The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutI. ERC Report DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNi� Y -� �- C�TY OF AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -"-"""""''--�`Rentan '} ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DATE: April 11, 2016 Project Name: Avana Ridge PUD Project Number: LUA15-000894, PPUD, ECF Project Manager: Rocale Timmons,Senior Planner Owner: Avana Ridge, LLC;9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 Contact: Justin Lagers;Avana Ridge, LLC; 9675 SE 36th St, Ste 105; Mercer Island, WA 98040 Project Location: 17249 Benson Rd S Project5ummary: The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units in two 4-story structures. The vacant 3.78 acre site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density (RHD) land use designation. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 du/ac. The subject site is fronted by three public rights-of-way: SE 172nd St, Benson Rd S (108th Ave SE) and Benson Drive S (SR-515). The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172"d St between the proposed buildings, and another entrance off of Benson Road S. There is an unnamed stream, classified Ns, bisecting the site which runs from east to west. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, the applicant is proposing impacts to the stream buffer through buffer averaging. Additionally, the site contains critical slopes and Coal Mine Hazards. The Preliminary PUD would be used to vary street, building height, parking, design, open space, and retaining wall standards. The applicant has proposed to provide buffer enhancement as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with the construction of enhanced open space, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. Site Area: 164,827 SF Total 8uilding Area GSF:92,899 SF STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination RECOMMENDATION: of Non-Significance-Mitigated(DNS-M). � �ti ��.�� ,�`� � � � Project Location Map ERC Report City of Renton Department of Community&E,.. ,omic Development _nvironmental Review Committee Report AVANA RIDGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF Report of April 11,2016 Page 2 of 13 PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a Preliminary Planned Urban Development (PPUD) and Environmental (SEPA} Review for the construction of a multi-family development containing 74 units, in two 4-story structures. During our review, staff determined additional information was necessary in order to proceed. On February 15, 2016 the project was placed on hold pending receipt of an Independent Secondary Review of the provided Traffic Study. The applicant submitted all necessary documentation and on March 30, 2016 the project was taken off hold. Submittals included an Independent Secondary Review of the provided Traffic Study prepared by TENW, dated March 21, 2016 (Exhibit 17). In addition, the applicant also provided a memo, dated March 26, 2016, in response to the recommendations included in the secondary review(Exhibit 18). The project site is located on the northwesterly corner of the intersection of Benson Drive S and Benson Rd S. The site is triangularly shaped and consists of two separate tax parcels (Parcel #292305-9009 and #292305-9148), totaling 164,828 square feet in area (3.78 acres). The site is located within the Residential Multi-Family (RM-F) zoning classification and the Residential High Density(RHD) Comprehensive Plan land use designation. Surrounding uses include: a daycare facility abutting the property to the east (zoned RM-F); existing single family residences to the north (zoned R-8); southeast of the site, along 108th Ave SE, a vacant parcel (zoned RM-F); and across Benson Drive S, to the west, uses consists of multi-family, public storage, and a dental office (zoned CA). The subject site is currently undeveloped with a ground cover of second growth conifer, deciduous trees and brush. The development would be comprised of two separate multi-family residential structures resulting in a density of 20.21 du/ac. The proposed 74 units would be comprised of(28) 1-bedroom units, (29) 2-bedroom units, and (17) 3- bedroom units. Access to the site is proposed via SE 172"d St, between the east and west buildings, and another ingress/egress point via Benson Rd S. The two access points create a through road for emergency vehicle ingress/egress across the property. The proposal is served by a surface parking area to the south of the two structures, flanking the main access drive. A total of 94 parking stalls would be provided in the surface parking area. An additional 20-parking stalls would be provided along the street. An unnamed seasonal stream, characterized as Ns pursuant to RMC 4-3-050, bisects the northern and southern portions of the site and runs east to west. The applicant is proposing buffer averaging pursuant to RMC 4-3-050. A Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study was performed by Sewall Wetland Consulting, Inc. on December 22, 2015 (Exhibit 10). An historic coal mine, known as the Springbrook mine, as well as its associated opening is also located on the site near the south property line. The coal mine is designated as a High Coal Mine Hazard pursuant to RMC 4- 3-050.A Coal Mine Hazard Assessment was performed by Icicle Creek Engineers, Inc. on March 22, 2004 and January 20, 2009 (Exhibits 7 and 8). Additionally,there are critical slopes located on site. The applicant is proposing the construction of a large 19,795 square foot landscaped community open space at the southern portion of the site. The community open space incorporates active and passive space, with a central connecting sidewalk which links the open space to the public right of way. A central path and complementing pedestrian bridge crossing is proposed to be constructed to create an access point to the community open space from the surface parking lot. There are a total of 429 trees on site of which 46 trees are proposed to be retained outside of the critical area and buffer. Preliminary earthwork for the proposal includes 11,000 cubic yards of excavation and 3,250 yards of fill. The Preliminary PUD would be used to modify parking,street, open space, retaining wall, building height, and design standards. The applicant has proposed to preserve the stream onsite, provide additional buffer, create a large public amenity space as part of the proposed PUD public benefit, along with enhanced pedestrian and vehicular circulation, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping. Construction of the development is anticipated to begin in May of 2016 and would be completed in July of 2017. ERC Report City of Renton Department of Community&F��omic Development �nvironmental Review Committee Report AVANA R/DGE PUD __ y � LUA15-000894,PPUD, ECF Report of April 11, 2016 Page 3 of 13 Staff received several traffic related comments/concerns. Also included in the comments letters were concerns related to: access, open space, street improvements, drainage, wildlife, density, and quality of life (Exhibit 16). Non- Environmental 'SEPA' Review concerns will only be addressed as part of staff's recommendation to the City's Hearing Examiner for the Preliminary PUD and are not included in this report. Non-SEPA concerns include, but are not limited to the following: zoning, permitted uses, density, construction mitigation/traffic control, crime, landscaping, access, parking, retaining walls, setbacks, utilities, public services, and home sizes. Studies provided by the applicant include a stormwater report, traffic study, habitat assessment, wetland and supplemental stream study, arborist report,geotechnical and a coal mine hazard report. PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period. B. Mitigation Measures 1. An updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted demonstrating the proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions and the development can be safely accommodated on the site. The report shall also discuss any measures employed in the final site/building design which serve to mitigate coal mine subsidence risk. If no measures are employed,the applicant shall provide justification for the exclusion of additional measures. The updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. 2. One (1) Electronic Speed Radar Sign shall be installed in the northbound direction on both 106th Ave SE and 104th Ave SE. The applicant shall install the signs, mounting poles, and associated equipment, at the direction of the City. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. 3. The applicant shall provide an off-site sidewalk, along the south side of SE 172"d St and the west side of Benson Rd S, approaching the intersection. The width of the off-site sidewalks shall be consistent with the widths proposed along the frontage of the subject site. ADA ramps shall also be constructed at the southwest corner of the intersection. Finally, a street lighting analysis is required to be conducted by the developer at the southwest corner of the intersection of SE 172"d St and Benson Rd S. If necessary, required street lighting shall be provided according to City standards. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. C. Exhibits Exhibit 1 ERC Report Exhibit 2 Site Plan Exhibit 3 Landscape Plen Exhibit 4 Elevations Exhibit 5 Grading Plan Exhibit 6 Geotechnical Report, prepared by Earth Solutions NW(dated December 21, 2015) Exhibit 7 Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated March 22, 2004) ERC Report City of Renton Department of Cammunity&E�,.,,omic Development �nviranmental Review Committee Report AVANAR/DGEPUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF �_—__ - — —... - - — — ---___._ _ ___ _.—..-- - Report af April 11, 2016 Page 4 of 13 Exhibit 8 Coai Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers(dated January 20, 2009) Exhibit 9 Drainage Report, prepared by D.R.Strong (dated December 28, 2015) Exhibit 10 Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting(dated December 22, 2015) Exhibit 11 Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan prepared by 5ewell Wetland Consulting(December 28, 2015) Exhibit 12 Habitat Qata Report, prepared tay Sewell Wetland Consulting(dated December 22, 2015j Exhibit 13 Arborist Report, prepared by Greenfarest Inc. (dated December 16, 2015} Exhibit 14 Tree Retention Pian Exhibit 15 Traffic impact Analysis{T1A}, prepared by TraffEx(dated February 2, 2016j Exhibit 16 Public Comment Lettersf Emaiis Exhibit 17 independent Secondary Review—Traffic Study, prepared by TenW(dated March 21, 201fi) Exhibit 18 Response Memo- Independent Secondary Review, prepared by Traffex(dated March 26, 2016) D. Enviranmentallmpacts The Proposa/ was circu/ated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisians to determine whether rhe ppplicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated ta accur in conjunction with the proposed develapment. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probab/e impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: The site can best be characterized as hilly generally sloping south toward the stream on site and Benson Drive S. Slopes on-site range from 8 to 15% with a tapographic relief af approximately 35 feet. The steepest siape on the site is approxirnately 20% in the praximity of the stream on site. The applicant is propasing excavation in the amount of approximate�y 11,000 cubic yards. Approximately 3,250 cubic yards of fiil is proposed, of which 1,000 cubic yards wauld be imported structured fiil. Foilawing construction the appiicant is prnposing an impervious cover af approximately 53% of the net site area, minus right-of-way dedicatians and the stream on site. Less than 40% impervious cover is proposed when using the gross site area. The applicant submitted a Geotechnical Report prepared by Earth Solutions NW, dated December 21, 2015 (Exhibit 6). The report states that there are no geotechnical canditions on site which would preclude the propased development and the development would likely be supported by conventional foundatians. The soils on site were classified as Vashon till, beginning at approximately 2 to 6 feet below grade. Bedrock was encauntered approximately 22 to 43 feet below grade. No groundwater seepage was faund by Earth Salutions NW. However, groundwater seepage was encountered by Icicle Creek Engineers during their field visit, for the coal mine hazard analysis, at ane to two feet below grade (Exhibit 7). Therefore, perched seepage zones are anticipated during construction depending on the time of year grading activities take place. The geotechnical report includes specific recommendations in arder to mitigate potentia! geotechnica! impacts including: site preparation, structural fill, foundations, drainage cansiderations, hazards including, and project design and monitoring. The applicant wil! be required to comply with the recommendations included in the provided Geotechnical Engineering Report (Exhibit 6j, A coal mine was operated historically urithin the southerr� portion af the site, afang the southwesterly property line. Accarding to the Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by fcicle Creek Engineers on lanuary 26, ERC Report City of Renton Department of Community&E._,�omic Development _nvironmental Review Committee Report AVANA RIDGE PUD __ _ _ LUA15-000894,PPUD, ECF Report of April 11,2016 Page 5 of 13 2009, the coal mine is designated a High Coal Mine Hazard (CH) as defined by RMC 4-3-050 (Exhibit 8). The classification was affirmed by Earth Solutions NW in the provided Geotechnical Report(Exhibit 6). High Coal Mine Hazards are considered areas with abandoned and improperly sealed mine openings and areas underlain by mine workings shallower than 200 feet in depth for steeply dipping seams, or shallower than 15 times the thickness of the seam or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by collapse or other subsidence. The main entry and airshaft for the Springbrook mine is also located on site. Icicle Creek Engineers encountered approximately 15feet of fill at what appears to be the mine entry, estimated to be 5 to 8 feet in diameter, and inclined at approximately 55 to 60 degrees to the south (Exhibit 8). There were several recommendations to mitigate potential risk of the coal mine hazard/former entry as part of the Icicle Creek Engineer report, including the excavation of the fill at the mine entry and backfilling with controlled density fill (Exhibit 8). However, these recommendations were based on a former proposal for a development which included structures in the southern portion of the site. The proposed development is setback approximately 125 feet from the coal mine hazard and would likely not have the same impacts as the former development. However, there are some grading activities and smaller recreational improvements in the proximity of the coal mine hazard which may potentially be affected by mining related subsidence. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring an updated Coal Mine Hazard Report demonstrating the proposal would not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre-development conditions and the development can be safely accommodated on the site. The report shall also discuss any measures employed in the final site/building design which serve to mitigate coal mine subsidence risk. If no measures are employed,the applicant shall provide justification for the exclusion of additional measures. The updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted to, and approved by,the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. Removal of the existing vegetated cover during construction would leave soils susceptible to erosion. The applicant will be required to design a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) pursuant to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements. A number of retaining walls are also proposed to be constructed on site as part of the grading proposal (Exhibit 5) and will be further reviewed as part staff's recommendation to the Hearing Examiner for the Preliminary PUD. Mitigation Measures: An updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted demonstrating the proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre- development conditions and the development can be safely accommodated on the site. The report shall also discuss any measures employed in the final site/building design which serve to mitigate coal mine subsidence risk. If no measures are employed, the applicant shall provide justification for the exclusion of additional measures. The updated Coal Mine Hazard Report shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to engineering permit approval. If mitigation measures are includes, they shall be implemented during utility permit construction. Nexus:SEPA Environmental Regulations, RMC 4-3-050 Critical Area Regulations 2. Water a. Wetland,Streams, lakes Impacts: The applicant submitted a Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Ed Sewell Consulting Inc., dated December 22, 2015 (Exhibit 10). The report states there are no wetlands located on site. An unnamed seasonal stream (Stream A) has been identified on the subject site. Stream A bisects the northern and southern portions of the site and runs from east to west. As defined by RMC 4-3-050.G the stream best meets the criteria of a Type Ns stream due to its intermittent flow and lack of fish use. Class Ns streams have a standard buffer of 50 feet as measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) as well ERC Report City of Renton Department of Community&E. .�omic Development _nvironmenta!Review Committee Report AVANA RIDGE PUD _! LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF __._._. _..._ _. __ --- _. �_ ._.._.-- --___. - Report of April 11,2016 Page 6 of 13 as a 15-foot setback from the edge of the buffer to any structure. The applicant is proposing buffer averaging for portions of the stream buffer. Additionally, the applicant is proposing an alteration within the stream and its associated buffer for a pedestrian crossing. It should be noted that the Habitat Biologist for WDFW concluded the on-site stream is not a jurisdictional water, or a "water of the state". As a result no Hydraulic Permit Approval(HPA) permit is required from Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife. Stream Buffer Avera�in� Proposal: RMC 4-3-050.1.1 altows for critical area buffers to be reduced to no less than a 25-foot minimum for Type Ns streams. The applicant has proposed buffer averaging, with reductions of the buffer down to 25feet, for Stream A. Overall the applicant is proposing buffer reductions in the amount of approximately 8,835 square feet to be mitigated with buffer additions in the amount of approximately 9,527 square feet. The applicant is also proposing buffer enhancement for those portions of the buffer which would be reduced. Pursuant to RMC, buffer width averaging may be allowed by the reviewing official only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. There are existing physical improvements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and ii. Buffer width averaging will result in no net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function;and iii. The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; and iv. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365-195-905: and v. Where the buffer width is reduced by averaging pursuant to this subsection, buffer enhancement shall be required. The existing stream buffer, which separates the north apartment building area from the southern open space, is mostly existing forest (primarily Alder and Cottonwood) with an understory dominated by invasive Himalayan blackberry. The buffer would be enhanced through the removal of the invasive blackberries and other undesirable vegetation and replaced with native understory vegetation. There are existing road improvements within the buffer on both the east and west sides of the stream. The applicant's Supplemental Stream Study concluded the buffer reduction, through averaging, would have the physical characteristics that can protect water quality and functions of the stream on site (Exhibit 10). Staff has reviewed the stream buffer averaging proposal for Stream A, and agrees that the proposal meets all requirements found in RMC 4-3-050.1.1. However, the provided stream study does not include a demonstration of compliance with criteria found in RMC 4-3-050.H.2. Therefore, staff was unable to verify that through the enhancement of the buffer and the use of low impact development strategies the reduced buffer will function at a higher level than the standard buffer. Staff will be recommending a condition of Preliminary PUD approval to address this concern prior to construction permit approval. Stream Alteration Proposal: RMC 4-3-050.1.2.a allows for the construction of non-vehicular transportation crossings. The applicant has proposed a pedestrian bridge trail crossing over Stream A. Pursuant to RMC, crossings may be permitted by the reviewing official only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. The proposed route is determined to have the least impact on the environment, while meeting City Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element requirements and standards in RMC 4-6-060; and ii. The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of wood and gravel; and iii. Transportation facilities in buffer areas shall not run parallel to the water body; and iv. Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and v. Crossings are designed according to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Water Crossing Design Guidelines, 2013, and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid ERC Report City of Renton Department of Community&E._.�omic Development t _nvironmental Review Committee Report AVANA RIDGE PUD _ LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF Report of April 11, 2016 Page 7 of 13 Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equivalent manuals as determined by the Administrator; and vi. Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and vii. Mitigation criteria of subsection L of this Section are met. The path would connect the north and south sides of the buffer, crossing over Stream A, via a pedestrian bridge. The bridge would also serve to connect the proposed structures to the proposed open space on the southern portion of the site. The proposed bridged trail crossing is located within a narrow portion of the stream, above the flow path of water, and is perpendicular to the water body. Staff has reviewed the alteration proposal for the bridge across Stream A, and agrees that the proposal meets all requirements found in RMC 4-3-050.J.2. However, the provided stream study does not include a demonstration of compliance with criteria found in RMC 4-3-050.H.2. Therefore, staff was unable to verify that the bridged crossing will not impact the function of the stream. Staff will be recommending a condition of Preliminary PUD approval to address this concern prior to construction permit approval. Additional conditions associated with Preliminary PUD approval will likely include signage and fencing and review and approval of a final stream mitigation plan. In order to preserve and protect the stream and its associated buffer the applicant will be required, to establish a Native Growth Protection Easement over the parts of the site encompassing stream and buffer areas. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed Nexus: Not applicable b. Storm Water Impacts: The site is located within the Black River drainage basin and Panther Creek drainage sub-basin. Upstream runoff enters the site in two locations. Portions of SE 172"d St and 106`h Ave SE direct upstream runoff across the northern property line. Upstream runoff from the west side of Benson Rd S flows into a ditch along the east property line. Runnoff currently discharges at the sites western property line, at two locations, and heads north through a conveyance system in Benson Drive S. The flows eventually cross under Benson Drive S and conveyed a westerly direction in a series of pipes and catch basis eventually outfalling into Panther Creek. This project is required to comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapter 1 and 2. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Forested Conditions. This project is subject to full drainage review. The applicant submitted a Preliminary Drainage Report prepared by D.R. Strong, dated December 28, 2015 (Exhibit 9). The report also includes a detailed summary of the pre and post developed conditions. The stormwater detention and water quality treatment would be provided within a combined detention/water quality vault under the parking area located in the western portion of the site. The combined detention/water quality vault would be followed by a media filtration system to accommodate the Enhanced Water Quality Treatment requirements for multi-family development. For water quality features that are not in the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM, and which have the General Use level designation through the state Department of Ecology's Technology Assessment Protocol—Ecology(TAPE) program, an adjustment process request is required. Conditions associated with Preliminary PUD approval will likely include a requirement for the submittal, and approval, of an Adjustment in order to utilize water quality features which are not in the City Amendments or the 2009 KCSWDM. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed Nexus: Not applicable 3. Vegetation ERC Report City of Renton Deportment of Community&t. .,omic Development _nvironmental Review Committee Report AVANA RIDGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF Report of April 11,2016 Page 8 of 13 Impacts: The site is currently forested with mixed canopy dominated by Douglas fir, red cedar, big leaf maple, Scouler's willow, and black cottonwood. The site's understory is dominated by tndian plum, hazelnut, Himilayan blackberry, sword fern, and creeping blackberry. The applicant provided a Tree Protection Plan/Arborist Report, completed by Greenforest Inc., dated December 16, 2015 (Exhibit 13). Based on the provided tree inventory, 429 trees are located on the subject site. There are 114 trees located in critical areas and associated buffers; 67 trees were identified as dead, diseased, or dangerous; and 37 trees would be located within proposed rights-of-way. This results in the exclusion of 218 trees from retention calculations. As such, 211 trees were utilized to calculate retention requirements of 10% of the significant trees located on the site. Therefore, the applicant would be required to retain at least 42 trees on site. The provided Tree Retention Plan depicts the retention of 46 trees outside of the critical areas and their associated buffers which serves to meet tree retention requirements (Exhibit 13). Additional analysis will be provided as part of staff's recommendation to the Hearing Examiner on the Preliminary Planned Urban Development. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended Nexus: Not applicable 4. Wildlife Impacts: The applicant submitted a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Assessment, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting, Inc., dated December 22, 2015 (Exhibit 12). Several potentially regulated fish and wildlife habitats and priority species are identified in the vicinity of the project according to the list generated by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife' (Priority Habitats and Species list). The provided report identifies two mechanisms as having potential for impacting potentially regulated fish and wildlife species and/or associated habitat: temporary impacts from construction noise and long term effects associated with increased impervious surfaces. This study identified that no state or federally listed species were identified or known to use the site and/or are located on or near the site. Pursuant to the provided report there is no "critical habitat" as defined by Renton Municipal Code located on or near the subject site. Offsite priority aquatic species associated with the Panther Creek in water habitat are not anticipated to be impacted if the proposal complies with stormwater requirements as listed above. While the above conclusions may be true,the site still provides habitat for many non-state or federally listed species. Noted in the projects SEPA check list, and comments from parties of interest, several birds and mammals utilize the site (coyote, mule deer, raccoon, opossum, eastern gray squirrel, barn owl, European starling, common crow,flicker,garter snake, Pacific tree frog,songbirds, and small rodents). The removal of a large portion of the trees would impact existing habitat for common local wildlife. However, the applicant proposes a large, landscaped community open space provided at the southern portion of the site totaling 19,795 square feet and the 49,918 square feet of critical area and associated buffer would remain in a vegetative/open space state providing a sanctuary for the animals that reside in the area. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the subject development would result in a significant adverse impact to wildlife. In order to preserve and protect the stream and associated buffers the applicant will be required, to establish a Native Growth Protection Easement over the parts of the site encompassing the stream and buffer area. Recommended Preliminary PUD conditions will include requirements for permanent fencing of the native growth protection areas which would eliminate human or domesticated animal intrusion and would not adversely impact habitat connectivity. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed Nexus: Not applicable ERC Report City of Renton Department af Community&c_..�omic Development _nvironmental Review Committee Report AVANA R/pGE PUD LUAIS-000894,PPUD,ECF ---- , -- - ----- — - _ :----: -------- —. . _ --- _ Report of April 11,2016 Page 9 of 13 5. 7ransportation Impacts; The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by TraffEx, dated February 2, 2016 (Exhibit 15j. The provided T1A was found to meet the intent of the TIA guidelines and is generally acceptable for preliminary review. Several traffic related comments iettersJemails have been received by the public. The comments raise concerns regarding the use of the prapased SE 172"d St entrance and potential impacts to the neighbaring single-family residential development to the north as well as additional impacts to queueing delays at Benson Rd S and Benson Drive S(Exhibit 15}. Based on public comments received, staff required an evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant's transportation analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures. An Independent Secondary Review of the provided Traffic Study prepared by TENW, dated March 21, 2016 (Exhibit 17). In general, the secondary review affirmed the overall trip distribution patterns. The report however, recommended revisions be made to the traffic counts to cansider the worse-case traffic scenario given the observed intersection queuing at 108`h Ave SE and Benson Rd S. The applicant provided a memo, dated March 26, 2016, in response to the recommendations included in the secondary review (Exhibit 18). The memo generally concurred with the recommendatians of the peer review with the exception for the removal of the site driveway access restrictions to SE 172nd Street. The applicant's response memo revised the TIA to reflect recommended changes in trip distribution, balanced traffic volumes, the anaiysis af queuing on Bensan Rd and left turn lane warrants. After review of the ariginal Traffic Impact Analysis (Exhibit 15), Independent Secondary Review (Exhibit 17), and the applicant's respanse memo (Exhibit 18) staff provided applicable comments below for each Transportation subject. Access: The applicant is proposing two points o# ingress and egress into the site in order to meet Fire Department requirements for access. The applicant proposes one entrance off of SE 172nd St between the proposed buildings, and one entrance off of Benson Road Sauth. The two access points converge to form drive-through access through the site. Several public comments were received requesting access be eliminated from SE 172"d St, in order ta mitigate anticipated cut through traffic on neighbaring raads to the north. In addition, concerns were raised regarding the blocking of the propased access, along Benson Rd 5, during PM peak hour traffic. The applicant has proposed a driveway configuration which would attempt to restrict movements to left-in/right—out only as way to mitigate cut through traffic on residential streets to the north. Access and prapased mitigation, was analyzed as part of the Independent Secondary Review prepared by TENW (Exhibit 17}. TENW general4y affirmed the trip distribution assumptions made by TraffEx and substantiated the need for two access points. With respect to proposed mitigation,TraffEx de#ermined that the proposed SE 172"d St driveway configuration would be ineffective in limiting impacts to neighboring residential streets ta the north. In addition, it is anticipated that restrictions to the SE 172"d driveway would encourage u-turns and assaciated impacts to existing residential driveways along the north side of 5E 172na St. Therefare, staff will be recommending a condition, of Hearing Examiner approval, the elimination of the propased access restrictions along SE 172"�St, and the entrance will be required ta pravide full access. In order to address anticipated impacts on neighboring streets caused by cut-through traffic, staff recammends traffic calming measures be used in lieu of the foregaing site access restrictior�. Specifically, Electronic Speed Radar Signage has been shown ta be effective in reducing traffic speeds and aggressive driving. Staff recommends, as a mitigation measure,that one �1� Electronic 5peed Radar Sign be installed in the northbound directian on bath 106th Ave SE and 104th Ave SE, The applicant shall instaU the signs, mounting poles, and assaciated equipment, at the direction of the City. All improvements shall be induded in the engineering permit submittal far review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. ERC Report City of Renton Department of Community&Ec��iomic Development ,✓ironmental Review Committee Report AVANA RIDGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD, ECF Report of April 11,2016 Page 10 of 13 Level of Service: It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate approximately 492 average daily trips with 38 AM peak-hour trips and 46 PM peak-hour trips. The provided report analyzed three intersection locations(Exhibit 15): Intersection 1: Site Access/SE 172"d St Intersection 2: 108`h Ave SE/Benson Rd 5/SE 172"d St Intersection 3: Site Access/Benson Rd 5/108th Ave SE The provided analysis notes that all intersections will operate at an acceptable level of service with the proposed development. Therefore, the proposal would not be required to mitigate at any intersection. Analysis of future conditions address cumulative impacts of the proposed project and traffic growth in the study area. Traffic signal warranty analysis was also provided at the intersection of SE 172"d St and Benson Rd S. The report states there is no need for a signal at the intersection as a result of the project. However, The Transportation Department is conducting a model to assess any possible solution to address the citizen's concerns regarding the backing of queue on Benson Road from the intersection with SR 515 to SE 172"d Street. Staff, is hoping to provide an update at the public hearing for the subject project. Increased traffic created by the development would be mitigated by payment of transportation impact fees. The transportation impact fee that is current at the time of building permit application will be levied. The applicant submitted for a building permit in December of 2015. The fee in 2015 was assessed at$2,214.44 per new multi-family unit. The fee is estimated at approximately$164,000. The fee shall be payable to the City at the time of building permit issuance. Site Distance: The provided Traffic Impact Analysis states sight distance requirements are met at the site access driveway onto SE 172"d St and with vegetation trimming, within the right of way, at the site access driveway to Benson Rd S (Exhibit 15). Street Improvements: Street Improvements are regulated by RMC 4-6-060—Street Standards.See below: Benson Drive S—Benson Drive S (SR 515) is a principal arterial and a state route roadway along the project's west property line. The existing road currently contains curb, gutter, and sidewalk on both sides of the street. There is currently no planter strip existing along the Benson Drive S street frontage. Per code, frontage improvements including 0.5 feet wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, an 8- foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and storm water improvements are required on principal arterial streets. The applicant is proposing to maintain the existing right-of-way. Due to critical areas along portions of the frontage, the applicant has requested a modification to allow the sidewalk to remain in the current location for those areas where critical areas are located. As part of the Preliminary PUD recommendation to the Hearing Examiner staff will likely be recommending approval of the requested modification. The approval would likely include a condition of approval requiring the applicant to dedicate 1-foot behind the sidewalk in addition to right-of-way dedication for luminaire foundations along Benson Drive S. Benson Rd S — Benson Rd S is a minor arterial along the project's east property line. Half-street frontage improvements are required to be provided on the side of the street fronting the development. Per code, the minimum right-of-way width required for a minor arterial is 91 feet. The available right-of-way width on the Benson Rd S frontage, per the King County assessor map, is 100 feet and would not necessitate additional right-of-way dedication. The required paved width on this street is 44 feet, which includes three travel lanes and a 5-foot wide bike lane on both sides of the street. Frontage improvements would include the following: a 0.5 foot wide curb and gutter, an 8-foot wide landscaped planter, an 8-foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements are required. ' The applicant is proposing street improvements along Benson Rd S which comply with code. SE 172"d St —SE 172"d St is a commercial mixed use and industrial access street along the project's north property line. Half-street frontage improvements are required to be provided on the side of the street fronting the development. Per code, the minimum right-of-way width required for a commercial mixed use and industrial access street is 69 feet. The available right-of-way width on the SE 172"d St frontage, per the ERC Report i City of Renton Department of Community&Economic Development _,ivironmental Review Committee Report AVANA RIDGE PUD LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF Report of April 11, 2016 � Page 11 of 13 King County assessor map, is 60 feet and would require additional right-of-way dedication. Frontage improvements would include the following: an 8-foot parking lane, a 0.5 foot wide curb and gutter, an 8- foot wide landscaped planter, a 6-foot wide sidewalk, street lighting, and stormwater improvements are required. The applicant is proposing street improvements, along SE 172"d St, which comply with code. The applicant has requested a modification to reduce the required dedication from 4.5 feet to 3 feet. As part of the Preliminary PUD recommendation to the Hearing Examiner staff will likely be recommending approval of the requested modification. The approval would likely include a condition of approval requiring the applicant to dedicate 1-foot behind the sidewalk in addition to right-of-way dedication for luminaire foundations along SE 172"d St. Pedestrian Improvements: As part of the proposed project, sidewalks would be constructed along the frontage of the site and would connect to the existing sidewalk system. However,safety concerns have been raised with respect to pedestrian connectivity off site due to missing sidewalk linkages off site approaching the intersection of Benson Rd S and SE 172"d St. Given the number of homes proposed it is very likely that a large influx of people would utilize the public sidewalk system as well as the anticipated school bus stop across Benson Rd S. Providing pedestrian connections to abutting properties is an important aspect of connectivity and encourages pedestrian activity and is required to be considered when reviewing the subject application. Pathways should be easily identifiable to pedestrians and drivers. The condition of the existing protruded curb, approaching the intersection of SE 172"d St and Benson Rd S, has been largely disturbed and does not provide a safe route for school children and or residents walking to and from the site. As a result, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the applicant provide an off-site sidewalk, along the south side of SE 172"d St and the west side of Benson Rd S, approaching the intersection. The width of the off-site sidewalks shall be consistent with the widths proposed along the frontage of the subject site. ADA ramps shall also be constructed at the southwest corner of the intersection. Finally, a street lighting analysis is required to be conducted by the developer at the southwest corner of the intersection of SE 172"d St and Benson Rd 5. If necessary, required street lighting shall be provided according to City standards. All improvements shall be included in the engineering permit submittal for review and approval, and shall be constructed prior to temporary occupancy. Concurrencv - A concurrency recommendation will be provided in the staff report to Hearing Examiner based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS- tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation. The development will have to meet the City of Renton concurrency requirements. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation needed Nexus: Not applicable E. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or"Advisory Notes to Applicant." ✓ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3);WAC 197-11-680). ' Environmental Determination Apaeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner,City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA 98057,on or before 5:00 p.m.on April 29,2016. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall— 7tn Floor, (425)430-6510. ERC Report City of Renton Department of Community, -conomic Deve/opment Environ�---nta/Review Committee Report AVANA RIDC�E PUD LUAIS-000894,PPUD, ECF Report of April 11,2016 Page 12 of 13 ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. eecause these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Plannin�: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family,new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock(7:00)a.m.and eight o'clock(8:00)p.m., Monday through Friday.Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock(9:00)a.m.and eight o'clock(8:00)p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty(30)days of completion of grading work,the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety(90)days.Alternative measures such as mulch,sodding,or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year.The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant will be required to submit a Final Stream Mitigation Report and Maintenance and Monitoring proposal. In addition,the applicant will be required to comply with all the code requirements of RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas. This includes, but is not limited to, placing the critical area within a Native Growth Protection Easement, providing fencing and signage,and providing the City with a site restoration surety device and,later,a maintenance and monitoring surety device. 6. 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. 7. The applicant shall erect and maintain six-foot(6')high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees,or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet(50')indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING—Protected Trees"or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet(50').Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four(4)sides. In addition,the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 8. This permit is shall comply with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permitted is responsible for adhering to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines(2007)and/or your U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service permit. Water: 1. Water Service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A water availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved water plans from Soos Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Sewer: 1. Sewer Service is provided by Soos Creek Water and Sewer District. 2. A sewer availability certificate from the Soos Creek utility was submitted to the City with the land use application. 3. Approved sewer plans from Soos Creek should be provided during utility construction permit review. Draina�e: 1. A geotechnical report for the site'prepared by Earth Solutions Inc.was submitted for the project. The geotechnical report mentions that the soil is til�soil and is not suitable for infiltration. All geotechnical recommendations shall be followed. 2. A Construction Storm water General Permit from Department of Ecology is required since grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre 3. Surface water system development charge fee is$0.594 per square foot of new impervious surface area, but not less than$1,485.00. This fee is subject to change at the rate that is applicable at the time of issuance of the utility ERC Report City of Renton Department of Community&E. 7mic Development �nviranmental Review Committee Report AVANA RID6F PUD � LUA15-000894,PPUD,ECF . __—. _ . — _. __ ..— — —_. _ __..--- -- _ _. __-----:: Report af April 11,2016 Page 13 of 13 construction permit will be appEicable. Transportation: 1. 7he maximum slope back of sidewalk is 4H:1V for minimum 3 feet back of the sidewalk. 2. The corner curb ramps at all street intersections adjaeent to the site should be ADA compliant. ADA also requires matching ADA campliant curb ramps on the other side of the intersection. 3. The site is proposed to be accessed via driveways from Benson Road South and SE 172nd Street. Please refer to RMC 4-4-080 for driveway design standards including location,grade,and width. 4. Street lighting is required ta be provided on the frantage streets by the praject. 5. The City of Rentan Trench restoration and Street overlay requirements wiil be appiicable for any work in the public right af way. Parks: 1. Park Impact Fees per Ordinance 567Q applies. 2. Street trees—6inkgo on SR 515;Ash on Benson Rd.S.;Elm on SE 172nd.Space minimum distance of 5Q feet apart and not dose than 30 feet from street lights{not a!I lights are shown on plans). Potentia!for one to two more street trees at NE corner af 5R515 8e Benson Rd. Use only Ginka, Elm,and Ash as street trees. 3. Planting Strip:require a continuous planting strip along all streets,then sidewalk; plan does not shaw this. Dangerous, fast traffic requires that a planting strip buffer pedestrians fram roadway. 4. Parking lot:some islands are too smalfi far trees;use only vine maple or smaller in those areas. Generai: 1. Afl canstruction or service u#ility permits#or drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittafs. A!I utility plans shall canform to the Renton Orafting Standards.Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. When utility pEans are cnmplete,pfease subrnit four{4}copies of the drawings,two(2}copies af the drainage report, permft application,an itemized cost of construction estimate,and applicatian fee at the counter on the sixth floor. ERC Report o ,} ' EXHIBITS Project Name; Project Number: Avana Ridge Preliminary PUD LUA15-000894, ECF, PPUD Date of Hearing Staff Contact Project Contact/Appiicant Project Location (tentatively)5/10/16 Rocale Timmons lustin Lagers 17249 Benson Rd S Renton, Senior Planner Avana Ridge,LLC WA 9675 SE 36th St,Ste 105; Mercer Island,WA 98040 The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit 1 ERC Report Exhibit 2 Site Plan Exhibit 3 Landscape Plan Exhibit 4 Elevations Exhibit 5 Grading Plan Exhibit 6 Geotechnical Report, prepared by Earth Solutions NW(dated December 21, 2015) Exhibit 7 Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers(dated March 22, 2004) Exhibit 8 Coal Mine Hazard Study, prepared by Icicle Creek Engineers (dated lanuary 20, 2009} Exhibit 9 Drainage Report, prepared by D.R. Strong (dated December 28, 2015) Exhibit 10 Supplemental Stream Study, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (dated December 22, 2015) Exhibit 11 Conceptual Stream Mitigation Plan prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting (December 28, 2015) Exhibit 12 Habitat Data Report, prepared by Sewell Wetland Consulting(dated December 22, 2015) Exhibit 13 Arborist Report, prepared by Greenforest Inc. (dated December 16, 2015) Exhibit 14 Tree Retention Plan Exhibit 15 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by TraffEx(dated February 2, 2016) Exhibit 16 Public Comment Letters/Emails Exhibit 17 Independent Secondary Review—Traffic Study, prepared by TenW(dated March 21,2016) Exhibit 18 Response Memo- Independent Secondary Review, prepared by Traffex(dated March 26, 2016) �`_ CITY OF = en on �� - - - - -- -- - ---- - - -- - --- - ------ - - -- ---- - -- --- --- ---- --------- --------- --, $ � �� v ! �� , g_ :� � - - -- - � "•- �� L � �;�� __ , , - _ ;_S� �I 721�1-�S� -EF1` _ _ _ __ _ .-__ __,,_- �� . ,�, �_ � _ ;r., , - � , _ , _ -_ __ �,:-, , ___._ ��` � - _ ---� - .._.�i–�_L_ ��`--=---- - ; ..P , , . -- _� ;�� i , l� \ 559AEJ PROP.UNE`___—__. ——---- ----------_—�. ...: __--------_--,..�.. �\��.� \��.,w� .w .....w.�. �'— .Wi,t� �--�----�-aw+,_. ^ i i � i � � �i .v.— � n. ' y w rxi� w nr �� I ` � ` �_r'_ �r�� 1{ ' 1 ..._.._,...... .-_..,_, � . � i ... j,..,,.. `• •\\`.\\` � 4 '� ..____ — i _. r-- '" { ." ie-.f-�:x-a, _.�Y.__ �iBUILqN6 �.��'__e_ _^y) I� �� —! J � � y r � � 'i ��,-.��, rn��s*an � � rna�oe[oaeran �q� �� rua�l cciCe�oa n I \`� � �vAxf�E1�i8�YLxG � w�NiMFNiBualNNi 6 � p ' \�`�. \ . � I OVEIIQ{riliB�ISEYEMT � i � _ OVfRMriJTBASENENT ,,� 7'p� . `�♦ �� . ` , 'f' � i , �� R ... _ , �-��4 , � ......,.,. �. \�;��,t �_-�_ ___•� _��'; _._°. �wm7 J1111; ..��; ,o , � � __ ,�.;a,� � �( . � — I^ � = i . , � ' �. I i: ' �'�. �� ,�� ,� b. I I � I I I �.��;� �:.�.�!_��d�__�_1.�_..�.�.1.._�_�.�:1.�,1 � �.�, , � �� ; . . �-__ ��.:_...____��_��..�_�.--f � � � � - - . � - , � �.� ,, . , �,. . � �" �� _ �.. ,�. , .._.� .: �� /jj ��:��,� � ` .�:,�; \ ;� , . _ .,, . t `._ _�1�:1_TZ.I. �_( I 11.1_.1�1._lJ.. •. ,; I ....�. a� ' ��__�_�_.1_1__I_�° �°� 11 T ��. - . , $ , ,` ; s �`:`� `' �. ' �` ` .'j , . R f:• �� PLANLOPMENT N � ' - � ,-�.. _ . � ,..r. r.. .... I . .� ., � ._� ,� o c �c '.��n `/`w`„+ebsc�"` ( � I ' ��1� < I : � I I D� � , � � �j �os�ssEnz�a � o `` . � �.e-,.,.,.,, � /. � STREET,REMON,WA /� �� _ �� ;% �.__ \ �� I/ "�0 ` / \l � � �� /%� O: I � e `.\ ��'� i�;�� I � j% O i AVANA RIDGE,LLC � '�� '; -_ � � � j �\ . . � _ 4i �% i ,I �/ �� "' ,., �' � ��,«�� .�> � � -..�-.,...� , , ` �j � � `�� _ �� j �; �,� i . �.-.. .. , `,, „_ ` . � ��.\ �� .:p�? �y, , ..'� � .\ �\ � : � j \ � \�\ � �; , �._ ,. � imn � ' �\ \ � . ... :.�/% p' rc�aoun / �,i!, �� ` ' ; : �, i ,�� N•H s �,,, � ,�; , � � ., , , ,, . ,, ,�. �, , , � � � �` e,.00�r' � -� � -..__._..__,;� , ROP.LHVE-'� �� I � � 1—-. ." i %/ I °"ucc�"'-------� _ �m ' ---- '�% � I SITEEPLAN PUD � EXHIBIT 2 ----J ; � � � - i -_ �, � �� , awew�rkl�ani.,H`.%'I rw.tN�E--- - --- '- - - � � - ---' " I IYINIrflu�tlY --- " - ---- - ' - —__.__ __" _ _.. ,�'� � • `�� h, - ' � e� , • � ��?�� `� 4 �� Z �� / �yyy�yyy� .y�� : � ��llly'gi�- /'�� . 'T,�� ... ,WRP1�Ird�11Al,A��'..� � , p tY�" �-w�� `�.. r ' • C� ♦ �b•L� ' . H .`'�F �. N`r ":* r�z�:' rhr.✓. ,� .r. :'.9:. .. b,"ty ,..I�J�_�'lw,..."i"w..3e_.._...^.v.'. +.'_`. �_. y .�.t �tayh k� ' 'Ff 4�''y"' }�°�x �ee�� .� �' '_ �� .� � ��✓��'<< �'X. y��. 4 xL+trs�¢"'�� ■ �: 4`�, /1 �:� 'f`�'�°� '�'+e� � �^ ��'�s&*�,� '��{�. �'��I{, ��: � ... � . 3`.P'd'�' r . i �."' � ,; � � `/► � ��' xa �`� � . �- """ .>-��x IU��"x;:_x.��iss +� a "� '�r.�•. _, �,�,C�" a i C� . � 4 . �_:�`'ag, a�� 4�+��i) w "�F�� r� t '�� . �.., / . .-_ "�y� ``se,� �"2 ,. 's•i � '�� - -�t"i�f�.�' � w +��cr;,'�!�,w. �x`�aka, iii ...i�,-- • � �°��`x�... '�� r ��'mC�� . 5°♦ �'i` ".�,r`y �.. fi �� .- �3i''� � '�' . �`„te �F'4 ;� s s �^� �w.��s�''�`" � � - �i ;r .. r � &�:a t�`�`� ' � ` . ��h�. ��'."�`�"�.� � � ��} 3�Y '�fiis. '�.� ... .d� .... . ��.��m+b.'-wr� � �Jt�t�� 5�`�.`�"' �.tw.w�. ��IX � •' � � �� '�°'y,�.^` �� .n»"r' � g�.e�-P ;w`�.Sb �' , �n�, � i. . � . W� . . .. .. �, . +ttNF1W..,unsRh.,�bft �; u4 t�� •�.i�'l 1 ':.1 � � hF . e'F'� ♦ � p � �� q ��'�° , �.�..C_) . _ . � . . .. . . . . . .. � a '� w+ne�a, � a '�� , � �" ' �� , �.- �� i �� r.� s � "� � � � .� �� .. � � � �a'� s «�� .��'� ,w �i i@e,+'�,°� � ... . �"F�� .'z�'�a��w`�l+;;e � .. � . • � � t �_ .� �g� �� , , �y'�in i�Y1�� ,b �L � ��.�� • � �• � � :r , �I / ` Y#Y':, �y,, d ;, �� t jI ,�,$.-� L'�3 ,s.�? ,�'�.'Slre+ �.'".' ,. ya �.'�r� �q �'�! .�",y,�,",-9 .� ;,,� •'�/ , � ��.5 . �+ `�'��rty s `,�� ,�, . � � �i' ��y . ��`a'yA' ' �' !�'��,."k �/'�'��y�OI :�^ ��, �� . .� '�"��`•'�'"^"�,'.�,'��+!r4b'A� , �Y�' � ��y,�g.� v'�s��w50-��`�"� ,�^�k' �� ' , �m'�I� +��+�,�''��w..r a''�*�sy,/ � �f� �t4` �'y�.9 - � � ,t��/%/ �� ,� �� . � . Full Document - _ _- _ -__ - - - - -__- ------ _ _--- ------------ ------- - ----------------------- i Available upon Reques - _--- ---- - _ - -- - - --- -- - --------- - _--- -- ------------ �$ .�, � � i � �'� -;,� �� Nx�w i�j �m C/� S � ..' "____" ^__ `'_______ 1. .. _ .� � -' _ . � �- — -r--, r - r_.--__i i t.—� 't_r— } --1__r—i 8 � i � i � � i ` ' � _ , '� u I , � �� i N:�l.v> I � �M u� � i � �� _ , i _ � i � i -� � � � r� I i i ir J � � �� i i � . L__" '`__, . '._"__.r—� ,--J i i._ .__f' '� 1 _ '_" � � j . - � _1 " ' "'____" , _ �' i___1 � L u, N� � }u�? i °j L KEV_P.LAN QVERALL ELEVATIQN.--- �� . SCh.E LN'="�0' __-_' �\ �w "� � � � I l A��A-Si �,B� �C�(�C2�C.3J (C.fij(C 8j D�,��_5; �E_��F� �F.3� �F.6; �G�� (H H.1,�H,1 �H Bj (I�'�' ,'I 5) !J�J XJ.� `J.b)�J 8�K j(K 5) l��M� (N 1 �,)�p) - � , � �_. 1 ' ' ��--T' - - �" - ' ,. - , i f"+�"�` �� ' i � i �_- r' '�-+,__._.:, T _�_ _� ,�w..l�. - —_ ,� .;." - - - ------ ._._ _ ��.j� , —J � AVANA R ..... I .P. T—.. ; � _ �' �� : --- - IDGE . , � : ., . , ., ... - ..;,._ � I • ;L_i ' __. .-��_k:. _ � s;. ..- ' �., . .... . - ._ - ' .._. ��p ,.,:, . ....- _. .._. '�"T`I � D URBAN _, .� � DEVELOPMENT � - - - . __ _{; -- �;.; -- 'i — - 1�.--�� - ., , , ., . - - �os�s se nz�d - -- --- STREET,RENTON,WA r .• . _.......� 98055 � � � L �� OVERAL�SRE-SOUTHELEVATION_ r2 �) SCA:E 1ItG•1-0' �u�J �. � AVANA RIDGE,LL � �, �� ;� �,;o �- \ �. \ �/ �O��N_5� (,N; !M��L! ,K.S�K�J.B�J.6�,�J.31�J.2��J ? (IS�; ( I,1 (H.B�� iH.3� �H.1�\H;' �G� F.6i (F,3� ��F,�� (D.�D�C.B��C,6i�C.:�,�Q2��C� �B� �q.>�q� .�w.�w. , �.i.- �.� . ,�s:� �� --- -, ,�--� .--- � �,�h �;,, _.._ ,.. . _ � , � � . .i ....... ..,.. : .--� �r--� __._• ---� —'-�IM � �� , �: � - _ -- -...� ._.. � _- _1 _ , , �:� �. -� --� � �--� T , -- .1 _.._ ,, � � - -- � - � ---- __. �— _ _. __ -- `'� -- ; _._.� _ �• .,... _ - , , , .__.. �:.. .. --- _ . 'T; - _ ;'� ' - - - �.. !�7 -,� — — - -.,'.,.1 -^ j �' OVERALL ,,"`"""',�,.','t— PROJECT �� ',�i ,{`�'.l[1'1�.I.;.!_i.i ELEVATIONS � � L �� ' A3.01 — -- OVERALL SITE-NORTH ELEVATION ___ � �.�,.�� rah�.�.�.��w --- �-�---- -- - -- --- -- --- � scn�E irg.rp— -- ---- u�, EXHIBIT ---- --- - ------ - -- � �p��,�" � � ��""�L� � ---",� -�"` \"�' � �,-;,:,: ,,' m � ,��,,:"'�°° '1�:` ',;�;'.:�'; ;�, a� ,N s'� a,m,.�s"'"� „ �-�=- � �. �c„vr.a sa3'�'��cu��tl � � Ag � aad� 3'� w �s'°.� i �q�» S .��, �,� ,�1N�C� �—Y ��:. 5 sx „a�a,��,>,,,,ara�,��o,e �+° m�"�' ..� � ��'ON i��'Obd St10 ,soo*N�l��a '�j�i �:;." `.,�` ,�,,wvu" �' \y�d j� � �V 1\`�. �'n��a��L�� N --t�;_-��:�. 4 c 'fan NIA�y� ' �.,':,,r'.,..�=-W.�:.�� ~`� ,�°on�";;;;,+w�p,ma n°s .,wm.y�+v s �nd�,�� / ,'� \� ua a°"e m`°""�"'�ais�"°<i�is i`nvi, �" �� y„sv� � t�..z.. ,f' ,. . s,��, .�nw z� � qt EL �-•-../,,�� ~\ . �µ/M�ap�W��w-:�M fF,•H'JM� o ' .t . ,.� ~ ` WIY�i�T�u��i�+6�Y�"" ra ,r�c"a�° � ��%�� - _ _ "� �\.A f�,:' ��.. �r�,'rW�rw��iayjrio�"'"��m„s�'�T",N y�oN � -V � - , \\ ��ei�,o '� ��,��,'��" s,9, N �. ��y,��7y . ,��,,,,,.�� .u< ,��,;� / ` � '�I \ ,✓':��.`��:.',�� , 3J � iq� � � � �,.;' ;� , 't�yb�g�s� �y3•a'i �,�**' � _,.�! iY� �� ''",�'•'•. � ^�\ �� 1 � - �� - '��.�'' C�~N�'' � "�'.. � W _ . . .y ,. _ ` 8 �'.�.--� " •' " ' ��' ��','".'�,'�,'��, \ '� ._ � f.""��_� - - - � , � 4`�'� h''a,y" h� �� s t � �\ __ �y� ' �'' • ;"'�`�$`,' � ��n�%n�s �a ` ' . - �'�-'`_:.`. �' ' ��`'� /� _ , , . A, - . �°'"� �� .., ��" ��, � ,.-�+ '. . �'' � ''�� - �' ��_. {�� 1>' 'N ' '��1�..^... R ^``�'`� Y 1 �, ` � �� _ _ � ��. . ��. � is M a•r-_� -�;� a~9 Y � i� ��.. . #�e#� � 3. - �� ` {� ��,1N:,. ��. � d��-°T- � }� - " �� \' � �✓"T ~ ��G.� w� y / i ` � �. � �-,9€dii�. �11: V� r / - �,�..��;,il: �, `''F.�l` '� , sf hv� y� 3,ie�[�:,,�e r`^. ��'a�a,�e:�.x�. -''r .� ��.,.-?.'�"`" �' � � �f ' �,i' _- '-- - :_.;�-�, - ;Y. _'_�'�� , 4 ��'~'{:{'_._ ., t�`} J� �r;y �l . .. ' " �, � Y=-/ /', �°'.!"'?" �,.�=" 1y � ' ` - -� �;�_-�=- �� R� � _ — � \' c,�Up11f191S� 'L`1" � ``��;,�( � ��re��' - * -� " ��..� _ _._�_:��' f �f`' f _,.� %,�� \ �� n\�` ��. ' � ,x `�--<,,, J > .;`� '. � _ ,�, ,, � ' � 7 �: (y�� ^`�-� 4�,..__ \ 'ti- � �-----� y..."`"'-` .�.___ _--=. X `( '/Y�� i �..m��+ � ' ��.� �.�.� _ "_ . "--'_ y(' ...'��.5_��"_ �� 1..,�..�i�� ..�•-�.: �,, M � :L� � .o�oKu+ lr '< � f� ��fi 1�'°M" 1!3 �. _.- :�,Yw^ � � ']c '" a�cs� ` 'ti(1 js " !' .' I,,� ..�� c ��y/ � M,' _� , rt' �10 8 - t� t„ .%r: .�.+.,��'" x i'�vl ,. ' �-=" t , .-�.--: , ; : .- $s ,f_ `i �,� -� I'j... ;t;,,',,, l-/ J--""�`�yc�as � ___- — � ` '� �..---'4 _;,�;t;w�y , �� a S �, r--- 1 ,."'', � L/ �� J ' �-�' J�p ' -a"`".I w ��`� / tk ' " /` ' / �'��. I � '� s- ' �+� ✓ i ,", ,, �: _ �J\�� ` S , _ , — . ,.--��_�-. �� ,�NdndN0il�3s 4�t M I � ,,.-- -'� � `---�'"",....-.,,--�" �YNaZ�iNs��l ' _.-- �..---"'�� , 5 39N �,,, .--- �,. .WM 3 ,---.�'�� .. ,� � - ` :�� .: ' `�:: � f�+�,. :�'*� � �, „�t- :� .,r , � si � , Full Document � '$+�`�� Available upon Request :� � -�. � �: ,�� y; .�� -�� , �� . . .F ;4,�� i . �� h . z � - �. �,. . Geotechnical Enginee�ing � '� Geoln�• ,� � Environmental Scientists �� Construction 1�lonitorinQ �; ,:� .� 3� � �. f �. . _�� °:� ,,. v.�� `��:x��-,�: . . <<��:r:��`. ;��; >��ro•y� ��' ��;;,,:�'�r=i.�'�,r'�'r'� �rm �.+^�, ,.�s,�",�,"�='s��`�f _ .�, ��"A'^` �'4� ..� �4. �� A, w�� e� ., � � '"X ,.�p ' }� {' }'_,i.. 4' , �M � ��d� 1' aq��:x^��tiw �� ,�.i� ,. (� ,ad"' �� .yJw vl l i"!�+r7�`,�/�il�, #�J�',� � ��I�^.�a' :��' .f ' �"" « '�� ;3n' t�"� ww��,^^.+�i°'f� _'��`� ��. �,��' �'r�� .�� N� p� ��' �.a,` 'y' y tw i�� +4 �p ' .d. � .f . F �'A `��Yi'MMf'a f A . �`�'@''�',i�� 'k ' � la F'Y,ay,M �r w. ' � b. . �+N'� �jj� y�e t� z wa.o� �'m,�',� . . ��:�'gy'T � �F d 'y �,. �.,�,y �� ,� , ,. ' . s g *t �' • , �",.�,'y�; ' „ ,� ` „, ,�r��.- �* ` :� � �y` �, ' �Y�`er �'s".'�`- ."v. > . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY ��;�.� « � � .� � AVANA RIDGE `� ` �'�:� � F"� ��`': , � �. -. '�. ' a ..,�,. 10615 SOUTHEAST 172nd STREET ;��.��< � ' ` RENT�N, WASHINGT4N __ � ° '• ° ��,, � ��.-;� „��' ��r� ,..�.. < �.. ES-4147 ` � �� ,. . - � EXHIBIT 6 "� '� � ' �� :� a T �. .� �. � ��,.�.w.„, � �.�i` �. �.; '"� �' -�"L,i�: " ,.:�"'", ��'"`sr �� ' �' � _ � .. �. ��.�, �, * � *'�;;�:-:...�«.�" � ��. �, � �..e,�,� .�,. ,, �. .aC. .. _ _ __ . <.._ ._�.,M.._ .s� 4 .�`� .. ' Fut1 Document � � 'j Avaitable upon Request • i - • Report � Gealogical Engineering Services Coal Mine Hazard Assessment Cugini Property—Narthwest Parcel Renton (King Caunt�}, Washingtan _ March 22,2U94 � Praj�ct�lvo..0336-004 Prepared For: AIe��ugini Prenared By; �cicie �reek Engineers,Inc. EXHIBIT' 7 Futl Document Avaitable upon Request Repc�rt Geotec�nical�ngineering Services Praposed Praperty I3ev+�opmQnt 5pringbrook Ridge �ing Corunty Tax Parcel Nos. 2923459Q09 and 2023Q59148 Rentan,Washingtan Janusry 2G,2Q(i9 Project No.4336-004 Prepared For: Alex Gtcgiu� Prepared By: Icicle Creek Engineer�,Inc. EXHIBIT $ � Futi Document Avaitable upon Request Preliminary Technical Information Report (T!R} for AVANA RIDGE PUD i7249 Benson Road S and 10615 SE 172"¢Street Renton,Washingtan p+riE R S \��fl aF w�s �c�c� Uxtt-��' � 2 � '�,� �,, �jv 30i95 �_ �SsiorvA�.�`�`�G /a•2�.�,v�f DRS Project No. 15088 Renton File No. PRE15-0�0611 OwnerfAppricarrt Avana Ridge, LLC 9725 SE 36`h Street, Sui#e 214 Mercer Island, Washington 98040 Repart Prepared by � � '#�' J D. R. STRONG Gonsulting Engineers, Inc. 620 7th Avenue Kirkland WA 9$033 �425) 827-3063 Report lssue Date December 28, 2015 EXNIBIT 9 C�3 2015 D. R.STRONG Consuiting Engineers Inc. .� K�.-�� _-� �._�.;a-��...�� Sewall Wetland Consulting. lnc. � - _ �o�sso �2�s�-o�7� --- --._ __- - FallGty.WA;�Q24 Futl Document Available upon Request December 22, 2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th Street, Suite 145 Mercer Island, WA RE: Wetland and Supplemental Stream Study - Avana Ridge PUD City of Renton, Washington SWC Job #15-159 Dear Justin, This repart describes our observations of jurisdictional wetlands, streams and buffers on or within 100' of the proposed Avana Ridge PUD praject in the City of Renton, Washington {the "site"). i�� III�� , 1- � t6i� . � l s sy �I j f � , � � . �. .,�„ s* ; ,�it�su a " , ..,.., .... .,..�_..�> Above: Vicinity Map of site EXHIBIT 10 C � SE172NOSTREET _____---- � ____' '- ____"_____'_"_ « � __�-/� � ` ` - __� 1_�+�_T-'��, Y///A � I I I I I I � o ----- --- u � �_______ a __�_�_ _ __i_' — r-r--��______ . _- _ � ,� i 3 � . _ - . � \ EASTBUILDING I d � ` WESTBUIIDING I '� �\ i � ``� _ � � � � � � � � � L V � � ��_�� U.I �_I,1..ry.0 � ��,i.,.'..... I I::::I: I ' I I,:I... --� � -= � I I ... - � � 3 `� ` I � I � I � U III � � � � ' E . i . � - a xo o �70 � �xr i �' swE w w[r [pNTWI IHIFRV�L 3 FOpT �1' ��/ / RS' v� /J!/I��..� ��/� � �.�.,,�� ,s/eF�� `\�'�G" ��C�� m��i,�� '� -- i �' g ------ SO'ST�NOMOSLRE�MlIIiR�IlM11S Oq2 „J+�,`��/!/!!///�'�� /�°B' y �r �\ � �� C i _ 9.,,,��,�E.aEo�„ `�' �., ��J---- ' ��l �,�� i ;' o � \ �%�� ' F= 3 � � 9.53)Sf SIRFAM sUFFEII fl(PANSpN �.�� / ��\ \._�_"..\. � Q Q C v ` \ ".8� (7 � O �n L� 11.SOOSFFNX�HCEMEN�%ANIWGS-SEEUFiMLl.1 /� a � � v e `\ \•�. / ~ m t z . SPU�MkiEHCING�TB11fiEXlIMI151t.0601i1-�FDET�IL]-3 � � C �3 O� / C � [ARIGLMFASIGtMGf�TlUFFFRLM1f13(13TOT�L��SEfDfT/JLi-3 � --- pQ � Q =M �� W m d 3 � E� i �2' OC a a� �� r Q a� \. E�� / � • a \ � �i , . � � ._.._ -- � u � � e a r_,�_,_..._._ •'' � 'rv,-J ) � �'�i.-1,-.;_� I��2+—�� MITIGATION PLAN SHEET INDEX: _ �'}' ' ,. ._i i) �l � i s ; 7 L._.._-.J .\�• �;' � sirF.rMxrE�. or�arrw� ..I•. �(._...__._ll '___.... /, " ' � � �� '� -�'`"' I �..- .�_ � � y/ 1 SRFPLVI,N01f1(IUSWFfO[ONTXOL,NOTFS '/ � ' A � �NiING PIAN,MONITO0.HIG i MNMEIUNR � ` _ _""__ �� ' l �� ....\��\�\�. \\ ,�/ \ sf'� ' __ � \� MITIGATION PLAN NOTES: ' �__ CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE: 1 iXElOUNMIIY/fOPOGMqIKMMANO51iE%AN115EOTOGENEMI[TNISPIAH � � � GENERAL NOTES: wnscnoHaoeroannarWconsu�.x��eHeir�eeRs,mc I�onH�ve. ` t fUG4MIROFGlM1TINGME� KII1kWlO,WASWHGfON9W33.5OUPCfMUWIHGSHAVEBEENMOqf1E0FOp � \ ' �LLCONSiFUCTqNSHAlt0E1NKCOR��NCfW11NCIrypf11FMONCOp[S, NSUUFNMNlCEMEMf.MAPWTEqFFEpENCFI]/}1�1015 � /, 1 PEQUESfANO�TiEHOMEiONSTR11CtIONMEEfINGW�iNaWNfNANOCRYOf I OR�IN�xCE5,�N0�VFPOVFOYERMIiCdIq110H5. \ ...�M ' - u pErvrOx � � � PRWXiOWANTIN5T�l1AlIqN,CpNiqplNppp115W[EOSWIi1MNT1ElUT[HE�MF�SIqWNIXITIUSDET,UL TMGFfNOMIWSWEEOSPEbf55HWN1CLU�E 3 CONTIIOLNONiOUSWfE05VECIESWiiHINTXE�REASSHOWNINOfTMl1-1 ��e NOREtHESTARTOiANY[pNSTRUCIKK1,�p11[{pHSiqUCIIpMMEEfINGMUSf � I TNFfIXLVMHG.I�LL[US{•�•+�•µp•ryppp�y��y��y�HBHONJIFBUUIFDY"Nq'CNOMIWSWFFOSIUFNI%kYpIMF1AlFSTkIHG OBEIWFFNGTYOfI1EMOM,iNEOWNER,ANOTNECONTMCIOq. �� I . ��r��f�W7111�i1�Y�SQ3��NEkpCUNIXOLWp11[,EIIISTINGly�TNEVEGEf�TMINSHASbI-pAajFPP[${�p/�pµ��E,�LL'ppUl15' 4.INST�LLNATIVEPIANTS�SEESXEFi2� �[OFI��iNESE%ANSMUSTBFONTHEIOBSITEWHENEVENCONS}RIICfIpNI51N MTE�13/]e/]O15 W� M[0�[ ,TNDDFBrtISLULLlE11EMWFOfROM1HE51fE PROGI1fSi IOONliMBEX 15-159 ... 5 PIACFMYLCN�TO�SEOFaIANiS�SEESNFFTII �FSWNBY� Et � 6 CLf�N��P�NO�fMO&LREFROMSIiE �TMECUNTMCTOIISH�l�0ERE5POH510lEfWPROVp�(1(Ap[pyTESAfEG11MD5, DMWNBY FAqt 1 REDUCETdGI1qViNOiN0Yb115WEED5 K[FttA&FMETHpO51N¢UOF�WALLlENI11�011'IMCfpqIApUNTEp�qWER,IXGVATMWIfN SI�fEiYpEVI[[S,PRpTERIVEERUIFMENT,FLWGEII;ANOMIYOTHERNEEDEO �N,�M,��bW LHECIfOY E5 BUIXEIANpTHUMl,�pW[115/iW,MU5N1qG,LWFT11pAMEq,�OPFFX5,G1pPFrtS,11�HOWWNG,M,WPR0VE0fpIML l RFQUESTiqOM�NO�nfNDINSPFRIONWIiHOWNEII ��'SiOPROTERTMFL1iE,MFALTX,ANOSAfET'OFiNEWNN,N1pT0 norenvxoren�rwcaHxenwNwrrnrxecexvannunceorm��wnx CeIIMla�yaudp, Site Plan, ] GRUlOVTIMGfIlOOiGOWNS�W�MNWPOORlYWW�IISINGMWI.MTIOCII,MIIASIII,ORM�qOVEOFpU�I, 1 p�yxE11TOCOMPLETE�S�BUIITANOSUBMrtiO[i1vOFqENiON ��T7FSEOMWINGS TNnYAWORN�NINIHETMVELEORIGHtdi-W�V ��W��ryL�n��o��^� l SVOTMPLYXODEMHER&(pETOREGROWlH.HEqBppESHALIBE�PPIIEUlY�WASHWG�OHST�IELICENSEOCAMMERCI�IMVIKATOp I � H�TM iN EM xOXM�I FF�CfL SHMLpFWM,FTMFFICCONiqIXNI Noxiaus Weed HAVINGANMENT'�QIIATK"�O�ENOOAiEMFNT KCORWN[FWITN�NYMlpAtL[I}'IOiIIFlrtpISTANMMS, ��TIDNSANDMNUCfEfl5I1GS5XOWNONiHI50MWMIC�IfNlY, 1Y� 9[ONtMCipRTOVqOV�OESYFAROFMNNTFNNiCF11NPEPMRERIONOiOWNFN, MEBASEOONTHEFlEIOIOCAPONOFTHEAVPMEf?SIIXfACEENpENCEOF � fuTllqEMAINiEN�NCfiOBEVRWIOE�BYOWNFl1 5 SITE[ONDRIONSM�YVAqY9A5E00NSEA5aNANp/pp}p,�EOfYEM ��T�+STRUCfU11fS THEUHDEIIfiqOUN�RWTINGMIpCOHIXIqNOF Control,Notes � NOXIOUSWEEDCONTROLREQUIREMENTS: �o„.�.o,:�«.«oM��,E�E.�Eo�„o,w.Kw,rEo�,E�„o„KK„ eVR1E011T1lRiE5HASNOTBFFNVENFIEOMCdIFIqME0.MM1pN�LLUT1111Y ]0 OWNEq TO CAMPLRE S YEARS OL MONR�IIING V YOWNONiHISPLW IOCATIONANOMMPMWf.UYOEREQlMpEO FlFIOIOGT[.VEqIfY�ERNOf, �� o �o ro __ � �xo,�uu�.eirvxa*ecr.uiurwriEsmwxraTnennmawaxK � a 2 .—_____--.—__---__-_—_—___ _.___—__— . - _—__-.� `—' ' '— _--_—' ___' EXHIBIT 11 `��. ,I ��c r �„>r � ___..f�:.� � -��' Sewall Wetland Consulting. lnc. � - - - __._ __� PC�Box880 I'hone:253-8.59-0615 Fall City,WA 918024 Full Document Availabie upon Request December 22, 2015 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9725 SE 36�' Street, Suite 214 Mercer Island, Washington 98040 RE: Habitat Data Report—Avana Ridge City of Renton, Washington SWC Job#15-159 Dear Justin, This report is in reference to the City of Renton's requirements for a Habitat Assessment for the Avana Ridge project. ;�.; 4��' �' ■ �� . .�. i .�_ �� _ � �� _ � - „� ��su � _ ;;.. ,. AboUe: Vicinity Map of site EXHIBIT 12 3 � �� Greenfores� Incorparated Full Document Availabte upon Request December 16, 2Q15 Justin Lagers Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St., Suite 1Q5 Mercer Isiand, WA 98040 RE: Tree Inspectian; Avana Ridge PPUD, Parcel Nos. 29230S-91�8, -9009; Renton WA Dear Mr. Lagers: You contacted me and cantracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect and assess the condition of surveyed trees at the above referenced site. I received a topographic survey of the site from DR Strang Consulting Engineers, shawing the locations of the surveyed trees. I visited the site on 10/15/1S and inspected the trees, which are the subject of this report. Neither parce! is developed. The site has a SW aspect with a sfiream delineated through the center of the site, east to west. Bath parcels are covered in native vegetation, predaminatefy deciduous tree species with moderate to dense lawer understory. TREE lNSPECTION My inspection is limited to visual abservatian from the subject parcels and the rights-af-way. Both health and structure were evaluated. A tree's strueture is distinct from its health. Structure is the way the tree is put together or constructed, and identifying obvious defects can be helpful in determining if a tree is predisposed to faiiure. Health addresses disease and insect infestation. Na invasive procedures were performed on any trees. The results of this inspection are based on what is visible at the time of the inspection. I identified the species of each tree, canfirmed trunk diameter(DBH), estimated average dripline and rated the condition of each tree. Bigleaf map(es an this site have a wide age and size range. The largest and aldest maple trees are generally in the poorest condition.A handfu! of bitter cherry are scattered throughout the site, and all are viable. Black cottonwoods daminate the site in numbers, and there are far more yaunger cattanwoods than older. The oldest and larger trees are in better condition overaCl. Many of cattonwaads as edge trees lean excessively away from the stand. Nearfy all the smafler cottonwoods are very slender. Althaugh they are healthy and have no visible defects,their trunks are too tali for 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. EXHIBIT 13 SW 1/4 SEC770N 29, TOW)VSHIP 23 N, RANGE 5 E, W.M. X A I/ANA RIDGE x , � � - - - -�- - - - � x x �� __, SEIMNDSTREET �,,.. . - .�""'._��,_�_��...�..--.--� . . .— '\ �"`'.. y --- '__ _'- � �' ___' .'--_'_'�-....-...,,- -_ �- � .�� ...� -.�� -- -- —-- , /\ .._._.._�.-_.. _ - .... �'� � � __...:�_,,._----__ __..�.-_...__- " _-_ -_ �_ — _. — — — — — — — — — — — — , .. . _ ,...--- ____._..._. �.� _ - — - w w __ -�--=---------- � .._... . , , ._ _ �, , � � __..__ .,_- -._ ; }�-�aZ _�'__..- �_...___ __� �� / ,. ��-� J _ � � �r=;�� X �� ri �------- , i _ � —� , �'"°�" �`\ i �,�;,[��, � 1 � > �'I �( J�£� , �( � z \ \\� %�'.T,�.*` � � X EqSTBU/LDINQ y ,97�+`j� / Q �\ ;,,� ��J_w ��WESrBUILD/N(a� � � � �� - � l \\ � � '� � � , �� -,. .� % \\ � � � = -- - _ --- --- a� � _ , T — I ' ---�—,--��-�. � _ �.�. .� _,�; ��.;r�.-- . . �-�;, / � �� - � ��► �,� , .� � �,� � ,. � - 3�£ � �—��--,-_� �£ , �`� '� 1 � � ��i 1�� , , � �� ` � ...'' ` � � _- _�-,_..._._�_�. � �I i�---- � i i i e` / � ,,�. � ! �, ;_: _ �� ' ,� �.,� ~k_�_�:._�� ;-,—i._l — � _ � � � ,, , .\ .o '� ., " � ' � �� }� � , � ~ �: ' / 1 �i� U � , I �-- \ ''�� ;i t �Y--- /:./' ' l.C9�� :��., 1 �_I—�� ,�' � � � - - p , .�M ` " r j %' , ��` ' 1 � � / �;, - !-'��' � � .'4-E,��., �-��J, �% � � �p � . � �;� � ' O'` � A� , � �n i �\ � C�d,. <- , � � `� // , ,�^ � � � -^-r,,'f �. �$C��/�� ,� ...^� t - �y� - 1 ' / 'i . . � T - � \ �^ � \ N � / � i i..in�,u�.i.i.'. .'. HI511[mI5MUC1roV rtNtY l�l' \\ � ',. _,� �`^�� \ �� _ - 4� O / / ' „ �; y "'� , ,x � l�£ ,�_��M„oKo s,�s `�� ;�;�V��=' ;,l� � �r 1. �� ,' , ,� ,,, � .,; , '�.�� 7� ` � �. l v��1 O/�:�.,,ar�n.�.�E.,�"r"., ia�Y3, � �,� •�j.�"�`;% �/�",/_ _- - '��.,;� Q, " rv �: - �p�/ �,� `\ � '�. '.;,:��.,�` l�l" �� '�`;,' `{ M � �S' � �'P "��?;.�S,.'O� , �� , � M l f �/ O O�.��-a�;�, � ` = � � � ,\ '- ,� , �'��` ' 0, # o �..,�,.,s,�.,;,�, '� � ,;, �`� �- ��_; � �t ��, � ;.��' � , f /, �� `� ��£ �, � `�'y � ,f 9 m��,vnav cn�cu�ananis � �— c q �.a�a"" awa.�a,:�r�s � s.,a.,..�,��s.�'��.ttm„�,� ,�. \ y� � �X / � �6� / � ,�,� z,� � �'�;,' f f. F �a �ox r� sa .o az� .1 \\ \l � �` -f // � Mo xra�a�,e�.ncr,w�� ,F'� � � \\ � f i a ��W: .. � ~ r` . � \ �,,,,,.�-" ,/ NORTH / ORAPH�9GLE q � � , � \` -+INLn 3�l0 � =R � � � ��plC • Ff � A '� �. AVANA RIDGE PUD �"iz.sa.ia •�a o.n wa.ra au� ;�-_==__-� i D.R.s7RdJG � � � � � �pe I��s rarm I^-:`-�^�••w^, • 8�1 '�ii i�-il�,'�,_' ''l CONSULTINCiENCiINwEWEHS � 1 I I""uo � ..,.�... � � R�ENT�IV ;i��' � � , rr�e r�rErrnoN a umm c�na�c Pun � � � loxr �uw�a�c«r ssw`x.°�,`� ��.I I e,e.v. ...�. I i I�m �_� I WYY wa��n/e�ea��e/a�oi�<wo.k:osai ` I BY I p/�iE I MPR i� ] 3 DRS PROJECT N0. 75088 A—N N N N A EXHIBIT 14 — Full Document Available upon Request AVANA RiDGE APARTMENTa REVISED TRAFFIG IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY 4F RENTUN Prepared for Avana Ridge, LLC 9fi75 SE 36#h St Suite 105 Mercer Isfand, WA 98048 Prepared by �� M��-.:. � ,�f�J�+�/T��/��)r,/� � F /TV i.JlC!F7 r'i�G r7��,_... �.-i'e.`..� s:.,� /`/"C��f..r �./�!�'�f��J 11490 N.E. 124th St, #590 Kirkiand, Washingtan 98034 Telephone: 425.522.41'18 February 2, 2016 EXHIBIT 15 Full Document � Availabie upon Request ' '�`� 'j i i • C p �, 1 i�V u � "_ � Q!_ � h ._ � t0 Q� d � I� y�4 tQ Q , �� Q�+ � � Qi .,� w R ;.m ,w �a,� o ti � Q y� 4°�' m a, F ra° � ,Q m a, :o ;;w. _-Z � ,� r � �� 'oa_ '� F � i r `' 23 ,c H y °'; � o `� � 2, o. �' c; °Q m m � m � :; ic� a�, -o° r a a�, .r° o � °� o` a .F m - •, � m n,� y ' 0 2 � O r �°' � � �. .. � = QQ m /�N y � " �y 2 U a Hiranaka Daniel ' 1J31%2016 E X X : X ` b IRadtke IJuli and Mike I 1/31/2016 E X X X X X X �Moss. �Molly � 1/31/2016 E , X X X . d Ridenour IDaniel � 1/31/2016 E X X X �Brooker �Emily � 1/31/2016 E -X X f IGoods IDoug � 1/31/2016 E X X X X X g �Byrnes �6enevieve ' 2j1/2016 E X X ` . X h �Miller �Jerry � 2/1/2016 E X X X i �Yadock ` :,�Wendy � 2/1/2016 E X X X X �Heine IMolly � 2/1/2016 E X X k Cantu �Caryn � 2/1/2016 E X X X. X X I ;Reitz �Phillip I 2/1/2016 E X X X X X m IGray �Andrew � 2/1/2016 E X _ X �n McMullin IKimmie I 2/1/2016 E X X X Murphy �Rhonda Rae � 2%1/2016 E X . X X �p Hanawalt IJody � 2/1/2016 E X X X X Skulstad �Paul I 2/2/2016 E X - X r �Faas �Mark � 1/30/2016 E X X X s `Cramton , �Dawn _ � 1/30/2016 E X X X t IHanawalt IJody � 2/7/2016 E X u �Miller �1erry ` � 4/4/2016 L X X X v IYadock �Wendy � 4/5/2016 E X X X w�Cantu �Caryn . � 4/6%2016 E X X X - X X x � � Y�I � � =1 � � EXHIBIT 16 Full Document Available upon Request �� TEN W Transportation Engineering NorfhWest MEMORANDUM DATE: March 21,2016 TO: Rocale Timmons, City of Renton- Current Planning,Senior Planner FROM: Michael Read, PE, Principal,TENW SUBJECT: Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Study—Peer Review TEN W Project No.3462 This memorandum documents my review of the Avana Ridge �lpa�tments Revised Tia�c lmpacf Study, February 2, 201 b, prepared by TraffEx, site plan and site access/frontage improvement plans prepared by DRS Consulting Engineers, and field work conducted in February 2016 related to existing site frontage conditions, available sight distance, and a general field conditions to address trip distribution questions outlined by the City of Renton. Avana Ridge TIS Peer Review The following is a general list of assumptions, methods, and conclusions I have verified or recommend verification and or modification in review of the A�ana RidgeApa�tments Revised TIS, February 2016: • The study applies standard trip generation rates as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the Trip Generation Manual, 9'h Edition, consistent with standard practice. • The trip distribution assumptions appear reasonable in general, although the overall total in Figure 4 only indicates 99%. The total number of trips during the p.m. peak hour however, appear to be distributed to the proposed site access driveways. Given a majoriiy of trips are expected to be distributed to/from the south, the "equitable distribution" of estimated trips currently assumed entering the site from SR 515 seems unlikely given that a majorily of parking access will be accessed via the driveway onto Benson Road. A directional split should be identified between these two access points that reflects the "circuitous route" afforded by SE 172�d Street versus the direct site entry onto Benson Road for both entering and exiting traffic. Also, the trip distribution figure should be adjusted to better indicate the actual location of the entry driveway onto SE 172nd Street (immediately east of 106rh Avenue SE�. • Related to trip assignment, existing a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic counts between SE 172�d Street and 108rh Avenue SE should be balanced. In general, reported traffic counts at the proposed site access location are directionally higher along Benson Road at 108rh Avenue SE. Traffic operational analysis should consider the worse-case scenario and given the intersection Transportation Planning I Design ( Tra�c Impact 8�Operations PO Box 65254,Seattie,WA 98155 I Office(206)361- EXHIBIT 17 Full Document ��'"�� ^"''��'`�� Available upon Request �� 1141 Q NE 12�t Phar��: 425.v Mr. Justin Lagers March 26, 2016 Avana Ridge, LLC 9675 SE 36th St. Suite 105 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Re: Avana Ridge Apartments — City of Renton Memorandum - Revisions to TIA per Peer Review Dear Mr. Lagers: The purpose of this memo is to provide revisions to the Avana Ridge Traffic Impact Analysis per the recommendations in the March 21, 2016 Peer Review Memo prepared by TENW. The recommendations dealt with: • revising trip distribution and assignment due to a restricted site driveway access to SE 172"d St. and also the shorter trip length using the Benson Rd. driveway for south oriented trips • balancing traffic volumes between intersections • revising level of service calculations due to new trip distribution • evaluating traffic queues on Benson Rd. from the SR 515/Benson Rd. intersection • evaluating left turn lane warrants into the site access driveway from Benson Road. Trip Distribution and Assiqnment Figures R1 and R2 show the revised trip distribution and assignment of site generated traffic in the AM and PM peak hours. The revisions reflect a restricted access to SE 172"d St. allowing only left turns into the site and right turns out of the site. A careful design of the site access driveway should effectively eliminate most site generated trips to the west on SE 172"d St. and to the north on 106th, 105th and Cedar Ave. Also, site generated trips oriented to the south were assigned to the Benson Rd. driveway since it provides a shorter route to SR 515 than the driveway to SE 172"a Street. Page 1 EXHIBIT 18