrV1GM ca,.Tr F};:Aeo (J Tyr 3;J1N(a1T AOTvnoP rNOR'.hv?'QµF'iR ]I /iPftTLV JI. W. 114P 1C.w N. 1ECL1, PCRTICW PSa T Z KNKN CWD -Y RJAD� alp t1CLPf TY.AY PW -'p^ LY.� OE31 d /ENT ON \LID FMD RCRM MIu4S ,MIG.IEFIN] ON 1YCIRIST uAC d P•+a 4 Ji 0 51ON IMrT IR:%6Pt.[VMi.M1T 4LFNCP Txlkl[!,lW15.9Y1 fklT.A1aI TAAYAEI TO f•IOA(V (l Nt. L,'f 1. Earn 1. 1 401E Lt TOO Itt ESJ fC fft"0 LDT'.N N.E..ra X EE[-TII-n-, D;_7 1 t-1 ah9w•LLMCY\=Tx[3C PFt1[h131iI11Y(.1*E uItafFSICN[C. iarrf'(4xb INS (_•;RI AREA Et'w rE. TK I E r74OVI,C O f!`( RALNLR[1Y kLPT rES EJ$ D N W. 1 k 0 P E E A C �TIrtl RPOLC PUN('G•G\tt'CR A,t irAtEraA45 •YEkJ ES INCMU ;RE,.e'*Lr: '.F fiE N'E� PPR PL: Rill=4 P'JAi6]IJ MP- NCONS ST[Yr'M".',r( lbt 1KRlG( ICP /..yl.: x:Gi•AY, RRRY3LS.1�411[FY 'UOrL [J,h++i (f1ART""I. Pp\CIf3 OF r.LWlyp!•1..[ ..0F 4, TAC IA.C. aI ANO L FN5,4ON ;Tw:f PIIT.-11 •vE G:WYA•Ai31"•NII.( ywC }A: OF µ, Tlrl TR[T'] MD M[%v[S 1}Cwr: xCrECh . v[f5w•'[A[]r w[ x3.r 4CAC- Oro YT ^,:\ KaN C] JIYP 1Fa� `+' 3 11T Ca'DI_N�r_ • O -,la tiJ1T`A3l'LA..'.d�413 S� HfhLl'�'$da. iX •Av:�IA L:l.1rNY C•M'4. ,,A,RV_• WrAKEk RF {Etta$ •..i 1'fi fRT r•^ T:'r r,.5 L 5r Drr Ce A0I/iY li'myE, t f 1)" k111Nb.A Y:.t a PCJ _. P RJin /::• 7F3E•FED nilKi• G aPEF w5I;J Jt a.4 i..,1'•rt. TO i'F PSIMIN TO K T.( Pf P*W AF t]'(CJr[O T.r( POWEC0 O a[ DtCAFIGNANO AM Itw.YQw' LELGE 0 ID WE TWAT TKI 3WJLDAND YaLED TIDE 1-W W T.r\FI((I%; YO(':Yx"A'•_ T •ap fu 01,1z 13 AND P� A PO S%J Tntk(Y YI[ YT.ek(D A.T%S51 YY sad'.-Aat 3r r.; t'Ar 1[aL TNC M F: g111�( R -.IN X- :rq:•�-%cY7-\Jr¢iSF w.T ter Yf:c.A •r �Fi.'.. � � p.Lv:*1CW-Z Dr, EhlEN'T lal 3T0 Lf i'if1T:I']hT.]}-fr aaYtP �ateaOit/a, f[FOeE Y[.Ti[✓.gtll-:JFID. ate. krM:.'.C�P}R1dxrL.ri:ia3EC./«WAE 010:T, GMArALEI. T9 YE •.CNa n; II TYQ P3tS Olv "t+An Es a!f.Ir.trYELT #brE NIT•SY AL MrxK # •A1V.N4TPN 1M•1 C]r{D'.tC 1..! Y T1fN IY9 IPR! 60W4 :4iAYYE%T. FYD V 4. AffYL+LEYy.ED MAT h.( 3Axp :NrlwDLl[YT Aa! V 7 IaEf a4P YJ _UNTIRr aLT4a a[[0 POF T.t i'PS F Ax} PA PL3 E 1 Tn[MI., Y[NT✓.Nq 1. alp iwT T+,1 !a'S OEIICL PS Or Sa:O W F r9MT 04 eN OnT.+. i?•T1 D t.•' T.! r WCkf P.TAOR•(tD IL Er [Gl'E T1TSl1D i41TR.iYfNl: A4D T.I:L; r.t T{Il •TrI;E7 IJ T.f :-0A PCRa11 Y[>t 7 Yf P wsPCRA,w. fN WTV(J.1 JY(A(gt 7 P1AYE .[A['JYTD SIT YI PANG A.\O 4fr. C[O LLY rfl l(I •: ]IF L. •x(DAT AI.i TTPR !{ F51 A1CvC YL.IIr1A(e _ "G C DCL IN •pra PT 4;;, 1raJ0 raP T:'! P•'f Y rJfw- :r;TOP afF:A.K RESTR i C'1 l4 N S +'.,17TEwlFnsF�:,+[PaIIRc,(DaD1-1.rsL�'�e..uur.ac(sTLmsllDa.� -a W^353r6 Y&:YG'�. a:R LLia la#. [LP i-LaY1,lLF1a LOY]i (SkkLWNICV{{C \L]n rt!(D 10•-r IPCIIpC,(1J Jf[ RC VfGR PGlsaa dP Lr3rlait Ka-YrN�AM }DLDI rlFJ7lII10R d YER]RI r LNAaGlD D! T•alar[ 1 a! a.•r EAE(, M QAiiEa9Ye GF AYr R5klrbt d TN.1 PLATi1latL k sfu T. aY uaw. 31 !' l0a 1-I95L :lp SSi TAW 90011 n.IRO SbIi... rIFT4101 F. 1111[. P3s1 Y,.IlsT iL:rT R F■ rp T+d ray.';# Lkl G Rlwi ShIY`T kf i. NF MM A46lts♦Sffy[w, IN FN5- N[in TPIf?'STD -1PP14:::.[V wATERSf1TEAP SrwF [ :'JOULA• - U-f a fANWA JEkIA1: ` PhanA.L NENw T•[X rlplNrl.T++sNt•TFi J.XF3R.utaIW'r�Ly-a[(l�'NO-SiSALAKI01 _ A,5*;r[,*P EJ5AFEF5IwtL(d1%ELANLs@P:fw !}TT(9..TR[w LON'"Wr MID. K(I-T II; C,iY51!'LAa".:aV Dr 3R[ PCc('•ANC(AND AM•ry!J L (Y TM P'+lrl'K AJ T.M., OF !WJ PLC .IT. CMM%I77IKLT3.lY7 NAS. FW 0VAFPJ 4WD .'.Yl 11 YY IYPka'fO,wt WI,L wPFO+E W THE WW IEA KW O(O IP TNC n V. W':Nh P_MMS k(C,y J1rOY7 AAw ANr }Pt+' }l \1 FT.IL•[YY(rIk%.i!/ARO. 4R n fAf 100ALT43A:4DP ANY P1f CS jJ R1\.'E: 6F LAYP1NTT,W, 04 ANf SVI$n KT-w[M. IfAYiv[DINDaP►qf(O TR/I�}{a DA�rf4.r%.1 PIpF [MHL\Y(Flr'3f•r'+AT 1hF rIA^'}rlf(L'F rIMF W! h1iy�•U3•-:rP'A'aT paf'EPG]ITa*ONO rP:V1::n(3Ty'NPgq,[WW- IL'W14•OK FEAR rW e 1.K .l.p.(•/.r.YT�Y T:p1;�1AAlSEl7O„a:YA0V1YA1Y+[S Tµ lPVFY INainkI\PNCG1}PJFN:Jry'ALr ]ECTIOR 11 TOO 21r4 A.59.• wW.2Inalf. .• TWO CANENIWT Tt>A: tTVE I.VFj WU51IAT.A.4 Ta\E E14Ci44 0Y T( PLI17111 nP T,r( IRE 11MMtowtLZW N\tt"!•li,•X. VRt'AiiM JI TwIW ty"t wwws NRY!(EtkAENO T'A[LfaMa= 5_} w :' rh''Jf.[3u'IF Kf(411TJ,EI'S:I\r.WD3 M]PI.P f(ISiT'\F] TP.Ty Ejt fiur+NYOPxOIPPapYp TNII�;P DRf OXCEf A O. wrr GGRatka SfAPEa[DaW,1LT ONTi.((.(OOdi 10.1 L./YE-'4-��•^^ AtoUwPL11aYIr. lRff4"llSbnl aPM JTJY;JTE3� k li4 �' hn R +NA MF FR'vEl14"1 KVILKIIN Y6"?.rjRGE--- 4wrIPVII.FARO # rah 46wTT q NF!ppr(Jf C' A' R� is 1"101 Yr y1'[ !N rN «T!7i 7 STCRf+ .� __N • `• i _...` ._. :,P- _ _ -.- -� ^� - ^ - - - - -- Or1[• g'.N.rNf crPTr.; er(Y'5M 01 Fjrrt:/lr IlrW DO nK C4trP'rr f}I�NJf+hiel 116Y.(w L IF 3.735�39 L[RJrLTdAdI]lL�?SNGEE Li1CIN gel atif15ute w IF OOLTa# WILD&TR.W4W% V IWC [YLIL Y 5E i�a4 /IXPf CiG •T -1 a.[�pL,aP TF K(pAT D•, a_ttA IMA LONY45&a%TYWNA.%44 kroWx 7Wr>1lPACT N "0 f ONATJ PILE 'N: ( T}iGaODbr:Y.[A,Y+r.W3.147 pfYpkY r4f Cwtt ar lrffYn I. N N.J. A�A,L.I IY]v PLOW, /IT +:DILa W5UT A N60.a'S r•K19 _MTr 47fai- � 1t1 �.F4L P•. i ,2' ... � •' sti - .s TI• TF •� 7 A �..T�Ll1'•a JT a r. '�_ !'�� Pj�'} 'p-{•' a , .«'Hula \f �i• r �. C �. yt'n Wr2D RI,CI r 1 - ° �•{3 i } � zt lY. - - .rw ] sar'__R S } N i3pf i a. • 1 f '� 7 ��•YT S s o } -' •ran zz ..... _ ..... iK , Ir I [I i 11 11 l6 I p3 A: ^ 4 w� � ]I ai JP• f N s 4 r i72N D,y IT IA Jr 77 J1{ This map'plat is being Furnished as an aid in locating the herein describcd Land in relation to adjoining streets, natural boundaries and other land. and is not a suraey of the land depicted. Except to the extent a policy of title insurance is expressly modified by endorsement, if any, the Company does nut insure dimensions, distances, location of easements, acreage or other matters shown thereon. Order: 611148918 Page 1 of i Requested By: fidna3692, Printed: 12/21/2016 4:04 AM Doc: KC:MPLT 40-00027 .-^'T!r-HVr.M;+.`•`n'rw.11rwih�...r.+M.t.r:' --'� r�i'Lr:.a.sir..+w.n.w..�rciM6.&fHpYt:..u+b-i+eei...iw,...l.:.++t _—..,,�n"'4ns..V�i�u.+b1+W`ML.eY - G' 77777 ii y'S A 14 1A i 'THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE. J First American Title <_ _• "= INSURANCE COMPANY 3 FW Ow RMad at RftWt Cd 97� JAB f2 4h! $ 30 t, . tD Filed fdr, Record of Roque" *fFM9 APAERIC81�6 TITLE 1000.2M AVENUE At'fL£ WISFii GTGN 5g1t?4 S6, CAREWrOR ' N Natue.. i RECOR+DS 4. E'LEOT10'-' ' }-'Fiae�ity MarteaRe tk Escro+�r MC. I ' Address-, 401 South 3rd Street Ph. 235-11Oa KING w . ,;MrY W- ' iieiit9il, W " _CBMISE CCU i v�;rn ia; OSs `� `" "`� A AX PAIDCity andD./1353 Statutory Warranty Deed THE GRANTOR DONALD D TEETER AND BEITIV J. TSETER, husband and wile t: for and .in cormideration of EN DOLLARS AND OTHER VALUABLE CONSIDERATIONS in. hand paid, conveys and warrants. to GEORGE W. SUB-IG Alm FRANCES M SUBIC, husband and wife the follamng described real estate, situawd in the County, of KING Swe of Washingicn: C- LOT 11., BLOCK 4, AKEiLfS FARMS NO, 5, ACCORDING, 1-0 THE PLAT TURRUF t S RECORDED IN VOLUi',E 40 OF PLATS, PAGE 27 rtECOFtOs 4I? KING CUiTYt tiA.S.13t[ifGTiaN; f w• SI"i'UA3'1= IN THE CI1Y OF RI;NTON, (:{}lJNT'Y OF KING, STATE OF WASiII1YGTON - } t Subject Co easeme4ts, reattictions and reservaCiotaa of record, If any. ar taElxlltTtt�, ~+�1.;;i�° F 4 A, a„ • 1t ?. ut I N (. Dated this ! day of ���F 1� 1 %j GY f'~ •x9 7 7 STATE OF WASHINGTON, - --- + On this day personally appeared before me o0o moV c<o D 7-&'6 la1 6,, , La me known to be the individual S described in and who executed the within and foregoing Instrument, and £ .j acknowkdW thet 7 e °r- signed the same as rye oR free and voluntary ad and dad, for the uses and purpaaca therein mentioned. GIVEN under my band Lad official seal this / ? day of /�� L e*n-t 6e"�2 �v , ig 77 Xalnry Pubfis is and for e�slate of wasiingfoa t vu residiar or FAT SUBDIVISION issued By: 0- Fidelity National Title Insurance Company Guarantee/Certificate Number 611148917 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation, herein called the Company GUARANTEES Stein Skattum herein called the Assured, against actual loss not exceeding the liability amount stated in Schedule A which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. 2. the Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amount of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall the Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth in Schedule A. Please note carefully the liability exclusions and limitations and the specific assurances afforded by this guarantee. If you wish additional liability, or assurances other than as contained herein, please contact the Company for further information as to the availability and cost. Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Countersigned By: -::V___:_ Q - Authorized Officer or Agent Fidelity National Title Insurance Company By: Attest: SEAS. President Secretary Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.23.16 @ 04:12 PM Page 1 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148917 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY GUARANTEE/CERTIFICATE NO. 611148917 ISSUING OFFICE. Title Officer: Bill Fisher! Mike McCarthy! Terry Sarver Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Phone: (425)771-3031 Main Phone: (425)771-3031 Email Unit2@_fnf.com SCHEDULE A Liability Premium Tax $1, 000.00 $350.00 $34.30 Effective Date: December 14, 2016 at 08:00 AM The assurances referred to on the face page are: That, according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matter relative to the following described property: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Title to said real property is vested in: Frances M. Subic, who acquired title as Frances M. Sanders, as her separate estate subject to the matters shown below under Exceptions, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority. END OF SCHEDULE A Subdivision GuaranteelCertificate Printed: 12.23,16 @ 04.12 PM Page 2 wA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-5PS-1-16-611148917 EXHIBIT "A"' Legal Description For APNIParcel ID(s): 008700-0265-06 LOT 10, BLOCK 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 40 OF PLATS, PAGE 27, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.23-16 @ 04:12 PM Page 3 VVA-FT-FTMA•01530.610051 SPS-1-16-611148917 FIDELITY NATIONAL TI INSURANCE COMPANY %,auARANTEEICERTIFICATE NO. 611148917 SCHEDULE B (continued) 5. Soos Creek Water and Sewer District - King County, Washington - Resolution No. 1887-W and the terms and conditions thereof: Recording Date: November 14, 2000 Recording No.: 20001114000732 A resolution of the Board of Commissioners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, King County, Washington, establishing Special Connection Charge #112 due Soos Creek Water and Sewer District for Contract 17-96W. Affects: West 150 feet of said premises and portions of other property END OF EXCEPTIONS NOTES The following matters will not be listed as Special Exceptions in Schedule B of the policy. There will be no coverage for loss arising by reason of the matters listed below because these matters are either excepted or excluded from coverage or are not matters covered under the insuring provisions of the policy. Note A: Note: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per Amended RCW 65,04,045. Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description within the body of the document: LT 10, BLK 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5 Tax Account No.: 008700-0265-06 Note B: Note: The Public Records indicate that the address of the improvement located on said Land is as follows: 17018 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 END OF NOTES END OF SCHEDULE B Subdivision GuaranteelCertificate Printed: 12.23.16 @ 04:12 PM Page 5 wA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148917 SUBDIVISION Issued By: 0- Fidelity National Title Insurance Company Guarantee/Certificate Number: 611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY a corporation, herein called the Company GUARANTEES Stein Skattum herein called the Assured, against actual loss not exceeding the liability amount stated in Schedule A which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurances set forth in Schedule A. LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS 1. No guarantee is given nor liability assumed with respect to the identity of any party named or referred to in Schedule A or with respect to the validity, legal effect or priority of any matter shown therein. 2. The Company's liability hereunder shall be limited to the amount of actual loss sustained by the Assured because of reliance upon the assurance herein set forth, but in no event shall the Company's liability exceed the liability amount set forth in Schedule A. Please note carefully the liability exclusions and limitations and the specific assurances afforded by this guarantee. If you wish additional liability, or assurances other than as contained herein, please contact the Company for further information as to the availability and cost. Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Countersigned By. SAL Authorized Officer or Agent Fidelity National Title Insurance Company By - Attest: President Z.-,- Secretary Subdivision Guarantee/Certlficale Printed: 12.27.16 @ 09:27 AM Page 1 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611146918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY GUARANTEE/CER r IFICATE NO. 611148918 ISSUING OFFICE: Title Officer: Sill Fisher / Mike McCarthy / Terry Sarver Fidelity National Title Company of Washington 3500 188th St. SW, Suite 300 Lynnwood, WA 98037 Phone: (425)771-3031 Main Phone: (425)771-3031 Email: Unit2 fnf.com SCHEDULE A Liability Premium lax $1,000.00 $350.00 $34.30 Effective Date: December 21, 2016 at 08:00 AM The assurances referred to on the face page are: That, according to those public records which, under the recording laws, impart constructive notice of matter relative to the following described property: SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF Title to said real property is vested in: George W. Subic and Frances M. Subic, husband and wife subject to the matters shown below under Exceptions, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority. END OF SCHEDULE A Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.27.16 @ 09:27 AM Page 2 WA-FT-FTMA-01530.610051-SPS-1-16-611148918 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description For APNIParcel ID(s): 008700-0270-09 LOT 11, BLOCK 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED 1N VOLUME 40 OF PLATS, AGE 27, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.27.16 @ 09:27 AM Page 3 WA-FT-FT#VIA-01530.610051-SP$-1-16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE .,JMPANY GUARANTEE/CE---- FICATE NO. 611148918 SCHEDULE B GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: H. Reservations and exceptions in United States Patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: Covenants, conditions, restrictions, recitals, reservations, easements, easement provisions, dedications, building setback lines, notes, statements, and other matters, if any, but omitting any covenants or restrictions, if any, including but not limited to those Lased upon race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, familial status, marital status, disability, handicap, national origin, ancestry, or source of income, as set forth in applicable state or federal laws, except to the extent that said covenant or restriction is permitted by applicable law, as set forth on the Plat of Aker's Farms No. 5. Recording Number: 3436169 2. Notice of Water Special Connection Charge #112, and the terms and conditions thereof: Recording Date: November 14, 2000 Recording No.: 20001114000732 3. Rights of the public to make necessary slopes for cuts or fills upon the Land in the reasonable original grading of streets, avenues, alleys and roads, as disclosed in the Plat. 4. General and special taxes and charges, payable February 15, delinquent if first half unpaid on May 1, second half delinquent if unpaid on November 1 of the tax year (amounts do not include interest and penalties): Year: 2016 Tax Account Number: 008700-0270-09 Levy Code: 2128 Assessed Value -Land: $190,000.00 Assessed Value -Improvements: $123,000.00 General and Special Taxes: Billed: $4,247.89 Paid: $4,247,89 Unpaid: $0.00 The search did not disclose any open mortgages or deeds of trust of record, therefore the Company reserves the right to require further evidence to confirm that the property is unencumbered, and further reserves the right to make additional requirements or add additional items or exceptions upon receipt of the requested evidence. END OF EXCEPTIONS Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.27.16 @ 09:27 AM Page 4 WA-FT-FTMA-01 530,610051 -SPS-1 -16-611148918 FIDELITY NATIONAL E INSURANCE COMPANY IARANTEEMERTIFICATE NO. 611148918 SCHEDULE B (continued) NOTES The following matters will not be listed as Special Exceptions in Schedule B of the policy. There will be no coverage for loss arising by reason of the matters listed below because these matters are either excepted or excluded from coverage or are not matters covered under the insuring provisions of the policy. Note A: FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: The following may be used as an abbreviated legal description on the documents to be recorded, per Amended RCW 65.04.045. Said abbreviated legal description is not a substitute for a complete legal description within the body of the document: LT. 11, BLK. 4, AKER'S FARMS NO. 5 Tax Account No.: 008700-0270-09 Note B: The Public Records indicate that the address of the improvement located on said Land is as follows: 17022 106th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 END OF NOTES END OF SCHEDULE B Subdivision Guarantee/Certificate Printed: 12.27.16 @ 09:27 AM Page 5 WA-FT-FTMA-01530,610051-SPS-1-16-611140918 Filed for Record at the request of SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT 14616 SE 192nd St P O Box 58039 Renton, Washington 98058-1039 L 6M=8 IM: up r.-4 C" r- Document Title(s) WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE #112 Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released NIA r-- Additional reference numbers on page ` of document(s) c- T- Grantor(s) N/A J Additional names on page __ of document Grantee(s) SOOS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT Additional names on page _ of document Legal Description N/A Additional legal is on page l of document Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number(s) See Exhibit "B" SODS CREEK WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 1887-W A RESOLUTION of the Board of Commissioners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, King County, Washington, establishing Special Connection Charge #112 due Soos Creek Water and Sewer Distract for Contract 17-96W WHEREAS, water mains and facilities have heretofore been installed as part of the project commonly known as Contract 17-96W, and WHEREAS, said water facilities will provide benefits and services to the properties described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which is made a part hereof by this reference thereto, and WHEREAS, at is the policy of Soos Creek Water and Sewer Drstnct to require reimbursement for any facilities built by the District and/or by an individual when said facilities provide benefit and r•? service to other properties, and r� WHEREAS, the Distract engineer has determined the properties benefitted and computed C" the value of said benefit as applied to said properties, and WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners finds said benefits and the cost thereof to be reasonable, and the Special Connection Charge Rate based thereupon to be a fair allocation of such ` benefits and costs, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer Distract as follows SECTION 1: That Water Special Connection Charge No 112 is hereby established for the properties and an the amounts shown in Exhibit "A", which as incorporated herein by this reference Said rate does not include cost of connecting, stub service, permits or inspections, general facilities charges, or other latecomers that may be due on the properties RESOLUTION NO. 1887-W SUBJECT: Establishing Water Special Connection Charge #112 Due SCWSD Pertaining to Contract 17-96W PAGE-1 SECTION 2: That no service shall be provided to any of the property described in Exhibit "A" prior to payment to the District of this above established charges for all property held by the applicant which Ices within the area described in Exhibit "A" SECTION 3: That a Notice of the adoption of this Resolution as Special Connection Charge shall be recorded with the King County Division of Records and Elections ADOPTED by the Board of Commissioners of Soos Creek Water and Sewer District, King Country, Washington, at a regular open public meeting th of on th 1 st day of April, 1999 P adept a CLEMEW QUANRUD, S etary T L, Commissioner f(ARONIVESSTER,_ Commissioner +-- PHILIPALLIVAN, Commissioner �a r- r- C'V RESOLUTION NO. 1887-W SUBJECT: Establishing Water Special Connection Charge #112 Due SCWSD Pertaining to Contract 17-96W PAGE-2 EXHIBIT A xti -r Exhibit "A" SGOS CREEK WATER & SEWER DISTRICT WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE NO. 112 Contract 17-96W, Aker's Farm No. 5 Water Main Replacement Base Maps B-2, 3 & C-2 SIZE ON FROM TO 8" Benson Road Intersection of Benson Intersection of Benson Road Road and S. 27th Street and S.E. 31 st Avenue 8" 106th Avenue S.E. Intersection of 106th Intersection of 106th Avenue S.E. and Benson Avenue S.E. and S.E. 166th Road Street 8" S.E. 166th Street Intersection of S.E. 166th Intersection of S.E. 166th Street and 106th Avenue Street and 104th Avenue S,E. S.E. 8" 105th Avenue S.E. Intersection of 105th 200 +/- feet North of the Avenue S.E. and S.E intersection of 105th 166th Street Avenue and S.E. 172nd Street 8" 106th Avenue S.E intersection of 106th 100+/- feet North of the Avenue S.E. and S.E. intersection of 106th 166th Street Avenue and S.E. 172nd Street F 11 2\014103tSCC1 12a doo - 03/25/99 Exhd)it "B" SOOS CREEK WATER & SEINER DISTRICT WATER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE NO 112 Contrast 17-96W, Aker's Farm No 5 Water Main Replaceinent Base Maps 13-2, 3 & C-2 All properties benefited by new water service Connections and/or meters, and wNch Ile within 150 feet of the existing water mains as described in Exhibit "A", and which lie within the following described parcels of land Bass Map B-Z Those portions of the Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 29, Towsiship 23 North, Range 5 East, W M , in King County, Washington described as follows Lot 14, Olympic View Terrace, according to the plat thereof as recorded in V011jrnc 64 of Plats, Page 69, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the Southwesterly ISO feet of Lots & through 9, Block 1, Aker's Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded it Voturne 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington as measured parallel with tltc Southwesterly line thereof, TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 and 2, Block B, Aker's Farrn No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume, 40 of Plats, Padre 27 records of King County, W ashirxl ton, TOGETHER WITH the North 100 feet of the East 100 feet of the Southwest t{udrter of said Northwest quarter of Section 29 and also the North 200 feet of that portion of the Southeast quarter of said Northwest quarter of Section 29 lying Westerly of Benson Road, Gam! C3 r-- TOGETHER WITH the Northeasterly 150 feet of Lots 1, ? 4, 5, Block A, Aker',, F,irni C-D No 5, according to the plat thereof as ret,urdetd Ill VolulTic 40 ul r I4lts, Page 27, D records of King County, Washington as rneasurrid paraltpl with the Northeasterly 1111v r 5 �r thereof, TOGETHER WITH thie Southerly 150 feet of Lots 2, 4 and 5, Block A, Aker's Farm No r., 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, rer orris r-- of Icing County, Washington as measured parallel with ahe Southerly brit tliereol c : TOGETHER WITH Lot 3, Block A, Aker's Firm No 5, ar,curdjiiU to the plat III ICof as t •, iecorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washngton, TOGETHER WITH Lot 1, Block 2, Aker's Farm No 5, iccording to the plait thereof ,is recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records or King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the East half of Lots 2 through 5, Block 2, Aker's Farrn No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded ii Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH Lots 1 through 5, Block 3, Aker'% F.irrn No 5, accotcfrriq to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Paige 27, records of King County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the West 150 feet of Lots 1, 3, 4 and 5, Block 4, Aker's Farrn No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Patfe 27, records of King County, Washington, Page 1 of 2 r 12W14WV':CC112h thjr 04/06/99 TOGETHER WITH the Northeasterly and Easterly 150 feet of Lots Z, 23,24 and 25, Block 4, Aker's Farm No 5, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of icing County, Washington as measured parallel with the Northeasterly and Easterly line thereof, Base Ma 8-3 Those portions of the Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W M , in Icing County, Washington described as follows The Westerly 150 feet of Lot 8, Block 8, Aker's Farm No 6, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 42 of Plats, Pane 15, records of Kind County, Washington, TOGETHER WITH the Westerly 125 feet of the North 104 47 feet of Lot 7. Block 8, Aker's Faun No 6, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 42 of flats, Page 15, records of King County, Washington, Base Map C-2 Those portions of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 29, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W M , in King County, Washington described as follows The East half of Lots 5 through 12, Block 2, Aker'-, F,,rm No 5, accordinq to the plat thereof as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, oecords of Kmg Cowily, Washington, TOGETHER WITH Lots 5 through 12, Block 3, and the Noiih 75 feet of the East 140 feet of Lot 13, Block 3, Aker's Faim No 5, a1-cording to the plat thereof «, as recorded in Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, records of K!nq County, W-15h1nr41011, c� TOGETHER WITH the West 150 feet of Luts 5 Iinrol,yll 12, Black 4, and th>> North 60 feet of the West 130 feet of Lot 13, Blo( k 4, Akoi',� Faim No 5 ca according to the plat thereof as recorded u) Volume 40 of Plats, Page 27, recortfs of King County, Washington, T ^ r" SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE $37 79 per Front Foot Page 2 of 2 11121014io3iSCT112hdnr odro6199 KER'S FARMS NC 5 WOW Tto IN D4 iN THE NEve or 7LIE SW V4 AN C ',HEsEjOFTH;.%WVCSEC. 2-.I23NP5E,wv, OC'CK4,'i9444 SCALE 0UHT TO iNCH 1 tr T r rT l i k ,9yy ' tk a AYIt... y7910 I+ h L y1� j tk 2. 4,6 }I� •„�'� 4 \t DM•.A i vYiPi`i.: � . iL+G y , rA«•rr A 5 4 m W ; t•, 4 , �4C(i_.�f1 �.. - V pw •• i ,Mac, 2A a=A --�� 23 ti Sr1 A 'L i'",,, .. ttrTt• Or 7 b -4 h i! iy R S= 1 _ ? II .4 '€ 14 a < 13 6 ! � p�>t, •Y�+ mA• S.E:� FAa r172 S n,lAs i 1 1aP•f3 , LA A Yee T 'N orw.en'rc p�v] Roy a STOR; Y CIv',` EIIMNEEk- .k'! A4- ;1 A . i k S IARRW NO. I f,OV IN 1 A,4 ,WQ0 15 ALi TA not NOA!,J-$T D, A lts Or Sy( K{ TKWLI' Ooa"w 4, 1(L, zk 3a TJAAYN; P TI NUA`N, IAN:1 3 CAal,w W. ! ICE FI T+t %k.104 Lily YKA',AVO V-1 IWTFCA--].,11Ni+YNO1ldrl-tr"QLWC4 O15AoJ%TCV 44. iNd a1a YSL.w L,, ixtlAl r`=4Ta',+•' cyl'Mt atyxM1 Sd4k=r IA�ADALRE Friin TmA! WCW`T`'„h IO ROAD OE YMTri PlA V k- R1!yFI oAOO d b rNi rjlr ur1L CT 3A1 J ! .. 4,a S, Dy .;NAr.lC4T, or TOE sl%RT+'RtSftDRvfR;FiRlOa, AND Rlghi2 to C.AT RILKx A4CEt110 v10 wirr .�yt . L'f 2. iL4CX i • U KC3I ar EC [0A KC [Sf TD A4a P?FCb NNE N E :+• N ;rC N-n i C �-rF:?',101N *NOW KLVLN$ 'METE -EnNIS TMI WI, N4 LWCTRS,Gk£D, n4fPE` C. Al EPMS C_A,6E AAt! y3 N ri • OW N fA71N FCI i MALE CP ?Ft LAyD F(R(d'r A A4 rE4. kAltL @, xaUNf T..q ALAS Y':CJ,ATE-..IiE YSE CX'^I WAL'4 ryljtiCA '-L]rRIFTf Ayc AY LA'+�ld }v'JR r¢n6":. Aap T,F-3d'+E"�' RDN+4t +WiL.: R'.RND}ES Ntl: YlcckT,iiVr'AC1 Tht 9[!t#NLU cif AlAf.:: I:ytYAY NJRRCd(! ALSO Ar•1[110YAPL A,G KC 3 OATS r4A :'A1} OAF. c�} JVON .S'E 'T7 R,CCPb•A'SFPR PIA[EE}x -cNC NDA'Y M CN "I v NEW%GaAL RCASDKAYi[ 4AA0:N4 O/ ALt •,d S:AL! N! AAJ wlklEs YDIIN y CRLCt. k NLJ3ln EA[c?Na wrAq ytRfVH'LSF 1(16JA MAN()j ANPACit1'Wsb bbTW>,•tikY C RI/ - lox-ci :-.Sk SFpYgir+!wmN('r''a,�« A,. ARa'ii. .. y1 tiAkD-LEw_-._ +Hin[YT sPlNt(a �? i 'y,1 aTD EIT'F 'I.Af ly Twllil fr,',+r Cr wpp AD ac.A.fdl•r[»C, T.iLUkCEA3RA. c. W Dw. 10 -K WE E'A Lw fR[aPE%,i'4t'A1-Evt lxlAANO tiA.YE APtR a T( 16 c$Y GY Tp Pn-' AVW.5R1,0aIL-Lt LT SMdAA,kC➢SDiW.410N.Y'YDYIFOA(rtf1il�- TOWE]k TKL k.A[O ARO:GLED TIV[1VSy AS T.CiV TREr AVC YOLV' rAyE r[.[ rM YxI'.il1 AMD PZ:.Aj]fr 1FI1W-r v[N1 CNCC ♦-.k[31 WY ,AVC Fat OL{. taAL 1CAi -kC .XI !a?+N,1 �A11CN ����ddYY����cy F L�$YET llt?' D im7iS%r-v,. . a 7�k wry s{�'i N rAF L ! € •nr:A rr [.v1 Al rFwT f § Y S` ACKNOlaLE C{;ENE?JT •,+-F iT7 r. e4, TN A' C% SM3 #:!! M Y +C! YN NN ! A D 1944, ANuf YE, T4C IAiDi n4M O, A W].A Rr 0.4:1Gr PI A10ltiV A ARIO. Ar arD.AE 00 C.T. VK04LER. T4 WE 404 R 1C IE In msiOW AAA C&P tAo AEd ltTM4L, CF NE NATPOR AL dAkK C( MININCTON YAM CNEWT(D S14 U"TFIN AND Fm COAj iAaT'RVY[yitANOrolAAUINOWLEDrtD TIVT RK dIWO tNITAUYtNT 11! ,AS MEEANO Y�LUNIARt ALTAVD DE(D MR 7K VF[] INO RU A PCSt3 NtMN ARNTA?NED- AILTMTI}tUID W109 AS DA SAC E40-CRAG-C.Y Dk OATH il.-fo TYT TN[ V R(1( W'TNSA•](D 16 ElCC iIt 'n E},LFC ILSTk,.liCNT A.V6 TKAT'TREtl•VE ATi,Y ED Ii TN( tW! PDRA't }iAl FR (N IC =APPRAT,DV ,N W1TVL15 rWKRCV I ..I MC.t U%TO W V, MVS 4NP Ai1:fL D IAT WICI A.- stAL,?Nt DAY ANCVt AN 11 N1Y AdCYC VLNTIDk ES Yo. -AYdt[. wI+O OP I+!9TA][yY rAyr .rs TOA PFArO.K fr•,y1L•A1,1�.. RESTR';C? SO N S AL.:1TS ,r Ty } RyAT ARC Ry3iy KFL O RO I.1, tTL9LJf ftm 141IYC(R .OTJ I N ..1 .. .2 .dT31T41C, �NC>, d4R S. L01a 14I•ILAA.:CT,.Di4At'01S+P5, kr,.w-1C4A44A0TArrt0 Tg A_+L Y[I OFkS]1 J1i Vp LPT DR h}REON ri+lOry,iLLir c, Yl C(3 AA0 ]PLd-lY1 A(.lDLD. DR MkERly, A GFANalN CP TRAkSrSAAI!%.YrVERFAY TK 45RKSdfaP .Ni A.ar PO hT+ON (P TH€3 PLATYLrS: PE .Ls3 TWAy 14:14- F:. n TOR T ^ I CS( , ar?R •„(111PAk 6!0}1O rS ARO 30T...k •.ITA NOW R. I YU. 13 h'C1Ti iyRT CR TB Trt YRjy,]-CMS CF K,WC�.NTY QI. NA-H1IAVCIlpi]ltlAf NT AYlM3• Y(17MNa£TC- r AT(A WE; LT-SR.k+• l•Lt y WATER PSSLu 314K(:11POSA4 -SEA}1L TANAr ..iE` AN' ArOff AuYEiik TPCx RRMLNYf.ImAoYNC. Tyt vaDLRawNro MAtifL4_•%F.y ,AND, ,.yY :lye Y. INF[!11YS:.F OTye LAa6AlSn,YPLATSL0.1i(R(>a'rOY;1YINTa/1Wis ANG alWorm WkrtRATPONOIrMri4(sW-x %L CCRTAS.a1T"C1},WIN:l S.SMLE YARD! AV] k,40PAT1 C N RIAA11. 0,Y•1 WLL 110R tNI NEILRR4EA Ar'y 440 Lf 101 P Rt W'YyTr ALAI 1146 l3 G:A W6Trv?ks -40 AN: 4ULK 1TfEF1. W LRVL.Ab t!'lAA0. CR N.,GnrAT KAU( TRA[ }A:C QA A1n HtGC 4R PA.fEj L Oi V NPiP=f3TrNi fRI AM' L;KP STREES.IREIr.C, (raV1NC0 AkLYMNDc[S TKh-{I DAT OAk F. A. p.[pCl [Rtd!$YGfR:.,rT T1UT Th{\iAT pi aA[A'F /a WFli¢S i0.-tY\R9. DR wrG xxY.3�E4",TAOND T@I.VF'AC )SI ,V3RN1GcE k, M?TR+Y 44l 1 EAR"40 1LCy SALE. I� - tfl"it 12 1.104 Or A.".4 10WARIT�TKt ..�•.Y-tt Y•M[COW.NTYID:rQ lAawLl!•T+ON TDNIa.1.0ED ,TmOTOrrW.yA tCm TRn14pN[fwMT LAA3,kI.1101. AW TOK Nrkw:kN O. TkE PLA?TCN3 ACA Ty( r1.lM}21yN.sE.R VATPAT TACO1a•IWG[i, , Ah[S,grk R,tRlCNtaAalcttT. }CN¢Y!T arAL; iFk P41olNA3[A3 45:FNLF3.w0a,lGLt1 }WTSI,( Y:NUYENTd MYL SL(NSCT-i,A i6TAYN?DiCCn S _ 15':- ,y NITk1dF f^'(AA(r FA4f ,.Er$yA,N( 3IT W! PAAID] Af? AkD 1taF9 T,A] a,F- p Or D 15 f IEAYfNl4 AND APRAOIW rFi!•7a1 SAY "CLO- A.0.1Wi LU1Lr U7— �.^:•.,— ±DNR't lT4REO LCAN�TLY Oli'TFEGMURi3i T!iaT[YAYt I A ,Ni. - "•' » A.;EY COWPL1ID WVtK 1yt ANRIYIS Y.ASs0 M STA%'TI I. A•k'Oht aEDy:A TImY VCVIRN,NL PIAT'1 KAR V�Y£AK�__ F�,.wq'. R1AA0 UYaw CWFrr W c awflF - 3l:;rT/-rCF lA;P7Aa 01 PWF CDWrr fsA1R41fatifNr DcSC:lp'N./It :[9NAV;arf M:F10 AFrhw; f. teR t 1[RIP 4191` Fv'RAT TF(WATKIN PLAT Ca _ _ ...� 3 DULY APPrpr1011 t4 AIVC WVWTr ILA!ANIM CvyrNl: - R [ "-Is 'I' :G R2 AT TWF Rf4,tET0° P TN +K 46JNT1' rLAilN-gt PyAf. Y.APTAI! IZK 4cr 0l nEj.A a.1iiA `y, [Ntuo:S'.Uk lwa��1� WY4A QE; ram: +.D 114. AS ,'�Wi4uTFSN1Y 1.1A Y. Alb At JI D'A 004Il Ap'A ALi rF PAL F A 1, 4Lff�l ' QFt SWhL+g4Lu gLv�S TdrN5Gs Wo ftOfron;Cdu Tr.wSWlgi� KN£IAOtvw* I+ 1([�par itNrlAAraF}'e;fa" �.,r OlFy]C s%aYTY ArmyP� P�9ERT A vQPAa3 rF.TA IDcA'H AC,OlfOP •••� »•••• This mapr'plat is being furnished as an aid in locating the herein described Land in relation to adjoining streets, natural boundaries and other land, and is not a saner of the land depicted. Except to the extent a policy of tide insurance is expressly modified by endorsement, if any, the Company does not insure dimensions, distances, location of easements, acreage or other makers shown thereon. Order: 611148918 Page 1 of 1 Requested By: €idna3692, Printed: 12/21/2016 4:04 AM Doc: KC: MPLT 40-00027 aSK wl121t fC Fist American Title 1NSURANC COMPANY r. F+71d tee• Rid n RapWat d u Filed fear, Rscwd a1 Regtseat ofFUMAMERICAN TITLE two-.fnd AVENUE yv4w"-FCYN "104 Cq Name. � , - -. .,__�__ .^'F' e�iy`�iJTurti�BQa b Esceow. Inc. 401 South 3rd Street Ph, 236-1100` Ge`i►ian.`W�s-engioa5 O C:ty 4md SPACEYfIfSEMD FOR RECORDER'$ USt, � 1978 JAN 12 Ai 8 30 Statutory Warranty Deed tYIRE'TOR RECOROS 4 EI.EOTIV, KihlO L; ,;N'' Y._ Vj E451353 TIRE GP-kNT'OR N3 ALD D TEETER AND BETTY J. TEETER,: husband and wife For andla consideration of. Ti if DOLLARS AND OTHrit VALUABLE COW81DERAT'IOIIS ift hand Paid,,.coaveys and warragts to GEORG$ W. SUBIC At;D F11 LACES ti SUBIC, husband and wife the :following described real .estate, situated in the County! ,of KING , -Slate of Washington, LOT 11, BLOCK 4, AM'$ FARMS NO. 5, ACCORDING TO THE piwr Tuna RuoRDED IN VOLLW 40 OF PLATS, PAG8 37 , RECORDS OF xjuc CouNTY, t;ASHXNGTW. SS'rVATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASIIINGTONt Subject to eaaezeftts, Testrictia" and preservations of recosst, if any. a A.77 Dated thin '% day of t=Ct y i1- ,•I9 T i S# t STATE OF WASHING'1ON,M. � t tin this dap personally appeared before me Do mw iz o to me known to be the individual S described in and who executed the within and foregoing Fnstrurnent, and. � ackaowledged that •7l4t 5^ signed the same as r•.v; qz free and voluntary act and deed, for iha uses and puipom therein mmtioned. GIVEN under my band &ad of wW seal this / 7 day o1 1;)e e-e-m a 2 77 Nolmy PmWt: fa and fo► f a State of l;V"Wagion, *A -'sty d him .S r PLAT NAME RESERVATION CERTIFICATE TO: MARK TRAVERS 2315 E PIKE ST SEATTKE, WA 95122 PLAT RESERVATION EFFECTIVE DATE: December 27, 2016 The plat name, RENTON SUBDIVISION has been reserved for future use by MARK TRAVERS ARCHITECT. I certify that I have checked the records of previously issued and reserved plat names. The requested name has not been previously used in King County nor is it currently reserved by any party. This reservation will expire December 27, 2017, one year from today. It may be renewed one year at a time. If the plat has not been recorded or the reservation renewed by the above date it will be deleted. Deputy Auditor e aLITCHFIELD ENGINEERING civil Engineering r& Development Serviees PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE REPORT for the Renton Subdivision Prepared for: Stein Skattum P.O. Box 769 Renton, WA 98057 Prepared By - Keith A. Litchfield, P.E. Date Issued: December 20, 2016 ty r� PD�76 Aa SI o,Al E\� {v I Z 12840 815T AVENUE NE # KIRKLAND, WA 98034 PH 425-821-5038 FAX 425-821-5739 KING COUNTY, WASH _TON, SURFACE. WATER DESIGN A UAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PROJECT ENGINEER Project Owner Stein Skattum Phone (206) 300-6231 Address 10350 Rainier Avenue S Seattle, WA 98178 Project Engineer Keith Litchfield, PE Company Litchfield Engineering Phone 425-821-5038 Part 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION ❑ Landuse Services Subdivison / Short Subd. 1 UPD ❑ Building Services M/F I Commerical / SFR ❑ Clearing and Grading ❑ Right -of -Way Use ❑ Other Part 2 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Project Name Renton Subdivision DDES Permit # Location Township 23N Range 5E Section 29 Site Address 17018 & 17022 106th A Renton, WA 98055 Part 4 OTHER REVIEWS AND PERMITS ❑ DFW HPA ❑ Shoreline ❑ ❑ ❑ COE 404 DOE Dam Safety FEMA Floodplain COE Wetlands Management © Structural Rockery/Vault/ ❑ ESA Section 7 ❑ Other Part 5 PLAN AND REPORT INFORMATION Technical Information Report Site Improvement Plan (Engr. Plans) Type of Drainage Review Full / Targeted 1 Type (circle one): Full / Modified 1 (circle): Large Site Small Site Date (include revision 12 - 2 0 -16 Date (include revision 12 - 2 0 -16 dates): dates): Date of Final: Date of Final: Part 6 ADJUSTMENT APPROVALS Type (circle one): Standard / Complex / Preapplication 1 Experimental / Blanket Description: (include conditions in TIR Section 2) Date of Approval: 2009 Surface Water Design Manual t/9/2009 I SE KING LINTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE � ER DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 7 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Monitoring Required: Yes / No Start Date: Completion Date: Describe: Part 8 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Plan : Soos Creek Special District Overlays: Drainage Basin: Black River Stormwater Requirements: Part 9 ONSITE AND ADJACENT SENSITIVE AREAS ❑ River/Stream ❑ Steep Slope ❑ Lake ❑ Erosion Hazard ❑ Wetlands ❑ Landslide Hazard ❑ Closed Depression ❑ Coal Mine Hazard ❑ Floodpiain ❑ Seismic Hazard ❑ Other ❑ Habitat Protection Ll Part10 SOILS Soil Type Slopes AgC, Alderwood 0-150 ❑ High Groundwater Table (within 5 feet) ❑ Other ❑ Additional Sheets Attached ❑ Sole Source Aquifer ❑ Seeps/Springs Erosion Potential Minimal 2009 Surface Water DesiEn Manual 1/9/2009 2 KING COUNTY, WASHOTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN A `UAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 11 DRAINAGE DESIGN LIMITATIONS REFERENCE LIMITATION I SITE CONSTRAINT ❑ Core 2 — Offsite Analysis ❑ Sensitive/Critical Areas ❑ SEPA ❑ Other ❑ Additional Sheets Attached Part 12 TIR SUMMARY SHEET(provide one TIR Summary Sheet per Threshold Discharge Area Threshold Discharge Area: project Site name or description) Core Requirements (all 8 apply) Discharge at Natural Location Number of Natural Discharge Locations: Offsite Analysis Level: 1 1 2 1 3 dated: 1- 2 7 -15 Flow Control Level: 1 / 2 / 3 or Exemption Number incl, facilit summa sheet Small Site BMPs Conveyance System Spill containment located at: Erosion and Sediment Control ESC Site Supervisor: Contact Phone: TBD After Hours Phone: Maintenance and Operation Responsibility: Private / Public If Private, Maintenance Log Required: Yes / No Financial Guarantees and Provided: Yes I No Liability Water Quality Type: Basic / Sens. Lake / Enhanced Basicm I Bog (include facility summary sheet) or Exemption No. Landscape Management Plan: Yes / No Special Requirements as applicable Area Specific Drainage Type: CDA / SDO / MDP I BP 1 LMP / Shared Fac. I None Re uirements Name: Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Type: Major I Minor / Exemption / None 100-year Base Flood Elevation (or range): Datum: Flood Protection Facilities Describe: N/A Source Control Describe landuse: (comm./industrial landuse) N/A Describe any structural controls: 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 1/9/2009 3 KING AUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE i'LR DESIGN MANUAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Oil Control High -use Site: Yes I No Treatment BMP: Maintenance Agreement: Yes 1 No with whom? Other Drainage Structures Describe: Part13 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION AFTER CONSTRUCTION 0 Clearing Limits ❑ Stabilize Exposed Surfaces © Cover Measures © Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities ❑ Perimeter Protection ❑ Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris, Ensure ❑ Traffic Area Stabilization Operation of Permanent Facilities ❑ Sediment Retention ❑ Flag Limits of SAO and open space ❑ Surface Water Collection preservation areas ❑Other ❑ Dewatering Control ❑ Dust Control 0 Flow Control Part 14 STORMWATER FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS Note: Include Facility Su mary and Sketch Flow Control Type/Description Water Quality Type/Description ❑ Detention ❑ Infiltration ❑ Regional Facility ❑ Shared Facility ❑ Flow Control BMPs ❑ Other Vault ❑ Biofiltration ❑ Wetpool ❑ Media Filtration ❑ Oil Control ❑ Spill Control ❑ Flow Control BMPs 0 Other wetvault 2009 Surface Water Design Manual 119!2009 4 KING COUNTY, WASH .TON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN N UAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET Part 15 EASEMENTS/TRACTS Part 16 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS x❑ Drainage Easement ❑ Cast in Place Vault ❑ Covenant ❑ Retaining Wall ❑ Native Growth Protection Covenant ❑ Rockery > 4' High ❑ Tract ❑ Structural on Steep Slope © Other ❑ Other Part 17 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I 1, or a civil engineer under my supervision, have visited the site. Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attached Technical Information Report_ To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. 12-20-16 2009 Surface Water Design Manual I/9/2009 Contents SECTION 1: Project overview.......................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 2: Core and Special Requirements Summary.................................................................. 3 SECTION 3: Off -site Analysis............................................................................................................. 4 SECTION 4: Flow Control and water quality Facility Analysis and Design .................................. — 6 SECTION 5: Conveyance System Analysis and Design.................................................................. 10 SECTION 6: Special Reports and Studies....................................................................................... 12 SECTION7: Other Permits................................................................-........................................... 12 SECTION 8: CSWPP Analysis and Design....................................................................................... 12 SECTION 9: Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant ......................... 12 SECTION 10: Operations and Maintenance Manual... ........... ...................................................... 12 FIGURES APPENDICIES Figure 1— Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Soils Map Figure 3A & 3B—Downstream Mapping Appendix A — KCRTS Analysis Appendix B — Operations & Maintenance Manual Appendix C — Geotechnical Report Appendix D — Arborist Report Appendix E — Wetland & Stream Reconnaissance SECTION 1: Proiect Overview This Technical Information Report is submitted in support of the Renton Subdivision Preliminary Plat. The project site consists of 2 parcels; KC Parcel Ws 0087000265 and 0087000270. The properties are rectangular in shape and are located on the east side of 106th Avenue SE (See Figure 1 - Vicinity Map below). The property is bordered along the north, south, and east by single family residences. The project area is approximately 1.94 acres and is presently developed with 2 single-family residences. The existing buildings and driveways will be removed. Project site improvements will consist of on & off -site infrastructure improvements to support the future construction of 11 single family residential building lots and new public road. Frontage improvements will include the installation of an 8' wide planter strip and a 5' wide sidewalk along 106th Avenue SE. Figure 1— Vicnity Map v to>99 tom e` '" IOIDT 1a,u iMll 1001 149i1 I— }Z161 IM19 14 Ike. .k ITD19 IM1! 17914 tr0u1 I:OOf - 10957 SITE +Tnfo 1rn�r 9+! 17021 Inn ti01] ttl13 - i F - l: ei! frON M22 lr9ll 1700 17W. Mx f 1A14 I<e 1. +1M12 q ` �F feV• - � _ - 1 Soils: The SCS Soils map indicates the site is underlain with AgC (Alderwood) soils. Figure 2 —Soiis Map rJOCI county Area, wasnmgton kwaoaa) Map Map Unit Name Acres Percent Unit in of AOI ��� SYm6o1 ROI Of �.. � .-. �. A9C 1 -> a.1- 16.9 1i30 0% Totals for Area of Interest 16.9 1013.13% :H 154 A _ _ AM SECTION 2: Core and Special Requirements Summary To obtain preliminary approval with the City of Renton, the relevancy of the 8 core and 6 special requirements per Section 4-6-030 of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC), KCSWDM are required to be addressed: 1. Core Req. #1— Discharge at natural location A field review of the site -specific topography indicates that the developed drainage will discharge to the natural location situated downstream to the west of the project site. 2. Core Req. #2 — Offsite Analysis An off -site analysis has been prepared for approval by the City of Renton, See Section 3. 3. Core Req. #3 — Flow Control Flow control will be provided for the development via a detention vault. See Section 4. 4. Core Req. #4 — Conveyance System The proposed on -site conveyance and tightline system will route runoff to the existing conveyance system within 106ih AVE SE. 5. Core Req. #5 — Erosion & Sediment Control. An erosion and sediment control plan, which will serve to minimize soil erosion/sedimentation during the proposed site construction, will be prepared for approval by the City of Renton. 6. Core Req. #6 — Maintenance and Operations The on -site stormwater system will be maintained by the homeowners. The off -site conveyance systems will be maintained by the City of Renton. See Appendix B. 7. Core Req. #7 — Financial Guarantees & Liability Financial Guarantee & Liability commitments between the property developer and the City of Renton will be established at the time of permit issuance. 8. Core Req. #8 — Water Quality The proposed pollution generating impervious surfaces are greater than the 5,000 SF threshold, therefore water quality treatment is required. The project proposes a combined detention and wetvault system to meet the water quality requirement. 9. Special Req. #1— Other Adopted Requirements The Renton SWDM was reviewed and there are no additional requirements. 10. Special Req. #2 — Floodplain/Floodway Delineation Per City of Renton mapping the site does not lie within a floodplain or floodway 11. Special Req. #3 — Flood Protection Facilities Not applicable to this project. 12. Special Req. #4 — Source Control Not applicable to this project 13. Special Req. #5 — Oil Control This project is not considered high -use therefore oil control is not applicable to this project. 14. Special Req. #6 — Aquifer Protection Area Not applicable to this project. 3 SECTION 3: Off5ite Analysis A field review of the downstream conditions was performed on January 27, 2015. The weather was sunny and wet, the temperature was approximately 55 degrees. A visual reconnaissance was performed utilizing information obtained from the City of Renton GIS Mapping. Please refer to storm drainage mapping exhibits that foilow for a depiction of the downstream drainage conditions. Upstream: A detention vault constructed for the Marvin Garden Townhomes project is located east of the Skattum properties and presently discharges to a ditch east located near the northeast property corner. Drainage from this system will be collected and conveyed along the east and south property lines to bypass the Skattum Plat's detention vault. Please refer to Figure 3A for the location of the Marvin Garden Townhomes vault. Downstream: The runoff is tributary to the existing ditch to the west of the site. The ditch conveys runoff to the south for approximately 320 feet before crossing SE 172nd Street via an existing closed pipe conveyance system for 68 feet. Runoff then appears to sheet flow down the hill to an existing ditch along the north side of Benson Drive South before entering an existing closed pipe conveyance system. The conveyance system directs runoff to the west for 80 feet where runoff then enters a ditch and continues west for approximately 400 feet. Runoff is then directed to the southwest for approximately 580 feet via a closed pipe system within South 36"' Street. The field reconnaissance was terminated as the investigation exceeded the required % mile point analysis. Downstream Concerns & Effects of Proposed Project: Discharge from the developed site will sheet flow across the property in a similar Fashion as it presently exists. The downstream drainage system consists of a series of catch basins, ditches, and closed pipe systems. No adverse impacts to the downstream system are anticipated or expected. 4 i Figure 3A — Downstream Mapping (City of Renton GIS) I4Ta1 r0:'. c l ZBde E T nnr ITa15 IMU ITa64 ITB 14 1'S 17W311� Marvin Gardens Gardens SITE 1702r ITWT s Townhomg, vault' r� II9p 1744t r ys i �Qrreer ma 1JOI4 :AI1 e nett i IIr7a IAxa 17n4 •'fir `SI' 179t4 r9fN le6)3 { s rasa I ��O S2 I iM 91 3= 172n99r 1 tt0051 f" SF ,Tln�S'34 3' O 1.15 10914- r0717 Maw s Ate. y Qb w ?�[ 1002 010 r Figure 3B — Downstream Mapping (City of Renton GIS) lu fats s a5xn 51 lxrs 1221 Ysm St ta74 tall va4 n ��, 1115 1111 r17s 1YB9 1587 I101 14a1 19a7 141) toil Bae 2 1107 x IF 172"01 � _ _ 15as 3504 550E 1}BB IS 11 2 .. 7390 _ 1si c� i01 1511 ]SIB t}07 ' ISBa " l7er 150 7561 113D 1512 2rp31 t 512 15Ba 7}o9 v lsn 1224 ,. iw9 ALI E14 7}Ir I515 1S14 MI Q hiT 38m St kFe �� 1229 1275 352} 1175 100T 1e4J loss, lots Ilos'ill 1117 11� tlt9 .' 1B7] t612 )e i5 SMr I'a Ir44 'As i}12 IaB2 FQ4 "a.104N 113I loll 111a 121a 61 h� n I- 7 rD SECTION A: Flow Control and water quality Facility Analysis and Design A formal flow control facility is required for the project site based on Section 1.2.3 of the City of Renton Surface Water Design Manual (SWDM). According to the Flow Control Application Map in the City of Renton SWDM the project site is located within the Flow Control Duration Standard (Forested Conditions). This flow control standard is equivalent to the Conservation Flow Control Area in the King County SWDM which utilizes historic site conditions for the predeveloped flow rates. A combined detention and wetvault is proposed to meet the Flow Control and Water Quality Requirements. Flow control BMPS will be analyzed and sized in the preparation of the Engineering Drawings. A hydrologic analysis of the site was completed in order to size the required on site detention and water quality treatment necessary to account for the increase in the peak storm water release rate for the developed site. The site was analyzed for the pre -developed and developed conditions under the King County Continuous Runoff Time Series (KCRTS) hydrograph model using the KCRTS software developed and provided by the King County Surface Water Management Division. Below are the historic and developed KCRTS flow rates output. Please refer to Appendix A for the complete KCRTS analysis. Due to topographic constraints a portion of the project area cannot be intercepted therefore an area swap is proposed. The area swap is summarized below (see Developed Conditions Map): Impervious Area Swap Summary (See map below) Project Swap Area = 1,673 SF Off -Site Trade Area = 1,600 SF Historic Site Conditions: 40 Land UseSummary i_. �'A Area ? Till Forest 2.10 acres Till Pasture 0.00 acres Till Grass 0.00 acres Outwash Forest 0.00 acres t i Outwash Pasture 0.00 acres i outwash Grass 0.00 acres: Wetland 0.00 acres: Impervious 0.00 acres Total 2.10 acres 1 Scale Factor : 1.00 Hourly Reduced Time Series: Skattum2Ex >) Compute Time Series I i Modify User Input File for computed Time Series I.TSFJ 0 Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series Fiie:skattum2ex.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.132 2 2/09/01 18:00 0.036 7 1/06/02 3:00 0.C98 4 2/28/03 3:00 0.004 8 3/24/04 20:00 0.058 6 1/05/05 8:00 0.102 3 1/19/06 21:00 0.086 5 11/24/06 4:00 0.170 1 1/09/08 9:00 Computed Peaks Developed Conditions (without flow control): -----Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.170 1 100.00 0.990 0.132 2 25.00 0.960 0.102 3 10.00 0.900 0.098 4 5.00 0.800 0.086 5 3.00 0.667 0.058 6 2.00 0.500 0.036 7 1.30 0.231 0.004 8 1.10 0.091 0.157 50.00 C-980 # Land Use Summary A I Area .... Till Forest 0.00 acres Till Pasture' 0.00 acres Till Grass: 0.76 acres Outwash Forest 0.00 acres. Oulwash Pasture 0.00 acres Outwash Grass 0.00 acres Wetland 0.00 acresi Impervious 1.34 acres!, Total- - - 2.10 acres Scale Factor : 1.00 Hourly Reduced Time Series: SkattumMel - >) Compute Time Series Modify User Input File for computed Tii.me Seri' es j.TSFJ Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:skattum2de.tsf Project LocatzCn:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.393 6 2/09/01 2:00 0.321 8 1/05/02 16:00 0.472 3 2/27/03 7:00 0.348 7 8/26/04 2:00 0.419 4 10/28/04 16:00 0.417 5 1/18/06 16:00 C.506 2 10/26/06 0:00 0.794 1 1/09/06 6:00 Computed Peaks ------Flow Frequency Analysis ------- - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CFS) Period 0.794 1 100.00 0.990 0.506 2 25.00 0.960 0.472 3 10.0C 0.900 0.419 4 5.00 0.800 0.417 5 3.00 0.667 0.393 6 2.00 0.50C 0.348 ? 1.30 0.231 0.321 8 1.10 0.091 0.698 50.00 0-980 7 Outlet Riser: The outlet riser for the combined facility was sized per Section 5.3.4.2 of the KCSWDM. A 12- inch diameter riser, with 0.50 feet of head, can convey 2.67 CFS. The 100-Year developed peak flows for the drainage basin tributary to the detention vault is 0.740 CFS. QORIFICE—CxAx(2xgxH)1/2 where: D = diameter (ft) —1.0' H = head (ft) — 0.50' ExistinE Conditions Ma E:3 Developed Conditions Map r tan ro 3� !Iq� R 9A II ��� Water Quality: The proposed pollution generating impervious surfaces are greater than the 5,000 SF threshold, therefore water quality treatment is required for this project. The area -specific water quality treatment was determined to be Basic. The project proposes a combined detention and wetvault system to meet the water quality requirement. The storm water facility incorporates and provides a two -cell basic wet vault (i.e. Va/VR = 3.0) into the design of the storm water control and treatment facility by providing additional storage volume below the detention vault volume. The wet vault was designed as detailed in the 2009 KCSWDM utilizing the following equation: Vb = fVr = f (0.90Ai + 0.25At) x (R/12)1 where; Vb = wetpool volume (cu. ft.) f = volume factor = 3.0 Vr = volume of runoff from the mean annual storm (cu. ft.) A; = area of impervious surface (sf) At = area of till soil covered with grass or forest (sf) R/12 = rainfall from mean annual storm (feet) = 0.47/12 Impervious Areas (Ai) = 58,370 sf Pervious Areas (A,)) = 33,106 sf Vb = 3.OVr = 3.0(0.90 x Ai + 0.25 x At) x (0.47/12) = 7,145 c.f. (required volume) The proposed vault provides 28,000 CF of live storage and 7,200 CF of dead storage. SECTION 5: Conveyance System Analysis and Design The on -site drainage conveyance system is planned to be constructed of a series of catch basins interconnected with 12" PVC pipe. The conveyance calculations were performed using Manning's Equation. The conveyance system was checked to ensure that during the 100-year storm event, the system would function adequately. The 100-year peak flow using KCRTS 15-minute time steps from the developed site was compared to the maximum capacity of the pipe. Using the Manning's Equation, the maximum capacity of a 12" pipe sloped at 0.50% is 2.98 cfs, which is greater than the actual 100-year flow of 1.83 cfs (see output below). Since all pipes within the proposed conveyance system are sloped at grades equal to or steeper than 0.50%, the system will have adequate capacity to convey the generated runoff. 10 Lard Use Area Till Forest) 0.00 acres, Till Pasture0.00 acres' Till Grassi 0.60 acres, Outwash Forest' 0.00 acres' Outwash Pastured 0.00 acres Outwash Grass' 0.00 acres' Wetland) 0.00 acres Impervious' 1.26 acres' Total 1.94 acres Scale Factor: 1.00 15-Mln Reduced Edit Flow Paths Time Series: Slcatt2CDIdV� Compute Time Series Modify User Input File for computed Time Series I.TSFJ Flow Frequency Analysis Time Series File:skatt2conv.tsf Project Location:Sea-Tac ---Annual Peak Flow Rates --- Flow Rate Rank Time of Peak (CFS) 0.601 6 0.425 8 1.29 2 0.484 7 0.727 4 0.716 5 0.837 3 1.83 1 Computed Peaks 8/27/01 18:00 1/05/02 15:00 12/08/02 17:15 8/23/04 14:30 11/17/04 5:00 10/27/05 10:45 10/25/06 22:45 1/09/08 6:30 -----Flow Frequency Analysis - - Peaks - - Rank Return Prob (CF5) Period 1.83 1 100.00 0.990 1.29 2 25.00 0.960 0.837 3 10.00 0.900 0.727 4 5.00 0.800 0.716 5 3.00 0.667 0.601 6 2.00 0.500 0.484 7 1.30 0.231 0.425 8 1.10 0.091 1..65 50.00 0.980 11 SECTION 6: Special Reports and Studies • Geotechnical Engineering Study; Earth Solutions NW; December 20, 2016 • Arborist Report; American Forest Management; December 13, 2016 • Wetland & Stream Reconnaissance; Altmann Oliver Associates; May 21, 2016 SECTION 7: Other Permits Single -Family Residential Building Permits and a Right -of -Way Use Permit from the City of Renton will be required. Utility permits to construct the water and sewer system will be required from Soos Creek Water and Sewer Distict. SECTION S: CSWPP Analysis and Design Several standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be utilized by the contractor to minimize the amount of erosion and sedimentation that may be perpetuated by the construction site. Some of the measures might include filter fence, catch basin protection, and standard ground cover practices. A general stormwater permit will be required from the Washington Department of Ecology and will be obtained prior to construction. SECTION 9: Bond Quantities, FacilitV Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant These documents will be provided at the time of Single -Family Building Permit application. SECTION 10: Operations and Maintenance Manual A draft Operations & Maintenance Manual is provided in Appendix B. 12 APPENDIX A KCRTS HYDROLOGIC ANALYSES Retention/Detention Facility Type of Facility Facility Length: Faci_-._i-y Width: =ac_lity Area: Ef`ective Storage Depth: Stage 0 elevation: S*-orage Volume: Riser Head: PJi3er Diameter: Number of orifices: Detention Vault 8G.00 ft 50.00 =t 400C. sq. ft .00 =t 0.00 tt 28000. cu. ft i.00 ft 12.00 inct_es 3 Pull Head Pipe Or]f--ce # Heicht Diameter Discharge Diameter 0.00 0.69 C.034 2 4.70 1..25 0.064 4.0 3 6.00 1.00 0.027 4.0 Too Notch Weir: None Outflow Rating Curve: None Stage Eleva-ion Storage Discharge Percolation (ft} (ft) (cu. =t) (ac-ft) (cfs) {cfs) O.C{) 0_,)0 0. 0.000 0.000 0.00 O.C1 0.01 40. 0.001 0.002 0.00 C.C2 0.02 80_ 0.002 C.002 0.00 0.03 0.03 120. 0.003 C.002 0.00 O.C4 0.04 16C. C.004 C.003 0.00 0.05 0.05 20C. C.005 C.003 0.00 0.06 C.06 24C. C.006 O.D03 O.00 0.2C 0.20 800. 0.018 0.006 0.00 0.34 C.34 1360. C.031 0.007 0.00 0.48 C.45 1920, 0.044 0.009 0.00 0.61 0.61 2440. 0.056 0.010 0.00 0. 15 0.75i 31)00. G.C69 O.C11 0.00 0.89 0.89 3560, O.C82 O.G12 D.00 1.03 1.0'i 4120. G.095 0.013 0.00 1.16 1.16 4640. 0.107 O.C14 0.00 1.30 1.3D 5200_ 0.119 0.015 0.00 "_.44 1.44 5763. 0.132 0.015 0.00 _.57 1.J? 6280. 0.144 ").016 0.00 ;7 1.71 6840. 0.15i 0.011 C.00 1.85 1.85 ?400. 0.17G 0.011 C.00i 1.99 1.99 ?960. 0.183 0.018 C.00 2.12 2.12 8480. 0.19�: O.O19 0.00 2.26 2.26 9040. 0.208 0.019 0.W) 2.40 2.4C 96D0. 0.220 0.020 0.00 2.54 2.54' 10160. 0.233 0.020 C.CD 2.67 2.61 1068D. 0.245 D_021 0.CID 2.81 2.81 11240. 0.238 0.021 O.00 2.95 2.95 11800. D_2?1 0.022 O.CO :.05 3.08 12.320. 0.283 0.023 O.00 3.22 3.22 1288D. 0.296 0.023 O.CG 3.36 3.35 13440_ 0.309 0.02.3 0 . C C 3.50 3.50 14000. 0.321 0.024 0.00 3.63 3.63 14520. 0.333 0.024 0.00 3.77 3.77 15080. 0.346 C.025 0.00 3.91 3.91 15640. 0.359 0.025 0.00 4.04 4.04 16160. 0.371 0.026 0.06 4.18 4.18 16720. 0.384 0.026 0.00 4.32 4.32 17280. 0.397 0.027 0.00 4.46 4.46 17840. 0.410 0.027 0.00 4.59 4.59 18360. 0.421 0.027 0.00 4.70 4.70 18800. 0.432 0.028 0.00 4.71 4.71 18840. 0.433 0.028 0.00 4.73 4.73 18920, 0.434 0.029 0.CG 4.74 4.74 18960. 0.435 0.031 0.00 4.75 4.75 19000. 0.436 0.033 0.00 4.77 4.77 19080. 0.438 0.036 0.00 4.78 4.78 19120. 0.439 0.040 0.00 4.79 4.79 19160. 0.440 0.041 0.00 4.80 4.80 19200. 0.441 0.042 0.00 4.91 4.94 19760. 0.454 0.049 0.00 5.08 5.08 20320. 0.466 0.055 0.00 5.22 5.22 20880. 0.479 0.060 0.00 5.35 5.35 21400. 0.491 0.064 0.00 5.49 5.49 21960. 0.504 0.068 0.00 5.63 5.63 22520. 0.517 0.071 0.00 5.76 5.76 23040. 0.529 0.075 0.00 5.90 5.90 23600. 0.542 C.078 0.00 6.00 6.00 24000. 0.551 0.060 0.00 6.01 6.C1 24040. 0.552 C.080 0.00 6.02 6.C2 2408C. 0.553 0.081 0.00 6.03 6.03 24120. 0.554 C.082 0.00 6.04 6.04 24160. 0.555 C.084 0.co 6.05 6.05 24200. 0.556 0.086 0.00 6.06 6.06 24240. 0.556 0.088 0.00 6.07 6.G7 24280. 0.557 0.089 0.00 6.08 6.08 24320. 0.558 0.089 0.00 6.09 6.09 24360. 0.559 0.090 0.00 6.23 6.23 24920. 0.572 0.097 0.00 6.37 6.37 25480. 0.585 0.104 0.00 6.51 6.51 2604C. 0.598 0.109 0.00 6.64 6.64 26560. 0.610 0.114 0.00 6.78 6.78 27120, 0.623 0.118 0.00 6.92 6.92 27680. 0.635 0.123 0.00 7.00 7.00 28000. C.643 0.125 0.00 7.10 7.10 28400. 0.652 0.436 0.00 7.20 7.20 28800. C.661 1.000 0.00 7.30 7.30 29200. C.670 1.730 0.00 7.40 7.40 29600. 0.680 2.530 0.00 7.50 7.50 30000. 6.689 2.810 O.OQ 7.60 7.60 30400. 0.698 3.070 0.00 7.70 7.70 30800. 0.707 3.310 0.00 7.80 7.80 31200. 0.716 3.530 0.00 '7.90 7.90 31600. 6.725 3.740 0.00 8.00 8.00 32000. C.735 3.930 0.00 8.10 8."_0 32400. C.744 4.120 0.00 8.20 8.20 32800. 0.753 4.300 0.00 8.30 8.30 33200. 0.762 4.470 0.00 8.40 8.40 33600. 0.771 4.640 0.00 8.50 8.50 34000. 0.781 4.790 0.00 8.60 8.60 34400. 0.790 4.950 0.00 8.70 8.70 3480C. 0.799 5.100 O.00 8.80 8.80 3520C. D.808 5.240 O.00 Hyc Inflow Outf'cw Peak S orage Target Calc S�age Elev (Cu-Ft) (Ac-Ft) 1 O.?9 0.17 0.42 i.C9 7.D9 28378. OAK 2 7.39 ******* 0.12 6.7.3 6.73 26936. 0.61E 3 0.4? ****** 0.10 6.29 6.29 25159. 0.3?8 4 0.00 ***x*** ME 5.91 5.91 23636. 0.513 5 0.42 ***"*** 0.C4 4.8C 4.80 19184. 0.440 6 0.25 *** *** 0.03 4.32 4.32 17275. OAK 7 0.32 ******* O.C3 4.16 4.16 16645. 0.382 8 0.35 ******* 0.02 2.64 2.64 10543. 0.242 ---------------------------------- Route Time Series through facility Inflow Time Series F_le:skattum2de.tsf Outflow Time Series F_le:rdout =nflow/Outflow Analysis Peak inflow Discharge: 0.794 CFS at 6:00 on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Outflow Discharge: 0.419 CFS at IIAC on Jan 9 in Year 8 Peak Reservoir Stage: 7.09 Ft teak Reservoir Elev: 7.09 Ft Peak Reservoir Storage: 28378. Cu-Ft 1,651 AC -Ft Flow Duration from Time Series File:rdcu!.Lsf Cutoff Count Frequency CDE Exceedence_Probability F 3 % "c 1 0.002 27075 M AI 44.154 55.846 0.558E+00 D.005 8578 13.989 A.143 41.857 0.419E+00 0.009 6853 11.176 69.318 30.682 0.30MI50 0.012 6421 10.471 79.790 20.210 0.202S+00 0.016 4863 7.931 87.720 L2.280 0.123E+00 0.019 3217 5.246 92.966 7.034 0.703E-01 C.023 1722 2.808 95.775 4.225 0.423E-01 C.026 1789 2.917 98.692 i.308 0.131E-01 C.030 462 0.7.53 99.446 0.554 0.55AE-02 0.033 A 0.021 99.467 0.533 0.533E-02 0.037 20 0.033 99.499 0.501 0.501E-02 0.040 5 0.008 99.207 0.492 0.492E-02 0.044 31 0.060 99.568 CAN 0.432_E-02 0.047 35 0.057 99.625 0.375 0.315E-02 0.050 A D.055 99.600 C.320 0_320E-02 O.C54 28 0.046 99.726 0.274 0.274E-02 0.057 26 0.042 99.768 0.232 0.232E-02 0.061 16 0.026 99.795 0.205 0.205E-02 0.064 11 0.01E 99.812 0.188 0.-88E-02 0.06E 12 0.020 99.832 0.16E 0.i& F-62 0.07i 15 C.024 99.856 0.141 0."A W-02 0.075 18 C.029 99.886 0.114 0.114E-02 0.01E 18 C.029 99.915 0.085 C.848E-03 0.082 6 0.0N 99.925 0.075 C.750E-03 0.085 1 0.002 99.927 O.C73 CAA E-C3 0.089 2 0.003 99.930 0.070 0.700-C3 0.092 7 0.0_1 99.941 0.059 0.537E-C3 0.096 5 0.008 99.949 0.051 0.506E-03 0.099 7 0.011 99.961 0.039 0.391E-03 0.103 6 O.C10 99.971 0.029 0.294E-03 0.106 2 0.0O3 99.974 0.026 0.261E-03 0.109 2 0.003 99.977 0.023 0.228E-C3 0.113 3 0.005 99.982 0.018 C.179E-C3 0.116 3 0.005 99.987 0.013 0.130E-03 0.120 3 0.005 99.992 0.008 0.815E--04 0.123 3 0.005 99.997 0.003 0.326E-04 Durat-on Comparison Anaylsis Base File: skattum2ex.tsf New File: rdout.tsf Cutoff Units: Discharge in CFS -----Fraction of Time----- CutoffBase New °Change 0.029 0.95E-02 0.57E-02 -40.5 C.037 0.63E-02 0.50E-02 -20.5 0.045 0.50E-02 0.41E-02 -18.0 0.053 0.37E-02 0.29E-02 -21.8 0.061 0.29E-02 0.21E-02 -28.4 C.069 0.22E-02 0.16E-02 -26.5 0.077 0.15E-02 0.10E-02 -30.4 C.085 0.10E-02 0.73E-03 -27.4 C.093 0.62E-03 0.57E-03 -7.9 C.100 0.34E-03 0.31E-03 -9.5 0.108 0.21E-03 0.23E-03 7.7 0.116 0.16E-03 0.13E-03 -20.0 0.124 0.98E-04 O.00E+00 -100.0 0.132 0.16E-04 0.00E+00 -100.0 ---------Check of Tolerance ------- Probability Base New °,Change 0.95E-02 0.029 0.027 -6.5 0.63E-02 0.037 0.028 -24.3 0.50,=-02 0.045 0.039 -13.9 0.3"1E-C2 0.053 0.047 -10.7 0.29E-02 0.061 0.053 -12.5 0.22E-02 0.069 0.059 -14.6 0.15E-02 0.077 0.070 -8.6 0.10E-02 0.085 0.077 -9.2 0.62E-03 0.093 0.092 -0.8 0.34E-03 0.100 0.099 -1.D 0.21E-03 0.108 0.112 3.2 0.16E-03 0.116 0.115 -0.9 0.98E-04 0.124 0.120 -3.8 0.160E-04 0.132 0.124 -6.2 Maximum positive excursion = 0.004 cfs ( occurring at 0.108 cfs on the Base Data;skattum2ex.tsf and at 0.112 cfs on the New Data:rdout.tsf Maximum negative excursion = 0.012 cfs (-29.10) occurring at 0.040 cfs on the Base Data:skattum2ex.tsf and at 0.029 cfs on the New DaL-a:rdout.tsf APPENDIX B MAINTENANCE and OPERATIONS MANUAL AI'I'FNDI\ A MAIN-I-ENANCE: REQUIPEME:N'C'S FOR FI,OW C ONTRC)I,, C'C)NVF.YANCE, AN1) WQ FACHATiES NO.3 - DETENTION TANKS AND VAULTS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Site Trash and debris Any trash and debdswhich exceed 1 cubic foot Trash and debris cleared from site. per 1.000 square feet (this is about equal to the amount of trash it would take to fill up one standard size office garbage can). In general, there should be no visual evidence of dumping. Noxious weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may Noxious and nuisance vegetation constitute a hazard to County personnel or the removed according to applicable public_ regulations No danger ofr ions vegetation where County personnel or the public might normally he Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Grasslgroundcover Grass or groundcover exceeds 18 inches in Grass or groundcover mowed to a height. height no greater than fi inches_ Tank or Vault Trash and debris Any trash and debris accumulated in vault or tank No trash or debris in vault. Storage Area (includes fioatables and non-floalables). Sediment Accumulated sediment depth exceeds 10%ofthe Al sediment removed from storage accumulation diameter of the storage area for % length of area storage vault or any point depth exceeds 15°fa of diameter Example: 72-inch storage tank would require cleaning when sediment reaches depth of 7 inches for more than %:length of tank. Tank Structure Plugged air vent Any blockage of the vent. Tank or vault freely vents. Tank bent out of Any part of tank pipe is bent out of shape more Tank repaired or replaced to design_ shape than 1 DA of its design shape Gaps between A gap wider than Yrinch at the joint of any tank No water or soil entering tank sections, damaged sections or any evidence of soil particles entanng through joints cr walls. joints or cracks or the tank at a joint or through a wall. tears in wail Vault Structure Damage to wall, Cracks wider than %inch, any evidence of soil Vault is sealed and structurally frani bottom. and/or entering the structure through cracks or qualified sound. top slab inspection personnel determines that the vault is not structuraiiy sound. Inlet/Outlet Pipes Sediment Sediment filling 20 % cr more ofthe pipe in pipes clear of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet No trash or debris in pipes. pipes (includes floatables and non-ficatables). Damaged Cracks wider than %cinch at the joint of the No cracks more than %.-inch wide at inletioutlet pipes or any evidence of sal entering the joint of the inletloutlet pipe. at the joints of the inlet/outlet pipes 2009 Surl�rC-2 Wider Desi<m 1lanual Appendix A I'Q 2009 A-15 APPFNDIl A MAINTENANCE REQU[RENTENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE. AND WQ FACILIT[ES NO.3 - DETENTION TANKS AND VAULTS Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance Is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Access Manhole CcverAid not in place CoverAid is missing or only partially in place. Manhole access covered. Any open manhole requires Immediate maintenance. Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism opens with proper tools, not working maintenance person with proper tools_ Bolts cannot be seated. Self-locking coverAid does not work. CoverAid difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove CoverAid can be removed and remove coverAid after applying 80 Ibs of lift. reinstal€ed by one maintenance person. Ladder rungs unsafe Missing rungs, misalignment, rust, or cracks. Ladder meets design standards. Allows maintenance person safe access. Large access Damaged or difficuH Large access doors or plates cannot be Replace or repair access door so it doors/plate to open openedfiremoved using normal equipment. can opened as designed. Gaps, doesn't cover Large access doors not flat an Nor access Doors close flat and covers access completely opening not completely covered. opening completely. Lifting Rings missing. Lifting rings not capable of lifting weight of door Lifting rings sufficient to lift or rusted or plate. remove door or plate. 1-9; 2009 1001) Sur (icy Wai Design Rdarurari Apparcbx A A-6 APPENDIX A hIAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW CONTROL. CON E'EYANCE, AIN D YYQ FACILITIES NO.4 - CONTROL STRUCTUREIFLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Defect or Problem Condltlon When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Structure Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than Y cubic foot which No Trash or debris blocking or is located immediately in front of the structure potentially blocking entrance to opening or is blocking capacity of the structure by structure. more than 10%. Trash or debris in the structure that exceeds'1, No trash or debris in the structure. the depth from the bottom of basin to invert the lowest pipe into or out ofIhe basin, Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in No condition present which would volume. attract or support the breeding of insects or rodents. Sediment Sediment exceeds 600A of the depth from the Sump of structure contains no bottom of the structure to the invert of the lowest sediment_ pipe into or out of the structure or the bottom of the FROP-T section or is within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the structure cr the bottom of the FROP-T section. Damage to frame Corner of frame extends more than 1. inch past Frame is even with curb. and/or top slab curb face intothe street (If applicable). Top slab has holes larger than 2 square inches or Top slab is free of holes and cracks. cracks wider than % inch. Frame not sitting flush on top slab, i.e., Frame is sitting flush on top slab. separation of more than IX inch of the frame from the tap slab. Cracks in wails or Cracks wider than % inch and longer than 3 feet, Structure is sealed and structurally bottom any evidence of soil particles entering structure sound, through cracks. or maintenance person judges that structure is unsound. Cracks wider than 1 inch and longer than 1 foot No cracks more than 1, inch wide at at the joint of any inlet/outlet pipe or any evidence the joint of Inlet/outlet pipe, of soil particles entering structure through cracks. Settlement/ Structure has settled more than 1 inch or has Basin replaced or repaired to design misalignment rotated more than 2 inches cut of alignment. standards. Damaged pipe joints Cracks wider than '/ inch at the joint of the No cracks more than ! inch wide at inlet/cutlet pipes or any evidence of sal entering thejdnt of inletfoutlet pipes_ the structure at the joint of the inlet/outlet pipes. Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil. gasoline. concrete slurries or paint. according to applicable regulations. Source contrd Bill implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Ladder rungs missing Ladder is unsafe due to missing rungs. Ladder meets design standards and or unsafe misalignment. rust. cracks. or sharp edges. allows maintenance person safe access FRCP-T Section Damage T section is not securely attached to structure T section securely attached to wall wall and outlet pipe structure should support at and outlet pipe. least 1,000 Ibs of up or down pressure_ Structure is not in upright position (.allow up to Structure in correct position_ 10%from plumb 1. Connections to outlet pipe are not watertight or Connections to outlet pipe are water show signs of deteriorated grout tight; structure repaired or replaced and works as designed. Any holes --other than designed holes—n the Structure has no holes other than structure. designed holes. Cleanout Gate Damaged or missing Cleanout gate is missing, Replace cleanout gate. 1004 Surfhea Wat�T i V;o1n l - Appcndis A APPFNT)TX A MA REQUIRENIENTS FLOW CONTROL, CONVEYANCE, AND WQ FACILITIES NO.4 - CONTROL STRUCTUREIFLOW RESTRICTOR Maintenance Defoct or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance Is Performed Clean out gate is not watertight. Gate is watertight and works as designed. Gate cannot be moved up and dawn by one Gate moves up and down easily and maintenance person. is watertight. Chainlrod leading to gate is missing or damaged. Chain is in place and works as designed. Orifice Plate Damaged or missing Control device is not working properly due to Plate is in place and works as missing, out of place, or bent orifice plate. designed. Obstructions Any trash, debris, sediment, or vegetation Plate is free of all obstructions and blocking the plate. works as designed. Overflow Pipe Obstructions Any trash or debris blocking (or having the Pipe is free of all obstructions and potential of blocking) the overflow pipe. works as designed. Deformed or damaged Lip of overflow pipe is bent or deformed. Overflow pipe does not allow lip overflow at an elevation lower than design nlet/Cutlet Pipe Sediment Sediment filling 20% or more of the pipe Inletloutlet pipes clear of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in inlet/outlet No trash or debris in pipes. pipes (includes floatabies and non-floatables). Damaged Cracks wider than Y-inch at the joint of the No cracks more than Xrinch wide at inletloutlet pipes or any evidence of so f entering the joint of the inlet/outlet pipe. at the joints of the inleUoutlet pipes. Metal Grates Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than 'la inch, Grate opentrig meets design (If Applicable) standards. Trash and debris Trash and debris that is biocking more than 20% Grate free of trash and debris, of grate surface. footnote to guidelines for disposal Damaged or missing Grate missing or broken member(s) of the grate. Grate is in place and meets design standards. Manhole Cover/Lid CoverAid not in place CoverAid is missing or only partially in place, CoverAid protects opening to Any open structure requires urgent structure. maintenance. Locking mechanism Mechanism cannot be opened by one Mechanism openswith proper tools. Not Working maintenance person with proper tools. Bolts cannot be seated- self-locking coverAid does not work. CoverAid difficult to One maintenance person cannot remove CoverAid can be removed and Remove cover -Aid after applying 80lbs. of lift. reinstalled by one maintenance person. I,i>;2(309 2004 Surface Water Design ti1,utuat Apprmdix _l A-S .APPEND[\ A NiAINTENANC'E REQUIREMENTS FOR FLOW f'f1NTROL. C ON), E1'AVI. AND t•N'C? FAC'1LL[[ES NO.5 - CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES Maintenance Defect or Problem Condition When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Maintenance is Performed Strvtaure Sediment Sediment exceeds 60% of the depth from the Sump of catch basin contains rho bottom of the catch basin to the invert of the sediment lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin or is within 6 inches of the invert of the lowest pipe into or out of the catch basin. Trash and debris Trash or debris of more than f, cubic foot which No Trash or debris ttfocking or is located irtrrwKWr eiy in front of the catch basin potentially blacking enhance to opening of is bhocking capacity of the catch basin catch basin. by more than I OV Trash or debris in the catch basin that exceeds Na trash or debris in the catch basin. '1, the depth from the bottom of basin to invert ire lowest pipe into or out of the basin. Dead animals or vegetation that could generate No dead animals or vegetation odors that could cause complaints or dangerous present within catch basin. gases (e.g., methane) - Deposits of garbage exceeding 1 cubic foot in No condition present which would volume. attract of support the breeding of insects or rodents. Damage to frame Comer of frame extends more than % inch past Frame is even with curb. andlor top slab curb face into the street (if applicable). Top slab has holey, larger than 2 square inches or Top slab is free of holes and cracks - cracks wider than 'i: inch Frame not sitting flush on top slab, Le_. Frame is sitting flush on tap slab. separation of more than'!. inch of the frame from the top slab. Cracks in walls or Cracks wader than '/ inch and longer than 3 feet. Catch basin is sealed and bottom any evidence of soil particles entering catch structurally sound_ baron through cracks, or maintenance person judges that catch basin is unsound. Cracks wider than '1r inch and longer than 1 foot No cracks more than 'f, inch wide at at the joint of any infetloudet pipe or any evidence the joint of inietroudet pipe - of sod parodes entering catch basin through cracks. Settlement/ Catch basin has settled more than 1 inch or has Basin replaced or repaired to design misaligrwnent rotated more than 2 inches out of alignmsnt standards - Damaged pipe joints Cracks wider than ','Anch at the joint of the No cracks more than S;-inch wide at wiletkmlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of iniettoudet pipes - the catch basin at the joint of the inietfoudet PQes- Contaminants and Any evidence of contaminants or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of poAution as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate- No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. lnWOutlet Pipe Sediment Sediment filling 20% or more of the Pine_ Inietloudet pipes clear of sediment. accumulation Trash and debris Trash and debris accumulated in iniet/outlet No trash or debris in pipes pipes{includes floatab les and non-lloatabies). Damaged Cracks wider than ':-Y-inch at the joint of the No cracks more than V.-inch wide at iMetloutlet pipes or any evidence of soil entering the joint of the irtietfoutlet pipe. al the joints of the inletbutlet pipes. 2-009 Surtacc Watcr Dcsrgn Manual—.Appcndhx A I119i2001i A-H APP1 NDIX A '61AINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FLOW C0NTR0L, C0NYEl ANCE, XND %VQ FACILITIES NO.5 - CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES Maintenance Defect or Arnblann Condition When MaimaeroncP is Needed Results FspWed When Component Maintenance is Performed Metal Grates Unsafe grate opening Grate with opening wider than 'to inch. Grate opening meets design (Catch Basins) standards. Trash and debris Trash and debris that is blocking more than 20% Grate free of trash and debris, of grata aurface. footnote to guidelines for disposal l)anntaged or missing Gra6a missing or broken member(s) of the grata_ Crate is in place and meets design Any open structure requires urgent standards- mhair tenance. Manhole ComrfLid Covedid not in place CoverAid is missing or orily partially in place. CoverAid protects opening to Any open structure requires urgent structure. maintenance. Lodung mechanism Mechanism [annat be opened by are Mechanism opens with proper bools_ Not Workirhg meirtienanos parson with proper toots Boles carrot be seated. Self-locking eoverilid does nd warm Coverlid diffiwR to One mewitenance person cannot remove CoverAid can be removed and Remove coverAid after applying 80 lbs_ of kit reinstalled by one maintenance person. 1/91-1009 20M Suhrtkc Water IDe919n -Manual — Appendix A A -to APPkNOI\ A MA1NThNA`.0 E; RLQLIRE MENTS FOR IrLOW CONTROL C'CTNVI* Y- NCE' AND A-Q VAC I L1 FIE NO.6 - CONVEYANCE PIPES AND DITCHES Maintenance Defect or Problem Conditions When Maintenance is Needed Results Expected When Component Malnlenarice is Performed Pipes Sediment d debris Accumulated sediment or debris that exceeds Water flaws freely through pipes. accumulation 20% of the diameler of the papa. Vegetabordroots Vegetationtroots that reduce free movement of Water flows freely through pipes. water through pipes. Contaminerrts and Any evidence of coniaminerns or pollution such Materials removed and disposed of pollution as oil, gasoline, concrete slumes cr paint according to applicable regulations. Source control BMPs impiemented rf appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Damage to pro4activa Protective coating is damaged; rust or corrosion Pipe repaired or replaced. coating or Corrosion is weakening the structural integrity of any part of pipe, Damaged Any dent that decreases the cross section area of Pipe repaired or replaced. pipe by more than 20% or is determined to have weakened structural integrity of the pipe. Ditches Trash and debris Trash and debris exceeds 1 cubic fool per 1,000 Trash and debris cleared from square feet of ditch and slopes. dAches. Sediment Accumulated sediment that exceeds 20% of the Ditch deanedffiushed of all sediment accumulation design depth_ and debris so that it matches desigin- Noxious 'weeds Any noxious or nuisance vegetation which may Noxious and numance vegetation constitute a hazard to County persavmi or the removed according to applicable public. regulations. No danger of noxious vegetation where County personnel or the public might normally be. Contaminants and Any evidence of cantamnams or pollution such Materials removed and disposed at pollution as oil, gasoline, concrete slurries or paint according to applicable regulations - Source control BMPs implemented if appropriate. No contaminants present other than a surface oil film. Vegetation Vegetation that reduces free movement of water Water flows freely through dtches. through driches- Erosion damage to Any erosion observed on a ditch slope. Slopes are not eroding. slopes Rock lining out of One layer or less of rock exists above native soil Replace rocks to design standards. puce or missing { If area 5 square feet or more, any exposed native Applicable) soil. 2009 wurface Water Ikstgn Manual —Appendix A I14)1?pt19 A- I I APPENDIX C GEOTECHNICAL REPORT Earth Solutions NW LLc Geotechnical Engineering Geology Environmental Scientists Construction Monitoring GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SHORT PLAT 17018 & 17022 - 106th AVENUE SOUTHEAST rfr\IT/1\%AAA hl\ltiT/\il PREPARED FOR MR. STEIN SKATTUM December 20, 2016 4&e— Brett J. Priebe, E.I.T. Staff Engineer f fti }YI L� I • � 4���� WIN Kyle R. Campbell, P.E. Principal GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SHORT PLAT 17018 & 17022 — 1061h AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON ES-4948 Earth Solutions NW, LLC 1805 — 136kh Place Northeast, Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone:425-449-4704 Fax:425-449-4711 Geotechnical Engineering Report Geotechnical Services Are Performed for Specific Purposes Persons, and Projects Geotechnical engineers structure their seniices to meet the specific needs of (heir clients. A geotech*ai engineering study conducted for a civil ergi- neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil englneer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each geotechnical engineerng report is unique, prepared soielyior the client No one except you should ruly on your geotechnical engineering report without first conferring wth the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one —noteven you should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one originally contemplated. Read the Full Report Serious problems have occurrent because those relying on a geotechnical engineering report d d not read it a€I Ou nut rely on an executive summary Do ncl read selected elements only. A Geotechnical Engineering Report is Based on A Unique Set of Project -Specific Factors Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project -specific far, - tors when establisning the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; [he location o; We structure on tr-e s:te, and other planned nr existing site improvements, such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities Unless the geotechnical englneer who conducted the study speoifically indicates oth- ekvise, do not rely wa geotechnical engineering report that eras: • not prepared for you, • not prepared for your project, • not prepared for We specific site explcred, ar • cornp'eted before imporant project changes were made Typical ehanges that can erode the reliability of art existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect • the function of the proposed structure. as when :f's changed from a parksrtg garage to an efticc building, or from a light industrial alai[ to a refrigerated warehouse, elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the proposer] structure, composition of the des,gn team, or project ownership. As a general rule, aiways inform your geotechnical engineer of project changes —even minor unes and request an assessment of their impact. Geotechnical er?gineers cannot accept responsrbr7ity o_r liability far prob!erns that occur because Moir reports du not consider devetopmefrfs of vahich they ww fro[ inforrrred Subsurface Conditions Can Change A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the time the study was performed. L)o not rely nn a geotechnlca! engineer- iny renorfwhose adequacy may have been affected by the passage of time, by man-made an-ade events, such as ccnst%ctinn on or adjacent to the site; nr by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua- tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it is stiff! reliahle. A minor amount of additionai testing cr analysis could prevent major problems. Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional Opinions Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points ',vhere subsurface tests are conducted or samo!es are taken_ Geotechnical engi- neers reV4N field and laboratory data ano then apply tht:ir professional judgment ;o render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual sub6urface conditions may diner —sometimes signif_cantiy— from those Mn cat-:d in ynur report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer ,vho developed your repor, to provide construrtion observation is the most effective method of managing the risks associated 11th unanticipated conditions. A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final 7o nct overreiy on the construction recomrnendations included in your report ,'�vse rEcorr,rerrdatonsare not final, because geotechnical engi- neers develop therr principalky f om judgr-ient and opinion. Geotechnical engineers ban finalize their recommendatlons only by ohsorving actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geuiouhtucai engineer wW developed your repod cannot assume respoosilbiLijy or liability for the repod s recommerdatfors it that engineer does riot perform CORS5(Wtion observation. A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to Misinterpretation Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geo- technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after submitting the report. Also retain your geotechricai engineer to review pertl- nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications Contractors can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by having your geotechnical engineer participate in prehid and preconstnac . conferences, and by providing construction observation. Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs Geotechnical engineers prepare final tinning and tesiing logs based upon their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or omissions, the Icgs included in a geotechnicaf engineering report shouA neverbe red,awn tar inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Only photographic ; r electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize that separati;rg logs from the report can elevate risk. Give Contractors a Complete Report and Guidance Some owners and design professionals mistakenly helieve they can make contractors liahle for unanticipated subsulace conditions by limiting what they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give rcn- tractors the cc7iplete geotechnical engineering report, butpreface it ~with a clearly written letter of transmittal. In tnat letter, advise cortractors that the report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the reports accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with tne Geotechnical engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to conduct additional study to obtain the specific types pf information they need cr prefer A prehid conference can also be valuable. 8e sure contrac- tors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might YOU be In a position to give contractors the best information available to you, while requiring them to a; least share same of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that geotechnical engineering is tar less exact than other engineering disci- plines. This laCK of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led to disappointments, claims, arrMsputes. To help reduce the risk of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeler) "Ilmitafions" many of ;here provisions indicate where geo`eohnical engineers' respcnsi- bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their awn responsibilities and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should responc fully and frankly. Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geaenviron- Thrental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geoteehnical study. For that reason, a geotechnica) engineering report does not usually relate any geoenvifonmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations,- e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoen- vironnrental information. ask your gectec'nnical consultant for risk man- agement guidance. uo pointy oo 3t7 environmental report prepared for swmeor e ei5e. Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be devised for the express puroose of mold prevention, integrated into a com prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a'professional mold prevention consultant Because just a small amount of water or moisture pan lead to the development of severe mold infestations, a num- ber of mold prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While grcurdwater water infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of the geotechnicaf engineering study whose findings are conveyed in -this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention consultant none of the services per- formed in connection with the geotechnical engineer's sturdy were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven- tion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the structure involved. Rely, on Your ASFE-Member Geotechncial Engineer for Additional Assistance Membership in ASFF(The Best Pecole on Earth exposes geotechnical engineers to a Aide array of risk management techniques that can be of genuine benefit `cr everyone involved with a construction project. Corner with you ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more information. A=SFE The Beal Pnopla in Earth 3811 Co-esvllle F.oadrSultc G106. Silusr spring, MU 20TO lelephone 301 `565-2733 Facsimile: 301/539-2017 e-mail: infc3sfe.orgrarr,.aslP.oy Cupyrigrrt 2UO4 by ASFC. Inc. Ouplicatioa, reproCuction. or caoying of this d;;runrenr. in whole or in par.', by any moors wiiitsoever, is strictly prohibited. except wiO ASFE's sp°cifi':• wrrrten permissrun. Excerpling, yuoUlig. or othettivis9 extracting b Ording from this dccurpept r5 perprirt?d only with the vY.preSs rVntfen pe rmssinn of ASFE, and only fur purposes of scnnlariy research or bock review. onfy memhers of ASFE may use fhs dO UniCiSt as a cornpiement to or as .rrr elemi.wf of a geatec,hpicai augi;;eerir f teoorT. Any othsr firm, individual, or other entrly that so uses this dorumenr ;vdnout bercg er 45FF member cruud he rommitifrrg nagGgeot or dntentmmn {frau1!derrt; nisrNprese�fatiop. LuFrifl$r�45.r1i4� December 20, 2016 ES-4948 Mr. Stein Skattum P.O. Box 769 Renton, Washington 98057 Dear Mr. Skattum: Earth I Solutions NW UC Earth Solutions NW LLC • Gcolechnicil EngincQ,ing • (_Dn;lr'uCl.ii}n A�IOoilgrirl�, • Fnvirunrnenta] SCiN1CCS Earth Solutions NW, Ll_C (ESNW) is pleased to present this report titled "Geotechnical Engineering Study, Proposed Residential Short Plat, 17018 & 17022 — 106'r' Avenue Southeast, Renton, Washington". Based on the results of our investigation, the proposed residential development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Our study indicates the site is underlain primarily by glacial till. During our subsurface exploration completed on December 7, 2016, perched groundwater seepage was encountered at depths of approximately one to three feet below existing grades at the test pit locations. In our opinion, the proposed residential structures may be constructed on conventional continuous and spread footing foundations bearing upon competent native soil, recompacted native soil, or new structural fill. 1n general, competent native soil, suitable for support of new foundations, will likely be encountered within the upper three to four feet of existing grades. Where loose or unsuitable soil conditions are exposed at foundation subgrade elevations, compaction of soils to the specifications of structural fill, or overexcavation and replacement with a suitable structural fill material, will be necessary. Construction of a stormwater detention vault is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. We anticipate medium dense to dense, undisturbed deposits will be encountered within excavations at depth for the foundation subgrade elevation. With respect to infiltration, it is our opinion native soils will not accommodate large-scale or full infiltration facility design; however, native soils may be feasible for limited infiltration and/or bioretention applications, provided overflow provisions are incorporated into final designs. Recommendations for foundation design, site preparation, drainage, preliminary detention vault design, and other pertinent development aspects are provided in this study. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have questions regarding the content of this geotechnical engineering study, please call. Sincerely, EARTH SOLUTIONS NW, LLC Brett J. Priebe, E.I.T. Staff Engineer 1805 - "1 ,601 Pla(_e N.E., Suitr., )r1 I - Fitdlevucc, A+Vie %(1 0.5 0 ,q?5i +N-470.1 • FAX (.425) 449-1'711 Table of Contents ES-4948 1:7,[r] 4 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................. 1 General.............................. .......... ............................................. 1 Project Description................................................................. 2 SITECONDITIONS.............................................................................. 2 Surface..................................................................................... 2 Subsurface............................................................................... 3 Topsoil and Fill............................................................. 3 NativeSoil..................................................................... 3 Geologic Setting........................................................... 3 Groundwater............................................................................ 4 CriticalAreas........................................................................... 4 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................ 4 General........................................ ........ 4 Site Preparation and Earthwork ............................................. 5 Temporary Erosion Control ......................................... 5 Stripping........................................................................ 5 In -situ and Imported Soils ............................................ 6 Subgrade Preparation .................................................. 6 Structural Fill ................................................................ 7 Foundations............................................................................. 7 SeismicDesign. ....................................................................... 7 Slab -on -Grade Floors.............................................................. 8 RetainingWalls........................................................................ 8 Drainage................................................................................... 9 Infiltration Feasibility.................................................... 9 Preliminary Detention Vault Design ............................ 9 Excavations and Slopes......................................................... 10 Preliminary Pavement Sections ............................................. 11 Utility Support and Trench Backfill ............................... LIMITATIONS...................................................................................... 12 Additional Services................................................................. 12 Earth Solutions NW, LLC Table of Contents Cont'd ES-4948 GRAPHICS Plate 1 Vicinity Map Plate 2 Test Pit Location Plan Plate 3 Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Plate 4 Footing Drain Detail APPENDICES Appendix A Subsurface Exploration Appendix B Laboratory Test Results Earth Solutions NW, LLC GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SHORT PLAT 17018 & 17022 —1061h AVENUE SOUTHEAST RENTON, WASHINGTON ES-4948 INTRODUCTION General This geotechnical engineering study (study) was prepared for the proposed residential development to be completed at 17018 and 17022 — 106th Avenue Southeast in Renton, Washington. The purpose of this study was to provide geotechnical recommendations for currently proposed development plans. Our scope of services for completing this study included the following; Subsurface test pits for purposes of characterizing site soils; • Laboratory testing of soil samples collected at the test pit locations; Engineering analyses, and; • Preparation of this report. The following documents and maps were reviewed as part of our study preparation: Preliminary Site Plan, prepared by Mark Travers Architect, AIA, dated November 11, 2016; • Topographic Survey, prepared by Informed Land Survey, dated October 13, 2016; • Liquefaction Susceptibility for King County (Map 11-5), incorporating data from the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, May 2010; • Geologic Map of the Renton Quadrangle, King County, Washington, by D.R. Mullineaux, 1965, and; • Online Web Soil Survey (WSS) resource provided by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 Project Description ES-4948 Page 2 The preliminary site layout indicates the site will be developed into a residential short plat comprised of 11 single-family lots, access roads, open space and/or stormwater management areas, and related infrastructure improvements. At the time of report submission, specific grading and building loading plans were not available for review; however, based on our experience with similar projects, the proposed residential structures will likely be two to three stories in height and constructed utilizing relatively lightly loaded wood framing supported on conventional foundations, Perimeter footing loads will likely be 1 to 2 kips per lineal foot (klf). Slab -on -grade loading is anticipated to be approximately 150 pounds per square foot (psf). Based on existing topographic relief across the site, we estimate grade cuts and fills of about 5 feet may be necessary to establish finish grades for the proposed improvements. We anticipate stormwater runoff will likely be managed by a detention vault (vault) located in the southwest corner as well as by a series of shallow infiltration facilities and/or dispersion techniques (to the extent feasible). If the above design assumptions are incorrect or change, ESNW should be contacted to review the recommendations provided in this report. ESNW should review final designs to confirm that our geotechnical recommendations been incorporated into the plans. SITE CONDITIONS Surface The subject site is located on the east side of 106th Avenue Southeast, approximately 300 feet north of the intersection with Southeast 172nd Street, in Renton, Washington. The approximate location of the property is illustrated on Plate 1 (Vicinity Map). The site is comprised of two adjoining tax parcels (King County Parcel Nos. 008700-0265 and -0270) totaling approximately 1.96 acres. The site is bordered to the north, east, and south by single-family residences and associated open space, and to the west by 106th Avenue Southeast. Two single-family residences and associated improvements currently occupy the site and are expected to be removed as part of the project redevelopment plans. Site topography generally descends gently from northeast to southwest across the property; elevation change across the site is about 10 to 15 feet, with a gradient of about 5 percent. A drainage ditch is located on the west, south, and east margins of the site. Vegetation consists primarily of grass and light to moderate tree cover. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 Subsurface ES-4948 Page 3 An ESNW representative observed, logged, and sampled five test pits, excavated at accessible locations within the property boundaries, on December 7, 2016 using a mini trackhoe and operator retained by our firm. The test pits were completed for purposes of assessment and classification of site soils as well as characterization of groundwater conditions within areas proposed for new development. The approximate locations of the test pits are depicted on Plate 2 (Test Pit Location Plan). Please refer to the test pit logs provided in Appendix A for a more detailed description of subsurface conditions. Soil samples collected at the test pit locations were evaluated in accordance with both Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) methods and procedures. Topsoil and Fill Topsoil was encountered generally within the upper 3 to 12 inches of existing grades at the test pit locations. The topsoil was characterized by dark brown color, the presence of fine organic material, and small root intrusions. Based on our field observations, we estimate topsoil will be encountered across the site with an average thickness of 10 inches. Deeper pockets of topsoil, however, may be encountered locally throughout the site. Fill was encountered to depths of approximately one to two -and -one-half feet below the existing ground surface (bgs) at TP-1 and TP-2. Where encountered during construction, fill may be suitable for re -use as structural fill, but should be evaluated at the appropriate time of construction by ESNW. Approximately 10 to 12 inches of topsoil was encountered underlying areas of fill. Where encountered in structural areas of the site, the underlying topsoil and organic rich soil must be removed and replaced with suitable structural fill. Native Soil Underlying topsoil and fill, native soils were encountered consisting primarily of medium dense to dense, silty sand with gravel (USCS: SM). The native soils were observed primarily in a moist to wet condition. The maximum exploration depth was approximately seven -and -one-half feet bgs. Geologic Setting The referenced geologic map resource identifies ground moraine deposits (Qgt), known as glacial till, across the site and surrounding areas. Glacial till typically consists of a nonsorted mixture of clay, silt, sand, pebbles, cobbles, and boulders in variable amounts. The till was deposited directly by ice advanced over previously deposited sediment and rocks. The referenced WSS resource identifies Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (Map Unit Symbols: AgC) as the primary soil unit underlying the subject site. The Alderwood series were formed in ridges and hills. Based on our field observations, native soils on the subject site are generally consistent with the geologic setting outlined in this section. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 Groundwater ES-4948 Page 4 During our subsurface exploration completed on December 7, 2016, light to heavy perched groundwater seepage was encountered depths of approximately one to three feet bgs at the test pit locations. Soil mottling was observed generally below the areas of seepage at the test pit locations. In our opinion, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater seepage will likely be encountered within site excavations, particularly within deeper excavations for new utilities and the vault. The contractor should anticipate, and be prepared to respond to, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater during construction. Temporary measures to control surface water runoff and groundwater during construction would likely involve interceptor trenches and sumps. Seepage rates and elevations fluctuate depending on many factors, including precipitation duration and intensity, the time of year, and soil conditions_ In general, groundwater flow rates are higher during the wetter, winter months. If the proposed project starts in the winter, spring, or early summer, an interceptor drain should be considered on the uphill gradient of the site. Critical Areas Based on our review of the Sensitive Area maps provided by the City of Renton and the King County GIS online database, the subject site does not lie within a critical area. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on the results of our investigation, construction of the proposed residential development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. The primary geotechnical considerations associated with the proposed development include site drainage, foundation support, slab -on -grade subgrade support, the suitability of using native soils as structural fill, installation of site utilities, and construction of the vault. In our opinion, the proposed residential structures may be constructed on conventional continuous and spread footing foundations bearing upon competent native soil, recompacted native soil, or new structural fill. In general, competent native soil, suitable for support of new foundations, will likely be encountered within the upper three to four feet of existing grades. Where loose or unsuitable soil conditions are exposed at foundation subgrade elevations, compaction of soils to the specifications of structural fill, or overexcavation and replacement with a suitable structural fill material, will be necessary. In our opinion, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater seepage will likely be encountered within site excavations, particularly within deeper excavations for new utilities and the vault. The contractor should anticipate, and be prepared to respond to, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater during construction. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum ES-4948 December 20, 2016 Page 6 Construction of the vault is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. We anticipate medium dense to dense, undisturbed deposits will be encountered within excavations at depth for the vault subgrade elevation. With respect to infiltration, it is our opinion native soils will not accommodate large-scale or full infiltration facility design; however, native soils may be feasible for limited infiltration and/or bioretention applications, provided overflow provisions are incorporated into final designs. This study has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Stein Skattum and his representatives. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This study has been prepared in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. Site Preparation and Earthwork Initial site preparation activities will consist of installing temporary erosion control measures, establishing grading limits, performing site clearing and site stripping (as necessary), and removing existing structural improvements. Subsequent earthwork procedures will involve mass grading and related infrastructure improvements. Temporary Erosion Control Prior to the installation of either initial or final pavement sections, temporary construction entrances and drive lanes, consisting of at least 12 inches of quarry spalls, should be considered in order to both minimize off -site soil tracking and provide a stable access surface for construction vehicles. Geotextile fabric may also be considered underlying the quarry spalls for greater stability of the temporary construction entrance. Erosion control measures should consist of silt fencing placed around appropriate portions of the site perimeter. Where generated, soil stockpiles should be covered or otherwise protected to reduce the potential for soil erosion during periods of wet weather. Temporary approaches for controlling surface water runoff should be established prior to beginning earthwork activities. Additional Best Management Practices (BMPs), as specified by the project civil engineer and indicated on the plans, should be incorporated into construction activities, as necessary. Stripping Topsoil was encountered generally within the upper 3 to 12 inches of existing grades at the test pit locations. ESNW should be retained to observe site stripping activities at the time of construction in order to assess the required degree of stripping. Over -stripping may result in increased project development costs and should be avoided. Topsoil and organic -rich soil is neither suitable for foundation support nor for use as structural fill. Topsoil and organic -rich soil may be used in non-structural areas, if desired. Earth Solutions NW, t_LC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 In -situ and Imported Soils ES-4948 Page 6 From a geotechnical standpoint, native soils may not be suitable for use as structural fill unless the soils are near the optimum moisture content at the time of placement and compaction. Based on relatively appreciable fines contents, native soils should be considered moisture sensitive. Successful use of native soils as structural fill will largely be dictated by the moisture content at the time of placement and compaction. In general, on -site soils that are at (or slightly above) the optimum moisture content at the time of placement and compaction may be used as structural fill_ If the on -site soils cannot be successfully compacted, the use of an imported soil may be necessary. In our opinion, if grading activities take place during months of heavy rainfall activity, a contingency should be provided in the project budget for export of soil that cannot be successfully compacted as structural fill and subsequent import of granular structural fill. Soils with fines contents greater than 5 percent typically degrade rapidly when exposed to periods of rainfall. Imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a well -graded, granular soil with a moisture content that is at (or slightly above) the optimum level. During wet weather conditions, imported soil intended for use as structural fill should consist of a well -graded, granular soil with a fines content of 5 percent or less (where the fines content is defined as the percent passing the Number 200 sieve, based on the minus three -quarter -inch fraction). Subgrade Preparation Following site stripping (where necessary) and removal of the existing structures, cuts and fills will be necessary to establish the proposed subgrade elevation(s) across the site. ESNW should observe the subgrades during initial site preparation activities to confirm soil conditions and to provide supplementary recommendations for subgrade preparation. The process of removing the existing structures may produce voids where old foundations and/or crawl space areas may have been present. Complete restoration of voids (caused by the removal of existing structural improvements) must be executed as part of overall subgrade and building pad preparation activities. The following guidelines for preparing building subgrade areas should be incorporated into the final design: Where voids and related demolition disturbances extend below planned subgrade elevations, restoration of these areas should be completed. Structural fill should be used to restore voids or unstable areas resulting from the removal of existing structural improvements. + Recompact, or overexcavate and replace, areas of existing fill (if present) exposed at building subgrade elevations. ESNW should confirm subgrade conditions and the required level of recompaction, or overexcavation and replacement, during site preparation activities. Overexcavations should extend into competent native soils, and structural fill should be utilized to restore subgrade as necessary, • ESNW should confirm the overall suitability of prepared subgrade areas following site preparation activities. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum December 20, 2016 Structural Fill ES-4948 Page 7 Structural fill is defined as compacted soil placed in foundation, slab -on -grade, and roadway areas. Fill placed to construct permanent slopes and throughout retaining wall and utility trench backfill areas is also considered structural fill. Soils placed in structural areas should be placed in loose lifts of 12 inches or less and compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent, based on the laboratory maximum dry density as determined by the Modified Proctor Method (ASTM D1557). Additionally, more stringent compaction specifications may be required for utility trench backfill zones depending on the responsible utility district or jurisdiction. Foundations In our opinion, the proposed residential structures may be constructed on conventional continuous and spread footing foundations bearing upon competent native soil, recompacted native soil, or new structural fill. In general, competent native soil, suitable for support of new foundations, should be encountered within the upper three to four feet of existing grades. Where necessary, loose or unsuitable soil conditions exposed at foundation subgrade elevations should be compacted to the specifications of structural fill or overexcavation and replaced with a suitable structural fill. Organic material encountered at structural subgrade elevations, such as the topsoil underlying the fill encountered at TP-1 and TP-2, should be removed, and grades should be restored with structural fill as necessary. Provided the foundations will be supported as described above, the following parameters may be used for design: • Allowable soil bearing capacity 2,500 psf • Passive earth pressure 300 pcf (equivalent fluid) • Coefficient of friction 0.40 A one-third increase in the allowable soil bearing capacity may be assumed for short-term wind and seismic loading conditions. The above passive pressure and friction values include a factor -of -safety of 1.5. With structural loading as expected, total settlement in the range of one inch and differential settlement of about one-half inch is anticipated. The majority of the settlements should occur during construction, as dead loads are applied. Seismic Design The 2015 International Building Code recognizes the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) for seismic site class definitions. In accordance with Table 20.3-1 of the ASCE Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures manual, Site Class D should be used for design. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum ES-4948 December 20, 2016 Page 8 The referenced liquefaction susceptibility map indicates the site and surrounding areas maintain very low to low liquefaction susceptibility. Liquefaction is a phenomenon where saturated or loose soils suddenly lose internal strength and behave as a fluid. This behavior is in response to soil grain contraction and increased pore water pressures resulting from an earthquake or other intense ground shaking. In our opinion, site susceptibility to liquefaction may be considered negligible. The relatively consistent and compact density of the native soils and the absence of a uniformly established, shallow groundwater table were the primary bases for this consideration. Slab -on -Grade Floors Slab -on -grade floors for the proposed residential structures should be supported on a well - compacted, firm and unyielding subgrade. Where feasible, native soils exposed at the slab -on - grade subgrade level can likely be compacted in situ to the specifications of structural fill. Unstable or yielding areas of the subgrade should be recompacted, or overexcavated and replaced with suitable structural fill, prior to construction of the slab. A capillary break consisting of a minimum of four inches of free -draining crushed rock or gravel should be placed below the slab. The free -draining crushed rock or gravel should have a fines content of 5 percent or less (where the fines content is defined as the percent passing the Number 200 sieve, based on the minus three -quarter -inch fraction). In areas where slab moisture is undesirable, installation of a vapor barrier below the slab should be considered. If a vapor barrier is to be utilized, it should be a material specifically designed for use as a vapor barrier and should be installed in accordance with the specifications of the manufacturer. Retaining Walls Retaining walls must be designed to resist earth pressures and applicable surcharge loads. The following parameters may be used for design: • Active earth pressure (yielding condition) At -rest earth pressure (restrained condition) • Traffic surcharge* (passenger vehicles) • Passive earth pressure Coefficient of friction i Seismic surcharge "Where applicable, and where H equals the retained height (in feet) Earth Solutions NW. LLC 35 pcf (equivalent fluid) 55 pcf 70 psf (rectangular distribution) 300 pcf (equivalent fluid) MElto] 6H* Mr. Stein Skattum ES-4948 December 20, 2016 Page 9 The above design parameters are based on a level backfill condition and level grade at the wall toe. Revised design values will be necessary if sloping grades are to be used above or below retaining walls. Additional surcharge loading from adjacent foundations, sloped backfill, or other loads should be included in the retaining wall design, where applicable. Retaining walls should be backfilled with free -draining material that extends along the height of the wall and a distance of at least 18 inches behind the wall. The upper 12 inches of the wall backfill can consist of a less permeable soil, if desired. A perforated drainpipe should be placed along the base of the wall and connected to an approved discharge location. A typical retaining wall drainage detail is provided on Plate 3. If drainage is not provided, hydrostatic pressures should be included in the wall design. Drainage Discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater seepage should be anticipated within site excavations, particularly in excavations at depth for utilities and the vault. The contractor should anticipate, and be prepared to respond to, discrete to moderate zones of perched groundwater during construction. Temporary measures to control surface water runoff and groundwater during construction would likely involve interceptor trenches and sumps. ESNW should be consulted during preliminary grading to identify areas of seepage and to provide recommendations to reduce the potential for instability related to seepage effects. Finish grades must be designed to direct surface drain water away from structures, slopes and walls. Water must not be allowed to pond adjacent to structures, slopes or walls. In our opinion, foundation drains should be installed along building perimeter footings. A typical foundation drain detail is provided on Plate 4. Infiltration Feasibility As indicated in the Subsurface section of this report, native soils encountered during our fieldwork were characterized primarily as medium dense to dense glacial till. From a geotechnical standpoint, glacial till is not considered an ideal geologic feature for accommodation of infiltration facilities, especially when encountered in a dense, compact state. In general, the infiltration capacity of glacial till should be considered minimal. It may be possible to accommodate construction of rain gardens (bioretention) and other limited - infiltration facilities, provided overflow provisions are successfully incorporated into final designs. ESNW can provide further evaluation of, and recommendations for, stormwater flow control BMPs upon request. Preliminary Detention Vault Design Stormwater is expected to be managed by a detention vault located within the southwest area of the site. We anticipate cuts of approximately 10 to 15 feet may be necessary to achieve the vault foundation subgrade elevation. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum ES-4948 December 20, 2016 Page 10 The vault foundations should be supported directly on competent, native, undisturbed soil at depth. Final vault designs must incorporate adequate buffer space from property boundaries or sensitive areas such that temporary excavations to construct the vault structure can be successfully completed. Perimeter drains should be installed around the vault and conveyed to an approved discharge point. Perched groundwater seepage should be expected within excavations for the vault. In our opinion, the contractor should be prepared to respond to the presence of perched groundwater during construction of the vault. Provided the vault will be supported as described above, the following parameters may be used for preliminary design: Allowable soil bearing capacity 5,000 psf (dense glacial till) • Active earth pressure (unrestrained) 35 pcf At -rest earth pressure (restrained) 55 pcf • Coefficient of friction 0.40 Passive earth pressure 300 pcf Seismic surcharge 6H* " Where applicable, and where H equals the retained height (in feet) Vault walls should be backfilled with free -draining material or suitable sheet drainage that extends along the height of the walls. The upper one foot of the wall backfill may consist of a less permeable soil, if desired. A perforated drainpipe should be placed along the base of the wall and connected to an approved discharge location. If the elevation of the vault bottom is such that gravity flow to an outlet is not possible, the portion of the vault below the drain should be designed to include hydrostatic pressure. ESNW should observe grading operations for the vault, as well as subgrade conditions prior to concrete forming and pouring, in order to confirm conditions are as anticipated and to provide supplementary recommendations as necessary. Excavations and Slopes The Federal Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (WISHA) provide soil classification in terms of temporary slope inclinations. Soils that exhibit high compressive strengths are allowed steeper temporary slope inclinations than are soils that exhibit lower strength characteristics. Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum ES-4948 December 20, 2016 Page 11 Based on the soil conditions encountered at the test pit locations, upper weathered soils, fill soils, and any area where groundwater seepage is exposed would be classified as Type C by OSHA and WISHA. Temporary slopes over four feet in height in Type C soils must be sloped no steeper than one -and -one-half horizontal to one vertical (1.511:1V). Very dense native deposits encountered without the presence of groundwater may be classified as Type A by OSHA and WISHA. Temporary slopes over four feet in height in Type A soils must be sloped no steeper than 6.75H:1V. Type A soils that are fissured, subjected to vibrations from heavy traffic, or have been otherwise previously disturbed must be classified as Type B by OSHA and WISHA. Temporary slopes over four feet in height in Type B soils must be sloped no steeper than 1 HA V. ESNW can provide supplementary recommendations, including field observations of excavations for the vault, during the appropriate phase of construction. The presence of perched groundwater may cause localized sloughing of the temporary slopes due to excess seepage forces. ESNW should observe site excavations to confirm soil types and allowable slope inclinations. If the recommended temporary slope inclinations cannot be achieved, temporary shoring may be necessary to support excavations_ Given the groundwater encountered during our subsurface exploration, temporary slopes for the vault excavation may need to be flatter than 1 H:1 V, if conditions warrant. Permanent slopes should be planted with vegetation to enhance stability and to minimize erosion, and should maintain a gradient of 2HAV or flatter. An ESNW representative should observe temporary and permanent slopes to confirm the slope inclinations are suitable for the exposed soil conditions. Supplementary excavation and slope recommendations may be provided at the time of construction, as necessary. Preliminary Pavement Sections The performance of site pavements is largely related to the condition of the underlying subgrade. To ensure adequate pavement performance, the subgrade should be in a firm and unyielding condition when subjected to proofrolling with a loaded dump truck. Structural fill in pavement areas should be compacted to the specifications previously detailed in this report. Soft, wet, or otherwise unsuitable subgrade areas may still exist after base grading activities. Areas containing unsuitable or yielding subgrade conditions will require remedial measures, such as overexcavation and/or placement of thicker crushed rock or structural fill sections, prior to pavement. We anticipate new pavement sections will be subjected primarily to passenger vehicle traffic. For lightly loaded pavement areas subjected primarily to passenger vehicles, the following preliminary pavement sections may be considered: A minimum of two inches of hot mix asphalt (HMA) placed over four inches of crushed surfacing top course (CSTC), or; • A minimum of two inches of HMA placed over three inches of asphalt treated base (ATB). Earth Solutions NW, LLC Mr. Stein Skattum ES-4948 December 20, 2016 Page 12 The HMA, ATB and CSTC materials should conform to WSDOT specifications. All soil base material should be compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent, based on the laboratory maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. Final pavement design recommendations, including recommendations for heavy traffic areas, main access roads, and frontage improvement areas, can be provided once final traffic loading has been determined. Road standards utilized by the City of Renton may supersede the recommendations provided in this report. Utility Support and Trench Backfill In our opinion, native soils may not be suitable for support of utilities unless the soils are near the optimum moisture content at the time of placement. Organic -rich soils are not considered suitable for direct support of utilities and may require removal at utility grades if encountered. Remedial measures, such as overexcavation and replacement with structural fill and/or installation of geotextile fabric, may be necessary in some areas in order to provide support for utilities. Groundwater seepage will likely be encountered within utility excavations, and caving of trench walls may occur where groundwater is encountered. Temporary construction dewatering, as well as temporary trench shoring, may be necessary during utility excavation and installation as conditions warrant. In general, native soils may be suitable for use as structural backfill throughout utility trench excavations, provided the soils are at (or slightly above) the optimum moisture content at the time of placement and compaction. Structural trench backfill should not be placed dry of the optimum moisture content. Each section of the site utility lines must be adequately supported in appropriate bedding material. Utility trench backfill should be placed and compacted to the specifications of structural fill as previously detailed in this report, or to the applicable specifications of the City of Renton or other responsible jurisdiction or agency. LIMITATIONS The recommendations and conclusions provided in this study are professional opinions consistent with the level of care and skill that is typical of other members in the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in this area. A warranty is not expressed or implied. Variations in the soil and groundwater conditions observed at the test pit locations may exist and may not become evident until construction. ESNW should reevaluate the conclusions provided in this study if variations are encountered. Additional Services ESNW should have an opportunity to review final project plans with respect to the geotechnical recommendations provided in this study. ESNW should also be retained to provide testing and consultation services during construction. Earth Solutions NW, LLC it A1.1�' � r•Nil, L .r r 17tt- .1- : UNTM TH �18 � LG�IGaCAf � � SrnAL MAW, 1 � + 4 rR "I I - ' .' ',4 40 I i'1o._ ai '4 N I % � S +rn SST..•, �1.'- •. r R e'F�' ]�A�'�"� yrN4,0 �SlPtlr� ��o� a lraa '.5 itq t IV i 4` L4 _ f $Ii111W5 AA A— +SLd0r W.1 !w 0.4 FfNIC rL JaWH TW WAS 7fi"ttii 1��" SI _ _ sr, 'x �''tQfH h s zr s s_ l4 Y .10 r'r•- YAI'S1 !r -,M r mar_TrT lc iii ^ ` �7 i 3tiw 'i-i i II i Reference: King County, Washington Map 656 By The Thomas Guide Vicinity Ma Rand McNally Y P 32nd Edition Skattum Short Plat Renton, Washington NOTE: This plate may contain areas of color. ESNVV cannot be Drwn• MRS Date 12/19/2016 Proj. No. 4948 responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate Checked BJP Date Dec. 2016 Plate 1 LEGEND TP-1 Approximate Location of — ■ — ESNW Test Pit, Proj. No. ES-4948, Dec. 2016 Subject Site Existing Building Proposed Building NOTE: The graphics shown on this plate are not intended for design purposes or precise scale measurements. but only to illustrate the approximate test locations relative to the approximate locations of existing and / or proposed site features The information illustrated is largely based on data provided by the client at the time of our study. ESNW cannot be responsible for subsequent design changes or interpretation of the data by others. NOTE: This plate may contain areas cf color. ESNW cannot be responsible for any subsequent misinterpretation of the information resulting from black & white reproductions of this plate. '-4 0 30 60 120 1 =60' W Scale in Feet Earth Solutions NW L�c Test Pit Location Plan Skattum Short Plat Renton, Washington Drwn. MRS Date 12/19/2016 kroj. No, 4948 Checked BJP Date Dec. 2016 Plate 2 18" Min. 0 o a l 0. O 0 0 o �Oa� a 00 o V O O9 0 o Qp 0 O° 4.!O C O a o p o o po o� -oo p -0 cam o �o O o o O o g o o O o 0 OV O 0 o� p1R O V c 0 o Q o ot! p G O (� o Ooo ooO Oo OOO O o pV o 00000 0-0 O p o 0 o 0 oo 00 o p 0 o a o O 0 p 4 O c C�00 p �o O V o ooOo -.o-0 o o g o pp 0 00F10 0 0 a0 ' pO o po 00 p V o o o O 0' p o. o 0 o 00 0 .0 00 o a 0. p O o 0 0 '-' p0O O o �oQoo0 o O DO � Oa 0 00 0 0 fir. NOTES: • Free Draining Backfill should consist of soil having less than 5 percent fines. Percent passing #4 should be 25 to 75 percent. • Sheet Drain may be feasible in lieu of Free Draining Backfill, per ESNW recommendations. • Drain Pipe should consist of perforated, rigid PVC Pipe surrounded with 1" Drain Rock. LEGEND: D pp o 0 0o0 0 Free Draining Structural Backfill p 4 +r.l.s.s. .�.r.r.r. +r;r;rti fti 1 inch Drain Rock Structural Fill Perforated Drain Pipe (Surround In Drain Rock) SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE NOT ACONSTRUCTION DRAWING Earth Solutions N W uc RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL Skattum Short Plat Renton, Washington Drwn. MRS Date 12/19/2016 Proj. No. 4948 Checked BJP Date Dec. 2016 Plate 3 Perforated Rigid Drain Pipe (Surround with 1" Rock) NOTES: • Do NOT tie roof downspouts to Footing Drain. • Surface Seal to consist of 12" of less permeable, suitable soil. Slope away from building. LEGEND: Surface Seal; native soil or other low permeability material. ;.r•f.r•r ti.S•ti•ti• r•r•r•r•r 1" Drain Rock ti.ti..,. Z SCHEMATIC ONLY - NOT TO SCALE NOT A CONSTRUCTION DRAWING Earth Solutions IVW 11 c FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL Skattum Short Plat Renton, Washington Drwn. MRS Date 12/19/2016 Proj. No. 4948 Checked BJP Date Dec.2016 Plate 4 Appendix A Subsurface Exploration ES-4948 Subsurface conditions at the subject site were explored on December 7, 2016 by excavating five test pits using a mini trackhoe and operator provided by our firm. The approximate locations of the test pits are illustrated on Plate 2 of this study. The test pit logs are provided in this Appendix_ The test pits were advanced to a maximum depth of approximately seven -and - one -half feet bgs. The final logs represent the interpretations of the field logs and the results of laboratory analyses. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types. In actuality, the transitions may be more gradual_ Earth Solutions NW, LLC Earth Solutions NWLLC SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOLS TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS GRAPH LETTER GRAVEL AND CLEAN GRAVELS s ��� • , GW WELL -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES GRAVELLY SOILS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) oar ;av pQo 0 '00,00 GP POORLY -GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NO FINES COARSE GRAINED SOILS MORE THAN 50°J° OF COARSE GRAVELS WITH FINES °� '° a ° 0 GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL -SAND - SILT MIXTURES FRACTION RETAINED ON NO. 4 SIEVE (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) G+�+ CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL- SAND - CLAY MIXTURES MORE THAN 50% OF MATERIAL IS SAND AND CLEAN SANDS SW WELL -GRADED SANDS. GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OK NO FINES SP POORLY -GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NO FINES LARGER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE SIZE SANDY SOILS (LITTLE OR NO FINES) SANDS WITH FINES SM SILTY SANDS. SAND - SILT MIXTURES MORE THAN50% OF COARSE FRACTION PASSING ON NO. 4 SIEVE (APPRECIABLE AMOUNT OF FINES) SC CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY MIXTURES INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE. ML SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY GL INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, LEAN CLAYS FINE GRAINED SOILS SILTS AND LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN 50 CLAYS _ OL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY MORE THAN 5u% OF MATERIAL IS SMALLER THAN NO. 200 SIEVE MH INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND OR SILTY SOILS SIZE SILTS LIQUID LIMIT ANDS GREATER THAN 50 CLAY CH INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY OH ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS _ PT PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITH HIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS DUAL SYMBOLS are used to indicate borderline sail classifications. The discussion in the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of the nature of the material presented in the attached logs. Earth Solutions NW T r PIT NUMBER TP-1 1805- 136th Place N.E., Suite 1 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-44941711 CLIENT Mr. Stein Skattum PROJECT NAME Skattum Short Plat PROJECT NUMBER 4946 PROJECT LOCATION Renton, Washingon DATE STARTED 12f7116COMPLETED 1217116 GROUND ELEVATION 390 ft TEST PfT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating_ _ GROUNDWATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY _8JP _ _ CHECKED BY BJP AT END OF EXCAVATION -- NOTES Depth_ of Topsoil & Sod 3': grass AFTER EXCAVATION — W of of '6 _ wCO a=) TESTS ui CL O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION o az u} 0 Brown silty SAND, loose, moist to wet (Fill) SM MC = 19.00% 2 Dark brown TOPSOIL TPSL , ,, -roots, moderate to heavy groundwater seepage, slight caving to 4' ---- - - — 35 386._5 MC = 25.80% Tan silty SAND with gravel, medium dense, moist to wet Fines = 27.84% [USDA Classification: gravelly sandy LOAM] 5 -mottled texture SM MC = 21.30% 75 --- -- ..382.5 Test pit terminated at 7.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 2.5 feet during excavation. Caving observed from 2.5 to 4 feet. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. k t3 Eart tions NW TEST PIT NUMBER TP-2 1805 - _6th Place N.E., Suite 201 PAGE 1 OF 1 Bekevue, Washington 980d5 Telephone! 425-049-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711 CLIENT Mr. Stein 5kattum PROJECT NAME Skattum Short Plat PROJECT NUMBER 4948 PROJECT LOCATION Renton, Washingon_ DATE STARTED 1217116 COMPLETED 1217/16 _ GROUND ELEVATION 396 ft TEST PIT SI2E EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR _NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY BJP CHECKED BY BJP AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES Depth of Topsoil &_Sod 3" grass AFTER EXCAVATION _ w } ix LS aUj InTESTS (L J MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ❑ o� ¢z v) d Brown silty SAND, loose, moist to wet SM 1.0 -caving to 3' 395.0 Dark brown TOPSOIL, roots TPSL ,_ .:, 2.0 -heavy groundwater seepage 394.0 Brown silty SAND, medium dense, moist to wet MC = 18.40% -becomes wet MC = 27,20% g SM MC = 21.10% -becomes medium dense to dense, moist 7.5 -mottled texture 30.s MC = 23.80% Test pit terminated at 7.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 1.0 foot during excavation. Caving observed from TOH to 3 Feet. Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. Earth Solutions NW T r PIT NUMBER TP-3 1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite ­1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 PAGE 1 OF 1 Telephone: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711 CLIENT Mr. Stein Skattum PROJECT NAME Skattum Short Plat PROJECT NUMBER 4948 PROJECT LOCATION Renton, Washingon _ DATE STARTED 1217116 ., — COMPLETED 12/7116 __- GROUND ELEVATION 400 ft rn TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW Excavating GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY BJP CHECKED BY BJP AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES _Depth -of Topsoil & Sod 10"- 12": -grass AFTER EXCAVATION -- w CL aTESTS W cr1 U � p MATERIAL DESCRIPTION z c� 0 W Dark brown TOPSOIL and roots TPSL, ' 1.0 _ _ Grown siltyAND, L Soose, moist MC = 15.60% [USDA Classification: slightly gravelly sandy LOAM] Fines = 36.00% SM -becomes moist to wet, slight caving from T to 5' -moderate groundwater seepage 5 MC = 34.50% 5.0— — - -- -- - _ 395.0 — Tan sandy SILT, medium dense to dense, moist ML -mottled texture 6.5 393.5 SM _ 7.0 Gray sllty SAND, medium dense, wet MC = 20.00% ..393.0 Test pit terminated at 7.0 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 3.0 feet during excavation. Caving observed from 3' to 5'. Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. Eart tions NW 1805 - _6th Place N.E., Suite 201 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Telephone: 425-449-4704 Fax: 425-449-4711 CLIENT Mr. Stein Skattum PROJECT NUMBER 4948 DATE STARTED 1217116 COMPLETED 1217116 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW.Excavatina EXCAVATION METHOD LOGGED BY BJP CHECKED BY BJP NOTES De tp h of To sp ail g Sod 10":_grass_ TEST PIT NUMBER TP-4 PAGE 1 OF 1 PROJECT NAME Skattum Short Plat PROJECT LOCATION _RentonWashingo_n_ GROUND ELEVATION 404 ft TEST PIT 312E GROUND WATER LEVELS: AT TIME OF EXCAVATION AT END OF EXCAVATION -- AFTER EXCAVATION — _ a $ Ud 0 w ul ul Lu _ COTESTS � � 2z v; Uj ca Q.0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Dark brown TOPSOIL TPSL; Brown silty SAND, loose, moist = MG 2D.90°/a -light groundwater seepage, light caving to 3' -becomes tan, medium dense -mottled texture MC = 18.70% SM 5 -becomes gray, medium dense to dense MC = 1 1-70% T,5 -weakly cemented 396 5 Fines = 37.25% \[USDA Classification: slightly gravelly sandy LOAMY Test pit terminated at 7.5 feet below existing grade. Groundwater seepage encountered at 2.0 feet during excavation- Light caving observed from 2 to 3 feet. Bottom of lest pit at 7.5 feet. Earth Solutions NW T r PIT NUMBER TP-5 1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite ru1 Bellevue, Washington 98005 PAGE 1 OF 1 Telephone: 425- 49-47G4 WAN Fax: 425-449-4711 CLIENT Mr. Stein Skattum _ PROJECT NAME Skattum Short Plat PROJECT NUMBER 4948 PROJECT LOCATION _Renton, Washingon DATE STARTED 12f7116 _ COMPLETED 1.217116 _ GROUND ELEVATION 402 ft- TEST PIT SIZE EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR NW ExCav_ating- — _- GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY BJP CHECKED BY BJP AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES Deeth of Topsoil & Sod 10"- 12": grass _ AFTER EXCAVATION -- u! CL Ww W g TESTS _ Q 8 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION p o- : qoc z =)0 0 Dark brown TOPSOIL PSL,, }; 1_ -0 _4.6_1.0 Brown silty SAND with gravel, loose, moist MC = 10.30% Fines = 17.06% -becomes medium dense [USDA Classificaliom very gravelly sandy LOAM] SM -becomes tan, medium dense to dense MC = 15,90% 5 -mottled texture -becomes gray, dense MC = 9.10% Test pit terminated at 7.0 feet below existing grade. No groundwater encountered during excavation. No caving observed. Bottom of test pit at TO feet. Appendix B Laboratory Test Results ES-4948 Earth Solutions NW, LLC Cnrlh � • Wlu�lun� \Nip �Oiiii��■�iiin i N■ i°iii�ii�iiii� � N �' IIN�� � � i��y�1��I�I1N1■■AEI; 11 qll ■■�I�I■�III���■�I��������1� 1�1■�YIIN�■�II� I ' ,�I���II I ��i������� I 11� 11 1 �IIIg11■■IIIYI 11��■IIII 0 1 �IIir1111■�IIIYI ����1 ■NN ■� I���i� NI;■�I�HNI „ �,i� ����IIIYII■�I111■�YII■1 ■m����■■��M�i�i�ui�ll 11�1 �111 Ip i II��IIIII��Iq 11■■III�I�I���II��IINI� COBBLES GRAVE ND fine medium —fine Specimen Identification m USDA: Brown Slightly Gravelly Sandy Loam. USCS: SM. 7.5011. USIA: Gray Slightly Gravelly Sandy Loam. USCS: SM. 0TP-4 �.Specimen COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY SILT DR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Report Distribution ES-4948 EMAIL ONLY Mr. Stein Skattum P.O. Box 769 Renton, Washington 98057 EMAIL ONLY Litchfield Engineering 12840 — 81st Avenue Northeast Kirkland, Washington 98034 Attention: Mr. Keith Litchfield, P.E. Earth Solutions NW, LLC 1,«Wrei u ARBORIST REPORT AFM -4-4 11415 NE 1281h St Suite 110 Kirkland WA 98034 • (425)820-3420 a FAX (425)820-343 i www.ame.ricanforestmanagemeiit.com 2, _ Arborist Report Skattum Plat 17018 & 17022 106th Ave SE Renton, WA December 13th, 2016 Table of Contents 1. Introduction................................................................................. 1 2. Description...............................................................................................................1 3. Methodology............................................................................................................1 4. Observations..................................... .....................................................................2 5. Discussion...............................................................................................................3 6- Tree Retention.........................................................................................................3 7. Tree Replacement...................................................................................................3 8. Tree Protection Measures ...........................................................................4 Appendix SitefTree Photos — pages 7 - 12 Tree Summary Table -- attached Tree Locator Map - attached Tree Plan Map — attached City of Renton Tree Protection Measures — page 6 American Forest Management 12113/2016 Skattum Plat - Arborist Report 1. Introduction American Forest Management, Inc. was contacted by Keith Litchfield of Litchfield Engineering and was asked to compile an 'Arborist Report' for two parcels located within the City of Renton, The proposed subdivision encompasses the properties at 17018 & 17022 106" Ave SE. Our assignment is to prepare a written report on present tree conditions, which is to be filed with the preliminary permit application. This report encompasses all of the criteria set forth under City of Renton code section 4-4-130. The tree retention requirement is 30% of significant trees. Date of Field Examination: December 6th, 2016 2. Description 70 significant trees were identified and assessed on the property. According to City of Renton code, a significant tree is a tree with a caliper (trunk diameter measured 4-1/2' above the ground) of at least 6" or an alder or cottonwood tree with a caliper of at least 8". frees planted within the most recent 10 years qualify as significant trees, regardless of the actual caliper. A numbered aluminum tag was placed on the lower trunks of the subject trees. These numbers were used for this assessment. Tree tag numbers correspond with the numbers on the Tree Summary Tables and copy of the attached site survey. There are eight neighboring trees with a drip lines that extend over the property line. 3. Methodology Each tree in this report was visited. Tree diameters were measured by tape. The tree heights were measured using a Spiegel Relaskop. Each tree was visually examined for defects and vigor. The tree assessment procedure involves the examination of many factors: • The crown of the tree is examined for current vigor. This is comprised of inspecting the crown (foliage, buds and branches) for color, density, form, and annual shoot growth, Limb dieback and disease. The percentage of live crown is estimated for coniferous species only and scored appropriately. • The bole or main stem of the tree is inspected for decay. which includes cavities, wounds, fruiting bodies of decay (conks or mushrooms), seams, insects, bleeding, callus development, broken or dead tops, structural defects and unnatural leans. Structural defects include crooks, forks with V-shaped crotches, multiple attachments, and excessive sweep. • The root collar and roots are inspected for the presence of decay, insects and,or datuage, as well as if they have been injured, undermined or exposed, or original grade has been altered. Based on these factors a determination of condition is made. The four condition categories are described below based on the species traits assessed: Excellent - fi-ee of structural defects. no disease or pest problems, no root issues. excellent structure" Form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, above average vigor.. it will be wind firm if isolated, suitable for its location Good --- free of significant structural defects, no disease concerns, minor pest issues, no significant root issues, good structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, average or normal vigor, will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, suitable for its location Page 1 American Forest Management 121l3/2016 Skattum Plat - Arborist Report Fair — minor structural defects not expected to contribute to a failure in near future, no disease concerns, moderate pest issues, no significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, average or normal vigor, foliage of normal color, moderate foliage density, will be wind firm if left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, cannot be isolated, suitable for its location Poor — major structural defects expected to fail in near future, disease or significant pest concerns, decline due to old age, significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, sparse or abnormally small foliage, poor vigor, not suitable for its location A `viable' tree is "A siznilicanl tree that a qualified professional has determined to be in good health, with a low risk of failure due to structural defects, is wind firm rf isolated or remains cis part of a grove., and is a species that is suitable for its location. " Trees considered `non -viable' are trees that are in poor condition due to disease, age related decline, have significant decay issues and/or cumulative structural defects, which exacerbate failure potential. The attached tree map indicates the `condition' of the subject trees found at the site. 4. Observations The subject trees are primarily native, mature conifers. Specific tree information for individual trees can be found on the attached tree table. The Douglas -fir trees on the property are generally healthy and mature, estimated at 60 — 70 years of age..Most were planted in rows or clusters. The row of Douglas -fir trees on the west property line. #t 150 - #156.. are growing very closely together and should not be isolated. One incident of fungal disease was observed. A Phaeolus schiveinitzii conk was found 1' from the trunk of tree # 132. The vigor of tree 4132 is good and the infection is suspected to be incipient, Foliage color is good. All of the Douglas -fir trees on the site are viable. The western red cedar trees on the property are generally mature. Most of the western red cedar trees on the property are in groupings. Decay was observed in multiple trees. The decay is suspected to be brown cubical rot, but no fungal fruiting bodies were found. Some of the western red cedar trees were topped in the past. Co - dominant trunks with included bark wer commonly observed and are the most concerning defect. The western red cedar trees on the property range in dondition and all but one are viable. Tree # 165 - # 167 are black cottonwood I rces on the west side of the property. Tree 9165 and # 166 are mature black cottonwoods growing closely toge her. Tree 4165 has a DBH of 54" and a height of 167'. Tree #166 has a DBH of 45" and a height of 154, Large limbs on both tree have failed but no other concerning defects were observed. Tree #167 is younger. The top of this tree broke off and there is decay in the trunk, All three trees are viable. Tree #149 is an English oak on the west property line. This tree has a forked trunk. The attachment between the two trunks is good. The crown is full and no other defects were observed_ This tree is in good condition and is viable, Tree #125, 9130 and 9131 are European larch trees on the west side of the property. Tree #130 and 413l have poor trunk taper. All three trees are viable. Neighboring Trees Tree #201 - 9206 are mature big leaf maple trees north and cast of the property lines. Big leaf maple trees often have large lateral branches. Co -dominant trunks with included bark were the most common defects observed. All six trees are in fair to good condition and are viable_ Tree r#207 is a mature Douglas -fir south of the property line. This tree has no concerning defects, is in good condition and is viable. Page 2 American Forest Management 12/1312016 Skattum Plat - Arborist Report 5. Discussion The extent of drip -lines (farthest reaching branches) for the subject trees can be found on the tree summary tables at the back of this report. These have also been delineated on a copy of the site survey for viable/healthy trees proposed for retention. The information plotted on the attached survey plan may need to be transferred to a final tree retention/protection plan to meet City submittal requirements. The trees that are to be removed shall be shown "X'd" out on the final plan. The Limits of Disturbance (LOD) measurements can also be found on the tree summary table. This is the recommended distance of the closest impact (soil excavation) to the trunk face. These should be referenced when determining tree retention feasibility. The LOD measurements are based on species, age.. condition, drip - line. prior improvements, proposed impacts and the anticipated cumulative impacts to the entire root zone. Tree Protection fencing shall be located beyond the drip -line edge of retained trees, and only moved back to the LOD when work is authorized. Trees on the property growing closely together are recommended for retention as groupings. One example is the row of Douglas -fir trees, #1150 -1i156 are growing in a row with only a few feet between each trunk. When trees are growing closely together, they often develop small trunk taper and live crown ratios, As long as the trees are retained as groupings and not isolated, the risk of failure is lessened. A Phaeolus schweinit_ii conk was found I' from the trunk oftree n 132. The vigor of tree "l32 is good and the infection is suspected to be incipient. All conifers are susceptible to Phaeolit s schireinitzii and it is likely present in multiple trees on the property. Trees in advanced stages of the disease often have thin crown~ and/or branch dieback, and swollen lower trunks. No trees with advanced or significant internal decay were identified. The western red cedar trees on the property are mature and some concern ing defects were observed. Brown cubical rot is suspected to be in multiple western red cedar trees on the property. The development of internal decay columns within mature cedar is common. As long as trees are vigorous and actively growing, the risk of failure remains low. Western red cedars are good at compartmentalizing decay radially and the presence of rot is not necessarily an indication that the tree is declining. The largest concern with the western red cedar trees on the site is co -dominant stems with included bark_ Tree 4115 is a western red cedar with co -dominant stems that have split apart. Failure of this tree is extremely likely. `free 41 15 is a high risk tree and should be removed before work commences on the site. The tree density on the site is currently low and mainly concentrated in the southwest region of the property. Most of the trees are in the center and west side of the property. Sidewalk improvements, water utilites and the construction of new homes will prevent retention of the majority of the existing trees. The site will fall S",' short of meeting the required 30% significant tree retention requirement. New trees will be planted to mitigate for the tree removal and to enhance the landscape. There are no concerns with neighboring trees. The tree protection measures below will serve to protect these trees. 6. Tree Retention A total of 70 significant trees were identified on the subject property. One of the significant trees is in poor condition. This tree was not included in the tree calculation. Landmark trees and tree groves were prioritized when selecting trees for retention, per the City of Renton tree code 4-4430. Tree Caiculation based on 69, healthy, viable, significant trees Viable Trees proposed for removal — 54 (7$%,) Viable Trees proposed for retention — 15 (22'%,) Page 3 American Forest Management 12/13/2016 Skattum Plat - Arborist Report Tree Type Removal Retained Total Landmark # 11 0 11 Landmark % 100% 0% 100% Significant # 43 15 58 Significant % 74% 26% 100% Total # 54 15 69 Total % 78% 22% 100% 7. Tree Replacement Replacements trees may be required. Consult your city planner for tree replacement requirements. All replacement trees are to be planted on site. For planting and maintenance specifications, refer to Section 4-4- 130 of the Renton Tree Ordinances. B. Tree Protection Measures The following guidelines are recommended to ensure that the designated space set aside for the preserved trees are protected and construction impacts are kept to a minimum. Refer to the City of Renton Code 4-4-130- 9. Protection Measures During Construction for more information. • Tree protection barriers shall he initially erected at 5' outside of the drip -line prior to moving any heavy equipment on site. • Tree protection fencing shall only be moved where necessary to install improvements, but only as close as the Limits of Disturbance, as indicated on the attached plan. • Excavation limits should be laid out in paint on the ground to avoid over excavating. • Fxcavations within the drip -lines shall be monitored by a qualified tree professional so necessary precautions can be taken to decrease impacts to tree parts. A qualified tree professional shall monitor excavations when work is required and allowed up to the "Limits of Disturbance". • To establish sub grade for foundations, curbs and pavement sections near the trees, soil should be removed parallel to the roots and not at 90 degree angles to avoid breaking and tearing roots that lead back to the trunk within the drip -line. Any roots damaged during these excavations should be exposed to sound tissue and cut cleanly with a saw_ Cutting tools should be sterilized with alcohol_ + Areas excavated within the drip -line of retained trees should be thoroughly irrigated weekly during dry periods. • Preparations for final landscaping shall be accomplished by hand within the drip -lines of retained trees. Plantings within the drip lines shall be limited. Large equipment shall be kept outside of the tree protection zones. Page 4 American Forest Management 12/1312016 Skattum Plat - Arborist Report There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man -caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Overtime, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or i can be of further assistance. Sincerely, hl� Kelly Wilkinson kelly.wilkinsan cafmforest.com ISA Certified Arborist #PN-7673A ISA Tree Risk Assessment (qualified Page 5 American Forest Management 121l3/2016 5kattum Plat - Arborist Report City of Renton Code 4-4-130- 9. Protection Measures During Construction a. Construction Storage Prohibited: The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment. dispose of any materials, supplies or Fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. b. Fenced Protection Area Required: Prior to development activities. the applicant shall erect and maintain six-foot (6) high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees or at a distance surrounding the tree equal to one and one -quarter feet (1.25') for every one inch (1 ") of trunk caliper, whichever is greater, or along the perimeter of a tree protection tract. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING — Protected Trees," or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. c. Protection from Grade Changes: If the grade level adjoining to a tree to be retained is to be raised, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or rock well around the tree. The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the tree's drip line. d. Impervious Surfaces Prohibited within the Drip Line: The applicant may not snstall impervious surface material within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. e. Restrictions on Grading within the Drip Lines of Retained Trees: The grade level around any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the greater of the following areas: (i) the area defined by the drip line of the tree, or (ii) an area around the tree equal to one and one-half feet (1-1/2') in diameter for each one inch (V) of tree caliper. A larger tree protection zone based on tree size, species, soil, or other conditions may be required. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) f. Mulch Layer Required: All areas within the required fencing shall be covered completely and evenly with a minimum of three inches (Y) of bark mulch prior to installation of the protective fencing. Exceptions may be approved if the mulch will adversely affect protected ground cover plants. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012) g. Monitoring Required during Construction: The applicant shall retain a certified arborist or licensed landscape architect to ensure trees are protected from development activities andlor to prune branches and roots, fertilize, and water as appropriate for any trees and ground cover that are to be retained. h. Alternative Protection: Alternative safeguards may be used if determined to provide equal or greater tree protection. (Ord. 5676,12-3-2012) Page 6 American Forest Management 12/13/2016 - ICClt i� ',i a ' �� y `� SIR . r •�.� �'4 -� r M1y l �•. .. YF..�Mr -lyt .. M. . "mow s„ $� '! u! i Y. I/1 7 Skatt nn Plat - Arborist Report Tree #132 - Douglas -fir tree with Phaeolus schweinitzii conk Tree #133 - European white birch with a large burl Pae,s 11 American Forest Management 1211312C16 Tree Summary Table For: Skattum Plat City of Renton Tree/ DBH Height American Forest Management, Inc. Date: 12/7/2016 Inspector: Wilkinson Tag # Species (inches) (feet) Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W 101 Douglas -fir 22 96 13110 17110 good viable retain 102 Douglas -fir 28 103 141 12 11 1 12 16112 8112 good viable Slight lean E retain 103 big leaf maple 29 85 12 / 12 21 1 12 19/12 18/12 good viable retain 104 Douglas -fir 12 42 9/6 1416 17 16 fair viable retain 105 western red cedar 20 81 13 10 17 4 good viable remove 106 western red cedar 28 52 4 17 16 6 fair viable Topped remove 107 western red cedar 24 78 10 8 4 6 good viable remove 1 D8 western red cedar 34 72 18 21 11 23 good viable landmark tree remove 109 western red cedar 37 45 10 17 15 10 good viable landmark tree remove 110 western red cedar 32 103 17 9 12 11 fair viable Top broke off, landmark tree remove 111 western red cedar 20 76 4 13 6 6 good viable remove 112 western red cedar 28. 24 (37) 96 17 19 8 9 fair viable Forks at 2', landmark tree remove 113 western red cedar 25 77 18 6 5 17 fair viable Decay remove 114 western red cedar 32 68 2 17 7 14 fair viable decay, torKed top, sligrit lean , landmark tree remove 115 western red cedar 24 46 poor non -viable runK splitting, hazardous - non -significant remove 116 western red cedar 28 79 16 10 20 fair viable Connected at base to tree 115 remove 117 western red cedar 33 89 17116 17 116 14/16 16 / 16 good viable run or s a , some me u =e bark, landmark tree remove 118 Douglas -fir 27 109 8113 10/13 121 13 9 / 13 good viable flat trunk on north side retain 119 Douglas -fir 26 120 4112 15 1 12 9112 1 4/12 good viable retain 120 Douglas -fir 21 91 12 110 9 / 10 16/10 good viable retain 121 Douglas -fir 16 81 518 918 1218 6 ! 8 fair viable retain 122 Douglas -fir 31 118 9 18 6 16 good viable landmark tree remove 123 Douglas -fir 28 111 13 8 9 11 good viable some old lower trunk bleeding remove 124 Douglas -fir 29 118 7/12 11 1 12 11 ! 12 good viable retain 125 European larch 10 30 10 9 2 9 fair viable remove 126 Douglas -fir 38 110 20 25 24 18 good viable landmark tree remove 127 western red cedar 35 78 19 18 21 good viable landmark ree, in 106th Ave 5E right-of-way remove 128 quaking aspen 11 55 9 6 5 11 good viable remove 129 quaking aspen 7 27 0 11 8 2 fair viable remove 130 European larch 14 76 10 6 7 9 fair viable poor trunk taper remove 131 European larch 15 74 6 8 6 11 fair viable poor trunk taper remove Tree Summary Table For: Skattum Plat City of Renton Tree/ DBH Height American Forest Management, Inc. Date: 12l7/2016 Inspector: Wilkinson Tag # Species (inches) (feet) Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W 2 Douglas -fir 20 74 10 13 6 15 fair viable aeo us sc weini zii con found 1' from trunk on east side remove 3 European white birch 16 64 13 12 7 16 fair viable Burl on trunk remove 134 grand fir 28 77 12 16 14 15 good viable Forked top remove 135 western red cedar 26 84 15 12 19 12 fair viable Forked trunk, minor included bark remove 136 Douglas -fir 13 81 7 10 9 5 good viable remove 137 Douglas -fir 25 115 11 10 8 12 good viable remove 138 Douglas -fir 16 95 10 7 6 12 good viable remove 139 Douglas -fir 24 111 11 17 12 23 good viable remove 140 Douglas -fir 16 100 3 7 6 10 good viable remove 141 Douglas -fir 17 98 11 10 6 12 good viable remove 142 Douglas -fir 22 log 11 14 8 10 good viable remove 143 Douglas -fir 28 110 8113 18113 6113 14113 goad viable remove 144 Douglas -fir 33 101 15115 161 15 18/15 8115 good viable landmark tree remove 145 western red cedar 22 83 6/12 121 12 16112 5 f 12 good viable in grouping with tree #146 remove 146 western red cedar 27 85 8/14 11 1 14 91 14 11 / 14 good viable in grouping with tree #145 remove 147 Douglas -fir 29 118 15 8 11 13 good viable remove '48 Douglas -fir 19 100 7 7 9 14 good viable remove 9 English oak 25 91 4 19 11 17 good viable Forked trunk remove 150 Douglas -fir 17 45 13 11 17 good viable remove 151 Douglas -fir 20 95 10 11 good viable Slight lean N remove 152 Douglas -fir 19 91 16 15 good viable remove 153 Douglas -fir 11 63 11 8 good viable remove 154 Douglas -fir 18 85 12 14 good viable remove 155 Douglas -fir 19 83 6 14 good viable remove 156 Douglas -fir 12 52 8 7 7 good viable remove 157 western red cedar 23 38 15 12 11 good viable remove 158 western red cedar 13 23 10 9 9 good viable remove 159 western red cedar 18 39 141 15 7/15 12 115 fair viable Topped retain 160 western red cedar 14 45 13112 9/12 7/12 fair viable Topped retain 161 western red cedar 19 55 121 10 9/10 101 10 good viable retain 162 western red cedar 23 61 12 / 16 101 16 61 16 good viable retain 163 Willow 6, 5, 4 (9) 39 1416 1316 9/6 fair viable retain 164 Douglas -fir 12 51 1416 1516 good viable retain Tree Summary Table For: Skattum Plat City of Renton American Forest Management, Inc. Date: 12/7/2016 Inspector: Wilkinson Tree/ DBH Height Tag # Species (inches) (feet) Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W 165 black cottonwood 54 167 18 15 19 fair viable landmark tree remove 166 black cottonwood 45 154 18 17 11 fair viable Large limbs have failed, landmark treE remove 167 black cottonwood 12. 13 (17) 55 17 19 16 17 fair viable decay, top broke off remove 168 western red cedar 23 54 16 13 14 14 good viable remove 169 Douglas -fir 23 94 10 17 15 15 good viable remove 170 western red cedar 25 85 8 9 11 11 good viable remove Neighboring Trees 201 big leaf maple 8, 7 (11) 54 610 good viable Leans W, 10' east of property line protect 202 big leaf maple 16 71 6 f 2 fair viable protect 203 big leaf maple 15 (27) 78 915 fair viable protect 204 big leaf maple 13 (27) 70 12/14 fair viable 5' from property line protect 205 big leaf maple 29, 32 (43) 111 5114 16I 14 19 f 14 good viable runk torks at base, goo attachment.. landmark tree protect 206 big leaf maple 28 73 18 / 12 good viable protect 207 Douglas -fir 28 94 1012 good viable 8' S of properly line protect 208 western red cedar 129, 16 (33) 49 8/5 good viable 10' S of property line, landmark tree protect Drip -Line and Limits of Disturbance measurements from face of trunk Trees on neighboring properties - Drip -line and Limits of Disturbance measurements from property lines Calculated DBH: the DBH is parenthesis is the square root of the sum of the dbh for each individual stem squared (example with 3 stems: dbh M square root [(steml)2 +(stem2)2 +(stem3)2]. % ---� _- - o � 16THW7(R2SE / TNI�r19 E 188188s.64 (P) N 01'47 ►. /� 3' 140.55(C) 40 co >4 /; ,R7 rl / *A4 1 ` zto -.:a rn LP till/ r7 P4 \\ 7ME tw 3 I 140.62'(c)- 140.62'(e) �u 140.60'(P) - '�j `� 140.60'(P) S O1'45'28" W S O1'45'28" W f l r N �� FCC 85.00' W20 PL 60.00' PL 60.00' PL 95.00' 4'' No3 CUTLOTB+C)5031• SF t j LOT D { oLo co j LOT E` i I _ ...__ j 7200 SF. + 80 SF' i O i (6729 SF) I , 66 NALK LOT C .PING = ' i, 6864 SF !,` , STRIP 1 LOT A AV .. 1: 5031 SF ' CD �m Lo LOT F a . �6674 SF ,URB I x�'-o- _ RAMP _ LOT F I + WI - i PL 5.00'— o PL 60.0' �, 6680 SF�, I w i {{ + + i LOT I I I I+ i co 5031 SF I i j �- — -_ F '�A r a LOT C _ ( -' CL� ± 6855 SF; c jo[ � L T_ _ + LOT D r P P o)c t m P T eS c i. j 6855 SF ! i LOT E I ! (6390 SF} 1 a7 j 6680 SF- o PL 60.00' PL 60.00' :; , _ 4 LPL 95.00' DENSITY WORKSHEET `f' i' City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 1. Gross area of property: (comprised of Lot 10 & 11) 1. 84,360 square feet 2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public streets"* Private access easements" Critical Areas* Total excluded area: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area: 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density 10,530 square feet 580 square feet 0 square feet 2. 11,110 square feet 3. 73 250 1 square feet 4. 1.68 acres 5. 11 unitstlots 6. 6.54 = dwelling units/acre *Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways." Critical areas buffers are not deductedlexcluded. ** Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded. (Applicant note.. public access including driveway, walkway and landscaping . private access easement between lot D & lot E, lot I & lot K) DEPARTMENT OF CC 4UNITY CITY GF AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1rM, nt6o� TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, WA 98057 Phone:425-430-7200 1 www.rentonwa.gov 1. Total number of trees over 6" diameter', or alder or cottonwood trees at least 8" in diameter on project site 69 trees 2. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dangerous' trees Trees in proposed public streets 11 trees Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts 31 trees Trees in critical areas' and buffers trees Total number of excluded trees: 42 trees 3. Subtract line 2 from lute 1: 27 trees 4. Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained, multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, R-4, R-6 or R-8 0.2 in all other residential zones 0.1 in all commercial and industrial zones 9 trees 5. List the number of 6" in diameter, or alder or cottonwood trees over 8" in diameter that you are proposing' to retain: 27 trees 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: (if line 6 is zero or less, stop here. No replacement trees are required) 0 trees 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 0 inches 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: (Minimum 2" caliper trees required) 0 inches per tree 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees6: (If remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 0 trees 1 Measured at 4.5' above grade- z A tree certified, in a written report, as dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property by a licensed landscape architect, or certified arborist, and approved by the City. 3 Critical areas, such as wetlands, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined in RMC 4-3-050. 4 Count only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers. 5 The City may require modification of the tree retention plan to ensure retention of the maximum number of trees per RMC 4-4-1301-17a. 6 When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, replacement trees, with at least a two-inch (2") caliper or an evergreen at least six feet (6') tall, shall be planted. See RMC 4-4-130.H.I.e.(ii) for prohibited types of replacement trees. 1 Z,\Stein1106th-Ave-SE_Short-Plats\PRE-PLAT_0QC5\23-Tree- Retention -Works heet\TreeRetenticnworksheet.doc Rev: 08/2015 Minimum Tree Density A minimum tree density shall be maintained on each residentially zoned lot (exempting single-family dwellings in R-10 and R-14). The tree density may consist of existing trees, replacement trees, or a combination. Detached single-family development': Two (2) significant trees' for every five thousand (5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. For example, a lot with 9,600 square feet and a detached single-family house is required to have four (4) significant trees or their equivalent in caliper inches (one or more trees with a combined diameter of 24"). This is determined with the following formula: I Area x 1 = Minimum Numberof Trees 5, DDO sq. f t, Multi -family development (attached dwellings): Four (4) significant trees& for every five thousand (5,000) sq. ft. of lot area. Lot Area x 4 - Minimum Number of Trees 5, ODE) sq.ft. ExamDle Tree Densitv Table: Lot Lot size Min significant New Trees Retained Trees Compliant trees required 1 5,000 2 2 @ 2" caliper 0 Yes 2 10,000 4 0 1 tree (24 caliper Yes inches) 3 15,000 6 2 @ 2" caliper 1 Maple —15 Yes caliper inches 1 Fir — 9 caliper inches. Lots developed with detached dwellings in the R-10 and R-14 zoned are exempt from maintaining a minimum number of significant trees onsite, however they are not exempt from the annual tree removal limits. 8 or the gross equivalent of caliper inches provided by one (1) or more trees. 2 Z;\Stein\105th-Ave-SE_Short-PIats\PRE-PLAT_DOCS\23-Tree-Retention -Worksheet\TreeRetentionWorksheet.doc Rev, 08/2015 Altmann Oliver Associates, LLC AOA N)Ii�,i', s Ca. Imsi„sk,WA980!I M/ r , :J i ,r May 21, 2016 Stein Skattum skaftum@comcast.net SUBJECT: Wetland and Stream Reconnaissance for: 17018 and 17022 - 1061th Ave. SE, Renton, WA Parcels 008700-0265 and -0270 Dear Stein: F;l lvi rol I tile] r 1;11 l'1:1l m it 1� & 1-111(kcal.)c rcl1ilcc]l1rc, AOA-5175 On May 19, 2016 1 conducted a wetland and stream reconnaissance on the subject property utilizing the methodology outlined in the May 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0). No wetlands or streams are mapped on the City of Renton mapping and no wetlands or streams were identified on or adjacent to the property during the field investigation. Each of the two parcels are currently developed with a single-family residence and associated lawn and maintained yard areas. Scattered trees including Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesit), big -leaf maple (Ater macrophyllum), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), and black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) were observed throughout both lots. An upland forested area is located off -site to the east. This off -site area was dominated by big -leaf maple, Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), vine maple (Ater circinatum), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), trailing blackberry (Rubes ursinus), and sword fern (Polystichum munitum). No hydrophytic plant communities were observed on or adjacent to the property. Borings taken throughout the two parcels revealed high chroma, dry, non-hydric, soils and there was no evidence of ponding or prolonged soil saturation anywhere on the property. Stein Skattum May 21, 2016 Page 2 Ditch During the field investigation, a small (-1-foot wide) ditch was observed along the east and south property lines of the site (Figure 1). Stormwater runoff from an off - site development to the northeast is collected in a vault and the overflow is discharged from a pipe at the NE corner of the 17018 residence. Intermittent runoff within the ditch then drains south and west before entering the roadside ditch adjacent the east side of 1061h Ave. SE. A slight flow was observed discharging from the off -site vault at the time of the site visit. This runoff was observed infiltrating within the ditch near the southeast corner of the 17018 residence and the remainder of the ditch was dry. Since the ditch: 1) conveys entirely artificially collected stormwater runoff and 2) was cut through an upland where no stream previously existed, the ditch should not be considered a stream by the City of Renton or any other regulatory jurisdiction. Conclusion No wetlands or streams were identified on or immediately adjacent the site. This determination is based on a field investigation during which no hydrophytic plant communities, hydric soils, or evidence of wetland hydrology were observed. If you have any questions regarding the reconnaissance, please give me a call. Sincerely, ALTMANN OLIVER ASSOCIATES, LLC John Altmann Ecologist DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CITY OF Renton0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Planning Division i'ry 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, WA 98057 Phone:425-430-7200 1 www.rentonwa.gov PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision -making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. INSTRUCTIONS FOR LEAD AGENCIES: Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJFCT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/201b area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non -projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements —that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Renton Subdivision 2. Name of applicant: Stein Skattum 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Stein Skattum (Contact & Applicant) 10350 Rainier Avenue S Seattle, WA 98178 (206) 300-6231 4. Date checklist prepared: 12-20-16 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Summer 2017 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The project will ultimately include construction of 11 single family homes. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Geotechnical Report Arborist Report Wetland and Stream Reconnaissance 2 \\LE-PG\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.doex Rev: 08/2016 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Renton Preliminary and Final Plat City of Renton Construction Permits Department of Ecology NPDES Soos Creek Water and Sewer District 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project is an 11 lot plat of TPs 008700-0265 and -0270 located at 17018 and 17022 106' Avenue SE. Each parcel contains a house and an access to 106th Avenue SE. The short plat will create 11 lots, Drainage Tract and a new public road. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Quarter -Section -Township -Range SW-29-23-5 Legal Description TRACT 10, BLK 4 AKER'S FARMS NO.5 LOT 11, BLOCK 4, AKER'S FARMS NO.5, ACCORDING TO THR PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 40 OF PLATS, PAGE 27, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUA TE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (check or circle one): Flat oiling, illy, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 15% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whetherthe proposal results in removing any of these soils. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None known e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Trenching and excavation associated with utilities installation, road improvements, storm water vault, etc. Estimated earthwork quantities: 1,200 CY cut/fill f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, some erosion could occur during construction, erosion will be controlled. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not to exceed max per zoning (65%). h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Re -vegetate exposed soils or cover with impervious surfaces. During construction - construction access, plastic cover, catch basin inserts. 4 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Dust, auto emissions b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None at this time 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Vrl 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. NIA 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 5 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Stormwater from roofs, driveways, landscaping and the new road will be collected and tightlined to a combined detention/water quality treatment vault. Detained and treated storm water will then be discharged to the conveyance system in 1061" Avenue NE. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No 6 \\LE-PC\Projects\5kattum\Renton Plat 2\skattum Renton subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: D8/2Q16 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: Stormwater vault outflows will be detained to the duration control standard and provided with basic water quality treatment. 4. PLANTS a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs X grass pasture crop or grain orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Grass, trees and brush c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Grass and landscaping with trees and shrubs. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None known 5. ANIMALS a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. 7 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\5kattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-15.docx Rev; 08/2016 Examples include: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, ongbirds other: Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not that is known. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None known 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not that is known c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Standard energy conservation measures that are required by the Uniform Building Code for the construction of the houses. 8 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No environmental hazards are expected. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses None that is known 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None known 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. None. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None beyond standard life safety services. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None at this time. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? No significant noise impacts. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction per City of Renton noise ordinance. 9 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Observe City of Renton noise ordinance. S. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. Single -Family Residential, not anticipated b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or non -forest use? Not known 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: Not known c. Describe any structures on the site. Two single family residences d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Both residences and associated outbuildings will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is zoned R-8. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Residential Medium Density. 10 \\LE-PC\Projects\5kattum\Renton Plat 2\5kattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 11 residences/families j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? 2 single family homes will be removed as part of the project development k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Meets land use code and comprehensive plan designation. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long- term commercial significance, if any: N/A 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 11 middle income homes b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 2 middle income homes 11 \\LE-PC\Projects\5kattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Buildings will not exceed the allowable maximum building height as defined by the land use code. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None know c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Houses will be constructed to meet City of Renton codes, Zoning and Comprehensive Plan. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Porch lights at night b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No significant impact expected. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None known d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None 12 \\LE-PC\Proiects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Fred Nelson Middle School b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None at this time 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers ? If so, specifically describe. Not that is known. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. Not that is known. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. N/A d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. None 13 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The site is currently accessed via 106th Avenue SE, as will the developed site. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? There are 2 transit stops approximately 0.5 miles from the site at the following locations: 108th Avenue SE & SE Carr Road SE Petrovitsky Road & 108th Avenue SE c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Completed project will provide 24 parking spaces. Approximately 2 parking spaces will be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes, a new road will be constructed off of 1061 Avenue SE. Frontage improvements along 106' Ave SE will include curb, gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, and widening the road to 26' e. Will the projector proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Not that is known. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non -passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Using ITE Trip Generation rates, the proposed 11 lot plat will generate 11 PM peak hour trips and 8 AM peak hour trips. 14 \\LE-PC\Projects\5kattum\Renton Plat 2\5kattum Renton subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. Not that is known. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. General public services to accommodate (11) single family residences. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Payment of property taxes and other supportfees. 15. UTILITIES Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas water, refuse service telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Water & Sewer — Soos Creek Water & Sewer District (sewer extension required) 15 \\LE-PC\Projects\skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skattum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016 C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. {. Proponent Signature: - Name of Signee (printed): Keith A. Lichfield, P.E. Position and Agency/Organization: Owner of Litchfield Engineering Date Submitted: 1 2- - 2-1 - 1 LD 16 \\LE-PC\Projects\Skattum\Renton Plat 2\Skartum Renton Subdivision ECL 12-20-16.docx Rev: 08/2016