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

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA99-136 „ p CITY OF RENTON ea _ . mil Planning/Building/Public Works F.1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 .3 43 W ►- ACi 7'9 D • Li: ma PB neTEADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ` j20Q260 47 # PAUL M. MOORE I PO BOX 5985 KENT WA 98064-5985 MOOR90a g006142g40 IN Og SOi 12i9g RETURN TO SENDER NOT DELIVERABLE NO FORWARD ORDER ON FILE AS ADDRESSED UNABLE TO FORWARD RETURN TO SENDER „MARLE TO FORWARD RETURN wE> +5�e � •C.'J fh.r. .,,t rrv`vti S } Y �..i.,. 0 Q CITY OF RENTON o - '"� � = , ••LL Planning/Building/Public Works krt / • o " Oct ays• !' :, E 0 3 0 5 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 W 1r +..++ { CC x it ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 1 0 0 $ 9 t F ►r' S IIp T 4IO U.S. POSTAGE 104 i ,O tie 9 lPe 41? 0„t oi? r .0FR SAMUEL L.PATTER ON 6310 STONE I MALL RD#D-104 PLEASANTO A 94588-8042 x II1I11I,,IlilllIlliltiltillil11tilslilIltialtliI tfil.I.,,IIiI 0 p CITY OF RENTON �rl � Cb NIL Planning/Building/Public Works 1i%"'' ., cr 1055 South GradyWay - Rent n Washingtona �, OCT 0.7'9 9 W!S 1 = 5 o 98055 W •• 0 .3 .. # ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 7 P04260 U.S.PIETER POSTAGE 10 08 99 FCTl1 PR.ESDRTED SEP L)A 981 TIMOTHY SIEBERSMA 440 S 51 ST CT#B303 RENTON WA 98055-6389 1F)E. ! UHN ,-- --,------,,,,,_,I ITO WRITERic. _ 1-0 (ADDRESSEE -1 1 Z !UNKNOWN Wd j ( j t j t ( j J� i tax d atr�v~.'j� .�.a.7.r IIifiiii?ifiliiiililiddiiiiimilinfIii?Iilillieillimil ;; p • CITY OF RENTON 7 0 Av r ---' , 7 r ••LL Planning/Building/Public Works F I ��,,,"' ; 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 W RI7'B 8 0 35 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 7204260 U.S. POSTAGE 10 0$ 99 F►M PRESORTED SEA WA 981 JOAN B.NEI'cY \O , 6916 126TH PL.'; ...—) ,06 4062 BELLEVUE WA 9' `` ti0i r.ELI ITIABLE I \\ F AS AODRESSE© 1 ,0 st 1. UNABLE TO FORWARD v WV �, fEi;iRN TO SENDER :•.ti.t : + 3£f _} i j! ( ! k } j Y` ^__ ��' 2� � �' i � 9 £? tt1 11it?,££ t.lf fl£iFlili£il£i£1£ £tiliil?�?£flip c: CITY OF RENTON ,______ © Planning/Building/Public Works '�" �i ; 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 N 43 OCT 0.7'9 9 �.m O 5 anIv ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED a a, PBMETER U.S. POSTAGE 1i I i 11 99 FCM P•RE ;DRTED '_E.A 1.)y '=31 MARGARETA. MC KEE KEE 455 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055-6363 r R T U R N r-y z., c T ,.. ' TO �i Y°Ci I L.f iw`----y. c, - I T Yt f sti'a 1.i i1NO`.1E ; .41_,A4_ hl.,1„ t tt,+ - its O © CITY OF RENTON - �L ••.�—.- Planning/Building/Public Works 1 1 .+'' ' • 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 W ►- UT 0 re 9 %��" `N a 0 .3 ac 2 ; ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED a .. y204160 U.S. POSTAGE In n8 a9 FCM PRESORTED SEA WA 981 SCOTT D.BATTLE NE 7356 W Lp`KE SAMMAMISH PKWY 98052-4340 6ATT3S6 980522003 iN 17 10/12/99 /REDM` WA RETURN TO SENDER I:CTt�EIIYERABIE NO FORWARD ORDER ON FILE S ADDRESSED UNABLE TO FORWARD j;;0 SI r�cr::on: rn AFNt1FR NL 3LE TO FORWARD 1CTURN TO SENDER Wd `'� •• ll 1 1 •l ll l 1.:l i s # `_: ! s1 I�f�•:'�� .._�_._._...,__. �y � �:. .�, �'t t a:►;: s :fa: r ; r.�l�a�i Fi.. 1F: :f:l:l:s 1.: 11. „ © CITY OF RENTON o �;14-; � asiL Planning/Building/Public Works V�b”' ao OCT 07'99 0 % 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 W ►-. txsixm — Q 3 Q 5 ex iADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED 1 04260 METER * U.S. POSTAGE 4\ /\49 JANICE M.FOSTER 27715 48TH AV S AUBURN WA98001_1121 F0:3T715- 9000i2940 1.699 09 10l1.2i9,4 RETURN TO SENDER FOSTER MOVED LEFT NO ADDRESS UNABLE TO FORWARD RETURN TO SENDER AUTO 114111,41/"a...-�2. IltittlitlillittilelititltillitiiliiiiiiiiiiiisIglidiltulltl c: © CITY OF RENTON �� .,,�I mu Planning/Building/Public Works i- g �frAli�, + 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 W y i>1C1 0 7 8 9 orb❑ 0 0 5 . ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ° " �DMlTea U.S. POSTAGE 1204260 t it 08 9ci F i_t'1 F RE=.%DF:T ED SEA IAA 981 KA 2152RL NE.1127HHAMMER S7#301 _— S��LE WA 98133-8598 i�j OELIVERAEtr�-= _� _ �Sb� AS ACURESS�C, �, ( 6651 p !WOKE i0 rLR:ii.• . iL1ETUFN ;0NnirR I'Y ci GT _3C� ! t"•< ih.,il ui:lh n.i,i,Ij iNil uild uii iuld. w. ih i:, ii. c: © CITY OF RENTON eta Planning/Building/Public Works si= 1 ��0 o (.3 (ICT 0 7'9 9 �' 1 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 W *- _ :S.UPOSTAGE ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTEDt�w 120426o '* THEO B.HALL 630 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055-5094 1R IURN ._�.— � I ,4 ; res 1 TO WRITER "---�-,! e:i t2 Z ,4 7 tca9 ! ADDRESS l,NKNOW N. citc\,› ssg-_=-=a nt,►:;I.}:i#:,,:I:!„i i it:,,;,{tjII,I;I:i:,:;iri„d,: „ p CITY OF RENTON o —'�''s°'�' , . oil Planning/Building/Public Works I- S ��r��,t 0 ” Oct O 118 4f = $�: 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 W y �� 0 -� — ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED cc cr � " 72• 04260 U.S. POSTAGE * 10 ne 99 FCM PRESURTED SEA WA 981 r AM SAY PO 0 RE T WAacQ7-0$QO NOT DELIVERABLE _ -� (NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED UNABLE TO FORWARD AS ADDRESSED ��UNABLETOFORWARD ::ii....1'° nINS TO SEND.R aL...: ,,ri ' : 8�3' 's/ �1 'AC BIL,hI111I:IIIII1II1 1,l 1 f11sII11:i,Irl,Ii:Iiill:ili4. llill w 4 0 CITY OF RENTON a y r �a t•,� �r._..�.. Planning/Building/Public Works �, is41A i� • 1055 South Grady Way - Renton Washington 98055 co cc 5 OC1 A re 9 • ziman 0 .3 Q 5 *• CC cc ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED a. 4. PBMETER t - - H.Two�. 7204260 U.S. POSTAGE ,nciaimed TO !Refused SOON e Attempted Not Known Insufficient Address V No Such Street No Such Number No Such Office In State Do not remaiI in th;s envelope LAUNA M.MC GAUGHEY GAUGHEY 401 SW 41ST ST `� '- RENTON,WA 98055-4926 t ' '0- PM ' ' T0 WRIII`._i --__ 0.,f 12. iy LADDRESS, _ UNKNOVI;� f`� 5 1 1 1 i { t 1 1 1 f t •••�'�_ �'lT ostAtit iiitu1ttltl{,sttls,��4tiitiilttilt;,.11tttlthlit�tltii itta it _ Lili [ 1 �? . 1< t 1,.V 1 14 T I__..-_ ..._. ... lv h ms e17 6i.` ' ,7.:...,+_ {1 :II ) 1 .to ' ...,,taWN1t� S Q1 ,: 1 t 1 j q'+I 1 / 1 �{-J ' • 4rr 1 ! •J:4 �_I 1 { 1 t i I '' lil 18r # I I / 11 FW 1 ,4, f, 0 t r aii .I e iffi m. a ., •f, ,'tl.. y . ,mt• • I =ad .111... �,Q t ( . t Y�i F *. T 1 ,,c 2 tmI$ of�D; , i N ; ,he 1 ® — js.l� •+-- • / i ai: • s. pp 1 i 1 .°. ..IYZ o ova I e `tI i . v ` 1 { I ..1 M Yel je riln • Yk� 1i 1 { e 1 Se ad,b7u, . eeer.. ,� 3 �1 1 Y ,. - i ! ( j w 1< iejY.i� iP. c i' l 1,, // . b �' s E R ¢y @� a uv I I l l / I T I j MEE li J�\ p R • 1 1 / / / / / I I PI SITE PLAN-STATISTICS e \ •q I i I \ I / / / / I 11 E IS Y CONDPLAN IOI S PLAN G" — ...- -- I \ - 1 - �� 1 \ ( f \ PS WIT C FLANS 1 { I ---- -L-------L------------- �!- L NS f ( _ :.�':. ■ •■ ■ ■ - "'rT.��■ •■ -■ ■1j- ■■--'1--- I�"-I"'-1"�--^'--T--T�- `1 Pb WIT D•F PLANS b ---- - L- - 1 pi WIT E P FPLANS - -- If ` , D I -- I I I I I \ I IJ \,e PS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS ° '.I In -`�. ll �� 111 /� �� 4 i i I \% \ \ \ P9 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS Stit I _1.1111_ _ Ii_ _i lull_ _ T p g PO RECREATION BUILDMCs <1 l / / / 1 \\ \ `\ `\ PII N�EI I ,EBORNOOD I�ON.9� r. PIP t ■ IIh■ ■iiii■ ■iiiii■ ■�11i■ii, , 1 / / 1 i I CI AMC UTILITY PLAN ADJAceT ,,. I4...,,,,,,© � ' i / WOE... T / / I I 1 \ C7 CIVIL DETAILS0 /�� ' .. o_IM: TI�aMrwE.--1s ..��Ll / cr / / / / m.E E aTNE, I 01 .11; ..' -'-'_*A-. : , . , Ilk , L grj 1) D.P.,.ROAD STOW STEET I --r■ I.■ :.14 MN.DEN.PM I _� ■ ■illil SO 9l 11 ■ T..TU I � •. \ \ I \ F. $ CINL MAW EXI•TNG _ �� II vti, �� ■ r Ic •r- 1 mi<<<� c 1 \ a \ ; li• �= -a' �� ;111141 r I .c I 1 II \\ © u -7 - � i_Ai .1 \ \\ \ $\ \PER cN�.c4�u ? 1� -----$- EL� - op ,mwoE , �r- __ " ��I 1�■ ■1111■ I 11■ ■Mll ■�■_II ■ ■ 116 I I TO Mil11.ME1. ' 1■ � ■ ■■ . ■ � ■ .. ■ / / \9oEX . � ea GORE 4 mg _-• �r •� �� `� '°Imo._ -��-�� •'...." i .�!��y„ ,� .,I i m \\ I\ \ � \ \I O aW-CFGS �.lti \ I 1., TFFE .� �, I ➢1.* Hum = \ \\ \ \ \ I J A a 5 ,:\: .‘,.„.1.x A'rEa S \. \,. \ d LGHTING NOTE, Zone change hne EACH r•ARAM1F AT tauM'ME BUILDINGS AND Limit of 25% natural slope area b • 4 m EACH ENTRY Do°R•APARMENT BUILDINGS TO Alterations in slope occur below HAVE Lew(T FIXTURE CONNECTED TO PHOTOCELL this line, created by prior construction, which are greater than 257, slope. I 15 LOT AREA: 341516 SF 1110 ACRES) WIT MIX: PARKING: IS'POLE LIGHT W/150W HF'S '� Q RI AREA: 86325 SF(1.99 ACRES) TOENHOMIES A 3 BED/215 BA 22 TOUNHOMES 15 STALLS/UNIT REQUIRED ''' B 1 BED/1119 BA 10 11 4'FLUORESCENT•CARPORTS RI4 AREA: 261.191 SF.(599 ACRES) �� .., STREAM AREA APARTMENTS C BED I I BA 8 WIT A-1 GARAGE•1 TANDEM g J490 5F •4/WIT PROVIDED COD RETAINING WALLS-SEE CIVIL 255.111 SF(596 ACRESI E I BED/I d0 W WIT B-I GARAGE•I TANDEM � 0 - • ® n ALLOWED DENSITY 83 UNITS F 2 BED/1 DA e •1/use PROVIDED ^ 5I2 ACCESS, PROPOSED DENSITY:83 WITS MANAGERS WIT I APARTMENTS (15 STALLS PER WIT) p ■ - O TOTAL�'� 4I WITS(15/•61 STALLS �, BUILDINGS: TYPE V-NON-RATED .151111 BARRIER FREE WIT REQUIREMENTS: RE(iIIRED 4 PROVIDED OCCUPANCY: RI HINIHSI OF 20%OF GRDWD BOOR WIT9 TO DE SS OF THESE ARE STRAIGHT IN Pm TO '11_ _-__-_ APPROX.BLDG.AREA: FAIR HOUSING ACCESSIBLE(STATE TYPE B) STALLS LOCATEDRISA ADJACENT A •"�II �� N p --- , GIVEN THAT ALMOST ENTIRE SITE GRADE 15 N APARTMENTS AND 4 ARE PARALLEL �I &' p Q. a B_�GS -4.8.10,II,13,14 R B •6410 SF. LOCATED ADJACENT TO BUILDRIG 12 _ EXCESS OF 10A SLOPE. 10 GROWD FLOOR WITS(201•4 MIN. GUEST 1 PER 4 WITS G =_LG556 I l •1810 5F 83 TOTAL WITS ON SITE/4 Z a - d �_�G516•R SF •b5• 10 SF. MINIMUM STATE TYPE A WITS •2015 STALLS REQUIRED Mil p�C•j I�y�B 8SE 5 T•4E A IL 5) 21 CF STALLS PROVIDED .7• 11 f0 F a RECREATION BLCG. .4488 SF USE 5 TYPE A(HK)WITS FOR FAIRV�f 111360 SF. HOUSING WRS 24 THESE ARE E STRAIGHT TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA: STALLS AND 3 ARE LION BLDGLT M p T<,•p '" �.+_ • ri WILDRGS •68008 SF. LOCATED•RECREATION E DRIVES•WALKS •82412 5F. BARRIER FREE PARKING REQUIREMENTS R-14 i � 150.480$F. TOTAL PAFKII9 NOT DEDICATED TOTaUNHC Yt TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA. PARKING IN STALLS OF RI AREA: •86315 SF PARKING IN EXCESS OF I STALL PER WIT. tit Rs AREA. •T8141 SF ADDITIONAL BARRIER FREE STALLS REQUIRED STREAM/DITCH BRPER 49,02,•I STALL(PROVIDED•AEC.BLDG, s Sa s 111111t^4 IN RI4 AREA. •32564 5F. 1 APARTMENT BA IER FREE STALLS REQUIRED T _ __ice - - - _--_"---- ITN__ /7.1 ----' A ---TL°A- -A_ • - III111 ' ►1'•.1'.:...•«.•" NORMANDY RIDGE APARTMENTS I. I re,te.It MUM.a tl+�a MIL,OM ollt•r.•■*7S LIME . °v.....m.;. umr ® LAM ■. ......a•.Si` �'.." -i . .m xo n 0tr Woav i;tee n R i.? rxe 11 rc.,,s.0�.nrcu 9°' GRAPHIC SCALE •4• 0•- �s avY n mv.m.iwa '^m'RIF r"' , scan`r.max xr w..isse num 1 ,v....m 1. 1 - t, r, s•n.r sm MIME xa,e • max gi wet rot 1': . s.. '' 1 � I , ' 1! '•,.°1 ._ _ t , ` ` t s ` \ ' . \ \ \ CI I ( 7.�e.oxr. LI ' • ` \ ., \ • \ , 1 s • \ ' I I' I \ 1 '� \q\ A '\ \ \ • ` ; i i 1 . • • I I; 1 s r t`.. °I■ !■:■ ■ ■ ■■ #R'� ■' 1■■ ■ ^°hp Ri ■■ u • ■� �,p. o^. 'p k l °i I I II I I 444444= 1 :::.•itei , � - - ...X A" I� _ _ _ ;, :::::" )Aar1h� IIII I I ;yam.� .✓� " (Itip . II ..,,, I I jI �i/ / l 1 � ':17'1 I;'ist�- .rill o,. INIggAlt _ ' ' INLIVAIdifliNi I / / / / / / . ( I ( I . — ')Y\.yp�a� 1 �. il,,ppp`—aasee,,, i --,11b�.- Iy --1• p �� 1 ��^-r l,f .f;, ��, ,`,r ;j;T/..4 !��I � �q�.1�, ._ 4 ADA� �I!' o.D' A lig' - �7'I►11 --.Y',. 1 '4 I '/ l‘s�i i 'i ice/l I,! ! \ Iw";;." I i ,al a ,ti4,3 ..... d®:160.,...simams` s,,,,a mea..i.......w.umb.....:kalam. .....M.1■Y'a owt `il m g_� r 1. ��4 '" .... I�t f`ii■rhiim ltipiatxrtartr■a.eltl■irtt, +awasiimiw °°"�; d $ •�,r/ If/ I / (l i l / /(/-•'/ 'I/l• l,, {., �� n'. + 1,��+�cw1�t 7M' � 7 #1'� 11F WRrm 11�'#�lFMtt pyr+lo t!!►!R T�"+r +mw+' ��'" 9" f./ l 1 ..°I/ l// /J I (r I / S 1zai CCC I �Ftia..c+''�� '".l.��i■��I 1 �+ • ` 1 / " "c. , ,.t./ / I 'I!l l I• i 2:: r° 1�A1 33`` ttttts•►w. \ I ` /'1 / r / 1 / �/ ii� / V 1 ' tee 1 > —_ ,, 44 t rpff xo' R a ''lam I I 1gg !i inwpwl • 1, I •r �.. ■� , It I ■� 16,-.� D,11 #1, I , 1 I I s 1 '14-111:iiiiy� 4 Is I t 8�iyli +-p1 I ! .e .u'r+xx-�r..�ar.Y,rrees .r i .(�., I I E "sr I' +'�y1 IIIilll Ill -- 9,"'t wily M k p 1 ` I . 1 i ,,.,t I Al �i� �■A1 IY i �■ S ! •',. l a I ! - - owild i .�.�t.. . --, ® %�� ; a7�• "e '' �� t .4,1, a..aii v s,Ili= 4t aaa�t�d „ail";:' � , �; W $,+; iI��l �'p!El, 'J JElff+`- wig ► , wl :�elv i 17 co Inter L14 1:t / rf p,� a ; o � 111 � � Nilllailiiitig— f klxlimg r �1 � I , . . za t I ■ ■ ■ t-74 rIA■ Ili, ..., ■`kilo N.-oil ■on u.I•a El IX MI IN MI II • •-'� i ,;--._ .1 t u,,,44 moirr+'l t.' k u.w, - woe . .rtk. fir-, ,,, si \fie a 2(„`�',••1. , I I ' I •�I 'I• �RI4 RI � "'� I .'. .... .«".°, " ., I r• 1 I \I I 1 I 1'� \ ll ; I ,��•,�, •°.�,. F I 'I I 1', I , \ \ / 'A'- nut in CALL 48 HOURS \ f BEFORE YOU DIG Limit of 25% natural slope area/ °" •° 0" 18004245555 Alterations in slope occur below µrya" ^ - - - thi-, line, created by prior construction. 0 NATIVE UNDERSTORY PLANTING THEME - - Di ALL NYEASOF THE SYMEOL i ORNMIENTAL SHRUB PLANTINGSSTRUT TRHT TTIXWUT NATIVE SHRUBS AND G0.0UNDCOVUBS ARE THE INTERIOR LOOP OF ROADWAY USED TO CREATE AN INFORMAL PLANTING #RHODODENDRONNEWNYMUY THEME N MEIN MOUND/BET WEEN THE V®URMIM TYPE SHRUBS TO BESWEETGUM AND KATSURA TREES ARE BINCKLEBERRY/UBSS M EVERGREEN USED AS ACLBD,6 TO BUDDING USED TO CREATE A CANOPY SlRFETSCAPE / FACADENSCREENI N0 MlER10R OF THE SITE. VIBURNUM AND G0.0IINDCOVERS ARECEBERRY SALA LONMCMASCADE ORECAN GRAPE/ I -.. 44t Y. "4M0 q r• ,94Al►t. - -- / - i- - I ti �� :c• lair:Omilr 4Il:wa:ri :irY iliinaidiiiil�'pl etaJi+ia i vfrrma TA190T RD.STREETSCAPE: �-/ 9P 1 l air / /'RFD MAPLE TREES ARE USEDroCREATE ,� �m� 11.1 _ / / /1LAWNWN UNDSCMMTMOPY OP TREES WITH P� 1PTlG�nY... l _ I� 1 •• - -_- � `% Imo':. - *Z'wwrwrw V";- _ - ' - W • +I _, F ,....-.-..—'�., e—rok:Y¢krvth aria. G , .0. -'�'wr 'r, ,, ,I _ 1 f .-nat)YK rYIA&alAA. iP /'� J,,l / 'V' „.\ •\, sY' llr: / 1 di Mo. L I i��_ i ��.�°rFwr-��l..I ii�/� . -"'.'.�.c -,� . �-% � � '" \naf..v¢ �r�.CA / r 1�',, p_�'yy. yj Y� irf ENTRY PLANING THEME. i � �f W_Lily 7 :__"- ^"..-7 , 'may rfan > f aL„ /I ICI ANNUAL PLANTINGS IN FROM OF --/1-- 1111 ,I / ` THE SIGNS AND WITH DOGWOOD ( � S •� � r - ' �1,1 -I Y. [ \ f 1 n_ AND JAPANESE MAPLE ACCENT TREES I G I " NMII --'■.1- Ir BEHIND THE SIGNS. @® P 0 1 7 t P I J _- rm ,24 Rom`.w e f t Ippol@.4 k —" co,7+�'r .$��4'7.L�I71 ,!_, e _ :::777 4 i. i I'iUMtil !ilUlil!itj NrIi 1111.4-3>a� 1:11a ►a'rlal® 111 1 a`ti11 ' � %I 1 ir 4 i. �. _ _ -'wV��WMV! —a ' -.L=----'�----------- ' a iq INTERIOR SMALL CANOPY TREES LAWN AREAS WHERE POSSIBLE RI4 RI - • RETAINING WALLS,SEE CIVIL PLANS ON FLATTER GRADE AREAS AND I ' SMALL SOME CANOPY TREES ARE NATIVE EVERGREEN PERIMETER BUFFER. AT SOME PARKING LOT ISLANDS. USED TO ACCENT THE BUILDING I O EVERGREEN TREES AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS ARE FACADES.IAPANESE MAPLE AND USED TO CREATE A PERIMETER BUFFER TREES DOGWOOD TREES TO BE USED. ARE DOUGLAS TRAVEL E.RED CEDARCONCEPTUAL PLANT MATERIALS LIST NATIVE PLANT THEME AT THE FROM OF BUILDINGS.IN AND SHRUBS ARE EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY/ BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND SLOPED AREAS i Ijl OREGON GRAPE/ SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME/ GENERAL REMARKS /-MAHOMA AQUIFOLII. 1•"NA y COMMON NAME OMGON GRAPE NATIVE SPECIESM' 1 `ppj AMELCHIEA/$E0.VICEBERRY 3K"NT V STREET TREE CANOPY TREES ALONG TALBOT RDSOUTH NATIVE SPECIES � AR 0 ACER RUBRUM' MSTKONG'/1'CALIPER RED MAPLE BBB,MATCHED, VACCEALTA OVATN b"M. 1E , (^'""7 EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY NATIVE SPECIES ^ NORTH �jI��,� ��T nrellfannikarry INTER100.PARKING LOT ISLAND CANOPY TREES y UDAtidAal�ICLLWI � GAULTHERIA SXALLON/SNAL IGAALLONT 36 OCANS ttpp SCALE: A 40' 0 LIQUIDAMBERSTYRACIFLUA/ 1"CALIPER NATIVE SPECIES, pN SWEETGUM BBB,MATCHED, SEE CIVIL PLANS FOR GRADING INFORMATION. ,¢.�, CAA'-f`,I� MROSTAPNYLOS WA-U0.5V I GALLON CANS [., b CERCIDAPHYLLUM TREE 2"CAL MA KINNIKINMGK TlONCA, C� IAPANESE KATSURA TREE BBB.MATCHED =I O NAIVE SPECIS, �\ A PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE BUFFER EVERGREEN TREES/PLANTS MAHONIA NERVOSA/ I GALLON CMS CASCADE ANS Z ao CASCADE OREGON GRAPE AT IC, -_- \-THUTA PLICATN 6 FOOT NT, NATIVE SPECIES WES ERN RED CELM BBC,NATIVE j SPECIES BMDNG FOUNDATION ACCENT SHRlB15 S J ` PSEUDOTSUGAMENZIESIV 6 FOOT M. / RHODODENDRON SPECIES ILK"M .. .. .. a DOUGLAS FIR BBB,NATIVE > o SPECIES, VIBURNUM PLICATUM a<"M Z Y BdJ - GENERAL NOTES BUILDING FOUNDATION ACCENT CANOPY TREES AT TOE STREET SIDE OF 0 TOMENTOSU6V 06 fAUBLEFLLE V®URNUM b BUILDINGS N9,N13 AND Y16 AND AT THE ENTRY SIGNS a1 0_ EUONYMUS ALATN 1R"M S��i e I.ALL BEDS TO RECEIVE A TWO INCH LAYER OF BARK MULCH /AC PNMATIIM-RED/ 1"CALIPER WINGED EUONYMUS 1 ALL PROPOSED LANDSCAPING/LAWN AREAS WILL BE IRRIGATEDIA BB \ IAPMESE MAPLE B , WRH AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM MATCHED 4 I ALL PLANTINGS TO BE PLANTED WITH IMPORTED ORGANIC TOPSOILS O y 4I PRUNUS CEMSSIFERA 3"CALIPER - 'THIINDEOCLOUD'/ MB, LAWN AREAS-SODDED AND IIYDROSEEDED i \ FLOWERING PLUM TCHED, CORKORENUS KOUSMNDOGWOOD M 6'HTATCHE,BBBD LYNN WIWAM HORN B ASSOCIATES,LIE LANDSCAPE MCHITECTURE W OFFICE 101118 GRAVELLY LAKE DRIVE SW,Y IN LAKEW00D,WA9M99 gili"II-r._...rT _ - 4-1 ,0 0 A n_ oA A TTit 1 1 ' I x ,:.49\99052 ILLS!ro50!02 OW 0 010 TRIllbeQ NUL Reran is '- ----- , e it - I 2502 SF. 711 _, 1 1_ + + i + I 1 7IDn BF. . // I 1 7IDn DF. — -- V. i _-.I : .�I I. _ 1 V. 11 1 t L l I 7,D,,BF. !!I 5 .73ti et— 9 , II I ------------T-' A F ® __ ]302 SF. I { I 7IDn DF. .- I --T - n _. a * II -,,7IDn 5F.'1 I 7IDn et. -' rileg r,-- 7307 BtJ_ ..}..__._..__._.- 1307DF. -I e� 113ID7 SF. I! .v 1 �_ 111 7307 BF. I ei5 17IDn BF. T 1_1LI _.__E _ (N� 3 is:----1 ®. `' -.._ 7IDn DF..I.-. I.T Z m 7 Y i$ I 73D7 DF.� .. S 1 'I �.-�� __ 3 D p 0 A .6 i !]eo7 e� '„ _------T - �i y 2 .Ih 7507 BF. _ 7IDn et.' _- Li.± :::i. iE0§ ..}�7IDn --- --� • 1.._ N 333 N 1 - II ' 7 5F.,1 (PT ; ]r Q ! 7sO70� A A I 7IDn 0. f.,�`IpYN _1 ?d.- �l 7 Z -+I -- I - I usD: 2011 l Rp a I 2,O2 BF .lI L. JE III BF. 3 I a m G.m O1 D i 7307 8F. !I -1 \ ^—.__.r i-_ g"g A_O -A-A J r - 25028F D 9 T F. A OD 2'S w Z I I 7IDn DF.)'----- ... ... .— i- 9 9 D D N N 01 N(I7 Q ^T �..-_.-_—._+ 7302 BF., I r ZO ,n�N T yI i 20n 5F.-. - V '� 73o7 eF 1 °\ . i , - '11; Ilik>.\ I ,I I;.-- ! i L -0 t, ilk I1u: \ _If x x / 3; J' 8e . 1 i}�� PAU.A CAGEY,MA I - PROJECT NO.:99-052 !oRIBLlsom1Jy j I1 IHIonnot>mg Deve.1I®pI onerrn1t -- - - Q DRAWN BY OLD ^,yyl W:t 1S9 1E DATE :9-15-99 V LATEST REv. .51: Orrc�,�,s,[,r�,M, me gT: Q \�--= I 10118 98th Avenue Court SW. Suite-1O9 Tacoma.Washington 98499 12-53)SB+3207 _ 1 ��yyy��= :i:.I. •• MINE n • i 'n - a - - . aw longv,Ik Oiv ,I-ate '1 E h' Jetk lSparW t R I; lel Jamo ®" © Q 1001. .ale - — . ,-. OM �QJ, )1 Salk are ao., ,� I ; Clark, 0 Monnaao ® ___-- © G Fslh __ --- - UI ,� ✓ : / • , Carl - rya (21 • ; '” ----- Y CS W $ /r 1 ■ , '® -,...M-...--$'R j' '' �N�¢ - • Mark,NallyEilifj SE. ISSTH< T Izl +1) • e. Izl J► f21 111 �_ - '` ®e a e j i wnsle .yam c i, ,6,1; ;41, re :El kmmCl7m� rf ow...� ® 71p9 ... '�I� «® « .SE. 196TH Pa -i Pt. Ma't ffFF 1 i Q .'u ,i=^I v.ow< cemn <s 0 tgk Warne u«s t _ T 8 RI J O QM C, IY ® I 02 Vltllam♦Petersen _1 ©�. " T _ _ - — —— °®" n o"` aoI wm,a <„ '® a .o rR , ,® ` ,., 6. �0 ® ' SITE ' I® e®" ar$ t rr.` / l M M I T PARK �r r• • I PO 0/ fa. '. T S 1yl,`�31 3 4`',��K"j,`�a r<,.r< • • 2 �dritkllacrm,' m• ._ lil ;; �! pCHIINM�M�'�,. s a< r yT ;ill)... u-'I Izl ; m € e ar'.•a 91 W + - O -.-,_— lit':;s1o,:no:est, F ' y. Ys u, II -- , R a e m .«<. <.... .. r _- - .-j 1 I `4 fell. e„y r a<.,to I. © e Izl arc.,,-! - + } C ` lr Z < yy� s r In $ 11 1. a .13`a t Hay. -. Var® ri- , W In. p n,q� f� UI III �� -� 00te S.E 1M'II � SE-'MPMe • �. ® y : W. ® al Hlyl HOG r "Da .404 I __ q Er _S—192ND o :i7:' -�*" ►. I,. &34.l! 1 ——-`J_J�._ Alt0 , * CORPORATE tr .�Iaa�i. �► ' •w-<s JA Nei,Carl T.100 Jr ® ; + EI .Sne<nn wy,Me u "IYIA 1Itl ccwl,w t , °1 I I ° ., l sal n '' Onrt J Eu.. P7l 'a I g i o p NORMANDY e...Iam.r. 1u 1004 ©Ilia =_ 1.W.Zirlia..,011t iM .lie , r m. : _„ TlTT% In ,t. - 1, j a 1 �- 2 5prInRbrook Park of ,.- °®a 1 ` 1 99 ,os-99\99052-ru90!m.D\D.Ep 11-00 1 60 41 �_ it 1 ° »» i S 11,....) MIN ° d 1• e@o Op :�! d 4 E + ig +1+ _ r °_ 0 ,f I k...! a 6 El IIM 0 -- ,.» I ''. Itla ii 1111 F I' , ME ii 110 . I1 ein rDN �II °� `� 1 . 4 ... li r A111. 1 5 opt tete *ma (101 ill M. a opt Y • R . I R R ii 3 B !ig Via_ 4 ❑ ui ❑ h-r1- � PAUL I CASEY,MA PROJECT NO.:99-053 ..Non'rnnanrmally IThlallge alloUL69t1ffis Elcav(gopI®(effiQ Qi DRAWN BY OLD R@®Q®my Wm3l.:_..E.::1 & \ I urns RUE DATE :9-15-55 I wcartc! LAT REY. wa+ ' mser: Q - Burt a MING.J `/ EST 70 I 10116 96th Avenue Court SW,Suite.109 Tacoma Washington 98499(253)584-5207 9 os-W\99D•.1-L�LBOL FOtO\04 a.q 0-0.0 I r •_•�.00 1y •�• I , o I 'J T 19\ r., „____________/ 1 N N spy t it�]y I %T. C1 F t1 I ; I 11111Q ;� O I 11111111i11111 �!� .� 1 j Irei g -„ <PII p1'-n 1=1 oI d i - ,. ! r © 1 ,4 iiWia r n�,�, -■■■■■11111111111 i .e.a / .ri. op 72 0---:---, . . , _ , , . g , li ik 1 , 4171 1 . 1-Li ) 1 . — =; l__i ;gym ME,I ll. EfIA 3 "e � L ❑ ❑ Jo I I TJ pJ - o aL: 1 1 r W irk ki -f m IPADL J.user.AIA PRDJECTND.:99-e52 N®u^»>mdlq IRificrIlage IHI®Ull»$®eg IIDeveIl®pEmerm4 A I�� DRAWNRY DLD m� Q 1 )tl q 691E DATE :9-15-99 LATEST REV., A , A THISST: sLwn a a I 10116 36th Avenue Court SW,Suite •109 Tacoma,Washington 98499(253)584-5201 _,L %ice\ g l —' --.— __ �_. _ 3 ' u us 1 PI kr! = IIIIIIIIIIIIIII!iiTL: � ...INN IIIIIl ---- c i El � • � ' o iJLiiiiiiiiiiii4i. ji 11" III kil JR■I — I 011— � If 7 iWL1IILt__ llIl • SaunaStalle IE➢eva®in-has.9&±§12 North§G�le IEDev -Ieli,9,e 12 - R \—II III II 1 o dB I1PJIIUIti ems• -film 41 I 0 rm... iui T:ruii -11111 M ._ ui'Iit I N ➢{ITE WITF 0,-F IE�¢Mlle IE➢evslam.I::➢.I 9&112 Weal a Mev =t a➢$ 9&112 M E d 5 �0 g g ��= � �� ° 1 Ian - � 1 g ,-----ii•- I—weft 1rI \l i II / � ��,� - . . p-umilff iougolot , pio, Rd - - 1=11 Fll -- . d. __ p.ii,._,4it _.__ ____._moi- z _ _it-Aliiim_,_ _ __. mi=r,i,Ji_____ - lc 1----1. __ g ,,, .. i ; - o' „.=.; ==— '' '''=%'' nijil IILCI flLIiI_tin a �. ,LIB .flI!±i[I a WIT E El uNI._ WIT E ,autz WILE 4thlz Ent Mlle Ellev m-I::➢a➢s.Ils Wet State]EDevettem-I.Bilt,IlS Mel Mlle'Devitt=-14114 RS Meath Stalls n,rv� ... . e f 19 H ,obs-9M•052-TALBOT ROADS 4<_u.9 0-e0 I t m O r. 1m �— ,: a II IA� '1 2 ODI 0- i ®j C 0 kilo k,, linit nJ ;Li 1 0 �. o , ,iz,iiri.i I An4 4 VD • J v• . a � • 1 .0024 ti a 3 d . I n.. 4W go o a —p O • r� n ►r �dI. 1 1 EkEs 1 1iti 7060 CJI s M 0 r x .. �$ ® ® f $ ® CI . 1 DJ L Ill DIricLi. ' la ; t 4 ,� z n I a, 3 � ��. a. .. . . ,.1 ! y e_ t. r --.- m.� 1 PAUL J.CASEY,AIA I - I PROJECT NO.:99-052 NorruaDIQI'm�y at�ge U®UDB�eg IIDevellopmennt A DRAWN BY OLD - ,/;..... A "I psrtam 1411E DATE 9-15-99 1 4 LATEST A 11468E7 0 Q JJI�\, : J 10116 36th Avenue Court SW.Suite.109 Tacoma,Washington 98499(253/584-5207 - ig ARCHITECTURAL GRADE COMPOSITION SHINGLE. AIIIIIIIIII ;-:: _ diP ' '� °' ki1 litilIng1:1 1 , 0 , , .,,,,,, _ _, 1 i r �Nubamiii7 ■ I C 1 ARCHITECTURAL GRADE COMPOSITION SHINGLES .111 . i� I-. g MINN ::. am iMii - .-T- ' r\ .eF p000 In171: � ....i i MAR IL1ZVATIION fl g au.e I.ANT . �� - _ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 3 uuuJ'mIJkI '-''.- '''4'2 1:RC .�. 1 13 pp I..4_:"/ri Z t% i` �_� a.uT[ 7 .iUr �,■I� i i''' 11: 111 11 PIM ilkill 111.=—MIP,P =.e.'". L . tref smog IdLL IE V AllJI®1V •— ♦ J i.]i eF 11 -onm/mR/ A O1 I R _ . �rprtnnnrmTY�/�nhln�/m/��(� A�—L:a��a__�.. A..a Ail......:.... I 1 • NORMANDY RIDGE APARTMENTS SECTION 31,TOWNNi 22,RANGE 6E,W.IL KING COUNTY,WANNgTINI c DARNED CM PER PLANK NOR41 R/W FOR \I E 64HH SHEET w _ DETENTION VAULT CROSS-SECTIONS s•LANDSCAPE Smv HYROSEEMHC ROCKERY PER PLAN • -21 (SEE NOT N0.I) . e FLOW SPREADER r /r •e-,,/x PER rcwL THIS SKEET I E 1i- -1 r 1 ��Grt Oar • Ios a I i.°� I I �L} I B I I I •:�� I I. MOO SEEDING 1CR THE 8OFIL1RATI N 560.4 SHALL USE THE I I I I F2EON4G WIN E. 10E MI PERENNIAL RYE GRASS Q a a aQ QLi I }� °° *°"'°�' I I I GM CREEP lox HIGHLAND 510 CRASS L J L J r ` .. lox ANTE DUTCH CLOVER.PRETxocuuTm HroRrnEEwxc IN AREAS NOT SUSCEPTIBLE To PROLONGED -%+g.P/�,� E TM I I I CONTACT NTH WATER SHALL BE N 15 CIA FD AS DIRECTED BY /.., SS I THE EROSION CONTROL RMS.SHEETS CIA C2 7 NY,Tv 1 ! �� I I BIOFILTRATN)N SWALE II L s o r WIT'c'"API'L I 1 1.� ' O Nor-To-5C4LE '"s/P.4E- -{ .�J —v4. ° 1 gyp: 4 SAW WALK W4 • OFFSET. SEE O S-Y a E SIE➢5 22.5-2 ROUND SOLI°COVER U FRY GET-R2.0°'s. MOD.bRALN•ern 4 LSFE°CNING P0 R. N0..9 O BOTTOM SLAB PLAN \ ! AND b BOLTS. s. C� • m 1N.a N,a- _ OVERFLOW S W a E . 159.b' mNWD WA. /! SURFACE ELEV..159.b' S '%RIR TM �%•''TM� STANDARD 4REO 64 ,i" C PIPE SUPPoRf(S): STEEL2.IN WALLO LADDER/STEPS. y I 1 - •; �"°` } 1 • - 3•m.Dea c.GE aafFb _ E 8 OR NIBEDDED E SUPPORT. XE .C.R.S. O 61 TM. WIN.ONE PORT. a°GATE:" rL�tl g MIAMI ELEV..15231' XNERT ELEV..15201' i a— _—_ ii CIF -3�-ar • RES RX:fGR PULE • ,—., WI I y . EtEv.-ISD.51' 25 • -fTb&Y L OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE e-O xDT TO SCALE O^ fi COW . - t< rmr .FROM 115 AIN CI) TOP SLAB PLAN ,/ W �� , W //// ()W aI W �p Q .. tams rmlem0 m r A E®AR GM 9450 W M.0a0i „�uvA u W Or 0 ;. OHMAGE.(VASES) Fx91 GRADE EN'POST AS IEas0Y TO PR000E 0.10 0 < F A BANS co • r E.AFIER NING CROSS SECTION �� °^°•° N SWALE :Ira, ()FLOW SPREADER °" O: N.. ..•J NOT TO SCALE SUPPORT KW CALL 48 HOURS Ma° "$110 No BEFORE YOU DIG �� 1-800-424-5555 Al: .I 2 WC.Am,..mm,. ;Mo."'Sel=MCC i I 1 i i i i i i I i 1 1 1 ( f I i 1 a #i ( i 4 ! i{{ 1=1 ,s+t 1 --4 , t ta• t ait� '--1,•rl a „.tt Jt / Y it !1 �- -. 7t . t @. i I , 1 ` a a i t i `t i ♦ — .2 ` i,,I �I i. m k •\a a .. Q 5771 —� a. 1 \ / so • \a / 14 as \`♦... A'*'� t i. f — i , f .a R _A� 1. i 1 ti // (ilg�, ' t♦ dlz, .t of 33t :4 , 1 't •. i, , a — j', 7 , I - 9 EI n o 24 .>e— ® „yam; a= ` ` t u1€ 4i { nm : i --- — — —i — I' \ �i\, I ♦ \va a i - t N °m —' n for jt ��`a �a� _ �` % :t tea' W vwga ..aT\ 1 a♦tail\'. r.K fit\ ✓t I\d i t /' /: 1 1� �j CD I a� i' /___ i` _�.�r"j� _ \gip oq 1 II of — i�� PAWL J.C/gY,AIA I PROJECT NO..99-052 Norrim&im 1y Mildge ffi®Ullsflimag 1IDeadf®tpuOmSIn1 ij DRAWN BY .OLD _.__,' .:±.�+=" I yif.Ro I f a...•_ Ile e�__ ISSUE DATE :9-IN-99 r ..y I. LATEST REV. ,,," , TALLEST': Q � J I 10116 36th Avenue Court SW,Suite.109 Tacoma,Washington 98499(258)584-5207 _ I .e .-r r ....yr .+ .,.r V.' ... ... .....r I k or, .,w r.. .Sf3 o 67 _I2R. '''' ' —4 717-71 66 r b C Wa5'Pe :&g• '; 1 0 `� • `N,6iFe IGN L�IG b 2668 I' I __ ' 7 Me- ilteili - -11 15.2:71'i I inii " ® ® a o I- 1 = ® ® ; o 0 Umult 00IE°° (serzmiall flllan®n°) Ude°°IE°° 01=1 g1oon°) 0 g SCALE V4'.I'-0. SCALE V . .I'-0' E52 SF. ell SF. . H I �I 1 R f 1 — ; i - e J 1QI �eon -F,.r N A 4 6048 MO1— e� R 0 .-,<> ps • gab-56 i E�L1 /4lL 1 - - s g � I & AMWAUC•1 s DAiH YY1K-N ; c $ 0 nal aGOEI iL l UI 4❑ 1....w...e. D° ' El UI 4❑ 1....a....s ( _ ' E� 5 Qaec®maIl iiloomy Nett 9799 Murat il`Ilan®n°) I,SS SF USi SF. Casey CII'®tlIlip krellilfgeda Architecture And Planning Fl tCill r WA, _1647VO. 117111 t W � ��'� I ]07.71 , .....� Imo_ 00meurul --- I g 00 _ _ v a ,; ill I L :rTTLT 6 R WITC/D WITC/D r..w can raw- t.3 WITd t_J� ,.e®ue� ix��u F me]Ea�V$lii u .I;,a�, 9 Want Mention-I:, a 1,2,3,4(Ss le,IlIl,Il3,14,k fl DF awl llrillrlr 1 a. _L.__ --- - .... - 1 rt. or 'lAim&vo...w., , nun IIIII I + 111III m. I -_- _ m IMMO ,t q% \ �� --w.rw.,von,plena •�1 .i i ::lig „,.„,,,,„,,,,, a . , ,, .vF»..a �2r j IPh+mmt4 Rear]Eae�Qa®®=I:,a 7 ALA, W I2 WiT e Rear IF.11.evelkom a r,adlgo o Il,2,39 4(,Il61,Ill,13,14&113 01I. M) lir -1Pg„.Will .i. , ,,,..„,.., , . _.•-,,_------- _,...„._, _ ,,..7 - mpp.-__ L_____-_,_,-44-ii-H 111 No g 11 111 g n i ii vW,1 UMW. [iii-=----T I,E iril i ! , IFI I ! 2. ?., , __ z=7_,-.., IL Illtg_7=j1 t ! Id r _ IN A gl 11 :6 nT n 1LL2 �r 6 b pi nlm.I;,1143,,5 rr lElevadonn-1.;1168,5 writ..., Rear]E➢evapQa®>m-ccaallsa o 1,2,3,4,5,II,161,IlIl913,IN&LI s S i S. 8 Y CE.ge7 GIp®ULUfD kun allaect Architecture And Planning F3 2 Se '(1 - i3t° RIGHT VICK TRUST LLC SPRINGBROOK BURNSTEAD CONST CO 30 SW 43rd ST #413 2821 NORTHUP WAY #250 1215 120th AVE NE #201 EI9TON, WA 98055-4900 BELLEVUE, WA 98004-1468 BELLEVUE, WA 98005-2135 AI PEN LILA M TRUST A.I . BUTTON SHERIE & CAROL CORP 9018 TALBOT RD S 715 S 50th ST 4907 TALBOT RD S RENTON, WA 98055-6341 RENTON,WA 98055-6209 WA 98055-6210 WI, M. MOORE HENRY E. COOKS B. LEE BILSKI .0. BOX 5985 712 S 50th ST 700 SOUTH 50th ST ENT, WA 98064-5985 RENTON, WA 98055-6342 RENTON, WA 98055-6342 JRNSTEAD CONST CO LAWRENCE E. FINK GREGG S. MAYBERRY 215 120th AV NE 709 S 50th ST 401 S 51st CT ELLEVUE, WA 98005-2135 RENTON, WA 98055-6341 RENTON, WA 98055-6363 IRGINIA M. HENNING LORI R. NAKAHARA WAYNE A. LOUISE D7 S 51st CT 421 S 51st CT 427 S 51st CT ENTON, WA 98055-6363 RENTON, WA 98055-6363 RENTON, WA 98055-6363 DLTAN GYORKI NANCY J. JEFFREY JANICE M. FOSTER 35 S 51st CT 441 S 51st CT 27715 48th AV S EN"ON, WA 98055-6363 RENTON, WA 98055-6363 AUBURN, WA 98001 -1121 ARGARET A. MC KEE KEE THEO B. HALL JACK B. NASON 55 S 51st CT 630 S 32nd PL 507 S 51st CT ENI`ON, WA 98055-6363 RENTON, WA 98055-5094 RENTON, WA 98055-6364 DSE M. HAIGHT JANICE M. BROWN MICHAEL W. THOMPSON 15 S 51st CT 521 S 51st CT 529 S 51st CT EN'"ON, WA 98055-6364 RENTON, WA 98055-6364 RENTON, WA 98055-6364 DR A. BLUE AMY SAYRE JOHN ARTHUR 35 S 51st CT P.O. BOX 800 27319 139th PL SE ENJON, WA 98055-6364 RENTON, WA 98057-0800 KENT, WA 98042-9005 AR'IIN P. BAGOST MICHAEL W. LAWRENCE DONALD C. DAHLQUIST 64 S 51st CT 562-S 51st CT 556 S 51st CT ENZDN, WA 98055-6364 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055-6364 r A D. BOSWELL GORDON R. GULLINGSRUD jack w. martz 51st CT 552 S 51st CT 18831 102nd AV SE CON, WA 98055-6364 RENTON, WA 98055-6364 RENTON, WA 98055-6312 A M.MCGAUGHEY GAUGHEY JOAN B. NEIRBY RONALD E. STANDLEY SW 41st ST 440 S 51st CT #A201 440 S 51st CT #A301 70N, WA 98055-4926 RENTON, WA 98055-6386 RENTON, WA 98055-6387 :N C. REONAL DONALD C. MARSHALL SAMUEL L. PATTERSON S 51st CT #A102 440 S 51st CT #A202 6310 STONERIDGE MALL RD 'ON, WA 98055-6366 RENTON, WA 98055-6386 #D-104 PLEASANTON, CA 94588- 8042 M. BLIER SCOTT D. BATTLE JOHN P. HUNDS S 51st CT #A304 440 S 51st CT #8101 440 S 51st CT #8201 ION, WA 98055-6387 RENTON, WA 98055-6367 RENTON, WA 98055-6388 :S JACKSON LORI J. MATSUMURA CHARLENE R. BARBER S 51st CT #8301 440 S 51st CT #8102 440 S 51st CT #8202 'DINT, WA 98055-6389 RENTON, WA 98055-6367 RENTON, WA 98055-6388 :N E. HAGERUP KARL E. HAMMER MICHAEL R. FOULKS ICK 210014 2152 N 112th ST #301 440 S 51st CT #8304 BAY, AK 99821 -0014 SEATTLE, WA 98133-8598 RENTON, WA 98055-6389 SE M. ALCANTARA ROXANNE N K LOUI NIKKI MAYNARD S 51st CT #C101 440 S 51st CT #C201 440 S 51st CT #301 ON, WA 98055-6368 RENTON, WA 98055-6390 RENTON, WA 98055-6365 A A. JONES JOAN B. NEIRBY EDWIN C. LUTZ S 51st CT #C102 6916 128th PL SE 440 S 51st CT #EC-202 O1, WA 98055-6368 BELLEVUE, WA 98006-4062 RENTON, WA 98055-6365 C :A R. BULLEN SHANNON AWS SARA B. BOWLING S 51st CT #C302 440 S 51st CT #C303 440 S 51st CT #C304 S 4, WA 98055-6391 RENTON, WA 98055-6391 RENTON, WA 98055-6365 T D. BATTLE TIMOTHY SIEBERSMA SARA B. BOWLING 1 LAKE SAMMAMISH 440 S 51st CT #8303 440 S 51st CT #C304 CIE RENTON, WA 98055-6389 RENTON, WA 98055-6391 O' D, WA 98052-4340 CITA JF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator January 25, 2000 Mr. Paul Casey, A.I.A. The Casey Group Architects 10116—36th Avenue Court SW, Suite#109 Lakewood, WA 98499 SUBJECT: Normandy Ridge Project No. LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Dear Mr. Casey: This letter is to inform you that the comment and appeal periods have ended for the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the above-referenced project. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination. This decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. The applicant must comply with all ERC Mitigation Measures and Site Plan Conditions of Approval. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (425)430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, CR( Peter Rosen Project Manager cc: Mr. & Mrs. Ervin Yoder/Owners Mr. & Mrs. G. Warren Diamond/Owners Mr. Stephen Berg/SEB, Inc. Mr. Jack Martz FINAL 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 This nanar nnnfains 5tl%rarvclnd malarial 2C%nnst cnncumar CITY OF'RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING 20oc On the Q:1" day of Jai u.a , 1-999; I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Re..ewn and DeUStcv\ documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing LYN �, . laeir h tc_e_ - St --pk r s lax E- R, at v Ql0,_r ou k V11 cat z_ (Signature of Sender) Scuaykt Sc'-cr STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that JArc12R _ S �eQ 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: icinun I14', ?ZOO Notary PublO in and for the State Washington Notary (Print) MARIIYN KAMCHFFF My appointment A JNTMENT EXPIRES: 6-29-03 Project Name: Project Number: s;::n , i✓uA - i 3(o Sri w i l-�#` MAIM'MARILYN 6 'tMI I-IE =F NOTARY t'UBLIC STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES NOTARY.DOC JUNE 29, 2003 REPORT City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works DECISION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW& ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTION REPORT DATE: January 4, 2000 Project Name: Normandy Ridge Applicant: SEB, Inc. Owner: Ervin & Bernice Yoder, G. Warren & R. Elaine Diamond File Number: LUA-099-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF Project Manager: Peter Rosen Project Description: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi- family flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided, with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parking associated with the recreation building. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475-sq. ft. to 2,048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage channel/creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed internal street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance was approved by the Renton Board of Adjustments to allow the two street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. Project Location: 4914 Talbot Road S. Exist. Bldg. Area: Single family residence Proposed New Bldg. Area: 83 multi-family units Site Area: 7.98 acres total Total Building Area: NA 6 acres project area City of Renton P/B/PW Department dministrative Site Plan Approval&Environmi Review Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 2 of 20 PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. The proposal includes a total of 16 residential structures; with 10 townhouse buildings composed of 4 attached units, 1 townhouse of 2 units, and 5 structures of 8-unit stacked flats. The proposal includes a recreation building with a manager's residence, located in the northwest corner of the site. The proposal includes 42 townhouse, ground-related units and 41 multi-family flats. The townhouse units are all located along the north and south perimeters of the property. The multi-family flat buildings are located in the center of the property and along the east portion of the site. There are 10 townhouse buildings consisting of 4 units and 1 townhouse with 2 attached units. The 5 multi-family flat structures each include 8 units. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the 42 townhouse units, and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi-family flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided, with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parking associated with the recreation building. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A private street would provide internal access to the residences. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475-sq. ft. to 2,048 sq. ft. The City of Renton does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage ditch bisects the site and meets criteria for a stream. The proposal includes a 25- foot setback from the high water mark of each side of the drainage corridor. The proposed internal street access crosses the stream in 2 locations. The applicant received approval of a variance from the Renton Board of Adjustments (October 27, 1999) from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations to allow the two street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. The subject site has split zoning, with the R-14 zone on the west two-thirds of the property and the R-1 zone on the east one-third of the site. The applicant has identified the actual zone boundary at the base or toe of the 25% slope as required. The applicant has established the clearing limit for the project following the base of the 25% slope to avoid slope disturbance and encroachment of R-14 development into the R-1 zone. PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department dministrative Site Plan Approval&Environm Review Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 3 of 20 1. Earth Impacts: The subject site slopes gently upward (approximately 15%) to the east, except for the east 100 to 200 feet of the site which abruptly slopes steeply up to the east property line. The project is focused on the west two-thirds of the property to avoid disturbance of the steep slopes. A geotechnical report for the proposal has been prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc. The report states that the proposed multi-family buildings may be constructed using conventional foundations. Potential erosion impacts that could occur during construction would be mitigated by City Code requirements for a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) and Construction Mitigation Plan, approved prior to issuance of Construction Permits. Staff recommends the following measures to ensure that erosion controls are implemented for the duration of construction on the site: 1. The applicant shall install a silt fence along the downslope perimeter of the area''I, that is to be disturbed. The silt fence shall be in place before clearing and grading is initiated, and shall be constructed in conformance with the specifications presented in Section D.4.3.1 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual, Appendix D. This will be required during the construction of both' off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 2. Shallow drainage swales shall be constructed to intercept surface water flow and route the flow away from the construction area to a stabilized discharge point.; Vegetation growth shall be established in the ditch by seeding or placing sod', Depending on site grades, it may be necessary to line the ditch with rock to protect the ditch from erosion and to reduce flow rates. The design and construction or drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in, Section 4.4.1 of the SWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. This will be required during the constructions of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 3. The project contractor shall perform daily review and maintenance of all erosion and sedimentation control measures at the site during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the Project Engineer of record to the public works inspector. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to final approval of construction permits. Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall install a silt fence along the downslope perimeter of the area that is to be disturbed. The silt fence shall be in place before clearing and grading is initiated, and shall be constructed in conformance with the specifications presented in Section D.4.3.1 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual, Appendix D. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 2. Shallow drainage swales shall be constructed to intercept surface water flow and route the flow away from the construction area to a stabilized discharge point, SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department dministrative Site Plan Approval&Environm Review Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 4 of 20 Vegetation growth shall be established in the ditch by seeding or placing sod. Depending on site grades, it may be necessary to line the ditch with rock to protect the ditch from erosion and to reduce flow rates. The design and construction or drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in Section 4.4.1 of the SWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 3. The project contractor shall perform daily review and maintenance of all erosion and sedimentation control measures at the site during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the Project Engineer of record to the public works inspector. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to final approval of construction permits. Policy Nexus: Environmental Ordinance. 2. Water Impacts: A wetlands evaluation and stream report was prepared for the project site by Habitat Technologies (dated September 22, 1999). The report identifies five Category 3 wetlands on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2,048 sq. ft. The City of Renton does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A stream or drainage corridor flows through the center of the site in an east to west direction. According to the consultant's report, the drainage ditch was excavated to convey overflow from a spring located at the toe of the slope along the east project site boundary. Flows from the ditch are released into the roadside ditch along Talbot Road S. Because the excavated ditch conveys "naturally occurring surface water" from the spring, it meets the criteria for designation as a stream. In addition, this stream meets the criteria for designation as a Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Type 5 Water (i.e. it does not provide direct habitat for fish and is less than 2 feet in width at the ordinary high water mark). The importance of this stream is in the protection of downstream aquatic resources and local water quality. The site plan provides a 25-foot wide buffer from the stream except for two (2) road crossings. The westerly stream crossing occurs at the entry driveway to the proposed development off Talbot Road S. The second stream crossing is for the internal loop road and is located at the east end of the property. The Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations (Section 4-4-130.C.4.) restrict tree cutting and land clearing within twenty- five (25) feet of the ordinary high water mark of creeks. The applicant applied for a variance to allow the (2) street crossings to intrude into the required stream buffer. The Board of Adjustments approved the variance request on October 27, 1999. On August 11, 1999 Mr. Philip Schneider, Area Habitat Biologist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife visited the project site. Mr. Schneider concluded that the excavated ditch would be considered a stream for purposes of site development. Any proposed work within the ordinary high water mark of this stream would require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), approved by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. For approval of a HPA, the applicant would need to demonstrate that the proposed road SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department dministrative Site Plan Approval&Environm Review Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 5 of 20 crossing(s) is the only reasonable location for the crossing in terms of public safety and local engineering requirements. It will also be important to show that the method of crossing and the overall impact of any fill placed waterward of the ordinary high water mark is the minimum necessary to complete the project. Typically a crossing of this type of stream (i.e. intermittent and without direct fish habitat) can be completed using an oversized arch culvert. To compensate for the two proposed stream crossings, the applicant is proposing restoration and enhancement of the stream buffer. The applicant proposes to plant native species in buffer areas disturbed by the road crossings. The plantings would increase plant community diversity and complexity within the stream corridors adjacent to the new crossings. The City's Surface Water Utility staff report that there have been documented problems with downstream flooding in the valley floor west of the site. In order to ensure that this project does not add to these flooding problems, City staff recommends that the applicant be required to provide extra detention for the on-site drainage system. The recommendation is for detention through the 100 year storm event with a 30% safety factor. It appears that an HPA permit is also required for this project, which would likely include this additional detention standard as a permit condition. The conceptual drainage plan submitted with the application complies with this additional detention requirement. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall provide extra stormwater detention on-site with a 30% safety factor beyond the normal requirements for the 2, 10 and 100-year storm events to minimize additional downstream flooding problems. Plans for this facility shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of construction permits. Policy Nexus: Environmental Ordinance (SEPA) 3. Fire Protection Impacts: The proposal would add new construction to the City and would potentially impact the City's Fire Department. A Fire Mitigation Fee applies to all new construction at a rate of $388 per multi-family unit, and $0.52 per square foot for the recreation building. The Fire Mitigation Fee for the 83 multi-family units is estimated to be $32,204 (83 units X $388 = $32,204). The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee equal to $388 per multi-family unit and $0.52 per square foot for the recreation building. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. Policy Nexus: Fire Mitigation Fee Resolution and adopting ordinance, Environmental Review (SEPA) 4. Transportation Impacts: Access to the site is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. This driveway has been aligned directly across from the driveway serving the Burnstead development (Ashburn Condominiums) across Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A traffic analysis report for the proposal has been prepared by Heath & Associates, Inc. The report assesses general traffic impacts associated with the proposal by first SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department dministrative Site Plan Approval&Environmo Review Committee Staff Report • NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 6 of 20 collecting site-specific roadway information and providing a level of service analysis for existing traffic conditions. The report then forecasts future traffic conditions and intersection service levels with and without the project. The report specifically analyzed existing and future conditions at the intersection of Talbot Road S. and SW 43rd Street. Transportation and Plan Review staffs have analyzed results of the report and have found the methodology acceptable. The report concludes that the average delay in the P.M. peak at the intersection would be increased by 1.8 seconds by the project. The intersection would continue to operate at a Level of Service D for the P.M. peak with or without the project. The traffic report recommends a center left turn lane in Talbot Road S. adjacent to the project site. Talbot Road S. is being widened to a three-lane section, with bike lanes and sidewalks as the area is redeveloped. This roadway section conforms to the recommendations of traffic reports prepared for projects in this area. Based on the information provided in the traffic report, the traffic impacts do not appear to reach a level of significant adverse impact. Staff recommends that the project pay the typical traffic mitigation fee and construct its fair portion of the Talbot Road S. improvements adjacent to the development site. The proposed multi-family development would result in an increase in traffic trips on the local street system and therefore would be subject to the City's Transportation Mitigation Fee. The trip generation values are based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual which estimates 5.86 average daily trips per residential condo/townhouse unit, or a total of 486.38 average daily trips for the 83 unit development. The mitigation fee includes credit for the 9.55 trips for the existing single family residence on the site. The Transportation Mitigation Fee is calculated to be $75 per average daily trip attributable to the project. The traffic mitigation fee is estimated to be $35,762.25. A private street would provide internal access to the residences. Plan Review staff has approved a modification of street standards to allow for sidewalks along one side of the street only, pavement widths of 20 feet where parking is precluded by driveways on both sides of the street, and 28 feet of pavement with parking limited to one side of the street where parallel parking is feasible. All roadways 20 feet in width will be required to be marked as a fire lane with no parking. The applicant has submitted a Construction Mitigation Plan which discusses transportation routes to the site and states that construction activities would be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Truck hauling hours are limited to between 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, under the Development Guideline Ordinance (RMC 4-4-030:C.2). Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall be required to pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee of $75 for each average daily trip associated with the project. The traffic mitigation fee is estimated to be $35,762.25. This fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. Policy Nexus: Transportation Mitigation Fee Resolution, Environmental Ordinance (SEPA) 5. Community Services/Parks Impacts: The proposal would allow for the construction of 83 multi-family residential units. Future residents would make use of the existing and future City park and recreation facilities throughout the City. In order to mitigate for the impact of the development on the City's parks and recreation facilities the City has adopted a mitigation fee of $354.51 per new multi-family dwelling unit. The proposal also includes SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department dministrative Site Plan Approval&Environm( Review Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 7 of 20 a recreation building for residents, the cost of which may be credited for up to one-third of the total parks mitigation fee. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall pay a Park's Department mitigation fee of $354.51 per multi-family dwelling unit. The value of the proposed recreation building may be credited for up to one-third of the total parks mitigation fee. The required mitigation fee shall be subject to the approval of the Parks Department and the Development Services Division, and the fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. Nexus: Parks Mitigation Fee Resolution, Environmental Ordinance (SEPA) B. Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: DETERMINATION OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE NON- SIGNIFICANCE- MITIGATED. X Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Issue DNS-M with 15 day Period. Comment Period followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. C. Mitigation Measures 1. The applicant shall install a silt fence along the downslope perimeter of the area that is to be disturbed. The silt fence shall be in place before clearing and grading is initiated, and shall be constructed in conformance with the specifications presented in Section D.4.3.1 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual, Appendix D. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 2. Shallow drainage swales shall be constructed to intercept surface water flow and route the flow away from the construction area to a stabilized discharge point. Vegetation growth shall be established in the ditch by seeding or placing sod. Depending on site grades, it may be necessary to line the ditch with rock to protect the ditch from erosion and to reduce flow rates. The design and construction or drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in Section 4.4.1 of the SWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 3. The project contractor shall perform daily review and maintenance of all erosion and sedimentation control measures at the site during the construction of both off-site and on- site improvements as well as building construction. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the Project Engineer of record to the public works inspector. Certification of SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Iministrative Site Plan Approval&Environmc Review Committee Staff Report . NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4,2000 Page 8 of 20 the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to final approval of construction permits. 5. The applicant shall provide extra stormwater detention on-site with a 30% safety factor beyond the normal requirements for the 2, 10 and 100-year storm events to minimize additional downstream flooding problems. Plans for this facility shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of construction permits. 6. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee equal to $388 per multi-family unit and $0.52 per square foot for the recreation building. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. The applicant shall be required to pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee of $75 for each average daily trip associated with the project. The traffic mitigation fee is estimated to be $35,762.25. This fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. 8. The applicant shall pay a Park's Department mitigation fee of $354.51 per multi-family dwelling unit. The value of the proposed recreation building may be credited for up to one- third of the total parks mitigation fee. The required mitigation fee shall be subject to the approval of the Parks Department and the Development Services Division, and the fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. BUILDING Follow geotechnical recommendations. FIRE 1. The preliminary fire flow required is 3,000 GPM which requires one fire hydrant within 150 feet of the building and two additional hydrants within 300 feet of the building. 2. Secondary access roadway is required. Bollards cannot be used to control traffic. An approved gate or chain and padlock are allowed to restrict traffic on the emergency access. All roadways 20-feet in width are required to be marked as "Fire Lane, No Parking." 3. All buildings two stories and five or more units are required to be sprinklered. Central station monitored fire alarm systems are required in all buildings by City Ordinance. Separate plans and permits are required for the sprinkler and fire alarm systems. PLAN REVIEW SEWER • There is an existing 8" sewer main in Talbot Road available for this site. Most of the internal sewer system will be private, but constructed to City main line standards. A portion of the main may be required to be public to provide future service east of the site. This would required a minimum 15 foot easement, which would extend to the easterly property line. The main will not be required beyond the developed portion of the site. • System Development Charges (to be paid to the City, for Soos Creek Sewer District)will be required for this project(approximately$1835 per unit). SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department 'ministrative Site Plan Approval&Environme Review Committee Staff Report • NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 9 of 20 WATER • A water main loop extension will be required for this project. To meet the fire flow requirement of 3000 gpm set by the Fire Department, a minimum 10"main must be provided through the site. Easements will be required for all on-site water mains and hydrants (minimum of 15 feet in width). • Backflow prevention devices will be required for irrigation and fire protection systems. • Depending on fire flow requirements, additional hydrants will be required. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($510 per unit). There are SAD ($0.048 per sq. ft.)and Latecomers Fees ($0.0262 per sq. ft..) also due upon development of this site. DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report has been submitted with the site plan application for this project. The conceptual drainage plan includes provisions for detention and water quality treatment in compliance with the requirements of the KCSWM. • Due to downstream flooding problems in this drainage basin, staff recommends a SEPA condition for extra detention for the on-site drainage system. The recommendation will for detention through the 100 year storm event with a 30% safety factor. It appears that an HPA permit is also required for this project, which will include this additional detention standard as a permit condition. The conceptual DRAINAGE PLAN submitted with this application complies with this additional detention requirement. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($0.129 per sq. ft.. of new impervious surface) STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Talbot Road South adjacent to the site must be improved with curb, gutters, sidewalks, street lighting, new paving from the edge of existing pavement to the new gutter, and drainage improvements for the new street improvements. • This zone allows for condominium style development (i.e. no separate platted lots), but must meet the development standards of a shadow plat. The shadow plat provided demonstrates the equivalent of standard right-of-way widths through the project, with a interconnected vehicular and pedestrian system. The project provides equivalent street improvements internal to the site, including adequate pavement width, curbs, drainage, sidewalks and turnarounds for dead-end street sections. The standard street design requirements for this type of project has been modified to allow for sidewalks along one side of the street only, pavement widths of 20 feet where parking is precluded by driveways on both sides of the street, and 28 feet of pavement with parking limited to one side of the street where parallel parking is feasible. • Street lighting must be provided on the private street sections, meeting or exceeding the lighting levels established in City Code. This system will be privately owned and maintained. GENERAL • All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a registered Civil Engineer. The construction permit application must include a itemized cost estimate for these improvements. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5% of the first $100,000 of the estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,00 but less than $200,000, and 3% of anything over $200,000. Half of this fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. PARKS Recommend 5-foot bike lanes striped and signed on Talbot Road S. Ensure that new street trees are not planted under existing electric/telephone lines. POLICE Estimate 76.36 police calls for service annually, based on the number and type of residential dwelling units. Many of these estimated calls will occur during the construction phase, and will be incidents such as Trespass, Commercial Burglary and Theft of building materials and tools. To help prevent these crimes, the I site will need to have temporary, security fencing in place and security lighting. Post the correct No Trespass signs along the fencing (refer to the attached flier with the correct wording). SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department fministrative Site Plan Approval&Environme Zeview Committee Staff Report • NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 10 of 20 Other properties along Talbot Road experienced crime problems such as burglary, theft, trespass and even a drive-by shooting at one of the construction trailers. Other sites felt the need to use the services of off-duty police and private security companies for on-site patrols of the area while it was being built. All building materials and tools will need to be kept locked up when not in use, and any construction site office trailer will need to have metal doors with dead-bolt locks, metal bars over the windows, and all office machinery will need to have the serial numbers recorded to aid in recovery in the event of theft. On some of the proposed units, there are windows adjacent to the entry doors. These windows will either need to have reinforced glass in place, or an application of security film. Otherwise, it would be too easy for a burglar to break the glass, put his hand through the window, unlock the front door and gain entry to individual units. Each door to each unit will need to be solid core wood or metal, with dead-bolt locks and peepholes for security of the residents. Each unit will need to have the address clearly posted, of a color that contrasts strongly with the color of the unit, and at least 6" in height, to aid responding emergency personnel. Since this development has one entry/exit, recommend the installation of a security gate to limit access only to residents and guests. PLANNING Only rockeries or retaining walls that are less than 4-feet in height may extend into required yard setbacks. The applicant shall require variance approval if the rockery walls shown on the site plan that extend into the required yard setbacks exceed 4-feet in height. PART THREE: ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTION - REPORT & DECISION This decision on the administrative land use action is made concurrently with the environmental determination. A. Type of Land Use Action x Site Plan Review Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Conditional Use Binding Site Plan Special Permit for Grade & Fill Administrative Code Determination B. Exhibits The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing: application, proof of posting and publication, environmental review and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No. 2: Drawing No. 1, Cover Sheet/Project Information/Vicinity Map, (Received June 11, 1999) Exhibit No. 3: Drawing No. 2, Site Plan, Vicinity Map (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 4: Drawing No. 3, Shadow Plat (Received September 29, 1999). SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department ministrative Site Plan Approval&Environme ?eview Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 11 of 20 Exhibit No. 5: Drawing No. 4, Existing Conditions (Topography, Tree Survey) (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 6: Drawing No. 5, Floor Plan, Units 'A' and 'B' (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 7: Drawing No. 6, Floor Plan, Unit `C' (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 8: Drawing No. 7, Floor Plan, Unit 'D' (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 9: Drawing No. 8, Floor Plan, Unit `E' and 'F' (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 10: Drawing No. 9, Building Elevations, Buildings 9, 12, 16 (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 11: Drawing No. 10, Building Elevations, Buildings 1-8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 12: Drawing No. 11, Floor Plan, Building Elevation, Recreation Building (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 13: Drawing No. 12, Vicinity Map (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 14: Drawing No. 13, Landscape Plan, (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 15: Drawing No. 14, Preliminary Grading Plan (Received September 29, 1999). Exhibit No. 16: Drawing No. 15, Standard Details and Notes, (Received September 29, 1999). C. Consistency with Site Plan Criteria In reviewing the proposal with respect to the Site Plan Approval Criteria set forth in Section 4-31-33(D) of the Site Plan Ordinance, the following issues have been identified by City Departmental Reviewers and Divisional Reviewers: 1. GENERAL CRITERIA (1) CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ITS ELEMENTS & POLICIES The site is designated Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) in the Comprehensive Plan. The RPN designation is intended to create opportunities to develop new neighborhoods that include a variety of housing types and incorporate features from both single family and multi-family development. Development in the RPN should support cost-efficient housing, transit service and the efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. (Obj. LU-K) Developments should have the character of a neighborhood rather than that of a multi-family complex. Residential Planned Neighborhood General Policies Policy LU-41. Provision of small lot single family detached unit types, townhouses and small scale multi-family structures should be encouraged provided that density standards can be met. The proposal includes townhouses and small scale multi-family structures. Policy LU-43. Central place public amenities should function as a focal point within the development and should include features such as a public square, open space, park, SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department ministrative Site Plan Approval&Environmei eview Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF_ REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 12 of 20 civic or commercial uses. The central place should include passive amenities such as benches and fountains, and be unified by a design motif or common theme. A drainage corridor/stream runs through the center of the property. The site plan includes a 25-foot buffer on both sides of the drainage. This would provide a natural, green corridor through the site that could serve as a central focal point in the development, as well as provide for pedestrian trails. Policy LU-44. The dwelling types, including detached and attached units, should be clustered and connected within the overall development through the organization of roads, blocks, yards, central places and amenity features to create a neighborhood with diverse housing types. The proposed development is organized with the townhouse buildings along the north and south perimeters of the site. The townhouses all are oriented toward the loop road/ street, with consistent front yard setbacks, and building entries of 2 units along the front façade with the other unit entries on the sides of the buildings. The multi-family flats in the center part of the site are oriented with the side facades along the loop street and the front facades and unit entries facing the small carport parking areas. The overall organization of the proposed development and the building architecture creates a neighborhood environment as intended by the policy. Policy LU-46. Specific design standards should be developed for residential structures and building clusters based on the following criteria. a. heights, width and length of structures should be designed to resemble single family housing, with similar setbacks from the street as single family; b. parking should be in the rear or side yards of multi-family lots or under the structure; c. structures should be located on lots to ensure adequate light and air, and views if any, are preserved between lots; d. buildings should be massed in a manner that promotes a pedestrian scale with a small neighborhood feeling; e. units and entrances of each dwelling unit should be individually distinctive and front on streets rather than courtyards and parking lots. f. fences may be constructed if they contribute to an open spacious feeling between units and structures; and g• streetscapes should include green, open space for each unit. The townhouses include consistent front yard setbacks that are landscaped, and individual unit entries are oriented toward the street. The buildings take advantage of the topography to provide modulation between the attached units. The building massing and design resembles single family housing. The multi-family flat structures provide individual ground-related entries for all of the units, including the second level units. The buildings incorporate modulation and articulation and use a variety of building materials to effectively reduce the appearance of building mass and scale. (2) CONFORMANCE WITH EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS The subject site is in the Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) zoning designation. The purpose of the R-14 zone is to encourage development of new residential neighborhoods that provide a mix of dwelling unit types (i.e. detached, semi-attached, attached) which are SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department ministrative Site Plan Approval&Environme ?eview Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 13 of 20 organized and designed to combine characteristics typical of both detached single family and small-scale multi-family developments. Permitted Uses and Dwelling Unit Type Mix The R-14 zone specifies primary and secondary residential unit types and limits the secondary unit types to 50% of the units in a project. The primary residential uses include attached ground-related townhouse units and the secondary uses allow "stacked flats" with second story units. The proposal complies with the required dwelling unit type mix, proposing 42 (50.6%) townhouse (ground-related) units and 41(49.4%) multi-family stacked flats. Bonus Criteria The R-14 zone includes a bonus provision allowing for increased density and/or a greater number of dwelling units per structure if an applicant can qualify by incorporating specified design features and amenities. The applicant is proposing to utilize the bonus provision only to allow for more dwelling units per structure. With the bonus provision, primary use townhouse structures may include 4 units per structure (with a maximum building length of 100 feet) versus 3 attached units per structure entitled without a bonus. Secondary use stacked flat structures may include up to 8 units per structure (with a maximum building length of 115 feet) instead of 6 units without the bonus provision. Nine (9) of the ten (10) townhouse buildings include 4 attached units. All five (5) of the multi-family flat buildings include 8 units. The proposed buildings comply with the maximum building lengths under the bonus provision. The code includes specific criteria required for achieving the bonus provisions. The intent of the bonus criteria is to encourage provision of aggregated open space and rear access parking, stimulate provision of project/neighborhood amenities, and for project designs to address methods of reducing the size and bulk of structures. To qualify for the bonus an applicant needs to provide for one of the project features listed in the code. The applicant proposes a recreation center for residents. The recreation center is located in the northwest corner of the site and includes an outdoor pool, indoor spa, exercise room, lounge with a kitchen, and a second-story manager's residence. Developments which qualify for the bonus also need to incorporate a minimum of 3 features listed in the code. One is for active recreation amenities such as a recreation center, pool, spa. The site plan includes a recreation center for residents with an outdoor pool and spa. The applicant states that the development includes 2 other improvement options as required by the code. The architectural design incorporates enhanced building entry features and a coordinated site design incorporates amenities which enhance neighborhood character such as coordinated street lighting, mailbox, signage and street trees. The proposal complies with the bonus criteria. All of the units (including the multi-family flat units) have individual, ground-related, covered entries. The applicant should submit details of the street lighting, mailboxes, and signage to qualify for the other bonus requirement. Plats or Shadow Plats Development in the R-14 zone may platted through the subdivision process or may remain unplatted. For development which is to remain unplatted, the code requires the application to include a shadow plat in order to demonstrate that the proposed development would meet equivalent standards in terms of lot area, lot widths, setbacks, and access/infrastructure. The purpose of this requirement is to foster the objective of creating neighborhoods. With platting or a shadow plat, the developments are more SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department ministrative Site Plan Approval&Environmei 2eview Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 14 of 20 likely to be organized with a grid-like street system, with buildings oriented toward the street and consistent yard setbacks. The applicant is not proposing subdivision of the site and the proposal includes a shadow plat with the application. Lot Area, Lot Dimension and Setback Requirements The R-14 code requires the primary use townhouse units to have a minimum lot area per unit of 2,500 square feet for attached units at the end or exterior of structures and 2,000 square feet for attached interior units. The proposal meets the lot area and lot width/depth requirements for the townhouse units. The shadow plat lots for the townhouses include the sidewalks but do not extend into the road area. This would comply with the subdivision lot standards if the sidewalk is considered as part of a private easement versus a right-of-way improvement. Secondary use flats are required to have a minimum lot size of 1,800 square feet per unit. All of the stacked flats in the proposal consist of 8-unit structures which would require a minimum lot area of 14,440 square feet (8 X 1,800 = 14,440). The proposal meets the lot area/dimension requirements for the building flats. The lot areas for the stacked flat buildings include the carport structures but do not extend into the drive aisles. The carports may be included in the lot area for the multi-family flat buildings as the drive aisles may be considered private drives off the "public" street and a private driveway may be included as a part of a lot area under subdivision standards. The proposed townhouse and apartment flat buildings comply with the setback standards of the R-14 code. The townhouses and stacked flat structures include a 15- foot front yard setback and 15-foot rear yard setback. All of the buildings include a 5 — foot side yard setback. The site plan indicates rockery walls that extend into the required setback area. Only rockeries or retaining walls that are less than 4-feet in height may extend into required setbacks. The R-14 code requires a 15-foot front yard setback for detached accessory structures where the parking access is provided from the front or side. The proposed detached carports that front the multi-family flat structures would comply with the setback standard only if the drive aisles are considered private streets and the setbacks are thus measured from the edge of the "public" street that loops through the site. The carport associated with Building 9 is accessed directly off the main loop road. This carport would not meet the front setback requirement for detached accessory structures and should therefore be removed from the site plan. Density The proposal has a net density of 13.93 dwelling units per acre which meets the maximum density limit of 14 dwelling units per acre. The bonus provision allows up to 18 dwelling units per acre. The net density has been determined by subtracting sensitive areas from the gross site acreage. 1,480 square feet was deducted for the stream corridor. The private, internal road system was not subtracted from the gross area of the site for calculating density. Lot Coverage The R-14 zone limits the lot coverage of buildings to a maximum of 50% of the total lot area. All the buildings appear to comply with this standard. Residential Project Features The R-14 code lists project features which are to be incorporated to create a neighborhood environment. SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department ministrative Site Plan Approval&Environmei eview Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 15 of 20 1. Building location - The code standard requires the development to be connected through organization of roads, blocks, yards, central places, pedestrian linkage and amenity features. It also requires the front facades of buildings to address the street. The buildings are organized addressing the internal street to create a neighborhood environment. The buildings have consistent front yard setbacks and a sidewalk along one side of the road provides a pedestrian connection. The stream/drainage corridor provides a green, linear corridor through the site. The road system and parking avoids continuous head-in parking lots which are common to multi-family development. The proposal complies with the intent of the zone, orienting the buildings to the street, having continuous setback/yard areas, and incorporating an open space system. 2. Building Design - The code requires architectural design of the buildings to incorporate variation in vertical and horizontal modulation of structural facades and roof lines among attached dwelling units, and private entry features to provide a ground floor connection for the townhouse units. The proposed buildings include modulation of the building footprint, architectural articulation and varying roof lines of the attached dwelling units. The townhouse units are all ground-related and 2 of the 4 units have entries directly facing the street, with the other 2 unit entries at the sides of the buildings. The dwelling units in the flats all have separate ground level entries, avoiding common entries, outside stairwells and interior corridors common to apartment buildings. 3. Landscaping - The code requires landscaping of front setback areas (excluding driveways) and that landscape areas be treated with pervious surfaces. The proposal complies with this code requirement. The front yard setback areas are all landscaped. Parking The Parking Code requires 1 1/2 parking spaces per dwelling unit for multi-family development and one parking space per 4 dwelling units is required for guest parking. This would equate to a parking requirement of 146 spaces for the 83 proposed units. The applicant is proposing a total of 190 parking spaces; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway (tandem) parking spaces for the 42 townhouse units, and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi-family flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided, with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parking associated with the recreation building. Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator of Planning/Building/ Public Works, has written a determination regarding tandem parking for multi-family residential development, as follows: 1) The apron length must conform to City Code. 2) A restrictive covenant or other device will be required to assign tandem parking spaces to the exclusive use of specific dwelling units. 3) If tandem parking spaces are proposed, then 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit will be required for the dwelling units. Guest parking per Code will be required in addition to the 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit. 4) Tandem parking spaces cannot be counted as guest parking spaces. The proposal includes 64 driveway or tandem spaces. 44 of these driveway spaces are associated with the 'A' units. These units already include a 2-car garage so the tandem spaces are not needed for the 'A' unit parking counts. The driveway aprons for the 'A' units are 18 feet in length and therefore below the standard parking stall length of 20 SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department ministrative Site Plan Approval&Environmei eview Committee Staff Report • NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 16 of 20 feet. If the 44 driveway spaces associated with the 'A' units are eliminated from the parking counts, the project would include 146 spaces which is the exact number of parking stalls required by the code. (3) MITIGATION OF IMPACTS TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND USES: The project site is located in an area of the City that is developing with multi-family projects of a similar density and housing type. Development of the site would result in noise, dust, and traffic impacts on surrounding properties. These impacts would be limited to the construction phase of the project. The applicant has submitted a construction mitigation plan outlining mitigation measures to be employed for minimizing dust, noise and traffic impacts during construction. Construction-related traffic is limited to off-peak hours (8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday) under the Development Guidance Ordinance to reduce traffic conflicts during peak traffic times. City Code (Section 4-4-030C:3.b) also limits work in or near residential areas to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturdays; with no work permitted on Sundays. After completion of the project, there would be impacts on surrounding properties related to increased traffic volumes, noise and other activities normally associated with residential neighborhoods. The layout of the proposed residential development would not impair the use of surrounding properties. (4) MITIGATION OF IMPACTS OF A PROPOSED SITE PLAN TO THE SITE: The proposal would convert the mostly undeveloped site to a residential neighborhood use. This would result in inevitable impacts of clearing native vegetation, introduction of impervious surfaces, etc. The proposal includes measures to mitigate impacts of development on the site, including stormwater facilities to reduce runoff impacts and ornamental landscaping to mitigate loss of vegetation. The subject proposal avoids impacts to the most significant natural features on the site. The stream/drainage corridor is preserved on the site and incorporated as a site amenity. The applicant maintains a 25-foot wide buffer on each side of the stream, except for the two road crossings. There is also a pedestrian path leading to a wood bridge that crosses the drainage channel. The applicant proposes to enhance the stream buffer area that would be disturbed by the road crossings. The road crossings are designed to minimize impacts to the drainage channel. The proposal is focused on the west portion of the site to avoid disturbance of steep slopes on the east portion of the property. (5) CONSERVATION OF AREA-WIDE PROPERTY VALUES; The development of the site for a residential project should maintain or improve the area-wide property values in the vicinity. (6) SAFETY AND EFFICIENCY OF VEHICLE AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION; Access to the site is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. The primary driveway accessing the site is aligned directly across from the driveway accessing the Burnstead residential development across Talbot Road S. The alignment of these driveways would minimize traffic conflicts. SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Idministrative Site Plan Approval&Environm Review Committee Staff Report • NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF__ REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 17 of 20 A traffic study was prepared to analyze potential impacts of the proposal. The report conclusions are discussed in the transportation element of the SEPA environmental review section of this report. A private street would provide internal access to the residences. Plan Review staff has approved a modification of street standards to allow for sidewalks along one side of the street only, pavement widths of 20 feet where parking is precluded by driveways on both sides of the street, and 28 feet of pavement with parking limited to one side of the street where parallel parking is feasible. The proposal complies with the standards of the modification. The continuous sidewalk along the internal streets would provide for adequate pedestrian circulation through the site. A bicycle trail along Talbot Road S. is identified in the City of Renton Trails Master Plan, 1990. The applicant will be responsible for providing the bicycle trail as a part of the required right-of-way/street improvements. (7) PROVISION OF ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR; Adequate spacing is provided between the proposed buildings to allow for the movement of air and for adequate sunlight to reach the buildings. (8) MITIGATION OF NOISE, ODORS AND OTHER HARMFUL OR UNHEALTHY CONDITIONS; Noise and odor impacts may occur during the construction phase of the project. The applicant has submitted a Construction Mitigation Plan which provides mitigations to the construction impacts of the proposal. The residential development would not generate any harmful or unhealthy conditions. Noise associated with the completed project will mainly be associated with cars and other sounds normally associated with any residential project. (9) AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC_SERVICES AND FACILITIES TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED USE; AND The applicant has been advised of the utility extensions and improvements required to serve the proposal. The applicant will be assessed fire and park mitigation fees to compensate for the increased demand on public services. (10) PREVENTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD DETERIORATION AND BLIGHT. The proposal would develop a site with an underutilized site. The investment in site improvements and the presence of a residential population would serve to prevent neighborhood deterioration and blight. X Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Idministrative Site Plan Approval&Environm Review Committee Staff Repo,' NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF' REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 18 of 20 D. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION Having reviewed the written record in the matter, the City now enters the following: 1) Request: The applicant has requested Environmental Review, Variance, and Site Plan Approval for development of Normandy Ridge. 2) Variance: The applicant received approval of a variance from the Renton Board of Adjustments (October 27, 1999) from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations to allow the two street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required stream buffer. The variance approval is contingent upon the approval of the submitted site plan. 3) Environmental Review: The applicant's file containing the application, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation, the comments from various City departments, the public notices requesting citizen comment, and other pertinent documents was entered as Exhibit No. 1. 4) Site Plan Review: The applicant's site plan application complies with the requirements for information for site plan review. The applicant's site plan and other project drawings are entered as Exhibits No. 2 through 16. 5) Comprehensive Plan: The subject proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN). 6) Zoning: The site plan as presented complies with the zoning requirements and development standards of the Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14) Zoning designation. 7) Existing Land Use: Land uses surrounding the subject site include: North: Single-family residential, plans approved for multi-family residential development; East: Undeveloped hillslope, Single-family residential; South: Multi-family residential; and West: Single-family residential, plans approved for multi-family residential development. E. Conclusions 1) The subject proposal complies with the policies and codes of the City of Renton. 2) The proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) and the Zoning designation of Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14). 3) Specific Land Use (e.g. Site Plan Approval) issues were raised by various City departments. These issues are addressed in the body of this report. SITERC City of Renton P/B/PW Department dministrative Site Plan Approval&Environm Review Committee Staff Report • NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 19 of 20 F. Decision The Site Plan for Normandy Ridge, File No. LUA-99-136, SA-A, ECF, is approved subject to the following condition. 1) The applicant shall submit details of the street lighting, mailboxes, and signage in order to qualify for the R-14 bonus provision. The details shall be subject to the approval of the Development Services Division, prior to issuance of building permits. 2) The applicant shall revise the site plan to eliminate the carport to the east of Building 9 because the carport does not meet the front setback requirement for detached accessory structures. The revised site plan shall be subject to the approval of the Development Services Division, prior to issuance of building permits. 3) The applicant shall record a restrictive covenant or other device acceptable to the City that assigns tandem parking spaces to the exclusive use of specific dwelling units. The applicant shall also install signs at the garages indicating that the driveway apron is reserved for use by the unit occupant. The restrictive covenant shall be approved by the Development Services Division prior to recording. Recording of the covenant shall occur prior to final occupancy permits. EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURES: cl-e( an Hanson, Zoning Administrator date TRANSMITTED this 5th day of January, 2000 to the applicant and owner: Ervin and Bernice Yoder G. Warren and R. Elaine Diamond 1501 S. Eagle Drive 4914 Talbot Road S. Renton, WA. 98055 Renton, WA. 98055 Stephen Berg Paul Casey SEB, Inc. The Casey Group Architects 240 Stadium Way S. 10116 36t Ave. Ct. SW, Suite 109 Tacoma, WA. 98402 Lakewood, WA. 98499 TRANSMITTED this 5th day of January, 2000 to the following parties of record: Jack Martz 18831 102nd Ave. SE Renton, WA. 98055 SITERC Cty of Renton P/B/PW Department dministrative Site Plan Approval& Environmi Review Committee Staff Report NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B,ECF REPORT OF JANUARY 4, 2000 Page 20 of 20 TRANSMITTED this 5th day of January, 2000 to the following: Larry Meckling, Building Official C. Duffy, Fire Prevention Neil Watts, Public Works Division Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney South County Journal Land Use Decision Appeal Process Appeals of either the environmental determination [RCW 43.21.0075(3), WAC 197-11-680] and/or the land use decision must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM January 24, 2000. If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 980E Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. SITERC • Ln— )JL.,sl+,-la.r e \--. 11/11 - u I. ,111r:,. ,:t .:1-‘ .,..2_1...1, ....- ‘ Haw of Watwaren • 414W Mir Il ID•D/ .,';;ZI ..I 111. D. I f r ca.w ' g.»»•`.I�STH PL ; �» „ 'F �� it 1�11, a.»ef ®" O; —�._ — ... ' g hal.•uarilw® �.: sgrb K ..•a wbn.q.en a h0. zr I 154,I i V i•+y ♦ o I » D. »Y r" l ...•.r... @ g"` O ® ,�: .... ' I._. .... ^•,,,..... c`" .. i S.A. I)Dr 1,.rg1.a1 WWI 12 I ,. __ "��',"�," ��]] Ir 'ICJ w , f Irl _� .� I I A cl„.L. o,..ew "�' N © Carl c NW � ry Is. /e 14 j h� f..l. NunW.11, ®Is pawn Wry ,c [I•SE IISTN la I IL K ICI 0 II I��Y� ��I. �.0 f• I, it� �u G1_ w fteenve r •� ">4 m 'gz-:.. J-tly_ r 4e�r, I I . ...a••r• I® Q' » " LJ glf CiilM..0...!MM.59../ OOv't. s_OT 1 a J,ee _-_1_____ .SE gSTN o.»la — s.wo .c IS ®» 1 00 w1..a lawn. .® r.I. °.. ®x B c.e�v.n c.mx a0.', » I.re»»�wuwas ek�.__'1. ® — — c-_— — -- I I -III• c . -y e" Ili O`_ ® ® �IN ga.i ».a.--1 e.,..,-'' I © t, . . »WIN x a, ' 0 --- 1«® I° SITE 49 O. 4® N, x Mart n.,..e..r a. .w. .a ilill .. 1 an.w fir' •. r J.: 9 i t I » »• M M I T PAR K »», • Z .♦ � •I NI s !Is . � i: iL rl+F _-- �. »�. .'fl. wewx a we cr,.. r_ , — .ww - V 01 . . IF,%. _2'I sa q - b - _ _ _ __-, 5 :• r .., w..y. . ..^.et 1 x ® v.gee.w • QI e"aw "l ° p, • q .144.7 i , 4 ' NI 8 :: — ® — ' `® .," .z ® HI IE H..IG _c8 'E. ? , i rr"Yi - ,w ::...7........:.:,-_-'r.,,,_5...". ' . ea.w.*i�m .lug � �Y � 'iis.nest el- .,. • • —, --i tl Y�W.v v m , 'I ;. — '�u .� e�ii 1 — 8E--If2 11 xaa - ®•I i P de A J j�jj x ' /i; - £ W-,, A 6.../.M• i C t r.R p i- a RA I 1© �1 IO .Iw i ...v..: 0 LO ) arr,,.• Ili l, ❑ 11 I - 011 a Glenn s NORMANDY J. x.. sae• u , I As -o:: --, , ba"y _.�... i o. =C'r..,,I..,�,a n l GE 1 li -- —1 S n r i n 0 h r n n 4 P n r L. Ile \V: mae, •� 'A • • • CINATIVE UNDERSTORY FLAMING THEME IN ALL AREAS OF THE STMBOLL, J ORNAMENTAL SHRUB PLANTINGS. STREET TREE THEME THRUOM NATIVE SHRUBS AND G0.0UNDCOVERS ARE THE INTERIOR LOOT Of ROADWAY: USED TO CREATE AN INFORMAL PLANTING I Y RIIDDODENDRONS/EUONYMUY AROUND/BETWEEN IN AREAS AROUNETWEEN THE r3 VIBURNUM TYPE SHRUBS TO BE SWEETGUM AND KATSURA TREES ARE USED AS ACCENTS TO BUILDING USED TO CREATE A CANOPY STRFETICAPE BUILDINGS SHRUBS ARE EVERGREEN z HLCKLEBERRV/OREGON GRAPE/SE0.VICEBERRT/ ((L� FACADESSCRFENNO. INTERIOR OF THE SITE. VIBURNUM AND GROUNDCOVERS ARE KINNIKINNICIUCASCADE OREGON GRAPE/ 1 ' $ALAL / I I Sono"OXPCS 5 14~3, 000 ao0 '- .�- 72- .., ---" 3i {73B *T .�7yr' i.. �, .rr ) �a1..+i€ willow �lirsiiliatilM'�"i:ain. it v Irlu TAlJ10T M.STRFETSCAPE: i j 1 r�"`'-^9P. �"'-' uIhipiijui2 � � —RED E EES USEDTOCREATE R lmto,n II��Il B_� I f I �T'STRI ' (1{�� 557�7 � i AWN UNDERNEATH. J 111ftftIIIl` i \.; o � 111�� atillk� �ali'I . rlEf i 3 �- A �— .Ja1 .� I I I I I I I I� . T. (' / : ' i 7' , _.y i D>f^.K Glwl1{�aflbP ., r }4 r#__ ;rA . lir_ 'I it �� -- - .; r �,e ii Bus ff �' 4 / r f 3 nu ENTRY r,GNTINOnm.6: 1 I Iii... !r1-Fii• B* t--rlI•.--/ ! R F t.ir-N R.. , f:va y xAS' R ANNUAL S A N 115TH D oWO OF I lM ./ I ' +-1 I F-. ---V- Na •ITHE MCNs nND NTTx DoowaoD i C /—�i Ii ly+- E E ! �-1-I �� ti,A � 1 �I 2 ANDJAPANESE MAPLE ACCENT TREESI ti II S I I 1A--_TI IA.WI trzBEIDND TIE SIGNS. I If; I�'1 1 L ----- — —I t :V71f/�/F • . . .I -� . /. P P T . P• a, , 1cii /!.I�`SA-,�Pg-`' li �Ri+£ 'sd' *i�I � tIH).Ab4&s ��l® ', I i ''.0 r ',. 11 III_j• IMj1Iiit I 1 it l R •. .. . . .. . . .. . . .:. . . . . .e:�� I RI INTERIOR SMALL CANOPY TREES: LAWN AREAS WHERE POSSIBLE RI4 • RI A RETAINING WALLS,SEE CIVIL PLANS ON FLATTER GRADE AREAS AND" —' kk77 SMALL SCAM CANOPY TREES ARE NATIVE EVERGREEN PERIMETER BUFFER. AT SOME PARKING LOT ISLANDS 261 USED TO ACCENT THE BUILDING FACADES JAPANESE MAPLE AND EVERGREEN TREES AND EVERGREEN SHRUBS ARE USED TO CREATE APE ppaA�ARE DOUGLAS FO DOGWOOD TREES TO BE USED. PERIMETER TREES. NATIVE PLANT THEME AT THE FROMS/BACKS OF BUIIDNGS,N C UWESTERN RED CEDAR CONCEPTUAL PLANT MATERIALS LIST C AND SHRUGB RAPE/E EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY/ BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND SLOPED AREAS OREGON SVMBq. BIITANII-.SI ABIF/ 11I'NNI'RAP.RIAMIES /AIAIIUNIAAOIRFUI.IUAV IC'oT COMMONN B UNI:GUN DRAPE NAIIVE SPECIES AMELMYIOER/SERVICEBERRY N'NA STREET TREE CANOPY TREES ALONG TALBOT RD SOUTH NATIVE SPECIES F. ) ACER RUSRUM'ARMSTRONG./2-CALIPER. VACCIMIIM OVATN VC HT FN !hw„J RED MAPLE B.B,MATCHED, C7 NORTH """"""""" d !'Y�'J EVERGREEN HUCKLEBERRY NATIVE SPECIES < xl� P �ffi E� INTERIOR PARKING LOT ISLAND CANOPY TREES I OAULTHERIA SHALLONSALAL I GALLON CANS SCALE:I"•40' 0 LIOUIDAMBER STYMCIFLUN 2-CALIPER NATIVE SPECIES, yj SWEETGUM BBB,MATCHED, I{��SEE CIVIL PLANS FOR GRADING INFORMATION / ARKS INNICKS UVA.URSV IGALLONAT OCCANS [.I �5!3 T.CERCIDAPYLLUM1 JAPONICA/2-CALIPER, JAPANESE I:ATSUM TREE BRB,MATCNED NATIVE SPECIES, S-' - (\ PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE BUFFER EVERGREEN TREES/PLANTS. \MANONIA NERVOSA/ I GALLON CANS _ CASCADE OREGON GRAPE AT Jr C,\ I'4• Timm PLICATN bFOOT NT, NATIVE SPECIES a. FiiiEii. Cr WESTERN RED CEDAR BBB,NATIVE SPECIES, BINDING FOUNDATION ACCENT SHRUBS. 3 T • PSEUDOTSUGA MENDESIV b FOOT M, / RHODODENDRON SPECIES At M. a DOUGLAS FIR BBB,NATIVE - SPECIES, VIBURNUM PLICATTIM M'M Z K' - TOVIENTOSUM/ F. tl GENERAL NOTES BUILDING FOUNDATION ACCENT CANOPY TREES AT THE STREET SIDE OF 0 DOVBIEFILE VIBURNUM F}F}F}}.{.{.{{ Z G BUILDINGS W,PI2 AND PIS AND AT THE ENTRY SIGNS Ie 3 a p10 I.ALL BEDS TO RECEIVE A TWO INCH LAVER OF BARK MULCH EIIONYMUS ALATN N^M SS !^F 2 ALL PROPOSED IANOSCAPINGAAWH AREAS WILL BE IRRIGATED !ACER PALMATALREDI 2'CALIPER WINGEDEWNYMUS \ JAPANESE MAPLE BOB, WTI AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. MATCHED I.ALL PLANTINGS TO BEPLANTPD WITH IMPORTED ORGANIC TOPSOILS O fPRUNUS CEMSSIFEM 2-CALIPER. 8 • • 'THUNDERCLOUD, BUS. - LAWN AREAS"SODDED AND HVDROSEEDED FLOWERING PLUM MATCHED, 21 CORNUS KOUSN 5'M,BBB, LYNN WILLIAM HORN a ASSOCIATES.LLC & KO.. DOGWOOD MATCHED TU LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE RE IOOBGLGSWLLYUHJIYSWIJIIWUGEWASUAA11 AB. -gin.eAA z>l-SN,,AIl -• I v:•.•.;:.„.,„,,„„,, NORMANDY RIDGE APARTMENTS 1.). MINE WWII M.MM.Ilkillailli1%a a•11.4 COMM IPAIIIIIITIO MEM Mali flinila i• IRRNCIFT nya WM 10010B.11•1118 , ... GRAPHIC SCALE .\ .0.-.4 t•I . Vaal 71,7.11.4SIC CY 11•1•0 , •0•101 POI -0C, , .,... • t 7 7 7 I T , , •,.. -,..•••,.....•;!w 1 - !.,, „.• . . 1.0fr SUM. I ,.. 0 "7 : Olairlr I= (IP MT) .•' • '''..1 \ 1 , WO.PM ,:, .....Z•91 CUM OP .3•01.,.......,17:,... SW Si Rel NORRY•...03•641F ..` MOM 1. ,r.,..,'., ,, , •i, , ,/, • §' ,• . -, . , •• k \ 1 . ‘ ,,,i. , /, ,- •••1 Wit •". \ I \.\e' \e' ? e' '"*. ''' sp• wort r .1 1 cws, .1 , ii i• 1 i 1 cr , , \ \ \ ‘, ' s ,. . . (0 , /, ' - 1 ----- ...‘,....i.;;01.-;.;\ s \ ., i 1 1 ! 1 . \ 1 ,-. 1 'T" I ,. .1, 1 , \ ,..‘• '. \ \ 21...,.... 1 I 1 1 . .... . ,•. .,-------iT.-J I., ',...\- -. ...- ...,,I., \• k•A 1.- . ,. ,r;-• 1. t-..: L. ' \ ,,,, , 1 \.••• ) 4 1 ..1 •1 •is •A'1 4:.fl,* 1 , .•.' ' .!!..ls k.,,,,O\ • I'v ', ' i II,•1!I .1 ' ______;__• ____ • - 4- - ..e. , 411.....„.1 4,2„‘. I .,... ,..., ,c.• wit,, • 4 01.,, .:,,,. •••••-•, •. , , • 4 I •I.• ' • -! •:' . ! 1 I! i s•- -0 i•• ,.., , `"Inalan;,.A.„..,,1•- 1-77 1-7 _.....--/......_..._ -... ...ki,,,.....- ,,,.. • - ...--....,-,...,,....._-..77...... • .,......,..,„,-..-...- ' /I I ' • • r:'4-l'" . .0 I -''A n -- 1-01-, '..k.i'-i I"1"-Ii I!;; <1•<1.1. i , ' rl '2' -, ' ' I i • „ , r•!•••!..!--,"l' -i;:',” ! I' 1 I 4 1 . •!•.-/.•. '., I.. ,, kl, IN IN M . ii•'•,IN pt in um is NO ME ' • ""-"7,-' s..r r:;:•-• „.' 4" 1.4. illill 11, -0- ' 7'i rri.it -14-•••!• • ',,!;; ...' ,14r,.. P"'.F. 1 7 \T., r , "T-7', ,i)e,'-,-;,-/, • ! . . [1:i i 1 1 1 i'i i•' t i.- k‘ .., '1.•gr' ..--...--cF.....---','.."4!...‘,'.-. I ', „ , . ). , „ ' . . , ti-, 4'1'' ii...1A ' -1- •-•-•'• • • ,,,,, ,,, .. . -/ ,,,.kre,,,,, i 1 i • l• 1 Hi -..L•_.si•, 1 :. , 1 _ __ i 1 . _ _ i 1 _,,_:-,, •-,- II .....,1,-. .,.._ ; ,. "i 1 I , ''•„1' 1 , ; , , ,, • ,-.......• II;.1111 • • \Z.:1r"/ ...L.. . i -71 W7 7,-. -E-"lir'--,., .17.ZietIllit -- I,- -.1. oNT,-1. „„_,„ - ..../1• ,, I/i .-% / ,",i// / i i'' I''. 's \ \' I:=ZEEMM '...' 1 '6i,i .:2 '" 4,4-;-'..e'4• GI' imii kei ligli,litkg itAii MniNiligto#keg§ slii.G kfol ;,--A 1 •4 0 ; ' ' 'V ' • ' ''''/i'i;'1 '''''''' • Is •v ••,1.......4.,,c, *,,Iir<191111411WIA,ff51001/08(/,110.150111111151‘5'Tiia IrtIAMIKV111;1111111.11•11111240.1/6.46CIIMVA41.16111116111111.1191CW4.-4...eva.Aat velatfr.,."*" /; '• "1; ! • ' ! 1/ I ; 4.°7 I i / ' .4-4-' ' '4,,,,'..,-' ,' ; ; i" 1 ei ,i , 1 , • , , 1 • / u ! EP 1 ..., ... .:, 1 ,;(..-- '',,, '" - ' ' -=,...t--- - - , '--•'- - . - ' - - - - - est'1, 4, ! •' ! ' ; 1 ' / ' / I 1. 6:`" 7. (tha. ' .!,-.,41,-4,- . • ••• ‘.. .. , ; - . '• .- . ' ..., •.•1,,”-i _,...0.,..,-..1t . • . 'It,' " ' '7/• / / 1 i, / ; ; / , i ' ' „ •! „ ,, /y , ! ii.1 _ ..11 , 4> tr-..,ii.--i-- iii,1 405yr..srssAir. , _ 7 -•- ,_ •- - - i 4 , .... • .„N„,me...,, •14,.f.,,, / ; !i ' i • , !. , ."•‘1,,,k„ ,,,.. ,tdAinsie-, , .._. ; - - , I ' • 4 • ! ! ; 7, ;, `1,41.14,..1;;','''';•'.;re'-'''i...4,4 ! \mows Pm \ • il \ I 1 \ I (•''''I, /, / 1, • ;.., i , , /6 .,, ,, .14,', .., , i ; ;i, ;!,-'iii ', 1 i • 1 ' ' ' __ ‘ .,. ‘.1..., ,,,),.4, ,..,... ,,,d-....._1..a.r __.L.-. ,_-_••,IS =‘-'-=71'---5-1i. i. :•\ , • 4' pf,:ti,.,::.' ..7.,:;: , :•ok. •:. ,..,.' _ i '-' ---_,-•,__--,,,...,-..-1' r-,..1,•,"Le-• .--.70-, ---,,,,..47`"7"1,7"- .1 % ' .:.• \ I -- ,, ,• .., ,. 10 i •,,, i' . , ., ; ‘ '., , t ii -. --...... ........--e i . I'i°Ir....,-...;..'" ,' pitiTF:' 7-T:-', 01, '- `,'.7 ,..''''. 1...,‘ i 7.. ' , \ 'a 1 / 1 1 , •... 1 , plai,,, •- ' 1 _i `.' I • i I 1 0 I , `,' , )-- ,•••',4. , • , , ••:„..a.,,,,•4 , ., , ., , . ., ,,,,,• ‘ • • • , r-i-, - -•?:•Arapllea......... ,. , \ , 1. ,_.-t- ,r,...f. allEllitri . „ 13°4 1 pmi-',,....; 44......2 Aa W= wiraodng ' , .'"''...t. ‘.• '.. \.,. • cokr4 i ii -iii , '.!..!-:le,g.i.V,, 111\ • I % 1 ,,,A7VotfroliP"',)1 •i . ult .,41.7. 6. Via 2 .-,...1 I , .i.. I( '' 1;alai Film! 1 .II..14e ir,','-ttr'•.: me I.ir & 1 i ,6•10.0 :,.4.N'ivis'„, In, ,,, .1,-1/te Is. I ;11 fic;, ,„4„, am.:1%tit%_ .,..,..31 ‘,1,, L .....:'i'!i' :I I ; , 01 .04 q /1 ;I V, II •''''.; -`.'!*1 la \ \ 1Z.•,'' '1. -l'itgA.t,',...,„li is' I /, ..9 I, 1 ii, 4-:'.. :,'3'...,ilaii.e,,,,•1147;=4.7.1"..4am r.',• '1.+!::''I• 'Brea; i re I i.. ILI r41 ilia 1 1 .-tia,(11'bt i• .ii ' i as,„ • ,.N,••=4,.._.-c.i.1.!±:-....-r.f•-z7-•,,,,%-, ___Z:11; • N-p--V .witr'...--,-'"-717'-;L--1.-"014''•••=4**•!4..,•iik....t.••-•liffiNFAIr' 1.6.--- -....- 1"..... • •Mah-i0:.,,,,.• •....h9140. 0,----• -,......r,:,,,,,,•01" ..,!••..:;..- . ,-....."t-i, . ., ,,17„.itriaissrigosaiikaihko..77:„7.0,..i7e4.••, .;:tflt,ift,sH.-•;!tt%..7, sh c.r. ..;d41:$•.;,.„:01.,;;;,-.•.i.,.•114.111;i.• -ii. ,Ir. I -'F. ' -. „, '4"4 A:*.- .:n1,11%.ni.1.0..4^7.4/.,,,,..4,,,,44-A.et.t...: -P i.,:..*.s,4:4-•Fltl.:itli • s:-..18.•.11V',...ti,"2421,)14,••41,4?4,441,5,!' „„ifokw,A; i-• •,..4 '.t4., 4, . .,\o,\\.\' ..' • 03 :.._ ... 0. ....:. . ..ws our fAr*To cx-arrtrAel 014#Il 0 fa'ilW 1911.11...t.4491rg, 1.1;:.1..,,A,L. .to....4.7:a,*is tta.3,„,,...,k....0/:•;,,,..:!..2.s.:.‘,... ,s-i. rilll' it-i'...................Wit....7.... ..!..,...---J=r1.--v,......var 747.==.4r Fir.....z,4. .,....LI•••••,.......-14,7c.... ..-•••••••••••••••••ii-F••••••••••.i.°,,liir 111 . i .... 1P21.,.. wi.,, , 1 $'',', , \ . . , 1"C firglitir QVIII Z•--• ••'•mi 2••• - •in MP ititme• '• • ''--,.,88 .4311• • -••''Elm in• .• •• fai, • • •• '' •I'-•:•'.. , co ' ' L . ijki . ...''.......i::::4.• 11- . 4 g• 1 g x110104:1 1121,1g 11111111 filli . 811 ; ...,`? girl; •! ' I ; I , ; : • , F.,. ri 1;; , o _ ;'.1i of'• 11 11 . iil gib 41 ' 1 ,.I 1r I., : , \ 1111 Wit' ICIE.bt.,, .111.1111 la a 7;, ,,,,,N. in qui ou'w wriz i .1 91 i ipli•N. it N in iN• it . ,. .......,__,,,, • . , i. , i i , ,. H II r ., .. .. • ..---'''-'-r-J.1 .4"1,="t,:"I'"','" ' i '',:...i..,.' ,. ,i'.),,(`-' s,;.'-'--:!:r,:,-;„,,,:::',,..../'‘,i,.::, Ale-- fir...,,,...I,%:"..F:".:1::,ig.';,i'•;Iit-s-,.,\,,,.7"-7-7, ,, ',---.- ., ''. , • .,.-r-t-1-. ....'....'.... ;. "j _ ,,,Tar,:..;.10.1 th..,0,,,.....1.,,P. , :::,t',•''''';',1'44.'" ' --'.. 1- ''''%7•••;'-...1"-!!4''''.0:'' .'''''-, • ..:.4):,..4.''''';,v-":-r•_,-', .,.,_,,,.,:,-!.."."!•;'.'-, 1. ' 1 ' ' • fR I 4 ' 'RI. • • ' '' - .. , ... ....,""""" ..1-.-;.-• 1 1 tf,t's. ,. e...ii .. .r.ii.-'1,' - ..,et, ; . ii '.li I. .... . fr1,1111111,0 1 . e I 1 I ". . ' • a I ' I ' / . INspa WS IN ear. -BCEAFL0LR E4 8y 0H Ou HOURSG Limit of 25% natural slope area: .• 1 t; , ; Alterations in slope o.:•cur below c•••• .,,,» I !f;.;' 1-800-424-5555 this line, created by prior construction,!,. - -whk-h-arra-gxeatxq-tiun2-fe:0.•s ire ---Aaillillannisimmir- .. 11111111111111111111111111 - Cl ( • NORMANDY RIDGE APARTMENTS RCTKN1 Et TOTRML!*E.PARE R.It r.UN WARY,VAIMGTC11 EXTRUDED CURB PER RAM NDRTH RAVER \ E E.Ci1M STREET y ARMIES �- I Z,HK DETENTION VAULT CROSS-SECTIONS 1 5'LANDSCAPE SOW RS, I HITWOSEEDNC (SEE NOTE NO i) ROp(ERT PER PLAN 7 -v 1 .. r FLOW SPREADER /PER DETAIL TINS SHEET .P y IJ — a a s DEAL. J.a a Li r —1 I L J 1 1 i a3'.. TIDED': TE: I I ) g ma T»I•¢, 1 1. H�XDROO SFEDNG EEL ME BWHLIRATION STALE STALL USE THE I t�� I I mle FEuowc LRx: M,Issr o wv,b4 W I I I axUN PERENNIAL ME GRASS .: L 40E CNEP ESP FUME a a a J L J In IRRENB BENT CLASS I 102 11411 DITCH CLOSER NSMOCAATm ,O NN I— r HTTROSEFDNG elAREAS NOT SADPTBR TO REWIND 'y.; m<�• 1 ER,"P I I I RLIE TER T NM wWAATER PLANS SNAIL BE HYD DROSEEPED As RUED BY .0. * q I co.o.d. o r com. I I �.. W..v I O BIOFILTRATION SWALE �i,.^`� L I o i NOT-TO-SCALE k... i uY L _ Iso Lerniae ) S. yapi �< ro� 1 .a—— _—_ mon.vu OUT a-0 .a Pe Ew STEW RauND San cam Ri 3 iiI r '"' RY 410-lex.00• MARKED TPMI•MID p LOCI=Bars. s SEE OAR'S.MD..9 ppgg O BOTTOM SLAB PLAN A.o 50 N'.CR.S. LL' - �/ • 1$. W..aE A. OVERFLOW E.. 15e.30• w WK..WATER SURPAGE ELEV..1M.5U' 1 f gi .Epp 511PPpRf(�� SaxpARo O.EvwxED - — - Y ll I - - - EN]T D' PACT STEEL LADDER/SFERS. i! J `zl'v ,� SEE DNC.ND.J9 N.C.R.S. Z MN E_ a�Na �R. o% a I° ti. WAR HERE. P.M ELEV..1BOAY MERE EL...1=3,• RESTwcron PLATE ^ r rl aRN10E.x ET l,yn il. ELEv..1m.J1' naWrl y» i5.'S'1'f t-As dt OgRLET�CONTROL STRUCTURE VD F 0 n Nor ro SfNE CO _ TOP SLAB PLAN /N I I Z J <�. I r— ILI o gE, w.nCARA�NAncu 'N MI +p. r.(ROAR ZOO eow.s.•DOD[J / V u„, RC 3 0 oscre Nma(v.R.sl `�'GRADEr..Pon ASNRSexlr ro PRIM SWORE < Kg Ei B &WM M 1600.SKI NKS.WAR 70 Y UVAION � I.car oo ATM RAI DEAN WARD �ma.ED -§ W;` �ukvoxx o Wlrs NM PEA CRAM nu.ro `A dui ,oo°�iR.e;`%�' 1.MS Bt.sorts B:L9KRU[Rn 50 AS 5z'ovER DRAM PAREbN EAvf�iar ARwr'�io to BREW rail YSDIwa. ./n1E11 FAebc sou, NA COMPACTED,•LrnK r.1• Z BE.AND OM MAK RKI a LEV& - SWOS//SLIS MESHED ROOK BALLAST- PRSB"[ 1 ODa DUO SAW Pal SP.nc AS FROWS PLACE NMEpATELE AFTER iREARD CON®Br 5fR Ca ONE ^ R OVER CUBERAG i AN FADE C+CAVATMNe aAOL WARD A.SERUM PURRERI yiyy BE AT 5'XIV R( -8YB aYNR"D Al PE BOP=OF R(SWALLPos We CROSS SECTION ( FLOW SPREADER ,00 N. .. O HOT TO SCALE c..Pa.e. w vvPOG POST a"• ign0a A•A I CALL 48 HOURS oo,:IN ---_ —. ORE YOU OKI F _ 1 1-800-424-5555 • �- I - \ r I �' i f f f > g 1 Jo\\ 1 T. } \ I / / / / / / I , FPI 2 SITE 11PLA STATISTICS gb - \ \ • - i 1 ' I / / I I P3 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN t' 1 / / I .-..� I I I II I I \ \ 1 I II f/ I I1 I \ P4 WIT A e B PLAN5 .....��' I i ---- ------- ----- ANS -�_-: I. , w -- •-,,L --I 4 ! 1.-�•F--L-+-ice \I PP66 Wei DD PLANS I I i s I-_- ��-- ---.. Min - -. '.� - -..- -- - -' -1 --- --v_ I I,I I I I \ I'� \. PB EXTERIORELE ATIONS — • F' r \ E B A. • 5 5• J }• I I I \ \ \ I'9 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS.,-.� 11 ' I e I�1141I I�111 ' V 7I• I \ \ \ \ PS EXTERN RECREATION BUILDING S i :�'1 1 1yy- �— ` - 1 L - - • L�1 / , / II , \ \ \ tIC4450R4000 PLAN PII NEE '!!7: lop i��.yt IIIIII1�III� .� 'A II �� / 1 I \ \ LI LANDSCAPE PLAN 2 r AD,.m,T MAI 1 I J /►© - I`•"! . • ' COL DOER Rkp / I j / I I \I \\ a c`GRADING DETAILS urr PLAN s air .�.•.� - j�- �...�� ! \ `_�'_ _ NIe111lR \ 1. \ / EIS D I I I iT DAAe eDeR I " I I �-� . arili !� no.To ttow. �41 At 11110. ■ ■ ' ■ I I 1 wwAe.nRaTr• { T_ • Ot TO MI \ via�41r,I�ee I EIN I it I _w I• '+Y-1 4I` / F� I�k*a I I .. \ 1 I \ i \ \� . wE• -I 1.. I•� � i l4 Irk ;r I' . 1� IL I \ I I \ - \\ ` II 1 M F�l� -� I NEW.. '^ _/' ; r I • t ■ r... 1` r, —_ • / Ez,ae \. • • _____ ___ ...A.; 1':11 _11 :1-ki. ' ( \ \ \ g \ ITS OvIL•..- ill. _ aR - lg. - - n::I� l I i / I I I TO ,. , I lima isii .kill Itill ! JA II . I A . B a e e . . 1. ME ACCESS I _M =Si • - ■. Mill • ■ •MO t _ • Oa MI •_ .pm• is_ w: IN IN so_+ ' ---.....--•----!• __ I / I �\ III tl e exroin 5meers I �••• -� 1 _�+ __ e ° 1 •_ I E r —1' - 1 1 �y. •E,n.T.6_• r•_ •r'S I \I I �l4 RII\' I\ I\ \ \\ \ •.ONIANt a- R 1 y Mee Thum - \ \\ \\ N\ 1 I II IA y e LGNTEG NOTE Zone change line \ ° 1 a 6�16 I EACN GARAGE AT TO.OE BULLYA p• AND Limit of 25% natural slope area. E ^P ln 3 EACN ENTRY DOOR•APARTMENT d1LLD•L•5 TO Alterations in slo occur below -qq9 HLION,AVE L FIMRRE CGNECTED TO m O1OLELL this line, created by prior construction, A9 which are greater than 259. slope. Ck77 LOT AREA oolo*SF.09e ACRESI WI7 MIX: PARCDYz T lb'POLE L GNT Up 15011 MPS '' RI AREA: 1.6315 SF 11.95 ACRES) TOLNI4C TES A 3 BED/1y BA 11 TOWIOMES IS STALLSANIT REQUIRED C RI4 AREA: 16I,151 5F.15.55 ACRES) B 1 BED/113 BA 10 7 GARAGE.7 TANDEM ewe 4'FLUORESCENT•CARPORTS ) STREAM AREA: APARTMENTS C 1 BED/IBA S WIT A- „�. 755,111 9F.(596 ACRESI E ?BED I 1 BA 16 •4/WIT PROVIDED ® RETAINING WALLS-SEE CIVIL 1 i W IT B- GARAGE E TANDEM ,��SA y/ ALLOLLED DENSITY: 63 WITS F 2 BED/1 BA 6 •2/WIT PROVIDED ��+++��,��L"' W `A.' •-.....-- MANAGERS WIT I4112.. C 5-E AC�e5 PROPOSED DEWITY:13 WITS APARTMENTS !IS STALLS PER WITI - ^r c TOTAL:S: OUILDRKaS: TYPE v-NON-RATED AI WITS(IS)•67 STALLS DARRIER FREE Wli REQUIREMENTS: REQUIRED•PROVIDED aOCCUPANCY: A mme101 OF 10*CF GRCIND FLOOR W ITS TO BE •ie 6 t�ESE AIE STRAI(y1T M�- STALLS LOCATED ADJACENT TO :.OO •D Z DAPPROX.BLDG.AREA: FAIR NOOSING ACCESSIBLE'STATE TYPE B) APARTMENTS ASG 4 ARE PARALLEL BLDGS.I-4,1.10 II,B.Il e B i!T0 SF GIVEN S OF ST.S 9T ENTIRE bllE GRADE IS N � O m E%CE54 6 IOt SLOPE LOCATED ADJACENT TO BUILDING R C BLDG 5 OW 5F. 10 GRC ND FLOOR WITS/301•4 MN. GUEST I PER 4 WIT9 'M• ilin _ p > SLOGS.6(l TATO SF e3 TOTAL WIT9 ON JI /t Z m o /// SLOGS 5•R e}10 SF aCm,STATE TYPE A WITb .2015 STALLS REQUIRED BLDG.K 6.511 SF. 031091•Al/OR 51 11 STALLS PROVIDED. jG\--RECREATION BLDG. Atte SF. USE 5 TYPE A(WIC)WITS FOR FARLLEL 11 S I 111360 If NOU5NG WITS STALLS AND 3 ARE STRAKWT M ewa1EAD Yl K S 7. TOTAL IMPERVIOUS AREA LOCATED•RECREATION BLDG. -• • g BUILDINGS •66C0a SF. R-14 8 DRIVES 1 YYLKS •6202 SF. BARRIER FREE PARKING REQUIREMENTS: :Iraq G less T TAL PAR N M, SNOT LDEDICATED TO y TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA: PARK.*N EIICESS OF I STALL PER WlT. —t l = $S' RI AREA. •66325 SF. 65-40.41 .' 74 STALLS �, RN AREA •1•ul SF ADDITIONAL BARRIER rlaffa 5'AL'.5•SOJ�RE,D 5 Skn x I .STREAI'1/D TCN dFFER 45,02,•I STALL'PROVIDED•REC BLDG' ^ 1, •v44Y --. -Af3Np _. -+Jlt FaG __ — C / iGTT/TRT nTomml T1 rFN A no no s,n44 /1116rt , • .. . 0\1 II - LOZS-1,90 MST)66196 6+00°6VwM O.L 601..IMS'MS 1moD anew.-.•^^"91101 I /� xaaMw v.I V n ist.to -` • t 66-GI.6: 3LVU 3(Lm P • vi.k.'OrnrAiii OlO: A9 NA1Vlp V 7caannuall®QaAapal StalmmoiE alfdpGaI tuzuniscani.nom ZSO-SS: Ow1.73roaa VW 13SV3 I.-Nvi 6 1 6 1 I I I Al El /•, 8 11R , I : ,\ \\ J. A is tad�, . _ A ... I Is. arc udC 'I LL.N-'4 N Z I "ia COO '\ -. 1-- 0 0 e0 0 4_ 4 Z _ —_ - ... . �ia Uat I Z dl 6+1 tp:1�0 q`j Q is taQ • - II JVK0V! )3g0k a -- _ —_--" 'ii WC I IN r,-- II' �� --- --- I QmClwk7 xa<-=1" I igl 4is _ ia taaiit — r 3N g I� IS uat., a4. rL • r --,is umt i "t $ € i i'L I II +-,1• P - .lYa Ud2 I Li Na'IiiIU cc llti661��1 �2'.0 n' I [i b, L —_ I1 • - -'ro tact I WV r 1 I(.ra ,t 1..✓ d . a �I w N �-. s N 'fo Uat E I ___ J9 on -I - W V Q _ I,-- 6III! -,.- C + I'01a UaL I ' r� Nu I,-'i9taat _- N ~ 20 I > �li r� 6 0 3 R' Q E III I -- III ISit'''�11 w� Y I-J+a tAaL I — --- _t-- L II ( * I+a teat 1 g ti. I ia uat-� - i .. I = I�I _ `Z ii ` — 1'ia WIC a i va UOL 'j '-'i A* I -.J� IaGL �- II - -'is UJt ; R F I� ----,is�a vaL II - I is toox 3 R r I i s tact I "IS Uge.- + — - -�--- _ I de Wt II --- is uat —. II - V 1.. �'— .1 is uat I �Laat _ °� i JyI 1 \�� ' AA I Y _ii L I vs WO I 6 - I 'ia Ufa I .�"�. I I + 1 + + r- ,=3- i i�tO61 Ili OL-OW 0•000 106.1 24066,66.w0C x Nil II 99 r :s.p 9M-..ror roro,.l.p n-nc 4ii'' I t 1 II l I ! # # ( # #i # # k C < L . _—0., „: 4‘ %Airs .el InDP".11—--k-.7".--W. ":..tel?,,: '''1.1.: 7.-....-.....—--1. . •;,---W.-'.--— ...: 1--.5:7-% -'-‘ \ :r - _ ...' % \ '''.%*"...... '.....: - I ir I h'''''''--.''Pr- Wk J ..-i I , iki, % ' A.,: A.V -AA s s s • �s. _ s • e A -- L 1_____ .} 1 „ • ,..—., 0 . J i \.t { ! i ;h I .t 1 Aar i `� i i �� — -- \\ •_, • ill' f 1 t , a , � ` a • �` s \' - -gam r ],. R .jam to illiir-..7-4..A.2 4 I' I �\ 3 >r>r;. T ..—;,^e \ F Z. a.r n \ s\ \ >4 , ✓. no Rya$ .� \ f, i, ni�\} -� ill—...— pO` i (- 4 j' ---°a ) 5 N-.-..z. ——— 1 adot \ $ _� //i\f` \ ` —� —�°" r. \ _tom -----.. PAUL l CASEY.MA PRWECT n0.:99-052 N®u-1>ons®aily Iiknai1aige II-II®oatIng IIDeaeDopromenal¢ ,_ CItAWN BY DUD IRV120419.7Je5211dm.g',C:. Q \KOSIIIII:1, • 6 SSUE DATE :9-1.-99 uTTSTIIEV. a.a wn • 7TIEWT: 0 a wsn. 1 10110 36th Avenue Court SW. Suite .109 Tacun.ti Washington 98499(2531581-5207 11,1, 0 A Y 1 a MMUS .La MON 0.41,1,... • . 0 I 4 10 = ...igi _ _ �� .�N I LJA I : i -; — ... 12131313 .4;11i .Liii i QM WW1 1 „...... sirir—mmi EC.CV mural __.,__ � -_I. 7, " i%^simmaal - ®g ®�:a--4,‘,_ -,L...1" . ;I I ;�Mi1/6 il f IIlll I II! 0 0 ��, AIM' 11: 4111M111111111 0 1f�®®, _ __ �� ® iiik Emio 0' AM ‘.____IN__ ki.2 L P. mom MI ' ».... .... eeaema� .it: MIM isi ■■■■■■i \ O / L■\EE3■ I gg�1 I\b Iuauff•m �� iwk i Z L J 5!3 SF I o 601 BF156 5P 530 SF I • �111111¢ 111" UnllllLL D A" _ SCALE:VY.I'•0' BCALE.V�'.I'-0" Z SF((..* E 17%SP �' Ip14 SF S. o a s Ef 8 8 i 0 o :m 3 . 00 i es RI © � 5,1 ,.. 1 014 - .@ 0. --v . 4 N. e 0 r f 1! II I.11 6 k...1, R ......— : 1 14_ 1 *a " '' �pCllllllllllll��r- 1 = 0-: fill I a Ni l; • Ilk f . r 0 I 1E il 9® i' • III, ,0 01 r 19 1 1 . , ...„ --iminimmuz 001 Vi, 15111111 = it 0,, 1 1 4 �m I � I �' „� 11 1 H. i ►AUL 1 CASEY.MA PROJECTi7Q:99-052 gT®rurmantmally IIBdallg �IID e IHIounateeveIl®ipmm >mR e A DRAWN BY :DLD RESS W 1 In iw_i min L. 1 /'\xcamm 1 . ISSUE DATE :9- -99 D • LATEST REV. THE SET: Q • l S rc awaw 1 1 10116 2 enue Court SW.Suite.109 Tacoma Washington 98499(253)58 �'4- D7 - •, w.-9”5052-14110 i4in o..ey o-no it ill: I( )) :: *1 e_ , 2 ,:r./ k_\p,i IS 0_, IPpG 4 = 16 y_4 ui� • 4 N1 • I_ Fi $ - 3 E bJ 32-de o a 0Q . N 4 POI 1111111111111EL 10/ .. . 1 s — r. N 5 ID do I I I O 49 O ° i 7 „m___ y i Y - . R ' n zal Ii k 1 4 4 7 0iI Tim %10 i + _ .� I 4II 11 i iii.' 1-1 u 1 kr-L- 0-fr •.iir Midge irn m....�n PAUL J.CASEY.AIA PROJECT NO.:T9.052 N®�®�y Midge lIIl®Q s lu�evellogourm Z(mQ 1 Qi DRAWN BY OLD Manna,Wi b111E DATE :9-15-9T "w"'"'u6'ww' Qj 4 suct4 4. THIS SET: I 10118' .,enue Court SW.Saute.109 T.cwna W Wlnyton 98499(259)5843207 • ,o • L.. - . ( © P-ilii) mg 6.1 47111fli (zoolli Pa10=0 e.e.,E88 lipila r , ...... 1 — .., i ..• i . . )15 0 11-1 0 9900-00••09 I OM 0 1 1.....itr' e8715 RIM 411; I 0 DM, RIM 0 Fp .• D . Ct 1, A Li t I ,. 0 0 , .....___e_ WINFIC110111 6-aanellinl i 2 ....., _ q . . . , . , —a-OI•9 09 I j , - i _ ..p,RR= •, Xli:mgril • 1 qu do famoss H g 0 11 -110 '•—, 1 lien - CM.09 ir . 1 IS) d i DIRI • 51777 112 011X11 9 • 0= ----/i= 1 .4:1_31, . 1...,., ... i .... 1 1 • tt, 0 IS Lie IS LSO 63 '0 .0-1•OM 31VOS .0-1•-1•11 310.% g n (33allli MUM isaEm Mulla 1 i (.1100111i Puliaces) 082108 13ifuna • — •1 — —LWIT141V4 W 11 in . co 1111 1 " Ril ,--) 71/075 0 401.) li-XIVII ....Jo.j..tz____, 1 I 0.1 L__J I 0 0 ti-,111174 &• . . FINIMISI" )___ H H i ... FIRM , H ,,Hg ..... , ...), _ . .5mm•441> E N-- a a E A A \I-- I° IMP LARIIRMININIK/i Iti5I 1:10alit=inaWd] MI I _I / .1_ _ Ei.1 •-,cs•••o• CIPI IN 09 0 MI allV7 LAME Ilk 1 .17.71 lit li '---- i: • 491 • Al I., A 4 al•0•I.t 1 r ... :___. . • 0.• / .d..• .•t••.._,i i .•.• —.., 4 /` I 11- T--- Igb --- U1fl ' uNi „ I Him mu u ! /�. ® VIII li °° : Hl ou I1 — ---- � wro 6 IIIII01 � - L �I-�: III IIIII -. r 1, I1-1 ® -_ _- - -- %r- _ ift E ! i___ __"___=,. MULE Mal t- s---,_---- W„E — ,�' a a Soot&Mlle ElI¢viQiim-3,114.9 112 Muth ffi)idle]E.11evigL®®-I„p.d_,9 Os 112 n ii $ ' I m R i ' Iliahi gm iiii 1 , a tim ili 1 ; E. 11; IIIi ' _ •' il �� I �a: III! of ,. WITS &ill Wawa,(� Jill��µ�� p��gVw_E Dug SIA&x IElleytQflm-1,0 9 m3 12 W,WI1.Y lElle antko.W-I,, e 9 a3 llb I R 4 1 3 1 i o I. rI — �_riiiiiiii - - Y -- - •- - -i_� _---- I - 1111 IIII I[ w __- , o_ � MIMI I 11 III o � ••I _ _ °// —_ l + IEII• II 111■IOW jllall 11 111 gf s y ` 0 I•,� ME _ a s o0 1111 -. - -- o0 0 - - '- 00= a ; i='� 4`I �'aaa�ll w, nil e 1 1111 — I,__ '� ME J fl 11 s � r ER_ 10 ti 0� -- -- II.I'I.'I •a 11• MILE c Mal WIT E MILE WILE MILE i ]Etat Me)Ellevrn4 -3,5118.116 Weal Mile IRJlevrd=-1palls,11 llama Mile]E11ev -wilds.IL Puma SW Opp.) R 11 (f`' TIDR - — — — - � el (al �rprt�Tmf}�rot}m A--�°---- A _� ,,,- UCU l •••• • • • - . • .vvvwou\y• 1/4.411111‘111oLltp liVII/Wl.126 a ' III ---..— E i •• su le n'Eli tic tg t V'y t t%:054111-of-iosAatrii Jan —— g lipali-agogiluaril anuaglill g Appi-anOtualall.1144412M1 . 114.1 ,I4.1:al Veiny v-/1141 1 1 T` 3 2110 1 . "--—III 7--------MO --- L --- -, 1? 1 =.:•0_ ::. •-----••. .••___••• •••—____••• ;0 • t . .: ... -.•• In WM:::S t . ___••. ••• W 0 4 0;7151r- e Mil } i I HI ••• Iiiii a) _1•4 _._ _ Ja 2! } 41 , ----•- ---- •••W I 0 o P 81.013...11. WY. 1 .. --•,-,,,,,,'' • ..... "ZoZ.v...1 l• N cram'•dizo 0 v n ta tu,Git eti s,t t if:espil-znagylmollz zwalll [ ,- ,„, i ..... 1 , In"' ...111•MM. IrliF11 FliRn L V 91911E-uNgtsh211211=VI z N'Agre4 rur .,a--7R5 iiiiiiiiiimil ' ' \•;1; 1 ' c:,.„.... -..z.5,c------- 5,..=,. 31. i.rl,I t- --,-, IMLLI O... .., I L 47 • "Ulf -111111111111H i•:-' BM 111111111111. --- -- . :::OM , I I .., 1 I I I 11- i 1 i iiiii fill 1 - OWN 1.6.•IFM111...1 t •••MI: __._._- ..21 iii II E 1 ! 64; I ru = =: :7:===:: _____:::. EA;F: REMI: ----'' N _..... 1.1 :it.....1V1.741:: ...........1 ; 4 . ... 1 Mil i 1 i:•- 'I ::: . IIIIse - II iiii!II 11 1 . -!, Hill u 111 .- 1 R, • o ' i Ili IIIM Mill i 'min E @ 2 L w 9 11911:1-ImMIA21121;WS OINVIEll'al°91[V tfll'VI‘1111'an V)t t t 1:ESPUffil-oaccriA4VE NIGAil -r? •--im 5.? MM... a/311M •n..•-5=Fe •,:.-•:IL:. ''''' criTntl 7 'A F-7 G17.7W-' '..••••„< - S 1,41 --- __i_-_. •AU•Wle ...SWI MAIO, &Mee M M ..NY•1.12. '......1. On j 1 11111: 1-rtur ..• ..• 1 5-? : 001- 00 , -, WI" ...•1 0 I ... ..1.1 ip.:11 — ,..1-- 1 _ •` ; .— , •••, ,11,!M, --7— iii Matill • '''''' 1:1"1' 111=111 ... „,.... aw--"-"-. ..-- --- OM: 1111 11E i II. rilTt 1 I - , iii&,A1111 _ i111/11 --- - .... "...,-,--- -... .7,, , no.roo. --'-.1111111111111111111111 J11,61 - LP I AA ----- II! 11,1 r • .----- g6 APLOITECTORAL OWE CO0POSIT:ON SPONOLO 1-111111 Itooln 1 AIIIIIIIII t - MM.VAULT Set DOW!. Th. tiatintieila 1 1 4.00.0041100 I ,i 4 iw4.1 I Millail- • ...,...•soppy '''''. .. ,41111ftr. 1 1.. ,1.. •6,1:••• 11•••2 ink]- • • • Alegi ., ropp•-- . ,. ....... , : Arno --- --- — —IMO MIMIC ELEVATION -117-----11 0111111:1111.11 Eit AllirA 1":::*''''7" :Au vs.•1.tr Arecurrecrwr.wave UMW_—...:1iiimir :_____ '0' ------ COPIPOSITTON 0001-Of Al- /1 i1 I la 1 1 4-- ,;-•,.cs 1 [ammo,/5.02.6 IP I 0 ;Is II 1111MP,'- 1:1 lirilib'.11V I ----1-41 Ill IMO. 11111.1 A El moil .--- iii • . LCOMIL 1 m, him •-- issiii. Efilll'E MST ELME ELAN . o ft 2.5F MAE ELEVATION 11 g a...LE—.r.o i i1.000/ 41-0 WO v00 1 8 bo.100.00 'PIMP :=1.1fteMP ril 1 ,',s , 001.001, 41 11 4 4:tn ,/ „ ..`, j.,.. ,..,,..,.....c. 0 ! N \ • --, . • , inimmffillion ,........, ,..i-,--. .1 l .,,. _. . , ...... . . . _ ,1-- ‘ ;.•.174#, 111.11412 (I U TIN li 1 , 1 . 1 : .-.. E II . PIRST P22102 t, N 1 ilwriii 7 IIEFlii , 1 2 : : E MEE DILIEVATION ' :ME , o ti g 2 sc.Le,,*.•f fl. lippl.I.M.. aw..M Z -.' i N, I i • 9 0 • =-• - , Ma k ' •, •• A „..,,,,,,,...."....e..,.....,• ,,,,,,.,,,. ' k , .. S 1 1 •,_,,,_ .PL000 SECONED 1111,001R PLAN ....,.._, iL. , J 12215F § SIDE ELEVATION I SCA.vs'•I•o TThnl in\ E. CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION'. AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE. BY MAILING On the - ': day of ,13t.utuaxi , 1999, I deposited in the mails of the Unite.: States, a sealed envelope containing deiexwlvoV\ documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Department of Ecology Don Hurter WSDOT KC Wastewater Treatment Division Larry Fisher Washington Department of Fisheries David F. Dietzman Department of Natural Resources Suoervso-v\ Seattle Public Utilities Duwamish Indian Tribe Rod Malcom Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Joe Jainga Puget Sound Energy (Signature of Sender) & STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that'3(=,n cl 2 A Imo. S-a2 .oe 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: I y, Oa 21 c �; Notary Public i and f he State of hington Notary (Print) MARILYN KAMCHEFF My appointment eyrrpppOINTMENT EXPIRES:6 Ly-03 Project Name: Project Number: LUA. qq . 13(,,, s,a - A, ta f NOTARY PUBLIC STATE or WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES NOTARY.DOC JUNE 29, 2003 •J. CITY JF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator January 06, 2000 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: Environmental Determinations Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmen Review Committee (ERC)on January 04,2000: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi- family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access als, connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 drivewa parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi-family flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided, with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parkin) associated with the recreation building. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2,048 sq.ft. The City does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. al hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage channel/creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed intern street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance was approved by the Renton Board of Adjustments to allow the two street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot require buffer. Location: 4914 Talbot Road South. Appeals of either the environmental determination [RCW 43.21.0075(3), WAC 197-11-680] and/or the land use decisior must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM January 24, 2000. If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Rentor City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. If you have questions, please call me at(425)430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, Peter Rosen Project Manager cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Larry Fisher, Department of Fisheries David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources Don Hurter, Department of Transportation Eric Swenson, Seattle Public Utilities Duwamish Tribal Office Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance) Joe Jainga, Puget Sound Energy agencyltr\ 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 .ca_. 4 -. -,b CITY .F RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department J e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator January 06, 2000 Mr. Paul Casey, A.I.A. The Casey Group Architects 10116—36th Avenue Court SW, Suite#109 Lakewood, WA 98499 SUBJECT: Normandy Ridge Project No. LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Dear Mr. Casey: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project. The ERC, on January 04, 2000, issued a threshold Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. See the enclosed Mitigation Measures document. Appeals of either the environmental determination [RCW 43.21.0075(3), WAC 197-11-680] and/or the land use decision must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM January 24, 2000. If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at (425)430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, • Peter Rosen Project Manager cc: Mr. & Mrs. Ervin Yoder/Owners Mr. & Mrs. G. Warren Diamond/Owners Mr. Stephen Berg/SEB, Inc. Mr. Jack Martz Enclosure dnsmletter 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES AND CONDITIONS APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF APPLICANT: SEB, Inc PROJECT NAME: Normandy Ridge DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi-family flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided, with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parking associated with the recreation building. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2,048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage channel/creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed internal street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance was approved by the Renton Board of Adjustments to allow the two street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4914 Talbot Road South MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The applicant shall install a silt fence along the downslope perimeter of the area that is to be disturbed. The silt fence shall be in place before clearing and grading is initiated, and shall be constructed in conformance with the specifications presented in Section D.4.3.1 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual, Appendix D. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 2. Shallow drainage swales shall be constructed to intercept surface water flow and route the flow away from the construction area to a stabilized discharge point. Vegetation growth shall be established in the ditch by seeding or placing sod. Depending on site grades, it may be necessary to line the ditch with rock to protect the ditch from erosion and to reduce flow rates. The design and construction or drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in Section 4.4.1 of the SWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 3. The project contractor shall perform daily review and maintenance of all erosion and sedimentation control measures at the site during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the Project Engineer of record to the public works inspector. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to final approval of construction permits. Normandy Ridge LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,EC F Mitigation Measures & Conditions (continued) Page 2 of 2 5. The applicant shall provide extra stormwater detention on-site with a 30% safety factor beyond the normal requirements for the 2, 10 and 100-year storm events to minimize additional downstream flooding problems. Plans for this facility shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of construction permits. 6. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee equal to $388 per multi-family unit and $0.52 per square foot for the recreation building. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. The applicant shall be required to pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee of $75 for each average daily trip associated with the project. The traffic mitigation fee is estimated to be $35,762.25. This fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. 8. The applicant shall pay a Park's Department mitigation fee of $354.51 per multi-family dwelling unit. The value of the proposed recreation building may be credited for up to one-third of the total parks mitigation fee. The required mitigation fee shall be subject to the approval of the Parks Department and the Development Services Division, and the fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. The Site Plan for Normandy Ridge, File No. LUA-99-136, SA-A, ECF, is approved subject to the following conditions. 1) The applicant shall submit details of the street lighting, mailboxes, and signage in order to qualify for the R-14 bonus provision. The details shall be subject to the approval of the Development Services Division, prior to issuance of building permits. 2) The applicant shall revise the site plan to eliminate the carport to the east of Building 9 because the carport does not meet the front setback requirement for detached accessory structures. The revised site plan shall be subject to the approval of the Development Services Division, prior to issuance of building permits. 3) The applicant shall record a restrictive covenant or other device acceptable to the City that assigns tandem parking spaces to the exclusive use of specific dwelling units. The applicant shall also install signs at the garages indicating that the driveway apron is reserved for use by the unit occupant. The restrictive covenant shall be approved by the Development Services Division prior to recording. Recording of the covenant shall occur prior to final occupancy permits. CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF APPLICANT: SEB, Inc PROJECT NAME: Normandy Ridge DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi-family flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided, with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parking associated with the recreation building. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2,048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage channel/creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed internal street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance was approved by the Renton Board of Adjustments to allow the two street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4914 Talbot Road South Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. BUILDING Follow geotechnical recommendations. FIRE 1. The preliminary fire flow required is 3,000 GPM which requires one fire hydrant within 150 feet of the building and two additional hydrants within 300 feet of the building. 2. Secondary access roadway is required. Bollards cannot be used to control traffic. An approved gate or chain and padlock are allowed to restrict traffic on the emergency access. All roadways 20- feet in width are required to be marked as"Fire Lane, No Parking." 3. All buildings two stories and five or more units are required to be sprinklered. Central station monitored fire alarm systems are required in all buildings by City Ordinance. Separate plans and permits are required for the sprinkler and fire alarm systems. PLAN REVIEW SEWER • There is an existing 8" sewer main in Talbot Road available for this site. Most of the internal sewer system will be private, but constructed to City main line standards. A portion of the main may be required to be public to provide future service east of the site. This would required a minimum 15 foot easement,which would extend to the easterly property line. The main will not be required beyond the developed portion of the site. • System Development Charges (to be paid to the City, for Soos Creek Sewer District) will be required for this project(approximately$1835 per unit). Normandy Ridge LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Advisory Notes (continued) Page 2 of 3 WATER • A water main loop extension will be required for this project. To meet the fire flow requirement of 3000 gpm set by the Fire Department, a minimum 10"main must be provided through the site. Easements will be required for all on-site water mains and hydrants (minimum of 15 feet in width). • Backflow prevention devices will be required for irrigation and fire protection systems. • Depending on fire flow requirements, additional hydrants will be required. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($510 per unit). There are SAD ($0.048 per sq. ft.) and Latecomers Fees ($0.0262 per sq. ft..) also due upon development of this site. DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report has been submitted with the site plan application for this project. The conceptual drainage plan includes provisions for detention and water quality treatment in compliance with the requirements of the KCSWM. • Due to downstream flooding problems in this drainage basin, staff recommends a SEPA condition for extra detention for the on-site drainage system. The recommendation will for detention through the 100 year storm event with a 30% safety factor. It appears that an HPA permit is also required for this project, which will include this additional detention standard as a permit condition. The conceptual DRAINAGE PLAN submitted with this application complies with this additional detention requirement. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($0.129 per sq. ft.. of new impervious surface) STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Talbot Road South adjacent to the site must be improved with curb, gutters, sidewalks, street lighting, new paving from the edge of existing pavement to the new gutter, and drainage improvements for the new street improvements. • This zone allows for condominium style development(i.e. no separate platted lots), but must meet the development standards of a shadow plat. The shadow plat provided demonstrates the equivalent of standard right-of-way widths through the project, with a interconnected vehicular and pedestrian system. The project provides equivalent street improvements internal to the site, including adequate pavement width, curbs, drainage, sidewalks and turnarounds for dead-end street sections. The standard street design requirements for this type of project has been modified to allow for sidewalks along one side of the street only, pavement widths of 20 feet where parking is precluded by driveways on both sides of the street, and 28 feet of pavement with parking limited to one side of the street where parallel parking is feasible. • Street lighting must be provided on the private street sections, meeting or exceeding the lighting levels established in City Code. This system will be privately owned and maintained. GENERAL • All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a registered Civil Engineer. The construction permit application must include a itemized cost estimate for these improvements. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5% of the first $100,000 of the estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,00 but less than $200,000, and 3% of anything over $200,000. Half of this fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. PARKS Recommend 5-foot bike lanes striped and signed on Talbot Road S. Ensure that new street trees are not planted under existing electric/telephone lines. Normandy Ridge LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Advisory Notes (continued) Page 3 of 3 POLICE Estimate 76.36 police calls for service annually, based on the number and type of residential dwelling units. Many of these estimated calls will occur during the construction phase, and will be incidents such as Trespass, Commercial Burglary and Theft of building materials and tools. To help prevent these crimes, the site will need to have temporary, security fencing in place and security lighting. Post the correct No Trespass signs along the fencing (refer to the attached flier with the correct wording). Other properties along Talbot Road experienced crime problems such as burglary, theft, trespass and even a drive-by shooting at one of the construction trailers. Other sites felt the need to use the services of off-duty police and private security companies for on-site patrols of the area while it was being built. All building materials and tools will need to be kept locked up when not in use, and any construction site office trailer will need to have metal doors with dead-bolt locks, metal bars over the windows, and all office machinery will need to have the serial numbers recorded to aid in recovery in the event of theft. On some of the proposed units, there are windows adjacent to the entry doors. These windows will either need to have reinforced glass in place, or an application of security film. Otherwise, it would be too easy for a burglar to break the glass, put his hand through the window, unlock the front door and gain entry to individual units. Each door to each unit will need to be solid core wood or metal, with dead-bolt locks and peepholes for security of the residents. Each unit will need to have the address clearly posted, of a color that contrasts strongly with the color of the unit, and at least 6" in height, to aid responding emergency personnel. Since this development has one entry/exit, recommend the installation of a security gate to limit access only to residents and guests. PLANNING Only rockeries or retaining walls that are less than 4-feet in height may extend into required yard setbacks. The applicant shall require variance approval if the rockery walls shown on the site plan that extend into the required yard setbacks exceed 4-feet in height. _ AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Charlotte Ann Kassens first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL RENTON,WASHINGTON 600 S. Washington Avenue, Kent, Washington 98032 The Environmental Review Committee (ERG) has issued a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the fol- a daily newspaper published seven (7) times a week. Said newspaper is a legal lowing project under the authority of the Municipal newspaper of general publication and is now and has been for more than six months Renton NORMANDY RIDGEe prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, Washington. The South County Proposal to construct 83 multi-family resi- dentialJournal has been approved as a legal newspaper order of the Superior Court of the units. Location: 4914 Talbot Road PP 9by P South. State of Washington for King County. Appeals of either the environmental deter- minationThe notice in the exact form attached, waspublished in the South County1 -68 ] [RCW 43.21.0075(3),landus WAC must 11-680] and/or the land use decision must Journal (and not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to the subscribers be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a January 24, 2000. If no appeals are filed by this date,both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together Normandy Ridge with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA as published on: 1/10/00 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are gov- erned by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11B. Additional information The full amount of the fee ch ed for said foregoing publication is the sum of$43.13, regarding the appeal process may be charged to Acct. No. 8051 obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office,(425)-430-6510. Publication Date: January 10,2000 Legal Number 7068 Published in the South County Journal January 10,2000.7068 Legal Clerk, South ou Journal Subscribed and sworn before m on this �3ay of , 2000 �� ,��N••M. pi*, f�,�'�i Notary residing Pnblic of thef State of Washington .`��V•`;l�� siori4 pi'e.,01:.1 King County, Washington v, NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. NORMANDY RIDGE LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units. Location: 4914 Talbot Road South. Appeals of either the environmental determination [RCW 43.21.0075(3), WAC 197-11-680] and/or the land use decision must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM January 24, 2000. If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. Publication Date: January 10, 2000 Account No. 51067 dnsmpub.dot • CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF APPLICANT: SEB, Inc PROJECT NAME: Normandy Ridge DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 groun - related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. \ secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 6-4 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi-fam.y flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided, with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parking associated with the recreation building. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2,048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage channel/creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed internal street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance was approved by the Renton Board of Adjustments to allow the two street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4914 Talbot Road South LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2),c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of either the environmental determination [RCW 43.21.0075(3), WAC 197-11-680] and/or the land use decision must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM January 24, 2000. If no appeals are filed by this date, both actions will become final. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Exami .er, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Rer ton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Rer ton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510.. PUBLICATION DATE: January 10, 2000 DATE OF DECISION: January 04, 2000 SIGNATURES: GreZi a n, r�* DA DepartmentY° PI in /Buildin /Public Works /69/cg-t. 11/40 Ji Shepherd, Adm nistrator DRTE Communit Services Lee W e er, Fire Chief DATE Renton Fire Department dnsmsig CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES AND CONDITIONS APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF APPLICANT: SEB, Inc PROJECT NAME: Normandy Ridge DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi-family flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided, with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parking associated with the recreation building. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2,048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage channel/creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed internal street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance was approved by the Renton Board of Adjustments to allow the two street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4914 Talbot Road South MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The applicant shall install a silt fence along the downslope perimeter of the area that is to be disturbed. The silt fence shall be in place before clearing and grading is initiated, and shall be constructed in conformance with the specifications presented in Section D.4.3.1 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual, Appendix D. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 2. Shallow drainage swales shall be constructed to intercept surface water flow and route the flow away from the construction area to a stabilized discharge point. Vegetation growth shall be established in the ditch by seeding or placing sod. Depending on site grades, it may be necessary to line the ditch with rock to protect the ditch from erosion and to reduce flow rates. The design and construction or drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in Section 4.4.1 of the SWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 3. The project contractor shall perform daily review and maintenance of all erosion and sedimentation control measures at the site during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the Project Engineer of record to the public works inspector. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to final approval of construction permits. Normandy Ridge LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,EC F Mitigation Measures &Conditions (continued) Page 2 of 2 5. The applicant shall provide extra stormwater detention on-site with a 30% safety factor beyond the normal requirements for the 2, 10 and 100-year storm events to minimize additional downstream flooding problems. Plans for this facility shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of construction permits. 6. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee equal to $388 per multi-family unit and $0.52 per square foot for the recreation building. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. The applicant shall be required to pay a Traffic Mitigation Fee of $75 for each average daily trip associated with the project. The traffic mitigation fee is estimated to be $35,762.25. This fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. 8. The applicant shall pay a Park's Department mitigation fee of $354.51 per multi-family dwelling unit. The value of the proposed recreation building may be credited for up to one-third of the total parks mitigation fee. The required mitigation fee shall be subject to the approval of the Parks Department and the Development Services Division, and the fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits. The Site Plan for Normandy Ridge, File No. LUA-99-136, SA-A, ECF, is approved subject to the following conditions. 1) The applicant shall submit details of the street lighting, mailboxes, and signage in order to qualify for the R-14 bonus provision. The details shall be subject to the approval of the Development Services Division, prior to issuance of building permits. 2) The applicant shall revise the site plan to eliminate the carport to the east of Building 9 because the carport does not meet the front setback requirement for detached accessory structures. The revised site plan shall be subject to the approval of the Development Services Division, prior to issuance of building permits. 3) The applicant shall record a restrictive covenant or other device acceptable to the City that assigns tandem parking spaces to the exclusive use of specific dwelling units. The applicant shall also install signs at the garages indicating that the driveway apron is reserved for use by the unit occupant. The restrictive covenant shall be approved by the Development Services Division prior to recording. Recording of the covenant shall occur prior to final occupancy permits. it CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF APPLICANT: SEB, Inc PROJECT NAME: Normandy Ridge DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi-family flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided, with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parking associated with the recreation building. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2,048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage channel/creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed internal street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance was approved by the Renton Board of Adjustments to allow the two street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4914 Talbot Road South Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. BUILDING Follow geotechnical recommendations. FIRE 1. The preliminary fire flow required is 3,000 GPM which requires one fire hydrant within 150 feet of the building and two additional hydrants within 300 feet of the building. 2. Secondary access roadway is required. Bollards cannot be used to control traffic. An approved gate or chain and padlock are allowed to restrict traffic on the emergency access. All roadways 20- feet in width are required to be marked as"Fire Lane, No Parking." 3. All buildings two stories and five or more units are required to be sprinklered. Central station monitored fire alarm systems are required in all buildings by City Ordinance. Separate plans and permits are required for the sprinkler and fire alarm systems. PLAN REVIEW SEWER • There is an existing 8" sewer main in Talbot Road available for this site. Most of the internal sewer system will be private, but constructed to City main line standards. A portion of the main may be required to be public to provide future service east of the site. This would required a minimum 15 foot easement, which would extend to the easterly property line. The main will not be required beyond the developed portion of the site. • System Development Charges (to be paid to the City, for Soos Creek Sewer District) will be required for this project(approximately$1835 per unit). Normandy Ridge LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Advisory Notes (continued) Page 2 of 3 WATER • A water main loop extension will be required for this project. To meet the fire flow requirement of 3000 gpm set by the Fire Department, a minimum 10"main must be provided through the site. Easements will be required for all on-site water mains and hydrants (minimum of 15 feet in width). • Backflow prevention devices will be required for irrigation and fire protection systems. • Depending on fire flow requirements, additional hydrants will be required. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($510 per unit). There are SAD ($0.048 per sq. ft.) and Latecomers Fees ($0.0262 per sq. ft..) also due upon development of this site. DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report has been submitted with the site plan application for this project. The conceptual drainage plan includes provisions for detention and water quality treatment in compliance with the requirements of the KCSWM. • Due to downstream flooding problems in this drainage basin, staff recommends a SEPA condition for extra detention for the on-site drainage system. The recommendation will for detention through the 100 year storm event with a 30% safety factor. It appears that an HPA permit is also required for this project, which will include this additional detention standard as a permit condition. The conceptual DRAINAGE PLAN submitted with this application complies with this additional detention requirement. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($0.129 per sq. ft.. of new impervious surface) STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Talbot Road South adjacent to the site must be improved with curb, gutters, sidewalks, street lighting, new paving from the edge of existing pavement to the new gutter, and drainage improvements for the new street improvements. • This zone allows for condominium style development(i.e. no separate platted lots), but must meet the development standards of a shadow plat. The shadow plat provided demonstrates the equivalent of standard right-of-way widths through the project, with a interconnected vehicular and pedestrian system. The project provides equivalent street improvements internal to the site, including adequate pavement width, curbs, drainage, sidewalks and turnarounds for dead-end street sections. The standard street design requirements for this type of project has been modified to allow for sidewalks along one side of the street only, pavement widths of 20 feet where parking is precluded by driveways on both sides of the street, and 28 feet of pavement with parking limited to one side of the street where parallel parking is feasible. • Street lighting must be provided on the private street sections, meeting or exceeding the lighting levels established in City Code. This system will be privately owned and maintained. GENERAL • All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a registered Civil Engineer. The construction permit application must include a itemized cost estimate for these improvements. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5% of the first$100,000 of the estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,00 but less than $200,000, and 3% of anything over $200,000. Half of this fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. PARKS Recommend 5-foot bike lanes striped and signed on Talbot Road S. Ensure that new street trees are not planted under existing electric/telephone lines. Normandy Ridge LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,EC F Advisory Notes (continued) Page 3 of 3 POLICE Estimate 76.36 police calls for service annually, based on the number and type of residential dwelling units. Many of these estimated calls will occur during the construction phase, and will be incidents such as Trespass, Commercial Burglary and Theft of building materials and tools. To help prevent these crimes, the site will need to have temporary, security fencing in place and security lighting. Post the correct No Trespass signs along the fencing (refer to the attached flier with the correct wording). Other properties along Talbot Road experienced crime problems such as burglary, theft, trespass and even a drive-by shooting at one of the construction trailers. Other sites felt the need to use the services of off-duty police and private security companies for on-site patrols of the area while it was being built. All building materials and tools will need to be kept locked up when not in use, and any construction site office trailer will need to have metal doors with dead-bolt locks, metal bars over the windows, and all office machinery will need to have the serial numbers recorded to aid in recovery in the event of theft. On some of the proposed units, there are windows adjacent to the entry doors. These windows will either need to have reinforced glass in place, or an application of security film. Otherwise, it would be too easy for a burglar to break the glass, put his hand through the window, unlock the front door and gain entry to individual units. Each door to each unit will need to be solid core wood or metal, with dead-bolt locks and peepholes for security of the residents. Each unit will need to have the address clearly posted, of a color that contrasts strongly with the color of the unit, and at least 6" in height, to aid responding emergency personnel. Since this development has one entry/exit, recommend the installation of a security gate to limit access only to residents and guests. PLANNING Only rockeries or retaining walls that are less than 4-feet in height may extend into required yard setbacks. The applicant shall require variance approval if the rockery walls shown on the site plan that extend into the required yard setbacks exceed 4-feet in height. NOTICE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: NORMANDY RIDGGE PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-99-136,SA-A.V-B,ECF Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units,consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats.Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S.A secondary,emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed;with 64 garage spaces and 84 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses,and 62 parking stalls in carports for the multi-famdy flats. 27 guest parking stalls are also provided,with 24 stalls as parallel parking along the Internal streets and 3 stalls of head-in parking associated with the recreation building. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site,ranging in size from 475 sq.ft.to 2,048 sq.ft. The City does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq.It.and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage channeVcreek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed internal sheet crosses the stream in 2 locations.A variance front the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance was approved by the Renton Board of Adjustments to allow the two sheet crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer.Location:4914 Talbot Road South. I, THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED I THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE 1S ENVIRONMENT. 11 Appeals of either the environmental determination[RCW 43.21.0075(3),WAC 197.11-6801 and/or the land use decision must be Bled in writing on or before 5:00 PM January 24,2000. N no appeals are filed by this date,both actions will become Mal.Appeals must be Bled in writing together with the required$75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner,City of Renton,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Coda Section 4-8-1113. Additional Information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office,(425)-430-6510 •_.' ‘. .' v:.:t TV:: •:.. • :• ..---- . F -sue_—=- ' ,ter - I �._ f —_—,;__l04 t, NNORMANDY IL FUDGE 1`_ .....I.1.. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON.DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper Tile Identification. CERTIFICATION I, 0'i.c2j4' F1?# /r—iu,Shereby certify that -5 copies of the above document were posted by me in 3 conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on cT,Anlv4•e-7 7., 7...ige)ig2t • • Signed: ATTEST: Subcribed and sworn before me, a Nortary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing i tf eA-t -rs , on the 11f,t t day of ` -7.1 _ jd o cult ..riy_ MARILYN KAMCHEFF MARILYN KAMCHEFF NOTARY PUBLIC MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 29, 2003 /. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF Natural Resources JENNIFER M.BELCHER Commissioner of Public Lands DATE: October 25, 1999 CMVELAPMENT PLAN INU CITY OF RENTON TO: Peter Rosen OCT 4 (01999 Cityof Renton 1RECEIVED 1055 Southte Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 FROM: David John Weiss Resource Protection Specialist South Puget Sound Region SUBJECT REVIEW OF: Normandy Ridge LUA-99-136 , SA-A,V-B, ECF ACTION SPONSOR: Casey Group Architects PROJECT: Timber Harvest/Land Conversion [] We do not have an interest in the above project and have no comments on the proposal . [X] We do have an interest in the above project and wish to make the following comments: A *forest practices permit will be required for the harvest of timber associated with this project. cc: Dave Dietzman - SEPA Center - DNR SEPA#: 017283 SOUTH PUGET SOUND REGION 1950 FARMAN ST N I PO BOX 68 I ENUMCLAW, WA 98022-0068 FAX:(360)825-1672 I TTY:(360)825-6381 I TEL:(360)825-1631 Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer REC ED PAPER C~J 1 r I AlIft � Washington State Northwest Region mI/ Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue North Sid Morrison P.O.Box 330310 Seattle,WA 98133-9710 Secretary of Transportation ' (206)440-4000 October 15, 1999 DEVELOPM"JT PLANNINg CITY OF RENTOM Y Peter Rosen City of Renton 0 Li I' 1999 Development Services Division 1055 S Grady Way RECEAVED Renton, WA 98055-3232 RE: SR 515, vic. MP 4.53, CS 1741 Normandy Ridge Land Use Number LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF Dear Mr. Rosen: Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review the Notice of Application for the Normandy Ridge,which is located at 4914 Talbot Road South. The State recommends that a traffic study be prepared to analyze the state intersections that are impacted by ten or more of the project's generated peak hour trips and also determine what mitigation measures for these impacts, if any, would be required. If you have any questions,please call John Collins at(206)440-4915. Sincerely, i �� Fv2 f,i '1 raig J. Stone, P.E. I Area Administrator- South King CJS:jc JTC cc: file I i • CITY OF RENTON BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES OCTOBER 27, 1999 The following minutes are a summary of the October 27, 1999 hearing. The legal record is recorded on tape. CALL TO ORDER Boardmember Wallace led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Board of Adjustment to order. ROLL CALL OF BOARDMEMBERS Jay Wallace; Ralph Evans; Greg Guillen, George Feighner. Motion made and passed to excuse Boardmembers Jolly, Jim Jacques, and Briere CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager; Karen Codiga, Recording Secretary. APPROVAL OF Moved by Evans, seconded by Guillen, Board approves the minutes of MINUTES June 23, 1999 as presented. Carried. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in accordance with local and State laws, Boardmember Wallace opened the public hearing to consider the Hazen High School Variance (LUA-99-137, SA-A,V). Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No. 2: Site Vicinity Map application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No. 3: Proposed Site Plan Map Exhibit No. 4: Elevation Map Project Description 1. Background/Project Description The Renton School District is proposing to perform renovations to Hazen High School, located in the Residential — 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. A major component of the renovation includes the addition of an auditorium to the southeast corner of the existing building. The proposed height of the auditorium addition, at 38 feet, is the subject of the variance request. Section 4-2-110A of the City's Development Regulations restricts building height in the R-8 zone to 30 feet and 2-stories. In order to provide the existing school with an on-site auditorium facility, the applicant is seeking a variance to exceed the height limitation by 8 feet. The proposed auditorium addition would have a 19,500 square foot first floor (of which 17,400 square feet is new construction) and a 1,829 square foot second floor—for a total auditorium area of 21,329 square feet. The auditorium would be designed to accommodate approximately 650 to 680 seats. The proposed building footprint would have a setback of 40 feet from the nearest property line (Hoquiam Avenue NE on the site's eastern boundary). There would be an additional Board of Adjustment Minutes October 27, 1999 Page 2 setback of 16 feet(a 56-foot total)from this property line for the portions of the building proposed to exceed the height limitation. Pursuant to the definitions contained in section 4-11-020, building height is measured from the average finished grade to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof. In addition to the requested variance, the proposal requires Administrative Site Plan Review and Environmental (SEPA) Review. The remainder of the proposed renovations would be reviewed under the Administrative Site Plan portion of the land use application. In addition to the auditorium, the renovation project includes the creation of a commons area within an existing courtyard, the remodeling of the administrative wing of the building, and the development of a new student entry plaza. The project also includes the reconfiguration of parking areas, revisions to landscaping, and street improvements to Hoquiam Avenue NE. The administrative review of the project will be conducted after the completion of the SEPA process, of which the Renton School District is serving as lead agency. Variance Criteria 1. City Code section 4-7-22.G.3 states the conditions under which a variance may be granted. Those conditions are listed below with discussion following each of the variance criteria. A. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification: The applicant maintains the development of an auditorium is essential for the continuing use of the property as a secondary school. Currently, the existing high school lacks the facilities necessary for large event functions and is forced to either utilize the gymnasium or hold events off-site. While the development of an auditorium would alleviate this hardship, the applicant contends the height limitation of the R-8 zone precludes the construction of such an addition. In order to accommodate the fundamental aspects of the auditorium use, a minimum height of 38 feet would be necessary for the proper function of the stage and seating areas. Without the essential overhead space, the stage lighting, sets, props, and other necessary equipment would not function properly and would possibly interfere with performance activities. The applicant also maintains that the strict interpretation of the zoning code would deprive them of the right to expand an existing secondary school in a manner that is necessary for the campus. In addition, the location of the secondary school within the R-8 zoning designation can be seen as special circumstances applicable only to the subject site. While the height limitation of the zone is clearly applicable to residential development, the standard is not appropriate for campus or school development. B. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated: The applicant contends that potential impacts that would result from the proposed addition would be minimal to surrounding properties in the vicinity of the subject site, especially when considering the existing building as well as the location and design of the addition. The footprint of the auditorium addition would have an approximate setback of 40 feet from the nearest property line (Hoquiam Avenue NE). The portions of the building proposed to exceed the 30-foot height limitation would have an even greater setback from this street frontage (approximately 56 feet). In addition, the applicant has stated that"much care has gone into coordinating the massing of the new addition with the existing building so that it Board of Adjustment Minutes October 27, 1999 Page 3 ties into the existing school in mass and material." Since portions of the existing building currently exceed the 30-foot height maximum, the addition would not be out of proportion to the existing buildings. Although the addition would intensify the building mass along the site's eastern boundary, the development would be sufficiently setback and appropriately designed to reduce avoid adverse visual impacts to adjacent properties. Furthermore, the approval of the variance would not set a precedent for the residential development in the surrounding area and R-8 zoning designation. Therefore, the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. C. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated: The properties in the vicinity of the subject site which are designated R-8 are mostly developed with single family residences. By virtue of student populations, the location of secondary schools are distributed in a regional manner. Therefore, there are no other uses within this area that would be able to justify the need for a 680-seat auditorium with a building height of 38 feet. Because the granting of the variance would not be applicable to residential development, it would not be considered a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. D. That the approval as determined by the Board of Adjustment is a minimum variance tha will accomplish the desired purpose: The applicant maintains that the requested 38-foot height is the minimum height under which the auditorium stage and seating functions could be accommodated. The applicant further contends that the additional 8 feet in height is proposed only for the portions of the addition where it is absolutely necessary for the required auditorium functions and would be applied only to the parapet area of the building above the stage and seating areas. Therefore, the approval of the variance would be the minimal variance necessary for the addition of an auditorium to the existing high school campus. AUDIENCE COMMENT/TESTIMONY: Boardmember Wallace asked for testimony from those in favor of the application: Mr. Craig Mason DLR Group 3100 E. Jefferson Seattle, WA Mr. Mason briefly reviewed the proposed variance and stated that the 38-foot portion of the building is over only the stage portion of the proposed auditorium. The height is required over the stage area for cables, lights, etc. Mr. Jack Connell Renton School District Facilities Manager 1220 North 4th St. Renton,WA Board of Adjustment Minutes October 27, 1999 Page 4 Mr. Connell voiced the Renton School District support of this project. Boardmember Wallace asked for testimony from those opposed to the application: There was no opposition. Boardmember Wallace called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The public hearing was closed. DECISION: It was moved by BOARDMEMBER Feighner and seconded by BOARDMEMBER Guillen to approve the variance as requested for LUA-99-137,SA-A,V, based on the attached findings of fact and conclusions. ROLL CALL VOTE: Wallace -yes; Evans -yes; Guillen - yes; Feighner—yes. BOARDMEMBER WALLACE STATED: The variance is hereby granted as proposed and outlined in the findings of fact and conclusions. DATED this 27th day of October 1999. An appeal of the Board of Adjustment decision is governed by Title IV, Chapter 36, Section I, which requires that such appeal be filed with the Superior Court of Washington for King County within 21 days from the date of issuance of the decision. The land use decision is considered issued three (3) days after the City mails a written decision. The appeal period for this variancE will end at 5:00 PM on November 21, 1999. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in accordance with local and State laws, Boardmember Wallace opened the public hearing to consider the Normandy Ridge Variance (LUA-99-136, SA-A,V,ECF). Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No. 2: Site Vicinity Map application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No. 3: Proposed Site Plan Map Exhibit No. 4: Elevation Map Project Description 1. Environmental Review and Administrative Land Use Approval The proposal requires SEPA environmental review and administrative site plan review in addi )n to the requested variance. These permit reviews will be conducted subsequent to the sub .ct variance. Board of Adjustment Minutes October 27, 1999 Page 5 2. Variance Requested The applicant requests a variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations to allow (2) street crossings to intrude into the required stream buffer. Section 4-4-130.C.4. restricts tree cutting and land clearing within twenty-five (25) feet of the ordinary high water mark of creeks. The site plan provides for the 25-foot wide buffer from the stream except for the two (2) road crossings. The westerly stream crossing occurs at the entry driveway to the proposed development off Talbot Road S. The second stream crossing is for the internal loop road and is located at the east end of the property. There was some question initially whether the drainage ditch on the site was considered a stream subject to the City's regulations. A wetlands evaluation and stream buffer report was prepared for the subject property by Habitat Technologies (report dated September 22, 1999). The report concludes that the drainage ditch on the site meets criteria for a stream and therefore is subject to the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations. The following description of the drainage ditch/stream is summarized from the report. The stream or drainage corridor on the site is an excavated ditch that flows through the center of the site in an east to west direction. The drainage ditch was excavated to convey overflow from a spring located at the toe of the slope along the east project site boundary. Flows from the ditch are released into the roadside ditch along Talbot Road S. Because the excavated ditch conveys "naturally occurring surface water" from the spring, it meets the criteria for designation as a stream. In addition, this stream meets the criteria for designation as a Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR)Type 5 Water (i.e. it does not provide direct habitat for fish and is less than 2 feet in width at the ordinary high water mark). The importance of this stream is in the protection of downstream aquatic resources and local water quality. On August 11, 1999 Mr. Philip Schneider, Area Habitat Biologist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife visited the project site. Mr. Schneider concluded that the excavated ditch would be considered a stream for purposes of site development. Any proposed work within the ordinary high water mark of this stream would require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), approved by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. For approval of a HPA, the applicant would need to demonstrate that the proposed road crossing(s) is the only reasonable location for the crossing in terms of public safety and local engineering requirements. It will also be important to show that the method of crossing and the overall impact of any fill placed waterward of the ordinary high water mark is the minimum necessary to complete the project. Typically a crossing of this type of stream (i.e. intermittent and without direct fish habitat) can be completed using ar oversized arch culvert. The site plan preserves the required 25-foot wide stream buffer except for the two roar' crossings. To compensate for the two proposed stream crossings, the applicant is proposing; restoration and enhancement of the stream buffer. The applicant proposes to plant native species in buffer areas disturbed by the road crossings. The plantings would increase plant community diversity and complexity within the stream corridors adjacent to the new crossings. Variance Criteria: 1. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification: The drainage ditch/stream runs east to west through the center of the entire site. Development of the s to would be severely compromised if the stream crossings were not allowed. The stream is thereforE- a special circumstance or condition of the subject property and the strict application of the Zoning Code i Board of Adjustment Minutes October 27, 1999 Page 6 would deprive the property owner of development potential and rights and privileges enjoyed byother I 9 P 9 J Y property owners in the vicinity and under the identical zoning classification. The project applicant has provided the following justification for the current road design: 1. The road forms a loop around the site and provides two separate access directions to each building, as desired/required by the Fire Marshal. Adequate and open site access to all buildings is a life safety issue, which has been addressed through the provision of this loop road. 2. The westerly stream crossing occurs at the development entry driveway along Talbot Road. This driveway is located directly across from the driveway serving the residential development on the west side of Talbot now under construction and is located to minimize traffic conflicts. Two separate driveways, each serving a separate segment of the site was not desired since the two new driveways would have been offset from the drive across Talbot approximately 100 feet or slightly more. These new driveways would have adversely effected the safe and smooth traffic flow in this area along Talbot Road, by increasing the number of driveways with driveway separation only slightly more than the minimum allowed. 3. The loop road provides safe on-site access to the common Recreation facility located in the northern site segment. Given the steep grade of the site, barrier free access to the Recreation Facility is provided by individual cars using the loop road. If this road were not available, residents would be required to access different parts of the site via Talbot Road,which would contribute to the congestion along Talbot Road. 4. The easterly stream crossing is not a true crossing and occurs at a poorly defined section between different stream segments. The crossing is located to minimize disruption of the existing stream and stream buffers. 5. Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments), located on the west side of Talbot Road,just south of this development was allowed a similar type road crossing across a small stream. The Zoning and use of the Springbrook property is identical to the zoning and use of this property. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated: The proposed road crossings would cross a stream that is actually a manmade drainage channel tha: directs seepage from a hillside spring across the site to a drainage ditch along Talbot Road S. on the west site boundary. The stream does not provide direct habitat for fish, so the installation of oversized culverts at the road crossings would not be materially detrimental to the stream habitat. Stormwater drainage from the roadway would be collected and routed to an on-site detention and water quality facility, avoiding direct discharge to the stream. The existing plant community along the stream is dominated by Himalayan Blackberries which has low value for habitat. The applicant's proposal to restore disturbed areas with native plantings would improve habitat values. The granting of a variance would not be detrimental or injurious to the subject site, to public welfare, or to property or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated: Road crossings of minor stream tributaries are common in developments with stream/drainage features, especially with requirements for traffic control and fire safety access needs (i.e. life safety issues). Board of Adjustment Minutes October 27, 1999 Page 7 Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments) located on the west side of Talbot Road, just south of the proposed development, was allowed a similar type road crossing. The City has approved stream crossings where it is necessary to provide adequate access and a crossing is the most viable alternative to develop a site. Therefore, the approval of a variance for the subject proposal would not constitute a grant of special privilege that is inconsistent with limitations on other uses and properties in the vicinity or zone in which the subject property is located. 4. That the approval as determined by the Board of Adjustment is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose: The two proposed stream crossings are the minimum number required to provide necessary access through the site. One of the crossings occurs at the entry driveway which is located to be aligned with the driveway serving the residential development on the west side of Talbot Road S. The easterly crossing may not be considered a true crossing as it is located at a poorly defined section between two stream segments. The two stream crossings have been located to minimize impacts to the existing stream habitat. Approval of the variance would be a minimal variance from code standards for the applicant to achieve their desired purpose of developing the subject site. Boardmember Wallace asked for testimony from those in favor of the application: There was no one wishing to speak. Boardmember Wallace asked for testimony from those opposed to the application: There was no opposition. Boardmember Wallace called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The public hearing was closed. DECISION: It was moved by BOARDMEMBER Evans and seconded by BOARDMEMBER Feighner to approve the variance as requested for LUA-99-136,SA-A,V,ECF based on the attached findings of fact and conclusions. ROLL CALL VOTE: Wallace-yes; Evans-yes; Guillen-yes; Feighner—yes. BOARDMEMBER WALLACE STATED: The variance is hereby granted as proposed and outlined in the findings of fact and conclusions. DATED this 27th day of October 1999. An appeal of the Board of Adjustment decision is governed by Title IV, Chapter 36, Section I, which requires that such appeal be filed with the Superior Court of Washington for King County within 21 days from the date of issuance of the decision. The land use decision is considered issued three (3) days after the City mails a written decision. The appeal period for this variance will end at 5:00 PM on November 21, 1999. Board of Adjustment Minutes October 27, 1999 Page 8 6. OLD BUSINESS: None 7. NEW BUSINESS: None 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None 9. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded to adjourn. Meeting adjourned. - (k) J W (lace Acting'Chairperson I BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF RENTON In Re: Normandy Ridge Variance No. LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The applicant requests a variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations to allow (2) street crossings to intrude into the required stream buffer. Section 4-4-130.C.4. restricts tree cutting and land clearing within twenty-five (25)feet of the ordinary high water mark of creeks. The site plan provides for the 25-foot wide buffer from the stream except for the two (2) road crossings. The westerly stream crossing occurs at the entry driveway to the proposed development off Talbot Road S. The second stream crossing is for the internal loop road and is located at the east end of the property. 2. The stream or drainage corridor on the site is an excavated ditch that flows through the center of the site in an east to west direction. The drainage ditch was excavated to convey overflow from a spring located at the toe of the slope along the east project site boundary. Flows from the ditch are released into the roadside ditch along Talbot Road S. Because the excavated ditch conveys "naturally occurring surface water" from the spring, it meets the criteria for designation as a stream. In addition, this stream meets the criteria for designation as a Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Type 5 Water (i.e. it does not provide direct habitat for fish and is less than 2 feet in width at the ordinary high water mark). The importance of this stream is in the protection of downstream aquatic resources and local water quality. 3. On August 11, 1999 Mr. Philip Schneider, Area Habitat Biologist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife visited the project site. Mr. Schneider concluded that the excavated ditch would be considered a stream for purposes of site development. Any proposed work within the ordinary high water mark of if s stream would require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), approved by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. For approval of a HPA, the applicant would need to demonstrate that the proposed road crossing(s) is t9 ie only reasonable location for the crossing in terms of public safety and local engineering requirements. It will also be important to show that the method of crossing and the overall impact of any fill placed waterward of the ordinary high water mark is the minimum necessary to complete the project. Typically a crossing of this type of stream (i.e. intermittent and without direct fish habitat) can be completed using an oversized at3h culvert. 4. The site plan preserves the required 25-foot wide stream buffer except for the two road crossings. To compensate for the two proposed stream crossings, the applicant is proposing restoration and enhancement of the stream buffer. The applicant proposes to plant native species in buffer areas disturbed by the road crossings. The plantings would increase plant community diversity and complexity within the stream corridors adjacent to the new crossings. CONCLUSIONS: FROM THESE FINDINGS OF FACT, THE BOARD MAKES THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSIONS: Development Regulations Section 4-9-250.B.5. — The Reviewing Official shall have authority to grant a variance upon making a determination in writing that the conditions specified below have been found to exist: 1) That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is four d to decision,findings.doc deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification: The drainage ditch/stream runs east to west through the center of the entire site. Development of the site would be severely compromised if the stream crossings were not allowed. The stream is therefore a special circumstance or condition of the subject property and the strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the property owner of development potential and rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under the identical zoning classification. The project applicant has provided the following justification for the current road design: 1 The road forms a loop around the site and provides two separate access directions to each building, as desired/required by the Fire Marshal. Adequate and open site access to all buildings is a life safety issue, which has been addressed through the provision of this loop road. 2 The westerly stream crossing occurs at the development entry driveway along Talbot Road. This driveway is located directly across from the driveway serving the residential development on the west side of Talbot now under construction and is located to minimize traffic conflicts. Two separate driveways, each serving a separate segment of the site was not desired since the two new driveways would have been offset from the drive across Talbot approximately 100 feet or slightly more. These new driveways would have adversely effected the safe and smooth traffic flow in this area along Talbot Road, by increasing the number of driveways with driveway separation only slightly more than the minimum allowed. 3 The loop road provides safe on-site access to the common Recreation facility located in the northern site segment. Given the steep grade of the site, barrier free access to the Recreation Facility is provided by individual cars using the loop road. If this road were not available, residents would be required to access different parts of the site via Talbot Road, which would contribute to the congestion along Talbot Road. 4 The easterly stream crossing is not a true crossing and occurs at a poorly defined section betweei different stream segments. The crossing is located to minimize disruption of the existing stream and stream buffers. 5 Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments), located on the west side of Talbot Road,just south of tt is development was allowed a similar type road crossing across a small stream. The Zoning and u-,e of the Springbrook property is identical to the zoning and use of this property. 2) That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated: The proposed road crossings would cross a stream that is actually a manmade drainage channel that directs seepage from a hillside spring across the site to a drainage ditch along Talbot Road S. on the west site boundary. The stream does not provide direct habitat for fish, so the installation of oversized culverts at the road crossings would not be materially detrimental to the stream habitat. Stormwater drainage from the roadway would be collected and routed to an on-site detention and water quality facility, avoiding direct discharge to the stream. The existing plant community along the stream is dominated by Himalayan Blackberries which has low value for habitat. The applicant's proposal to restore disturbed areas with native plantings would improve habitat values. The granting of a variance would not be detrimental or injurious to the subject site, to public welfare, or to property or improvements in the vicinity. 3) That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated: Road crossings of minor stream tributaries are common in developments with stream/drainage features, especially with requirements for traffic control and fire safety access needs (i.e. life safety iss les). Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments) located on the west side of Talbot Road, just south c' the proposed development, was allowed a similar type road crossing. The City has approved stream cros sings decision,findings.doc H where it is necessary to provide adequate access and a crossing is the most viable alternative to develop a site. Therefore, the approval of a variance for the subject proposal would not constitute a grant of special privilege that is inconsistent with limitations on other uses and properties in the vicinity or zone in which the subject property is located. 4) That the approval as determined by the Board of Adjustment is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose: The two proposed stream crossings are the minimum number required to provide necessary access through the site. One of the crossings occurs at the entry driveway which is located to be aligned with the driveway serving the residential development on the west side of Talbot Road S. The easterly crossing may not be considered a true crossing as it is located at a poorly defined section between two stream segments. The two stream crossings have been located to minimize impacts to the existing stream habitat. Approval of the variance would be a minimal variance from code standards for the applicant to achieve their desired purpose of developing the subject site. DECISION: FROM THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS, THE BOARD ENTERS THE FOLLOWING DECISION: 1. The variance is hereby granted from the City of Renton Development Regulations Section 4-9-250.B.5. to allow (2) street crossings to intrude into the required stream buffer. The variance approval is contingent. upon approval of the submitted site plan. DATED this 27th day of October, 1999. An appeal of the Board of Adjustment decision is governed by Title IV, Chapter 36, Section I, which require s that such appeal be filed with the Superior Court of Washington for King County within 21 days from the date pf issuance of the decision. The land use decision is considered issued three (3) days after a written decJ mailed by the City. The appeal period for this variance will end at 5:00 PM on November 21, 1999. ---<-------.4.—\.It i AAPZ ,,i— -9 - ( t--- ,a, , 1 Greg i en George Feighne L- \-- 410 -t/t4-. t Teri Briere Jim Jacques a .. /Q------- 7419Seilk J W lace Jim Jolly Ralp an; (. j4Y----lL---) I decision,(ndings.doc BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF RENTON In Re: Hazen High School Auditorium Height Variance File No. LUA-99-137, SA-A, V-B FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Renton School District is proposing to perform renovations to Hazen High School, located in the Residential — 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. The renovations include the addition of a 21,239 square foot auditorium at the southeast corner of the existing building. 2. The applicant is requesting a variance from section 4-2-110A of the City's Development Regulations, which restrict building height in the R-8 zone to 30 feet and 2-stories. The proposed auditorium addition would have a height of 38 feet, 8 feet greater than the maximum permitted height, only where necessitated by the function of the building. 3. The proposed building footprint would have a setback of 40 feet from the nearest property line (Hoquiam Avenue NE on the site's eastern boundary). There would be an additional setback of 16 feet (a 56-foot total) from this property line for the portions of the building proposed to exceed the height limitation. 4. Pursuant to the definitions contained in section 4-11-020, building height is measured from the average finished grade to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof. 5. In addition to the requested variance, the approval of the Administrative Site Plan and the completion of the Environmental (SEPA) Review portions of the land use application are necessary. CONCLUSIONS: FROM THESE FINDINGS OF FACT, THE BOARD MAKES THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSIONS: 1. City Code section 4-9-250B5 states the conditions under which a variance may be granted. Those conditions are listed below with discussion following about each variance. A. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification: The applicant maintains the development of an auditorium is essential for the continuing use of the property as a secondary school. Currently, the existing high school lacks the facilities necessary for large event functions and is forced to either utilize the gymnasium or hold events off-site. While the development of an auditorium would alleviate this hardship, the applicant contends the height limitation of the R-8 zone precludes the construction of such an addition. In order to accommodate the fundamental aspects of the auditorium use, a minimum height of 38 feet would be necessary for the proper function of the stage and seating areas. Without the essential overhead space, the stage lighting, sets, props, and other necessary equipment would not function properly and would possibly interfere with performance activities. The applicant also maintains that the strict interpretation of the zoning code would deprive them of the right to expand an existing secondary school in a manner that is necessary for the campus. In addition, the location of the secondary school within the R-8 zoning designation can be seen as special circumstances applicable only to the subject site. While the height limitation of the zone is clearly applicable to residential development, the standard is not appropriate for campus or school development. B. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated: The applicant contends that potential impacts that would result from the proposed addition would be minimal to surrounding properties in the vicinity of the subject site, especially when considering the existing building as well as the location and design of the addition. The footprint of the auditorium addition would have an approximate setback of 40 feet from the nearest property line (Hoquiam Avenue NE). The portions of the building proposed to exceed the 30-foot height limitation would have an even greater setback from this street frontage (approximately 56 feet). In addition, the applicant has stated that"much care has gone into coordinating the massing of the new addition with the existing building so that it ties into the existing school in mass and material." Since portions of the existing building currently exceed the 30-foot height maximum, the addition would not be out of proportion to the existing buildings. Although the addition would intensify the building mass along the site's eastern boundary, the development would be sufficiently setback and appropriately designed to reduce avoid adverse visual impacts to adjacent properties. Furthermore, the approval of the variance would not set a precedent for the residential development in the surrounding area and R-8 zoning designation. Therefore, the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. f C. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the i limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated: The properties in the vicinity of the subject site which are designated R-8 are mostly I developed with single family residences. By virtue of student populations, the location of secondary schools are distributed in a regional manner. Therefore, there are no other uses within this area that would be able to justify the need for a 680-seat auditorium with a I' building height of 38 feet. Because the granting of the variance would not be applicable to residential development, it would not be considered a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. D. That the approval as determined by the Board of Adjustment is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose: The applicant maintains that the requested 38-foot height is the minimum height under which the auditorium stage and seating functions could be accommodated. The applicant further contends that the additional 8 feet in height is proposed only for the portions of the addition where it is absolutely necessary for the required auditorium functions and would be applied only to the parapet area of the building above the stage and seating areas. Therefore, the approval of the variance would be the minimal variance necessary for the addition of an auditorium to the existing high school campus. III DECISION: FROM THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS, THE BOARD ENTERS THE FOLLOWING DECISION: I I 1. The variance is hereby granted from the Development Regulations, section 4-2-110A of the I City of Renton Development Regulations, allowing the proposed auditorium addition for Hazen High School at a height of 38 feet. The Variance approval is contingent upon the approval of the Administrative Site Plan portion of the land use application. DATED this 27th day of October, 1999. i' An appeal of the Board of Adjustment decision is governed by Title IV, Chapter 36, Section I, which requires that such appeal be filed with the Superior Court of Washington for King County within 21 days from the date of issuance of the decision. The land use decision is considered issued three (3)days after a written decision is mailed by the City. The appeal period for this variance will end at 5:00 PM on November 21, 1999. -\. CZik.k...tielr•--) ..• reg u Ile George Feigh er i " 41n4 f4 Teri Briere Jim Jacques c i 1 tit----- illyiNI— J Vallace Jim Jolly Ralp ans If I I I dl CITY OF RENTON . 1. � Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator October 28, 1999 1 CERTIFIED MAIL NO.Z433 709 829 Mr. Paul Casey, A.I.A. The Casey Group Architects 10116—36th Avenue Court SW, Suite#109 Lakewood,WA 98499 SUBJECT: Normandy Ridge Project No. LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Dear Mr. Casey: The Renton Board of Adjustment, at its regular meeting on October 27, 1999, granted your request for a variance from City of Renton Development Regulations Section 4-9-250/B.5 to allow two (2) street crossings to intrude into the required stream buffer. The variance approval is contingent upon approval of the submitted site plan. This is the only variance granted under this application and all other provisions of the Renton Municipal Code will apply. An Appeal of the Board's decision is governed by Title IV, Chapter 36, Section I, which requires that such appeal be filed with the Superior Court of Washington for King County within twenty one (21) days from the date of issuance of the decision. The date on which a land use decision is issued is considered to be three days after a written decision is mailed by the City. The appeal period for this variance decision will end at 5:00 PM on November 21, 1999. The Board of Adjustment decision will become final on November 21 d Wish to focanetbel4Ira c) appealed to Superior Court. i a\so ing services l 11 If you have any questions, please 1-,--` s Addrel dditlonal seNlces' we can return th•s Q Addressee For the Renton Board of Ac d sEN�ER' S,andla�dtoba reverse°tthlstorrnsothat d0esnot 2' R estricte Denver I Complete Ytem on the back it space items 3,d y dress or o the mb ❑OomP n er. 'm letu name an d of the mellpiece, the adicl d the date H print io Y°u' to the trout below, , / • A pr card iMs torm on the ma�lpie was delivered an k/Q�ber �r '`'\ 0 Attach t Requested om the ari�cle 4a Al{lcle N J✓1 a? pente%Fieturn AeCe'p ill show to wh l'!l lfie� l v 2�� m 0 W rte Receipt w �(herC Peter Rosen olbe Return ervice Type � sure• livered. ss tp'. 4b• K Project Manager c- g Article Nu" re ed p1p egister"• P EW ;,OD .ise Pain Casey , Architects ❑Exp e . orM• ► cc: Mr. & Mrs. Ervin Yoder, a Mr• Group SW O a` Mr. & Mrs. G.Warren D e Case 36th Je Ct• �56 • • •• line Pole iy if}agues 116 �IA �►� �, :. SEB, Inc. w 10 e rt1Jy g4g9 �; � '. ,r`L Mr. Jack Martz/Party of F o Sint of 0 9 8. fee • • 1 a Lakew e / Z B (print Nam G Dom ;C�c F' tr 5.-eceived y iii W Ad 1 re a or Age 102595-gg_5.0223 BOAORANT 6 S�t` ( ��. 1055 Sout cr.g, �� A e per 1g94 J t� 3g1i,Dec eTI P ....onal,20%post consumer Z 433 709 829 US Postal Service Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided. Do not use for I""nternational Mail(See reverse) Street Ca..1(-71116p ber0 e/ ,_l os is&Sta &ZIP Cg7y7e CL 1S !� . Postage �� $ Certified Fee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Lr) — m Return Receipt Showing to Whom&Date Delivered Q, Return Receipt Showing to Whom, < Date,&Addressee's Address O TOTAL Postage&Fees $ tb C./ Postmark or Date j BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF RENTON In Re: Normandy Ridge Variance No. LUA-99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The applicant requests a variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations to allow (2) street crossings to intrude into the required stream buffer. Section 4-4-130.C.4. restricts tree cutting and land clearing within twenty-five (25) feet of the ordinary high water mark of creeks. The site plan provides for the 25-foot wide buffer from the stream except for the two (2) road crossings. The westerly stream crossing occurs at the entry driveway to the proposed development off Talbot Road S. The second stream crossing is for the internal loop road and is located at the east end of the property. 2. The stream or drainage corridor on the site is an excavated ditch that flows through the center of the site in an east to west direction. The drainage ditch was excavated to convey overflow from a spring located at the toe of the slope along the east project site boundary. Flows from the ditch are released into the roadside ditch along Talbot Road S. Because the excavated ditch conveys "naturally occurring surface water" from the spring, it meets the criteria for designation as a stream. In addition, this stream meets the criteria for designation as a Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Type 5 Water (i.e. it does not provide direct habitat for fish and is less than 2 feet in width at the ordinary high water mark). The importance of this stream is in the protection of downstream aquatic resources and local water quality. 3. On August 11, 1999 Mr. Philip Schneider, Area Habitat Biologist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife visited the project site. Mr. Schneider concluded that the excavated ditch would be considered stream for purposes of site development. Any proposed work within the ordinary high water mark of this stream would require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), approved by the Department of Fish and Wildlife For approval of a HPA, the applicant would need to demonstrate that the proposed road crossing(s) is the only reasonable location for the crossing in terms of public safety and local engineering requirements. It will also be important to show that the method of crossing and the overall impact of any fill placed waterward of the ordinary high water mark is the minimum necessary to complete the project. Typically a crossing of this type of stream (i.e. intermittent and without direct fish habitat) can be completed using an oversized arch culvert. 4. The site plan preserves the required 25-foot wide stream buffer except for the two road crossings. To compensate for the two proposed stream crossings, the applicant is proposing restoration and enhancement of the stream buffer. The applicant proposes to plant native species in buffer areas disturbed by the road crossings. The plantings would increase plant community diversity and complexity within the stream corridors adjacent to the new crossings. CONCLUSIONS: FROM THESE FINDINGS OF FACT, THE BOARD MAKES THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSIONS: Development Regulations Section 4-9-250.B.5. — The Reviewing Official shall have authority to grant a variance upon making a determination in writing that the conditions specified below have been found to exist: 1) That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to decision,findings.doc deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification: The drainage ditch/stream runs east to west through the center of the entire site. Development of the site would be severely compromised if the stream crossings were not allowed. The stream is therefore a special circumstance or condition of the subject property and the strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the property owner of development potential and rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under the identical zoning classification. The project applicant has provided the following justification for the current road design: 1 The road forms a loop around the site and provides two separate access directions to each building, as desired/required by the Fire Marshal. Adequate and open site access to all buildings is a life safety issue, which has been addressed through the provision of this loop road. 2 The westerly stream crossing occurs at the development entry driveway along Talbot Road. This driveway is located directly across from the driveway serving the residential development on the west side of Talbot now under construction and is located to minimize traffic conflicts. Two separate driveways, each serving a separate segment of the site was not desired since the two new driveways would have been offset from the drive across Talbot approximately 100 feet or slightly more. These new driveways would have adversely effected the safe and smooth traffic flow in this area along Talbot Road, by increasing the number of driveways with driveway separation only slightly more than the minimum allowed. 3 The loop road provides safe on-site access to the common Recreation facility located in the northern site segment. Given the steep grade of the site, barrier free access to the Recreation Facility is provided by individual cars using the loop road. If this road were not available, residents would be required to access different parts of the site via Talbot Road, which would contribute to the congestion along Talbot Road. 4 The easterly stream crossing is not a true crossing and occurs at a poorly defined section between different stream segments. The crossing is located to minimize disruption of the existing stream and stream buffers. 5 Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments), located on the west side of Talbot Road,just south of this development was allowed a similar type road crossing across a small stream. The Zoning and use of the Springbrook property is identical to the zoning and use of this property. 2) That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated: The proposed road crossings would cross a stream that is actually a manmade drainage channel that directs seepage from a hillside spring across the site to a drainage ditch along Talbot Road S. on the west site boundary. The stream does not provide direct habitat for fish, so the installation of oversized culverts at the road crossings would not be materially detrimental to the stream habitat. Stormwater drainage from the roadway would be collected and routed to an on-site detention and water quality facility, avoiding direct discharge to the stream. The existing plant community along the stream is dominated by Himalayan Blackberries which has low value for habitat. The applicant's proposal to restore disturbed areas With native plantings would improve habitat values. The granting of a variance would not be detrimental or injurious to the subject site, to public welfare, or to property or improvements in the vicinity. 3) That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated: Road crossings of minor stream tributaries are common in developments with stream/drainage features, especially with requirements for traffic control and fire safety access needs (i.e. life safety issues). Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments) located on the west side of Talbot Road, just south of the proposed development, was allowed a similar type road crossing. The City has approved stream crossings decision,Bndings.doc where it is necessary to provide adequate access and a crossing is the most viable alternative to develop a site. Therefore, the approval of a variance for the subject proposal would not constitute a grant of special privilege that is inconsistent with limitations on other uses and properties in the vicinity or zone in which the subject property is located. 4) That the approval as determined by the Board of Adjustment is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose: The two proposed stream crossings are the minimum number required to provide necessary access through the site. One of the crossings occurs at the entry driveway which is located to be aligned with the driveway serving the residential development on the west side of Talbot Road S. The easterly crossing may not be considered a true crossing as it is located at a poorly defined section between two stream segments. The two stream crossings have been located to minimize impacts to the existing stream habitat. Approval of the variance would be a minimal variance from code standards for the applicant to achieve their desired purpose of developing the subject site. DECISION: FROM THE FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS, THE BOARD ENTERS THE FOLLOWING DECISION: 1. The variance is hereby granted from the City of Renton Development Regulations Section 4-9-250.B.5. to allow (2) street crossings to intrude into the required stream buffer. The variance approval is contingent upon approval of the submitted site plan. DATED this 27th day of October, 1999. An appeal of the Board of Adjustment decision is governed by Title IV, Chapter 36, Section I, which requires that such appeal be filed with the Superior Court of Washington for King County within 21 days from the date of issuance of the decision. The land use decision is considered issued three (3) days after a written decision is mailed by the City. The appeal period for this variance will end at 5:00 PM on November 21, 1999. L, ft,t& Greg i en George Feighne L- Teri Briere Jim Jacques 4// -bsen-t- J W�Ilace Jim Jolly it://VX RalP fans decision,findings.doc PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 27 , 1999 7 : 30 PM BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT A CENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (June 23, 1999) 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED: • Hazen High School Renovation Variance LUA-99-137, SA-A,V Location: 1101 Hoquiam Avenue NE • Normandy Ridge Variance LUA-99-136,SA-A,V,ECF Location: 4914 Talbot Road South 6. When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to the podium and state your name and address for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 8. NEW BUSINESS 9. ANNOUNCEMENTS 10. ADJOURNMENT ii BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 41' STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 27, 1999 A. BACKGROUND APPLICANT: SEB, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Normandy Ridge APPLICATION NO.: LUA99-136, SA-A, V-B, ECF SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Request for a variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations (Section 4-4-130) to allow two (2) street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required stream buffer. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4914 Talbot Road S. .._- ._— . ®'� .. ---�- `. •,• ' c. it ® ----y-°-- �- `t 'ffi yMes'. M» a e i 9 ) -.z n� 5` —-_ I 11&'* sere-8'L .Ri a ,`'o- �0. ' 1 T 4, tips , iif - % r y JI ��YY L ♦•'Rat. �p�' �'T�'�p i. 'f X rd ��'.. . ..y. -' w Y• f t �_ E 3_ 3'ft ® Y,. ,ate I '' I a dy, �, 1�IORMANDY -/. _cao� ?1 RIDGE " ,.:' _A 1 .41'. �n.i.e A.n.L 1t d. 1' 111 BOA Staff Report.doc 1 14 p' BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT NORMANDY I E LUA-99-136,ECF,SA-A,V-B OCTOBER 27,1999 Page 2 of 4 B. BACKGROUND 1. Environmental Review and Administrative Land Use Approval The proposal requires SEPA environmental review and administrative site plan review in addition to the requested variance. These permit reviews will be conducted subsequent to the subject variance. 2. Variance Requested The applicant requests a variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations to allow (2) street crossings to intrude into the required stream buffer. Section 4-4-130.C.4. restricts tree cutting and land clearing within twenty-five (25) feet of the ordinary high water mark of creeks. The site plan provides for the 25-foot wide buffer from the stream except for the two (2) road crossings. The westerly stream crossing occurs at the entry driveway to the proposed development off Talbot Road S. The second stream crossing is for the internal loop road and is located at the east end of the property. There was some question initially whether the drainage ditch on the site was considered a stream subject to the City's regulations. A wetlands evaluation and stream buffer report was prepared for the subject property by Habitat Technologies (report dated September 22, 1999). The report concludes that the drainage ditch on the site meets criteria for a stream and therefore is subject to the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations. The following description of the drainage ditch/stream is summarized from the report. The stream or drainage corridor on the site is an excavated ditch that flows through the center of the site in an east to west direction. The drainage ditch was excavated to convey overflow from a spring located at the toe of the slope along the east project site boundary. Flows from the ditch are released into the roadside ditch along Talbot Road S. Because the excavated ditch conveys "naturally occurring surface water" from the spring, it meets the criteria for designation as a stream. In addition, this stream meets the criteria for designation as a Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Type 5 Water (i.e. it does not provide direct habitat for fish and is less than 2 feet in width at the ordinary high water mark). The importance of this stream is in the protection of downstream aquatic resources and local water quality. On August 11, 1999 Mr. Philip Schneider, Area Habitat Biologist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife visited the project site. Mr. Schneider concluded that the excavated ditch would be considered a stream for purposes of site development. Any proposed work within the ordinary high water mark of this stream would require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), approved by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. For approval of a HPA, the applicant would need to demonstrate that the proposed road crossing(s) is the only reasonable location for the crossing in terms of public safety and local engineering requirements. It will also be important to show that the method of crossing and the overall impact of any fill placed waterward of the ordinary high water mark is the minimum necessary to complete the project. Typically a crossing of this type of stream (i.e. intermittent and without direct fish habitat) can be completed using an oversized arch culvert. The site plan preserves the required 25-foot wide stream buffer except for the two road crossings. To compensate for the two proposed stream crossings, the applicant is proposing restoration and enhancement of the stream buffer. The applicant proposes to plant native species in buffer areas disturbed by the road crossings. The plantings would increase plant community diversity and complexity within the stream corridors adjacent to the new crossings. BOA Staff Report.doc BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT NORMANDY I E LUA-99-136,ECF,SA-A,V-B OCTOBER 27, 1999 Page 3 of 4 C. VARIANCE DECISION CRITERIA Development Regulations Section 4-9-250.B.5. — The Reviewing Official shall have authority to grant a variance upon making a determination in writing that the conditions specified below have been found to exist: 1. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, and the strict application of the Zoning Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical zone classification: The drainage ditch/stream runs east to west through the center of the entire site. Development of the site would be severely compromised if the stream crossings were not allowed. The stream is therefore a special circumstance or condition of the subject property and the strict application of the Zoning Code would deprive the property owner of development potential and rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under the identical zoning classification. The project applicant has provided the following justification for the current road design: 1. The road forms a loop around the site and provides two separate access directions to each building, as desired/required by the Fire Marshal. Adequate and open site access to all buildings is a life safety issue, which has been addressed through the provision of this loop road. 2. The westerly stream crossing occurs at the development entry driveway along Talbot Road. This driveway is located directly across from the driveway serving the residential development on the west side of Talbot now under construction and is located to minimize traffic conflicts. Two separate driveways, each serving a separate segment of the site was not desired since the two new driveways would have been offset from the drive across Talbot approximately 100 feet or slightly more. These new driveways would have adversely effected the safe and smooth traffic flow in this area along Talbot Road, by increasing the number of driveways with driveway separation only slightly more than the minimum allowed. 3. The loop road provides safe on-site access to the common Recreation facility located in the northern site segment. Given the steep grade of the site, barrier free access to the Recreation Facility is provided by individual cars using the loop road. If this road were not available, residents would be required to access different parts of the site via Talbot Road, which would contribute to the congestion along Talbot Road. 4. The easterly stream crossing is not a true crossing and occurs at a poorly defined section between different stream segments. The crossing is located to minimize disruption of the existing stream and stream buffers. 5. Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments), located on the west side of Talbot Road,just south of this development was allowed a similar type road crossing across a small stream. The Zoning and use of the Springbrook property is identical to the zoning and use of this property. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated: The proposed road crossings would cross a stream that is actually a manmade drainage channel that directs seepage from a hillside spring across the site to a drainage ditch along Talbot Road S. on the west site boundary. The stream does not provide direct habitat for fish, so the installation of oversized culverts at the road crossings would not be materially detrimental BOA Staff Report.doc BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT NORMANDY E LUA-99-136,ECF,SA-A,V-B OCTOBER 27, 1999 Page 4 of 4 to the stream habitat. Stormwater drainage from the roadway would be collected and routed to an on-site detention and water quality facility, avoiding direct discharge to the stream. The existing plant community along the stream is dominated by Himalayan Blackberries which has low value for habitat. The applicant's proposal to restore disturbed areas with native plantings would improve habitat values. The granting of a variance would not be detrimental or injurious to the subject site, to public welfare, or to property or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated: Road crossings of minor stream tributaries are common in developments with stream/drainage features, especially with requirements for traffic control and fire safety access needs (i.e. life safety issues). Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments) located on the west side of Talbot Road, just south of the proposed development, was allowed a similar type road crossing. The City has approved stream crossings where it is necessary to provide adequate access and a crossing is the most viable alternative to develop a site. Therefore, the approval of a variance for the subject proposal would not constitute a grant of special privilege that is inconsistent with limitations on other uses and properties in the vicinity or zone in which the subject property is located. 4. That the approval as determined by the Board of Adjustment is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose: The two proposed stream crossings are the minimum number required to provide necessary access through the site. One of the crossings occurs at the entry driveway which is located to be aligned with the driveway serving the residential development on the west side of Talbot Road S. The easterly crossing may not be considered a true crossing as it is located at a poorly defined section between two stream segments. The two stream crossings have been located to minimize impacts to the existing stream habitat. Approval of the variance would be a minimal variance from code standards for the applicant to achieve their desired purpose of developing the subject site. D. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested variance from Section 4-4-130.C.4. of City of Renton Development Regulations. The variance allows two (2) road crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required stream buffer. The variance approval shall be contingent upon approval of the submitted site plan. Transmitted this 20th day of October, 1999 to the applicant and owner: Stephen Berg SEB, Inc. 240 Stadium Way S. Tacoma,WA. 98402 Ervin & Bernice Yoder G.Warren & R. Elaine Diamond 1501 S. Eagle Drive 4914 Talbot Road S. Renton, WA. 98055 Renton,WA. 98055 BOA Staff Report.doc RENTON BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Board of Adjustment at its regular meeting in the Council Chambers, on the seventh floor of City Hall, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA, on October 27, 1999 at 7:30 PM to consider the following variances: HAZEN HIGH SCHOOL RENOVATION VARIANCE LUA-99-137,SA-A,V-B Project requires the approval of a height variance. A parking modification request is also included to exceed the maximum number of permitted parking stalls. Location: 1101 Hoquiam Ave. NE. NORMANDY RIDGE VARIANCE LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Request for a variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance to allow the street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. Location: 4914 Talbot Road So. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Development Services Division, Sixth Floor, Renton City Hall. All interested persons to said petitions are invited to be present at the Public Hearing to express their opinions. Publication Date: October 15, 1999 Account No. 51067 BOAPUB City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: post ce COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 1999 APPLICANT: SEB, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: Peter Rosen PROJECT TITLE: NORMANDY RIDGE WORK ORDER NO: 78584 LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South SITE AREA: 7.98 acres 1 BUILDING AREA(gross): 112,360 sq.ft. 7 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related / townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats.Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage space.; and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2.048 sq. ft. The City does not regula* category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands an I compensatory mitigation is not required. A creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. T e proposed street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance is required to allow the street to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer • A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessar.' Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Services Health Public Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet Estimate 76.36 police calls for service annually, based on the number and type of resid nti dwelling units. Many of these estimated calls will occur during the construction phase , an will be incidents such as Trespass , Commercial Burglary and Theft of building materials and tools. To help prevent these crimes , the site will need to have temporary , security fencin in place and security lighting. Post the correct No Trespass signs along the fencing (refe the attached flier with the correct wording). Other properties along Talbot Road experien. crime problems such as burglary, theft, trespass and even a drive-by shooting at one of the construction trailers . Other sites felt the need to use the services of off-duty police a X6XXAMEMAAMEEAMMMOMOitt private security companies for on-site patrols of the area wh it was being built. All building materials and tools will need to be kept locked up when in use , and any construction site office trailer will need to have metal doors with dead-b' locks , metal bars over the windows , and all office machinery will need to have the serial recorded to aid in recovery in the event of theft. On some of the proposed units , there are windows adjacent to the entry doors . These wndo will either need to have reinforced glass in place , or an application of security film Otherwise, it would be too easy for a burglar to break the glass , put his hand through the window, unlock the front door and gain entry to individual units . Each door to each unit need to he solid core wood nr metal _ with dead-holt locks and peepholes for security c ' t XdDatoN,VaiWidttAOREAtt residents. Each unit will need to have the address cl ear iy . of a color that contrasts strongly withihe color of the unit, and at least 6" in height , aid responding emergency personnel . Since this development has one entry/exit , recomnens installation of a security gate to limit access only to residents and guests. We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impac areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. /o / aciAl g( 8- Si ature of Direct° or Aut rized Representative Date routing Rev. I Trespass sivtaAEecbtlaznartio BUSINESS En f o r c e m e n t WATCH Quite often, business owners and managers are faced with crimes that occur on the property after the businesses are closed and the employees have gone home. Some of the crimes that occur are burglary, vandalism, graffiti, trespassing, drug dealing and robbery in the parking lots. There is a way for police and business owners to discourage these types of crimes from taking place on private property, and that is by enforcing the City of Renton's Municipal Trespass Code 6-18-10. In order for police to be able to make an arrest for Trespass, business owners or managers need to purchase signs and display them in conspicuous areas on the property. These signs need to include the following language: 1. Indicate that the subject property is privately owned and; 2. Uninvited presence on the specified property is not permitted during the hours the business is closed, and; 3. Violators will be subject to criminal sanctions pursuant to Renton City Code 6-18-10. MOST IMPORTANTLY-THE SIGNS SHOULD BE CONSPICUOUS FROM ALL POSSIBLE POINTS OF ENTRY TO THE PROPERTY,AND ALSO BE PLACED ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGS. This way when a suspect is arrested, he/she will not be able to claim as a defense that he/she did not know he or she was trespassing. EXAMPLES FOR TRESPASS SIGNS: NO TRESPASSING NO TRESPASSING This is private property. Persons without specific No Trespassing after business hours business are not authorized to be on the premises between (insert specific times). Anyone on the the hours of(insert the hours your business is closed). premises after business hours is subject to Violators are subject to arrest and/or citation for criminal arrest and/or citation for Criminal Trespass pursuant to Renton City Code #6-18-10.. Trespass and/or impoundment of vehicle. Per Renton City Code #6-18-10. By enforcing the Trespass Ordinance, business owners and police will be sending a message to criminals that they are not allowed to conduct criminal activity on the property. In making arrests for Trespass, police may be preventing the more serious crimes from taking place. <CY r,,t, COURTESY OF RENTON POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME PREVENTION UNIT 235 - 2571 I City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Pourte.s COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 1999 ilia, APPLICANT: SEB, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: Peter Rosen PROJECT TITLE: NORMANDY RIDGE WORK ORDER NO: 78584 Gt 1- " LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South G P,4 SITE AREA: 7.98 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): 112,360 sq.ft. "ks4 R SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot-Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2.048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance is required to allow the street to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants ;'� Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet . 14,000 Feet 1 V/iViV) ' V I)`1"4 47/ 1)--- 4- 1'Cjil L -144- Z'a—) . ,o B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS �� L �/ 3 51 3� �/� / d r 40 lr � s� �/ ,(2e Job , Gvm� L( 33 a 5a -cined 7�/6d ft W060/ 27 yycc-t C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS \`:*-_/L< (4--T..0 �i7,,C� G /61 �Le�1O, We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable irnpac, areas w ere additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. -VAI'dO'Lt / 6/Y /7 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date routing Rev.1 City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:Cpve m Se Nicer COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 1999 APPLICANT: SEB, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: Peter Rosen PROJECT TITLE: NORMANDY RIDGE WORK ORDER NO: 78584 LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South SITE AREA: 7.98 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): 112,360 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2.048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance is required to allow the street to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals _ Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS pc:,Ll o a C?Eo t'EC_r,' I c RE-Co J p. ri We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impac areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this prppoosal. G AG ✓'-��`C�-�' /0 / 8 9 7 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date routing Rev.1 City of Re....,.. Department of Planning/Building/Public W U,Ks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:6./CAM AL DeueicrommAICOMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 1999 APPLICANT: SEB, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: Peter Rosen PROJECT TITLE: NORMANDY RIDGE WORK ORDER NO: 78584 LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South SITE AREA: 7.98 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): 112,360 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2.048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance is required to allow the street to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 4 B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS O eO L U i 155u0, . © rvp- 5 !fit 1 c—'t c el-Ftivry)nib • !� C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable irnpact areas •- . •••' -. '• •rmation is needed to properly assess this proposal. gri' / 1011099 Signature o.i erector or Ald orize• 'epresentative Date routing 1 Rev.1 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1999 TO: PETER ROSEN FROM: NEIL WATTS SUBJECT: TALBOT ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT SITE PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS I have reviewed the project submittal for the above listed project, and have the following comments at this time: SEWER • There is an existing 8" sewer main in Talbot Road available for this site. Most of the internal sewer system will be private, but constructed to City main line standards. A portion of the main may be required to be public to provide future service east of the site. This would required a minimum 15 foot easement, which would extend to the easterly property line. The main will not be required beyond the developed portion of the site. • System Development Charges (to be paid to the City, for Soos Creek Sewer District) will be required for this project (approximately $1835 per unit). WATER • A water main loop extension will be required for this project. To meet the fire flow requirement of 3000 gpm set by the Fire Department, a minimum 10"main must be provided through the site. Easements will be required for all on-site water mains and hydrants (minimum of 15 feet in width). • Backflow prevention devices will be required for irrigation and fire protection systems. • Depending on fire flow requirements, additional hydrants will be required. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($510 per unit). There are SAD ($0.048 per sq.ft) and Latecomers Fees ($0.0262 per sq.ft.) also due upon development of this site. 11/4/99 1 PAGE 2 DRAINAGE • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report has been submitted with the site plan application for this project. The conceptual drainage plan includes provisions for detention and water quality treatment in compliance with the requirements of the KCSWM. • Due to downstream flooding problems in this drainage basin, staff recommends a SEPA condition for extra detention for the on-site drainage system. The recommendation will for detention through the 100 year storm event with a 30% safety factor. It appears that an HPA permit is also required for this project, which will include this additional detention standard as a permit condition. The conceptual drainage plan submitted with this application complies with this additional detention requirement. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($0.129 per sq.ft. of new impervious surface) EROSION CONTROL MEASURES • We recommend the following conditions for this short plat (for both preliminary plat development and future building permits for the individual lots): 1. The applicant shall install a silt fence along the downslope perimeter of the area that is to be disturbed. The silt fence shall be in place before clearing and grading is j initiated, and shall be constructed in conformance with the specifications presented in Section D.4.3.1 of the King County Surface Water Design Manual, Appendix D. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 2. Shallow drainage swales shall be constructed to intercept surface water flow and route the flow away from the construction area to a stabilized discharge point. Vegetation growth shall be established in the ditch by seeding or placing sod. Depending on site grades, it may be necessary to line the ditch with rock to protect the ditch from erosion and to reduce flow rates. The design and construction or drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in Section 4.4.1 of the SWDM. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. This will be required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 3. The project contractor shall perform daily review and maintenance of all erosion and sedimentation control measures at the site during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building construction. 4. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the project Engineer or record to the public works inspector for the preliminary short plat construction. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the short plat. 11/4/99 PAGE 3 STREET IMPROVEMENTS • Talbot Road South adjacent to the site must be improved with curb, gutters, sidewalks, street lighting, new paving from the edge of existing pavement to the new gutter, and drainage improvements for the new street improvements. • This zone allows for condominium style development (i.e. no separate platted lots), but must meet the development standards of a shadow plat. The shadow plat provided demonstrates the equivalent of standard right-of-way widths through the project, with a interconnected vehicular and pedestrian system. The project provides equivalent street improvements internal to the site, including adequate pavement width, curbs, drainage, sidewalks and turnarounds for dead- end street sections. The standard street design requirements for this type of project has been modified to allow for sidewalks along one side of the street only, pavement widths of 20 feet where parking is precluded by driveways on both sides of the street, and 28 feet of pavement with parking limited to one side of the street where parallel parking is feasible. • Street lighting must be provided on the private street sections, meeting or exceeding the lighting levels established in City Code. This system will be privately owned and maintained. • Traffic mitigation fees of$35,762.25 will be required prior to issuance of building permits for this project. GENERAL • All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a registered Civil Engineer. The construction permit application must include a itemized cost estimate for these improvements. The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5% of the first $100,000 of the estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,00 but less than $200,000, and 3% of anything over $200,000. Half of this fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional fees for water service related expenses. I r *._ , . . • ,,..42,11*,ft".... .....,._-..,:,_-,....4.g. .7-:- - !•mil.':^ :.':.y • tilFR - No gas • ,..,..„.... � .. � ..,�..,. PQ` w�w�Mw.AY./v .Yws w!•if! ��., .. ._ `MM TTI � llI ; ' 10. FE • ....,. Project Name N)O✓It/taL( ,A(C n. Project Address triq t titicl RA.,ac( Scp«iLi Contact Person 5tt,oltcil Scvej } 56 a , Jug , Address 24 c itcrdrtcwl Watt S , Tacouu' WA qg) /( Z Phone Number (25 3) - 4 2 - 0800 • Permit Number L U A -cjC - !3 (o Project Description 3 c..vvu r w1u f t, awn f1, (,A - /y) cif cVe/0?ti4-t Got,e4 cla is/,,A. ttcL-c r . Land Use Type: Method_of Calculation: Tow4t &,j, (2 D Residential TE Trip Generation Manual 0 Retail 0 Traffic Study 5•o6i c, r4i 0 Non-retail 0 Other 5/alit Fawi</c/ - (i ,)5 , • Calculation: k):-t u uu ei vela c dedy t vip 7 (g 3) (5,gb) — ( 1)(t. 55 ) — 4'7G At i75 r4A d f7 Irlf - (L-J76. V3) ( t75) = 35,762- 25 Transportation Mitigation Fee: f 7(,2. '/ Calculated by: Aid ti(,�C' Date: io l gI Account Number: to5. 5Qq. 3)80, 70, 00. Date of Payment 1 City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: f yt Fr utA fi01,1 COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 — APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 9 9 APPLICANT: SEB, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: Peter Ross ro— �,RE - PROJECT TITLE: NORMANDY RIDGE WORK ORDER NO: 78584 O . , 'T,o, raU'— LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South 1i 0 7 1999 SITE AREA: 7.98 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): 112, /q/t. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats.Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2.048 sq. ft. The City does not regu late category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance i required to allow the street to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code)COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing _ Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation _ Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation _ Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet — j � � fir. 4 B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS �E n� f , C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS i n-Q-A.C< eA LLj Jo L'S 7 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impac areas where additional information is needed to properly assess his proposal. /0 ?Iq Signature of Director or Authorized Re re tative Date 9 Rep re Rev.1 411. O + A CM CITY OF RENTON Y.P),NTO FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU MEMORANDUM DATE: August 3, 1999 TO: Laureen Nicolay, Planner FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal ol Jd-- SUBJECT: Talbot Road Townhouses, 4900 Block Talbot Rd. S Fire Department Comments: 1. The preliminary Fire flow is 3000 GPM which requires one fire hydrant within 150 feet of the building and two additional hydrants within 300 feet of the building. L.00 r 1',. 5:1,0 , 2. Secondary access roadway is required. Bollards cannot be used in the to control traffic. An approved gate or chain and padlock are allowed to restrict traffic on the emergency access. All roadway 20 feet in width are required to be marked as Fire Lane, No Parking. 3. A fire mitigation fee of$ is required based on $388.00 per unit. 03z 20-1.co 4. All buildings two stories and five or more units are required to be sprinklered. Central Station monitored fire alarms systems are required in all buildings by City Ordinace. Separate plans and permits are required for the sprinkler and fire alarm systems. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. I City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Piiah ReUI-PW _tar,.-COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6AIMLOPMENT SERVICE CITY OF REN FUN APPLICANT: SEB, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: Peter Rosen PROJECT TITLE: NORMANDY RIDGE WORK ORDER NO: 78584 OCT 0 8 1999 LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South RECEIVE p SITE AREA: 7.98 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): 112,360 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spat:es and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats. There aro. five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2.048 sq. ft. The Citydoes not regul'ite category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq.ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands pnd compensatory mitigation is not required. A creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. he proposed street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance is required to allow the street to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Informaton Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS S-eQ cepcwtJ& 11/V w10 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impac areas where additional inform tiqn i4,needed t properly assess this proposal. ate( ' 1 iq Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date routing Rev.1 City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Sl>.r{t.e. LatsickoStrtommENTs DUE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 1999 APPLICANT: SEB, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: Peter Rosen PROJECT TITLE: NORMANDY RIDGE WORK ORDER NO: 78584 LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South _ SITE AREA: 7.98 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): 112,360 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats.Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats. There ant: five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq. ft. to 2.048 sq. ft. The City does not regulate category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands . nd compensatory mitigation is not required. A creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. The proposed street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance is required to allow the street to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Informal on Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation _ Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS sefavalc me Ivl o We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable imileci areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. COzti to/il%q Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date routing Re 1( City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:� Oltil r� COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 1999 APPLICATION NO: LUA-99-136,SA-A, -B,ECF •�' • DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 1999 APPLICANT: SEB, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: Peter Rosen PROJECT TITLE: NORMANDY RIDGE WORK ORDER NO: 78584 LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South SITE AREA: 7.98 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): 112,360 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed; with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats. There art five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site, ranging in size from 475 sq.ft. to 2.048 sq. ft. The Citydoes not regul tte category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq. ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands id compensatory mitigation is not required. A creek bisects the site and the proposal includes a 25-foot stream buffer. he proposed street crosses the stream in 2 locations. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance is required to allow the street to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Informal 3n Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare — Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS ,.-;.< evvlp- We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date routing Rei 10, CITY>,OF RENTON DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION LIST OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS within 300 feet of the subject site PROJECT NAME: 1OI;L1-1 i.1©`' DC APPLICATION NO: LU+; • 99 - - \ V-6, EL1 The following is a list of property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. The Development Services Division will notify these individuals of the proposed development. NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL ��.. 1� �-- NUMBER Tc' 1t�vTfT�E, Ct tY OF RE:\ can , RECEr: ) (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) (Continued) NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER � Applicant Certification e I, C"t�'v C• \ • �% "1J , hereby certify that the above list(s) of adjacent property (Print Name) owners and their addresses were obtained from: CI City of Renton Technical Services Records X. Title Company Records King County Assessors Records Signed Date 1 i 1-5ii i (Applicant) NOTARY ATTESTED: ubs ribed and sworn before me, a Notary Pu lic, in and for the S to of Washington, residing at on the / y of , 19 �' . Sign (Notary Public) ****For City of Renton Use**** CERTIFICATION OF MAILING I,S11,41.141 IC Se .er , hereby certify that notices of the proposed appli :tri�i` t'„y , (City Employee) L.1%it each listed property owner on tO .."1 . 1 1' STATE OF WASHINGTON ' COMMISSION EXPIRES. Signed Ak,lla�.40., V-• Date: (0 .-1' al'- JUfE 2J,2G C NOTARY ATTE T: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing at ,r4-0-y7 on the /r4 rk day of ey- , 19 9 j. Signed �`" ",,-) 4.�r.I . -''j :77�-tt-(/ n. _ lislprop.doc REV 07/98 -MARILYN KAMCHEFF '' MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 2 • 8) ' ' Situs: 18428 SPRINGBROC ) S, RENTON WA 98055 Lot Area: 200,812 APN: 312305-9087-08 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: 1,760 County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: SF Use: SFR Doc#: Cnty Use: 101 Owners: CAMPEN LILA M Rooms: 5 Bedrms: 3 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: 1 Half: Yr Built: 1932 Mail: 4908 TALBOT RD S; RENTON WA 98055-6209 C004 Phone: 425/25f. 41t 9) Situs: 4907 TALBOT RD S, RENTON WA 98055-6210 C004 Lot Area: 32,400 APN: 312305-9091-02 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/01/1998 09/29/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: 4,160 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $236,000 Zoning: PNR Use: SFR Doc#: 9810012370 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: SHERIE& CAROL CORP Rooms: 11 Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: 3 Half: Yr Built: 1966 Mail: 4907 TALBOT RD S; RENTON WA 98055-6210 C004 Phone: 10) Situs: 718 S 50TH ST, RENTON WA 98055-6342 CO26 Lot Area: 14,850 APN: 312305-9093-00 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/22/1992 09/14/1992 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,720 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $150,000 Zoning: SF Use: SFR Doc#: 9209221215 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: MOORE PAUL M Rooms: 6 Bedrms: 4 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: 2 Half: Yr Built: 1966 Mail: PO BOX 5985; KENT WA 98064-5985 B009 Phone: 11) Situs: , RENTON WA 98055 Lot Area: 14,850 APN: 312305-9099-04 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: ` County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: SFL Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: Cnty Use: 901 Owners: COOKS HENRY E Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 712 S 50TH ST; RENTON WA 98055-6342 CO26 Phone: 12) Situs: 700 S 50TH ST, RENTON WA 98055-6342 CO26 Lot Area: 17,325 APN: 312305-9100-01 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/16/1988 12/16/1988 Bldg/Liv Area: 3,260 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $139,000 Zoning: SFL Use: SFR Doc#: 8812160550 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BILSKI B LEE/HW Rooms: 9 Bedrms: 6 Map Pg: 686-B2 ROXANNE H Full Baths: 3 Half: Yr Built: 1964 Mail: 700 SOUTH 50TH ST; RENTON WA 98055-6342 CO26 Phone: 425/221 •2( 13) Situs: 712 S 50TH ST, RENTON WA 98055-6342 CO26 Lot Area: 14,850 APN: 312305-9104-07 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: 2,600 County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: SF Use: SFR Doc#: Cnty Use: 101 Owners: COOKS HENRY E Rooms: 7 Bedrms: 3 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: 3 Half: Yr Built: 1966 Mail: 712 S 50TH ST; RENTON WA 98055-6342 CO26 Phone: 14) Situs: 18621 96TH AVE S, RENTON WA 98055 Lot Area: 48,787 APN: 312305-9122-05 Rec/Sale Dt: 07/30/1997 07/24/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: 2,300 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $206,000 Zoning: PNR Use: SFR Doc#: 9707300436 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BURNSTEAD CONST CO Rooms: 7 Bedrms: 4 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: 1 Half: Yr Built: 1929 Mail: 1215 120TH AV NE; BELLEVUE WA 98005-2135 C076 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Pac : 15) ' ' Situs: 709 S 50TH ST, RENZ _._ WA 98055-6341 CO26 Lot Area: 43,560 APN: 312305-9150-00 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/04/1985 10/04/1985 Bldg/Liv Area: 3,480 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $115,000 Zoning: SF Use: SFR Doc#: 8510040400 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: FINK LAWRENCE E Rooms: 8 Bedrms: 3 Map Pg: 803-G4 SALLY J Full Baths: 2 Half: 1 Yr Built: 1963 Mail: 709 S 50TH ST; RENTON WA 98055-6341 CO26 Phone: 425/235 189 16) Situs: 401 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 3,565 APN: 808335-0010-00-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/23/1998 03/18/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $165,000 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9803231608 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: MAYBERRY GREGG S ETAL Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 401 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 17) Situs: 401 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 3,565 APN: 808335-0010-00-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/23/1998 03/18/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $165,000 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9803231608 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: MAYBERRY GREGG S ETAL Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 401 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 18) Situs: 401 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 3,565 APN: 808335-0010-00-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/23/1998 03/18/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $165,000 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9803231608 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: MAYBERRY GREGG S ETAL Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 401 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 19) Situs: 407 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0020-08-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/20/1996 12/06/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $153,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9612201206 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: HENNING VIRGINIA M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 407 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 20) Situs: 407 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0020-08-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/20/1996 12/06/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $153,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9612201206 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: HENNING VIRGINIA M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 407 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 21) Situs: 407 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0020-08-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/20/1996 12/06/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $153,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9612201206 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: HENNING VIRGINIA M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 407 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Pag, 3 • • 22) . Situs: 415 S 51ST CT, RENT( VA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0030-06-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/28/1997 02/18/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $154,000 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9702281586 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BROCK LAURA J Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 415 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 (No Mail) Phone: 23) Situs: 415 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0030-06-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/28/1997 02/18/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $154,000 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9702281586 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: BROCK LAURA J Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 415 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 24) Situs: 415 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0030-06-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/28/1997 02/18/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $154,000 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9702281586 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BROCK LAURA J Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 415 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 25) Situs: 421 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0040-04-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/01/1996 09/27/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: ` County: KING,WA Sale Price: $166,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9610010729 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: NAKAHARA LORI F Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 421 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 26) Situs: 421 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0040-04-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/01/1996 09/27/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $166,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9610010729 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: NAKAHARA LORI F Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 421 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 27) Situs: 421 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0040-04-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/01/1996 09/27/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $166,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9610010729 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: NAKAHARA LORI F Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 421 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 28) Situs: 427 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0050-01-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/26/1996 04/18/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $146,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9604261400 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: LOUISE WAYNE A ETAL Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 427 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: o ' 29) . Situs: 427 S 51ST CT, RENT, VA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0050-01-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/26/1996 04/18/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $146,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9604261400 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: LOUISE WAYNE A ETAL Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 427 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 30) Situs: 427 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0050-01-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/26/1996 04/18/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $146,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9604261400 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: LOUISE WAYNE A ETAL Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 427 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 31) Situs: 435 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0060-09-000 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: Cnty Use: 101 Owners: GYORKI ZOLTAN Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 EVA Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 435 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 32) Situs: 435 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0060-09-001 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: ' County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: Cnty Use: 901 Owners: GYORKI ZOLTAN Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 EVA Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 435 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 33) Situs: 435 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,700 APN: 808335-0060-09-002 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: Cnty Use: 101 Owners: GYORKI ZOLTAN Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 EVA Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 435 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 34) Situs: 441 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,748 APN: 808335-0070-07-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/17/1998 08/13/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $185,000 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9808171271 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: JEFFERY NANCY J Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 441 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 35) Situs: 441 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,748 APN: 808335-0070-07-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/17/1998 08/13/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $185,000 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9808171271 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: JEFFERY NANCY J Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 441 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: o 36) Situs: 441 S 51ST CT, RENT VA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 2,748 APN: 808335-0070-07-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/17/1998 08/13/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $185,000 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9808171271 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: JEFFERY NANCY J Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 441 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 37) Situs: 449 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 2,895 APN: 808335-0080-05-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/22/1996 04/02/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9604220641 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: FOSTER JANICE M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 27715 48TH AV S; AUBURN WA 98001-1121 C042 Phone: 38) Situs: 449 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 2,895 APN: 808335-0080-05-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/22/1996 04/02/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9604220641 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: FOSTER JANICE M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 27715 48TH AV S; AUBURN WA 98001-1121 C042 Phone: 39) Situs: 449 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 2,895 APN: 808335-0080-05-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/22/1996 04/02/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: ' County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9604220641 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: FOSTER JANICE M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 27715 48TH AV S; AUBURN WA 98001-1121 C042 Phone: 40) Situs: 455 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 3,167 APN: 808335-0090-03-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/19/1996 09/26/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9612191571 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: MC KEE MARGARET A Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 455 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 41) Situs: 455 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 3,167 1 APN: 808335-0090-03-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/19/1996 09/26/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9612191571 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: MC KEE MARGARET A Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 455 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: 42) Situs: 455 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Lot Area: 3,167 APN: 808335-0090-03-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/19/1996 09/26/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9612191571 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: MC KEE MARGARET A Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 455 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6363 C004 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page 6 43) Situs: 501 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 3,562 APN: 808335-0100-01-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/27/1997 08/25/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $171,500 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9708271863 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: HALL THEO B Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 NANCY M Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 630 S 32ND PL; RENTON WA 98055-5094 C085 Phone: 44) Situs: 501 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 3,562 APN: 808335-0100-01-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/27/1997 08/25/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $171,500 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9708271863 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: HALL THEO B Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 NANCY M Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 630 S 32ND PL; RENTON WA 98055-5094 C085 Phone: 45) Situs: 501 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 3,562 APN: 808335-0100-01-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/27/1997 08/25/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $171,500 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9708271863 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: HALL THEO B Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 NANCY M Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 630 S 32ND PL; RENTON WA 98055-5094 C085 Phone: 46) Situs: 507 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,898 APN: 808335-0110-09-000 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: ` County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: Cnty Use: 101 Owners: NASON JACK B Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 507 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 47) Situs: 507 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,898 APN: 808335-0110-09-001 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: Cnty Use: 901 Owners: NASON JACK B Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 507 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 48) Situs: 507 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,898 APN: 808335-0110-09-002 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: Cnty Use: 101 Owners: NASON JACK B Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 507 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 49) Situs: 515 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,485 APN: 808335-0120-07-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 06/11/1996 05/31/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $176,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9606111601 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: HAIGHT ROSE M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 515 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: — © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 'c 50) , , Lot Area: 3,485 Situs: 515 S 51ST CT, RENT( 1A 98055-6364 C004 9 god Aria Area: APN: 808335-0120-07-001 ReclSale Dt: 06/11/1996 05/31/ County: KING,WA Sale Price: $176,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9606111601 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: HAIGHT ROSE M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 515 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 51) Situs: 515 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,485 APN: 808335-0120-07-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 06111/1996 05/3111996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $176,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9606111601 Cnty Use: 101 Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: Owners: HAIGHT ROSE M Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 515 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: Lot Area: 4,435 52)APN: Situs: 521 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Bldg/Liv Area: 808335-0130-05-000 Rec/Sale Dt: Sale Price: Zoning: R24 County: KING,WA Cnty Use: 101 Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 101 Owners: BROWN JANICE M Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 521 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: Lot Area: 4,435 53)APN: Situs: 521 S 51 ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Bldg/Liv Area: 808335 0130-05-001 Rec/Sale Dt: Sale Price: Zoning: R24 County: KING,WA Cnty Use: 901 Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 901 Owners: BROWN JANICE M Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 521 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: Lot Area: 4,435 54)APN: Situs:80 521 S 51ST CT,RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Bldg/Liv Area: 8335-0130-05-002 Rec/Sale Dt: Sale Price: Zoning: R24 County: KING,WA Cnty Use: 101 Use: SFR Doc#: 686-B Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: Owners: BROWN JANICE M Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 521 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 55) S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 : 3,745 APN: 80Situs:8335-0529140-03-000 Rec/SaleC004 Dt: 11/27/1995 11/22/1995 Lot Bldg/LivArea A. County: KING,WA Sale Price: $160,590 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9511271315 Cnty Use: 101 2 Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: Owners: THOMPSON MICHAEL W Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 529 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 56) Situs: 529 S 51ST CT,RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,74 APN: 808335-0140-03-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 11/27/1995 11/22/1995 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $160,590 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9511271315 Cnty Use: 901 686 3� Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: Owners: THOMPSON MICHAEL W Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Phone: Mail: 529 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 — al © 1996 Win2Data 2000 57) ' Situs: 529 S 51ST CT, RENT_ ._ _NA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,745 APN: 808335-0140-03-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 11/27/1995 11/22/1995 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $160,590 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9511271315 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: THOMPSON MICHAEL W Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 529 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 58) Situs: 535 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,812 APN: 808335-0150-00-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/30/1996 09/26/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $174,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9609301540 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BLUE LORIS A Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 535 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 59) Situs: 535 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,812 APN: 808335-0150-00-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/30/1996 09/26/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $174,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9609301540 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: BLUE LORIS A Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 535 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 60) Situs: 535 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,812 APN: 808335-0150-00-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/30/1996 09/26/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: ' County: KING,WA Sale Price: $174,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9609301540 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BLUE LORIS A Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-82 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 535 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 61) Situs: 541 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 2,674 APN: 808335-0160-08-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 11/07/1995 10/26/1995 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $177,634 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9511071526 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: SAYRE AMY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 800; RENTON WA 98057-0800 B008 Phone: 62) Situs: 541 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 2,674 APN: 808335-0160-08-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 11/07/1995 10/26/1995 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $177,634 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9511071526 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: SAYRE AMY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 800; RENTON WA 98057-0800 B008 Phone: 63) Situs: 541 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 2,674 APN: 808335-0160-08-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 11/07/1995 10/26/1995 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $177,634 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9511071526 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: SAYRE AMY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: PO BOX 800; RENTON WA 98057-0800 B008 Phone: — © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: )c 64) " ' Situs: 549 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 3,316 APN: 808335-0170-06-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 06/28/1996 06/26/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $162,990 Zoning: R-24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9606282664 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: ARTHUR JOHN Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 27319 139TH PL SE; KENT WA 98042-9005 CO29 Phone: 65) Situs: 549 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 3,316 APN: 808335-0170-06-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 06/28/1996 06/26/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $162,990 Zoning: R-24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9606282664 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: ARTHUR JOHN Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 27319 139TH PL SE; KENT WA 98042-9005 CO29 Phone: 66) Situs: 549 S 51ST CT, WA Lot Area: 3,316 APN: 808335-0170-06-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 06/28/1996 06/26/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $162,990 Zoning: R-24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9606282664 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: ARTHUR JOHN Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-82 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 27319 139TH PL SE; KENT WA 98042-9005 CO29 Phone: 67) Situs: 551 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,416 APN: 808335-0180-04-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/26/1997 02/18/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: ' County: KING,WA Sale Price: $171,500 Zoning: R24 I Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9702260927 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BLAIR WAYNE C Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 UAH Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 551 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 (No Mail) Phone: 68) Situs: 551 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,416 APN: 808335-0180-04-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/26/1997 02/18/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $171,500 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9702260927 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: BLAIR WAYNE C Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 UAH Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 551 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 69) Situs: 551 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,416 APN: 808335-0180-04-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/26/1997 02/18/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $171,500 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9702260927 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BLAIR WAYNE C Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 UAH Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 551 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 70) Situs: 566 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,068 APN: 808335-0190-02-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 01/15/1997 01/13/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $176,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9701150970 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: DAVIS THOMAS M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 LINDA L Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: l Mail: 566 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 (No Mail) Phone: I ©1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 1 c 71) Situs: 566 S 51ST CT, RENT_ _ NA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,068 APN: 808335-0190-02-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 01/15/1997 01/13/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $176,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9701150970 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: DAVIS THOMAS M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 LINDA L Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 566 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 72) Situs: 566 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 3,068 APN: 808335-0190-02-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 01/15/1997 01/13/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $176,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9701150970 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: DAVIS THOMAS M Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 LINDA L Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 566 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 73) Situs: 564 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0200-00-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/20/1996 08/12/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $159,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9608200440 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BAGOST MARTIN P Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 MARY K Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 564 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 74) Situs: 564 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0200-00-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/20/1996 08/12/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: ' County: KING,WA Sale Price: $159,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9608200440 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: BAGOST MARTIN P Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 MARY K Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 564 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 75) Situs: 564 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0200-00-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/20/1996 08/12/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $159,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9608200440 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BAGOST MARTIN P Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 MARY K Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 564 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 76) Situs: 562 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0210-08-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/28/1997 03/25/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $174,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9703281844 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: LAWRENCE MICHAEL W Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 EILEEN A Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 562 S51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055 Phone: 77) Situs: 562 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0210-08-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/28/1997 03/25/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $174,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9703281844 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: LAWRENCE MICHAEL W Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 EILEEN A Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 562 S51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 1 . 78) Situs: 562 S 51ST CT, RENTG,. .JA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 • APN: 808335-0210-08-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/28/1997 03/25/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: 1 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $174,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9703281844 Cnty Use: 101 • Owners: LAWRENCE MICHAEL W Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 EILEEN A Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 562 S51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055 Phone: 79) Situs: 556 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0220-06-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/02/1998 09/29/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $175,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9810021135 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: DAHLQUIST DONALD C Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 556 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 80) Situs: 556 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0220-06-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/02/1998 09/29/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $175,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9810021135 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: DAHLQUIST DONALD C Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 556 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 81) Situs: 556 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0220-06-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/02/1998 09/29/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: s County: KING,WA Sale Price: $175,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9810021135 Cnty Use: 101 . Owners: DAHLQUIST DONALD C Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 556 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 82) Situs: 554 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0230-04-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/20/1996 09/17/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $159,990 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9609200478 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BOSWELL GAYLE D Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 554 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 83) Situs: 554 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0230-04-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/20/1996 09/17/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $159,990 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9609200478 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: BOSWELL GAYLE D Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 554 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 84) Situs: 554 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,712 APN: 808335-0230-04-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/20/1996 09/17/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $159,990 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9609200478 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: BOSWELL GAYLE D Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 554 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: — © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page 1'. . 85) Situs: 552 S 51ST CT, RENTON vvA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,746 APN: 808335-0240-02-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/17/1996 10/09/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $172,890 Zoning: R24 Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9610170750 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: GULLINGSRUD GORDON R Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 VIRGINIA L Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 552 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 86) Situs: 552 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,746 APN: 808335-0240-02-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/17/1996 10/09/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $172,890 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9610170750 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: GULLINGSRUD GORDON R Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 VIRGINIA L Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 552 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 87) Situs: 552 S 51ST CT, RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Lot Area: 2,746 APN: 808335-0240-02-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/17/1996 10/09/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $172,890 Zoning: R24 Use: SFR Doc#: 9610170750 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: GULLINGSRUD GORDON R Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-C2 VIRGINIA L Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 552 S 51ST CT; RENTON WA 98055-6364 C004 Phone: 88) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 84,071 APN: 808335-0260-07-000 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/23/1997 10/21/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: ' County: KING,WA Sale Price: $50,000 Zoning: R24 I Use: MULTIPLE USES Doc#: 9710230728 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: MARTZ JACK W Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 SALLY A Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 18831 102ND AV SE; RENTON WA 98055-6312 CO26 Phone: 89) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 84,071 APN: 808335-0260-07-001 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/23/1997 10/21/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $50,000 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9710230728 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: MARTZ JACK W Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 SALLY A Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 18831 102ND AV SE; RENTON WA 98055-6312 CO26 Phone: 90) Situs: , WA Lot Area: 84,071 APN: 808335-0260-07-002 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/23/1997 10/21/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $50,000 Zoning: R24 Use: RESIDENTIAL LOT Doc#: 9710230728 Cnty Use: 901 Owners: MARTZ JACK W Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 SALLY A Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 18831 102ND AV SE; RENTON WA 98055-6312 CO26 Phone: 91) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 101, WA Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0010-07 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/18/1996 08/30/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,161 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $122,500 Zoning: Use: SFR Doc#: 9609181145 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: MC GAUGHEY LAUNA M Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 401 SW 41ST ST; RENTON WA 98055-4926 C005 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 13 c . 92) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 201, REIN,'ON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0020-05 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: 1,133 County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: Cnty Use: 122 Owners: NEIRBY JOAN B Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#A201; RENTON WA 98055-6386 C004 Phone: 93) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 301, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0030-03 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/30/1996 04/27/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,195 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $137,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9604302441 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: STANDLEY RONALD E Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#A301; RENTON WA 98055-6387 C004 Phone: 425/235- 57 94) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 102, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0040-01 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/28/1997 04/24/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,179 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $119,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9704280711 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: REONAL ALVIN C Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#A102; RENTON WA 98055-6366 C004 Phone: 95) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 202, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0050-08 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/28/1997 03/25/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,171 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $123,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9703281842 Cnty Use: 129 1 Owners: MARSHALL DONALD C Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 GLORIA J Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#A202; RENTON WA 98055-6386 C004 Phone: 96) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 302, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0060-06 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/27/1996 08/02/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,303 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $136,690 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9608271028 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: MINGO CLARENCE N Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 JOSANNE Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#A302; RENTON WA 98055-6387 C004 (No Mail) Phone: 97) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 303, WA Lot Area: 64,743 ' APN: 808338-0070-04 Rec/Sale Dt: 09/03/1996 08/27/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,406 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $144,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9609031266 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: PATTERSON SAMUEL L Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 EARNESTINE Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 6310 STONERIDGE MALL RD#D-104; PLEASANTON CA 94588-8042 C095 Phone: 98) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 304, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0080-02 Rec/Sale Dt: 05/01/1996 04/27/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 985 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $100,590 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9605011114 Cnty Use: 129 ' Owners: BLIER TONI M ETAL Rooms: Bedrms: 1 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#A304; RENTON WA 98055-6387 C004 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 4 . 99) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 101, REiv I UN WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0090-00 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: 1,179 County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: Cnty Use: 122 Owners: BATTLE SCOTT D Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#B101; RENTON WA 98055-6367 C004 Phone: 425/430 173 100) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 201, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0100-08 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/31/1996 12/31/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,171 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $127,900 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9612312641 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: HYNDS JOHN P Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 KATHERINE L Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#B201; RENTON WA 98055-6388 C004 Phone: 101) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 301, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0110-06 Rec/Sale Dt: 06/18/1996 05/29/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,303 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $139,950 Zoning: Use: SFR Doc#: 9606181032 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: JACKSON JAMES Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 MELLISA B Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#B301; RENTON WA 98055-6389 C004 Phone: 102) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 102, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0120-04 Rec/Sale Dt: 07/16/1996 07/09/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,161 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $123,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9607160927 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: MATSUMURA LORI J Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#B102; RENTON WA 98055-6367 C004 Phone: 103) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 202, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0130-02 Rec/Sale Dt: 07/26/1996 07/23/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,133 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $128,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9607261050 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: BARBER CHARLENE R Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 SS 51ST CT#B202; RENTON WA 98055-6388 C004 Phone: 104) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 302, WA Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0140-00 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/31/1996 12/24/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,195 County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9612312119 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: HAGERUP ERVIN E Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 PATRICIA J TRUS Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: PO BOX 210014; AUKE BAY AK 99821-0014 B001 Phone: 907/789 '51 105) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 303, WA Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0150-07 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/08/1997 10/03/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: 985 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $103,500 Zoning: PNR Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9710081368 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: HAMMER KARL E Rooms: Bedrms: 1 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 2152 N 112TH ST#301; SEATTLE WA 98133-8598 C042 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 5 . 106) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 304, REIN ION WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0160-05 Rec/Sale Dt: 07/25/1996 07/17/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,406 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $145,000 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9607251647 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: FOULKS MICHAEL R Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#B304; RENTON WA 98055-6389 C004 Phone: 107) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 101, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0170-03 Rec/Sale Dt: 12/10/1996 11/25/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,161 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $118,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9612101053 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: ALCANTARA DENISE M Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#C101; RENTON WA 98055-6368 C004 Phone: 108) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 201, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0180-01 Rec/Sale Dt: 08/09/1996 08/02/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,133 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $128,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9608090484 Cnty Use: 129 ' Owners: LOUI ROXANNE N K Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#C201; RENTON WA 98055-6390 C004 Phone: 109) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 301, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0190-09 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/30/1997 04/25/1997 Bldg/Liv Area: '1,195 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $132,990 Zoning: Use: SFR Doc#: 9704302525 Cnty Use: 101 Owners: MAYNARD NIKKI Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#301; RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Phone: 110) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 102, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0200-07 Rec/Sale Dt: 10/30/1998 10/26/1998 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,179 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $129,900 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9810304501 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: JONES CELIA A Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#C102; RENTON WA 98055-6368 C004 Phone: 111) Situs: , WA Lot Area: APN: 808338-0201-06 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/28/1996 02/22/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $128,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9602280862 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: NEIRBY JOAN B Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 6916 128TH PL SE; BELLEVUE WA 98006-4062 C006 Phone: 112) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 202, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0210-05 Rec/Sale Dt: 11/26/1996 11/25/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,171 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $128,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9611260729 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: LUTZ EDWIN C Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#EC-202; RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: 6 . 113) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 302, REN,,,N WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0220-03 Rec/Sale Dt: 07/30/1996 07/24/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,303 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $139,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9607300764 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: BULLEN REBECCA R Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#C302; RENTON WA 98055-6391 C004 Phone: 114) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 303, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0230-01 Rec/Sale Dt: 04/29/1999 Bldg/Liv Area: 1,406 County: KING,WA Sale Price: $142,000 Zoning: PNR Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9904303242 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: AWS SHANNON Rooms: Bedrms: 2 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#C303; RENTON WA 98055-6391 C004 Phone: 115) Situs: 440 S 51ST CT 304, RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Lot Area: 64,743 APN: 808338-0240-09 Rec/Sale Dt: Bldg/Liv Area: 985 County: KING,WA Sale Price: Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: Cnty Use: 122 Owners: BOWLING SARA B Rooms: Bedrms: 1 Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: 1996 Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#C 304; RENTON WA 98055-6365 C004 Phone: 425/430- 14 116) Situs: , WA Lot Area: APN: 808338-2101-03 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/29/1996 03/25/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: ' County: KING,WA Sale Price: $123,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9603291416 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: BATTLE SCOTT D Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 7356 W LAKE SAMMAMISH PKWY NE; REDMOND WA 98052-4340 C041 Phone: 117) Situs: , WA Lot Area: APN: 808338-2303-09 Rec/Sale Dt: 02/27/1996 02/20/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $98,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9602271020 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: SIEBERSMA TIMOTHY Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#B303; RENTON WA 98055-6389 C004 Phone: 118) Situs: , WA Lot Area: APN: 808338-2304-08 Rec/Sale Dt: 03/08/1996 03/06/1996 Bldg/Liv Area: County: KING,WA Sale Price: $98,990 Zoning: Use: CONDOMINIUM Doc#: 9603082028 Cnty Use: 129 Owners: BOWLING SARA B Rooms: Bedrms: Map Pg: 686-B2 Full Baths: Half: Yr Built: Mail: 440 S 51ST CT#C304; RENTON WA 98055-6391 C004 Phone: © 1996 Win2Data 2000 Page: "7 i > r �I:C� 7Stat t . APN...,, .: _.:�.... .. ...:: .. ,;< Dyrgel's ;;. ,;:: ;.�:.: #property Add3ess ,;;..... �VI�:�.fiddass . ;:. .......; ..Nta .. tY ;. a 1Mai1 Z,F.� 3. 312305-9022-06 WRIGHT VICK TRUST 4827 TALBOT RD S 330 SW 43RD ST#K413 IRENTON WA 98055 , 2 312305-9023-05 SPRINGBROOK LLC 2821 NORTHUP WAY#250 LBELLEVUE WA 98004 3 312305-9037-09 BURNSTEAD CONST CO 5017 TALBOT RD S 1215 120TH AVE NE,#201 BELLEVUE WA 98005 4 312305-9038-08 CAMPEN LILA M TRUST -4908 TALBOT RD S 4908 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 5 312305-9048-06 CAMPEN LILA M TRUST 18430 96TH AVE S 4908 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 6 312305-9049-05 BUTTON Al 715 S 50TH ST RENTON WA I98055 7 312305-9053-08 BURNSTEAD CONST CO 1215 120TH AVE NE,#201 'BELLEVUE WA 98005 8 312305-9087-08 CAMPEN LILA M 18428 SPRINGBROOK RD 4908 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 _ 9 312305-9091-02 SHERIE&CAROL CORP 4907 TALBOT RD S 4907 TALBOT RD S RENTON WA 98055 10 312305-9093-00 MOORE PAUL M 718 S 50TH ST PO BOX 5985 KENT WA 98064 11 312305-9099-04 COOKS HENRY E 712 S 50TH ST RENTON WA 98055 12 312305-9100-01 BILSKI B LEE/HW 700 S 50TH ST 700 SOUTH 50TH ST RENTON WA 98055 13 312305-9104-07 COOKS HENRY E 712 S 50TH ST 712 S 50TH ST RENTON WA 98055 14 312305-9122-05 BURNSTEAD CONST CO 18621 96TH AVE S 1215 120TH AV NE BELLEVUE WA 98005 is 312305-9150-00 FINK LAWRENCE E 709 S 50TH ST 709 S 50TH ST RENTON WA 98055 16 808335-0010-00-000 MAYBERRY GREGG S ETAL 401 S 51ST CT 401 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 17 808335-0010-00-001 MAYBERRY GREGG S ETAL 401 S 51ST CT 401 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 18 808335-0010-00-002 MAYBERRY GREGG S ETAL 401 S 51ST CT 401 S 51ST CT RENTON WA_ 98055 19 808335-0020-08-000 HENNING VIRGINIA M 407 S 51ST CT 407 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 20 808335-0020-08-001 HENNING VIRGINIA M 407 S 51ST CT 407 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 21 808335-0020-08-002 HENNING VIRGINIA M 407 S 51ST CT 407 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 1 22 808335-0030-06-000 BROCK LAURA J 415 S 51ST CT 415 S 51ST CT .RENTON WA 98055 23 808335-0030-06-001 BROCK LAURA J 415 S 51ST CT 415 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 24 808335-0030-06-002 BROCK LAURA J 415 S 51ST CT 415 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 25 808335-0040-04-000 NAKAHARA LORI F 421 S 51ST CT 421 S 51ST CT RENTON WA f98055 26 808335-0040-04-001 NAKAHARA LORI F 421 S 51ST CT 421 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 27 808335-0040-04-002 NAKAHARA LORI F 421 S 51ST CT 421 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 28 808335-0050-01-000 LOUISE WAYNE A ETAL 427 S 51ST CT 427 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 29 808335-0050-01-001 LOUISE WAYNE A ETAL 427 S 51ST CT 427 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 30 808335-0050-01-002 LOUISE WAYNE A ETAL 427 S 51ST CT 427 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 31 808335-0060-09-000 GYORKI ZOLTAN 435 S 51ST CT 435 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 32 808335-0060-09-001 GYORKI ZOLTAN 435 S 51ST CT 435 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 33 808335-0060-09-002 GYORKI ZOLTAN 435 S 51ST CT 435 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 34 808335-0070-07-000 JEFFERY NANCY J 441 S 51ST CT 441 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 35 808335-0070-07-001 JEFFERY NANCY J 441 S 51ST CT 441 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 36 808335-0070-07-002 JEFFERY NANCY J 441 S 51ST CT 441 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 37 808335-0080-05-000 FOSTER JANICE M 449 S 51ST CT 27715 48TH AV S AUBURN WA 98001 38 808335-0080-05-001 FOSTER JANICE M 449 S 51ST CT 27715 48TH AV S AUBURN WA 98001 14 Ena33S nnRn11ri12II? .rr TFR IAAI-«F AA -449 C" T CT 2771-554WT1i AV S -AUBURN WA aann1 � : i IS lP • r s I C . fate Matt Z P:.. ..::...:. ;. ... ..... .. .,. _MaiLAdd es . . Via .:.::::.::.. .:..:. APN cnnrners .;:. .:Property Adds;''.: :... ... ;. ,.., : tv.; ... ... _,__: ao 808335-0090-03-000 MC KEE MARGARET A 455 S 51ST CT 455 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 . 41 808335-0090-03-001 MC KEE MARGARET A 455 S 51ST CT 455 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 42 808335-0090-03-002 MC KEE MARGARET A 455 S 51ST CT 455 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 43 808335-0100-01-000 HALL THEO B -501 S 51ST CT 630 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 as 808335-0100-01-001 HALL THEO B 501 S 51ST CT 630 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 98055 45 808335-0100-01-002 HALL THEO B 501 S 51ST CT 630 S 32ND PL RENTON WA 198055 46 808335-0110-09-000 NASON JACK B 507 S 51ST CT 507 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 47 808335-0110-09-001 NASON JACK B 507 S 51ST CT 507 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 as 808335-0110-09-002 NASON JACK B 507 S 51ST CT 507 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 49 808335-0120-07-000 HAIGHT ROSE M 515 S 51ST CT 515 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 so 808335-0120-07-001 HAIGHT ROSE M 515 S 51ST CT 515 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 51 808335-0120-07-002 HAIGHT ROSE M 515 S 51ST CT 515 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 52 808335-0130-05-000 BROWN JANICE M 521 S 51ST CT 521 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 53 808335-0130-05-001 BROWN JANICE M 521 S 51ST CT 521 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 54 808335-0130-05-002 BROWN JANICE M 521 S 51ST CT 521 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 55 808335-0140-03-000 THOMPSON MICHAEL W 529 S 51ST CT 529 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 56 808335-0140-03-001 THOMPSON MICHAEL W 529 S 51ST CT 529 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 57 808335-0140-03-002 THOMPSON MICHAEL W 529 S 51ST CT 529 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 58 808335-0150-00-000 BLUE LORIS A 535 S 51ST CT 535 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 59 808335-0150-00-001 BLUE LORIS A 535 S 51ST CT 535 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 60 808335-0150-00-002 BLUE LORIS A 535 S 51ST CT 535 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 61 808335-0160-08-000 SAYRE AMY 541 S 51ST CT PO BOX 800 RENTON WA 98057 62 808335-0160-08-001 SAYRE AMY 541 S 51ST CT PO BOX 800 'RENTON WA 98057 63 808335-0160-08-002 SAYRE AMY 541 S 51ST CT PO BOX 800 RENTON WA 98057 64 808335-0170-06-000 ARTHUR JOHN 549 S 51ST CT 27319 139TH PL SE 'KENT WA 98042 6s 808335-0170-06-001 ARTHUR JOHN 549 S 51ST CT 27319 139TH PL SE KENT WA 98042 66 808335-0170-06-002 ARTHUR JOHN 549 S 51ST CT 27319 139TH PL SE KENT WA 198042 67 808335-0180-04-000 BLAIR WAYNE C 551 S 51ST CT 551 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 68 808335-0180-04-001 BLAIR WAYNE C 551 S 51ST CT 551 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 69 808335-0180-04-002 BLAIR WAYNE C 551 S 51ST CT 551 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 70 808335-0190-02-000 DAVIS THOMAS M 566 S 51ST CT 566 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 71 808335-0190-02-001 DAVIS THOMAS M 566 S 51ST CT 566 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 72 808335-0190-02-002 DAVIS THOMAS M 566 S 51ST CT 566 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 73 808335-0200-00-000 BAGOST MARTIN P 564 S 51ST CT 564 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 74 808335-0200-00-001 BAGOST MARTIN P 564 S 51ST CT 564 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 75 808335-0200-00-002 BAGOST MARTIN P 564 S 51ST CT 564 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 76 808335-0210-08-000 LAWRENCE MICHAEL W 562 S 51ST CT 562 S51ST CT RENTON WA 198055 77 808335-0210-08-001 LAWRENCE MICHAEL W 562 S 51ST CT 562 S51ST CT RENTON WA 198055 _1 id 1t3ut3s. 5-UL1u-u8-uut 'LAWRENCE-MICHAEL W - ;z�� ;;: .� ;562S51-ST CT f-RENTON WA !wan`c : 1 a� t:. � r' Marl C State M I�P. ,,.. �)wners::::;; :.:;::>:::>:::>::»>::>;:><::::>:::>::..: :: #bra Address: .: �Ia.IAdd:ess�. ............ ........... 79 808335-0220-06-000 DAHLQUIST DONALD C 556 S 51ST CT 556 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 so 808335-0220-06-001 DAHLQUIST DONALD C 556 S 51ST CT 556 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 s1 808335-0220-06-002 DAHLQUIST DONALD C 556 S 51ST CT 556 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 82 808335-0230-04-000 BOSWELL GAYLE D -554 S 51ST CT 554 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 83 808335-0230-04-001 BOSWELL GAYLE D 554 S 51ST CT 554 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 ' 84 808335-0230-04-002 BOSWELL GAYLE D 554 S 51ST CT 554 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 85 808335-0240-02-000 GULLINGSRUD GORDON R 552 S 51ST CT 552 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 86 808335-0240-02-001 GULLINGSRUD GORDON R 552 S 51ST CT 552 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 87 808335-0240-02-002 GULLINGSRUD GORDON R 552 S 51ST CT 552 S 51ST CT RENTON WA 98055 88 808335-0260-07-000 MARTZ JACK W 18831 102ND AV SE RENTON WA 98055 89 808335-0260-07-001 MARTZ JACK W 18831 102ND AV SE RENTON WA 98055 90 808335-0260-07-002 MARTZ JACK W 18831 102ND AV SE RENTON WA 98055 91 808338-0010-07 MC GAUGHEY LAUNA M 440 S 51ST CT 101 401 SW 41ST ST RENTON WA 98055 92 808338-0020-05 NEIRBY JOAN B 440 S 51ST CT 201 440 S 51ST CT#A201 RENTON WA 98055 93 808338-0030-03 STANDLEY RONALD E 440 S 51ST CT 301 440 S 51ST CT#A301 RENTON WA 98055 94 808338-0040-01 REONAL ALVIN C 440 S 51ST CT 102 440 S 51ST CT#A102 RENTON WA 98055 95 808338-0050-08 MARSHALL DONALD C 440 S 51ST CT 202 440 S 51ST CT#A202 RENTON WA 98055 96 808338-0060-06 MINGO CLARENCE N 440 S 51ST CT 302 440 S 51ST CT#A302 RENTON WA 98055 97 808338-0070-04 PATTERSON SAMUEL L 440 S 51ST CT 303 6310 STONERIDGE MALL RD#D-104 PLEASANTON CA 94588 98 808338-0080-02 BLIER TONI M ETAL 440 S 51ST CT 304 440 S 51ST CT#A304 RENTON WA 98055 99 808338-0090-00 BATTLE SCOTT D 440 S 51ST CT 101 440 S 51ST CT#B101 RENTON WA 98055 100 808338-0100-08 HYNDS JOHN P 440 S 51ST CT 201 440 S 51ST CT#B201 RENTON WA 98055 101 808338-0110-06 JACKSON JAMES 440 S 51ST CT 301 440 S 51ST CT#B301 RENTON WA 98055 102 808338-0120-04 MATSUMURA LORI J 440 S 51ST CT 102 440 S 51ST CT#B102 RENTON WA 98055 103 808338-0130-02 BARBER CHARLENE R 440 S 51ST CT 202 440 SS 51ST CT#B202 RENTON WA 98055 104 808338-0140-00 HAGERUP ERVIN E 440 S 51ST CT 302 PO BOX 210014 AUKE BAY AK 99821 los 808338-0150-07 HAMMER KARL E 440 S 51ST CT 303 2152 N 112TH ST#301 SEATTLE WA 98133 106 808338-0160-05 FOULKS MICHAEL R 440 S 51ST CT 304 440 S 51ST CT#B304 RENTON WA 98055 107 808338-0170-03 ALCANTARA DENISE M 440 S 51ST CT 101 440 S 51ST CT#C101 RENTON WA 98055 108 808338-0180-01 LOUI ROXANNE N K 440 S 51ST CT 201 440 S 51ST CT#C201 RENTON WA 98055 109 808338-0190-09 MAYNARD NIKKI 440 S 51ST CT 301 440 S 51ST CT#301 RENTON WA 98055 110 808338-0200-07 JONES CELIA A 440 S 51ST CT 102 440 S 51ST CT#C102 RENTON WA 98055 111 808338-0201-06 NEIRBY JOAN B 6916 128TH PL SE BELLEVUE WA 98006 112 808338-0210-05 LUTZ EDWIN C 440 S 51ST CT 202 440 S 51ST CT#EC-202 RENTON WA 98055 113 808338-0220-03 BULLEN REBECCA R 440 S 51ST CT 302 440 S 51ST CT#C302 RENTON WA 98055 114 808338-0230-01 AWS SHANNON 440 S 51ST CT 303 440 S 51ST CT#C303 RENTON WA 98055 115 808338-0240-09 BOWLING SARA B 440 S 51ST CT 304 440 S 51ST CT#C 304 RENTON WA 98055 116 808338-2101-03 BATTLE SCOTT D 7356 W LAKE SAMMAMISH PKWY NE REDMOND WA 98052 _ 117 ALtE1.4H_7sn3— FR-FRPrMA TIMOTHY j440 S51ST CT#8303 jRENTON WA jaOua5 1 110040 lie 808338-2304-08 BOWLING SARA B 440 S 51ST CT#C304 RENTON WA 98055 • • �° COUNTY �/4. KING COON �P ADEPT. OF ASSESSMENTS ,��• — NE 31 .I ( ✓n S.ors• 1320 / 7- .ven.ro-JeW ere• �ey I. ....1 555 t .We9 av ls.✓ j7v ej ` jaS v9 j1 q8 ea,of, . 7. ,� 30 „Is., I 1 3,h •% .y 4 ,1.• S+t ^/6—L 659E 9aM 1 �V 1 y73 -4. �s 'Gate P°• k �roJ tt. 8. I p Ap ill 1 470 c - ... .WA/-a-3i.., Go530 ••• • :4 P0' VgI Q 14 fiC 1. 400 kl • �� .V68-.,...2r r/ - /2.8.WI- . - ,se-0;......W' /e sa.20 5 It1 ` 44.1'97.4W ..,0 O/ flit Z ^ L' LOT 2 9' 19 � i�� 04Sq � LOT I • II 1. >q 8 /i t.cC3 ?0 x'c/.,-c, ceo -3/ �OOe ▪0 -� as-.,3-22,' 9a0 cc, _ , t y' _ to— %'c,,rc✓ 7•:o "�48—� L�iO 0 0 4.0 l ;_ a ^Ji 009'091 019,3 % GV/62/L •0.,603'O0 00111•.o,IN pq,00."00909/Q 0 uo 1,3300 u toy=011 :310N / Oti'900 09, .. - 6[990£1-- M[a .4 4.':' ley.4' ' 4 3'44W., ,od s 0 n' Z JOl ,, t'� 11) " , loi ',Iq9 9. gi 1006 11198 S8-6S0 dS'MT.; ii92s i'9S ' S2t �,L .O d CO' d 9 ds7 n ®,,tv o L`ZyL 0 £ •l?d el- Z -13.4 1 -ld `t kr. - _ U 0 9 $ C, L W ~y 10 3 0� of "t as'WY /'1'[E �0'z'J-9.r. 1,av0/ PM is 92 lip, _ I x4, I d `gyp .0 I2 ��g 0 C,/ Ikti -•a'' i 1. t, .,� P THIS MAP IS POI T8I PURPO5l Of K.C. 122 413I67110 I1 LGOATIIO TOUt P2OPs?7T u/ iS SOT 0ULIANTEID S C MAP REV. TO 3H01 L8CUtAT1 YSASUHEYEl78. L G-a!3-f8 3-5 SCALE. I°=1001 72 4=:.Io: 1 SI= - I320.555 t..v ee pH.4 VOL146/51-66 LI+��I a!,09.p.6 1 PH. 5 VOLI48/67-76 855910 3 P: �,�°� „ .� y 1 TALBOT PARK cor:no. v3`i�� s`3t 0 PH. I VOL. 140/6-13 eeya-OT ? ' q PH. 2 VOL. 144/36-44 I 1 U e PH. 3 VOL. I45/62-73 i a.,.Sa r/t_..,sL✓ •Se.ai r, -S.L/✓S OF A/. 90+4Al.. --.. near.op-sf.w' +J.-T•4P — 1. I It C J 2 111I Z. s'r L 5A \ a Li Apy j —" IA C I' 06 1 AG ni „'7 i G 5 L AVE OF A/� ] _ I� /O$ , • _JT 90 I 70 h i-i ,.00 ,67 Z. ZFa 5A - �,ILN? 1 ', I ,co ese) r io7 90 x I. r0 F ,10 S<°/<liCA tic'?Na B13a Il-,f</9.ia'/1 - - ��.�/� jW' , 0,/1 spy J1 U oc • I""n•SB-•3.3BA ir.l.yk yw J, • y J• Jaw_ �.. I 4.r.S.-" A,,-J!_...,, 111 000N00. „ 2.1 `7.3 22 21 20 19 t 1 SUMM.- IPAsi Ic co ",,* t: •:+ i't '� _ H N Val.130 1 ', if lI % 1 t""..- a ." ,:..t rsne e. ./ '".-, r d. Zii Nt: ;. �1.006 Dcc 4• : - 1 1 S^,( v VOL.1T3/I1-11e1 ,�-_ MF ..1 . PARK TR.t iA, `4� .l,.tii� �v1 \ rsfi r A°. y '�eftrs9A.L A.,,-....re Ka+ T I,If 2.4 i3 44; y0 60 fip.e 'i 1 10 !1 M1 Jea-24'+a[ a+ea.( AI L/N'0.5. / + C, 1s `1 SS.7- a`,+:.+�-_a.0 ,Y.c- -'/ VsJ.+a-. tay_1c.I 7.de Jr7,9 0 4 I N11121 7,W.weJ 04 )O' •eo.-/' v Le.A. LUA.10a K-LL.• yy. —T- — -- - 402.OA 7 375.,, '•1 LOT I N i,' ‘' 111v 0 I,� I o"J o 'J qtV P '' 10 I 1 �/ -REN SP 068.87 v 8806219005 ° pr,,pet i p"I . 1.-_,-+T..,..,.. ..I z'...,e,ti.._....-.a.— .-r_.rG 0, ee... a.. nr., R..$ 9,sA`J°\`T'' v_ ' Prepared for: WA Report Prepared by: STEW ITL IF WA. Service Rep Name : —7-' " EGER/S EWART TITLE Date • 08/26/99 Delivery Typ - : COURIER Fa • Sales Rep Name : N/A Package Includes : Property profile :e.:10PM77 phi' Comments : I 100 S'CArd ctroo " 9 2 .1 1p 305• - 0`a 17.ECEIVED. 3I11SDS - cop- 1Lvt oVey(\ oi\s ,t1' Copyright 1999 REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS TIPS On-Line .C.`r�Y 0 Land Use: The project site is zoned Residential-14 DU/AC(R-14). The proposal has a net density of 13.93 dwelling units per acre which Freed the ♦ •♦ maximum density permitted in the R-14 zone. The proposal comelies with development standards of the R-14 zone. ArnNrc0 Density: 13.93 dwelling units per acre EnvironmenNOTICE OF APPLICATION Evaluate the tPropo al Documents Project: Environmental Checklist AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The proposal will be subject to the Citys SEPA Ordinance, f og NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) Code,Public Works Standard's,Uniform Building Code,Uniforon: mmire lire Code,etc. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommerjced DATE: October 6,1999 Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above.LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-99.136,SA-A,V-B,ECF 1. A Transportation Mitigation Fee,at a rate of$75.00 per each new average daily trip attributable toll the APPLICATION NAME: NORMANDY RIDGE o PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family2. A Parks Mitigation Fee of$530.76 for each new single family residential dwelling unit. residential consisting of 42 tunes:ground-relatedwithI0 3. A Fire Mitigation Fee,equal to$488 per single family residential lot. PROJECT and :lamily stacked flats. The 3 ti-includesrea total units,16 residential structures;with townhouse buildings composed of 4 attached units,1 townhouse of 2 units,and 5 structures of 8-unit stacked flats. The proposal includes a recreation building with a manager's residence. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Mr.Peter Rosen,Project Manager,Develop A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed;with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5.00 PM on October 20,1999. This ester is and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats.Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S.A secondary, scheduled forSa public hearing before Na Board of Adjustment(BOA)on October 27,1999,at 7:30 PM,G emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S.A private street would provide internal access to the residences. Chambers,Seventh Floor,Renton City Hall,Services South Grady Way,Renton. If you are interestedth in hearing,please contact the Development Division,(425)430-7282,to ensure that the hearing not There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site,ranging in size from 475 sq.ft.to 2.048 sq.ft.The City of Renton rescheduled. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above,you may still appear the he does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq.R.and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill ad present your commentsord receive v proposal before the BOA. If you have questionsthe pro this proposal, wish the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage ditch bisects the site and meets criteria fora made a party of comments and utm additionaly informationeaparty l mold please contactet project manager. Anyone stream. The proposal includes a 25-foot setback from the high water mark of each side of the drainage corridor. The submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on :t projel proposed street access crosses the stream in 2 locations.The applicant requests a variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance to allow the street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. CONTACT PERSON. PETER ROSEN(425)430-7219 PROJECT LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE,MITIGATED(DNS,M): As the Lead Agency,the City of (PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICA'ION Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21 C.110,the City of Renton is using the Optional ONS(M)process to give notice that a DNS-M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance Mitigated(DNS-M).A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: September 29,1999 99 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: October 6,1999 1 ri///,/ .eF Permits/RevIew Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review;Administrative Site Plan Approval; - 7 Variance _I` t :',„ _. -r' •_. •`. Other permits which may be required: Hydraulic Permit Approval(HPA) "!?: _` �T--tql , -1_=--r-7.„+-g-�_ t,4 ' ' . -' I N_ Requested Studies: Wetland and Stream Report,Preliminary Storm Drainage Report, ;.v; -- L Geolechnical Report �y,, 4 Location where application may I r _ + ; _ I r i 1 - —— i'- bs reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, [ _ e sign., 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 •r ' ------ t +54 .-•.....`.. PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing scheduled for the variance application on October 27,1999 before - I--1 `y-�—1. — the Renton Board of Adjustment,in Renton Council Chambers. Hearings begin - - `-- J .w I al 7:30 PM on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady I Y - Way South. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: --�• 1♦ - Analytical process l 1p) _ I 4 Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations,or in ' • 'A !their absence,comprehensive plan policies.RCW 36 70B.110(2Hg)provides that the Notice or Application(NOA)include f NORMANDY ' - LE°mJ " 1. __ ,}` a statement of me preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use,level of development, I. RIDGE _ _ _ • 1 infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice.At a minimum,every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. 1 NOTICE OF APPLICATION NOTICE OF APPLICATION CERTIFICATION I, .TESSICA &)40e- AtA , hereby certify that ..5 copies of the above document were posted by me in 3 conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on .- 111-'Gt • Signed: c,, ' ATTEST: Subcribed sworn before me, a Nortary Public, ' and the State of Washington residing in , on the / Leh day of Qr -- Gih� �r MARILYN KAMCHEFF NOTARY PUBLIC '. STATE OF WASHINGTON MARILYN KAMCHEFF `. COMMISSION EXPIRES MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 • JUNE 20, 2003 r is • NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: October 6,1999 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF APPLICATION NAME: NORMANDY RIDGE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposal to construct 83 multi-family residential units, consisting of 42 ground-related townhouses and 41 multi-family stacked flats. The proposal includes a total of 16 residential structures; with 10 townhouse buildings composed of 4 attached units, 1 townhouse of 2 units,and 5 structures of 8-unit stacked flats. The proposal includes a recreation building with a manager's residence. A total of 190 parking spaces are proposed;with 64 garage spaces and 64 driveway parking spaces for the townhouses, and 62 surface parking stalls for the multi-family flats. Access is proposed via a driveway off Talbot Road S. A secondary, emergency access also connects to Talbot Road S. A private street would provide internal access to the residences. There are five Category 3 wetlands identified on the site,ranging in size from 475 sq.ft.to 2.048 sq.ft. The City of Renton does not regulate Category 3 wetlands that are less than 5,000 sq.ft. and hydrologically isolated. The proposal would fill the wetlands and compensatory mitigation is not required. A drainage ditch bisects the site and meets criteria for a stream. The proposal includes a 25-foot setback from the high water mark of each side of the drainage corridor. The S proposed street access crosses the stream in 2 locations. The applicant requests a variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance to allow the street crossings to intrude into the 25-foot required buffer. PROJECT LOCATION: 4914 Talbot Road South OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS, M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110,the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS(M) process to give notice that a DNS-M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance Mitigated(DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: September 29, 1999 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: October 6,1999 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental(SEPA)Review;Administrative Site Plan Approval; Variance Other permits which may be required: Hydraulic Permit Approval(HPA) Requested Studies: Wetland and Stream Report,Preliminary Storm Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report Location where application may be reviewed: Planning/Building/Public Works Division,Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055 PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing scheduled for the variance application on October 27,1999 before the Renton Board of Adjustment, in Renton Council Chambers. Hearings begin at 7:30 PM on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 Grady Way South. CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Analytical process Project consistency refers to whether a project is consistent with adopted and applicable development regulations, or in their absence,comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70B.110(2)(g)provides that the Notice of Application(NOA)include a statement of the preliminary determination of a project's consistency with the type of land use, level of development, infrastructure,and character of development if one has been made at the time of notice. At a minimum,every NOA shall include a determination of the project's consistency with the zoning,comprehensive plan and development regulations. NOTICE OF APPLICATION Land Use: The project sit, zoned Residential-14 DU/AC (R-14). The proposal has a net density of 13.93 dwelling units per acre which meets the maximum density permitted in the R-14 zone. The proposal complies with development standards of the R-14 zone. Density: 13.93 dwelling units per acre Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The proposal will be subject to the City's SEPA Ordinance, Zoning Code, Public Works Standard's, Uniform Building Code, Uniform Fire Code,etc. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. 1. A Transportation Mitigation Fee, at a rate of$75.00 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project. 2. A Parks Mitigation Fee of$530.76 for each new single family residential dwelling unit. 3. A Fire Mitigation Fee,equal to$488 per single family residential lot. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Mr. Peter Rosen, Project Manager, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on October 20, 1999. This matter is also scheduled for a public hearing before the Board of Adjustment (BOA) on October 27, 1999, at 7:30 PM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Development Services Division, (425) 430-7282, to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above,you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the BOA. 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: PETER ROSEN (425)430-7219 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION : „..- ,. - ti' 1:1_.,_..:11"...1.1" ti L I �Efry-__. P iPllh +' ig Y... rr - :6:11:1: e.,....r._„' 4"N.aj ,,,,,„„ip....„.„.:.,r j " -- - .f_ it; y. } �L...a-7. ..Ly_ . 'fi r+ . 'N _iits +e m,Il • --+ % " _ - t ' 6. "�a� NORMANDY _._ Ir Z.00ii _.Pi .; �e .:...i. l,i RIDGE r' ' __ r a.......... N.. ,g? -'m ca A NOTICE OF APPLICATION ` CITY OF RENTON -U. i % Planning/Building/Public Works Departmen Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrato4 October 6, 1999 Mr. Paul Casey, A.I.A. The Casey Group Architects 10116—36th Avenue Court SW, Suite#109 Lakewood, WA 98499 SUBJECT: Normandy Ridge Project No. LUA-99-136,SA-A,V-B,ECF Dear Mr. Casey: The Development Planning Section 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 November 9, 1999. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. The date of Wednesday, October 27, 1999, at 7:30 PM, has been set for a public hearing to review the proposed variance. The hearing, before the City of Renton's Board of Adjustment will be held in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. Interested parties are invited to attend. Please contact me, at(425)430-7219, if you have any questions. Sincerely, Rkt(-4-N_ Peter Rosen Project Manager cc: Mr. & Mrs. Ervin Yoder/Owners Mr. & Mrs. G. Warren Diamond/Owners SEB, Inc. 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 TY F R TON VELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION ...;! LAND USE PRM• T MASTER APPLICATIO PROPERTY OWNERS) ,, PROJECT iNPORMATION Note If'there is more than one:Iegalowner piease attach an additional< nofadzed Master Application fc :each;owner :_.. PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: Ervin & Bernice - G. Warren & R. Elaine Normandy Ridge Yoder Diamond PROPERTY/PROJECT ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION: ADDRESS 1501 S Eagle - 4914 Talbot Road S Drive Fast side of Talbot Road S between S i13r & S 55th St. Renton, WA - Renton, WA KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): CITY` 98055-3549 ZIP: 98055-6209 ! Yoder - 312305-9095-00 - — Diamond - 312305-9035-01 and 9088-07 TELEPHONE NUMBER: EXISTING LAND USE(S): Single family and undeveloped APPLICA'NT..(if other than owner) PROPOSED LAND USES: NAME: Stephen M. Berg Attached Townhomes and Apartments COMPANY (if applicable): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: SEB, Inc. Residential planned neighborhood ADDRESS: 240 Stadium Way S PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if ap.)lic Same CITY: Tacoma, WA ZIP: 98402 EXISTING ZONING: R-14 & R1 Development in R-14 Portion only TELEPHONE NUMBER: (253) 428-0800 (253) 428-8172 FAX PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): CONTACT.PERSON Same Cc�C%71, SITE AREA (SQ. FT. OR ACREAGE): OF:R NAME: Paul J. Casey, A.I.A. 7.98 acres SEP ICE 9 1999 COMPANY (if applicable): The Casey Group Architects PROJECT VALUE: $6,000,000.00 ADDRESS: 10116 36th Ave. Ct. SW Suite 109 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA? No CITY: Lakewood, WA ZIP: 98499 IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMEI(TA SENSITIVE AREA? TELEPHONE NUMBER: (253) 584-5207 Category 3 Wetlands with areas less (253) 581-9720 FAX 5,000 s.f. and unnamed stream FROM :• JMB ENTER FAX NO. : 4254305527 Sep, 24 1999 08:58PM P >. ��L;UES i2 '',LE CR[PT'1011� OF P r--- ...z �OP�RTY (A2t�ch "se a :. L �s�:,�� ....... ... p rare sheet �f : : see Attached • , i ��+Nn..�`�'3�`3 y%;fe�!� ?��icis�4"�r°. ��`ie:"'�,,��rlbi r.r'i w.Ol..k r.b y ,� s.. s��. tt[�i '�r;sNs.x% u6:kh f•ii`•`>Rk^ri9n'�k ` lbsh»,. 3Ka..�> . ...„b t L o y��:hr...A ¢:,,��^�.2i?a ig4,. >'<�h ..„:o•/' asx 014 S 2 r.. s gf. t r S;T 'rR'3,,c. f . ,1' . �1�AT�o;,. FFE . a .5 _'?�L,�: <is 0rI t�21�2:W?F #s•Y.;401.?; .:'.2„;%1 , r K :43 !4eli+tfdk aIVO0P1i:e tiOtr sjp:eSRthat.Ii pry.''City: S.t .tr:yyfll• eterming`:r•elas 3 k � `�r `21 f°> : • — ANNEXATION $ SUBDIVISION: • COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT $ — _REZONE $ _ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT I•_ SPECIAL PERMIT _ SHORT PLAT $ — TEMPORARY PERMIT $ _ TENTATIVE PLAT $'- COND;TIONAL USE PERMIT $ __ PRELIMINARY PLAT g 1 X $i?E PLAN APPROVAL $ yCO CC) FINAL PLAT $ Gt'ADF & FILL PERMIT $ — -- (N0. CU. YDS: ) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: $ VARIANCEX. • $ 2Oi_ o`- _� (FROM SECTION: �T ),,I�.ir PRELIMINARY WAIVER , FINAL ____WETLAND PERMIT t -- ROUTINE VEGETATION MOBILE HOME PARKS: • $ MANAGEMENT PERMIT S _ BINDING SITE PLAN $ SHORELINE REVIEWS: SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT $ T CONDITIONAL USE $ —VARIANCE $ _ • EXEMPTION $N9 Charge X. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $ 5OC . ' __ REVISION $ s K r�.r� o.> a/rt�r r��/(e((�� t `,,{., n�r t ` i ?;iiF r = S i ''Y r.:.,w : ,+ :ig 1.§' ,?•,• ,��hYF� 4. x:.'.....•u,..:.......</'�.kg.t !la:VtT�S�0. IVY, I.E.RSt-7 ..>...:.., .... ....f..........i+t',% , FFfs�ii }.: t�ynJ ( ls0a� :.� I. (Print Name)J:� V/ly /; eAeR(� , declare khat I am(please check one) the owner of the orooerty involved In this application. tie authorized representative t act fd'r the property owner(please attach proof of authorization), and that the foregoing statomenta and enswe�a hi contained and the information nerewitn submitted are lQ,au.reafoNts true and correct to the best of my knowledge and beliof. ..��p,\ H. 'Fq�'l ':sSIO/y'•• C 't p..,,,,,- i v . 'q F+•. 7i f ATTEST: Subscribed ena sworn to before me, a NotaryPublic, al "t n` soTAR,�p, m i for the State of W residing et (Namo-o wner/Repr a 've) U m: �'Erv'Tp o..th4lH day of (��e.njc«— 1 PUBLICco: ; 19 9 Q, (Signature of Owner/R resentative) , '••' f 9 • „ SS:MF, i4\‘\ tNASM (Sgnature of Notary Public) 9 :. h< • ::.:. xie S,d ' . < • 4 4f£ <t£ : S :< r v u t : r � 4. :!w.,n•: . s xk t�!: k D M s u y p<.; ak , •fx`�.�4 : <bSi : •kt t.t..>.•f i; � k s u....< , 'l xd' :s}•:i�tf� taff .•.'r t: 1:11; •:2a ,..,, 4:f r iy4s4>ra ?txryas;p;!,,;£ r•Mr x (ThIi:Ae"iittfi3obe :gmPeteb.. . ) `.S: C < •.:�9g ttU2H # a . 6x ;; t< A{jt•uy0s6xk; •)r kf� K ... Y ti :. AAD RB ' QAP ;C P.'U " P?N CU Ak � . V 3#'51ft Pi�l : r4`'! f'' � VPkfi 6t1PLA< 'SHPL WS��SMrSM :bTP;x�SiA:� �iMHF t� fr :P 'PR fiVAl Pt �t� }`q rn%w,M TQTALY FEES fS_ , TQTALf12OSTAGE`PR`OVIDED `.:.'�S;i:::.:;ff. rr",: MASTERAP.DOC REVISED 8/97 _ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP �M/ -JO cbiAotinAtb I, (Print Name L .A/tyL , declare that I am (please chock ono), the owner of the property involved in this application. _tl authorized representative to act for the property owner (please attach proof of authorization), and that the foregoing statements and answers contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. � ��,,// ^^ ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, it '�'��R� � ^ 'G+�p� ��O91(/�Q�� for the State of /j/�, jjciding at I a e of 0wner ..N,___(;;gf_►? , on the 2,2day of 19f_/r e7.-r7-16,'7-14, • (Signature of Owner/Represent ve) - !ldJa , (Signature f Notary Public) 40, ` e17�4tt'y (This section to be completed by City Staff.) City File Number: A AAD BSP CAP-S CAP-U CPA CU-A CU-H ECF LI. A MHP FPUD FP PP R RVMP SA-A 'SA-H ,:SHPL-A SHPL-H SP SM SME TP V-A V-B 1., .H TOTAL FEES : $ TOTAL POSTAGE PROVIDED: $ MASTERAP.DOC REVISED 8/97 I FROM JMB ENTER FAX NO. : 4254305527 Sep. 24 1999 09:00PM P. • ,in Au. U,JJJp EXHIBIT "A" THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; THE WEST 1,040.00 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY. THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M. , IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; LYING EASST OF COUNTY ROAD NUMBER 80. KNOWN AS KENT-RENTON ROAD; AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 124.00 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 100 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT ROADS. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. THE DESCRIPTION CAN BE ABBREVIATED AS SUGGESTED BELOW iF NECESSARY TO MEET STANDARDIZATION REQUIRE MENTS, THE FULL TEXT OF THE DESCRIPTION MUST APPEAR IN THE DOCUMENT(S)TO BE INSURED PTN SE4, 31-23-05 Page 2 Order Number 199900455 FROM JMB ENTER FAX NO. 4254305527 Sep. 24 1999 08:59PM P`.', • .24-1999 MUN 03: 19 PM S ART TITLE �� FAX N0, quo r'480536 • i �. j IM11,'in • ORDER NO_ / _ / / a)4 S Section__ Township RonC e Sanctity of Cor►trace Short Pint Rer_No. STEWART TITLE Volume .age 1 e ;III i .11 J tw. j 1 t.�? 41 • • Z 17-7.....::: r:C - vc c- O/s.V (.. I - Cc ...er ,?.,,. '''' :or : . --i•-; i. .<sr I'yLN r.trs. dui,' •,J47-..•/f `, a� L. r• sir ,_...,, ,. _ ,_ _...,_ ,..._„ .. _,........Ter :0.0 24. <. .•�-. 8°aIr AK •;:..y 1=r : r• : I •S U MM a' -_q IT/+;r J,f r t om• ` ,r I _ I w! i t• - : ..�� i]Ia ao-• `rr.t,:.� II cWit a -"; ' ` BOB» w o• 1TR •' ` .. ,`I`4 ,I�- _ I4 ,:1 , A I.iJ L.i 12, .' ',•,.•�.7 to rt tt'.O .'T ) !�/ ,r y mo`" Li t�` or,C,� �d'L�`!:r e- /ii lJ -r i N• I,.� t. - -.a .r. •t ..,.y.•mot note v .� \> I-' 1 >r `� I{ E� t. .- r,• a f1 This sketch is provided.Without charge for your information_ It is not.intended to show all goiters rclaccd to the property including• but mat limited to area, dimensions,easements,encroachments or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, the commitment or policy to Which it is attached. The company assumes NO LIABILITY for any mutter related to this sketch_ Rcfcrrnc should be made to an accurate survey for further informauon. FROM : JMB ENTER FAX NO. : 4254305527 Sep. 24 1999 09:01PM Pi PIAtIol .../ EXHIBIT "A" THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PA_ RCE_ L ATh- THE SOUTH HALF OF THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF of THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, WHICH LIES EAS OF THE COUNTY ROAD NUMBER 80. KNOWN AS THE KENT-RENTON ROAD; EXCEPT THE WEST 250 FEET OF THE SOUTH 135 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 375 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL B: THE WEST 250 FEET OF THE SOUTH 135 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTH HALF OF TH SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M_, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, WHICH LIES EAST OF COUNTY ROAD NUMBER 80, KNOWN AS KENT-RENTON ROAD, THE DESCRIPTION CAN BE ABBREVIATED AS SUGGESTED BELOW IF NECESSARY TO MEET STANDARDIZATION REQUIREMENTS. THE FULL TEXT OF THE DESCRIPTION MUST APPEAR IN THE DOCUMENT(S) TO BE INSURED: PTN SE4, 31-23-05 Page 2 • Order Number: 1999003•7 FROM : JMB ENTER FAX NO. : 4254305527 Sep. 24 199909:00PM PI -'gra- ORDER NO. /7i 7 CC 3q'7 im..V1311 Section -3! TownshiRange��L 31\) L • Sanctity of Contract Short Plat Rec.No. STEWART TITLE Volume Page w it a .e` n140 .} 1 G v 6w4r ere y- dais t - _ nor I �te C"L L.- £1 v 11 , _"'_"""""' + .Ce•L...-� ----�..... .c1,42,r-ao.......-•, .4 IJ ' 0 .-J-.,�_ ---_.,...---Pos voto...wm.. ----e.....a.,.._.-.---,-... A-,-- y 'I C . e _'��'� �: ;a:�'�";ax ti`a:�. ri:':a�;71,—.4 Cz:.-r53aae;a;.......-•—.zfC�, �'• 1'tn� ,v�r7 liIa,1 I .�� 11I _ I r_ 'L: I -'D;' 07 a� , / 11 L:! i Bot333a coax K vF zaN'�Z3 pax. 21 ;zo.`19 If gUMM PAR . ." 1 Vel t3011a.19 i f e r v'tN .^'is Vft e •1' 1 I• r 1 „A'.. 7 „ • 1M�Cr•y i I - i _��: ,,1B .,%1 • 1314 500 •_ • _ I ` 1} ...n.0 I •, yW P -I ,.I •1 1'4.7. .Illy la 113 12° • f . • ''`1T^=�. Iti 808Z3 5 1 ��_ �I ..r \� , .17.•1' �J� VOL.1T3/11- e 5 t l ..+ ." 1�� .'•' "7��' { Jrl• M 1 1_ �� 1 1. TR. a �S iJ'LS - = Z` 1 u j.� \ v �. ' ' ;I•� c.....1 71 I`a i Vb.i `3, •1` 5: 6A;Ti7R.IC910%0,1.,(1f f, r''1, /'�—� .. 1.,` )'r 40 This sketch is provided without charge for your information. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property including. but not limited to area, dimensions,easements. encroachments or location of boundaries. It is not a part of. nor does it modify. the commitment or policy to which it is attached. The company assumes NO LIABILITY for any matter related to this sketch. Reference should be made to an accurate survey for further information. Normandy Ridge Housing D___.opment Talbot Road PROJECT NARRATIVE Project Name: Normandy Ridge Housing Development Project Size: Approximately 8 acres, approximately 6 acres is in R14 Zone — See P1 Project Location: Sec. 31, TWP 23N, R5E, East side of Talbot Road between S. 55th & S 43rd Street Parcel No's#312305-9095-08, 9035-01, 9088-07 Zoning: R14 & R1 (R1 is portion of site with greater than 25% slope) Adjacent Zoning: R1 to east, R14 to north, R14 to south, R14 to west Current Site Use: Single family residence and undeveloped Existing Improvements: Single family residence, outbuildings & abandoned foundation Special Site Features: Unregulated wetlands per Wetland Report; Ditch, classified as unnamed tributary to Springbrook Creek; 25% and greater sloped areas in R1 portion of site Soil Type: Alderwood soils — See submitted Soils Report Existing Drainage: Drainage flow is towards the west to ditch in Talbot Road —See submitted Storm Drainage Report Proposed Use: Residential, Townhomes and Apartments 42 Townhomes (primary use) 41 Apartments (secondary use) 83 total units (13.92 units per acre) Bonus Dwelling Unit Arrangement per 4-31-7.D.2.d.(2): Primary use increase from 3 to 4 units per building. Secondary use increase from 6 to 8 units per building. Bonus is justified through provision of Recreation Center (4- �� 31-7.D.2.d.(3) (A) (ii)) and architectural A �� design elements, active common recreation Qo�Q'- Ny center and coordinated site design (lighting, �O mailbox, signage and street trees). (4-31- �Q�. 7.D.2.d.(3) (B) (i), (ii), & (vi)). 0tiG�� R+((/ 1. misc/99/052narr Normandy Ridge Housing D )pment Talbot Road Proposed Building Height: Approximately 30' to ridge from finished grade Proposed Building Areas: See Sheet P1 Proposed Lot Coverage: 1.89 acres parking 1.56 acres building Proposed Parking: Townhomes: Unit Type A has 2 car garage and 2 driveway tandem stalls Unit Type B has 1 car garage and 1 tandem stall. Apartments: 62, See Sheet P1 Guest: 27, See Sheet P1 Proposed Access: Single drive access to Talbot Road with additional emergency only access to Talbot Road Proposed Off-Site Improvements: Asphalt widening, curb, gutter& walk along east side of project frontage Total Estimated Project Value: $6,000,000.00 Estimated Earth Movement: Approximately 10,000 cu. yd. Estimated Type and Size of Trees to be Removed: Groups of Alder Trees predominate the site along with scattered Maple and 2nd or 3rd growth Fir and Cedar trees. Existing trees west of R1/R14 Zone change line and out of unnamed stream buffer area will be removed. Existing conditions plan indicates approximate locations of tree groups and larger evergreen trees. 2. misc/99/052narr Normandy Ridge Housing D Dpment Talbot Road CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION Proposed Construction Dates: Spring 2000 construction start. Approximately 8 — 12 month construction schedule Hours of Operation: Monday —Saturday 7 AM — 7 PM Proposed Hauling Routes: Talbot Road north to 167 Intersection Proposed Mitigation Measures: Quarry spalls at construction entry, street cleaning as required Preliminary Traffic Control Plan: Employee parking on site when possible. Construction flaggers to be utilized during frontage improvement construction. L - • Ors G1 fY• UP :ciVTpN P2 % 1aS9 RE. I. misc/99/052const Normandy Ridge Housing Dcviopment Talbot Road JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST Variance request Overview: Variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance, which requires a 25 foot undisturbed buffer width each side of stream (unnamed tributary), is requested to allow two road crossings across the stream. a. That the applicant suffers undue hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to subject property, including size, shape, topography, and location or surroundings of the subject property; and the strict application of the Building &Zone Code is found to deprive subject property owner of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and under identical classification. The development of this site would be severely compromised if the two stream road crossings were not allowed. The stream cuts the project into two narrow segments. The two segments are connected by an on-site road that crosses the stream at two locations and is connected to Talbot Road by a single access drive. The current road design is justified by the following reasons. 1. The road forms a loop around the site and provides two separate access directions to each building, as desired/required by the Fire Marshal. Adequate and open site access to all buildings is a life safety issue which has been addressed through the provision of this loop road. 2. The westerly stream crossing occurs at the development entry driveway along Talbot Road. This driveway is located directly across from the driveway serving the residential development on the west side of Talbot now under construction and is located to minimize traffic conflicts. Two separate driveways, each serving a separate segment of the site, was not desired since the two new driveways would have been offset from the drive across Talbot approximately 100' or slightly more. These new driveways would have adversely effected the safe and smooth traffic flow in this area along Talbot Road, by increasing the number of driveways with driveway separation only slightly more than the minimum allowed. 3. The loop road provides safe on-site access to the common Recreation facility located in the northern site segment. Given the steep grade of the site, barrier free access to the Recreation Facility is provided by individual cars using the loop road. If this road were not available, residents would be required to access different parts of the site via Talbot Road which would contribute to the congestion along Talbot Road. 4. The easterly stream crossing is not a true crossing and occurs at a poorly defined section between different stream segments. The crossing is located to ,. minimize disruption of the existing stream and stream buffers. N,tP+T Pam'` CiN OF ResTUt SrP • a 19`� 1. misc/99/052vari Normandy Ridge Housing D_._.opment Talbot Road 5. Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments), located on the west side of Talbot Road, just south of this development was allowed a similar type road crossing across a small stream. The Zoning and use of the Springbrook property is identical to the zoning and use of this property b. That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which subject property is situated. The proposed road crossings will cross a stream that is actually a manmade channel that directs ground water seepage from the toe of steep slope at the eastern side of the site across the site to the Talbot Road drainage system on the western site boundary. The stream does not provide direct habitat for fish, so the installation of culverts at the road crossings will not be materially detrimental to the related stream habitat. Roadway storm water drainage will not be directed to this stream but will be collected and routed to the on-site detention and water quality facilities. In addition, the present plant community along the stream is very limited and is dominated by Himalayan Blackberries. Any disruption due to the crossings will have minimal impact to the existing plant habitat since blackberries are a low quality habitat. These disruptions can be mitigated by use of native replacement planting at the disturbed areas. c. That approval shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. Springbrook (Glacier Creek Apartments) located on the west side of Talbot Road, just south of this development was allowed a similar type road crossing. The Sringbrook property also contained the R14 Zoning Classification of this property. Crossing minor stream tributaries is very common in developments containing these courses especially when traffic control and fire safety access needs (i.e. Life Safety Issues) are addressed and do not constitute a special privilege. d. That the approval, as determined by the Hearing Examiner or Board of Adjustment, is a minimum variance that will accomplish the desired purpose. The two stream crossings are the minimum number required and have the minimum size to meet the local development goals and guidelines. The two stream crossings have been located to minimize impacts to the existing stream habitat. Construction of improvements at each crossing will improve current water flow and will have minimum impact to water quality. 2. misc/99/052vari • Normandy Ridge Housing L.lopment Talbot Road Environmental Checklist A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Normandy Ridge Housing Development 2. Name of applicant: Casey Group Architects agent for SEB, Inc. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 240 Stadium Way S Tacoma,WA 98402, Contact: Paul J. Casey,A.I.A. (253) 584-5207 4. Date checklist prepared: 9/15/99 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable: Single phase, start Spring 2000, 8—10 month construction schedule 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None 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. No 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Site Plan Approval, variance for stream crossings, building, plumbing, electrical, mechanical permits, HPA permit for ditch (stream) crossings, grading/site development permits, NDPES permit. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. 83 Unit Townhome/Apartment developed on an approximate 6 acre portion of an 8 acre site. On-site parking and recreation facilities are part of development. See Site Plan for detailed development description. t2.'ELOPMENT PLAT.',,i1;4G CITY OF RENTON sty 2 9 1999 RECEIVED • misc/99/052sepa Normandy Ridge Housing L...,;lopment Talbot 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. Section 31, TWP 23N, R05E, located on east side of Talbot Road between S 55t" Street and S 43`d Street. Parcel#312305-9095-08, 9035-01 & 9088-07 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling hilly; teep slopes, mountainous, other Development is in portion of site where existing natural grades are less than 25%. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Development area up to 25%, typically 10—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 prime farmland. Glacial and weathered tills. See submitted Geo-Technical Report d. Are there surface indications of history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None observed e. Describe the ur ose, type, and ap proximate p yp quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 10,008 cu. Yd. Moved, some export amounts are probable depending on final site conditions. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes, typical for higher density residential project. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 43% of total site 57% of R14 portion of site h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 25' undisturbed buffer is proposed on either side of ditch (un-named tributary to Spring Brook Creek) except at two road crossings. State of the art temporary erosion control measures will be used as required by selected stormwater manual. 2 misc/99/052sepa Normandy Ridge Housing C lopment Talbot Road 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e. dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities, if known. Short term construction dust and equipment exhaust and long term vehicle exhaust and potential wood fireplace emissions. Quantities typical to residential development. 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: Periodic construction watering; provision of landscape buffers along project perimeter and site design that locates vehicle drives away from project perimeter. 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. Yes, un-named tributary to Spring Brook Creek. See attached letter from Dept. of Fish & Wildlife. Unregulated wetlands. See Wetland Report. 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. Yes, portions of ditch (stream) will be crossed and adjusted. Unregulated wetlands will be filled. See Site Plans and Wetland Report. 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. Neglitable amounts placed in nonregulated wetland areas. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. See Wetland Report 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 3. m isc/99/052sepa Normandy Ridge Housing L--lopment Talbot Road 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. Stormwater will be discharged to existing ditch system along Talbot Road. Stormwater will be pre-treated prior to discharge. See Grading Plan and Stormwater Report. b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? 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 storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff(including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow?Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Drives,walks and roof stormwater runoff will be collected, routed to detention vault, passed through water quality treatment and discharged to ditch along Talbot. See stormwater report& Grading Plan for quantities and description. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not anticipated d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Detention and water quality treatment per selected stormwater manual. See Stormwater Report. 4. PLANTS: a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other x evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other x shrubs qrass pasture See Wetland Report crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup. bull bush, 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? All within, not including ditch (stream buffer) development area. 4. misc/99/052sepa Normandy Ridge Housing C,,...,opment Talbot Road c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None observed d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. Typical local residential (suburban) planting is anticipated. See Wetland Report for work within ditch (stream) buffer. 5. ANIMALS: a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, ngbirdd)other Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None observed c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not anticipated d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Planting completed project to typical suburban standards 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. Electrical and potential natural gas heating b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Two story buildings along north property line will cast mid-day shadow onto adjacent property from October to February. Solar energy impact potential is very limited due to cloud cover, during fall &winter seasons. 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: Building construction per latest State Energy Code. 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. Typical risk of fire associated with attached residential developments 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Typical residential police,fire and paramedic services 5• m isc/99/052sepa Normandy Ridge Housing D opment Talbot Road 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Road design per fire marshal's requirements, construction per latest Uniform Building Code Standards, provision of Fire Sprinkler System in apartment buildings & Fire Alarm per Fire Marshal's requirements. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic along Talbot is minor impact 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. Typical short term construction noise and long term residential noise. Long term noise should be in 45—55dBA daytime and 35—45dBA nighttime 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Perimeter landscape buffer and fencing 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE: a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Single family residential and undeveloped b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No c. Describe any structures on the site. Existing house, abandoned building foundations d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? All on site e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? RI and R24 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Residential planned neighborhood 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 an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Not known Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 200 6. m isc/99/052sepa Normandy Ridge Housing L,,.-lopment Talbot Road j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? 2 -4 k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Building design per quality residential standards 9. HOUSING: a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 83, middle income b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 1 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? Approximately 30'to roof ridge from finish grade. Horizontal siding and composition roof. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Limited impact to territorial views of existing housing development south of site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Quality residential design and building material use similar to neighboring properties. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE: a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce?What time of day would it mainly occur? Typical security lighting and headlight glare b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not anticipated c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Use of perimeter landscape buffers 7. misc/99/052sepa Normandy Ridge Housing l: _lopment Talbot Road 12. RECREATION: a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Kentridge H.S. and Soos Creek Parks approximately 2 miles east of site 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: Recreation building with exercise, pool and Spa facilities will be provided 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION: a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. None known b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None observed c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None 14. TRANSPORTATION: a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Talbot Road, single vehicle access with additional emergency only access b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Not known c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? See Site Plan for new parking statistics, approximately 4 stalls eliminated d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Half street frontage improvements along Talbot Road e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No 8. misc/99/052sepa Normandy Ridge Housing __.alopment Talbot Road f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Approximately 486 average daily trips. See City's Traffic Study for area g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Payment of required fees-of$439.50 per unit, and construction of frontage improvements 15. PUBLIC SERVICES: a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes, typical increases in police,fire, paramedic and schools services for project of this size. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: Payment of required impact fees 16. UTILITIES: a. Circle utili '- cu rent) . -. - in the site. electricit atural ga.tllt servi O telephone, ..nitary sewer .eptic sys e , • er. 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. Puget Sound energy for Electric/Gas City of Renton for Water Soos Creek District for Sewer U.S. West for Telephones Refuse provider not known c. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that is might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full di I on y part. Proponent: Name Printed: Paul J. Casey,A.I.A. Date: 9/15/99 9. m isc/99/052sepa nuu G✓J 77 IJ. el A :;,, �= AUG i 8 1999 p1, State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ---�• ' - Region 4 Office:18018 Mill Croak Boutovard-Mill Crook,Washington 98012-(425)775-1311 August 17, 1999 SEB,Incorporated ATTENTION: Stephen M. Berg 240 Stadium Way South Tacoma; Washington 98402 Dear Mr. Berg: • SUBJECT: Request for Field Review,File#99-62 City of Renton; Unnamed Tributary to Spring Brook Creek in Section 31,Township 23 North,Range 05 East, King County As a result of our field review on August 11, 1999 I have determined that drainage flowing through this property is a stream and will require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)to install culverts or bridges. In addition the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Manual for Puget Sound or King County 1998 Stormwater Manual should be used to determine stormwater discharge. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this information. If you have any questions,please contact me at(425) 649-7015. Sincerely, Philip Schneider Area Habitat Biologist PS:ps DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL WAIVED MODIFIED COMMENTS: REQUIREMENTS: BY: BY: Calculations, Survey, Drainage Control Plan 2 Drainage Report 2 Elevations, Architectural 3 AND 4 Elevations, Grading 2 Existing Covenants (Recorded Copy)4 Existing Easements (Recorded Copy) 4 Flood Plain Map, if applicable 4 Floor Plans 3 AND 4 Geotechnical Report 2 AND 3 Grading Plan, Conceptual 2 Grading Plan, Detailed 2 King County Assessor's Map Indicating Site 4 Landscaping Plan, Conceptual4 Legal Description 4 List of Surrounding Property Owners 4 Mailing Labels for Property Owners 4 Map of Existing Site Conditions 4 Master Application Form 4 Monument Cards (one per monument) I Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis 4 Plan Reductions (PMTs) 4 Postage 4 Public Works Approval Letter 2 Title Report or Plat Certificate 4 Topography Map (5' contours)3 Traffic Study 2 f', Tree CuttingNegetation Clearing Plan 4 Utilities Plan, Generalized 2 Wetlands Delineation Map4 Wetlands Planting Plan 4 Wetlands Study4 This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: TO `ct t3 k > '2 L( ' -bi 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 1(7°' eit 3. Building Section DATE: 3- - CJq 4. Development Planning Section h:\division.s\develop.ser\dev.plan.ing\ aiver. 9. G1`SY .t + iit + CITY OF RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU -Nrco MEMORANDUM DATE: August 3, 1999 TO: Laureen Nicolay, Planner Q,� FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal (i�` V SUBJECT: Talbot Road Townhouses, 4900 Block Talbot Rd. S Fire Department Comments: . 1. The preliminary Fire flow is 3000 GPM which requires one fire hydrant within 150 feet of the building and two additional hydrants within 300 ` feet of the building. _ Loo ig.. v‘ (z.� Vie /9r , 2. Secondary access roadway is required. Bullard annot be used in the , to control traffic. An approved gate or clizin and p dlock are allowed to 20 w I restrict traffic on the emergency access. Ali roadway-M.-feet in width are 6(e511- required to be marked as Fire Lane, No Parking. 3. A fire mitigation fee of$31,816.00 is required based on $388.00 per unit. 4. All buildings two stories anfive or more units are required to be sprinklered. Central Station monitored fire alarms systems are required in all buildings by City Ordinace. Separate plans and permits are required for the sprinkler and fire alarm syste s. cA-3 Please feel free to contact me if you have any(questions. tT7V/9y(4 t ) C. k . , CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: AUGUST 5, 1999 • TO: LAUREEN NICOLAY FROM: NEIL WATTS SUBJECT: TALBOT ROAD RESIDENTIAL PROJECT PREAPPLICATION REVIEW COMMENTS I have reviewed the project submittal for the above listed project, and have the following comments at this time: SEWER • There is an existing 8" sewer main in Talbot Road available for this site. Most of the internal sewer system will be private, but constructed to City main line standards. A portion of the main may be required to be public to provide future service east of the site. This would required a minimum 15 foot easement, which would extend to the easterly property line. The main will not be requi er d beyond the developed portion of the site. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($350 per unit). WATER G1C ) 10 t �' • A water main loop extension will be required for this project. A minimum 8"main must be provided through the site. Easements will be required for all on-site water mains and hydrants (minimum of 15 feet in width). • Backflow prevention devices will be required for irrigation and fire protection systems. • Depending on fire flow requirements, additional hydrants will be required. • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($510 per unit). There are SAD ($0.048 per sq.ft) and Latecomers Fees ($0.0262 per sq.ft.) also due upon development of this site. 8/5/99 PAGE 2 DRAINAGE • • A conceptual drainage plan and drainage report will be required for the site plan application for this project. The conceptual drainage plan shall include provisions for detention and water quality treatment in compliance with the requirements of the KCSWM. • Due to downstream flooding problems in this drainage basin, staff will recommend a SEPA condition for extra detention for the on-site drainage system. The recommendation will for detention through the 100 year storm event with a 30% safety factor. • • System Development Charges will be required for this project ($0.129 per sq.ft. of new impervious surface) • A wetlands delineation will be required for site development. STREET IMPROVEMENTS 22T'b • Talbot Road South adjacent to the site must be improved with curb, gutters, sidewalks, street lighting, new paving from the edge of existing pavement to the new gutter, and drainage improvements for the new street improvements. • This zone allows for condominium style development (i.e. no separate platted lots), but must meet the development standards of a shadow plat. The shadow plat must demonstrate the equivalent of standard right-of-way widths through the project, with a interconnected vehicular and pedestrian system. The project must also provide equivalent street improvements internal to the site, including adequate pavement width, curbs, drainage, sidewalks and turnarounds for dead-end street sections. The standard street design `equ'rements for this type of project has been modified to allow for sidewalks along one side{' of the st e�et only pavement widths of 20 feet where parking is precluded by driveways on C _ gC -' both sides of the street, and 28 feet of pavement with parking limited to one side of the street where parallel parking is feasible. Staff will recommend wider pavement sections along the - southerly access road adjacent to Buildings 9, 12 and 16. • Street lighting must be provided on the private street sections, meeting or exceeding the 'l lighting levels established in City Code. This system wjll be privately owned and maintained. per'( • Traffic mitigation fees of $75 per net new average daily trip ($439.50 per unit) will be required prior to issuance of building permits for this project. �,�5c� GENERAL r \G ✓115 • The site plan application for this project must include a conceptual utility plan showing all existing and proposed utilities, including sewer mains, manholes, water mains, valves, hydrants, drainage facilities, drainage mains and catch basins. A complete conceptual drainage plan, with a,_Level 1 downstream analysis .and appropriate calculations for water quality treatment facilities and detention requirements shall also be included in this application. 8/5/99 PAGE 3 y, • All required utilit drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals Civil ngineer. prepared ag ccordin to City of Renton drafting standards by estimate for theseE p ovemeT�e prepared construction permit app,ication must include a itemized cost of The fee for review and inspection of these improvements is 5% of the $200 000,$100,000 o%the f estimated construction costs; 4% of anything over $100,Oa bupon application for building and anything over $200,000. Half of this fee • ' st be p ermits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There may be additional construction p fees for water service related expenses. Lam'Ge1/4211 oJ t✓ O M k)-) - c� � \00 gif O JUL 26 1 999 MEMORANDUM boo�U,,YU • /V/s/ON • DATE: 7(22. 197 TO: Construction Services, Fire Prevention, Plan, Review, Project Planner FROM: Jana Hanson, Development Sery 5! Diy5`98Director SUBJECT: New Preliminary Application: ALeST • AO 'TO W r A F LOCATION: '000 13(OGjJ 80-vh, PREAPP NO. et 9 -LZ A meeting with the applicant has been scheduled for f 1-0O ,4-74 , Thursday, 4Z 'Lt-5.74 ax' , in one of the 6th floor conference rooms (new City Hall). If this meeting is scheduled at 10:00 AM, the MEETING MUST BE CONCLUDED PRIOR TO 11:00 AM to allow time to prepare for the 11:00 AM meeting. Please review the attached project plans prior to the scheduled meeting with the applicant. You will not need to do a thorough "permit level" review at this time. Note only major issues that must be resolved prior to formal land use and/or building permit . application submittal. Please submit your written comments to vAree(1., at least two (2) days before the meeting. Thank you. ,5;erd • piziz.„4...„ 7, 9 Preapp2 • CITY OF RENTON Planning / Building / Public Works MEMORANDUM G tf iscvc(� DATE: August 5, 1999 TO: Pre-Application File FROM: Peter Rosen, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Talbot Road Townhomes/Flats--Pre-App File#99-62 We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the proposed Talbot Road Townhomes/ Flats development. Listed below and attached on several sheets are our preliminary findings. Although every attempt is made to ensure that these comments are complete, a more thorough examination of the project at the time of application submittal may reveal additional issues that may alter these comments or require additional comments. ‘-)Gp G Zoning. The project site is split by the R-14 and R-1 zoning designations. The boundary between the zoning designations is intended to correspond with the toe of the 25% slope. As part of the 1997 annual review of the City's Zoning Map, aerial mapping and survey data was used to identify the slope and corresponding zone boundary. With the technical correction it was determined that an applicant would be responsible for determining the actual location of the toe/top of the 25% slope with field survey data. According to the project narrative, the zone boundary has been established by a surveyor in the field and the proposed development is limited to the R-14 area of the site. R-14 Zone-The purpose of the R-14 zone is to encourage development of new residential neighborhoods that provide a mix of detached dwellings and attached dwelling structures, designed to combine characteristics of both typical detached single-family and small scale multi-family development. Permitted Uses - The R-14 code specifies the mix of dwelling unit types allowed in the zone. The code lists primary and secondary residential uses and limits secondary use unit types to 50% of the permitted units in a project. The pre-application indicates the proposal would include 42 townhouse units (primary uses) and 40 units in stacked flat buildings (secondary uses). The proposed mix of units satisfies code requirements. The code allows a maximum of 3 attached townhouse units per structure and 6 units per structure for the stacked flats. This may be increased through satisfaction of bonus provisions. According to the project narrative, the applicant is aware that approval of a bonus is necessary for the number of proposed units per structure. The design features/amenities required for the bonus provision are listed in the code.t The Reviewing Official, the Zoning Administrator in this case, has the discretion to determine if the project incorporates the features/anneniti4necessary for satisfaction of the bonus. Density-The R-14 zone allows a minimum density of 8 units per acre and a maximum of 14 dwelling units per acre, though up to 18 may be permitted through the density bonus. Net density is calculated by y 1 subtracting environmentally sensitive areas and public rights-of-way/streets from the gross site area. The Jc» y proposed private internal street does not need to be subtracted from the gross site area. Wetlania areas 'JVF less than 5,000 square feet which meet the code definition for Category 3 wetlands are exempt from wetland regulations and are not subtracted for purposes of determining density. Slope areas greater than 40% are considered sensitive areas and subtracted from the gross site area. The density of the proposal, 82 residential units on a 5.99 acre site, is 13.69 dwelling units per acre. (This is calculated without any subtractions from the gross site area. Lot Area and Lot Dimensions - The Code allows for development on platted or unplatted property. If the property is to remain unplatted it must be shadow platted to show that the structures comply with equivalent standards for lot area, lot dimensions and building setbacks, as if it was a subdivision or platted development. The pre-application includes a shadow plat and the lot areas a ear to comply with code requirements for lot area/dimensions. It is correct that t e o areas o not include interna roa area. Street/Circulation System - The F. .- code states that unplatted proposals need to provide access and infrastructure equivalent to those requirements in the Subdivision Ordinance. Where an internal, private street is proposed with a street width below subdivision public street standards (42 foot right-of-way width), a modification approved by the Administrator or designee is required. The pre-application plans indicate a 20-foot wide internal street. This is satisfactory where driveway cuts on both sides of the street would prevent on-street parking. The Fire Department has major concerns that on-street parking could block emergency access on a 20-foot road width. Therefore, applicants have been required to increase the road width to 28 feet with parallel parking on one side of the street, where • there are not continuous curb-cuts to prevent on-street parking. The internal circulation/street system should include continuous sidewalks, curbs and gutters. Proiect Features - The Comprehensive Plan policies for the Residential Planned Neighborhood designation and the R-14 code specifies that development should be designed to reflect a single family character and arranged to create a neighborhood environment. To accomplish this objective, the project should orient the units to address the street and include entry features facing the front yard, landscaping the front setback yard, etc. Building Height- Primary use units may have a maximum height of 2 stories and 30 feet. Secondary units permitted under the density bonus may have a maximum building height of 3 stories or 35 feet. Parking- The Parking Code requires 1 1/2 parking spaces per multi-family dwelling unit and one parking space per 4 dwelling units for guest parking. Tandem parking on driveway aprons may be counted toward parking requirements for the units but not for guest parking. The driveway aprons must have a minimum length of 18 feet and be designated for the exclusive use of the individual condo owner or apartment (:c7c resident. The amount of parking provided for the townhouse units is not clear froim he pre-application materials. Landscaping-A minimum 10 foot wide landscape strip is required along public streets, Talbot Road in the subject proposal. Environmentally Sensitive Areas. As indicated on the letter from Habitat Technologies, included with the pre-application materials, Category 3 wetlands less than 5,000 square feet in size are exempt from regulations of the Wetland Management Ordinance. The pre-application indicates a drainage ditch that is preserved on the site as a stream (with a 25 foot buffer width) due to uncertainty as to whether it would be considered a stream and therefore subject to buffer requirements. Man-made drainage ditches are not considered streams subject to the setback requirements of the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance. However If the drainage feature 170 Pj is determined as a stream, the proposed road crossings would necessitate a variance from the Land-) 4 ? Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance which requires a 25 foot undisturbed buffer wide._ The stream or rd ainage channel/stream would function as a continuous green space, organizing feature for the i'43 development and the zoning encourages this as a project focal feature. 'r & Permit Requirements. The proposal would require SEPA environmental review and Site Plan Review. The proposal would require administrative site plan review(no public hearing)with a decision made by the Zoning Administrator. The SEPA environmental review and site plan review would be conducted concurrently. The permit process would take approximately 10 to 12 weeks. A variance from the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance may be required as discussed above. 1 ' our vt -« CC: Jennefer Henning 'ter C,CUcAP V--6'v 1 � (, 1-5 Talbot Condominiums • CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: August 2, 1999 TO: Lau een Nicolay FROM: ennison(425 430-6576) SUBJECT: 82 Unit Talbot Road Townhomes/Flats Preapplication(99-62) (4900 block of Talbot Rd. S.) The site is designated Residential Planned Neighborhood in the Comprehensive Plan. Applicable Comprehensive Plan policies are attached. The proposal is generally consistent with the intent of the policies governing development in the RPN designatioi TThe one area Where greater consistency may be achieved is in the orientation of the entrances of the flats. Policy LU-63.2e states that"each dwelling unit should have an identifiable entrance and front on streets rather than courtyards and parking lots". At the least, orienting the doorways of the two streetside units in the two central flat-structures should help to emphasize the appearance of a residential street. Another issue of which the proponent should be aware is the proposed 1999 Comprehensive Plan amendment 99-M-4. The amendment was initiated as a review of the zoning designations along the slopes east of Talbot Road S. The current staff proposal was to replace the existing R-1 zoning with R-14 from the west and R-8.,from the east. The existing sensitive area regulations are expected to be sufficient to protect the slopes over 40%. Should the Land Use Map amendment and concurrent rezone occur, the portion of this parcel with slopes between 25% and 40%may become available for development. However, the Planning Commission has recommended-denial of the proposed amendments to the City Council, and there has been some public outcry against the proposal. The Council will likely make a final decision in August of this year. Att. cc: Rebecca Lind \\TS_SERVER\SYS2:\COMMON\- \\CENTRAL\SYS2\DEPTS\Economic Development\STRATPLN\PLANNING\P REAPP\RPN\TI bttown.doc\od August 2, 1999 Page 2 Residential Options and Residential Planned Neighborhood General Policies Objective LU-K: Create new planned residential neighborhoods in areas mapped as Residential Options (RO) and Residential Planned Neighborhood (RPN) which include a variety of unit types designed to incorporate features from both single family and multi-family developments, and to support cost efficient housing, infill development, transit service, and the efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. Policy LU-41. Provision of small lot single family detached unit types, townhouses and multi- family structures compatible with a single family character should be encouraged provided that density standards can be met. Policy LU-42. A range and variety of lot sizes should be encouraged. Policy LU-43. Central place public amenities should function as a focal point within the development and should include features such as a public square, open space, park, civic or commercial uses. The central place should include passive amenities such as benches and fountains, and be unified by a design motif or common theme. Policy LU-44. The dwelling types, including detached and attached units, should be clustered and connected within the overall development through the organization of roads, blocks, yards, central places and amenity features to create a neighborhood with diverse housing types. Policy LU-45. Development should occur on a flexible grid street and pathway system to the extent feasible given environmental constraints,traffic flow, and the pattern of existing development. Policy LU-46. Condominium ownership may occur in any unit type. Policy LU-47. Townhouse development should provide either condominium or fee simple homeownership opportunities.Residential Planned Neighborhood Policy LU-58. Density in the Residential Planned Neighborhood designation should be in the range of 8 to 18 dwelling units per net acre. Policy LU-59. A minimum of 50% of a project in the RPN designation should consist of the following primary residential types: traditional detached, zero lot line detached, or townhouses with yards which are designed to reflect a single family character. Policy LU-60. Townhouses building clusters which qualify as a primary residential type should be limited in size so that the mass and scale within the cluster retains a single family character. Limits on the number of units which may be attached in one cluster should be established in the development regulations. Policy LU-61. Longer townhouse building clusters or other multi-family building clusters, considered secondary residential types, should be limited in size so that the mass and scale of the cluster retains a small scale multi-family character rather than a garden apartment development style. Limits on the number of units which may be attached in one cluster should be established in the development regulations. Policy LU-62. The mass and scale of secondary residential types pursuant to policy LU-61 should not preclude their location adjacent to primary residential types. Policy LU-63: Projects in a Residential Planned Neighborhood designation should have no more than 50% of the units designed as secondary residential types, i.e. longer townhouse building clusters, and other multi-family buildings. August 2, 1999 Page 3 Policy LU-63.1. Development standards should reflect single family neighborhood characteristics and access to public amenities and services. Policy LU-63.2 Development Standards should reflect the following criteria: a. heights, width and length of structures should be designed to resemble single family housing, with similar setbacks from the street as single family; b. parking should be encouraged in the rear or side yards or under the structure; c. structures should be located on lots or arranged in a manner to appear like a platted development to ensure adequate light and air,and views if any, are preserved between lots or structures; d. buildings should be massed in a manner that promotes a pedestrian scale with a small neighborhood feeling; e. each dwelling unit should have an identifiable entrance and front on streets rather than courtyards and parking lots; f. fences may be constructed if they contribute to an open spacious feeling between units and structures; and g. streetscapes should include green,open space for each unit. Policy LU-63.3 Mixed use development in the form of civic, convenience commercial development, or other non-residential structures, may be allowed in the central places of development subject to compliance with criteria established through development regulations. GEOTECH May25, 1999 CONSULTANTS, INC. 13256 NE 20th Street,Suite 16 JN 99189 Bellevue,WA 98005 (425)747-5618 FAX(425)747-8561 SEB, Incorporated 240 Stadium Way South, Suite 330 Tacoma, Washington 98402 Attention: Stephen M. Berg Subject: Transmittal Letter - Geotechnical Engineering Study._ -.'-LO ._'hVt`',�.,, Proposed Multi-Family Development �`' Ct G� n 186xx Talbot Road South .-c , King County, Washington �t\150 Dear Mr. Berg: We are pleased to present this geotechnical engineering report for the proposed multi-family development to be constructed in King County, Washington. The scope of our work consisted of exploring site surface and subsurface conditions, and then developing this report to provide recommendations for general earthwork and design criteria for foundations, retaining walls, and pavements. This work was authorized by your acceptance of our proposal, P-4915, dated May 4 1999. The subsurface conditions of the project site were explored with 12 test pits that, in general, encountered medium-dense to very dense weathered till and glacial till soils. Where the till soils were not encountered, we found medium-dense to dense sands and silt. It is our opinion that the proposed multi-family buildings may be constructed using conventional foundations. The primary geotechnical concern in development of this project will be the moisture-sensitive nature of the on' site soils. Mass earthwork should be planned for dry weather. The attached report contains a discussion of the study and our recommendations. Please conta' us if there are any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further assistance during t • design and construction phases of this project. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Marc R. McGinnis, P.E. tlit Associate MRM: alt GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Proposed Multi-Family Development 186xx Talbot Road South King County, Washington This report presents the findings and recommendations of our geotechnical engineering study for the site of the proposed multi-family development in King County. The Vicinity Map, Plate 1, illustrates the general location of the site. We were provided with a faxed site plan showing lot lines and the location of the existing house in the northwest corner of the site. We anticipate that the property will be developed with apartment buildings and that the existing house will be removed or demolished. Detailed plans showing the proposed building locations, existing topography, and final site grading were not available at the time of this report. SITE CONDITIONS Surface The nearly rectangular tract covers 8.3 acres on the east side of Talbot Road South in King County. It has approximately 375 feet of street frontage and an average depth of about 930 feet. The ground surface slopes gently upward to the east for most of the property length. The eastern 100 to 200 feet of the property slopes steeply upward to the east property line. In addition to the existing house located in the northwest corner of the property (18624 Talbot Road South), several concrete structures including a barn, a bathhouse, two pump houses, and possibly a filled-in swimming pool occupy the site. A concrete and rock basement foundation was found near the middle of the site. Except for the area around the existing house, the property is wooded and overgrown. Nearby development consists of the Summit Park Condominiums immediately south of the site, and several houses located to the north and east. Subsurface The subsurface conditions were explored by excavating 12 test pits at the approximate location shown on the Site Exploration Plan, Plate 2. The test pits were excavated on May 14, 1999 with a track-mounted excavator. A geotechnical engineer from our staff observed the excavation process, logged the test pits, and obtained representative samples of the soil encountered. "Grab" samples of selected subsurface soil were collected from the trackhoe bucket. The Test Pit Logs are attached to this report as Plates 3 through 8. In the southeastern portion of the site, Test Pit 4 encountered about 1 foot of topsoil, and 3.5 fee-. of gravelly, silty sand overlying stiff, fractured silt. The silt is underlain by dense, slightly silty sanrl extending to an explored depth of 10 feet. Elsewhere, beneath 1 to 1.5 feet of forest duff anp topsoil, the native soils consist of medium-dense, weathered, silty sand with gravel, which became id gray and very dense with depth. The very dense silty sands have been glacially consolidated a GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. - SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 2 are referred to in this report as glacial till. In our explorations, the dense to very dense glacial till was encountered to a maximum explored depth of 12 feet below the existing surface grade. Based on our observations, the portions of the site have likely undergone grading associated with the existing and previous structures. Therefore, some fill and demolitions debris may be encountered. Fill will likely be found in the area of the old swimming pool. The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs and laboratory tests. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types at the exploration locations. The actual transition between soil types may be gradual, and subsurface conditions can vary between exploration locations. The logs provide specific subsurface information only at the locations tested. The relative densities and moisture descriptions indicated on the test pit logs are interpretive descriptions based on the conditions observed during excavation. The compaction of backfill was not in the scope of our services. Loose soil will therefore be found in the area of the test pits. If this presents a problem, the backfill will need to be removed and replaced with structural fill during construction. Groundwater Groundwater seepage was observed at a depth of about 6 feet in Test Pits 7 and 9. Surface water was observed flowing in several small ditches that traverse the site eat to west. Water could be heard flowing into and out of a cistern located underneath one of the concrete pump houses. The test pits were left open for only a short time period. Therefore, the seepage levels on the logs represent the location of transient water seepage and may not indicate the static groundwater level. It should be noted that groundwater levels vary seasonally with rainfall and other factors. We anticipate that groundwater could be found near the contact between the weathered upper soils and the underlying glacial till. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on the results of the test pits and the observations made during our site visit, it is our opinion that the proposed multi-family development is feasible from a geotechnical engineering standpoint. The proposed buildings may be supported on conventional foundations bearing on the medium- dense to very dense, native soils. A significant geotechnical consideration for development of this site is the overly moist to we condition of some of the soils. Based on our observations, and the results of our laboratory tests the moisture contents of the on-site soils varied from near optimum to as much as 5 to 10 percen above optimum. The fine-grained, soils are sensitive to moisture, which makes them impossible t adequately compact when they have moisture contents more than 2 to 3 percent above thei optimum moisture content. The reuse of the overly-moist soils as structural fill to level the site wi I only be successful during hot, dry weather. Aeration or chemical treatment of each loose lift of so I will be required to dry it before the lift is compacted. This drying will slow the earthwork proces The earthwork contractor must be prepared to rework areas that do not achieve proper compactiol due to high moisture content. Utility trench backfill in structural areas, such as pavements, mus GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 3 also be dried before it can be adequately compacted. Improper compaction of backfill in utility trenches and around control structures is a common reason for pavement distress and failures. Imported granular fill will be needed wherever it is not possible to dry the on-site soils sufficiently before compaction, or if wet weather earthwork is attempted. Depending on the depth of cuts necessary for site grading, seepage may be encountered. This is most likely to occur following extended wet weather. Temporary dewatering can consist of installing sumps or rock-lined ditches that are either pumped or that outfall by gravity. Subsurface interceptor drains will be needed immediately upslope of permanent cuts that expose significant seepage. These drains would consist of gravel-filled trenches excavated at least 12 inches into dense glacial till. A non-woven filter fabric should be draped into the trench before backfilling with gravel. A 4-inch-diameter perforated PVC pipe should be placed approximately 6 inches above the bottom of the trench, with the pipe being sloped to a suitable discharge. Well-constructed footing drains, free-draining wall backfill, and waterproofing are needed to prevent seepage through below-grade walls. Underslab drains should be installed where building excavations encounter heavy seepage. Surface drainage features have been constructed on the site in the past. The grading and drainage plan will need to include provisions for surface runoff entering the site. The erosion control measures needed during the site development will depend heavily ,on the weather conditions that are encountered. The erosion potential on the site is relatively low due to the gentle slope of the ground, however, site clearing will expose a large area of bare soil. We anticipate that a silt fence will be needed around the downslope side of any cleared areas. Rocked construction access roads should be extended into the site to reduce the amount of mud carried off the property by trucks and equipment. Following rough grading, it may be necessary to mulch or hydroseed bare areas that will not be immediately covered with landscaping or an impervious surface. Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be allowed to review the final development plans to verify that the recommendations presented in this report are adequately addressed in the design. Such a plan review would be additional work beyond the current scope of work for this study, and it may include revisions to our recommendations to accommodate site, development, and geotechnical constraints that become more evident during the review process. Conventional Foundations The proposed structures can be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearin on undisturbed, medium-dense to dense, native soil, or on structural fill placed above thi competent, soil. See the later sub-section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill lot recommendations regarding the placement and compaction of structural fill beneath structures. Adequate compaction of structural fill should be verified with frequent density testing during fill placement. We recommend that continuous and individual spread footings have minimum widths of 12 and 16 inches, respectively. They should be bottomed at least 18 inches below the lowes. adjacent finish ground surface. The local building codes should be reviewed to determine different footing widths or embedment depths are required. Footing subgrades must be cleaned o GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 4 loose or disturbed soil prior to pouring concrete. Depending upon site and equipment constraints, this may require removing the disturbed soil by hand. Depending on the final site grades, some overexcavation may be required below the footings to expose competent, native soil. Unless lean concrete is used to fill an overexcavated hole, the overexcavation must be at least as wide at the bottom as the sum of the depth of the overexcavation and the footing width. For example, an overexcavation extending 2 feet below the bottom of a 3-foot-wide footing must be at least 5 feet wide at the base of the excavation. If lean concrete is used, the overexcavation need only extend 6 inches beyond the edges of the footing. An allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) is appropriate for footings supported on competent, native soil or properly-compacted structural fill. A one-third increase in this design bearing pressure may be used when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. For the above design criteria, it is anticipated that the total post-construction settlement of footings founded on competent, native soil, or on structural fill up to 5 feet in thickness, will be less than one inch, with differential settlements on the order of one-half inch in a distance of 50 feet along a continuous footing with a uniform load. Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the foundation and the bearing soil, or by passive earth pressure acting on the vertical, embedded portions of the foundation. For the latter condition, the foundation must be either poured directly against relative) level, undisturbed soil or be surrounded by level structural fill. We recommend using the followin• design values for the foundation's resistance to lateral loading: Parameter Design Value Coefficient of Friction 0.40 Passive Earth Pressure 300 pcf Where:(i)pcf is pounds per cubic foot,and(ii)passive earth pressure is computed using the equivalent fluid density. If the ground in front of a foundation is loose or sloping, the passive earth pressure given above w II not be appropriate. We recommend a safety factor of at least 1.5 for the foundation's resistance i• lateral loading, when using the above design values. Seismic Considerations The site is located within Seismic Zone 3, as illustrated on Figure No. 16-2 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). In accordance with Table 16-J of the 1997 UBC, the soil profile within a depth of 100 feet is best represented by Soil Profile Type Sc (very dense soil). The site soils ate not susceptible to seismic liquefaction because of their dense nature. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 5 Slabs-on-Grade The building floors may be constructed as slabs-on-grade atop firm, stable, native soil or on structural fill. The subgrade soil must be in a firm, non-yielding condition at the time of slab construction or underslab fill placement. Any soft areas encountered should be excavated and replaced with select, imported structural fill. All slabs-on-grade should be underlain by a capillary break or drainage layer consisting of a minimum 4-inch thickness of coarse, free-draining structural fill with a gradation similar to that discussed later in Permanent Foundation and Retaining Walls. In areas where the passage of moisture through the slab is undesirable, a vapor barrier, such as a 6-mil plastic membrane, should be placed beneath the slab. Additionally, sand should be used in the fine-grading process to reduce damage to the vapor barrier, to provide uniform support under the slab, and to reduce shrinkage cracking by improving the concrete curing process. Permanent Foundation and Retaining Walls Retaining walls backfilled on only one side should be designed to resist the lateral earth pressures imposed by the soil they retain. The following recommended design parameters are for walls that restrain level backfill: Parameter Design Value Active Earth Pressure* 35 pcf Passive Earth Pressure 300 pcf Coefficient of Friction 0.40 Soil Unit Weight 130 pcf Where:(i)pcf is pounds per cubic foot,and(ii)active and passive earth pressures are computed using the equivalent fluid pressures. For a restrained wall that cannot deflect at least 0.002 times Its height,a uniform lateral pressure equal to 10 psf times the height of the wall should be added to the above active equivalent fluid pressure. The values given above are to be used to design permanent foundation and retaining walls oni The passive pressure given is appropriate for the depth of level structural fill placed in front of retaining or foundation wall only. We recommend a safety factor of at least 1.5 for overturning an sliding, when using the above values to design the walls. Restrained wall soil parameters shoul be utilized for a distance of 1.5 times the wall height from corners in the walls. The design values given above do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures behind thte walls and assume that no surcharges, such as those caused by slopes, vehicles, or adjacer t foundations will be exerted on the walls. If these conditions exist, those pressures should be adde i to the above lateral soil pressures. Where sloping backfill is desired behind the walls, we will nee' to be given the wall dimensions and the slope of the backfill in order to provide the appropriati,; GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 6 design earth pressures. The surcharge due to traffic loads behind a wall can typically be accounted for by adding a uniform pressure equal to 2 feet multiplied by the above active fluid density. Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and foundation walls within a distance equal to the height of a wall, unless the walls are designed for the additional lateral pressures resulting from the equipment. The wall design criteria assume that the backfill will be well-compacted in lifts no thicker than 12 inches. The compaction of backfill near the walls should be accomplished with hand-operated equipment to prevent the walls from being overloaded by the higher soil forces that occur during compaction. Retaining Wall Backfill Backfill placed behind retaining or foundation walls should be coarse, free-draining, structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain no more than 5 percent silt or clay particles and have no gravel greater than 4 inches in diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve should be between 25 and 70 percent. The onsite soils are not free-draining. If the excavated soils are reused as backfill, at least 12 inches of gravel should be placed against the walls. Gravel should be used for the entire width of backfill where seepage is encountered in the excavation. The purpose of these backfill requirements is to ensure that the design criteria for a retaining wall are not exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The top 12 to 18 inches of the backfill should consist of a compacted, relatively impermeable soil or topsoil, or the surface should be paved. The ground surface must also slope away from backfilled walls to reduce the potential for surface water to percolate into the backfill. The sub-section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill contains recommendations regarding the placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining and foundation walls. The performance of any subsurface drainage system will degrade over time. Therefore, moist conditions or some seepage through the walls are not acceptable, waterproofing should be provided. This typically includes limiting cold-joints and wall penetrations, and using bentonite panels or membranes on the outside of the walls. Applying a thin coat of asphalt emulsion is not considered waterproofing, but will only help to prevent moisture, generated from water vapor or capillary action, from seeping through the concrete. Rockeries We anticipate that rockeries may be used in the site development. A rockery is not intended t function as an engineered structure to resist lateral earth pressures, as a retaining wall would dd The primary function of a rockery is to cover the exposed, excavated surface and thereby retarp the erosion process. We recommend limiting rockeries to a height of 8 feet and placing then against only dense, competent, native soil. Loose soils should be excavated and replaced with quarry spalls. The construction of rockeries is, to a large extent, an art not entirely controllable by engineerini l methods and standards. It is imperative that rockeries, if used, are constructed with care and in GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 7 proper manner by an experienced contractor with proven ability in rockery construction. The rockeries should be constructed with hard, sound, durable rock in accordance with accepted local practice. Soft rock, or rock with a significant number of fractures or inclusions, should not be used, in order to limit the amount of maintenance and repair needed over time. Provisions for maintenance, such as access to the rockery, should be considered in the design. In general, we recommend that rockeries have a minimum dimension of one-third the height of the slope cut above them. Excavations and Slopes Excavation slopes should not exceed the limits specified in local, state, and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts to a depth of about 4 feet may be attempted vertically in unsaturated soil away from property lines and existing structures, if there are no indications of slope instability. Based upon Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 296, Part N, the soil type at the subject site would be classified as Type B. Therefore, temporary cut slopes greater than 4 feet in height cannot be excavated at an inclination steeper than 1:1 (Horizontal:Vertical), extending continuously between the top and the bottom of a cut. Flatter cuts, excavation sharing, and/or dewatering will be necessary where excavations encounter heavy seepage or caving soils. The above-recommended temporary slope inclination is based on what has been successful a other sites with similar soil conditions. Temporary cuts are those that will remain unsupported for relatively short duration to allow for the construction of foundations, retaining walls, or utilities. Th cut slopes should be backfilled or retained as soon as possible to reduce the potential for instability Please note that loose, wet soils can cave suddenly and without warning. Contractors should b made especially aware of this potential danger. All permanent cuts into native soil should be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (H:V). Fill slopes shoulQ not be constructed with an inclination greater than 2:1 (H:V). To reduce the potential for shallo sloughing, fill must be compacted to the face of these slopes. This could be accomplished b overbuilding the compacted fill and then trimming it back to its final inclination. Water should not b allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any temporary or permanent slope. Also, permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to redu erosion and improve the stability of the surficial layer of soil. Drainage Considerations Foundation drains should be installed around the perimeters of the buildings, at the base of I earth-retaining walls, and behind stepped foundation walls. These drains should be surrounded at least 6 inches of 1-inch-minus, washed rock and then wrapped in non-woven, geotextile filt r fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar material). At its highest point, a perforated pipe inv should be at least 6 inches below the bottom of a slab floor or the level of a crawl space, and it should be sloped for drainage. Drainage should also be provided inside the footprint of a structur , where a crawl space will slope or be lower than the surrounding ground surface or an excavatic encounters significant seepage. We can provide recommendations for interior drains, should thy become necessary, during excavation and foundation construction. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 8 AU roof and surface water drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. A typical drain detail is attached to this report as Plate 97. For the best long-term performance, perforated PVC pipe is recommended for all subsurface drains. Groundwater and wet soils were observed during our field work. Surface water was also observed in shallow ditches across the site. If seepage is encountered in an excavation, it should be drained from the site by directing it through drainage ditches, perforated pipe, or French drains, or by pumping it from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation. Building excavations and the site in general should be graded so that surface water is directed off the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where foundations, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grading in areas adjacent to buildings should slope away at least 2 percent, except where the area is paved. Pavement Areas The pavement section may be supported on competent, native soil or on structural fill compacted to a 95 percent density. Granular structural fill or geotextile fabric may be needed to stabilize soft,, wet, or unstable areas. To evaluate pavement subgrade strength, we recommend that a proof roll be completed with a loaded dump truck immediately before paving. In most instances where unstable subgrade conditions are encountered, an additional 12 inches of granular structural fill will stabilize the subgrade, except for very soft areas where additional fill could be required. The subgrade should be evaluated by Geotech Consultants, Inc., after the site is stripped and cut to grade. Recommendations for the compaction of structural fill beneath pavements are given in a later sub-section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill. The performance of site pavements is directly related to the strength and stability of the underlying subgrade. The pavement for lightly-loaded traffic and parking areas should consist of 2 inches of aspha concrete (AC) over 4 inches of crushed rock base (CRB) or 3 inches of asphalt-treated base (ATB We recommend providing heavily-loaded areas with 3 inches of AC over 6 inches of CRB or inches of ATB. Heavily loaded areas are typically main driveways, dumpster sites, or areas wit truck traffic. The pavement section recommendations and guidelines presented in this report are based on o experience in the area and on what has been successful in similar situations. As with a pavements, especially those underlain by silty soils, some maintenance and repair of limited are can be expected as the pavement ages. To provide for a design without the need for any rep r would be uneconomical. General Earthwork and Structural Fill All building and pavement areas should be stripped of surface vegetation, topsoil, organic soil, arid other deleterious material. The stripped or removed materials should not be mixed with arty materials to be used as structural fill, but they could be used in non-structural areas, such 0 s landscape beds. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 9 Structural fill is defined as any fill placed under a building, behind permanent retaining or foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soil needs to support loads. All structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture content at, or near, the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is that moisture content that results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of fill is very important and must be closely controlled during the filling and compaction process. The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type selected, the compaction equipment used, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. The loose lift thickness should not exceed 12 inches. We recommend testing the fill as it is placed. If the fill is not compacted to specifications, it can be recompacted before another lift is placed. This eliminates the need to remove the fill to achieve the required compaction. The following table presents recommended relative compactions for structural fill: Location of Minimum Fill Placement Relative Compaction Beneath footings, slabs 95% or walkways Behind retaining walls 90% 95% for upper 12 inches of Beneath pavements subgrade; 90% below that level , Where: Minimum Relative Compaction is the ratio, expressed in percentages, of the compacted dry density to the maximum dry density, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D 1557-78(Modified Proctor). Considerations for reuse of the on-site soils as structural fill are discussed in the General section. Structural fill that will be placed in wet weather should consist of an imported, coarse, granular so I with a silt or clay content of no more than 5 percent. The percentage of particles passing the N. 200 sieve should be measured from that portion of soil passing the three-quarter-inch sieve. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they existed at the time of our exploration and assume that the soil and groundwater conditions encountered in the test pits are representative of subsurface conditions on the site. If thle subsurface conditions encountered during construction are significantly different from those observed in our explorations, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered on construction sites and cannot be fully anticipated by merely taking soil samples in test pits. Subsurface conditions can also vary between exploration locations. Suci unexpected conditions frequently require making additional expenditures to attain a proper y constructed project. It is recommended that the owner consider providing a contingency fund o accommodate such potential extra costs and risks. This is a standard recommendation for II projects. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 10 This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of SEB, Incorporated, and its representatives, for specific application to this project and site. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on observed site materials, and selective laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Our conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance with current standards of practice within the scope of our services and within budget and time constraints. No warranty is expressed or implied. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. We recommend including this report, in its entirety, in the project contract documents so the contractor may be aware of our findings. ADDITIONAL SERVICES In addition to reviewing the final plans, Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be retained to provide' geotechnical consultation, testing, and observation services during construction. This is to confirm that subsurface conditions are consistent with those indicated by our exploration, to evaluate whether earthwork and foundation construction activities comply with the general intent of the recommendations presented in this report, and to provide suggestions for design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction However, our work would not include the supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor and its employees or agents. Also, job and site safety, and dimensional measurement will be the responsibility of the contractor. The following plates are attached to complete this report: Plate 1 Vicinity Map Plate 2 Site Exploration Plan Plates 3 - 8 Test Pit Logs Plate 9 Footing Drain Detail GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 11 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. R• Mc� �� w tip, mot.C).4. it 27845 , �v 5/z5,1/17 EXPIRES 14/25 h7 Marc R. McGinnis, P.E. Associate DBG/MRM: alt GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. # / 7,011MMNIIMEmh • f : A%.; ',di'.i i -; \ B-.4,•'-' .. y• . .1 1 i 1.2)is I4stH • ›. .s St 4 " .... ss"..•• . • " I ' ---- Swt-I-- 17 .1- i17,7.71 .... , ' ,,, I ".' ' I ••'1 "I 1. \.•• I 7 I k-r.-.."1.1:-Sr I ;_'• •,,,%. •11 ,, 1•/,•• ' • •.: ....•. s:III: '•'I 'I. ' I •- •. •' 1:, 5 '••• f • t s oikr•tve .,,... ; • .\ 'r•:WV,::'.. .?'"/" 'il, --8-7-1..._ 1 , r . 1.1 .. 't .. • ''"'-'.11. L t 9, • .? s; ... 1' '1•2 P.......•.- . .• •' s;. I 1 • 5, slp sl.4i •••• ...t.,• : ,.,• . • ,,,...„ .... .4 1,50-,;4 "I •L-.II-4 ••,---•sa: ;• - ...,-,,,,,, 1 ' . -; 150,-,:•!. .—'. :: ';;\ 12‘, ... '.:.,. ...,,x-:. k,-,,,._ .,,,....j...:=--,--; , ; ;,„, 4 • • _. 6 rlaT sT .°_, . 1. i—X-.\--: 22 ---F, 2; \. 1--2-23,A- 1 : '. IL . ..4 \ . y:.,* _______„,, ,f,. • ..1,..., _ . = ,...\ _.,c...-;,..ii.1. ',,I,,,, \4,,,,,)01, 3 rS.T,i:_____„„e...7,7.27 :\_S_LSIT:p.s: T .:11.4:,•i •,,,,...,7:t.,,.,, : ,s, ... „. 1 iv.:77:„N li? i s,. 7 en.c.,,,....:,.............::: 5 ar , i f•••••i il : .•....E.: -•'• - sq4--\- ,.1.- "24 -- • - ' '.• .,1" 5 1 ' ••• I —. .'" \,. ritfc. -I '4%'.•‘.t• • ..11j. 1 '‘.% • '.2. : ;' .......::••••\‘. t 4•lit. .. •• ••\..........‘\ I. 4 \ r.;_ts,:,••sr eiVrto -ill....:;A:... / rr 1: i,Long a cr t s - . .: 1 \\, .....— ii,t !. .i li • 52•""--r/e•--*-1 -, ,- . IS. ....ST / i. ,58I or 1;ST „. - ‘ 4 2 I I ''. ;1Race!• • ••••1,,, 2 ... ,w,....r. 17. % ....::::::: wILA s t'' 7. i • „iv 2,s, s, ''',•1 ' To. -"I' .1L!'•q. p...,...: %.7 :t. :::::::::::::..•::.::...:...., ...., ..I. iii ty4% . "•-•'''I Trark • ' ' r• :3.. ___.,,it • :.‘'.... .4.. •:•:.:•:•.•.•:.:•:•:•:.:••: 17,:•' • . ,t4._ • .:::"..i‘.,\ , cw,131114 ST ..4_..,..I. ,'._:4L- ..... I ..:1R......7f ih. ; % ..1" :::;•,...!..........•••'.......':'--..I 4..5 •'4q..'"':-' "......-. "• ' IV C; 14 ‘ -- j RE\TON A'3 ,. ....,..- < . .., ...;•ritiFi. !... ,, :i ::::/.,..m.:/py:N:.:•1,, • - -11..rt: ,7 ; R NT_ON____.:-: ).. 1 , ,i,..,•,1,,,,,,...,,i. 2 4,....,. , --iliNk. .....1.1„„... . f:. L=-.,\, - ..., .I JC.ALCIICINL:._'_; -- •-4i.„,• N.S,L;f:-If 74:',.411::.S' '. I s. p ,, 1,..._Uarrt•.-1. . -. '"- -TT: ...:.:s.•...•...........it— . • • , ___ Sw}T.si , Ps 'ft,. i• ., i '-';•. SM. 1 •„. , ,...„.. ._ , '. • .P • •;',..'''• .-'-' • r! stR4NC.C. SLVD sl . ....., -. .......51-.-"-, .;• tn 1 •r .'i 1...\•%$. 04.7!•-•„0„,. t -D...iiinkTI, ‘::i i 1 II I• Pt.,'VI.44`'r. ' "1'.1.I.S.T.t...s! . I 4, 0,0,... bd: mg SW MI.SI I 4' . -4 , 1 T. . *. *. 7 t.I7- st_ • x t , 2 6 I flo, ). *1 -''': : 25. 1 c1; ...;,...,„;?, -...,. . ' , ....,, \ \ '.------- ''''''''''' -''' -,. ' F.. .._ . -.••••'1 •s ..i. ';•.•:;',•' ','5; 3 s .70,...!,...1 ' 1 TUtKW ILA : '---- ve; , .5vir pst III:, IL., ss:...up . sf = ;.! .1 . s.- . . — E-AT-A, CIi , ' --..4.,;!, ; , • 1 . •/ i,..., - v • Sr .. , . 6.) :. , '-...,••• .' . c,....„.:_,J. . . , . ,. . ,,....,.. -L'v.---1-. -- . 0 ....,„•„5,5 blVt"• 11, 6: . . ... — •• •— • • • • ....,,,,,,,. ..„,„.: 1 17— ... •-_ • ..r...... e6.. .-i ... . .,.,.„ .. . ,; s.1,,.. I! _____ • ,,•11 . „-*/ .. .,• -1..4 1!,'IV-V.1 • a :..' c*• I '.1 h. ..._...,i: ,, • --„:,...131-''''.;'''.''.::‘•-•';' , . . i .,, . ,, . , \'‘ I . SA ot,, , P 'I / tAltI1C''''.' ' ..,„..,,t.--.1•W- ite , 114004..11 1 4__F:••1 ,`.,- s'---2,„„__L--,—,' ..,,,„, . ,,, `.,, .,...„•,_.,.., : —.1.----ii g'> - .: ‘ 41,,ail. ..r...... .1 ....,.._. ,._.....,4 I ' . -..: 4 OPIL.-I A ' I 2.r. . : 11 ":' ig Yi,.' . .'! ' ' ; .j.‘ **,-4 ::2': !• sw i , 1 ,, . \_13 ,,..,.. I ../. .....,...j.. . . ..... ..., . . . ,..... ....,431'_,Il_ ...1 ST_. ' -.-1,P''' f• st 1. • 1 1 i-% ' ' I I ,904,(a,.,::..9 '.i.- li,,.....t", s, I "- I . .4 . • . J I I i itlort-i , ..., .. A ...: •,,,,,,,. s ,,i:vi. • --,, ,4 4 i , ,-;• .. 7. ,... :4•'• 4 T. 'IT' , 5 't —i•••:••••••tok I \Is ' .II;I -1/4 /' 4in' - " " 0 i 7.g •,:. ...,..1.........,r • , • :: , , . •..,•,•,,• .... , 4,,, i 36 -• ,., „.• , ...z. --- , -• • v...y1r$ 7- .,..,.,Sr ••• ' 4 • ) 1 ; SITE r ,*Tv ..:" I.S- .• . _soli .P.AN,K, •O, . r . ,.. Y ,: ..--..f... ,,..„.„1 .. .. .„.._.,,...... .s, .„../ ,: Ssr If , i ';' ... • i .,• ,,, .y.. St.,.. 0 „;;Vis• --1 el !: • .. I -_, . • c.,,,.. .., - - ,.:,, ,-ni •*---" r'7 .., k "• :• • •s ,,,,....s, i -.•:: T 31L. '‘z-jL"i I •. .s_ss. _s__ > SI 27:7- . 1- ; ...._ I. 7 ..// .....).1-Li , I • - i: l',.• ' • ,...t-2...';..$;,)':j.. s-T ..v __ ....."' 1. --- - -2, ••I .%, __„,,,,,,..9 _s1._,, •..,,...- ..:.1 ...__.......:j,..,1:„.A.2__-7040 Sr N._Jont4(/_. 1.....Thva.ror __ . 7 >I )... .; • .1 • ss, •• .., se)..4•?.;.? 5, ----I r---.\ ., . --_ • ......._....._.... „,, r ,.., ...I I .. - ..,...' r\1 T• 1 ,i...a.• .• i 1 i:!..• , cs sl . s ,...•....1 .2 ..s,di...;,-r K E IN I '9 ..,_:__s_fm!s•st L....!' ',-, • .. 9 q9 .71 •y•- .,, , •_, I r .. ., ' -‘-1-'-— ,,!! ,,as ; l I US j 4 ' ' ir- ; / i- ',...'" • • 1.••.. ... 5--M111—. --St_._-1-' .)- ; , 1•.;1[ . .. .. 1 In •.0.: > 6).- i..r.i> ., • . i 4 , '.fa' .1 A V.4.4144.V_, . s..,,t •I .••••• %I • I- ("1 2 - • ' , , •., , .,;.,I 4 ,,... . '..,•• ----1 3.\-1-An_ I I ,,,,,,,,,.;.,fgeS,ACY i F%'F. r :• r!I . -'11 _Z1D' .1. ::• .51 isc ...qr. --..= .' l •.! • .* ••,''. ..1... .1 ,1,... r-. :I . •ir.,' st :, A 's R . r:.5 .C..-ZTZ-hts V• ST I I' ,..,..., D —=. '. i s --s,-.0.i__s•__E „::'...!:1;.'! ,• ' 1 ] VICINITY MAP ilt GEOTECH S.E.B., INC. ,•_.1 j \ . CONSULTANTS 186XX TALBOT RD. S. KING COUNTY, WA 3)„1 1 Plot, , Dolt:= Job No. ^'"w"Mm'olgi -"---____-,-.. ---- s•. 99189 MAY 1999 1 OTP-6 ATP-5 0 P-4 , 0 TP-7 A P-3 L4TP-8 2 ATP-9 AT -2 0 TP-10 o z O C) GITP-11 oc a F- EXISTING HOUSE OTP-12 AT -1 N TALBOT RD. S. LEGEND: APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION SITE EXPLORATION PLAN *1GEOTECH s.E.B., INc. CONSULTANTS 186XX TALBOT RD. S. KING COUNTY, WA Job No.' Dale' Platt. 99189 MAY 1999 2 • °�` TEST PIT 1 ti� c< Acyo` ��\�� G5 �c4 Go , 9" Description TOPSOIL Red-brown, silty SAND with some gravel, fine-grained, wet, medium-dense (Weathered Glacial Till) 15.7% - becomes gray-brown, dense to very dense (Glacial Till) 5 - - 13.9% II SM' 10 — * Test Pit was terminated at 12 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. 15— * No caving was observed during excavation. TEST PIT 2 co Go��4�acfr��c JSG� Description TOPSOIL Red-brown, silty SAND with gravel, fine-grained, moist, medium-dense (Weathered Glacial Till) - becomes gray-brown, dense to very dense (Glacial Till) 5 SM _ II - more gravelly and occasional cobbles within till 10 — I ; * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South CONSULTANTS, INC. King County, Washington Job No: ` Date: 'Logged by: I Plate: 99189 I May 1999 DBG 3 °i` TEST PIT 3 c " (,o��2fi��a��0 ,)SG Description TOPSOIL Red-gray, silty SAND with gravel and iron staining, fine-grained, very moist, medium-dense (Weathered Glacial Till) 5 — ,, SM - becomes brown to gray, dense to very dense (Glacial Till) 1 10 — .— * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15 00 TEST PIT 4 G5 �,o�� yro�� • ON Go 'Sa �5 Description TOPSOIL , I,ti l l ! Brown, gravelly, silty SAND with cobbles, fine-grained, moist, medium-dense SM 5 — Brown SILT, fractured, low plasticity, moist, stiff, iron stained _ ML ,lsp.smil Brown, slightly silty SAND, fine-to medium-grained, very moist, dense 10 — _ * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15 — TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South CONSULTANTS,INC. King County, Washington __ _ Jo99189 I DMay 1999 I LoggBG by: 'Plate: 4 �� ,� t TEST PIT 5 tia 4o r�,.‹�a\ tie o$ 9�4 Go ,�a \$ Description TOPSOIL and Forest Duff HI I I Brown, gravelly, silty SAND, fine-grained, moist, medium-dense SM 11111'5 Brown, slightly silty SAND, medium-grained, moist, medium-dense - becomes finer grained ISP•SM - becomes gravelly 10 — SM Brown with iron staining, silty, gravelly SAND, medium-to coarse-grained, wet, dense * Test Pit was terminated at 11 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— • oic TEST PIT 6 w`r C`or�� , �ab\� 6$ �c� Go ,�a �5 Description _ TOPSOIL and Forest Duff Brown, silty SAND with some gravel, moist, medium-grained, medium-dens SM 5 Brown-gray, silty SAND with some gravel, fine-grained, moist, dense to ver dense (Glacial Till) SM - becomes very moist 10 — * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— TEST PIT LOG ,44 GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South CONSULTANTS,INC. King County, Washington Job No: I May 1999 Date: 99189 I Logged by: 'Plate: DBG 5 °il TEST PIT 7 9o4q �Gor�o��fa>N� JSG� Description TOPSOIL and Forest Duff ,[1 Red-brown, silty SAND with gravel, fine-grained, moist, medium-dense _ 1 g 2% Gray-brown, gravelly SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, wet, medium-dense 5 — - becomes dense `SP — 10 — -J— Brown, silty, gravelly SAND, fine-grained, moist, very dense (Glacial Till) * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. * Moderate groundwater seepage was observed at 6 feet during excavation. — * No caving was observed during excavation. — 15— {� air TEST PIT 8 \`'\ • 'k. '�\ ,` w� +0 ,,c((.� awro\� G5 , 90. Go ,Sa �S5 Description TOPSOIL Gray-brown with iron staining, silty SAND, fine-grained, wet, medium-dense — ! (Weathered Glacial Till) — - becomes slightly gravelly 5 —. — GSM I - becomes dense (Glacial Till) 10 - - * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. — * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. — * No caving was observed during excavation. — 15— • TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South __44 CONSULTANTS,INC. King County, Washington ., _ � - __ Jo99189 l DMay 1999 1Loggedby: 1Plate: 6 \ toI` TEST PIT 9 (� �'0o�`�r�, �°�� SG� Description TOPSOIL 111, 11 5 ,— SM Red-brown to gray with extensive iron staining, clayey SILT and fine-grained — v ML SAND, wet, loose to medium-dense — I Gray, fine-grained SAND with some silt, very moist to wet, medium-dense to SP•SM dense 10 -- III * Test Pit was terminated at 10.5 feet on May 14, 1999. * Light groundwater seepage was observed at 6.5 feet during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— e TEST PIT 10 ist\o fi� �a��e G5 9,� cp , a �5 Description TOPSOIL Brown-gray with iron staining, silty SAND, fine-grained, wet, medium-dense, (Weathered Glacial Till) 5 SM 12.3% - becomes dense to very dense (Glacial Till) * Test Pit was terminated at 8 feet on May 14, 1999. 10 — * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South CONSULTANTS,INC. King County, Washington Job No: I Date: 'Logged by: I Plate: "ram-` 99189 May 1999 DBG 7 �1. °il TEST PIT 11 lr' o�C'�2r�a�.,\' G5 964 Go „spY Description TOPSOIL 1 Gray-brown with iron staining, silty SAND with trace gravel, fine-grained, wet, loose to medium-dense (Weathered Glacial Till) — SM - becomes very dense (Glacial Till) 5 — , II Hill II — _ * Test Pit was terminated at 6 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 10 — 15-- <0 °IO\ TEST PIT 12 Ail ��' x �< 9Qi ' C,0- ,Sa,°�� SG, Description TOPSOIL — Brown-gray with iron staining, silty SAND with trace gravel, very moist, _ medium-dense (Weathered Glacial Till) - becomes very dense (Glacial Till) 5 — SMI 10 — * Test Pit was terminated at 9 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. — * No caving was observed during excavation. 15 — TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South 'T CONSULTANTS, INC. King County, Washington A Job No: I May 1999 Date: 'Logged by: 'Plate: 99189 DBG I 8 Slope bockfill away from foundation. \ ✓� T/GHTL/NE ROOF DRAIN ' ® Do not connect to footing drain. , n BACKFILL See ire for 1 VAPOR BARRIER requirements. SLAB WASHED ROCK °.'.'o'. "\t. `< 4"min. f FREE-DRAINING NONWOVEN GEOTEXTILE SAND/GRAVEL FILTER FABRIC 4"PERFORATED HARD PVC PIPE Inver/ of least as low as footing and/or crawl space. Slope to drain. Place weepho/es downward. 1 FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL _ -4GEOTECH S.E.B., INC. do CONSULTANTS 186XX TALBOT RD. S. KING COUNTY, WA Job No.: Dote: Scale: , Pit �','"' 99189 MAY 1999 N.T.S. 9 llt'i C�+ 1Jy� HIUP UJ. 10 nt JIL H I HILL: t'HA NU, LUO(4UUJJU C. LI1 ui-I- -vi, DEVELOPMENT Pt✓'.r�. CITY OF F+ENTO ,I STEWART TITLE OF WASHINGTON $LP 2 9 is 700 51"Avenue,Suite 5500 `'� Seattle,WA 98104 RECEIv 0 Fax Cover Sheet From: Julie O'Sullivan Phone: (206) 770-8807 LEA:71.0PMEMT Fax: (206) 748-0536 Cl"IY OF FtEtvTOIJ so 2 B 19P9 To: Sieul RECEIVED Company: Fax: 2 3 -- - i Z Pages Including cover: Comments: I ft .. CM) Mirtnte YOCI-) licit CY 1000 Hull UJ• 11 1II kilt—min I I I ILL •••• ••"• —"'• - " • STEWART TITLE 18000 International Boulevard South, Suite 510 SeaTac, Washington 98188 Phone: (206) 770-8700 Fax: (206) 770-8750 Title Officer: JACK WHEIR Title Assistant: Your Reference: YODER!SEB INCORPORATED Order Number: 1999004 5 Escrow Number: 19990045 SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: May 5, 1999 at 8:00 a.m. 2. Policy Or Policies To Be Issued: ( X ) ALTA OWNER'S POLICY Amount: $140,000.00 ( X ) STANDARD ( ) EXTENDED Premium: '$640.00 HOMEOWNER'S RATE Tax: $55.04 Total: $ 695.d4 Proposed Insured: SEB INCORPORATED, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION ( ) ALTA LOAN POLICY Amount: ( ) STANDARD ( ) EXTENDED Premium: Tax: Total: $ 0.. TO BE DETERMINED 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: FEE SIMPLE 4. Title to said estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: ERVIN E. YODER AND BERNICE YODER, HUSBAND AND WIFE 5. The land referred to in this commitment is described in Exhibit "A". Page 1 Order Number: 1999004 luIl L't 1JJJ IIUII 1U 111 n11L1111L1.1 I11LL 1 RIl IIU. LUUIVUUJJU 1 . 4J/ • YOD1? EXHIBIT "A" THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THE WEST 1,040.00 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. , IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; LYING EASST OF COUNTY ROAD NUMBER 80. KNOWN AS KENT-RENTON ROAD; AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 124.00 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 100 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT ROADS. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. THE DESCRIPTION CAN BE ABBREVIATED AS SUGGESTED BELOW IF NECESSARY TO MEET STANDARDIZATION REQUIREMENTS, THE FULL TEXT OF THE DESCRIPTION MUST APPEAR IN THE DOCUMENT(S) TO BE INSURED. PTN SE4, 31-23-05 Page 2 Order Number: 199900 •5 l u•• '_ 1 UUU 11V11 VJ• Ill I IL U I LY!I11\I I I I L.L. l 11(1 11U. LUU I'tUUJJU ( , I.P1/ r SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 THE FOLLOWING ARE THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE COMPLIED WITH: ITEM (A) PAYMENT TO OR FOR THE ACCOUNT OF THE GRANTORS OR MORTGAGORS OF THE FULL CONSIDERATION FOR THE ESTATE OR INTEREST TO BE INSURED. ITEM (B) PROPER INSTRUMENT(S) CREATING THE ESTATE OR INTEREST TO BE INSURED MUST BE EXECUTED AND DULY FILED FOR RECORD NOTE: EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1997, AND PURSUANT TO AMENDMENT OF WASHINGTON STATE STATUTES RELATING TO STANDARDIZATION OF RECORDED DOCUMENTS, THE FOLLOWING FORMAT AND CONTENT REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET. FAILURE TO COMPLY MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF THE DOCUMENT BY THE RECORDER. FORMAT: MARGINS TO BE 3" ON TOP OF FIRST PAGE, 1" ON SIDES AND BOTTOM, 1" ON TOI SIDES AND BOTTOM OF EACH SUCCEEDING PAGE. FONT SIZE OF 8 POINTS OR LARGER AND PAPER SIZE OF NO MORE THAN 8 Y7 B` 14". NO ATTACHMENTS ON PAGES SUCH AS STAPLED OR TAPED NOTARY SEALS, PRESSURE SEALS MUST BE SMUDGED. INFORMATION WHICH MUST APPEAR ON THE FIRST PAGE: TITLE OR TITLES OF DOCUMENT. IF ASSIGNMENT OR RECONVEYANCE REFERENCE TO AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER OR SUBJECT DEED OF TRUST. NAMES OF GRANTOR(S)AND GRANTEE(S) WITH REFERENCE TO ADDITIONAL NAMES ON FOLLOWING PAGE(S), IF ANY. ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION (LOT, BLOCK, PLAT NAME OR SECTION, TOWNSHIP, RANGE AND QUARTER QUARTER SECTION FOR UNPLATTED). ASSESSOR'S TAX PARCEL NUMBER(S) RETURN ADDRESS WHICH MAY APPEAR IN THE UPPER LEFT HAND 3" TOP MARGIN Page 3 Order Number: 1999004 5 11111 LZ 1VVV 11'./11 VV` IV 111 V•L.r...... • . ..-•... - ---- --- - SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS THE POLICY OR POLICIES TO BE ISSUED WILL CONTAIN EXCEPTIONS TO THE FOLLOWING UNLESS THE SAME ARE DISPOSED OF TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMPANY. A. TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN AS EXISTING LIENS BY THE RECORDS OF ANY TAXING AUTHORITY THAT LEVIES TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY OR BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. B. ANY FACTS. RIGHTS, INTEREST, OR CLAIMS WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS BUT WHICH COULD BE ASCERTAINED BY AN INSPECTION OF SAID LAND OR BY MAKING INQUIRY OF PERSONS IN POSSESSION THEREOF. C. EASEMENTS, CLAIMS OF EASEMENT OR ENCUMBRANCES WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. D. DISCREPANCIES, CONFLICTS IN BOUNDARY LINES, SHORTAGE IN AREA, ENCROACHMENTS, OR ANY OTHER FACTS WHICH A CORRECT SURVEY WOULD DISCLOSE, AND WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN BY PUBLIC RECORDS. E. (A) UNPATENTED MINING CLAIMS, (B) RESERVATIONS OR EXCEPTIONS IN PATENTS OR IN ACTS AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE THEREOF; (C) WATER RIGHTS, CLAIMS OR TITLE TO WATER; WHETHER OR NOT THE MATTERS EXCEPTED UNDER (A), (B) OR (C) ARE SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS, (D) INDIAN TRIBAL CODES OR REGULATIONS, INDIAN TREATY OR ABORIGINAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING EASEMENTS OR EQUITABLE SERVITUDES. F. ANY LIEN, OR RIGHT TO A LIEN, FOR SERVICES, LABOR OR MATERIAL THERETOFORE OR HEREAFTER FURNISHED, IMPOSED BY LAW AND NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. G. ANY SERVICE, INSTALLATION. CONNECTION, MAINTENANCE, CONSTRUCTION, TAP OR REIMBURSEMENT CHARGES/COSTS FOR SEWER. WATER, GARBAGE OR ELECTRICITY. H. DEFECTS, LIENS, ENCUMBRANCES, ADVERSE CLAIMS OR OTHER MATTERS, IF ANY, CREATED, FIRST APPEARING IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OR ATTACHING SUBSEQUENT TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF BUT PRIOR TO THE DATE THE PROPOSED INSURED ACQUIRES OF RECORD FOR VALUE THE ESTATE OR INTEREST OR MORTGAGES THEREON COVERED BY THIS COMMITMENT. END OF GENERAL EXCEPTIONS Page 4 Order Number: 199900�155 Hu.. L`t 1 000 111)I1 UJ. 1 U III J I L1'r1(C I I 1 ILL FHA IVU. LU0(4000JU I . • SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 CONTINUED SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS 1, LIEN OF THE REAL ESTATE EXCISE SALES TAX AND SURCHARGE UPON ANY SALE OF SAID PREMISES, IF UNPAID. AS OF THE DATE HEREIN, THE EXCISE TAX RATE FOR CITY OF RENTON IS 1.78%. 2. GENERAL TAXES, THE FIRST HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER APRIL 30T". THE SECOND HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER OCTOBER 31sT YEAR: 1999 AMOUNT BILLED: $1,853.93 AMOUNT PAID: $ 926.97 AMOUNT DUE: $ 926.96, PLUS INTEREST AND PENALTY, IF DELINQUENT LEVY CODE: 2127__ TAX ACCOUNT NO.: ( 312305-9095-08 ASSESSED VALUE OF LAND: $136,000.00`` ASSESSED VALUE OF IMPROVEMENT: $ 1,900.00 3_ MATTERS REGARDING EXTENDED COVERAGE FOR THE MORTGAGEE'S POLICY WHICH ARE DEPENDENT UPON INSPECTION FOR DETERMINATION OF INSURABILITY. THE RESULTS OF OUR INSPECTION WILL BE FURNISHED BY SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT. ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: NOT AVAILABLE THE COVERAGE CONTEMPLATED BY THIS PARAGRAPH WILL NOT BE AFFORDED IN THE OWNER'S POLICY. 4. EVIDENCE OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE OFFICERS OF SEB INCORPORATED, A CORPORATION, TO EXECUTE THE FORTHCOMING INSTRUMENT. COPIES OF THE CURRENT ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, BY LAWS AND CERTIFIED COPIES OF APPROPRIATE RESOLUTIONS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO CLOSING. 5. TERMS, COVENANTS. CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, AS CONTAINED IN UNRECORDED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 873047 AS DISCLOSED BY THE KING COUNTY TAX ROLLS. 6. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CIITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR WATER SERVICE: RECORDED: MARCH 26, 1984 RECORDING NO.: 8403260504 7. A RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED JULY 9, 1984 UNDER RECORDING NO. 8407099008, Page 5 Order Number: 1999004.",5 1 llli �� IVVV /IVII VV• IV 111 IJILnIII\1 HILL 11111 11V. LVV I'TVV VVV 1 . a'I I • • 8. EASEMENT, INCLUDING TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN: RECORDED: MAY 16, 1941 RECORDING NO.: 3165342 FOR: LAY AND MAINTAIN A 1 INCH GALVANIZED PIPE THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONTAINED IN SAID EASEMENT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO DETERMINE ITS EXACT LOCATION WITHIN SAID PREMISES NOTES: NOTE A: IN ORDER TO ASSURE TIMELY RECORDING ALL RECORDING PACKAGES SHOULD BE SENT TO: STEWART TITLE 700 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5500 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 ATTN: RECORDER NOTE B: ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION FOR TITLE INSURANCE, TITLE IS TO VEST IN SEB INCORPORATED. EXAMINATION OF THE RECORDS DISCLOSES NO MATTERS PENDING AGAINST SAID PARTY(IES). END OF SCHEDULE B Copies to: STEWART TITLE OF WASHINGTON - SEATTLE 700 5TH AVENUE, #5500 SEATTLE, WA 98104 ATTENTION: CYNDI PEDERSEN Page 6 Order Number: 1999004 1.11/1 Ill.). CUU 1 40U0JU I , LAO/1.11111 GY-1000 HUI UJ. 10 Ill 0 11:-Virlli 1 I 1 ILL . . , . . r -• &WWI ORDER NO. / 9 ? c1 Do.e .,c;- 1111111.1113 Section Township Rance Sanctity of Contract Short Plat Rec.No. STEWART TITLE volume p.ir A ] . 0. 1/ --,....:) . (..,_-. : r [; ::•,•e_.....---;-..„ 1 ,.. .1 . ... zt .... ,.. c.,ri• .......11'.• A 6z.i., , r _,.. .:•-c-....vv.. 1 It, i . e01- .1f1 .... ../1.4 •C [-: T , ,. r J % •P . a i,..„i' ' ., .04) . . 1nil 1 111 v ) ..i. ...-;.:. 9/ ,...7 0 . til .Trt/ ...1 )10 I .„s n,y.,4•11 r e e,„ < j eri•CA". et.fr •••••• J 1'W. l' • 0. ....,,, . •,....•,le.4 JP,:4' 4. •' i ) I • t I 5 a 8 3-Fi'CICZ11;3)( :: 2.,,23 2z. v:zo II , ISUttl,i0),..i. i 6.!..4 i l'e'. ..,leer•Ie e•V .• .r_i‘ •I .0 ...a ..e. , 1 .4..'1---• . ".4`'...."..7•-"'.-is-.1:;:.:*7...-...- ‘4 " ... : ::. '.;-:.''.',----' 131 COO.1 .1 , 'I••--..'....--:::Li:4 a ....111et:i ! , ;3 . 4. _,_ „? ,„t T.....:'.414' '? 4 - _ , 1301:05 A TR 14 --.,"ii,.14 ? ,.. ,. TR,a .,... t. . ,.:. .J:.., .... S i'•* ..,,/ ‘...... . ..1....,.:"'! SUMMII. _— S-4,1377..,,...CT ...:_. ........ ....v.-, .'4.,',..,,'..514,T*4 04 .:;..7..„,.„.. i../•-04•11 ...:3 • •./ .• . 4. 6 fe.I. •• •• ••• ..--' Fli:‘•• T,t.r; a :iz:4;••.' -t--- . . ' z r • „..1 1 IJ 4.3 -.3, 4; 5: 41 T/4,4,cvo'40 ,f,T,•••••,... Ir I 1 .4 4 : •14,,,,,) ,' ..,4 V4s. 01. 0 0 P.o •4. , N. I l'' '--'• "4 ••••••,t ..4•••-d-s•r.i 414.*) • .1** t.1 , ;I (.., • ...,n t.....7: ...,,, ..•_-.1.. ...Of' •••11.•.••••:......,IV,4 1 This sketch is provided without charge for your information. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property inchiling. but not limited to area, dimensions, easements, encroachments or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify. the commitment or policy to which it is attached. The company assumes NO LIABILITY for any matter related to this sketch. Re icreni should be made to an accurate survey for further information. Orrin 11116111131 Sanctity of Contract STEWART TITLE 18000 International Boulevard, Suite 510 SeaTac, Washington 98188 Phone: (206) 770-8700 Fax: (206) 770-8750 SEB INCORPORATED 240 STADIUM WAY SOUTH TACOMA, WASHINGTON 98402 ATTN: STEVE BERG THANK YOU FOR USING STEWART TITLE Arnoncan Land I illo Association Cornmilrnonl - 19bb COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY t 74,' STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, A Texas Corporation, herein called the Company, for a valuabl= i consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, i favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. Signed under seal for the Company, but this Commitment shall not be valid or binding until it bears an authorized Countersignature. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Stewart Title Guaranty Company has caused its corporate name and seal to b hereunto affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A. STENS'ART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY • Chairman of t e Board 3� com4.4r'••sa President Countersigned by: ` —*— '"a:-< art 1908 ,?o 000 Authorized Signatory Company City. State 005- UN •Rev. 3/78 STEWART TITLE 18000 International Boulevard South, Suite 510 SeaTac, Washington 98188 Phone: (206) 770-8700 Fax: (206) 770-8750 Title Officer: JACK WHEIR Title Assistant: Your Reference: 199900397 Order Number: 199900397 Escrow Number: 199900397 SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: May 5, 1999 at 8:00 a.m. 2. Policy Or Policies To Be Issued: ( X ) ALTA OWNER'S POLICY Amount: TO BE DETERMINED ( X ) STANDARD ( ) EXTENDED Premium: HOMEOWNER'S RATE Tax: Total: $ 0.00 Proposed Insured: SEB INCORPORATED, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION ( X ) ALTA LOAN POLICY Amount: TO BE DETERMINED ( ) STANDARD ( X ) EXTENDED Premium: SIMULTANEOUS RATE Tax: Total: $ 0.00 Proposed Insured: 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: FEE SIMPLE 4. Title to said estate or interest in said land is at the effective date hereof vested in: G. WARREN DIAMOND AND R. ELAINE DIAMOND, HUSBAND AND WIFE 5. The land referred to in this commitment is described in Exhibit "A". Page 1 Order Number: 199900397 t71 A kc d� D EXHIBIT "A" THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A: THE SOUTH HALF OF THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, WHICH LIES EAST OF THE COUNTY ROAD NUMBER 80, KNOWN AS THE KENT-RENTON ROAD; EXCEPT THE WEST 250 FEET OF THE SOUTH 135 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 375 FEET THEREOF. PARCEL B: THE WEST 250 FEET OF THE SOUTH 135 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, WHICH LIES EAST OF COUNTY ROAD NUMBER 80, KNOWN AS KENT-RENTON ROAD. THE DESCRIPTION CAN BE ABBREVIATED AS SUGGESTED BELOW IF NECESSARY TO MEET STANDARDIZATION REQUIREMENTS. THE FULL TEXT OF THE DESCRIPTION MUST APPEAR IN THE DOCUMENT(S) TO BE INSURED. PTN SE4, 31-23-05 Page 2 Order Number: 1999003E ' SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 THE FOLLOWING ARE THE REQUIREMENTS TO BE COMPLIED WITH:ITEM ( ) p,GOR: A PAYMENT TO OR FOR THE ACCOUN TOE ESTATETHEG N IONRS FOR MOO G OF THE FULL CONSIDERATION FOR INSURED. RES ITEM (B) PROPER IN STRUMENT(S) CREATING THE ESTATE OR I TE RD T TO BE INSURED MUST BE EXECUTED AND DULY FILED FOR REC AMENDMENT OF NO TE: EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1997, AND EURSUANT LATING TO SOTANDARDIZAT ON OF WASHINGTON STATE STATUTES RECORDED DOCUMENTS, THE FOLLO TO OOMPLY MRMAT RESULT IN CONTENT REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET. FAILURE REJECTION OF THE DOCUMENT BY THE RECORDER. FORMAT: MA RGINS TO BE 3" ON TOP OF FIRST PAGE, 1" ON PAGE AND BOTTOM, 1" ON TOP, SIDES AND BOTTOM OF EACH SUCCEEDING FON T SIZE OF 8 POINTS OR LARGER AND PAPER SIZE OF NO MORE THAN 8 i' B 14". NO ATTACHMENTS ON PAGES SUCH AS STAPLED OR TAPED NOTARY SEALS, PRESSURE SEALS MUST BE SMUDGED. INFORMATION WHICH MUST APPEAR ON THE FIRST PAGE: VEYANCE N TITLE OR TITLES OF DOCUMENT.NUMBER OR SUBJOER RDEOD OF TRUST. REFERENCE TO AUDITOR'S FILE NAM ES OF GRANTOR(S) AND GRANTEE(S) WITH REFERENCE TO ADDITIOIN \L NAMES ON FOLLOWING PAGE(S), IF ANY. ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION (LOT, BLOCK, PLAT NAME SECTION FOR UONPLATTED R SECTIO TOWNSHIP, RANGE AND QUARTER QUARTER ASSESSOR'S TAX PARCEL NUMBER(S) RETURN ADDRESS WHICH MAY APPEAR IN THE UPPER LEFT HAND 3" TO ' MARGIN Order Number: 19' 3003 Page 3 SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS THE POLICY OR POLICIES TO BE ISSUED WILL CONTAIN EXCEPTIONS TO THE FOLLOWING UNLESS THE SAME ARE DISPOSED OF TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMPANY. A. TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN AS EXISTING LIENS BY THE RECORDS OF ANY TAXING AUTHORITY THAT LEVIES TAXES OR ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY OR BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. B. ANY FACTS, RIGHTS, INTEREST, OR CLAIMS WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS BUT WHICH COULD BE ASCERTAINED BY AN INSPECTION OF SAID LAND OR BY MAKING INQUIRY OF PERSONS IN POSSESSION THEREOF. C. EASEMENTS, CLAIMS OF EASEMENT OR ENCUMBRANCES WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. D. DISCREPANCIES, CONFLICTS IN BOUNDARY LINES, SHORTAGE IN AREA, ENCROACHMENTS, OR ANY OTHER FACTS WHICH A CORRECT SURVEY WOULD DISCLOSE, AND WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN BY PUBLIC RECORDS. E. (A) UNPATENTED MINING CLAIMS, (B) RESERVATIONS OR EXCEPTIONS IN ' PATENTS OR IN ACTS AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE THEREOF; (C) WATER RIGHTS, CLAIMS OR TITLE TO WATER; WHETHER OR NOT THE MATTERS EXCEPTED UNDER (A), (B) OR (C) ARE SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS, (D) INDIAN TRIBAL CODES OR REGULATIONS, INDIAN TREATY OR ABORIGINAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING EASEMENTS OR EQUITABLE SERVITUDES. F. ANY LIEN, OR RIGHT TO A LIEN, FOR SERVICES, LABOR OR MATERIAL THERETOFORE OR HEREAFTER FURNISHED, IMPOSED BY LAW AND NOT SHOWN BY THE PUBLIC RECORDS. G. ANY SERVICE, INSTALLATION, CONNECTION, MAINTENANCE, CONSTRUCTION, TAP OR REIMBURSEMENT CHARGES/COSTS FOR SEWER, WATER, GARBAGE OR ELECTRICITY. H. DEFECTS, LIENS, ENCUMBRANCES, ADVERSE CLAIMS OR OTHER MATTERS, IF ANY, CREATED, FIRST APPEARING IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OR ATTACHING SUBSEQUENT TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF BUT PRIOR TO THE DATE THE PROPOSED INSURED ACQUIRES OF RECORD FOR VALUE THE ESTATE OR INTEREST OR MORTGAGES THEREON COVERED BY THIS COMMITMENT. END OF GENERAL EXCEPTIONS Page 4 Order Number: 19990039 SCHEDULE B - SECTION 2 CONTINUED SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS 1. LIEN OF THE REAL ESTATE EXCISE SALES TAX AND SURCHARGE UPON ANY SALE OF SAID PREMISES, IF UNPAID. AS OF THE DATE HEREIN, THE EXCISE '. TAX RATE FOR UNINCORPORATED KING COUNTY IS 1.78°/0. 2. GENERAL TAXES. THE FIRST HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER APRIL 30TH THE SECOND HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER OCTOBER 31sT YEAR: 1999 AMOUNT BILLED: $1,265.56 AMOUNT PAID: $ 632.78 AMOUNT DUE: $ 632.78, PLUS INTEREST AND PENALTY, IF DELINQUENT LEVY CODE: 2127 TAX ACCOUNT NO.: < 312305-9035-Q1-) ASSESSED VALUE OF LAND: —$94,000.00 ASSESSED VALUE OF IMPROVEMENT: $ 0.00 AFFECTS: PARCEL A 3. GENERAL TAXES. THE FIRST HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER APRIL 30TH THE SECOND HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER OCTOBER 31sT YEAR: 1999 AMOUNT BILLED: $2,055.88 AMOUNT PAID: $1,027.94 AMOUNT DUE: $1,027.94, PLUS INTEREST AND PENALTY, IF DELINQUENT LEVY CODE: TAX ACCOUNT NO.: (312305-9088-00 ASSESSED VALUE OF LAND: $ 50,000.00 ASSESSED VALUE OF IMPROVEMENT: $103,000.00 AFFECTS: PARCEL B 4. EVIDENCE OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE OFFICERS OF SEB INC., A CORPORATION, TO EXECUTE THE FORTHCOMING INSTRUMENT. COPIES OF THE CURRENT ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, BY LAWS AND CERTIFIED COPIES OF APPROPRIATE RESOLUTIONS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO CLOSING. Page 5 Order Number: 19990C 97 C5.)EASEMENT, INCLUDING TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN: RECORDED: MAY 16, 1941 RECORDING NO.: 3165342 IN FAVOR OF: W.J. MCNAUGHTON AND BIRGER OLSON FOR: TO LAY AND MAINTAIN A PIPELINE AND INTAKE. AFFECTS: BOTH PARCELS REFER TO SAID INSTRUMENT FOR THE EXACT LOCATION. CPEASEMENT, INCLUDING TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN: RECORDED: AUGUST 21, 1964 RECORDING NO.: 5776815 IN FAVOR OF: G. WARREN DIAMOND AND R. ELAINE DIAMOND, HIS WIFE FOR: A THIRTY (30) FOOT PERPETUAL RIGHT-OF-WAY, OR EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS AFFECTS: PARCEL A FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARCEL B REFER TO SAID INSTRUMENT FOR THE EXACT LOCATION. 7. LATECOMERS AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: CITY OF RENTON AND: ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT, INC. RECORDED: MAY 8, 1995 RECORDING NUMBER: 9505080322 MODIFICATION AND/OR AMENDMENT BY INSTRUMENT: DATED: AUGUST 30, 1997 RECORDED: OCTOBER 14, 1997 RECORDING NO.: 9710140140 NOTES: NOTE A: IN ORDER TO ASSURE TIMELY RECORDING ALL RECORDING PACKAGES SHOULD BE SENT TO: STEWART TITLE 700 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 5500 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 ATTN: RECORDER NOTE B: ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION FOR TITLE INSURANCE, TITLE IS TO VEST IN SEB, INC.. EXAMINATION OF THE RECORDS DISCLOSES NO MATTERS PENDING AGAINST SAID PARTY(IES). Page 6 Order Number: 19990039; NOTE C: THE SITUS ADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED IS: 18624 96TH AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 AS TO PARCEL B N/A AS TO PARCEL ANACANT LAND END OF SCHEDULE B Copies to: STEWART TITLE OF WASHINGTON - SEATTLE 700 5TH AVENUE, #5500 SEATTLE, WA 98104 ATTENTION: CYNDI PEDERSEN Page 7 Order Number: 1999003 7 WWI= /? c"cc)3 7 — ORDER NO. `. Section 731 Townshipt931\.) Range_ L Sanctity of Contract Short Plat Rec.No. STEWART TITLE Volume Page_ _ u 4 h ,r +I iA i� t of A Al 41 - 1. % . . 00 5 ./., i for —•av co - sI I I.�/CAI:I� •�tt ; .--.,,,,...ws,a a„T«a..++�.[Ti��.�`. I _. .._ ..-rvey�+,-07,44::2 ^-`0'•'.•••-- .-! , t 1`•� 0.!5 " • -..r..,.�......... .,-,.-.....«r.... •t9',111HYe+c.p.sr.•«.v:..r.w_.,....—.. --wr..,� r:'•t✓ .... r,T g l`• � �' P. L O•'I- weir A"1" PC' .1.•� �� 11(/A -t- '-:— — ,,« , Mr w 1 � 1 • l • '� + 1 808338,cor,00 241,''23'22.,21 ;20.• '•19 P. 1 SUMN►1T, IPARK l,,e tilt; t;P 11`' r• �� vot 130/14-18 a .1•lt cir ,�' :ttr tlt� ' 1. ^tom PPP C,i•1 1 rd? f 1 I �', la1 3�,0 .1 ^ '14 , .17 e.!.4 Ili *i/ 808335 ./ �• t �.. i t Y r1111 ��` 11 r t 5. 41ST CT .• , '�� „ %`.: ;,.1 s :::,or, d �`` ,m i, r,: • 1 ' ^. '.� • tills .J f. �` / .' 1.,,' 1,Iw2 •3, 4r ,; 6A•7c:eC'49 40 oil VI�,1 -1`" ''' ) , l,r This sketch is provided without charge for your information. It is not intended to show all matters related to the property includ lig, but not limited to area, dimensions, easements.encroachments or location of boundaries. It is not a part of, nor does it modify, e commitment or policy to which it is attached. The company assumes NO LIABILITY for any matter related to this sketch. Ref4rence should be made to an accurate survey for further information. **************************************************************** City of Renton WA Reprinted: 09/29/99 14 :43 Receipt **************************************************************** Receipt Number: R9904857 Amount : 1, 759 .90 09/29/99 14 :42 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: 4174 Init : CRP Project # : LUA99-136 Type: LUA Land Use Actions Parcel No: 312305-9088 Site Address : 4914 TALBOT RD S Total Fees : 1, 759 . 90 This -ayment 1, 759 .90 Total ALL Pmts : 1, 759 . 90 Balance: . 00 *******************************************************. ******** Accot:nt Code Description Amount 000 .345 . 81 . 00 . 0007 Environmental Review 500 . 00 000 . 345 . 81 . 00 . 0017 Site Plan Approval 1, 000 . 00 000 .345 . 81 . 00 . 0019 Variance Fees 250 . 00 000 . 05 . 519 .90 .42 . 1 Postage 9 .90 (46 ' 136) (y) • SOUND ENGINEERING, INC. • civil engineers•land planners PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT PREPARED -FOR: STEVE BERG AND ERIC BLITZ SEB, INC. 240 STADIUM WAY SOUTH TACOMA, WA 98402 PREPARED BY: TIMOTHY D. HOLDERMAN, P.E., PRINCIPAL c,N SOUND ENGINEERING, INC. ,, Yp VF•�i1 ,,1019 PACIFIC AVENUE, SUITE 906 4 TACOMA, WA 98402 2 � F`` � (253) 573-0040 PROJECT 99121.10 DATED 9.16.99 PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR ti Normandy Ridge Apartments Renton, Washington September 1999 Prepared for: Steve Berg and Eric Blitz SEB, Inc. 240 Stadium Way South Tacoma, WA 98402 Prepared by: Timothy D. Holderman, P.E., Principal REPORT #99121.10 PRELIMINARY STORM DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL REPORT FOR Normandy Ridge Apartments Renton, Washington September 1999 Prepared for: 1OZ.k F I`•• 'Fir »- Steve Berg and Eric Blitz A. o SEB, Inc. 240 Stadium Way South if 33748 Tacoma, WA 98402 �9 4 S/oNAL EN • Prepared by: o;piREs 1O/23/G Timothy D. Holderman, P.E., Principal REPORT #99121.10 This analysis is based on data and records either supplied to, or obtained by, Sound Engineering, Inc. These documents are referenced within the text of the analysis. This analysis has been prepared utilizing procedures and practices within the standard accepted practices of the industry. SOUND ENGINEERING, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1 1.1 Purpose and Scope 1 1.2Pre-Developed Conditions 1 1.3Post-Development Conditions 2 2.0 PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS 2 3.0 OFFSITE ANALYSIS 2 4.0 FLOW CONTROL&WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 3 4.1 Existing Site Hydrology 3 4.2Developed Site Hydrology 3 4.3Performance Standards 4 4.4Flow Control System 4 4.5Water Quality System 4 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 4 7.0 BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS 5 8.0 OTHER PERMITS 5 9.0 TESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 5 9.1 Introduction 5 9.2Design Considerations 5 9.3Design 6 10.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES & DECLARATION OF COVENANT 6 10.1 Bond Quantity Sheets 6 10.2Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch 6 10.3Declaration of Covenant 6 11.0 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL 6 Appendix "A" Vicinity Map A-1 USDA Soil Map A-2 USDA Soil Description A-3 USGS Topographic Map A-4 Appendix "B" Geotechnical Report B-1 Appendix "C" Basin Summary C-1 CN Calculations C-3 Runoff Curve Numbers C-4 Isopluvial Charts C-6 Correction Factor to Pond Volume C-9 Detention Pond Sizing C-10 Bioswale Sizing C-16 SE 1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 Purpose and Scope This report accompanies the Preliminary Grading and Storm Drainage Plan for the proposed project as submitted to City of Renton. This document provides site information and the analysis used for the preliminary storm drainage design. The City of Renton Municipal Code, Section 4-6-030, the King County Surface Water Design Manual, January 1990 have partially established the methodology and design criteria used for this project. Because the project will require an HPA permit the Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin has been utilized for water quality treatment and stormwater detention sizing. 1.2 Pre-Developed Conditions The existing site consists of a rectangular parcel totaling approximately 8.12± acres. The site is located east of Talbott Road South just north of S. 55th Street, within the City of Renton. (See Appendix 'A' for Vicinity Map.). From the proposed developed eastern portion of the property, the site slopes to the west at approximately 15%. There is a single-family house that currently located on the lower northwest portion of the site. Short grass, brush, scattered conifer trees, and a couple of small out buildings make up existing ground cover on the site. The property on the north side of the site consists of a single-family house with a few out M buildings, property on east side of the site is made up of single-family housing, and an apartment project makes up the property on the south side of the site. Bordering the west property line is Talbott Road South. 1 1.3 Post-Development Conditions The proposed project consists of the construction of 82 apartment units, parking, landscaping, recreational building, and access roads. Approximately 5.24± acres of the overall site will be disturbed. Approximately 2.14± acres of the easterly portion will remain undisturbed due to steep slopes. An additional 0.74± acres will remain as buffers for a Type IV stream located within the undisturbed central portion of the site. There are two proposed paved accesses that will connect to Talbott Road South at the western edge of the site. Earthwork volumes are estimated in the 9,000 cubic yard range. The intent of the final grading plan will result in a balanced site. It is anticipated that unsuitable soils encountered during construction will be removed from the site. Site grading will consist of cutting pads for the proposed buildings as well as parking and access road construction. Stormwater runoff from the buildings, traveled areas and landscaping will be routed through an underground detention vault and thru a 14' biofiltration swale located adjacent to Talbott Road South. 2.0 PRELIMINARY CONDITIONS The conditions and requirements for the parcel have yet to be determined. This parcel falls within its intended zoning (R-14) and does not require any rezoning approval. 1 3.0 OFFSITE ANALYSIS The project basin flows west to Talbott Road South where storm water from the site will be discharged via controlled release to the existing storm drainage system located within Talbott Road South. This storm system crosses under Talbott Road South and flows west to where it discharges to a Type IV stream. Due to downstream drainage problems the 2 city has required that the proposed storm drainage detention be designed to detain the 2, 10, and 100 post-developed storm events. The proposed detention system goes one step further by restricting the pre-developed runoff rates to 50% of the 2-year, 10-year, and 100-year storm events. Consequently, post-developed runoffs will not exceed pre- developed flows up to the 100-year storm event. This offsite basin delineation was based on a site visit and a field survey. In addition, the USGS Map for this portion of King County was reviewed, and also confirms the basin boundary. 4.0 FLOW CONTROL & WATER QUALITY FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4.1 Existing Site Hydrology The 8.12-acre parcel is positioned along the easterly ridgeline. The soils consist of an Alderwood soils according to the USDA Soil Conservation Service soils survey of King County. In addition, the soil type and characteristics were also confirmed by a geotechnical consultant. In May of 1999, twelve (12) test pits were excavated by Geotech Consultants, Inc. (See Appendix 'A' for USDA Soil Conservation Service soils information and Appendix `B' for the Geotech report). 4.2 Developed Site Hydrology Approximately 5.24 acres of the overall 8.12-acre site will be developed. The remaining 2.88 acres will remain undisturbed. Of the 5.24 acres of developed area, 1.56 acres is 3 building, 1.89 acres are parking and paved areas while 1.79 acres will be landscaped. The I combined CN number for the developed 5.24 acres has been calculated to be 93.90. 4.3 Performance Standards Not applicable at this time. 4.4 Flow Control System The detention system was sized to detain the 2, 10, and 100 post-developed storm events and release at the pre-developed runoff rates equivalent to 50% of the 2 year, 10 year, and 100-year storm events with a correction factor of 1.37 has been utilized as required by the DOE design manual. Hydraulic calculations were performed utilizing the Santa Barbara Unit Hydrograph Method per City of Renton guidelines. The computer program "Waterworks" was utilized in this analysis. The calculation results are included in Appendix 'C' of this report. 4.5 Water Quality System Water quality will be addressed by providing a 12' wide biofiltration swale designed per t', 1990 King County Surface Water Standards. 5.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN All the stormwater from the proposed buildings and asphalt areas will be conveyed by a tightlined conveyance system to the underground detention vault. Therefore, no r conveyance analyses have been performed. 6.0 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES Not Applicable. ST 4 7.0 BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS Not Applicable. 8.0 OTHER PERMITS HPA permit and wetland permit. j' 9.0 TESC ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 9.1 Introduction The following discussion is provided to address general erosion control measures for site preparation. 9.2 Design Considerations The proposed grading of the site, as well as the construction of the items listed below, will mitigate against any major diversion of storm water runoff by maintaining natural drainage patterns. The structural components of the erosion control plan will work in combination with temporary and permanent soil stabilization efforts to minimize the level of sediment-laden runoff from leaving the site and entering the downstream environment. Measures Taken to Control Sediment: • A planned construction sequence designed to provide for construction of erosion control features. • Quarry spall construction entrance to mitigate the introduction of sediment into any off-site storm facilities or adjacent public roadway facilities. • Timely stabilization of exposed soils to prevent erosion. • Temporary siltation fences as needed. 5 9.3 Design SI A quarry spall construction entrance onto Talbott Road South will be provided. Silt fences will be utilized to control runoff velocities and sedimentation at appropriate locations. The creation of airborne dust during construction will also need to be controlled by the contractor. This can be accomplished through the use of watering trucks during li construction. (i All of the features contained within the TESCP, if installed and periodically maintained, are expected to minimize the level of sediment-laden runoff entering any of the public road right-of-ways and adjacent properties. 10.0 BOND QUANTITIES, FACILITY SUMMARIES & DECLARATION OF COVENANT 10.1 Bond Quantity Sheets Not applicable at this time. 10.2 Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Summary Sheet and Sketch Not Applicable at this time. 10.3 Declaration of Covenant Not applicable at this time. 11.0 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL Not applicable at this time. SE 01 6 1 Appendix "A" Vicinity Map A-1 USDA Soil Map A-2 USDA Soil Description A-3 USGS Topographic Map A-4 1019 Pacific Avenue,Suite 906 Normandy Ridge Apartments OUND Tacoma.WA 98402 g P Bus: (253) 573-0040 NGINEERING, Inc. Fax: (253) 573-0142 Vicinity Map CIVIL ENGINEERS•LAND PLANNERS sound 'soundenginc.corn i\ Not to Scale n 7 . O ■ - Z ST,,ARk _ ! SW a' 43RD u;r s< ST .t ,' .* x?E L11 �g s1 A a E (S 180 ST)I �,; i ' . Site`., 1.L arF~+,- '� $ 'i* 167 ��5 , r`• '__. SE: imp<' 1. I t-kJt ll IInw� +�?"9 r4i` 1,32 tW `S�1�83RD (d, , , :tn ,Lit)) i' Iff N 15y1 �'e ill so,.`\VL(s'i'° `n m " ° i 5184TH I SE - SE 184TM'�ST �< ! 1 ST— Ft 1 sr Ea :�• 1ITN(5 >- ENT — --ra ,r }86TH ST _ SE 1 SE ' T -T- - I E 17? l S� 1m Ae� �,, i 5 MTh ST I S 181TH ST II +„n C C Sf t9>SN _.,, 4 ' �N7 C3 c tV 1 sE 1aa & ® o^ 7 SE 188TH i: S wr , .Mn 1. ♦ ,� 4� �SE Mr. p to.. <>SE i aL @ ; SE 1Err*x S x;/ 1 m> xi S 194TH ST 1 sE 19011AI'sT t Q _E 12 157 ,wn ' < I_ I E901N ST 1 + " ) Lt,._1.lDiN PE `tt 'JI 7 . a- f L ti :I .�....1901N FL _ i si'` Win 1:._.-.,-, '1 '_19.?1.0 ST S 192ND ST 5__ 55TH _ ' 192ND^� !4 ST SE � �I n —- ,192ND ST i v0 a j i� El Ix \ f-• l ig11600 SW 194TH ST J .w. .�5 is i' of < fXS .• •- \� Y. --1 cF R SE 1W1N j LS 196TH ST ' 1 Z__ ski—. sT _._ NTy ( _ 96TN� ,._ ST c a>d ,S 198TH ST +;�� y 1 "� < l I � SE 197TH:_ 19BTH si yT--t-_' 1 ,_,�_. 1�4n� .,k SPRI ` SE I SE tae,. -, ' .1 r= •fa199TH E W{ " .._ . i s m zoom+ ST ;j S 6 200TH &� .'ST SE ST 200TH ST "' sE(�jrx i N•i lorQQ� _ 0e00 I W ;} 5 _� S 202M0— �7t Sp'102M0 573._ _ ti°, n �-. 4 r3�, PANTHER 1 > <l i 5 2�p('" < st{� 203kD ST x 0 2 § ; VT $'-' E 203R0 .4 < ` N Efr`, �t S c� r TW}'''N. aln;3 = ST Urk'E l ST 1� . I S 205TN pt, r, v in VI or-2A"Mii"ii: N :t c r, -r n n • S 20�� ST ) X�� a tf +cypbEh I< x n,,,, PANTHER • ' 8 "-y-'.:\`It I i gn 1 s a s 7M E _�s.,Ei ccl SE 2*TN VL sj turf --)Ss S .1,! 1 , q}y 2 ,- o� y`;1dC '207TN S7^ 5£imoi>TT"i y� CENIER 556x vts,�' . A} M1 P .•• Ni s 209TH --T 208T11 _ s *rev; SE �;� g Mr 208TH sr ,� �s 2o9TH , rs" ST i..- > 5T ' 11600 Ozw t s210TH .a ♦ E -,"++ C£M ,E —T"p o �� u "211TN ST �� P N/ SE_ZIOT._i pi t s I o u-�a . _-_f- - = h 212TH A. ST S 2� 1.19 ''`"'i 1 SE_ . .3'212TH lgST „ :'zr,14 sE 211n1 rr W 4 s 52u'' sT; ��`5' '� aq Mc H ST � 5E212VI I II S 214 s aam, , r,S 'JPy S pc n�� F t334N s 1 � W 1 M°`W_. �tI — � SEi 216TN °j` sE 1�! i x 6TMI£ ST _" b y> N 1C7 « ' 1111 ✓tt t, T-.--N. SE wTN <,._2.."4$s�.a - 5E vARK Map by Thomas Brothers Maps 01997 1019 Pacific Avenue,Suite 906 NormandyRidge Apartments OIIND Tacoma.W A 98402 g P Bus: (253) 573-0040 NGINEERING, Inc. Fax: t2531 573-0142 USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Map CIVIL ENGINEERS'LAND PLANNERS sound@soundenginc.corn i\ Not to Scale �.. r , i i 1 I ��. �` d It "V., .„.rW. 1 a N i ,, i I{) ' Sri,. �: .O illi: �` i 1 ... : iI 4:. _ Site . ;.., ,. ' " .' AttC i' "3 " ' fir Of er I/7 , Ur I `U�. p WA,k .." +�F _ .....---� • # h4.i. 11 I 11� .,,,�. N.-i -_ _r_ ' lt 1qI JI t 4 lea-II: ,t' Ng .� ii• I . ill.. e . .. I J -. �� • ., �� FiV . , • „... ,lr, ,arise, �' j V : 1 i. . 1S. • F. I , •It • A i" i�lo s li. { j _ Arc' 'It IL ii. e1 T.'_ Ur a r. '4' IIri.l. ' 0.. . , iri-- ii, . , - -. le,- ,- . i . f <11.,1 , \,,, ,,,,,,, --, . IN ' '1,4,. ir mil • Wi i> i y , •� • Map by USDA Soil Conservation Service OL 197 1019 Pacific Avenue,Suite 906 OUND Tacoma.WA 98402 Normandy Ridge Apartments Bus: (253) 573-0040 NGINEERING, Inc. Fax: (2531 573-0142 USDA Soil Conservation Services Soil Description CIVIL ENGINEERS'LAND PLANNERS sound@soundenginc.com Alderwood gravelly sandy loam,6 to 15 percent slopes(AgC) This soil is rolling.Areas are irregular in shape and range from 10 to about 600 acres in size. The A horizon ranges from very dark brown to dark brown. The B horizon is dark brown, grayish brown, and dark yellowish brown. The consolidated C horizon, at a depth of 24 to 40 inches, is mostly grayish brown mottled with yellowish brown. Some layers in the C horizon slake in water. In a few areas, there is a thin, gray or grayish-brown A2 horizon. In most areas, this horizon has been destroyed through logging operations. Soils included with this soil in mapping make up no more than 30 percent of the total acreage. Some areas are up to 3 percent poorly drained Norma,Bellingham,Seattle,Tukwila,and Shalcar soils; some are up to 5 percent the very gravelly Everett and Neilton Soils;and some are up to 15 percent Alderwood soils that have slopes more gentle or steeper than 6 to 15 percent. Some areas in Newcastle Hills are 25 percent Beausite soils, some northeast of Duvall are as much as 25 percent Ovall soils,and some in the vicinity of Dash Point are 10 percent Indianola and Kitsap soils. Also included are small areas of Alderwood soils that have a gravelly loam surface layer and subsoil. Permeability is moderately rapid in the surface layer and subsoil and very slow in the substratum. Roots penetrate easily to the consolidated substratum where they tend to mat on the surface. Some roots enter the substratum through cracks.Water moves on top of the substratum in winter.Available water capacity is low. Runoff is slow to medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for timber,pasture,berries,row crops, and urban development.Capability unit Ive-2; R, woodland group 3d1. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam,15 to 30 percent slopes(AgD) Depth to the substratum in this soil varies within short distances, but is commonly about 40 inches. Areas are elongated and range from 7 to 250 acres in size. Soils included with this soil in mapping make up no more than 30 percent if the total acreage. Some areas are up to 25 percent Everett soils that have slopes of 15 to 30 percent, and some areas are up to 2 percent Bellingham,Norma,and Seattle soils,which are in depressions. Some areas,especially on Squak Mountain, in Newcastle Hills, and north if Tiger Mountain, are 25 percent Beausite and Ovall soils. Beausite soils are underlain by sandstone, and Ovall soils by andesite. Runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is severe.The slippage potential is moderate. This Alderwood soil is used for timber. Some areas on the lower parts of slopes are used for pasture. Capability unit VIe-2; woodland group 3d1. USDA Soil Conservation Service©197 1019 Pacific Avenue,suns sos NormandyRidge Apartments OUND Tacoma. 98402 g P Bus: (253) 573-0040 NGINEERING, Inc. Fax: f2531 573-0142 USGS Topographic Map CIVIL ENGINEERS•LAND PLANNERS sound@soundenginc.com 4/M\ Not to Scale -` ,, i ":t I. ' \s' ;-I -q.z W , _a 0 oeM� l I t \itkii•• f...k ,, , 1 m 25 f I 30 `\ . ill. III wir, vocal ��' , ;, , \ , - .. t, 4, , . . , n , 1 ... • , :1 itik__ -1 , ! 1. " �!• ,', 4 ,I r, // //JI 1 �� l'ulliNkt,•1/4\441—'"-..,„,..--11116....-..:' Ajik r a,, .I . 1,,th .:. ..1 i ri i: ....1 flw� is ). rt\-4.—"-• 11 1 1 . :\ 36 I �� I li _i ...II Vim.. + = r Site ji(? - 1 •••„ ,°.`• I +.+. • i\ , t•E2ol r l • s -I: , 11 i .. ,i --1 .-. \ 1 .. ...: \._•ty..„,--.-11..us,,. ..K.. . ... :,.,, : .-----.... ..!,. 1 andlii... \. ., . . • _. - ;\:•, ,, Iu i-— - — 1. a':- , r' ,./15-t l t ./ 4: \ so ' .; \' i - • �_ I . . • •Thater _ 5 .. O I � aO • I' I / l I t ram•- �— --.` �r .J Appendix "B" Geotechnical Report B-1 1 Ij GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY Proposed Multi-Family Development 186xx Talbot Road South King County, Washington This report presents the findings and recommendations of our geotechnical engineering study for the site of the proposed multi-family development in King County. The Vicinity Map, Plate 1, illustrates the general location of the site. We were provided with a faxed site plan showing lot lines and the location of the existing house in the northwest corner of the site. We anticipate that the property will be developed with apartment buildings and that the existing house will be removed or demolished. Detailed plans showing the proposed building locations, existing topography, and final site grading were not available at the time of this report. SITE CONDITIONS Surface The nearly rectangular tract covers 8.3 acres on the east side of Talbot Road South in King County. It has approximately 375 feet of street frontage and an average depth of about 930 feet. The ground surface slopes gently upward to the east for most of the property length. The eastern 100 to 200 feet of the property slopes steeply upward to the east property line. In addition to the existing house located in the northwest corner of the property (18624 Talbot Road South), severa' concrete structures including a barn, a bathhouse, two pump houses, and possibly a filled-ir swimming pool occupy the site. A concrete and rock basement foundation was found near the middle of the site. Except for the area around the existing house, the property is wooded anc overgrown. Nearby development consists of the Summit Park Condominiums immediately south of the site, and several houses located to the north and east. Subsurface The subsurface conditions were explored by excavating 12 test pits at the approximate locations shown on the Site Exploration Plan, Plate 2. The test pits were excavated on May 14, 1999 with a track-mounted excavator. A geotechnical engineer from our staff observed the excavation process, logged the test pits, and obtained representative samples of the soil encountered. "Grab" samples of selected subsurface soil were collected from the trackhoe bucket. The Test Pit Logs are attached to this report as Plates 3 through 8. In the southeastern portion of the site, Test Pit 4 encountered about 1 foot of topsoil, and 3.5 feet of gravelly, silty sand overlying stiff, fractured silt. The silt is underlain by dense, slightly silty sand extending to an explored depth of 10 feet. Elsewhere, beneath 1 to 1.5 feet of forest duff and topsoil, the native soils consist of medium-dense, weathered, silty sand with gravel, which became gray and very dense with depth. The very dense silty sands have been glacially consolidated and GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. I '-I ' SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 2 are referred to in this report as glacial till. In our explorations, the dense to very dense glacial till was encountered to a maximum explored depth of 12 feet below the existing surface grade. Based on our observations, the portions of the site have likely undergone grading associated with the existing and previous structures. Therefore, some fill and demolitions debris may be encountered. Fill will likely be found in the area of the old swimming pool. The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs and laboratory tests. The stratification lines on the logs represent the approximate boundaries between soil types at the exploration locations. The actual transition between soil types may be gradual, and subsurface conditions can vary between exploration locations. The logs provide specific subsurface information only at the locations tested. The relative densities and moisture descriptions indicated on the test pit logs are interpretive descriptions based on the conditions observed during excavation. The compaction of backfill was not in the scope of our services. Loose soil will therefore be found in the area of the test pits. If this presents a problem, the backfill will need to be removed and replaced with structural fill during construction. Groundwater Groundwater seepage was observed at a depth of about 6 feet in Test Pits 7 and 9. Surface water was observed flowing in several small ditches that traverse the site east to west. Water could be heard flowing into and out of a cistern located underneath one of the concrete pump houses. The test pits were left open for only a short time period. Therefore, the seepage levels on the logs represent the location of transient water seepage and may not indicate the static groundwater level. It should be noted that groundwater levels vary seasonally with rainfall and other factors. We anticipate that groundwater could be found near the contact between the weathered upper soils and the underlying glacial till. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on the results of the test pits and the observations made during our site visit, it is our opinion that the proposed multi-family development is feasible from a geotechnical engineering standpoint. The proposed buildings may be supported on conventional foundations bearing on the medium- dense to very dense, native soils. A significant geotechnical consideration for development of this site is the overly moist to wet condition of some of the soils. Based on our observations, and the results of our laboratory tests, the moisture contents of the on-site soils varied from near optimum to as much as 5 to 10 percent above optimum. The fine-grained, soils are sensitive to moisture, which makes them impossible to adequately compact when they have moisture contents more than 2 to 3 percent above their optimum moisture content. The reuse of the overly-moist soils as structural fill to level the site will only be successful during hot, dry weather. Aeration or chemical treatment of each loose lift of soil will be required to dry it before the lift is compacted. This drying will slow the earthwork proces. The earthwork contractor must be prepared to rework areas that do not achieve proper compaction due to high moisture content. Utility trench backfill in structural areas, such as pavements, must GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. 3 • SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 3 also be dried before it can be adequately compacted. Improper compaction of backfill in utility trenches and around control structures is a common reason for pavement distress and failures. Imported granular fill will be needed wherever it is not possible to dry the on-site soils sufficiently before compaction, or if wet weather earthwork is attempted. Depending on the depth of cuts necessary for site grading, seepage may be encountered. This is most likely to occur following extended wet weather. Temporary dewatering can consist of installing sumps or rock-lined ditches that are either pumped or that outfall by gravity. Subsurface interceptor drains will be needed immediately upslope of permanent cuts that expose significant seepage. These drains would consist of gravel-filled trenches excavated at least 12 inches into dense glacial till. A non-woven filter fabric should be draped into the trench before backfilling with gravel. A 4-inch-diameter perforated PVC pipe should be placed approximately 6 inches above the bottom of the trench, with the pipe being sloped to a suitable discharge. Well-constructed footing drains, free-draining wall backfill, and waterproofing are needed to prevent seepage through below-grade walls. Underslab drains should be installed where building excavations encounter heavy seepage. Surface drainage features have been constructed on the site in the past. The grading and drainage plan will need to include provisions for surface runoff entering the site. The erosion control measures needed during the site development will depend heavily on the weather conditions that are encountered. The erosion potential on the site is relatively low due to the gentle slope of the ground, however, site clearing will expose a large area of bare soil. We anticipate that a silt fence will be needed around the downslope side of any cleared areas. Rocked construction access roads should be extended into the site to reduce the amount of mud carried off the property by trucks and equipment. Following rough grading, it may be necessary to mulch c• hydroseed bare areas that will not be immediately covered with landscaping or an impervioLl surface. Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be allowed to review the final development plans to verify that the recommendations presented in this report are adequately addressed in the design. Such a plan review would be additional work beyond the current scope of work for this study, and it may include revisions to our recommendations to accommodate site, development, and geotechnical constraints that become more evident during the review process. Conventional Foundations The proposed structures can be supported on conventional continuous and spread footings bearing on undisturbed, medium-dense to dense, native soil, or on structural fill placed above this competent, soil. See the later sub-section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill for recommendations regarding the placement and compaction of structural fill beneath structures. Adequate compaction of structural fill should be verified with frequent density testing during fill placement. We recommend that continuous and individual spread footings have minimum widths of 12 and 16 inches, respectively. They should be bottomed at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent finish ground surface. The local building codes should be reviewed to determine if different footing widths or embedment depths are required. Footing subgrades must be cleaned of GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. >^— SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 4 loose or disturbed soil prior to pouring concrete. Depending upon site and equipment constraints, this may require removing the disturbed soil by hand. Depending on the final site grades, some overexcavation may be required below the footings to expose competent, native soil. Unless lean concrete is used to fill an overexcavated hole, the overexcavation must be at least as wide at the bottom as the sum of the depth of the overexcavation and the footing width. For example, an overexcavation extending 2 feet below the bottom of a 3-foot-wide footing must be at least 5 feet wide at the base of the excavation. If lean concrete is used, the overexcavation need only extend 6 inches beyond the edges of the footing. An allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) is appropriate for footings supported on competent, native soil or properly-compacted structural fill. A one-third increase it this design bearing pressure may be used when considering short-term wind or seismic loads. For the above design criteria, it is anticipated that the total post-construction settlement of footings founded on competent, native soil, or on structural fill up to 5 feet in thickness, will be less than one inch, with differential settlements on the order of one-half inch in a distance of 50 feet along a continuous footing with a uniform load. Lateral loads due to wind or seismic forces may be resisted by friction between the foundation and the bearing soil, or by passive earth pressure acting on the vertical, embedded portions of the foundation. For the latter condition, the foundation must be either poured directly against relatively level, undisturbed soil or be surrounded by level structural fill. We recommend using the following design values for the foundation's resistance to lateral loading: Parameter Design Value Coefficient of Friction 0.40 Passive Earth Pressure 300 pcf Where:(i)pcf is pounds per cubic foot,and(ii) passive earth pressure is computed using the equivalent fluid density. If the ground in front of a foundation is loose or sloping, the passive earth pressure given above will not be appropriate. We recommend a safety factor of at least 1.5 for the foundation's resistance :o lateral loading, when using the above design values. Seismic Considerations The site is located within Seismic Zone 3, as illustrated on Figure No. 16-2 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC). In accordance with Table 16-J of the 1997 UBC, the soil profile within a depth of 100 feet is best represented by Soil Profile Type Sc (very dense soil). The site soils are not susceptible to seismic liquefaction because of their dense nature. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. t`�' • SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 5 Slabs-on-Grade The building floors may be constructed as slabs-on-grade atop firm, stable, native soil or on structural fill. The subgrade soil must be in a firm, non-yielding condition at the time of slab construction or underslab fill placement. Any soft areas encountered should be excavated and replaced with select, imported structural fill. All slabs-on-grade should be underlain by a capillary break or drainage layer consisting of a minimum 4-inch thickness of coarse, free-draining structural fill with a gradation similar to that discussed later in Permanent Foundation and Retaining Walls. In areas where the passage of moisture through the slab is undesirable, a vapor barrier, such as a 6-mil plastic membrane, should be placed beneath the slab. Additionally, sand should be used in the fine-grading process to reduce damage to the vapor barrier, to provide uniform support under the slab, and to reduce shrinkage cracking by improving the concrete curing process. Permanent Foundation and Retaining Walls Retaining walls backfilled on only one side should be designed to resist the lateral earth pressures imposed by the soil they retain. The following recommended design parameters are for walls that restrain level backfill: Parameter Design Value Active Earth Pressure * 35 pcf Passive Earth Pressure 300 pcf Coefficient of Friction 0.40 Soil Unit Weight 130 pcf Where:(i)pcf is pounds per cubic foot,and(ii)active and passive earth pressures are computed using the equivalent fluid pressures. • For a restrained wall that cannot deflect at least 0.002 times Its height,a uniform lateral pressure equal to 10 psf times the height of the wall should be added to the above active equivalent fluid pressure. The valuesgiven above are to be used to designpermanent foundation and retainingwalls on y. 9 The passive pressure given is appropriate for the depth of level structural fill placed in front of a retaining or foundation wall only. We recommend a safety factor of at least 1.5 for overturning and sliding, when using the above values to design the walls. Restrained wall soil parameters should be utilized for a distance of 1.5 times the wall height from corners in the walls. The design values given above do not include the effects of any hydrostatic pressures behind the walls and assume that no surcharges, such as those caused by slopes, vehicles, or adjacent foundations will be exerted on the walls. If these conditions exist, those pressures should be added to the above lateral soil pressures. Where sloping backfill is desired behind the walls, we will need to be given the wall dimensions and the slope of the backfill in order to provide the appropriate GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. -5 SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 6 design earth pressures. The surcharge due to traffic loads behind a wall can typically be accounted for by adding a uniform pressure equal to 2 feet multiplied by the above active fluid density. Heavy construction equipment should not be operated behind retaining and foundation walls within a distance equal to the height of a wall, unless the walls are designed for the additional lateral pressures resulting from the equipment. The wall design criteria assume that the backfill will be well-compacted in lifts no thicker than 12 inches. The compaction of backfill near the walls should be accomplished with hand-operated equipment to prevent the walls from being overloaded by the higher soil forces that occur during compaction. Retaining Wall Backfill Backfill placed behind retaining or foundation walls should be coarse, free-draining, structural fill containing no organics. This backfill should contain no more than 5 percent silt or clay particles and have no gravel greater than 4 inches in diameter. The percentage of particles passing the No. 4 sieve should be between 25 and 70 percent. The onsite soils are not free-draining. If the excavated soils are reused as backfill, at least 12 inches of gravel should be placed against the walls. Gravel should be used for the entire width of backfill where seepage is encountered in the excavation. The purpose of these backfill requirements is to ensure that the design criteria for a retaining wall are not exceeded because of a build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the wall. The top 12 to 18 inches of the backfill should consist of a compacted, relatively impermeable soil or topsoil, or the surface should be paved. The ground surface must also slope away from backfilled walls to reduce the potential for surface water to percolate into the backfill. The sub-section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill contains recommendations regarding the placement and compaction of structural fill behind retaining and foundation walls. The performance of any subsurface drainage system will degrade over time. Therefore, moist conditions or some seepage through the walls are not acceptable, waterproofing should be provided. This typically includes limiting cold-joints and wall penetrations, and using bentonite panels or membranes on the outside of the walls. Applying a thin coat of asphalt emulsion is not considered waterproofing, but will only help to prevent moisture, generated from water vapor or capillary action, from seeping through the concrete. Rockeries We anticipate that rockeries may be used in the site development. A rockery is not intended to function as an engineered structure to resist lateral earth pressures, as a retaining wall would do. The primary function of a rockery is to cover the exposed, excavated surface and thereby retard the erosion process. We recommend limiting rockeries to a height of 8 feet and placing them against only dense, competent, native soil. Loose soils should be excavated and replaced w$h quarry spells. The construction of rockeries is, to a large extent, an art not entirely controllable by engineering methods and standards. It is imperative that rockeries, if used, are constructed with care and in a GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 7 proper manner by an experienced contractor with proven ability in rockery construction. The rockeries should be constructed with hard, sound, durable rock in accordance with accepted local practice. Soft rock, or rock with a significant number of fractures or inclusions, should not be used, in order to limit the amount of maintenance and repair needed over time. Provisions for maintenance, such as access to the rockery, should be considered in the design. In general, we recommend that rockeries have a minimum dimension of one-third the height of the slope cut above them. Excavations and Slopes Excavation slopes should not exceed the limits specified in local, state, and national government safety regulations. Temporary cuts to a depth of about 4 feet may be attempted vertically in unsaturated soil away from property lines and existing structures, if there are no indications of slope instability. Based upon Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 296, Part N, the soil type at the subject site would be classified as Type B. Therefore, temporary cut slopes greater than 4 feet in height cannot be excavated at an inclination steeper than 1:1 (Horizontal:Vertical), extending continuously between the top and the bottom of a cut. Flatter cuts, excavation sharing, and/or dewatering will be necessary where excavations encounter heavy seepage or caving soils. The above-recommended temporary slope inclination is based on what has been successful at other sites with similar soil conditions. Temporary cuts are those that will remain unsupported for a relatively short duration to allow for the construction of foundations, retaining walls, or utilities. The cut slopes should be backfilled or retained as soon as possible to reduce the potential for instability. Please note that loose, wet soils can cave suddenly and without warning. Contractors should be made especially aware of this potential danger. All permanent cuts into native soil should be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (H:V). Fill slopes should not be constructed with an inclination greater than 2:1 (H:V). To reduce the potential for shallow sloughing, fill must be compacted to the face of these slopes. This could be accomplished by overbuilding the compacted fill and then trimming it back to its final inclination. Water should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over the top of any temporary or permanent slope. Also, ail permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation to reduce erosion and improve the stability of the surficial layer of soil. Drainage Considerations Foundation drains should be installed around the perimeters of the buildings, at the base of all earth-retaining walls, and behind stepped foundation walls. These drains should be surrounded by at least 6 inches of 1-inch-minus, washed rock and then wrapped in non-woven, geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, Supac 4NP, or similar material). At its highest point, a perforated pipe invert should be at least 6 inches below the bottom of a slab floor or the level of a crawl space, and it should be sloped for drainage. Drainage should also_be provided inside the footprint of a structure, where a crawl space will slope or be lower than the surrounding ground surface or an excavation encounters significant seepage. We can provide recommendations for interior drains, should th y become necessary, during excavation and foundation construction. �7-1 GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 8 All roof and surface water drains must be kept separate from the foundation drain system. A typical drain detail is attached to this report as Plate 97. For the best long-term performance, perforated PVC pipe is recommended for all subsurface drains. Groundwater and wet soils were observed during our field work. Surface water was also observed in shallow ditches across the site. If seepage is encountered in an excavation, it should be drained from the site by directing it through drainage ditches, perforated pipe, or French drains, or by pumping it from sumps interconnected by shallow connector trenches at the bottom of the excavation. Building excavations and the site in general should be graded so that surface water is directed of the site and away from the tops of slopes. Water should not be allowed to stand in any area where foundations, slabs, or pavements are to be constructed. Final site grading in areas adjacent tc buildings should slope away at least 2 percent, except where the area is paved. Pavement Areas The pavement section may be supported on competent, native soil or on structural fill compacted to a 95 percent density. Granular structural fill or geotextile fabric may be needed to stabilize soft, wet, or unstable areas. To evaluate pavement subgrade strength, we recommend that a proof roll be completed with a loaded dump truck immediately before paving. In most instances where unstable subgrade conditions are encountered, an additional 12 inches of granular structural fill wi°:I stabilize the subgrade, except for very soft areas where additional fill could be required. The subgrade should be evaluated by Geotech Consultants, Inc., after the site is stripped and cut to grade. Recommendations for the compaction of structural fill beneath pavements are given in a later sub-section entitled General Earthwork and Structural Fill. The performance of si;e pavements is directly related to the strength and stability of the underlying subgrade. The pavement for lightly-loaded traffic and parking areas should consist of 2 inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over 4 inches of crushed rock base (CRB) or 3 inches of asphalt-treated base (ATE). We recommend providing heavily-loaded areas with 3 inches of AC over 6 inches of CRB or 4 inches of ATB. Heavily loaded areas are typically main driveways, dumpster sites, or areas wit truck traffic. The pavement section recommendations and guidelines presented in this report are based on our experience in the area and on what has been successful in similar situations. As with any pavements, especially those underlain by silty soils, some maintenance and repair of limited areas can be expected as the pavement ages. To provide for a design without the need for any repair would be uneconomical. General Earthwork and Structural Fill All building and pavement areas should be stripped of surface vegetation, topsoil, organic soil, and other deleterious material. The stripped or removed materials should not be mixed with any materials to be used as structural fill, but they could be used in non-structural areas, such as landscape beds. GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 9 Structural fill is defined as any fill placed under a building, behind permanent retaining or foundation walls, or in other areas where the underlying soil needs to support loads. All structural fill should be placed in horizontal lifts with a moisture content at, or near, the optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content is that moisture content that results in the greatest compacted dry density. The moisture content of fill is very important and must be closely controlled during the filling and compaction process. The allowable thickness of the fill lift will depend on the material type selected, the compaction equipment used, and the number of passes made to compact the lift. The loose lift thickness should not exceed 12 inches. We recommend testing the fill as it is placed. If the fill is not compacted to specifications, it can be recompacted before another lift is placed. This eliminates the need to remove the fill to achieve the required compaction. The following table presents recommended relative compactions for structural fill: "Location of: Minimum; Fill Placement Relative Compaction Beneath footings, slabs 95% or walkways Behind retaining walls 90% 95% for upper 12 inches of Beneath pavements subgrade; 90% below that level Where: Minimum Relative Compaction Is the ratio,expressed in percentages, of the compacted dry density to the maximum dry density, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D 1557-78(Modified Proctor). Considerations for reuse of the on-site soils as structural fill are discussed in the General sectior Structural fill that will be placed in wet weather should consist of an imported, coarse, granular sol with a silt or clay content of no more than 5 percent. The percentage of particles passing the Nc. 200 sieve should be measured from that portion of soil passing the three-quarter-inch sieve. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they existed at the time of our exploration and assume that the soil and groundwater conditions encountered in the test pits are representative of subsurface conditions on the site. If the subsurface conditions encountered during construction are significantly different from those observed in our explorations, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations where necessary. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered on construction sites and cannot be fully anticipated by merely taking soil samples in test pits. Subsurface conditions can also vary between exploration locations. Such unexpected conditions frequently require making additional expenditures to attain a properly constructed project. It is recommended that the owner consider providing a contingency fund to accommodate such potential extra costs and risks. This is a standard recommendation for all projects. B -1 GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 99189 May 25, 1999 Page 10 This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of SEB, Incorporated, and its representatives, for specific application to this project and site. Our recommendations and conclusions are based on observed site materials, and selective laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Our conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions derived in accordance with current standards of practice within the scope of our services and within budget and time constraints. No warranty is expressed or implied. The scope of our services does not include services related to construction safety precautions, and our recommendations are not intended to direct the contractor's methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described in our report for consideration in design. We recommend including this report, in its entirety, in the project contract documents so the contractor may be aware of our findings. ADDITIONAL SERVICES In addition to reviewing the final plans, Geotech Consultants, Inc. should be retained to provide geotechnical consultation, testing, and observation services during construction. This is to confirm that subsurface conditions are consistent with those indicated by our exploration, to evaluate whether earthwork and foundation construction activities comply with the general intent of the recommendations presented in this report, and to provide suggestions for design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. However, our work would not include the supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractor and its employees or agents. Also, job and site safety, and dimensional measurements, will be the responsibility of the contractor. The following plates are attached to complete this report: Plate 1 Vicinity Map Plate 2 Site Exploration Plan Plates 3 - 8 Test Pit Logs Plate 9 Footing Drain Detail 5-/D GEOTECH CONSULTANTS,INC. SEB, Incorporated JN 9918c May 25, 1999 Page 1 • We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions, or if wf may be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. of wnsjJ1 4 T VS" �w 40 v1, — 0 'r ¢� fr 278-:5 O • S S Jr��.nt.��,0 5/z5,77 EXPIRES 10/ Marc R. McGinnis, P.E. Associate DBG/MRM: alt if GEOTECH CONSULTANTS, INC. Immtimmoommlft 1..1,J II r\`. I 1NI 4 NI I : \ B"y + a ,aa.t'.'Y1 t . I V. / i \ �x f I • It •$ I+JIN I ,415 T �\'. •� luiis/ ..._---a5_i�..._�1t t SI ( **.*_ S n«ST,� ) 1 _ �I A� .I 7: r •N - T I, A, I r s 0, „ l- '�'. 'on, :a �:1 •c i. '-I wT•t YJY %Ot«1.«._1..tln. • IYIr. s. 0 •�;. yy "s•. _, Ma..t••/. 1 s4•r«+ ,,.. '• o so sT":92 ca ty • ��;I -r:. 1 Z' s,R�1'�t S •'I \�• J 1 •r' �'n 1 J :-, ST (( =r• 1.Lon arms, 1 I • - li 5 if Sr \t � I•, LI 1 . :• : U,tYn�%• r �R, i Y,P,1 s• 3 - \ - ..'••- nx-'I :I_ •t lw f2'71 fi _!•7' % s•-i -.; ; yy�� ;�;� �� 1,: pp •x� `/�� R E N TON ;• .... t,, t '1'' ,I Iwarb-11 t .t ''I".lN.'/N'N'.•I •I •.,,•,,,,,,.. • R�.YTWY__ i't1r..Sr' 3 . .,: I /-r;•Uail_ . •:.:•:,:;•.;;;.:ii-D•.;:,:-...!!'il ...... , :ti •4. ` ` • i� I JtNLCIIQN= _ -_ - :_ •--• ••_ . _.. __ .ftrR�pi ,, t ;;• ; .` RYD I ;j `-1 SW m«51 1 ,Sr•{•�,�l�•' \ +1� _.I,.- �xE•�a.'whff •,•.ram • FI y' �n�t' "+'�:' ,,, s,Nn_sr 1 _ 1� od%..� tt' LJtr -awm_s1 1; >,.• �>,tL (,� ;__ «:N••• .,r r 1 Z c \ <' rf G ;;ss Q •,>. . 1c....fi'� > •.Lwi.:,n.l_-f� m 26 I V ..x.• •t.. GJ N fu �1`r «sl •\-'`•?:-_s!.c-- 6 ,, • n TU:L<VV ILA• • :(--aa'I r s� L, 3 h ! t ':1:.t. ':.i.t--A Vi..1,-...,.,;sT1..r._.1-_4A . 1 " ..Ix11gt. ',kY1• �. r , 1 1 , • I •i � C i 1II, :.•. t ; • I IA •mi i. WI. I -s._.i:n__-..�( n P H _ , ,i S ur1_ .t • I lox 1 PIT ; I.)r« I /�`,Ta n �: Sc+ - i�RD ST •I •�!�' ;. s der"_J'/ .• I 1 1-- I&ITN , ST _ I - J` '•i. 1E tia�!Ll SI 'a_ I?.Jy._"�?'t(:ST 1 rI ,a , I "' ia, -+` ,SrNI, •I / - _I - >•\(a„U`, s I,r••I • �. Qo -- g-0l_r. .._ 3• v,,,F.; ! ;% t,rsey:�., .s 36 - o`er =.'1p:S I.c,g3/ •rva .I.-1-. / • .o ,ii• 1,• :1' .I ,\ ' SITE r__ . I , .�.. -.J y �1 v.� rn I I -J • 1 2 I i 1"l1/� 7 :: s 1Yjry�.s1� _ ��33 _ W:..o 3r % <,>."n 5!i •w`l '•Ir•«n s_ \01 �\ w•Nn •.1•.,n 1 • •' •'51 3 _ - ' ( I 't!s_T r ..'I ,n 1 1 . 3 2 r _ pY,N;:•IF6,„.--- ....; -(\z i..1 .05,ci,'/t•/a I',•`•.I .— Q i O° : S ' 1,IITM •SI r1,�-. . ____. I wi' • 1• IS Mfn?lm 1' i, I ', - Si.nt. -i , A 9 1 R *.s .C._w:,,,, . S, ,91 ._.__ D .. 5' 1 s_.0;..1 1 s•. E .r...•1'.;. t! ~SI. • VICINITY MAP ,_*il GEOTECH S.E.B., INC. CONSULTANTS 186XX TALBOT RD. S. 3 KING COUNTY, WA A, . Job No./ Dole: Plot 99189 MAY 1999 1 13—I OTP-6 . OTP-5 O 'P-4 0 TP-7 0 P-3 ATP-8 cn 0 F OTP-9 OT -2 O T P-10 I r7 z 0 V OTP-11 cc F- EXISTING HOUSE DTP-12 pT • -1 N TALBOT RD. S. LEGEND: 51 APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION SITE EXPLORATION PLAN GEOTECH S.E.B., INC. CONSULTANTS 186XX TALBOT RD. S. KING COUNTY, WA /oD No. Doter Pies 7 99189 MAY 1999 2 ti�<��`�`6 TEST PIT 1 �� o`y a� o` a 5 <��L C° �espY �5G Description TOPSOIL — Red-brown, silty SAND with some gravel, fine-grained, wet, medium-dense — (Weathered Glacial Till) — 15.7% - becomes gray-brown, dense to very dense (Glacial Till) 5 - - 13.9% SM — 10 — — * Test Pit was terminated at 12 feet on May 14, 1999. — * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. 15— * No caving was observed during excavation. oi, TEST PIT 2 ' . �� c\ o< �r ig:, Aefi4d.�\� 0$ ce4 Go ,ta J5 Description TOPSOIL — — '' Red-brown, silty SAND with gravel, fine-grained, moist, medium-dense — (Weathered Glacial Till) — - becomes gray-brown, dense to very dense (Glacial Till) 5 — SM - more gravelly and occasional cobbles within till 10 --- - * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. — * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. — * No caving was observed during excavation. 15-- TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South ,_ii CONSULTANTS, INC. King County, Washington i Job No: Date: by: Plate: 99189 I May 1999 'Logged DBG 3 r:.)_' , �� `►`� TEST PIT 3 ices 9 Cp �° �5 Description TOPSOIL Red-gray, silty SAND with gravel and iron staining, fine-grained, very moist, medium-dense (Weathered Glacial Till) 5 '— SM - becomes brown to gray, dense to very dense (Glacial Till) 10 — _ Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15 e TEST PIT 4 • �^r o �w��4a,cti' C5 cox Go ,sa J5 Description TOPSOIL II '1'1 Brown, gravelly, silty SAND with cobbles, fine-grained, moist, medium-dense ISM 11.11 5 .—. l I I Brown SILT, fractured, low plasticity, moist, stiff, iron stained ML 10 -- SP•SM Brown, slightly silty SAND, fine- to medium-grained, very moist, dense * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South CONSULTANTS,INC. King County, Washington ^ram Jo99189 I DMay 1999 IBLoggG by: Plate: 4 e,c TEST PIT 5 ocv vi2N Gov '4Xery \fv Description TOPSOIL and Forest Duff _ I I Brown, gravelly, silty SAND, fine-grained, moist, medium-dense SM IIII 5 _, Brown, slightly silty SAND, medium-grained, moist, medium-dense - becomes finer grained ISP•SM - becomes gravelly 10 -- ISM Brown with iron staining, silty, gravelly SAND, medium- to coarse-grained, wet, dense * Test Pit was terminated at 11 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— s1 �� i�{ TEST PIT 6 �e4 Go 'S° J' Description _ TOPSOIL and Forest Duff Brown, silty SAND with some gravel, moist, medium-grained, medium-dense SM 5 — Brown-gray, silty SAND with some gravel, fine-grained, moist, dense to verb dense (Glacial Till) SM - becomes very moist 10 — * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South CONSULTANTS,INC. King County, Washington ♦ Job No: I Date: 'Logged by: IPlate: • 99189 May 1999 DBG 5 r3_ ti��`� TEST PIT 7 9,4 Go v \5 Description — TOPSOIL and Forest Duff _ SM Red-brown, silty SAND with gravel, fine-grained, moist, medium-dense _ — _ 18.2% Gray-brown, gravelly SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, wet, medium-dense 5 — - becomes dense SP 10 — I e'v'I '\Brown, silty, gravelly SAND, fine-grained, moist, very dense (Glacial Till) '" Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. _ * Moderate groundwater seepage was observed at 6 feet during excavation — * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— ,,, ��,{,,eK TEST PIT 8 ��r Ao ��c�a,tic G5 cod Go ,�a ,,5 Description _ TOPSOIL — Gray-brown with iron staining, silty SAND, fine-grained, wet, medium-dense — (Weathered Glacial Till) 1 - becomes slightly gravelly 5 .— _ ISM - becomes dense (Glacial Till) 10 — - - * Test Pit was terminated at 10 feet on May 14, 1999. — * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. — * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South ,_34 CONSULTANTS, INC. King County, Washington i -L.,.. Job No: Date: ' Logged by: 'Plate: — Y I 99189 May 1999 DBG 3 I )- `\i,� TEST PIT 9 9a4 Go , a �5 Description TOPSOIL 5 -- SM Red-brown to gray with extensive iron staining, clayey SILT and fine-grained — ML SAND, wet, loose to medium-dense — Gray, fine-grained SAND with some silt, very moist to wet, medium-dense tc SPSMI dense 10 *— 1111 * Test Pit was terminated at 10.5 feet on May 14, 1999. * Light groundwater seepage was observed at 6.5 feet during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15 <e' oh TEST PIT 10 Sex Go ,sa \f2 Description TOPSOIL _ Brown-gray with iron staining, silty SAND, fine-grained, wet, medium-dense _ (Weathered Glacial Till) 5 — SM — 12.3% - becomes dense to very dense (Glacial Till) — * Test Pit was terminated at 8 feet on May 14, 1999. 10 — * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15-- TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South CONSULTANTS,INC. King County, Washington • - Job 99189 I DMate:ay 1999 'Logged G by: 'Plate: 7 � �� TEST PIT 11 NT. _ ��a �� cc)CP ,sa \`' Description TOPSOIL Gray-brown with iron staining, silty SAND with trace gravel, fine-grained, wet, _ loose to medium-dense (Weathered Glacial Till) SM I11 - becomes very dense (Glacial Till) 5 — I1111 * Test Pit was terminated at 6 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 10 — 15— e TEST PIT 12 �r o rkg, .ck v\z G5 9e4 cp K �5 Description TOPSOIL Brown-gray with iron staining, silty SAND with trace gravel, very moist, medium-dense (Weathered Glacial Till) - becomes very dense (Glacial Till) 5 — 10 — * Test Pit was terminated at 9 feet on May 14, 1999. * No groundwater seepage was observed during excavation. * No caving was observed during excavation. 15— TEST PIT LOG GEOTECH 186xx Talbot Road South CONSULTANTS, INC. King County, Washington ♦ _ _ Job No: I Date: I Logged by: IPlate: 99189 May 1999 I DBG 8 Slope backfi/I away from foundation. \ ` TIGHTL INE ROOF DRAIN Do no/ connect to footing drain. BACKFIL L See text for VAPOR BARRIER requirements. SLAB WASHED ROCK °.'.'°', `'\ -• `� 4 min. G p %• • 6 min. '_•. % FREE-DRAINING SAND/GRAVEL NONWOVEN GEOTEXT/LE FILTER FABRIC 4"PERFORATED HARD PVC P/PE Invert a/ least as low as footing and/or crow/ space. Slope to drain. Place weepho/es downward. FOOTING DRAIN DETAIL GEOTECH S.E.B., INC. CONSULTANTS 186XX TALBOT RD.• S. KING COUNTY, WA Job No.' Dote: Seale: Plate' 99189 MAY 1999 N.T.S. Pr--; Appendix "C" Basin Summary C-1 CN Calculations C-3 Runoff Curve Numbers C-4 Isopluvial Charts C-6 Correction Factor to Pond Volume C-9 Detention Pond Sizing C-10 Bioswale Sizing C-16 9/16/99 11 :4 :46 am Sound Engineering Inc. page Normandy Ridge Apartments Detention sizing calculations BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: a4 NAME : post-developed 2 yr SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 5 .24 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 5 .24 Acres 0 . 00 Ac: TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 93 . 90 0 . 00 TC • 1 . 54 min 0 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 TcReach - Sheet L: 100 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 TcReach - Shallow L: 300 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 TcReach - Channel L: 300 . 00 kc :42 . 00 s : 0 . 1000 PEAK RATE: 1 . 72 cfs VOL: 0 . 61 Ac-ft TIME : 470 min BASIN ID: a5 NAME : post-developed 10 yr SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 5 .24 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 5 . 24 Acres 0 . 00 Ac: TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 93 . 90 0 . 00 TC • 1 .54 min 0 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 TcReach - Sheet L: 100 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 TcReach - Shallow L: 300 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 TcReach - Channel L: 300 . 00 kc :42 . 00 s : 0 . 1000 PEAK RATE: 2 . 83 cfs VOL: 0 . 98 Ac-ft TIME : 470 min BASIN ID: a6 NAME: post-developed 100 yr SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 5 . 24 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 5 .24 Acres 0 . 00 Ac: TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 93 . 90 0 . 00 TC 1 .54 min 0 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 TcReach - Sheet L: 100 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 TcReach - Shallow L: 300 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 TcReach - Channel L: 300 . 00 kc :42 . 00 s : 0 . 1000 PEAK RATE: 4 . 05 cfs VOL: 1 .41 Ac-ft TIME: 470 min 9/16/99 11 :4 :38 am Sound Engineering Inc . page Normandy Ridge Apartments Detention sizing calculations BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: al NAME : pre-developed 500 of 2 yr SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 5 .24 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 2 . 00 inches AREA. . : 5 .24 Acres 0 . 00 Ac: TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 85 . 00 0 . 00 TC • 65 . 31 min 0 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 TcReach - Sheet L: 800 . 00 ns : 0 .4100 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 PEAK RATE: 0 . 39 cfs VOL: 0 . 35 Ac-ft TIME: 540 min BASIN ID: a2 NAME : pre-developed 10 yr SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 5 .24 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 2 . 90 inches AREA. . : 5 . 24 Acres 0 . 00 Ac] TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 85 . 00 0 . 00 TC • 65 .31 min 0 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 TcReach - Sheet L: 800 . 00 ns : 0 .4100 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 PEAK RATE: 0 . 87 cfs VOL: 0 . 66 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min BASIN ID: a3 NAME : pre-developed 100 yr SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 5 .24 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 3 . 90 inches AREA. . : 5 . 24 Acres 0 . 00 Ac3 TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 85 . 00 0 . 00 TC • 65 . 31 min 0 . 00 min ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 .20 TcReach - Sheet L: 800 . 00 ns : 0 .4100 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 PEAK RATE : 1 .48 cfs VOL: 1 . 03 Ac-ft TIME: 490 min • SOUND ENGINEERING, INC. • civil•structural engineers•land planners Project N JOrL'-vo•.sr, ' 7?-1 cliG With/To Page of Project No. t Q a t ?l , i t Address Fax# Subject C!\ - C' G•L,C �, ._4�' , ��!` #Pages Faxed By 2 q Copies to Date I )lac , < C. �-� v, . c crL3 r1 o e k Q-4)S FCfi-c-/ A BC C _ a. ( L�S - -> `7 C✓G lJ�e o� C ./ • 5 -t � � �� g) -t- i ,'?4)(&C ) • If the above does not meet with your understanding,please contact SEI in writing within 7 days.Thank you. 1019 PACIFIC AVE.,SUITE 906,TACOMA,WA 98402•(253)573-0040•FAX(253)573-0142 ?� E-MAIL:SOUNDINCc AOL.COM KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL TABLE 3.5.2B SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS SCS WESTERN WASHINGTON RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS (Published by SCS in 1982) Runoff curve numbers for selected agricultural, suburban and urban land use for Type 1A rainfall distribution, 24-hour storm duration. f CURVE NUMBERS BY HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP LAND USE DESCRIPTION AB C D '. Cultivated land(1): winter condition 86 91 94 95 Mountain open areas: low growing brush and grasslands 74 82 89 92 Meadow or pasture: I 65 78 185 89 Wood or forest land: undisturbed or older second growth 42 64 76 81 Wood or forest land: young second growth or brush 55 72 81 86 Orchard: with cover crop 81 88 92 94 Open spaces, lawns, parks, golf courses, cemeteries, landscaping. good condition: grass cover on 75% or more of the area 68 80 86 90 fair condition: grass cover on 50% to 75% of the area 77 85 90 92 Gravel roads and parking lots 76 85 89 91 Dirt roads and parking lots 72 82 87 89 Impervious surfaces, pavement, roofs, etc. 98 98 98 98 Open water bodies: lakes, wetlands, ponds, etc. 100 100 100 100 1 Single Family Residential (2) Dwelling Unit/Gross Acre % Impervious (3) 1.0 DU/GA 15 Separate curve number 1.5 DU/GA 20 shall be selected 2.0 DU/GA 25 for pervious and 2.5 DU/GA 30 impervious portion 3.0 DU/GA 34 of the site or basin 3.5 DU/GA 38 4.0 DU/GA 42 • 4.5 DU/GA •46 5.0 DU/GA 48 5.5 DU/GA 50• 6.0 DU/GA 52 6.5 DU/GA 54 7.0 DU/GA 56 PI ned unit developments, % impervious co ominiums, apartments, must be computed co mercial business and industrial areas. (1) For a more detailed description of agricultural land use curve numbers refer to National Engineering Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology, Chapter 9, August 1972. (2) Assumes roof and driveway runoff is directed into street/storm system. (3) The remaining pervious areas (lawn) are considered to be in good condition for these curve numbers. *.� 3.5.2-3 11,192 KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANU , (2) CN values can be area weighted when they apply to pervious areas of similar CN's (within 2C CN points). However, high CN areas should not be combined with low CN areas (unless,the low CN areas are less than 15% of the subbasin). In this case, separate hydrographs should generated and summed to form one hydrograph. FIGURE 3.5.2A HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP OF THE SOILS IN KING COUNTY SOIL GROUP HYDROLOGIC GROUP* HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP GROUP* Alderwood JaJ Orcas Peat Arents, Alderwood Material C Oridia D Arents, Everett Material B Ovall D Beausite C Pilchuck C Bellingham C Briscot D Puget D Buckley D Puyallup B Coastal Beaches D Ragnar B Variable Renton D Eartmont Silt Loam D Riverwash Edgewick C Salal Variable Everett A/B 'Sammamish C I Indianola A Seattle D Kitsap C Shacar D Klaus C Si Silt D Mixed Alluvial Land Variable Snohomish DC Neilton A - Sultan D Newberg B Tukwila C Nooksack C Urban D Normal Sandy Loam D Woodinville Variable D HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP CLASSIFICATIONS A. (Low runoff potential). Soils having high infiltration rates, even when thoroughly wetted, and consisting chiefly of deep, well-to-excessively drained sands or gravels. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. B. (Moderately low runoff potential). Soils having moderate infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, and consisting chiefly of moderately fine to moderately coarse textures. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. C. (Moderately high runoff potential). Soils having slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted, and consisting chiefly of soils with a layer that impedes downward movement of water, or soils with moderately fine to fine textures. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. D. (High runoff potential). Soils having very slow infiltration rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soils with a high swelling potential, soils with a permanent high water table, soils with a hardpan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shallow soils over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. * From SCS, TR-55, Second Edition, June 1986, Exhibit A-1. Revisions made from SCS, Soil Interpretation Record, Form #5, September 1988. *1 3.5.2-2 11/92 1019 Pacific Avenue,Suite 906 Normandy Ridge Apartments OIND u LJ Bus: (253) 573-0040 NGINEERING, Inc. Fax: (2531 573-0142 King County Surface Water Design Manual CIVIL ENGINEERS'LAND PLANNERS sound®soundenginc.com Isopluvial Chart: 2 year, 24 hour A KING COUNTY. W ASHINGTON. SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FIGURE 3.S.1C 2-YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLUVIALS — .----- -- -A- -- - ,,, ,r�� '� Ott �� 1 \ Not to kale liql i iji ‘Iii t ,... � ,c. i:sw..Viga 1 /.7 —011.rsirw AfiLIELA is , Ni - ...4er ,mkillit - csi-- 79 --,11P-agi., i*,. :,. - .7-holf---iN le ft A N of 't4 0) 20 Ai-*Weil- - .! 71.7401161111611013.41110„ , ,, i ---- ,-Ivestrisnp:I:.‘r._ ..... wit-,....ti&a ., --,S.,_,:i7if . . 6—... iMiliiftv. IW:1111PoopossionimmoMmain ri,' 110.AVO,L ,47-71ilierr"-' 0#. _ _, i . IWICA 1* ire; - 'Or 1 I ilk- 4 k %—i-•ti--. .,‘,.,1, . -Orr,,---- --- MOW T,,•arliotEl.... NRLS... 1 ' , ; 1 : r .:. ,.: F. inga 1. g!.._, .._,..% __.., , _. _.,.. je-.,a,rlirc.-..N81 c.ieve,es "-' �- ,'ww -1' 7 ') ' 'a - Pi itibk 4411 ,01. ,. oniv- On , ) I, 4 .,.. ,•,,- V .• --- _ )1,----P,t-' ...i ......rid, wiErinAtiVak- /; : PMu III, AIM>� , 1:1 $tt!!., , morte., all 4 . i -f 11' - -- wjg1_ ,..iiii_ifiwas 7 31--r . 4' °IY.-.=I"I'7_._._. ._. _ iflq I i - . 2-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION t, ralgall�' ; n"'-•• ey /a itii r_•No 35 3.4 ISOPLUVIALS OF 2-YEAR 24-HOUR NIFIS.1 g� TOTAL PRECIPITATION IN INCHES e�,• -*A�*r •, C 7 •PAW* 'V H c w ;r-`, sf �7i- 1/90 i.300,000 3.5.1-8 c - (49 i 1019 Pacific Avenue,Suite 906 Normandy Ridge Apartments OUND Tacoma.WA 98402 Bus: (253) 573-0040 NGINEERING, Inc. Fax: (253) 573-0142 King County Surface Water Design Manual CIVIL ENGINEERS'LAND PLANNERS sound®soundenginc.com Isopluvial Chart: 10 year, 24 hour r ICING COUNTY. W AS HINGTON. SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FIGURE 33.1E 10-YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLUVIALS 2.1 'i "�lr�� E% " „�- ►M, • , Not to Scall 24 i slum �Il.�a - 2.7 , Iiiirifilaer401/04 t --Ntk ({ ea ,-'__1?,eit4iner' Mota""TANI I‘ li .., . - \,._A.....*:iitol -4ZOOrtakliwAllk,. _es& ' . iii 25 ./ 411t1Fatilk OrAtelriVar, \411111k1k ,c,_,,.' y. • , 7-5) 7 •I ' rii_ .. ... .• _ )riattlits , ,,, • 34 o '',, 1oini , T. .3.z 21 INiti.N. - r f ‘) Jigat,-7- ( tfk . 4 ,- _, Ilk t 1 ,, fp, .lai ,_, 1, ' • .. t. r liwitglifor-1011010,...., *v ----.1rillrgli ,...c...._ _ tii, ' , Pip. - - - ingfik dirkigin' ._. / , .. • . 4 ts --!'"it 7. ..,z7.1c __A MEE * 7/_.c.... , 1 WAIN% ‘Ma!7.4t.;4 ' 1.• . , *atm Anil ; ,..VI41114 - \- __•,. .. wils1111 "44 441- - gifeitti .0„, v , .t! iwvsl"ic fi‘, ,.. �- --- wad, tti.iir.. 110-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION • FAIN* 34 ISOPLUVIAI S OF 10-YEAR 24•HOUR �' ,�0 ��.�i'qrfi' r TOTAL PRECIPITATION IN INCHES i,300,000 3.5.1-10 �e�5 1/90 4.0 1019 Pacific Avenue,Suite 906 Normandy Ridge Apartments OIIND Tacoma.WA 96402 Bus: (253) 573-0040 NGINEERING, Inc. Fax: (253) 573-0142 King County Surface Water Design Manual CIVIL ENGINEERS•LAND PLANNERS sound®soundenginc.com Isopluvial Chart: 100 year, 24 hour A ,,,, KING COUNTY. WAS HINGTON. SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL FIGURE 3.5.111 100-YEAR 24-HOUR ISOPLUVIALS --. 30 ►f y ��'�� .-�_\ �� ` f VS APR Not to kale : ' wid f Wigwag AVOW. Ailli (... 'V VW I."7 LW) .. tiiiii711k ‘2.2493. aytpli4511anbilaisittk iliet Twialinig.' iiiitaill tit Ivo ; 4 \--NATIAi ' alti-w.*Vly ,.... . . . 4 y . - i ., 4.3 ' •-,..4t.h44%' - •=tek .011141,44111\ . 4.04 '- 4.4 , , --r,..., -} . 1 -- .--4=--Tormyr .rdisir "Orle: //c2,.< ' '• iN1-11, : ..„ ,edi .....,t , -'' z ..-, ' - ----x AXIL --- ---,;07=40.e.,0,---,......,._ -'--- - /s -i, -Ail 1.47uv,.!-• Ifkiltree,4w- -.—.•Aosii--- .... I v ''')4 .)ti . n i ! e ' 1.1 w t ofro,e.,40,;,--r—iii.e .:4 - 741 , 1,4411 _-•.7 OW \\ pr -Wzg gik '`. -- = .� ' �ipi1S it 11� �� , AV,,,=.t, _. 1 AN4,41164,1‘ .1.. i . •Afilriall c,:ltN_. '.,11\p, = --1 7 i 47 i . -_.- . mem, -,,,,, ,fic , ',_,• •.-- , -- , ,- : NA. 1 ==-, ___ • .• \,_ „..., 1.1...winicpa ,*, ,,,...e. ,,,, _ ,• • , :-_-.. ...., 10..... . • _ __ vim", ...ri, .,,, _ . ,;,,,,,... Nowt Ir ler ik**-mii 0'd-1 MO" :--) _ . tykativ,irriellaimi , 1eliw am - . . ... i to r ` IP . 0,..i . .._ _, , 4,044.7.114 mons tylarro ..../ \.-_-___ gnaw J.x.da.. astfaxitk. 014 .;,-Vj ' - . fir-ril 42.11PW:Mirlotgr -, % . 77...= atri \,,,,,,,A4 kg . _ „ , . ,..4, __ ..", , Or c, ,59._ • �''41AMMIL l OA, • 00-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION o�4 *!�`,��/1 /� 65 3.4 ISOPLUVIALS OF 100-YEAR 24-HOUR '� ��24. TOTAL PRECIPITATION IN INCHES b p,�' _�11/41, , ��r�Ir • 5.5 a 1.300,000 3 5.1-13 ' , of 1/90 C - 1!) DRAFT TACOMA STORMWATER MANAGEMENT MANUAL - VOLUME I 6.5.9 Correction Factor to Pond Volume When designing runoff quantity control facilities, the Engineer shall apply a correction fac Dr the design volume when using a unit hydrograph method to model 24-hour storm events. Tf correction factor is shown in Figure 6.1 and shall be used to increase the proposed )on volume by the applicable percentage, i.e. 10,000 c.f. + 30% = 13,333 c.f. This fac. �r based on site impervious cover. If the facility is to serve for water quality also, the pond c pt cannot be increased beyond the criteria established in Chapter 7. NOTE: This factor doe. nc apply to infiltration facilities or facilities sized with a continuous simulation model suc a HSPF however, the design engineer is encouraged to incorporate an appropriate factc c safety based upon the level of detail included in the model. FIGURE 6.1 VOLUME CORRECTION FACTOR TO BE APPLIED TO RUNOFF QUANTITY CONTROL BMPS BASED ON SITE IMPERVIOUS COVER 50 4s 40 — O v 35 30 — O ./ 0 25 E 20 O 15 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 SITE IMPERVIOUS COVER (%) Reference: Barker, et. al., -Performance of Detention Ponds Designed According to Current Standards', 1990. 6.6 DETENTION/RETENTION DESIGN CRITERIA 6.6.1 Discharge Criteria Unless exempted in Section 6.4, the following runoff quantity control requirements shall apply: 1 . Discharge Point - The discharge point for the project shall occur at the natural location. C 6-9 �`� 9/16/99 11 :27 :47 am Sound Engineering Inc. page Normandy Ridge Apartments Detention sizing calculations STAGE STORAGE TABLE RECTANGULAR VAULT ID No. 1 Description: Detention Vault Length: 100 . 00 ft . Width: 40 . 00 ft . voids : 1 . 000 STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> STAGE <----STORAGE----> (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- (ft) ---cf--- --Ac-Ft- 151.70 0.0000 0.0000 153.80 8400 0.1928 155.90 16800 0.3857 158.00 25200 0.5785 151.80 400.00 0.0092 153.90 8800 0.2020 156.00 17200 0.3949 158.10 25600 0.5877 151,90 800.00 0.0184 154.00 9200 0.2112 156.10 17600 0.4040 158.20 26000 0.5969 152.00 1200 0,0275 154.10 9600 0.2204 156.20 18000 0.4132 158.30 26400 0.6061 152.10 1600 0.0367 154.20 10000 0.2296 156.30 18400 0.4224 158.40 26800 0.6152 152,20 2000 0.0459 154.30 10400 0.2388 156.40 18800 0.4316 158.50 27200 0,6244 152.30 2400 0.0551 154.40 10800 0.2479 156.50 19200 0.4408 158.60 27600 0.6336 152.40 2800 0.0643 154.50 11200 0.2571 156.60 19600 0.4500 158.70 28000 0.6428 152.50 3200 0.0735 154.60 11600 0.2663 156.70 20000 0.4591 158.80 28400 0.6520 152.60 3600 0.0826 154.70 12000 0.2755 156.80 20400 0.4683 158.90 28800 0.6612 152.70 4000 0.0918 154.80 12400 0.2847 156.90 20800 0.4775 159.00 29200 0.6703 152.80 4400 0.1010 154.90 12800 0.2938 157.00 21200 0.4867 159.10 29600 0.6795 152.90 4800 0.1102 155.00 13200 0.3030 157.10 21600 0.4959 159.20 30000 0.6887 153.00 5200 0.1194 155.10 13600 0.3122 157.20 22000 0.5051 159.30 30400 0.6979 153.10 5600 0.1286 155.20 14000 0.3214 157.30 22400 0,5142 159.40 30800 0.7071 153.20 6000 0.1377 155.30 14400 0.3306 157.40 22800 0.5234 159.50 31200 0.7163 153.30 6400 0.1469 155,40 14800 0.3398 157.50 23200 0.5326 159.60 31600 0.7254 153,40 6800 0.1561 155.50 15200 0.3489 157.60 23600 0.5418 159.70 32000 0.7346 153.50 7200 0.1653 155.60 15600 0.3581 157.70 24000 0.5510 159.80 32400 0.7438 153.60 7600 0.1745 155.70 16000 0.3673 157.80 24400 0.5601 159.90 32800 0.7530 153.70 8000 0.1837 155.80 16400 0.3765 157.90 24800 0.5693 160.00 33200 0.7622 9/16/99 11 :27 :47 am Sound Engineering Inc. page Normandy Ridge Apartments Detention sizing calculations STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 1 Description: Outlet Control Structure Outlet Elev: 152 .20 Elev: 152 .20 ft Orifice Diameter: 1 . 9717 in. Elev: 155 . 70 ft Orifice 2 Diameter: 6 . 9609 in. STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 152.20 0.0000 154.00 0.1415 155.80 0.6160 157.60 2.0576 152.30 0,0334 154.10 0.1454 155.90 0.7910 157.70 2.1070 152.40 0.0472 154,20 0.1492 156.00 0.9259 157.80 2.1551 152.50 0.0578 154.30 0.1529 156.10 1.0400 157.90 2.2022 152.60 0.0667 154.40 0.1565 156.20 1.1408 158.00 2.2482 152.70 0.0746 154.50 0.1600 156.30 1.2321 158.10 2.2933 152.80 0.0817 154.60 0.1634 156.40 1.3163 158.20 2.3375 152.90 0.0883 154.70 0.1668 156.50 1.3949 158.30 2.3808 153.00 0.0944 154.80 0.1701 156.60 1.4687 158.40 2.4233 153.10 0.1001 154.90 0.1733 156.70 1.5387 158.50 2.4651 153.20 0.1055 155.00 0.1765 156.80 1.6054 158.60 2.5061 153.30 0.1106 155.10 0.1797 156.90 1.6691 158.70 2.5465 153.40 0.1156 155.20 0.1827 157.00 1.7304 158.80 2.5862 153.50 0.1203 155.30 0.1857 157.10 1.7894 158.90 2.6253 153.60 0,1248 155.40 0.1887 157.20 1.8463 159.00 2.6638 153.70 0.1292 155.50 0.1916 157.30 1.9015 153,80 0.1334 155.60 0.1945 157.40 1.9550 153.90 0.1375 155.70 0.1974 157.50 2.0070 C- 9/16/99 11 :5 :1 am Sound Engineering Inc. page Normandy Ridge Apartments Detention sizing calculations STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE MULTIPLE ORIFICE ID No. 1 Description: Outlet Control Structure Outlet Elev: 152 . 20 Elev: 152 .20 ft Orifice Diameter: 1 . 9717 in. Elev: 155 . 70 ft Orifice 2 Diameter: 6 . 9609 in. STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 152.20 0.0000 154.00 0.1415 155.80 0,6160 157.60 2.0576 152.30 0.0334 154.10 0.1454 155.90 0.7910 157.70 2.1070 152.40 0.0472 154.20 0.1492 156.00 0.9259 157.80 2.1551 152.50 0.0578 154.30 0.1529 156.10 1.0400 157.90 2.2022 152.60 0.0667 154.40 0.1565 156.20 1.1408 158.00 2.2482 152.70 0.0746 154.50 0.1600 156.30 1.2321 158.10 2.2933 152.80 0.0817 154.60 0.1634 156.40 1.3163 158.20 2.3375 152.90 0.0883 154.70 0.1668 156.50 1.3949 158.30 2.3808 153.00 0.0944 154.80 0.1701 156.60 1.4687 158.40 2.4233 153.10 0.1001 154.90 0.1733 156.70 1.5387 158.50 2.4651 153.20 0.1055 155.00 0.1765 156.80 1.6054 158.60 2.5061 153.30 0.1106 155.10 0.1797 156.90 1.6691 158.70 2.5465 153.40 0.1156 155.20 0.1827 157,00 1.7304 158.80 2.5862 153.50 0.1203 155.30 0.1857 157.10 1.7894 158.90 2.6253 153.60 0.1248 155.40 0.1887 157.20 1.8463 159.00 2.6638 153.70 0.1292 155.50 0.1916 157.30 1.9015 153.80 0.1334 155.60 0.1945 157.40 1.9550 153.90 0.1375 155.70 0.1974 157.50 2.007C 9/16/99 11 :5 : 1 am Sound Engineering Inc. page Normandy Ridge Apartments Detention sizing calculations :- STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE NOTCH WEIR ID No. NOTCH Description: Weir Length: 1 . 0000 ft. Weir height (p) : 0 . 2500 ft . Elevation : 155 . 82 ft . Weir Increm: 0 . 10 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 155.82 0.0000 156.70 3.1821 157.60 9.3568 158.50 15.386 155.90 0.0757 156.80 3.7736 157.70 10.098 158.60 15.884 156.00 0.2619 156.90 4.3979 157.80 10.834 158.70 16.326 156.10 0.5200 157.00 5.0512 157.90 11.559 158.80 16.705 156.20 0.8394 157.10 5.7298 158.00 12.268 158.90 17.016 156.30 1.2139 157.20 6.4295 158.10 12.956 159.00 17.252 156.40 1.6392 157.30 7.1464 158.20 13.618 156.50 2.1114 157.40 7.8763 158.30 14.247 156.60 2.6268 157.50 8.6145 158.40 14,838 C. 9/16/99 11 :5 : 1 am Sound Engineering Inc . page Normandy Ridge Apartments Detention sizing calculations STAGE DISCHARGE TABLE V-WEIR ID No. V-NOTCH Description: cd : 0 . 6200 Weir Angle: 45 . 0000 degrees Elev: 154 . 50 ft . Weir Increm: 0 . 10 STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> STAGE <--DISCHARGE---> (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs (ft) ---cfs 154.50 0.0000 155.70 0.4051 156.90 2.2916 158.10 6.3150 154.60 0.0008 155.80 0.4949 157.00 2.5379 158.20 6.7627 154.70 0.0046 155.90 0.5956 157.10 2.7993 158.30 7.2289 154.80 0.0127 156.00 0.7077 157.20 3.0763 158.40 7.7140 154.90 0.0260 156.10 0.8316 157.30 3.3691 158.50 8.2180 155,00 0.0454 156.20 0.9677 157.40 3.6780 158.60 8.7413 155.10 0.0716 156.30 1.1163 157.50 4.0033 158.70 9.2841 155.20 0.1053 156.40 1.2779 157.60 4.3453 158.80 9.8466 155.30 0.1470 156.50 1.4528 157.70 4.7043 158.90 10.429 155.40 0.1973 156.60 1.6412 157.80 5.0804 159.00 11.032 155.50 0.2568 156.70 1.8436 157.90 5.4741 155.60 0.3259 156.80 2.0603 158.00 5.8855 ki 9/16/99 11 :5 :3 am Sound Engineering Inc . page 7 Normandy Ridge Apartments Detention sizing calculations LEVEL POOL TABLE SUMMARY MATCH INFLOW -STO- -DIS- <-PEAK-> OUTFLOW STORAGE DESCRIPTION > (cfs) (cfs) --id- --id- <-STAGE> id (cfs) VOL (cf) 2 YR 24 HOUR 0.19 1.72 1 1 155.62 10 0.20 15690.63 cf 10 YR 24 HOUR 0.87 2.83 1 1 155.86 11 0.73 16652.45 cf 100 YR 24 HOUR 1.48 4.05 1 1 156.62 12 1.48 19675.42 cf ( I.37) c- 5 Size Biofiltration Swale Flow 0.87 cfs slope (s) 2.00% (bottom slope for for biofiltration design) depth (y) 0.33 ft. Mannings n 0.35 Sides (z) 3 (3 to 1 side slope preferred) Actual Length 135 ft. (desired length is 200 ft.) Required bottom width (b) calculation Q = (1.49/ n) x A x R2/3xj (mannings equation) A = (b+ zy)y R = A/(b+ 2y1/1+ z2 ) "b" is solved for using a computer spreadsheet function to obtain a trail and error solution of b = 8.78 feet, for a desired length of 200 feet. check Q = 0.870 cfs, OK same as given Velocity = 0.270 fps <1.5 OK Residence Time = 12.3 mins. 3.223 Find bottom width required if actual length is 135 ft. (Minimum length is 50 feet.) For equal Surface Areas: Required water Surface area = (2zy+b) x 200 feet = 2151 SF Actual bottom width required = (Des. Surf. Area)/(length (actual)) - 2zy b = 13.95 ft. Filename Bioswale.xls Tab BIOSWALE 9/16/99 11:39 AM C- 9/15/99 6 : 50 :25 pm Sound Engineering Inc . page Normandy Ridge Apartments Detention sizing calculations BASIN SUMMARY BASIN ID: WQ NAME : post-devel 64% of 2yr (6mo) SBUH METHODOLOGY TOTAL AREA • 5 .28 Acres BASEFLOWS : 0 . 00 cfs RAINFALL TYPE TYPE1A PERV IMP PRECIPITATION • 1 . 28 inches AREA. . : 5 .28 Acres 0 . 00 cr TIME INTERVAL 10 . 00 min CN • 93 . 90 0 . 00 TC • 1 .54 min 0 . 00 :n ABSTRACTION COEFF: 0 . 20 TcReach - Sheet L: 100 . 00 ns : 0 . 0110 p2yr: 2 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 TcReach - Shallow L: 300 . 00 ks :27 . 00 s : 0 . 1500 TcReach - Channel L: 300 . 00 kc :42 . 00 s : 0 . 1000 PEAK RATE : 0 . 87 cfs VOL: 0 .32 Ac-ft TIME: 470 min C1 q9 - 13fi (9 ) HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES WETLANDS EVALUATION AND DELINEATION REPORT AND STREAM BUFFER ESTABLISHEMENT PLAN TALBOT ROAD TOWNHOMES CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON prepared for: The Casey Group - Architects 10116 - 36th Avenue Court SW, Suite 109 Lakewood, Washington 98499 hl_OP,'FTNT P1 CFI'(OF i a 1`i prepared by: SEP 2 iv HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES RECEIVE P.O. Box 1088 Puyallup, Washington 98371-1088 253-845-5119 September 22, 1999 wetlands, streams, fisheries, wildlife -- mitigation and permitting solutions P.O. Box 1088, Puyallup, Washington 98371-1088 voice 253-845-5119 fax 253-841-1942 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Talbot Road Townhomes Project Site is located at 4914 Talbot Road South, City of Renton, King County, Washington. An assessment of this project site following the procedures outlined in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Wash. Manual) and the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) resulted in the identification of six small onsite wetland areas. These wetland areas exhibited hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation consistent with the established criteria of both the Wash. Manual and 1987 Manual. One of the excavated ditches generally through the center of the project site was noted to originate at a toe of slope spring and was identified to meet the criteria for designation as a Type 5 Water pursuant to the Washington Department of Natural Resources Forest Practice Rules (WAC 222-16-030). The project site was approximately 8 acres in size and had been manipulated and utilized as - homesite for several decades. The project site included an old barn, internal ditches, ol. orchard and garden areas, and domestic water well and surface water collection systems. Onsite assessment included an evaluation of the function and value rating for each wetland, . classification of each wetland following the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service methods, - categorization of each wetland following the City of Renton Wetlands Management Ordinance. WETLAND SIZE IN CLASSIFICATION CITY OF RENTON FUNCTION SQUARE FEET (USFWS) CATEGORY AND VALUE RATING A 475 sqft PEMEd 3 non-regulated Low B 1,230 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low C 500 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low D 2,048 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low E 1,481 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low G 1,454 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low PEMEd palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded/saturated, ditched PSSEd palustrine, scrub-shrub, seasonally flooded/saturated, ditched Both the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the City of Renton regulate activities in and aroun I identified wetland and stream areas. Proposed activities within a stream are also regulated b the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Such regulations focus on the avoidance and minimization of adverse impacts to wetlands, streams, and the associated buffers. Compensatory mitigation is required for impacts that cannot be avoided or minimized The City of Renton has established criteria to categorize wetlands for purposes of regulatior and requires a buffer along wetland and drainage corridor areas. The City of Renton does n t regulated Category 3 Wetland less than 5,000 square feet in size. The standard City of Rento buffer for the small onsite stream is 25-foot buffer as measured from the ordinary high wat r mark (i.e. top of ditch bank). The Selected Development Action focuses on the development of a residential communi within the project site. This development will require the filling of the non-regulated wetlan I areas and the establishment of two road crossing of the onsite stream. As a part of this proje t a 25-foot buffer will be established along each side of the onsite stream. This buffer will enhanced through the installation of native trees and shrubs to compensate for the impacts f the required road crossings. The overall goal is to ensure that proposed onsite activities do n t adversely impact onsite or downstream aquatic environments associated with the small stream TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 STUDY PURPOSE 1 SITE DESCRIPTION 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2 NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY 2 STATE OF WASHINGTON PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES 2 STATE OF WASHINGTON STREAM CATELOG 2 CITY OF RENTON WETLAND INVENTORY 2 SOILS MAPPING 2 ONSITE ANALYSIS 3 CRITERIA FOR WETLAND IDENTIFICATION 3 WETLAND STUDY METHODS 3 FIELD OBSERVATION 3 Soils 4 Hydrology 4 Vegetation 5 WETLAND AND STREAM DETERMINATION 6 WETLAND FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT 7 ONSITE WETLAND VALUATION 8 REGULATORY CONSIDERATION 9 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - SECTION 404 9 STATE OF WASHINGTON (HPA) 11 THE CITY OF RENTON - WETLANDS MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE 12 Wetland Categories 12 L] Non-Regulated Wetlands 13 LI Stream Buffers and Modifications 13 SELECTED DEVELOPMENT ACTION 13 FIGURES 15 REFERENCE LIST 16 APPENDIX A 17 APPENDIX B 18 APPENDIX C 19 STANDARD OF CARE Prior to extensive site planning, this document should be reviewed and the wetland boundaries verified by the appropriate resource and permitting agencies. Wetland boundaries, wetland classifications, wetland ratings, and proposed buffers should be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton and potentially other regulatory agencies. The above consultant has provided professional services that are in accordance with the degree of care and skill generally accepted in the nature of the work accomplished. No other warranties are expressed or implied. The consultant is not responsible fo design costs incurred before this document is approved by the appropriate resource an. permitting agencies. Thomas D. Deming Certified Professional Wetland Scientist Habitat Technologies INTRODUCTION This report details the culmination of activities and onsite evaluations undertake to complete a wetland and stream evaluation and delineation of the Talbot Road Townhomes Project Site. The project site is located at 4914 Talbot Road South, City of Renton, King County, Washington (Figure 1). The evaluation and delineation of onsite and adjacent wetlands and drainage corridors is a vital element in the planning and selection of a site development action. The goal of this approach is to ensure that planned site development does not result in adverse environmental impacts to regulated wetland areas. This report also provides a conceptual description of the compensatory actions to be undertaken onsite to address project related unavoidable impacts associated with the development of two road crossing of the onsite small stream. As a part of this project a 25-foot buffer will be established along each side of the onsite stream. This buffer will be enhanced through the installation of native trees and shrubs to compensate for the impacts of the required road crossings. The overall goal is to ensure that proposed onsite activities do not adversely impact onsite or downstream aquatic environments and water quality associated with this small stream. Wetlands are generally defined as "those areas that are transitional betwee terrestrial and aquatic systems that are inundated or saturated by ground o surface water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and, unde normal circumstances, do support a prevalence of vegetation typical) adapted for life in saturated soil conditions." (City of Renton Wetland Management Ordinance). STUDY PURPOSE The purpose of this document is two fold. First, this document presents the results o an onsite assessment and evaluation of wetland areas within the project site followin• the methods and procedures outlined in the Washington State Wetlands Identificatio and Delineation Manual (Wash. Manual) and the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual). Onsite assessment noted that there was n• difference in the identified wetland boundaries as a result to using either the Wash Manual or the 1987 Manual. Drainage corridors were also assessed in accordance wit the criteria established by the City of Renton and the State of Washington Departmen of Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practice Rules (WAC 222-16-030). Second, this document presents an overview of the conceptual compensatory actions t• be undertaken onsite to address project related unavoidable impacts associated wit the development of two road crossing of the onsite small stream. As a part of thi project a 25-foot buffer will be established along each side of the onsite stream. Thi buffer will be enhanced through the installation of native trees and shrubs to compensate for the impacts of the required road crossings. Talbot Road 99066 SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is approximately 8 acres in total size and located within a rapidly urbanizing area of the City of Renton. The project site has been manipulated and utilized as a homesite for a number of decades. However, this uses have been reduced over the past few years and the site has become overgrown with a mixture of invasive shrubs and sapling trees. The project site included an old barn, internal ditches, old orchard and garden areas, and domestic water well and surface water collection systems. The eastern portion of the site was dominated by a mixed forest hillslope that will be retained undeveloped as a part of the proposed residential community (Figure 2). BACKGROUND INFORMATION NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping completed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource failed to identify any onsite or immediately adjacent wetlands or drainage corridors. STATE OF WASHINGTON PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES The State of Washington Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource did not identify any priority species o habitats within or immediately adjacent to the project site. STATE OF WASHINGTON STREAM CATELOG The State of Washington Stream Catalogue for Puget Sound (Williams et al. 1975) wa- reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource did not identify an stream corridors within or immediately adjacent to the project site. CITY OF RENTON WETLAND INVENTORY The City of Renton Wetland Inventory Mapping was reviewed as a part of thi- assessment. This mapping resource failed to identify any onsite or immediatel adjacent wetlands of drainage corridors. SOILS MAPPING Soils mapping of the site completed by the Soils Conservation Service identified thz. onsite soils as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam. This soil series is defined as moderate) well drainage and formed in glacial till. This soil is not listed as "hydric." 2 Talbot Road 99066 ONSITE ANALYSIS CRITERIA FOR WETLAND IDENTIFICATION Presently accepted wetland identification is based on a three-parameter criteria test as established within both the 1987 Manual and the Wash Manual. These criteria are: 1. A predominance of hydrophytic vegetation. 2. The presence of hydric soils, and 3. The presence of wetland hydrology. WETLAND STUDY METHODS The project team completed an initial assessment of the project site during April 1999. Specific onsite evaluation and identification of wetland boundaries was completed on April 20, 1999. The objective of this evaluation was to review existing field mapping and to delineate potential wetland areas which may be present within the project area as defined by the three-parameter criteria test noted within the Wash. Manual and 1987 Manual. Identified drainage corridors were also identified. Boundaries between wetland and non-wetland areas were established by examining the transitional gradient between wetland criteria along a number of west to east transect- through the site. Delineation was performed using the routine methodology for area greater than five acres as detailed in the 1987 Manual. Field data sheets are provide. in Appendix A and sample plots are identified on Figure 2. FIELD OBSERVATION As defined by existing site conditions and a review of aerial photos the majority of th= project site has been managed and manipulated for several decades. Sit- management and manipulation activities have focused primarily within the central an. western portions of the project site and had included the development of a single-famil homesite and associated outbuildings, orchards, gardens, and pastures. However, a- defined by plant growth the use and management of this area for had been curtaile. and the old homesite had been removed. One single-family homesite was still presen in the northwestern corner of the site and an old barn and small outbuildings were stil present near the toe of slope in the east-central portion of the project site. With the recent curtailment of onsite management activities the site has become overgrown wit invasive shrubs and sapling trees. The eastern portion of the project site was composed of a hillslope dominated by mixed forest plant community. This hillslope area had been harvested several year. ago. 3 Talbot Road 99066 Soils The majority of the project site exhibited soils typical of the Alderwood soil series. The central and western portions of the project site had been modified by prior land use actions which appeared to include grading, leveling, and plowing in many areas. A typical soil profile was dominated by gravelly loam to gravelly sandy loam and did not exhibit prominent redoximorphic features. The majority of these soils did not meet the hydric soil criteria Within a number of small depressions generally located in the north-central portion of, the project site the soil also exhibited a gravelly loam texture. However, the surface soil included a higher content of organic materials and the sub-soil exhibited prominent) redoximorphic features. The soil appeared to be saturated at or near the surface throughout the early growing season and to exhibit shallow seasonally ponding during the late winter and very early part of the growing season. These small areas (noted as Wetlands A, B, C, D, E, and G below) met the hydric soil criteria. The soil generally within the bottom of the excavated ditches did not exhibit redoximorphic features. These ditches appeared to have been excavated within typically upland soil to convey surface water and prior land uses activities. In a few areas these ditches exhibited an accumulation of fine alluvial materials and a high organic content (i.e. Wetland C). Hydrology Onsite hydrology appeared to be the result of seasonal stormwater runoff from onsite and adjacent properties, human-caused drainage corridors, short-term seasonal ponding within a few small depressions, and soil characteristics. A well-maintaine. roadside ditch and City of Renton stormwater conveyance system was present alone Talbot Road. A spring was identified at the toe of slope near the north-central property boundary. Surface water from this spring appeared to at one time been collected within a cistern and conveyed via a pipe system. Overflow from this spring was ditched generally eas' to west through the central portion of the project site and released into the roadsidz ditch along Talbot Road. An additional series of east to west ditches also conveye• surface water runoff into the roadside ditch along Talbot Road. These east to wes ditches appeared to generally follow property boundaries and internal fencelines. Six small depressions onsite appeared saturated at or near the surface throughout the early growing season and to exhibit shallow seasonally ponding during the late winte and very early part of the growing season. These small areas (noted as Wetlands A, B C, D, E, and G below) met the wetland hydrology criteria and had been ditched. 4 Talbot Road 99066 Vegetation The central and western portions of the entire project area had been manipulated for the development and maintenance for several decades. However, routine maintenance of the project area appears to have ceased and the plant community had been allowed to go fallow. Areas once dominated by orchards, gardens, and pastures have been overrun with invasive herbs, shrubs, and sapling trees. The shrubs and sapling trees had formed large dense thickets. Observed seeded grasses included orchard grass (Dactylis glomerate), bentgrass (Agrostis alba and Agrostis tenuis), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), fescue (Festuca spp.), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundlnacea),'' bermudagrass (Cynodon dacty/on), and bluegrass (Poa spp.). Observed herbs bracken fern (Pteridium aquilium), sword fern (Polystichum munitum), buttercup (Ranunculus repens), yarrow (Achillea lanulosa), thistle (Cirsium spp.), softrush (Juncus effusus), fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium), cats-ear (Hypochaeris radicata), plantain (Plantago major), nettle (Urtica dioica), and dandelion (Taraxacum off/cinale). Observed shrubs and sapling trees included trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus), evergreen blackberry (Rubus laciniatus), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procera), snowberry (Symphoricarpus albus), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis), one-seed hawthrone (Crataegous monogyna), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), wild rose (Rosa gymnocarpa), Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis), red alder (Alnus rubra), big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa). This plant community was identified as non-hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of uplands). The eastern portion of the project site was dominated by a mixed upland forest community which appeared to have undergone forest harvest activities several decades ago. Observed species within this hillside area include second growth Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), big leaf maple, red alder, blackberries, snowberry, salmonberry, Indian plum, hazelnut, vine maple (Acer circinatum), wild rose, Oregon grape (Berberis nervosa), salal (Gaultheria shallon), and nettle. This plant community was identified as non-hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of uplands). The plant communities associated with the identified small depression and a few areas along the excavated ditches had also been managed by prior land use actions. Observed species include sapling red alder, sapling black cottonwood, Pacific willow, salmonberry, reed canarygrass, small fruited bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus), common horsetail (Equisetum arvense), buttercup, skunk cabbage (Lysichitum americanum), nightshade (Solarium dulcamara), and lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina). These plani communities were identified as hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of wetland). 5 Talbot Road 99066 WETLAND AND STREAM DETERMINATION Wetland determination was based on sample plots that contained hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology in accordance with both the 1987 Manual and the Wash. Manual. Based on these methods six small wetlands were identified onsite (Figure 2). Each onsite wetland was also identified to category as defined within the City of Renton Wetland Management Ordinance. WETLAND SIZE IN CLASSIFICATION CITY OF RENTON FUNCTION SQUARE FEET (USFWS) CATEGORY AND VALUE RATING A 475 sqft PEMEd 3 non-regulated Low B 1,230 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low C 500 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low D 2,048 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low E 1,481 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low G 1,454 sqft PSSEd 3 non-regulated Low PEMEd palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded/saturated, ditched PSSEd palustrine, scrub-shrub, seasonally flooded/saturated, ditched Onsite Wetlands: The identified onsite wetlands were located within small depressions that appeared to have been formed in part by prior land use management actions. These small depressions were ditched to drain into a series of onsite east to west drainage ditches. However, these small depressions exhibit a hydric mineral soils and an early growing season hydrology pattern sufficient to meet the wetland hydrology criteria. The plant communities within these small depressions were dominated by sapling trees (i.e. red alder, black cottonwood) and shrubs (i.e. salmonberry). Additional species include a wide variety of grasses and herbs. Wetland A was dominated by reed canarygrass and small-fruited bulrush. This wetland met the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for classification as palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded/saturated, ditched (PEMEd). Wetlands B, C, D, E, and F were dominated by sapling red alder and salmonberry. These wetlands met the USFWS criteria for classification as palustrine, scrub-shrub, seasonally flooded/ saturated, ditched (PSSEd). Based on small size and limited plant communities these wetlands were identified to meet the criteria for designation as City of Renton Category 3 Wetlands. However, all of these wetlands were smaller than the minimum size identified as regulated by the, City of Renton. Onsite Stream: A spring was identified at the toe of slope along the north-central property boundary. Surface water from this spring appeared to at one time been] collected within a cistern and conveyed via a pipe system. Overflow from this spring', was ditched generally east to west through the central portion of the project site ands released into the roadside ditch along Talbot Road. Since this excavated ditch conveys "naturally occurring surface water" this ditch meet the criteria for designation as a 6 Talbot Road 99066 stream. In addition, this stream meets the criteria for designation as a WDNR Type 5' Water (i.e. does not provide direct habitat for fish and is less than 2 feet in width at ordinary high water mark). The importance of this stream is in the protection of downstream aquatic resources and local water quality. On August 11, 1999 Mr. Philip Schneider, Area Habitat Biologist Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife visited the project site. Mr. Schneider concluded that this excavated ditch would be considered a stream for purposes of site development. Any proposed work within the ordinary high water mark of this stream would require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) (Appendix B). WETLAND FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Wetlands are known to perform significant roles in the ecosystem, some of which are of immediate value to society. These roles vary greatly with the size, type, hydrology,1 vegetation, and location of wetland areas. Although the ecological functions performed by these wetlands are complex, interrelated, and difficult to assess and quantify, methods have been developed for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Adamus et al. 1987: Reppert et al. 1979). The functions provided by wetlands include hydrologic support, shoreline protection, stormwater and floodwater storage, water quality, groundwater recharge, and provision of wildlife habitat. The HYDROLOGIC SUPPORT FUNCTION is defined by the measure of hydrologic stability and environmental integrity that the wetland provides. This function is measured by the frequency of inundation and saturation by tidal actions, stream flow, runoff, and precipitation. Wetlands permanently inundated or saturated, or intertidal wetlands are' valued as high. Medium valued wetlands are seasonally flooded or are open water', systems that remain saturated during most of the growing season. Wetlands that era intermittently flooded or hydrologically isolated are considered of low value. The SHORELINE PROTECTION FUNCTION is defined by the measure of shielding, from wave action, erosion, or storm damage that a wetland provides. This function is measured by the location and width of the wetland along shoreline areas, types of vegetation present, and the extent of development along the shoreline. A high value is given to wetlands along a shoreline that have a width greater than 200 yards and dense woody vegetation. A medium value is given to a wetland with a width of 100 to 2001 yards, sparse woody vegetation, and dense emergent vegetation. Wetlands less than 100 yards in width and emergent or lacking vegetation are considered of low value. The STORMWATER AND FLOODWATER STORAGE FUNCTION is defined by the, ability of a wetland to store water and retard flow during periods of flood or storm! discharge. Wetlands of larger size are generally considered to have greater ability to provide this function. In addition, wetlands nearer to urban or potentially develop-abl= areas are also considered to provide greater flood protections than wetlands that are i undeveloped areas. 7 Talbot Road 99066 The WATER QUALITY FUNCTION is defined by the physical, biological, and chemical processes which wetlands provide to naturally purify water. This function removes organic and mineral particulates through natural filtration. In general, wetlands of greater size, more dense vegetation, and those which are close to point sources of pollution are considered to be of higher value. Wetlands which are small (<5 acres), lacking dense vegetation, and not close to point or non-point sources of pollution are considered of low value. The GROUNDWATER RECHARGE FUNCTION is defined by the interaction of the underlying geology and soils, and the surface topography. This function provides for the movement of surface water into groundwater systems. Important to this function is wetland size, period of inundation, and depth of standing water within the wetland. High value is given to permanently inundated wetlands greater than 10 acres in size. Medium' value is given to wetlands which are seasonally flooded and 5 to 10 acres is size. Wetlands less than 5 acres in size, isolated, and temporarily saturated are considered of low value. The NATURAL BIOLOGICAL FUNCTION is defined by the complexity of physical habitats and biological species within the wetland area. The value given to a wetland depends upon its ability to provide habitat for nesting (spawning), incubation, feeding, rearing, and cover of aquatic and terrestrial animal and fish species. In addition, the ability of a wetland to provide support for varying food chains is an important element in value assessment. Wetlands of high species diversity, three or more habitat types, unique habitat features, large in size, and associated with a permanent stream or tidal marsh is considered of high value. Wetlands with moderate species diversity, two habitat types, moderate in size, and associated with an intermittent stream or high salt marsh are considered of medium value. A low value is given to wetlands of low species diversity, small size, and isolated. These six functions are rated low, moderate, or high, based on the criteria outline. above. These criteria are guidelines compiled from Adamus (1987) and Reppert (1979 and professional judgment must be exercised in assessing these criteria. Overal values for a wetland are assigned, based on a synthesis of individual values. In addition to intrinsic functions, extrinsic functions are also recognized. These extrinsi• functions provide social values that have indirect benefits to wetlands. Education an. recreational opportunities are most often mentioned as extrinsic functions. Associate. values are often in the eye of the beholder and are thus difficult to evaluate. As such these functions are not rated, but are nonetheless important when considering creation restoration, or enhancement projects. ONSITE WETLAND VALUATION The wetland areas identified within the site were evaluated following the functional value assessment process noted above. As identified in this assessment the identified wetlands would be considered to have an overall LOW value rating. The primar features that achieve this overall rating for these wetlands are in association with th following attributes: 8 Talbot Road 99066 • Water Quality Benefits - These wetlands are smaller than 1 acre in total size, have been severely disturbed, and located in a rapidly developing part of the City of Renton. These wetlands appeared to retain less than 25% of the runoff which occurs and exhibited a vegetation density less than 50%. The primary water quality benefit provided by these wetlands includes the biofiltration of a limited amount of surface stormwater. • Stormwater Storage - These wetlands are isolated, smaller than 1 acre in size, have been severely disturbed, and located in a rapidly developing part of the City of Renton. A limited amount of stormwater from onsite and offsite appears to be retained onsite. • Groundwater Recharge - Theses wetlands are small, isolated, have been severely disturbed, and located in a rapidly developing part of the City of Renton. These wetlands appeared to be seasonally flooded or seasonally flooded/saturated through the first part of the growing season. • Hydrologic Support - Theses wetlands are small, isolated, have been severely disturbed, and located in a rapidly developing part of the City of Renton. These wetlands are temporarily saturated or flooded by seasonal storm events. Evidence of shallow seasonal ponding and saturation to the surface are present. • Natural Biological Function - Theses wetlands are small, isolated, have been severely disturbed, and located in a rapidly developing part of the City of Renton. These wetlands exhibit a limited range of plant diversity and vegetation complexity. These wetlands have a single habitat type and no unique habitat features. The plan' community has been modified by past land use activities. REGULATORY CONSIDERATION The proposed alteration of lands defined by various federal, state, and local authorit rules and regulations as "wetlands" raises environmental concerns that are general) addressed in the development review process. These concerns center on th_ development's potential adverse impacts to the structure, function, value, and size o these "wetland" areas. Such adverse impacts may include a reduction in wildlif: habitats, reduced surface water quality, reduced water retention, a reduced group• water recharge rate, reduced plant species diversity, and the reduction in the functio and value of other associated wetland and non-wetland characteristics. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - Section 404 Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States" without a permit from the Corps o` 9 Talbot Road 99066 Engineers (Corps). The Corps has jurisdiction over freshwater systems waterward from) the ordinary high water line of a water body or waterward from the upland boundary of the adjacent wetland. The definition of fill materials includes the replacement of aquatic areas with dry land, grading which changes the surface contour of a wetland, and mechanized land clearing in wetlands. For the purposes of Section 404 permitting the Corps makes the final determination as to whether an area meets the wetland definition' and would be subject to regulation under the Corps program. Currently the Corps has two specific types of permits which apply to wetland fill proposals. These two types are a series of specific Nationwide Permits and the Individual Permit. The Nationwide Permit process identifies specific categories of work that can be undertaken following a set of specific conditions applicable to eacl, Nationwide Permit number. Currently the Corps, following the Nationwide Permit #26 process and the Seattle District Corps Regional Conditions - as amended following interactions with the State of Washington - can authorize maximum fill or adverse impact to two acres of wetland defined as above the headwaters or isolated (NWP#26 scheduled for change in January 2000). • Nationwide Permit #26 - discharge of fill into headwaters and isolated waters of the United States. Specific Needs: The total amount of impact to onsite wetlands must be identified, For impacts to less than 1/3 acre: The proponent must submit a report to the Corp$ within 30 days following completion of activities. For impacts between 1/3 acre and 2.0 acres: The proponent must notify and obtain permission from the Corps prior td undertaking such activities. To avoid adverse impacts to water quality, fisherie resources and other aquatic life, the NWP#26 is not applicable in wetlands within 10 feet of any stream with a channel width at the ordinary high water mark greater than tw feet. State 401 Certification: A 401 Certification issued by Washington Department Ecology is needed for fills affecting more than 1.0 acres, fills affecting more than 1/ acres which do not contain a mitigation plan approved by the local jurisdiction, and f fills within the 100-year floodplain (unless such fill is consistent with the local floodplai management plans and ordinances). Currently the Corps, following the Nationwide Permit #14 process and the Seattl4 District Corps Regional Conditions - as amended following interactions with the State • Washington - can authorize fill or adverse impact within a wetland for the placement • road crossing. • Nationwide Permit #14 - fills for roads crossing waters of the Unite,. States. Specific Needs: The width of the fill must be limited to the minimum necessary f• the actual crossing. In addition, the fill must be no greater than one tenth of an acre-, 10 Talbot Road 99066 no more than 200 linear feet, the alteration of adjacent vegetation must be held to a minimum, revegetation shall occur in impacted areas, and erosion controls must be used. The Nationwide Permit #14 can not be combined with the Nationwide Permit #18 or #26 for the purpose of increasing the footprint of the road crossing. Notification to the Corps is required. The proposed crossing cannot restrict instream flows or the low flow movement of aquatic organisms. In addition, the crossing must be consistent with the local floodplain management comprehensive plans and ordinances. The Corps requires an Individual Permit where a proposed activities within an identified jurisdictional wetland area can not be authorized under one of the Nationwide Permits. Within the Individual Permit process the Corps undertakes a much more inH depth review of the proposed project and the proposed impacts. The Corps must evaluate whether the benefits derived from the project outweigh the foreseeable environmental impacts of the project's completion. STATE OF WASHINGTON (HPA) Department of Fish and Wildlife - Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) An HPA is required for all activities waterward of the ordinary high water mark. This would include the installation of a new stream crossing for access to the site or for required roadway widening projects. Typically a crossing for this type of stream (i.e. intermittent and without direct fish habitat) can be completed using an oversized arcr' culvert. For a proposed crossing it will be important to define that this is the only reasonable location for the crossing, typically in terms of public safety and local road engineering requirements. It will also be important to show that the method of crossing and th overall impact of any fill placed waterward of the ordinary high water mark is th minimum necessary to complete the project. Permit Application: The HPA application is submitted directly to the Departmen of Fish and Wildlife, Regional Biologist. The application needs to include a detaile4. description of the proposed action, the associated impacts, and possible offsettin'. stream corridor enhancements. Many of the same enhancements that would b proposed to the local jurisdiction to offset impacts will also be noted within thi application (i.e. instream woody debris, construction schedule, and erosion controls). An HPA is typically required for the outlet structure of any onsite retention/detentio. facility. For such a proposed outlet it will be important to define that the be- management practices are being followed and that there will be no adverse impact t instream water quality. 1t Talbot Road 99066 THE CITY OF RENTON -Wetlands Management Ordinance The City of Renton regulates activities in and around sensitive wetland and stream areas. Such regulation also requires that an undisturbed native vegetation buffer be placed along the upland side of the identified sensitive areas. • Wetland Categories The City of Renton has identified categories by which to regulate wetland and buffe areas. These categories are based on such features as size, the presence o endangered or threatened plants, fish, or animals, regionally rare wetlands, wetlands o local significance, evidence of raptor nesting, the number of wetland classes an• subclasses, and adjacency to salmonid bearing waters. The City of Renton defines a Category 2 Wetland as those high quality wetlands o1 significant resource value based on significant functional value and diversity, wetlan communities or infrequent occurrence, and other attributes which may not b adequately replicated through creation or restoration. Category 2 Wetlands ar wetlands greater than 2,200 square feet in size that meet of or more the followin criteria: 1. Wetlands greater than 2,200 square feet that are not Category 1 or wetlands; 2. Wetlands that have heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees, but are not Category 1 wetlands; 3. Wetlands of any size located at the headwaters of a watercourse, but are n Category 1 wetlands; 4. Wetlands assigned the Significant #2 rating in the current King Count Wetlands Inventory 1991 or as thereafter amended; or 5. Wetlands having minimum existing evidence of human related physical alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization. Category 3 Wetlands are defined as those lower qualitywetlands that are greater thal 9 Y 5,000 square feet in size and which meet one or more of the following criteria: 1. Wetlands that are severely disturbed. Severely disturbed wetlands ar wetlands which meet the following criteria. • Are characterized by hydrologic isolation, human-related hydrologi alterations such as diking, ditching, channelization, and/or outl t modification; and • Have soils alterations such as the presence of fill, soil removal, and/car compaction of soils; and • May have altered vegetation. 2. Wetlands that are newly emerging. Newly emerging wetlands are: • Wetlands occurring on top of fill materials; and 12 Talbot Road 99066 • Characterized by emergent vegetation, low plant species richness and used minimally by wildlife. 3. All other wetlands not classified as Category 1 or 2 such as smaller, high quality wetlands. • Non-Regulated Wetlands The Cityof Renton does not regulated wetlands that meet the criteria for designation as 9 g Category 3 Wetland and are less than 5,000 square feet in size. • Stream Buffers and Modifications The City of Renton requires the establishment of a protective buffer adjacent to the ordinary high water mark of a defined stream. The required buffer width for a small stream that does not provide direct fish habitat is 25 feet. The City of Renton will allow the creation of stream crossing as a part of an overall site development plan. All sucr crossings need to be limited to the minimum number and minimum size (i.e. width of the footprint) necessary to meet local human health and safety regulations. The overal, intent is to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the stream corridor and in particular impacts to downstream water quality and quantity. SELECTED DEVELOPMENT ACTION The Selected Development Action focuses on the development of a residentia community within the project site consistent with City of Renton regulations. Thii development will require the filling of the non-regulated wetland areas and tha establishment of two road crossing of the onsite stream. As a part of this project a 25 foot buffer will be established along each side of the onsite stream. This buffer will ba enhanced through the installation of native trees and shrubs to compensate for th4 impacts of the required road crossings. The overall goal is to ensure that propose,' onsite activities do not adversely impact onsite or downstream aquatic environment!, associated with the small stream (see attached site plan). Site planning has focused on the mandated hierarchy of wetland impact reduction: I i avoidance, 2) minimization, and 3) compensation. These avoidance and minimization strategies included a site design to reduce impacts to onsite regulated stream corridor. The total amount of City of Renton non-jurisdictional wetland area which would be considered "above the headwaters" to be filled as a part of this project equals 0.16 acres (7,188 square feet). These wetlands are severely disturbed, have been altered by prior land use hydrologic manipulations (i.e. ditching, outlet controls), exhibit altered soils, and have altered vegetation communities. To compensate for the two required stream crossings the project will include restorati n and enhancement of the buffer plant community along the onsite small stream. Ths 13 Talbot Road 99066 restoration and enhancement will occur at the disturbed areas adjacent to the road crossings and is designed to accompany site development. The selected plant species will increase plant community diversity and complexity within the stream corridor adjacent to the new crossings. The plants selected for the restored/enhanced stream corridor will be obtained a nursery stock. These selected species are native and commonly occur in the loca area. The plant species prescribed are selected to increase plant diversity, matc present onsite communities, increase wildlife habitats, and enhance the aquati environment (Appendix C). The following table presents of list of species that may b used as a part of the stream corridor restoration and enhancement activities. COMMON NAME PROPOSED PROPOSED INDICATOR SCIENTIFIC NAME SPACING (oc) SIZE STATUS Douglas fir 12 - 15 ft 5 ft height FACU Pseudotsuga menziesii minimum Western hemlock 12 - 15 ft 5 ft height FACU Tsuga heterophylla minimum Western red cedar 12 - 15 ft 5 ft height FAC Thuja plicata minimum Oregon ash 10 -15 ft 4 ft height FACW Fraxinus latifolia minimum Big leaf maple 12 - 15 ft 5 ft height FACU Acer macrophyllum minimum Bitter cherry 10 - 15 ft 4 ft height FACU Prunus emarginata minimum Western crabapple 5 - 8 ft 4 ft height FACW Pyrus fusca minimum Vine maple 6 ft 2 gal FACU Acer circinatum Nootka rose 4 ft 2 gal FAC Rosa nutkana wild rose 4 ft 2 gal FACU Rosa gymnocarpa Snowberry 4 ft 1 gal FACU Symphoricarpus albus Black twinberry 4 ft 2 gal FAC+ Lonicera involucrata • Hazelnut 4 ft 2 gal FACU Corylus cornuta Flowering current 4 ft 2 gal UPL Ribes sanguineum The project proponent shall warrant that all plants will remain alive and healthy for a period of one-year following completion of planting activities. The project proponent shall replace all dead and unhealthy plants with plants of the same specifications. Supplemental irrigation may be necessary during the first year to ensure plant survival. 14 Talbot Road 99066 FIGURES 15 Talbot Road 99066 •C') cncP> 1 � S � St. G�� RM—I —8 y w i 1 <PP 11' Z1 / * � :1 nt4hroPl. CCP ,1' / -----L3___Kar--;---- - f: . ___ en . trrt t c.L_ �/ Rµ14 I P-1 . ,_ ( , 1/ . -\cip ' . -tjzIFE' '-ii--- ::" 1 R-14 R-1 J - ' — . SE 190th if 1 I R-1 —�—� _co_ 1 C. - S 5 5 t h St. -7-__ _____ • ......_________ i .,..__. \ __ cr, (, ,,,klf.—NN'----_ lir \ -Tr " ,,, HABITAT FIGURE I. TECHNOLOGIES SITE VICINITY MAP I V, WETLAND B ' excavated ditch . �% spring 72 ®3 0 2 ETL26 /AND E 2 "®Q} U• WETLAND D / 18 a /e •xisting WETLAND G •� /� .2I / S 28 � r� \homesife /� �� 24 22 31 '0") — WETLAND CJ / _# i , excavated ditch _ — — o0.- . �' CSTREAM DEFINED BY WDFW STAFF-) s��° , \ - S O tD $ existing O' � S i— I'`) 5 barn � '� m _ _ � ® excavated ditch wyu ouse �6 — - old7 �VJ .. Q S ®I 4 �7 homesite IQ ad a 15 a WETLAND A Jwpiouse ®ll a v -960ft existing homes t-PROJECT BOUNDARY toe of slope ® numbered sample plot �� general direction of surface water runoff HABITAT TALBOT ROAD PROJECT TECHNOLOGIES SITE DESCRIPTION FIGURE 2 REFERENCE LIST Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain Jr., R.D. Smith, and R.E. Young. 1987. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET); Volume II: Methodology, Operational Draft Technical Report Y-87, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79/31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. Cooperative technical publication. 76 pp. plus appendices. Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist. 1977. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Reppert, R.T., W. Sigleo, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman, and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetland Values - Concepts and Methods for Wetland Evaluation. Research Report 79-R1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soils Conservation Service. Soils Survey of The City of Renton Area Washington, February 1979. Washington State Department of Fisheries, Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1., 1975 16 Talbot Road 99066 APPENDIX A Field Data Forms 17 Talbot Road 99066 SAMPLE PLOT SP1 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP1 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Rubus procera S FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 0% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Old apple orchard overgrown with blackberries HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP1 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam_ Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-20 1OYR 3/2 none Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old orchard/garden and soils have been mixed by plowing several years ago Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION �� Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES //NO I Hydric Soils Present? YES (CIO) Wetland Hydrology Present? YES Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? (NO ) Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed orchard/garden area Site drainage via excavated ditch systems SAMPLE PLOT SP2 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP2 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. 3. Rubus procera S FACU 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 0% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Centerline of ditch, blackberries rooted in upland HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph X Saturated in upper 12" Other X Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available X Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: X Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: 14 inches Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Surface Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: Evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Centerline of excavated ditch 18 inches wide Field indicators of wetland hydrology present SAMPLE PLOT SP2 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-14 10YR 3/2 None Gravelly loam 14-20 10YR 4/2 10YR 4/6 Few prom Clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: prominent redoximorphic features in soil Centerline of excavated ditch Field indicators of hydric soil present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? r YES Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA MET Centerline of excavated ditch Ditch excavated within upland soils (see SP1) SAMPLE PLOT SP3 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP3 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator ' 1. Rubus procera S FACU 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 0% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Old apple orchard overgrown with blackberries HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP3 IMap Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, I (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. I0-10 10YR 3/2 none Gravelly loam 10-20 10YR 3/3 none Gravelly loam I Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old orchard/garden and soils have been mixed by plowing several years ago Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES INO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed orchard/garden area Site drainage via excavated ditch systems SAMPLE PLOT SP4 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP4 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. 3. Rubus procera S FACU 4. 5. Scirpus microcarpus H OBL 6. Equisetum arvense H FAC 7. Phalaris arundinacea H FACW 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 75% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Old fenced garden area - blackberries rooted in upland HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph X Saturated in upper 12" Other X Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available X Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: X Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: 11 inches Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Surface Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: Evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Small depression Field indicators of wetland hydrology present SAMPLE PLOT SP4 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-20 10YR 3/1 10YR 4/6 Few prom. Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol X Concretions Histic Epipedon X High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking X Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: prominent redoximorphic features in soil Center of small depression Field indicators of hydric soil present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YE NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA MET Defines Wetland A onsite Center of small depression once used as garden Ditch excavated adjacent to depression SAMPLE PLOT SP5 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP5 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. Salix lasiandra T FACW 3. Rubus procera S FACU 4. Polystichum munitum H FACU 5. Luzula multiflora H FACU 6. 7. 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 25% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Old apple orchard overgrown with blackberries Pacific willow rooted at top of ditch HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP5 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-18 10YR 3/2 none Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old orchard/garden and soils have been mixed by plowing several years ago Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES N Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed orchard/garden area at edge of excavated ditch Site drainage via excavated ditch systems SAMPLE PLOT SP6 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies - Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP6 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. Rubus procera S FACU 3. 4. Phalaris arundinacea H FACW 5. Polygonum cuspidatum H FACU 6. 7. 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 33% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Once managed now overgrown with blackberries HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP6 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-18 10YR 3/2 none Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old orchard/garden and soils have been mixed by plowing several years ago Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES /NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed orchard/garden area now overgrown with invasive Site drainage via excavated ditch systems SAMPLE PLOT SP7 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP7 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Acer macrophyllum sap FACU 2. Rubus procera S FACU 3. Corylus cornuta S FACU 4. Polystichum munitum H FACU 5. Ranunculus repens H FACW 6. Poa spp. H - 7. Geum macrophyllum H FACW- 8. Rumex crispus H FAC+ Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 42% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Area adjacent to old homesite HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP7 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-16 10YR 3/2 none Gravelly loam 16-20 10YR 3/2 1 OYE 4/6 Very few faint Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol X Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES (N-C-).)Hydric Soils Present? YES O Wetland Hydrology Present? YES .1O Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? O Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed homesite area now overgrown with invasive Site drainage via excavated ditch systems SAMPLE PLOT SP8 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies - Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP8 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Acer macrophyllum sap FACU 2. Rubus procera S FACU 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 0% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Area adjacent to old homesite HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP8 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-11 10YR 3/2 none Gravelly loam 11-20 10YR 3/3 10YE 4/6 Very few faint Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES N Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed homesite area now overgrown with invasive Site drainage via excavated ditch systems SAMPLE PLOT SP10 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies - Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP10 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Acer macrophyllum sap FACU 2. Populus trichocarpa sap FAC 3. 4. Rubus procera S FACU 5. Oemleria cerasiformis S FACU 6. Corylus cornuta S FACU 7. Phalaris arundinacea H FACW 8. Polystichum munitum H FACU Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 28% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Area adjacent to old homesite and well house HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP10 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-7 10YR 3/2 none Very compacted Gravelly loam 7-20 10YR 3/3 none Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES '; NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed homesite area now overgrown with invasive Site drainage via excavated ditch systems SAMPLE PLOT SP11 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies - Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP11 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Acer macrophyllum sap FACU 2. Populus trichocarpa sap FAC 3. Fraxinus latifolia sap FACW 4. Rubus procera S FACU 5. Oemleria cerasiformis S FACU 6. Corylus cornuta S FACU 7. Phalaris arundinacea H FACW 8. Poa spp. H - Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 42% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Area of recent clearing and adjacent to old homesite and well house HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP11 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-5 1 OYR 3/2 none Very compacted Gravelly loam 5-20 1 OYR 5/2 none Very Gravelly Sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES N Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO IRemarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed homesite area now overgrown with invasive ISite drainage via excavated ditch systems SAMPLE PLOT SP15 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP15 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an A) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Acer macrophyllum T FACU 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii T FACU 3. Alnus rubra T FAC 4. Oemleria cerasiformis S FACU 5. Corylus cornuta S FACU 6. Berberis nervosa S UPL 7. Rubus parviflorus S FAC- 8. Polystichum munitum H FACU Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 12% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Forested hillside HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP15 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-3 10YR 3/2 None Duff/loam 3-20 10YR 3/4 none Gravelly sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES I NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES I NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Mixed forest hillside - evidence of prior forest harvest a few decades ago SAMPLE PLOT SP18 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP18 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Acer macrophyllum T FACU 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii T FACU 3. Alnus rubra T FAC 4. Oemleria cerasiformis S FACU Rubus ursinus S FACU 5. Corylus cornuta S FACU Gaultheria shallon S FACU 6. Berberis nervosa S UPL Galium boreale H FACU 7. Rubus parviflorus S FAC- 8. Polystichum munitum H FACU Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 9% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Forested hillside HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other _ Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP18 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-6 10YR 3/2 None Duff/loam 6-20 1 OYR 3/4 none Gravelly sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION H droph tic Vegetation Present? YES NO Y Y Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES ' Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Mixed forest hillside - evidence of prior forest harvest a few decades ago SAMPLE PLOT SP20 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies-Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP20 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. 3. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 4. 5. 6. 7. Phalaris arundinacea H FACW 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 100% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Small ditched depression along internal road HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph X Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: X Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: 17 inches Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Surface Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: Evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Small depression that is ditched Field indicators of wetland hydrology present SAMPLE PLOT SP20 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-8 10YR 3/1 Gravelly loam 8-20 1 OYR 3/2 10YR 4/6 Few prom. Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol X Concretions Histic Epipedon X High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking X Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: prominent redoximorphic features in soil Center of small depression Field indicators of hydric soil present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO Hydric Soils Present? ( YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA MET Defines Wetland B onsite Center of small depression that is ditched Ditch excavated adjacent to depression SAMPLE PLOT SP21 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP21 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. Alnus rubra sap FAC 3. 4. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 5. Rubus procera S FACU 6. Equisetum arvense H FAC 7. Maianthemum dilatatum H FAC 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 80% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Area compacted and appears to be part of old internal roadway Remarks: Once managed homesite area now overgrown HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: _ Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP21 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-20 10YR 3/2 None Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? N• Hydric Soils Present? 'ES • Wetland Hydrology Present? YES 0 Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? ('NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Area compacted and appears to be part of old internal roadway Once managed area now overgrown Appears to drain well via adjacent excavated ditches SAMPLE PLOT SP22 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies -Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP22 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. Acer macrophyllum sap FACU 3. 4. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 5. Rubus procera S FACU 6. 7. 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 33% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands _ Describe Morphological Adaptations: 1 Remarks: Once managed homesite area now overgrown HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP22 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-9 1 OYR 3/2 None Gravelly loam 9-20 1 OYR 3/4 none Gravelly sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES O) Hydric Soils Present? YES NO 1 Wetland Hydrology Present? YES v.NO,/ Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? 'NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed homesite area now overgrown Appears to drain well via adjacent excavated ditches SAMPLE PLOT SP24 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP24 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. Alnus rubra sap FAC 3. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 4. Lysichitum americanum H OBL 5. Athyrium filix-femina H FAC 6. Equisetum arvense H FAC 7. Phalaris arundinacea H FACW 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 100% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Small ditched area HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph X Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: X Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: 11 inches Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Surface Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: Evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Centerline of ditch Field indicators of wetland hydrology present SAMPLE PLOT SP24 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. o 11 10YR 2/1 Soft alluvium 11-16 10YR 4/1 10YR 4/6 Few prom. Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol X Concretions Histic Epipedon X High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking X Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: prominent redoximorphic features in soil Center of ditch Field indicators of hydric soil present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA MET Defines centerline of ditch onsite Ditch excavated SAMPLE PLOT SP25 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP25 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an A) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. Alnus rubra sap FAC 3. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 4. Lysichitum americanum H OBL 5. Athyrium filix-femina H FAC 6. Equisetum arvense H FAC 7. Phalaris arundinacea H FACW 8. Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 100% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (A) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Small depression HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph X Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: X Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: 9 inches Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Surface Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: Evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Center of small depression Field indicators of wetland hydrology present SAMPLE PLOT SP25 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-8 10YR 3/1 Gravelly loam 8-16 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/6 Few prom. Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol X Concretions Histic Epipedon X High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking X Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: prominent redoximorphic features in soil Center of ditch Field indicators of hydric soil present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES I NO f Wetland Hydrology Present? YE NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? YES Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA MET Center of small depression and defined Wetland D Adjacent to excavated ditch the drains wetland area SAMPLE PLOT SP26 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) I Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: I (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP26 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Alnus rubra sap FAC I2. Corylus cornuta S FACU 3. Rubus laciniatus S FACU 4. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 5. Rubus procera S FACU 6. Equisetum arvense H FAC 7. Maianthemum dilatatum H FAC 8. IPercent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 57% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Once managed homesite area now overgrown HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. IArea appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP26 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. o->> 10YR 3/2 none Gravelly loam 11-20 10YR 3/3 None Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? a Hydric Soils Present? YES AT, Wetland Hydrology Present? YES 1g" Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed area now overgrown Appears to drain well via adjacent excavated ditches SAMPLE PLOT SP27 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP27 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. Alnus rubra sap FAC 3. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 4. Lysichitum americanum H OBL 5. Athyrium filix-femina H FAC 6. Equisetum arvense H FAC 7. Phalaris arundinacea H FACW 8. Scirpus microcarpus H OBL Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 100% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Small depression that is ditched HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph X Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: X Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: none Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: 5 inches Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: Evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Center of small depression that is ditched Field indicators of wetland hydrology present SAMPLE PLOT SP27 IMap Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No I Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. o-11 10YR 3/1 Gravelly loam 11-16 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/6 Few prom. Gravelly loam IHydric Soil Indicators: Histosol X Concretions Histic Epipedon X High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking X Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) IRemarks: prominent redoximorphic features in soil Center of ditch IField indicators of hydric soil present WETLAND DETERMINATION IHydrophytic Vegetation Present? S NO Hydric Soils Present? (E- S NO Wetland Hydrology Present? NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? Remarks: I WETLAND CRITERIA MET Center of small depression and defined Wetland E Adjacent to excavated ditch the drains wetland area SAMPLE PLOT SP28 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies-Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP28 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Alnus rubra T FAC 2. Corylus cornuta S FACU 3. Rubus laciniatus S FACU 4. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 5. Rubus procera S FACU 6. Oemleria cerasiformis S FACU 7. Polystichum munitum H FACU 8. Pteridium aquilium H FACU Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 25% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Once managed homesite area now overgrown HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP28 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-8 1OYR 3/2 none Gravelly loam I8-20 1OYR 3/3 None Gravelly loam IHydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) IRemarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite IField indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION IHydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES O Hydric Soils Present? YES ( NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? 0 Remarks: I WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET IOnce managed area now overgrown Appears to drain well via adjacent excavated ditches SAMPLE PLOT SP29 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies - Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP29 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. 2. Alnus rubra sap FAC 3. Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ 4. Lysichitum americanum H OBL 5. Athyrium filix-femina H FAC 6. Equisetum arvense H FAC 7. Phalaris arundinacea H FACW 8. Scirpus microcarpus H OBL Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 100% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Small depression that is ditched HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph X Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: X Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: 17 inches Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: 2 inches Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: Evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Center of small depression that is ditched Field indicators of wetland hydrology present SAMPLE PLOT SP29 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-7 10YR 3/1 Gravelly loam 7-16 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/6 Few prom. Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol X _ Concretions Histic Epipedon X High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking X Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: prominent redoximorphic features in soil Center of ditch Field indicators of hydric soil present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES NO Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? ES Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA MET Center of small depression and defined Wetland F Adjacent to excavated ditch the drains wetland area SAMPLE PLOT SP30 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies- Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP30 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Alnus rubra T FAC 2. Corylus cornuta S FACU 3. Rubus laciniatus S FACU 4. Symphoricarpus albus S - 5. 6. Oemleria cerasiformis S FACU 7. Polystichum munitum H FACU 8. Pteridium aquilium H FACU Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 16% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Once managed homesite area now overgrown HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP30 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-4 1 OYR 3/2 none Gravelly loam 4-20 1 OYR 3/3 None Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES 1\1(:) Hydric Soils Present? YES NO / Wetland Hydrology Present? YES , NO / Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed area now overgrown Appears to drain well via adjacent excavated ditches SAMPLE PLOT SP31 DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL) Project/Site Talbot Road Housing Date: 20 APRIL 99 Applicant/Owner: SEB County: King Investigator: Habitat Technologies -Thomas Deming State: Washington Have vegetation, soils, or hydrology been disturbed? YES NO Community ID: Is the area a potential Problem area? YES NO Transect ID: (If needed, explain on reverse) Plot ID: SP31 VEGETATION (Note those species observed to have morphological adaptations to wetlands with an *) Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator I Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. Alnus rubra T FAC 2. Acer macrophyllum sap FACU 3. Rubus procera S FACU 4. Symphoricarpus albus S - 5. Oemleria cerasiformis S FACU 6. Rubus parviflorus S FAC- 7. Polystichum munitum H FACU 8. Geum macrophyllum H FACW- Percent of Dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or 28% FAC (except FAC-). Include species noted (*) as showing morphological adaptations to wetlands Describe Morphological Adaptations: Remarks: Once managed homesite area now overgrown HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage Inundated Aerial Photograph Saturated in upper 12" Other Water Marks X No Recorded Data Available Drift Lines Sediment Deposits FIELD OBSERVATIONS: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 " Depth of Surface Water: Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Free Water Pit: Dry Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: Dry Other(Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO evidence of shallow ponding early in growing season. Area appears to drain well following seasonal storm events Field indicators of wetland hydrology NOT present SAMPLE PLOT SP31 Map Unit Name: Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam Drainage Class: Mod well Taxonomy (Subgroup) Entic Durochrepts Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Rhizospheres, etc. 0-6 10YR 3/1 none Gravelly loam 6-20 10YR 3/2 None Gravelly loam Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol Concretions Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking Probable Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: NO prominent redoximorphic features in soil Area part of old homesite Field indicators of hydric soil NOT present WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? YES NO Hydric Soils Present? YES NO Wetland Hydrology Present? YES N Is this Sampling Point within a Wetland? NO Remarks: WETLAND CRITERIA NOT MET Once managed area now overgrown Appears to drain well via adjacent excavated ditches APPENDIX B August 17, 1999 letter from Mr. Philip Schneider, WDFW 18 Talbot Road 99066 2534288172 SEB INC. 372 P02 RUG 20 '99 11:12 CA i<s '' vl''Y ''�°= AUG 1 8 1999 1 pi State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Region 4 Office:18018 Mill Crook Boulovard-Mill Creak,Washington 98012-(425)775-1311 August 17, 1999 SEB, Incorporated ATTENTION: Stephen M.Berg 240 Stadium Way South Tacoma, Washington 98402 Dear Mr, Berg: SUBJECT: Request for Field Review, File# 99-62 City of Renton; Unnamed Tributary to Spring Brook Creek in Section 31,Township 23 North, Range 05 East, King County As a result of our field review on August 11, 1999 I have determined that drainage flowing through this property is a stream and will require a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)to install culverts or bridges. In addition the Department of Ecology's Stormwater Manual for Puget Sound or King County 1998 Stormwater Manual should be used to determine stormwater discharge. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this information. If you have any questions,please contact me at(425) 649-7015. Sincerely, 1 , ' Philip Schneider Area Habitat Biologist PS:ps APPENDIX C Beneficial Uses of Plants Proposed for Planting Onsite 19 Talbot Road 99066 BENEFICIAL USES OF PLANTS USED IN WETLAND AND BUFFER RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES TREE STRATA BOTANICAL NAME INDICATOR PLANTING BENEFICIAL USES SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS LOCATION Douglas fir FACU buffer Provides escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and food for wildlife. Excellent insect habitat which Pseudotsuga menziesii _arc prey for wildlife. Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag. Western red cedar FAC wetland and Provides escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and food for wildlife. Habitat for insects which are Thuja plicata buffer prey for wildlife. Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag. Good along riparian areas. Good soil stability value. Western hemlock FACU buffer Provides escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and food for wildlife. Also habitat for insects which Tsuga heterophylla arc prey for wildlife. Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag. Good along riparian areas. Sitka spruce FAC wetland and Provides escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and food for wildlife. Seed cones drop in fall. Also Picea sitchensis buffer habitat for insects which arc prey for wildlife. Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag Good soil slnlnlrly.v;rluc. big leaf maple FACU buffer Important structural habitat component, alive or as a snag. Stumps produce dense mass of sprout Acer macrophyllurn stems. Seed eaten by many wildlife species. Provides escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Good soil stability value. Oregon ash FACW wetland and Female trees produce seeds that are eaten by many species of wildlife. Provides escape/refuge Fraxinus latifolia buffer edge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Western paper birch FAC wetland edge Hardy, fast growing. Seeds especially valued by goldfinches, siskins, and juncos. Provides Betula papyrivera escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. cascara FAG- buffer edge Good soil-binding characteristics and grows well in disturbed sites. Provides escape/refuge cover, Rhamnus purshiana nesting locations, and excellent insect habitat. Fruit eaten by wildlife. bitter cherry FACU buffer Provides escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Fruit eaten by wildlife. Good Prunus ernarginata soil stability value. Western crabapple FACW wetland and Provides escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Fruit eaten by wildlife. Good Pyrus fusca buffer edge soil stability value. black hawthorne FAC wetland and Dense crown provides escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Fruit eaten by Crataegus douglasii buffer edge wildlife. Good soil stability value. Pacific willow FACW+ wetland and Excellent soil-binding characteristics and very effective erosion control. Provides escape/refuge Salix lasiandra buffer edge cover, nesting locations, and excellent insect habitat. Does not produce seed or fruit for use by • wildlife. SHRUB AND GROUND COVER STRATA • BOTANICAL NAME INDICATOR PLANTING BENEFICIAL USES SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS LOCATION Sitka willow FACW wetland and Fast growing. Excellent soil-binding characteristics and very effective erosion control. Provides Salix sitchensis buffer edge escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and excellent insect habitat. Does not produce seed or fruit • for use by wildlife. . Scouter willow FAC wetland and Fast growing. Excellent soil-binding characteristics and very effective erosion control. Provides Salix scouleriana buffer edge escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and excellent insect habitat. Does not produce seed or fruit _for use by wildlife. ' • red-osier dogwood FACW wetland and Excellent soil-binding characteristics. Attractive multi-stern shrub with or without stems. Excellent . Corpus stolonifera buffer edge escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. White fruit eaten by wildlife. salmonberry FAC+ wetland and Good soil-binding characteristics. Well adapted to disturbed areas. Fruit has high food value for Rubes spectabilis buffer edge wildlife. . Nootka rose FAC wetland and Excellent soil-binding characteristics. Well adapted to disturbed areas. Fruit has high food value Rosa nutkana buffer edge and are persistent well into winter. peafruit rose FAC wetland and Excellent sud-bnulu ti cliaiaclenstics. Well adapted to disturbed areas. Fruit has high food value Rosa pisocarpa buffer edge and are persistent well into winter. • wild rose FACU buffer and Excellent soil-binding characteristics. Well adapted to disturbed areas. Fruit has high food value Rosa gymnocarpa buffer edge and are persistent well into winter. Pacific ninebark FACW- wetland and Excellent soil-binding characteristics. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and • Physocarpus capitatus buffer edge refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. vine maple FAC- buffer edge Excellent soil-binding characteristics. Multi-stem shrub. Excellent escape/refuge cover, nesting Acer circinatum locations, and insect habitat. Winged fruit eaten by wildlife. salal FACU buffer Good soil-binding characteristics and tolerant to poor soils. Produces edible berries used by some Gaultheria shallop wildlife. Provides excellent ground cover for wildlife escape and refuge. Oregon grape UPL buffer Good soil-binding characteristics. Produces edible berries used by some wildlife. Provides excellent Berberis nervosa ground cover for wildlife escape and refuge. snowberry FACU buffer Excellent soil-binding characteristics. Produces edible berries used by wildlife. Provides escape and Symphoricarpus albus _ _refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. • black twinberry FAC+ buffer Good soil-binding characteristics. Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Lonicera involucrata Provides escape and refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Pacific red elderberry FACU buffer Good soil-binding characteristics. Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Sambucus racemosa Provides escape and refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. prickly current FAC+ wetland and Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, Ribes lacustre buffer edge and insect habitat. i _ ' , BOTANICAL NAME INDICATOR PLANTING BENEFICIAL USES SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS LOCATION gooseberry FAC elland and Produces edible fruit. Flowers arc attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, Ribes divaricatum buffer edge and insect habitat. flowering current UPL buffer Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, Ribes sanguineum and insect habitat. hazelnut FACU buffer Excellent soil-binding characteristics. Multi-stem shrub. Excellent escape/refuge cover, nesting Corylus cornuta locations, and insect habitat. Nuts eaten by wildlife. Important small mammal winter stored food. kinnikinnick FACU- buffer Good soil-binding characteristics. Produces abundant, edible berries used by some wildlife. Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Provides excellent ground cover for wildlife escape and refuge. thimbleberry FAC- buffer Produces edible fruit. Flowers are attractive to hummingbirds. Provides escape and refuge cover, Rubus parviflorus iand insect habitat. evergreen huckleberry UPL buffer Good soil-binding characteristics and tolerant to poor soils. Produces edible berries used by some Vaccinium ovatum _ wildlife. Provides excellent ground cover for wildlife escape and refuge. oceanspray - buffer Good soil-binding characteristics and does well on disturbed sites. Multi-stem shrub. Excellent Holodiscus discolor escape/refuge cover, nesting locations, and insect habitat. Seeds persist through the winter and are eaten by wildlife. slough sedge OUL wetland Good soil-binding characteristics and does well in disturbed sites. Seeds persist through the winter Carex obnupta _and are eaten by wildlife. small fruited bulrush OBL wetland Good soil-binding characteristics. Seeds eaten by wildlife. . Scirpus microcarpus common cattail OBL wetland Good soil-binding characteristics and does well in disturbed sites. Stems and seeds are eaten by Typha latifolia wildlife. Provides escape and refuge cover, nesting sites, and insect habitat. HEATH & ASSOCIATES, INC Transportation and Civil Engineering 1 NORMANDY RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IRENTON, WA plOtatel cirf OF nc c 1999 ReCeiVeD • r . detr Prepared for: SEB, Inc. 240 Stadium Way South Tacoma, WA 98402 .\\ 3 Revised WE 3s) -e; DECEMBER 1999 EXPIREC; 6/;;0/b 2214 Tacoma Road • Puyallup, WA 98371 • (253) 770-1401 • Fax (253) 770-1473 NORMANDY RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction 3 II. Project Description 3 III. Existing Conditions 3 IV. Forecasted Traffic Demand 10 V. Conclusions and Mitigation 16 Appendix LIST OF TABLES 1. Existing Level of Service 9 2. Trip Generation 11 3. Future LOS With and Without the Project 12 LIST OF FIGURES 1. Vicinity Map 4 2. Roadway System 5 3. Site Plan 6 4. Existing Peak Hour Volumes 8 5. Trip Distribution-Project Traffic 13 6. 2001 Peak Hour Volumes Without Project 14 7. 2001 Peak Hour Volumes With Project 15 2 NORMANDY RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS I. INTRODUCTION This study serves to assess general traffic impacts related to the proposed Normandy Ridge apartment project. The final goal of this work is to meet transportation-related requirements for environmental review. In order to achieve reasonably accurate results, a comprehensive five-step study procedure is used. The first step involves the collection of site specific roadway information,pedestrian activity, road improvement information, sight distance data, and peak hour traffic counts. Next, a level of service analysis for existing traffic conditions is performed to determine present congestion levels. Forecasts of future traffic conditions on the surrounding street system are then made using established trip generation and distribution techniques. Following this step, intersection service levels are revisited for future traffic conditions. As a final step, appropriate conclusions and possible on-site/off-site mitigation measures are defined. Bottom-line contribution estimates toward possible area-wide improvement projects are also defined, if appropriate. The ultimate goal of this work focuses on insuring safe and efficient circulation of vehicular and non-motorist traffic in the future. General study results are outlined and summarized within the contents of this report. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is a 82-unit residential apartment project situated on the east side of Talbot Road and south of South 43rd Street. Access to the site is to be provided via a single main driveway with an additional emergency only connection to Talbot located south of the main access. The overall area surrounding the project is transforming into a moderate density residential area though portions remain rural with lower residential densities. Parking requirements as required by the city of Renton are proposed. Management projections estimate a completion date for overall build out and occupancy of 2001. Figure 1 on the following page shows the site location while Figure 2 shows the surrounding street system. The proposed site plan showing the building and access configuration is given in Figure 3. III. EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Surrounding Street Network The street network directly serving the Normandy Ridge project consists of mostly rural two-lane roadways with some transitioning to a three-lane section to allow for left turn movements. Characteristics for most roadways vary with respect to lane widths, grades, speeds, and function. Any differences are based on specific roadway designations and proximity to the major destination areas. 3 N N H T SW 43RD ST A Qq , SITE w a Op HEATH & ASSOCIATES, INC VICINITY MAP Transportation and Civil Engineering FIGURE 1 N TH ST SW 43RD ST ) �A SITE w a O 9 F S 55TH ST En is oo AA sM II HEATH & ASSOCIATES, INC ROADWAY SYSTEM Transportation and Civil Engineering FIGURE 2 J 1-il -- il ill1 , __^ I .I' ! i� � i 1 !! fiAl^mmHg Li e e .� . , 1,1,,..., .41211 kg:// . I I \\ r lip EN j. go Atjf \ ! f!i: pelrt'—i i l '� . 1 '� .':i, ,, " " 'Iofr \ \ ' I I ti Os ;Ij ' M I \ \ \-A . . , L �� . " y is6 „ \ \ \ , \ii — ‘ _ -,M�...Vial' ( \ \ \ '\ \)\ TI lilt ilk q r \` = ilani Iv:3i 1151i Ilk ABU F--"le 1 i .i i 1 ' ^ \ , ', ''_ (•_._ _ . R \ N \I e �--}—' _jam d i \ \ Lk \ \ \ \ I 46,46 HEATH & ASSOCIATES, INC SITE PLAN Transportation and Civil Engineering FIGURE 3 Talbot Road South is a somewhat meandering, two-lane arterial which lies west of the Normandy Ridge project and has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Pavement surfacing consists of asphalt concrete with lane widths of 10 to 11 feet. The roadway is somewhat rolling with grades generally in the range of 0 to 5 percent along its length. Shoulders are minimal along much of the road and range from 0 to 3 feet wide and are composed of gravel or a combination of asphalt and gravel. The roadway becomes more intensely developed in terms of number of lanes and geometrics toward the north at its intersection with SW 43rd Street. The roadway is gradually being re-built into a three-lane section as projects are constructed along its length. B. Peak Hour Volumes Field data for the PM analysis of this study was collected in February 1999 as part of other work in the area and updated to reflect later 1999 values. The counts were then compared to previous information originally obtained from the city of Renton for the intersection of SW 43rd/Talbot. A comparison of the data shows changes in the peak hour distribution at this intersection, however, the latest information would best reflect current conditions. At the request of the city of Renton an AM analysis was also conducted. Figure 4 shows the weekday PM peak hour volumes for the intersection along with the AM peak hour information gathered in December of this year. Average daily volumes for the area roads are available from the applicable jurisdiction but are not utilized in traffic impact analysis. C. Existing Level of Service Peak hour information and geometric intersection data collected in the field were used to perform capacity computations in accordance with the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. Capacity analysis is used to determine level of service, which is an established measure of congestion for transportation facilities. LOS is defined for a variety of facilities including intersections, freeways, arterials, etc. Intersection methodologies are described below. The methodology for determining the LOS at signalized intersections strives to determine the volume to capacity (v/c)ratios for the various intersection movements as well as the average stopped delay for those movements. Delay is generally used to measure the degree of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and lost time. Stopped delay, in particular, is defined as the amount of time a vehicle, on average, spends not in motion at an intersection. Aside from the overall quantity of traffic, three specific factors influence signalized intersection LOS. These include the type of signal operation provided, the signal phasing pattern, and the specific allocation of green time. The methodology for determining the LOS at unsignalized intersections strives to determine the potential capacities for the various vehicle movements and ultimately 7 ,y@TH ST SW 43RD ST �c. 251 226 190 248 41 1237-1110' 8 *-726 PM 54 238 78 61 QO SITE .cc�� 17I0 48 43 A, (30 . + 4 \4 p 403� 8 4-946 AM 0 94 18 661 137 33 S 55TH ST 00 00 HEATH & ASSOCIATES, INC EXISTING AM & PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES Transportation and Civil Engineering FIGURE 4 determines the average total delay for each movement. Potential Capacity represents the number of additional vehicles that could effectively utilize a particular movement,which is essentially the equivalent of the difference between the movement capacity and the existing movement volume. Total delay is described as the elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of a queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line. Average total delay is simply the mean total delay over the entire traffic stream. Several factors influence potential capacity and total delay, including the availability of gaps in the traffic stream, the usefulness of gaps, and the priority ranking of movements. TABLE 1 Existing Level of Service Intersection Control Approach LOS Delay S 43rd/Talbot(PM) Signal Northbound D 30.5 Eastbound D 25.4 Southbound D 34.0 Westbound C 21.8 Overall D 25.1 S 43rd/Talbot(AM) Signal Northbound D 32.5 Eastbound D 27.4 Southbound D 29.5 Westbound C 19.6 Overall D 26.9 Since the purpose of this study is to determine the effect of Normandy Ridge traffic on the system the intersection was not modeled as part of any interconnected signalization system. For unsignalized intersections, LOS A indicates low average total delay, while LOS E indicates long delays. Existing LOS is shown in Table 1. The LOS is very similar for both the AM peak hour and the PM peak hour. Level of service calculations are made using Signal94 developed by Dennis Strong, P.E. Signal94 emulates Chapter 9 procedures of the HCM for signalized intersection analysis and was used for the primary intersection under review. Field review shows a westbound lagging left turn that is utilized as the intersection is cleared of eastbound traffic via signal progression. D. Pedestrian and Bicycle Activity The intersection along with Talbot in front of the project has been observed on numerous occasions and little pedestrian or bicycle has been noted. Denser development area-wide, both residentially and commercially, is needed in order to see an increase in these travel modes. Based on these assumptions, no significant vehicle-pedestrian conflicts should arise in the area. Travel to and from the Normandy Ridge site is expected to be made exclusively by private vehicles, carpools or transit. 9 E. Public Transit A review of the Metro Transit regional bus schedule indicates that transit service is provided along the South 43rd Street corridor and Talbot Road north of South 43rd Street. Route 169 of the Metro Transit network utilizes Talbot Road while several routes travel along South 43rd Street. The route designations are 155, 163 and 169. Stops are made near the intersection of South 43rd Street and Talbot. Refer to the Metro Transit schedule for greater detail of the above routes in terms of arrivals and departures. The proximity of the bus routes allows for residents of Normandy Ridge to travel via mass transit. F. Sight Distance at Access Driveways Preliminary examination of the proposed site access was made to determine whether or not adequate entering and stopping sight distance could be provided for inbound and outbound project traffic. In accordance with established standards, a minimum entering sight distance of 450 to 500 feet is typically required for a 35-mph speed limit. Based on a review of the proposed Talbot Road access, it appears that this sight distance requirement is presently satisfied. The project design team should verify that sight distance is met at time of submittal of formal plans. Any adjustments to achieve sight distance requirements as established by the city of Renton should be made at the time of project design. IV. FORECASTED TRAFFIC DEMAND A. Trip Generation Trip generation is used to determine the magnitude of project impacts on the surrounding street system. Data presented in this report was taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineer's publication Trip Generation, Sixth Edition. The designated land use for this project was determined to be apartments (LUC 220). Data for the peak hours were used for future traffic estimations. Table 2 shows the trip generation values used for this study. Included are the average weekday daily volume and the AM and PM peak hour generation volumes for the total 82 proposed dwelling units. As shown in the table, somewhat fewer trips are expected for the AM peak hour versus the PM peak. This follows the same pattern as roadway peak hour travel and is due to the same reasons discussed earlier in the report. The overall peak in total traffic is therefore realized during this evening peak period. 10 TABLE 2 Trip Generation Volumes Time Period Volume AWDT 626 vpd AM Peak Inbound 7 vph AM Peak Outbound 37 vph AM Peak Total 44 vph PM Peak Inbound 43 vph PM Peak Outbound 21 vph PM Peak Total 63 vph The anticipated inbound and outbound split for the AM peak is estimated at roughly 16 percent entering and 84 percent exiting. A 68 percent/32 percent split is expected for the PM peak hour. B. Trip Assignment and Distribution The direction of travel both inbound and outbound affects how the driveways and nearby major intersections will function as traffic distributes through them to outlying areas. The trips generated by the project are expected to follow the general trip pattern as shown in Figure 5. Of the project traffic, 40 percent was assigned to the south and 60 percent to the north in keeping with other analysis in the area. Due to the residential nature of the project the trips would primarily be work-based and home-based trips taken by project traffic during the peak periods. C. Future Traffic Volumes With and Without the Project The owners of the project anticipate a completion date for the build out of this project by 2001. Future 2001 traffic volumes without the project were derived by applying a 2 percent annual growth rate to the volumes of Figure 4. This growth rate is based on previous discussions and project scoping with the City of Renton staff. Several pipeline projects are incorporated in this study and include a 152-unit residential condominium project known as Campen Springs also located on Talbot Road and a Burnstead project with 240 total condominium units which had been originally studied at 182 mixed units. The trip generation used for this pipeline project is built into the 2001 volumes without the project. Future 2001 volumes with the project completed were found by adding the project-generated volumes of Figure 5 to the future 2001 volumes without the project. Figure 6 represents 2001 traffic without the project. Figure 7 represents 2001 traffic with the project completed and generated trips added. 11 D. Future LOS With and Without the Project A level of service analysis was next made of the peak hour volumes with project generated trips applied. This analysis once again involved the use of the Signal94 program for the studied intersections. The year 2001 without the project includes traffic volumes from the two pipeline projects cited by Renton staff to be included in the study. These volumes are also carried forward in the year 2001 with the project. The results for 2001 future traffic conditions with and without project trips are given in Table 3. TABLE 3 Future Level of Service Intersection Control Approach 2001 Delay 2001w Delay S 43rd/Talbot(PM) Signal Northbound D 39.4 E 41.6 Eastbound C 23.4 C 23.3 Southbound E 40.9 E 42.2 Westbound C 23.9 C 24.8 Overall D 28.0 D 29.0 S 43rd/Talbot(AM) Signal Northbound D 34.1 D 34.2 Eastbound D 32.5 D 33.3 Southbound D 32.8 D 33.1 Westbound C 20.0 C 20.1 Overall D 30.1 D 30.6 Talbot/Main Entr(PM) Stop Westbound - - E 44.6 Eastbound E 37.7 E 41.2 Southbound LT - - A 3.6 Northbound LT B 9.1 B 9.1 The analysis shows a slight increase delay overall to the LOS at the South 43rd Street/Talbot Road intersection. The level overall remains the same at LOS D. Reductions in level occurs for the northbound movement. The increases in delay for each of the movements are minor, on the order of 1 to 2 seconds per vehicle. Results for the stop-controlled access intersection onto Talbot indicate LOS E conditions for the critical westbound approach(2001 volumes with the project)with the same LOS prevalent for the access into the Burnstead project. Left turns into the site would experience LOS A and LOS B; however, a safety concern is promulgated with this movement. Because of the safety issues a recommendation for a two way left turn pocket is the excellent safety enhancement for this corridor. The AM peak hour volumes passing the site were substantially less and a LOS analysis for the AM was not performed. With a two way left turn lane added for Talbot traffic at the access (see Left Turn Warrants for Talbot following), vehicles at the access making the left turn onto Talbot would have a safe halfway point from which to concentrate solely on gaps between vehicles in the southbound direction. The end effect is a two-stage left turn, which allows 12 (-) . --.-' 11 y SW 43RD ST (-( 5 0 ..--(--; 10 0 26 0—* 4-0 PM 13 V60% 20 CtPM (---C"; O—o. © 41—o 10 2 1 0 8 O 0 2 0 0 0 17 'Ck' 0 0 7 %SITE o a 123 1 A`� o ► �-0 AM o o 0-tit] 14 40% I5 3 2 _______,) 0 o O S 55TH ST n/\ w is F c0 OUTBOUND VOLUMES = 21 VPH (PM) 37 VPH (AM) INBOUND VOLUMES 43 VPH (PM) 7 VPH (AM) HEATH & ASSOCIATES, INC TRIP DISTRIBUTION-PROJECT TRAFFIC Transportation and Civil Engineering FIGURE 5 (-- ---- 11 _\ TH ST SW 43RD ST 261 265 198 258 p�p 43 52 1077 O 1287—� 8 ♦-755 P M 998 — 84 2644iviv O 1 PM o 4—o 290 95 73 170 52 47 34 398 0 �O SITE 1I ( 83 41j 48 .V 436-10. 8 --1023 AM 47 a 102 1— 19 F O 715 148 36 S 55TH ST co 54 x is F c0 VOLUMES INCLUDE PIPELINE TRAFFIC HEATH & ASSOCIATES, INC 2001 PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES WITHOUT PROJECT Transportation and Civil Engineering FIGURE 6 ril 11 _ 19TH ST SW 43RD ST �✓ 261 270 198 258 � 43 6 1287--► 81-755 P M 011}� BS (r.--52-1077-2 13 PM o— 0 4—O 300 97 74 17-*41T �e 0 SITE 183 54 47 34 398 17 4' / vtl4-'• / A 141 48 AV 436--► p 11-1023 AM 4, a 10620 F O 733 151 38 F S 55TH ST rn a CV F sM PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES 40 PERCENT HIGHER PASSING THE SITE HEATH & ASSOCIATES, INC 2001 PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES WITH PROJECT Transportation and Civil Engineering FIGURE 7 for vehicles to concentrate on one direction of traffic at a time, and which is common behavior for vehicles onto roadways such as this. E. Left Turn Warrant Left turn lanes are a means of alleviating congestion at intersections by allowing left turners to wait in a designated area while gaps in the opposing traffic stream develop. A fundamental left turn warrant analysis was made to determine whether or not a left turn pocket would be required on Talbot Road at the project entrance. This analysis was based on procedures as described in the HRR 211 publication, Volume Warrants for Left- Turn Storage Lanes at Unsignalized Intersections. A left turn volume of 26 vph was used along with a 40-mph design speed. Additional parameters include a 5 percent left turn proportion even though the left turn percentage is one percent, an estimated advancing volume of 1100 vph, and an opposing volume of 400 vph. The results of the analysis indicate that a left turn pocket is recommended on Talbot Road in front of the site in keeping with the city of Renton policy along this corridor. A brief summary of the analysis and the applicable nomograph is given in the appendix. V. CONCLUSIONS AND MITIGATION The Normandy Ridge project is defined as a residential apartment project comprised of 82 units. On a daily basis, the housing group can be expected to add nearly 630 total trip movements onto the adjacent roadway. Of the total daily traffic, roughly 44 movements should enter and exit the site during the AM peak hour with 63 trips expected during the PM peak hour. The difference between the previous analysis is the recognition in the software analysis as to how the northbound movement operates at Talbot/43rd. As the northbound left turn increases, especially in the AM, the left turn pocket and the left turn-through pocket will operate mostly as a double left turn. This provides a overall benefit to the intersection analysis. A continuation of Renton policy requiring widening on the project side of Talbot Road with the ability to provide a two way left turn pocket along the roadway is recommended. While the primary intersection of Talbot Road and South 43rd Street carries a substantial amount of entering traffic, the effect of project traffic on this intersection is negligible. 16 NORMANDY RIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX 17 LEVEL OF SERVICE The following are excerpts from the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual- Transportation Research Board Special Report 209 The concept of level of service is defined as a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, and their perception by motorists and/or passengers. A level of service (LOS) definition generally describes these conditions in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. Six levels of service are defined for each facility for which analysis procedures are available. They are given letter designations, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. Level-of-Service definitions The following definitions generally define the various levels of service for uninterrupted flow facilities. Level of service A represents free flow conditions. Individual users are virtually unaffected by the presence of others in the traffic stream. Freedom to select desired speeds and to maneuver within the traffic stream is extremely high. The general level of comfort and convenience provided to the motorist, passenger, and pedestrian is excellent. Level of service B is in the range of stable flow,but the presence of other users in the traffic stream begins to be noticeable. Freedom to select desired speeds is relatively unaffected, but there is a slight decline in the freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream from level of service A. The level of comfort and convenience provided is somewhat less than at the level of service A,because the presence of others begins to affect individual behavior. Level of service C is in the range of stable flow,but marks the beginning of the range of flow in which the operation of individual users becomes significantly affected by the interactions with others in the traffic stream. The selection of speed is now affected by the presence of others, and maneuvering within the traffic stream requires substantial vigilance on the part of the user. The general level of comfort and convenience declines noticeably at this level. Level of service D represents high-density,but stable, flow conditions. Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted,and the driver or pedestrian experiences a generally poor level of comfort and convenience. Small increases in traffic flow will generally result in the occurrence of operational problems at this level. 18 Level of service E represents operating conditions at or near the capacity level of a given facility. All speeds are reduced to a low but relatively uniform level. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is extremely difficult, and it is generally accomplished by forcing a vehicle or pedestrian to "give way" to accommodate such maneuvers. Comfort and convenience levels are extremely poor, and driver or pedestrian frustration is generally high. Operations at this level are usually unstable,because small increases in flow or minor perturbations within the traffic stream will cause breakdowns. Level of service F is used to define forced or breakdown flow. This condition exists whenever the amount of traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which can traverse the point. Queues form behind such locations. Operations within the queue are characterized by stop-and-go waves, and they are extremely unstable. Vehicles may progress at reasonable speeds for several hundred feet or more, then be required to stop in a cyclic fashion. Level-of-service F is used to describe the operating conditions within the queue, as well as the point of the breakdown. It should be noted, however, that in many cases operating conditions of vehicles or pedestrians discharged from the queue may be quite good. Nevertheless, it is the point at which arrival flow exceeds discharge flow which causes the queue to form, and the level-of-service F is an appropriate designation for such points. These definitions are general and conceptual in nature, and they apply primarily to uninterrupted flow. Levels of service for interrupted flow facilities vary widely in terms of both the user's perception of service quality and the operational variables used to describe them. For each type of facility, levels of service are defined based on one or more operational parameters which best describe operating quality for the subject facility type. While the concept of level of service attempts to address a wide range of operating conditions, limitations on data collection and availability make it impractical to treat the full range of operational parameters for each type of facility. The parameters selected to define levels of service for each facility type are called "measures of effectiveness" or"MOE's", and represent those available measures that best describe the quality of operation on the subject facility type. Each level of service represents a range of conditions, as defined by a range in the parameters given. Thus, a level of service is not a discrete condition,but rather a range of conditions for which boundaries are established. The following tables describe levels of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay. Delay is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption and lost travel time. Specifically, level-of-service criteria are stated in terms of the average stopped delay per vehicle for a 15-minute analysis period. Level of service for unsignalized intersections is measured in terms of potential capacity and average total delay of the lane in question. 19 Signalized Intersections -Level of Service Stopped Delay per Level of Service Vehicle (sec) A less than 5.1 B 5.1 to 15.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 D 25.1 to 40.0 E 40.1 to 60.0 F greater than 60.0 Unsignalized Intersections -Level of Service Average Total Delay Level of Service per Vehicle (sec) A less than 5.1 B 5.1 to 10.0 C 10.1 to 20.0 D 20.1 to 30.0 E 30.1 to 45.0 F greater than 45.0 As described in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual, level of service procedures for all- way stop controlled(AWSC) intersections have been refined significantly, though they are still treated in a slightly different manner than typical two-way stop controlled locations. Procedures for AWSC intersections are generally not as well defined as other forms of control. Due to the presence of stop control on all legs of an AWSC intersection, factors such as gap frequency and acceptance are generally eliminated, resulting in procedures which are slightly simplified. Nonetheless, the same criteria measures for two-way stop intersections are used for all-way stop locations. The table below describes AWSC intersection level of service. AWSC Intersections -Level of Service Average Total Delay Level of Service per Vehicle (sec) A less than 5.1 B 5.1 to 10.0 C 10.1 to 20.0 D 20.1 to 30.0 E 30.1 to 45.0 F greater than 45.0 20 Summary of Trip Generation Calculation For 82 Dwelling Units of Apartments December 08, 1999 Average Standard Adjustment Driveway Rate Deviation Factor Volume Avg. Weekday 2-Way Volume 7 . 63 0 . 00 1 . 00 626 7-9 AM Peak Hour Enter 0 . 09 0 . 00 1 . 00 7 7-9 AM Peak Hour Exit 0 .45 0 . 00 1 . 00 37 7-9 AM Peak Hour Total 0 . 54 0 . 00 1 . 00 44 4-6 PM Peak Hour Enter 0 . 52 0 . 00 1 . 00 43 4-6 PM Peak Hour Exit 0 . 25 0 . 00 1 . 00 21 4-6 PM Peak Hour Total 0 . 77 0 . 00 1 . 00 63 AM Pk Hr, Generator, Enter 0 . 16 0 . 00 1 . 00 13 AM Pk Hr, Generator, Exit 0 .42 0 . 00 1 . 00 34 AM Pk Hr, Generator, Total 0 . 59 0 . 00 1 . 00 48 PM Pk Hr, Generator, Enter 0 .49 0 . 00 1 . 00 40 PM Pk Hr, Generator, Exit 0 . 31 0 . 00 1 . 00 25 PM Pk Hr, Generator, Total 0 . 80 0 . 00 1 . 00 66 Saturday 2-Way Volume 4 . 73 0 . 00 1 . 00 388 Saturday Peak Hour Enter 0 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 0 Saturday Peak Hour Exit 0 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 0 Saturday Peak Hour Total 0 . 65 0 . 00 1 . 00 53 Sunday 2-Way Volume 5 . 18 0 . 00 1 . 00 425 Sunday Peak Hour Enter 0 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 0 Sunday Peak Hour Exit 0 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 0 Sunday Peak Hour Total 0 . 00 0 . 00 1 . 00 0 Note : A zero indicates no data available. The above rates were calculated from these equations : 24-Hr. 2-Way Volume : T = 5 . 994 (X) + 134 . 114, RA2 = 0 . 88 7-9 AM Peak Hr. Total : T = .497 (X) + 3 . 238 RA2 = 0 . 83 , 0 . 16 Enter, 0 . 84 Exit 4-6 PM Peak Hr. Total : T = . 541 (X) + 18 . 743 RA2 = 0 . 75 , 0 . 67 Enter, 0 . 33 Exit AM Gen Pk Hr. Total : T = . 542 (X) + 3 . 805 RA2 = 0 . 82 , 0 .28 Enter, 0 . 72 Exit PM Gen Pk Hr. Total : T = . 599 (X) + 16 . 5 RA2 = 0 . 8 , 0 . 61 Enter, 0 . 39 Exit Sat . 2-Way Volume : T = 7 . 852 (X) + -256 . 189, RA2 = 0 . 85 Sat . Pk Hr. Total : T = .412 (X) + 19 . 226 Sun. 2-Way Volume : T = 6 .418 (X) + -101 . 116, RA2 = 0 . 82 Sun. Pk Hr. Total : 0 RA2 = 0 , 0 Enter, 0 Exit Source : Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 6th Edition, 1997 . Heath & Associates Inc. Transportation Division 2214 Tacoma Road File Name : 1626A Puyallup, WA 98371 Site Code : 00001626 Start Date : 12/20/1999 Page No : 2 TALBOT ROAD 43RD AVENUE TALBOT ROAD 43RD AVENUE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound Start Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right To Left Thru Right Too . . a- al Total Peak Hour From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM-Peak 1 of 1 Intersection 07:00 AM Volume 43 48 170 261 18 946 44 1008 661 137 33 831 130 403 94 627 2727 Percent 16.5 18.4 65.1 1.8 93.8 4.4 79.5 16.5 4.0 20.7 64.3 15.0 07:45 11 10 45 66 3 248 22 273 166 48 9 223 39 115 27 181 743 Volume Peak Factor 0.918 High Int. 07:30 AM 07:45 AM 07:15 AM 07:45 AM Volume 14 16 56 86 3 248 22 273 182 33 11 226 39 115 27 181 Peak Factor 0.759 0.923 0.919 0.866 TALBOT ROADTo�I I a�Out l I ii1611 I 5721 I 1 I 1701 481 431 Right Tie Lqk 1 L North w z 73 Q 12/20/99 7:00:00 AM 12/20/99 7:45:00 AM Z 1�. L . C r`�a'IL^~JJI �°-'� Unshifted m 0 m 6i V— Li =1 1� •1 1111111111i1111 1 1601 1 9911 Out In Total TAI ROT ROOD Heath & Associates Inc. Transportation Division 2214 Tacoma Road File Name : 1626A Puyallup, WA 98371 Site Code : 00001626 Start Date : 12/20/1999 Page No : 1 Groups Printed-Unshifted TALBOT ROAD 43RD AVENUE TALBOT ROAD 43RD AVENUE Southbound Westbound Northbound Eastbound • Start Time Left Thru Right APp' Left Thru Right APR Left Thru Right APp' Left Thru Right Ina. Total Total Total Tootalral Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 07:00 AM 10 8 28 46 7 227 9 243 160 26 5 191 24 86 21 131 611 07:15 AM 8 14 41 63 5 236 8 249 182 33 11 226 30 102 20 152 690 07:30 AM 14 16 56 86 3 235 5 243 153 30 8 191 37 100 26 163 683 07:45 AM 11 10 45 66 3 248 22 273 166 48 9 223 39 115 27 181 743 Total 43 48 170 261 18 946 44 1008 661 137 33 831 130 403 94 627 2727 08:00 AM 8 10 41 59 3 176 36 215 104 33 4 141 46 95 32 173 588 08:15 AM 17 10 32 59 4 198 17 219 96 42 3 141 44 114 41 199 618 08:30 AM 16 14 39 69 5 223 27 255 79 35 4 118 38 108 36 182 624 08:45 AM 13 13 32 58 3 217 24 244 72 30 2 104 32 99 33 164 570 Total 54 47 144 245 15 814 104 933 351 140 13 504 160 416 142 718 2400 Grand Total 97 95 314 506 33 1760 148 1941 1012 277 46 1335 290 819 236 1345 5127 Apprch% 19.2 18.8 62.1 1.7 90.7 7.6 75.8 20.7 3.4 21.6 60.9 17.5 Total% 1.9 1.9 6.1 9.9 0.6 34.3 2.9 37.9 19.7 5.4 0.9 26.0 5.7 16.0 4.6 26.2 TALBOT ROAD 314 95 97 ht Thru LQft (;) j~ North w z z 12/20/99 7:00:00 AM 0 12/20/99 8:45:00 AM Z Unshifted r m os 4-I T r wino I 3641 EMI Out In Total TALBOT ROAD NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:19:07 EXISTING LOS AM PEAK HOUR SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Input Worksheet Intersection # 0 - Area Location Type: NONCBD Key: VOLUMES -- > 170 48 43 I WIDTHS 12.0 12.0 12.0 v LANES 1 1 1 \ 44 0.0 0 / 1 \ / \ -- 946 24.0 2 130 12.0 1 / + / 18 12 .0 1 North 403 24.0 2 -- \ I / 94 12.0 1 \ 661 137 33 Phasing: SEQUENCE 76 24.0 12.0 0.0 PERMSV NNNN LOSTTIME = 3 .0 sec. 2 1 0 OVERLP NNNN LEADLAG LD LD Appr Grade % Heavy Veh. Adj .Pkg Bus Pk.Hr.Factor Conf.Ped Actuated Arr.Type RT TH LT Loc Nm Nb RT TH LT peds/hr RT TH LT RT TH LT N 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 E 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 S 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 W 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 Sq 76 I Phase 1 I Phase 2 I Phase 3 I Phase 4 I Phase 5 I Phase 6 * + + A * + + **** /, \ <* + +> <**** A y A **** A ++++ v **** North <* + +> ++++> ++++> 1 * + + ++++ ++++ * + + v v G/C=0.144 G/C=0.253 G/C=0.048 G/C=0.037 G/C=0.351 G/C=0.000 G= 17 .3" G= 30.4" G= 5.8" G= 4.5" G= 42.1" G= 0.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 0.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=17 .8% OFF=46.4% OFF=54.5% OFF=61.6% OFF= 0.0% C=120 sec G=100.0 sec = 83.3% Y=20.0 sec = 16.7% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:19 : 07 EXISTING LOS AM PEAK HOUR SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Volume Adjustment Worksheet Appr Mvt Flow Lane Group No.of Lane Adj Prop.of -Mvt Vol PHF Rate Group Flow Lanes Util Flow LT RT -- vph -- vph -- vph - -- vph -- -- N-RT 140 0 . 90 156 RT 156 1 1.00 156 0 . 00 1. 00 N-TH 48 0 . 90 53 TH 53 1 1. 00 53 0 . 00 0. 00 N-LT 43 0 . 90 48 LT 48 1 1. 00 48 1. 00 0. 00 E-RT 34 0 . 90 38 -- 0 0 1.00 0 0 . 00 0. 00 E-TH 946 0 . 90 1051 TH+RT 1089 2 1. 05 1143 0. 00 0 . 03 E-LT 18 0 . 90 20 LT 20 1 1.00 20 1. 00 0.00 S-RT 23 0. 90 26 -- 0 0 1.00 0 0. 00 0 .00 S-TH 137 0. 90 152 TH+RT 178 1 1.00 178 0.00 0 .15 S-LT 661 0. 90 734 LT 734 2 1.03 756 1.00 0 .00 W-RT 1 0. 90 1 RT 1 1 1.00 1 0 .00 1. 00 W-TH 403 0. 90 448 TH 448 2 1.05 470 0.00 0 . 00 W-LT 130 0. 90 144 LT 144 1 1.00 144 1.00 0 .00 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Saturation Flow Adjustment Worksheet Ap Lane No Adjustment Factors Adj pr Group Ideal of Sat- ch Mvmts Satfl Lns Lane Heavy Bus Ar Right Left Adj flow -- -- pcphg - Width Vehs Grade Parkg Block Loc Turn Turn Fact vphg N- RT 1900 1 1.000 0 . 980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1. 0 0 .850 1.000 1.00 1583 N- TH 1900 1 1.000 0 .980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1.000 1.000 1.00 1863 N- LT 1900 1 1.000 0 .980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1. 0 1.000 0. 950 1.00 1770 E- TH+RT 1900 2 1. 000 0. 980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.0 0 .995 1.000 1.00 3706 E- LT 1900 1 1. 000 0 . 980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1.000 0. 950 1. 00 1770 S- TH+RT 1900 1 1.000 0. 980 1. 000 1. 000 1.000 1.0 0. 978 1.000 1.00 1822 S- LT 1900 2 1.000 0.980 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 0 1.000 0. 950 1. 00 3539 W- RT 1900 1 1.000 0 . 980 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 0 0. 850 1. 000 1. 00 1583 W- TH 1900 2 1.000 0 . 980 1. 000 1.000 1. 000 1. 0 1. 000 1. 000 1. 00 3725 W- LT 1900 1 1.000 0 . 980 1. 000 1.000 1. 000 1.0 1. 000 0 . 950 1.00 1770 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10: 19 : 07 EXISTING LOS AM PEAK HOUR SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Capacity Analysis Worksheet Ap Lane LT Adj Adj Flow Green Lane V/C Crit pr Group Phase Flow Satfl Ratio Ratio Group Ratio Lane ch Mvts Type Rate Rate v/s g/C Capac v/c Grp -- -- -- vph vphg -- -- vph -- - N- RT 156 1583 0 . 099 0.153 241 0 . 647 * N- TH 53 1863 0. 028 0.153 284 0 .187 N- LT Pri. 48 1770 0. 027 0.153 270 0.178 E- TH+RT 1143 3706 0 .308 0.359 1330 0 .859 * E- LT Pri. 20 1770 0 .011 0 . 056 100 0 .200 S- TH+RT 178 1822 0 .098 0.262 477 0 .373 S- LT Pri. 756 3539 0 .214 0.262 926 0 .816 * W- RT 1 1583 0 .001 0 .430 680 0. 001 W- TH 470 3725 0 .126 0.430 1600 0 .294 W- LT Pri. 144 1770 0 .081 0 . 127 225 0 .640 * Cycle Length, C 120 sec Sum(v/s) = 0 .702 Lost Time Per Cycle, L 12 . 0 sec Xc = 0.780 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Level-of-Service Worksheet Ap Lane Vol Green Unit Delay Lane Cal Incr Lane Lan pr Group Ratio Ratio Delay Fact Group Term Delay Group Grp Appr Appr ch Mvts v/c g/C dl DF Capac m d2 Delay LOS Delay LOS -- -- -- -- sec/v -- vph - sec/v sec/v - sec/v - N- RT 0. 647 .153 36 .3 0 .85 241 16 4 .09 35. 0 D N- TH 0.187 .153 33 .7 0 .85 284 16 0 .04 28.7 D+ N- LT 0.178 .153 33 .7 0 . 85 270 16 0 .03 28.6 D+ > 32 .5 D+ E- TH+RT 0. 859 .359 27 .1 0. 85 1330 16 4 .21 27 .2 D+ E- LT 0 .200 . 056 41.1 0. 85 100 16 0. 14 35.0 D > 27 .4 D+ S- TH+RT 0 .373 .262 27 .6 0 .85 477 16 0 .24 23 .7 C S- LT 0. 816 .262 31. 6 0. 85 926 16 4 .04 30. 9 D+ > 29 . 5 D+ W- RT 0. 001 .430 14 . 8 0 . 85 680 16 0. 00 12 . 6 B W- TH 0 .294 .430 17 . 0 0 . 85 1600 16 0. 03 14 .5 B W- LT 0. 640 . 127 37 . 8 0 .85 225 16 4 . 14 36 .3 D > 19 . 6 C+ Cycle=120" Int Total 0 .680 > 26 . 9 D+ NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10 :19 :07 EXISTING LOS AM PEAK HOUR SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance Sq 76 Phase 1 I Phase 2 I Phase 3 I Phase 4 I Phase 5 I * + + I * + + **** I / \ I <* + +> <**** v **** ^ ^ ++++ v **** North <* + +> ++++> ++++> I * + + ++++ ++++ * + + v v G/C=0. 144 G/C=0 .253 G/C=0. 048 G/C=0 . 037 G/C=0.351 G= 17 .3" G= 30.4" G= 5.8" G= 4 .5" G= 42. 1" Y+R= 4 .0" Y+R= 4 . 0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4 . 0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=17 . 8% OFF=46.4% OFF=54 .5% OFF=61. 6% C=120 sec G=100 . 0 sec = 83 .3% Y=20. 0 sec = 16.7% Ped= 0 . 0 sec = 0 . 0% MVMT TOTALS N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Int Param:Units RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total AdjVol: vph 156 53 48 40 1103 20 26 152 756 1 470 144 2969 Wid/Ln: ft/# 12/1 12/1 12/1 0/0 24/2 12/1 0/0 12/1 24/2 12/1 24/2 12/1 g/C Rqd@C:% 24 21 21 0 37 20 0 24 31 20 25 23 g/C Used: % 15 15 15 0 36 6 0 26 26 43 43 13 SV @E: vph 224 268 254 0 1330 81 0 477 926 680 1600 206 6046 Svc Lv1:LOS D D+ D+ D+ D C D+ B B D D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0. 65 0. 19 0.18 0 . 00 0 .86 0 .20 0.00 0 .37 0 .82 0 . 00 0.29 0 .64 0 . 68 Avg Del:s/v 53 .7 45.3 45.3 0 .0 40.1 55. 9 0.0 37 .6 45.6 19 .5 22 .7 55.5 40 .4 Tot Del:min 35 10 9 0 191 5 0 28 144 0 45 33 500 # Stops:veh 37 12 10 0 265 5 0 36 177 0 77 34 653 Max Que:veh 9 3 3 0 49 1 0 9 37 0 18 8 137 Max Que: ft 223 76 69 0 618 32 0 222 471 25 226 212 618 APPR TOTALS Int Param:Units N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Total AdjVol: vph 257 1163 934 615 2969 Svc Lvl:LOS D+ D+ D+ C+ D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0 .47 0. 85 0.73 0 .38 0. 68 Avg Del:s/v 50.4 40 .4 44. 1 30.4 40 .4 Tot Del:min 54 196 172 78 500 # Stops:veh 59 270 213 111 653 Max Que:veh 15 50 46 26 137 Max Que: ft 223 618 471 226 618 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:41:14 2001 LOS AM PEAK HOUR WITHOUT PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Input Worksheet Intersection # 0 - Area Location Type: NONCBD Key: VOLUMES -- > 183 52 47 1 WIDTHS 12.0 12.0 12.0 v LANES 1 1 1 \ 48 0.0 0 / \ / -- 1023 24.0 2 141 12.0 1 / + / 19 12.0 1 North 436 24.0 2 -- \ I / 102 12.0 1 \ 715 148 36 Phasing: SEQUENCE 76 24.0 12.0 0.0 PERMSV NNNN LOSTTIME = 3 .0 sec. 2 1 0 OVERLP NNNN LEADLAG LD LD Appr Grade % Heavy Veh. Adj .Pkg Bus Pk.Hr.Factor Conf.Ped Actuated Arr.Type RT TH LT Loc Nm Nb RT TH LT peds/hr RT TH LT RT TH LT N 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 E 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 S 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 W 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 Sq 76 I Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 Phase 4 1 Phase 5 Phase 6 * + + A . * + + **** / \ <* + +> <**** v **** A ++++ v **** North <* + +> ++++> ++++> * + + ++++ ++++ * + + v v G/C=0.143 G/C=0.253 G/C=0.044 G/C=0.043 G/C=0.351 G/C=0.000 G= 17 .2" G= 30.3" G= 5.3" G= 5.1" G= 42.1" G= 0.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 0.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=17.7% OFF=46.3% OFF=54.0% OFF=61.6% OFF= 0.0% C=120 sec G=100.0 sec = 83 .3% Y=20.0 sec = 16.7% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:41:14 2001 LOS AM PEAK HOUR WITHOUT PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Volume Adjustment Worksheet Appr Mvt Flow Lane Group No.of Lane Adj Prop.of -Mvt Vol PHF Rate Group Flow Lanes Util Flow LT RT -- vph -- vph -- vph - -- vph -- -- N-RT 153 0. 90 170 RT 170 1 1. 00 170 0 . 00 1. 00 N-TH 52 0 . 90 58 TH 58 1 1. 00 58 0. 00 0. 00 N-LT 47 0 . 90 52 LT 52 1 1. 00 52 1. 00 0. 00 E-RT 38 0. 90 42 -- 0 0 1. 00 0 0. 00 0. 00 E-TH 1023 0 . 90 1137 TH+RT 1179 2 1. 05 1238 0. 00 0. 04 E-LT 19 0 . 90 21 LT 21 1 1. 00 21 1. 00 0. 00 S-RT 26 0 . 90 29 -- 0 0 1. 00 0 0 . 00 0.00 S-TH 148 0 . 90 164 TH+RT 193 1 1.00 193 0. 00 0.15 S-LT 715 0 . 90 794 LT 794 2 1.03 818 1.00 0.00 W-RT 1 0 . 90 1 RT 1 1 1. 00 1 0. 00 1. 00 W-TH 436 0 . 90 484 TH 484 2 1. 05 508 0. 00 0.00 W-LT 141 0 . 90 157 LT 157 1 1. 00 157 1. 00 0. 00 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Saturation Flow Adjustment Worksheet Ap Lane No Adjustment Factors Adj pr Group Ideal of Sat- ch Mvmts Satfl Lns Lane Heavy Bus Ar Right Left Adj flow -- -- pcphg - Width Vehs Grade Parkg Block Loc Turn Turn Fact vphg N- RT 1900 1 1.000 0 . 980 1. 000 1. 000 1.000 1.0 0 .850 1. 000 1.00 1583 N- TH 1900 1 1.000 0 .980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1.000 1. 000 1.00 1863 N- LT 1900 1 1.000 0.980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1.000 0. 950 1.00 1770 E- TH+RT 1900 2 1.000 0. 980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 0.995 1.000 1.00 3706 E- LT 1900 1 1. 000 0. 980 1.000 1. 000 1. 000 1.0 1. 000 0. 950 1. 00 1770 S- TH+RT 1900 1 1. 000 0 . 980 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1.0 0. 977 1.000 1.00 1821 S- LT 1900 2 1.000 0 . 980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1. 0 1.000 0. 950 1. 00 3539 W- RT 1900 1 1. 000 0 . 980 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1. 0 0 . 850 1. 000 1. 00 1583 W- TH 1900 2 1. 000 0 . 980 1. 000 1. 000 1.000 1. 0 1. 000 1. 000 1. 00 3725 W- LT 1900 1 1. 000 0 . 980 1.000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 0 1. 000 0. 950 1. 00 1770 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:41:14 2001 LOS AM PEAK HOUR WITHOUT PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Capacity Analysis Worksheet Ap Lane LT Adj Adj Flow Green Lane V/C Crit pr Group Phase Flow Satfl Ratio Ratio Group Ratio Lane ch Mvts Type Rate Rate v/s g/C Capac v/c Grp -- -- -- vph vphg -- - vph N- RT 170 1583 0.107 0.152 240 0.708 * N- TH 58 1863 0.031 0.152 282 0.206 N- LT Pri. 52 1770 0.029 0.152 268 0.194 E- TH+RT 1238 3706 0.334 0.359 1331 0.930 * E- LT Pri. 21 1770 0.012 0.052 93 0.226 S- TH+RT 193 1821 0.106 0.261 475 0.406 S- LT Pri. 818 3539 0.231 0.261 924 0.885 * W- RT 1 1583 0.001 0.435 689 0.001 W- TH 508 3725 0.136 0.435 1620 0.314 W- LT Pri. 157 1770 0.089 0.128 227 0.692 * Cycle Length, C 120 sec Sum(v/s) = 0.761 Lost Time Per Cycle, L 12.0 sec Xc = 0.846 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Level-of-Service Worksheet Ap Lane Vol Green Unif Delay Lane Cal Incr Lane Lan pr Group Ratio Ratio Delay Fact Group Term Delay Group Grp Appr Appr ch Mvts v/c g/C dl DF Capac m d2 Delay LOS Delay LOS -- -- -- -- sec/v -- vph - sec/v sec/v - sec/v - N- RT 0.708 .152 36.8 0.85 240 16 6.25 37 .5 D N- TH 0.206 .152 33 .9 0.85 282 16 0.05 28.9 D+ N- LT 0.194 .152 33.8 0.85 268 16 0.05 28.8 D+ > 34.1 D E- TH+RT 0.930 .359 28.1 0.85 1331 16 8.51 32.4 D+ E- LT 0.226 .052 41.4 0.85 93 16 0.22 35.4 D > 32.5 D+ S- TH+RT 0.406 .261 27.9 0.85 475 16 0.33 24.0 C S- LT 0.885 .261 32.4 0.85 924 16 7.33 34.9 D > 32.8 D W- RT 0.001 .435 14.6 0.85 689 16 0.00 12.4 B W- TH 0.314 .435 16.9 0.85 1620 16 0.04 14.4 B W- LT 0.692 .128 38.0 0.85 227 16 5.87 38.2 D > 20.0 C+ Cycle=120" Int Total 0.737 > 30.1 D+ NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:41:14 2001 LOS AM PEAK HOUR WITHOUT PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance Sq 76 1 Phase 1 I Phase 2 1 Phase 3 I Phase 4 Phase 5 * + + A • * + + **** / \ <* + +> <**** A A v **** A ++++ v **** North <* + +> ++++> ++++> 1 * + + ++++ ++++ * + + v v G/C=0.143 G/C=0.253 G/C=0.044 G/C=0.043 G/C=0.351 G= 17.2" G= 30.3" G= 5.3" G= 5.1" G= 42.1" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=17.7% OFF=46.3% OFF=54.0% OFF=61.6% C=120 sec G=100.0 sec = 83.3% Y=20.0 sec = 16.7% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% MVMT TOTALS N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Int Param:Units RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total AdjVol: vph 170 58 52 44 1194 21 29 164 818 1 508 157 3216 Wid/Ln:ft/# 12/1 12/1 12/1 0/0 24/2 12/1 0/0 12/1 24/2 12/1 24/2 12/1 g/C Rqd@C:% 25 21 21 0 39 20 0 25 32 20 26 24 g/C Used: % 15 15 15 0 36 5 0 26 26 43 43 13 SV @E: vph 223 266 251 0 1331 74 0 475 924 689 1620 208 6061 Svc Lvl:LOS D D+ D+ D+ D CDBBD D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0.71 0.21 0.19 0.00 0.93 0.23 0.00 0.41 0.88 0.00 0.31 0.69 0.74 Avg Del:s/v 57 .1 45.6 45.5 0.0 50.0 56.7 0.0 38.1 51.9 19.2 22.6 58.0 46.1 Tot Del:min 40 11 10 0 258 5 0 31 177 0 48 38 618 # Stops:veh 40 13 11 0 298 5 0 40 197 0 83 38 725 Max Que:veh 10 3 3 0 53 1 0 10 40 0 19 9 148 Max Que: ft 243 83 74 0 669 34 0 241 510 25 242 231 669 APPR TOTALS Int Param:Units N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Total AdjVol: vph 280 1259 1011 666 3216 Svc Lvl:LOS D D+ D C+ D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0.51 0.92 0.79 0.40 0.74 Avg Del:s/v 52.6 50.1 49.3 30.9 46 .1 Tot Del:min 61 263 208 86 618 # Stops:veh 64 303 237 121 725 Max Que:veh 16 54 50 28 148 Max Que: ft 243 669 510 242 669 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:42:26 2001 LOS AM PEAK HOUR WITH PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Input Worksheet Intersection # 0 - Area Location Type: NONCBD Key: VOLUMES -- > 183 54 47 ( WIDTHS 12.0 12.0 12.0 v LANES 1 1 1 \ 48 0.0 0 / I \ / -- 1023 24.0 2 141 12.0 1 / + / 20 12.0 1 North 436 24.0 2 -- \ I / 106 12.0 1 \ 733 151 38 Phasing: SEQUENCE 76 24.0 12.0 0.0 PERMSV NNNN LOSTTIME = 3.0 sec. 2 1 0 OVERLP NNNN LEADLAG LD LD Appr Grade % Heavy Veh. Adj .Pkg Bus Pk.Hr.Factor Conf.Ped Actuated Arr.Type RT TH LT Loc Nm Nb RT TH LT peds/hr RT TH LT RT TH LT N 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 E 0.0 2 .0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 S 0.0 2.0 2 .0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 W 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 Sq 76 I Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 Phase 4 1 Phase 5 I Phase 6 * + + * + + **** / \ <* + +> <**** v **** A ++++ v **** North <* + +> ++++> ++++> 1 * + + ++++ ++++ * + + v v G/C=0.142 G/C=0.256 G/C=0.044 G/C=0.042 G/C=0.349 G/C=0.000 G= 17 .1" G= 30.8" G= 5.3" G= 5.1" G= 41.8" G= 0.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 0.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=17.6% OFF=46.5% OFF=54.3% OFF=61.8% OFF= 0.0% C=120 sec G=100.0 sec = 83.3% Y=20.0 sec = 16.7% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10 :42 :26 2001 LOS AM PEAK HOUR WITH PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Volume Adjustment Worksheet Appr Mvt Flow Lane Group No.of Lane Adj Prop.of -Mvt Vol PHF Rate Group Flow Lanes Util Flow LT RT -- vph -- vph -- vph - -- vph -- -- N-RT 153 0 . 90 170 RT 170 1 1. 00 170 0 . 00 1. 00 N-TH 54 0 . 90 60 TH 60 1 1. 00 60 0 . 00 0 . 00 N-LT 47 0 . 90 52 LT 52 1 1.00 52 1.00 0 .00 E-RT 38 0. 90 42 -- 0 0 1.00 0 0 .00 0 . 00 E-TH 1023 0 . 90 1137 TH+RT 1179 2 1. 05 1238 0. 00 0 . 04 E-LT 20 0 . 90 22 LT 22 1 1. 00 22 1. 00 0 . 00 S-RT 28 0. 90 31 -- 0 0 1.00 0 0 .00 0. 00 S-TH 151 0. 90 168 TH+RT 199 1 1.00 199 0 . 00 0 . 16 S-LT 733 0.90 814 LT 814 2 1.03 838 1. 00 0 . 00 W-RT 1 0 . 90 1 RT 1 1 1. 00 1 0 .00 1. 00 W-TH 436 0 . 90 484 TH 484 2 1. 05 508 0.00 0 . 00 W-LT 141 0.90 157 LT 157 1 1.00 157 1. 00 0 . 00 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Saturation Flow Adjustment Worksheet Ap Lane No Adjustment Factors Adj pr Group Ideal of Sat- ch Mvmts Satfl Lns Lane Heavy Bus Ar Right Left Adj flow -- -- pcphg - Width Vehs Grade Parkg Block Loc Turn Turn Fact vphg N- RT 1900 1 1.000 0 . 980 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1.0 0 . 850 1. 000 1. 00 1583 N- TH 1900 1 1.000 0. 980 1.000 1. 000 1. 000 1.0 1.000 1. 000 1. 00 1863 N- LT 1900 1 1.000 0. 980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.0 1.000 0 .950 1. 00 1770 E- TH+RT 1900 2 1. 000 0 . 980 1. 000 1.000 1.000 1. 0 0 . 995 1. 000 1.00 3706 E- LT 1900 1 1.000 0 . 980 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1.0 1. 000 0. 950 1. 00 1770 S- TH+RT 1900 1 1.000 0. 980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1. 0 0. 977 1.000 1.00 1819 S- LT 1900 2 1.000 0.980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1. 000 0. 950 1.00 3539 W- RT 1900 1 1. 000 0 . 980 1. 000 1.000 1. 000 1.0 0 .850 1. 000 1. 00 1583 W- TH 1900 2 1. 000 0 . 980 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 0 1.000 1.000 1.00 3725 W- LT 1900 1 1.000 0. 980 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 0 1. 000 0. 950 1. 00 1770 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:42:26 2001 LOS AM PEAK HOUR WITH PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Capacity Analysis Worksheet Ap Lane LT Adj Adj Flow Green Lane V/C Crit pr Group Phase Flow Satf1 Ratio Ratio Group Ratio Lane ch Mvts Type Rate Rate v/s g/C Capac v/c Grp -- -- -- vph vphg -- -- vph -- - N- RT 170 1583 0.107 0.151 239 0.711 * N- TH 60 1863 0.032 0.151 281 0.214 N- LT Pri. 52 1770 0.029 0.151 267 0.195 E- TH+RT 1238 3706 0.334 0.357 1322 0.936 E- LT Pri. 22 1770 0.012 0.052 92 0.239 S- TH+RT 199 1819 0.109 0.265 482 0.413 S- LT Pri. 838 3539 0.237 0.265 937 0.894 W- RT 1 1583 0.001 0.432 685 0.001 W- TH 508 3725 0.136 0.432 1611 0.315 W- LT Pri. 157 1770 0.089 0.128 226 0.695 Cycle Length, C 120 sec Sum(v/s) = 0.767 Lost Time Per Cycle, L 12.0 sec Xc = 0.852 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Level-of-Service Worksheet Ap Lane Vol Green Unif Delay Lane Cal Incr Lane Lan pr Group Ratio Ratio Delay Fact Group Term Delay Group Grp Appr Appr ch Mvts v/c g/C dl DF Capac m d2 Delay LOS Delay LOS -- -- -- -- sec/v -- vph - sec/v sec/v - sec/v - N- RT 0.711 .151 36.8 0.85 239 16 6.41 37.7 D N- TH 0.214 .151 34.0 0.85 281 16 0.06 29.0 D+ N- LT 0.195 .151 33.9 0.85 267 16 0.05 28.9 D+ > 34.2 D E- TH+RT 0.936 .357 28.3 0.85 1322 16 9.17 33.2 D E- LT 0.239 .052 41.5 0.85 92 16 0.27 35.5 D > 33 .3 D S- TH+RT 0.413 .265 27.7 0.85 482 16 0.34 23.9 C S- LT 0.894 .265 32.3 0.85 937 16 7 .88 35.3 D > 33 .1 D W- RT 0.001 .432 14.7 0.85 685 16 0.00 12.5 B W- TH 0.315 .432 17 .0 0.85 1611 16 0.04 14.5 B W- LT 0.695 .128 38.1 0.85 226 16 6.01 38.4 D > 20 .1 C Cycle=120" Int Total 0.742 > 30.6 D+ NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10 :42 :26 2001 LOS AM PEAK HOUR WITH PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance Sq 76 I Phase 1 I Phase 2 I Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 * + + ^ * + + **** / \ <* + +> <**** V ^ **** 1 ^ ++++ V **** North <* + +> ++++> ++++> 1 * + + ++++ ++++ * + + v v G/C=0. 142 G/C=0 .256 G/C=0. 044 G/C=0 . 042 G/C=0 .349 G= 17 . 1" G= 30. 8" G= 5.3" G= 5. 1" G= 41. 8" Y+R= 4 . 0" Y+R= 4 . 0" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4 . 0" Y+R= 4 . 0" OFF= 0. 0% OFF=17 .6% OFF=46. 5% OFF=54 .3% OFF=61. 8% C=120 sec G=100 .0 sec = 83 .3% Y=20.0 sec = 16 .7% Ped= 0 .0 sec = 0 .0% MVMT TOTALS N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Int Param:Units RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total AdjVol: vph 170 60 52 44 1194 22 31 168 838 1 508 157 3245 Wid/Ln: ft/# 12/1 12/1 12/1 0/0 24/2 12/1 0/0 12/1 24/2 12/1 24/2 12/1 g/C Rqd@C:% 25 21 21 0 39 20 0 25 32 20 26 24 g/C Used: % 15 15 15 0 36 5 0 26 26 43 43 13 SV @E: vph 222 265 250 0 1322 73 0 482 937 685 1611 207 6054 Svc Lv1:LOS D D+ D+ D D C D B B D D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0.71 0.21 0.19 0. 00 0 . 94 0.24 0.00 0 .41 0. 89 0 . 00 0.31 0 .69 0.74 Avg De1is/v 57 .4 45. 8 45.6 0. 0 52 .2 57 .0 0 .0 37 . 9 52 . 9 19 .3 22 .8 58 .3 47 .3 Tot Del:min 41 11 10 0 269 5 0 31 185 0 48 38 638 # Stops:veh 40 13 11 0 299 5 0 41 202 0 83 38 732 Max Que:veh 10 3 3 0 53 1 0 10 41 0 19 9 149 Max Que: ft 244 86 74 0 671 35 0 247 520 25 243 231 671 APPR TOTALS Int Param:Units N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Total AdjVol: vph 282 1260 1037 666 3245 Svc Lvl:LOS D D D C D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0 .51 0. 92 0 .80 0 .40 0 .74 Avg Del: s/v 52 . 8 52 .3 50 . 0 31.2 47 .3 Tot Del:min 62 274 216 86 638 # Stops:veh 64 304 243 121 732 Max Que:veh 16 54 51 28 149 Max Que: ft 244 671 520 243 671 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:30:54 EXISTING LOS PM PEAK HOUR SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Input Worksheet Intersection # 0 - Area Location Type: NONCBD Key: VOLUMES -- > 251 226 190 I WIDTHS 12.0 12.0 12.0 v LANES 1 1 1 \ 41 0.0 0 / I \ / -- 726 24.0 2 248 12.0 1 / + / 54 12.0 1 North I 1237 24 .0 2 -- \ I / 896 12.0 1 \ 238 78 61 Phasing: SEQUENCE 76 24.0 12.0 0.0 PERMSV NNNN LOSTTIME = 3 .0 sec. 2 1 0 OVERLP NNNN LEADLAG LD LD Appr Grade % Heavy Veh. Adj .Pkg Bus Pk.Hr.Factor Conf.Ped Actuated Arr.Type RT TH LT Loc Nm Nb RT TH LT peds/hr RT TH LT RT TH LT N 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 E 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 S 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 W 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 Sq 76 I Phase 1 I Phase 2 I Phase 3 I Phase 4 I Phase 5 I Phase 6 * + + * + + ++++ / \ <* + +> <++++ v **** ++++ v ++++ North <+ * *> ++++> ++++> + * * **** **** * * v v G/C=0.208 G/C=0.123 G/C=0.060 G/C=0.124 G/C=0.319 G/C=0.000 G= 24.9" G= 14.7" G= 7.2" G= 14.8" G= 38.3" G= 0.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 0.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=24.1% OFF=39.7% OFF=49.0% OFF=64.7% OFF= 0.0% C=120 sec G=100.0 sec = 83 .3% Y=20.0 sec = 16.7% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10 :30 : 54 EXISTING LOS PM PEAK HOUR SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Volume Adjustment Worksheet Appr Mvt Flow Lane Group No.of Lane Adj Prop.of -Mvt Vol PHF Rate Group Flow Lanes Util Flow LT RT -- vph -- vph -- vph - -- vph -- -- N-RT 221 0. 90 246 RT 246 1 1.00 246 0 .00 1.00 N-TH 226 0. 90 251 TH 251 1 1. 00 251 0 . 00 0 .00 N-LT 190 0. 90 211 LT 211 1 1.00 211 1. 00 0 .00 E-RT 31 0 . 90 34 -- 0 0 1.00 0 0 .00 0.00 E-TH 726 0. 90 807 TH+RT 841 2 1. 05 883 0.00 0. 04 E-LT 54 0 . 90 60 LT 60 1 1. 00 60 1.00 0. 00 S-RT 51 0 . 90 57 -- 0 0 1. 00 0 0. 00 0 .00 S-TH 78 0 . 90 87 TH+RT 144 1 1.00 144 0. 00 0 .40 S-LT 238 0. 90 264 LT 264 2 1. 03 272 1. 00 0 .00 W-RT 596 0 . 90 662 RT 662 1 1.00 662 0.00 1.00 W-TH 1237 0 . 90 1374 TH 1374 2 1. 05 1443 0 . 00 0.00 W-LT 248 0 . 90 276 LT 276 1 1. 00 276 1. 00 0.00 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Saturation Flow Adjustment Worksheet Ap Lane No Adjustment Factors Adj pr Group Ideal of Sat- ch Mvmts Satf1 Lns Lane Heavy Bus Ar Right Left Adj flow -- -- pcphg - Width Vehs Grade Parkg Block Loc Turn Turn Fact vphg N- RT 1900 1 1. 000 0. 980 1. 000 1. 000 1.000 1.0 0 .850 1. 000 1.00 1583 N- TH 1900 1 1. 000 0 . 980 1. 000 1. 000 1.000 1.0 1.000 1. 000 1. 00 1863 N- LT 1900 1 1. 000 0. 980 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1. 0 1.000 0 .950 1. 00 1770 E- TH+RT 1900 2 1.000 0. 980 1.000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 0 0. 994 1.000 1. 00 3703 E- LT 1900 1 1.000 0. 980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.0 1.000 0. 950 1.00 1770 S- TH+RT 1900 1 1. 000 0 .980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.0 0 . 941 1.000 1. 00 1752 S- LT 1900 2 1.000 0 . 980 1. 000 1. 000 1.000 1.0 1.000 0 .950 1.00 3539 W- RT 1900 1 1. 000 0. 980 1.000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 0 0 . 850 1.000 1.00 1583 W- TH 1900 2 1. 000 0. 980 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 0 1. 000 1. 000 1.00 3725 W- LT 1900 1 1. 000 0. 980 1. 000 1. 000 1. 000 1. 0 1. 000 0 .950 1.00 1770 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:30:54 EXISTING LOS PM PEAK HOUR SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Capacity Analysis Worksheet Ap Lane LT Adj Adj Flow Green Lane V/C Crit pr Group Phase Flow Satfl Ratio Ratio Group Ratio Lane ch Mvts Type Rate Rate v/s g/C Capac v/c Grp -- -- -- vph vphg -- -- vph -- - N- RT 246 1583 0.155 0.216 342 0.719 * N- TH 251 1863 0.135 0.216 402 0.624 N- LT Pri. 211 1770 0.119 0.216 382 0.552 E- TH+RT 883 3703 0.238 0.328 1213 0.728 E- LT Pri. 60 1770 0.034 0.068 121 0.496 * S- TH+RT 144 1752 0.082 0.131 230 0.626 * S- LT Pri. 272 3539 0.077 0.131 464 0.586 W- RT 662 1583 0.418 0.485 767 0.863 * W- TH 1443 3725 0.387 0.485 1806 0.799 W- LT Pri. 276 1770 0.156 0.225 399 0.692 Cycle Length, C 120 sec Sum(v/s) = 0.690 Lost Time Per Cycle, L 12.0 sec Xc = 0.766 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Level-of-Service Worksheet Ap Lane Vol Green Unif Delay Lane Cal Incr Lane Lan pr Group Ratio Ratio Delay Fact Group Term Delay Group Grp Appr Appr ch Mvts v/c g/C dl DF Capac m d2 Delay LOS Delay LOS -- -- -- -- sec/v -- vph - sec/v sec/v - sec/v - N- RT 0.719 .216 33.2 0.85 342 16 4.89 33.1 D N- TH 0.624 .216 32.4 0.85 402 16 2.14 29.7 D+ N- LT 0.552 .216 31.8 0.85 382 16 1.33 28.4 D+ > 30.5 D+ E- TH+RT 0.728 .328 27.1 0.85 1213 16 1.57 24.6 C E- LT 0.496 .068 41.0 0.85 121 16 2.61 37.4 D > 25.4 D+ S- TH+RT 0.626 .131 37.5 0.85 230 16 3.68 35.6 D S- LT 0.586 .131 37.3 0.85 464 16 1.41 33.1 D > 34.0 D W- RT 0.863 .485 20.8 0.85 767 16 7.06 24.8 C W- TH 0.799 .485 19.8 0.85 1806 16 1.87 18.7 C+ W- LT 0.692 .225 32.4 0.85 399 16 3 .49 31.0 D+ Cycle=120° > 21.8 C Int Total 0.739 > 25.1 D+ NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10 :30 :54 EXISTING LOS PM PEAK HOUR SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance Sq 76 Phase 1 I Phase 2 I Phase 3 I Phase 4 Phase 5 * + + * + + ++++ / I \ <* + +> <++++ v **** ++++ v ++++ North <+ * *> ++++> ++++> + * * **** **** + * * v v G/C=0.208 G/C=0 .123 G/C=0 . 060 G/C=0.124 G/C=0.319 G= 24 . 9" G= 14 .7" G= 7.2" G= 14 .8" G= 38.3" Y+R= 4 . 0" Y+R= 4 .0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4 .0" Y+R= 4 .0" OFF= 0. 0% OFF=24 .1% OFF=39.7% OFF=49 .0% OFF=64 .7% C=120 sec G=100 .0 sec = 83 .3% Y=20 .0 sec = 16 .7% Ped= 0 . 0 sec = 0 . 0% MVMT TOTALS N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Int Param:Units RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total AdjVol: vph 246 251 211 36 847 60 57 87 272 662 1443 276 4448 Wid/Ln:ft/# 12/1 12/1 12/1 0/0 24/2 12/1 0/0 12/1 24/2 12/1 24/2 12/1 g/C Rqd@C:% 28 26 26 0 32 21 0 23 23 48 43 28 g/C Used: % 22 22 22 0 33 7 0 13 13 48 48 23 SV @E: vph 332 395 374 0 1213 101 0 212 453 767 1806 392 6045 Svc Lvl:LOS D D+ D+ C D D D C C+ D+ D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0 .72 0. 62 0.55 0 . 00 0 .73 0.50 0 .00 0 .63 0 .59 0. 86 0. 80 0 .69 0 .74 Avg Del:s/v 50 .2 45. 6 44 .3 0 . 0 37 . 0 59 .0 0. 0 54 .5 50.2 37 .0 27 .8 47 .2 37 . 9 Tot Del:min 51 48 39 0 136 15 0 33 57 102 167 54 702 # Stops:veh 57 57 47 0 195 14 0 34 64 147 303 63 981 Max Que:veh 13 13 11 0 40 4 0 8 16 23 50 14 192 Max Que: ft 325 332 279 0 501 94 0 211 199 575 627 361 627 APPR TOTALS Int Param:Units N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Total AdjVol: vph 708 943 416 2381 4448 Svc Lvl:LOS D+ D+ D C D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0 . 64 0.71 0 .60 0 .80 0 .74 Avg Del:s/v 46 . 8 38.4 51.7 32 .6 37 . 9 Tot Del:min 138 151 90 323 702 # Stops:veh 161 209 98 513 981 Max Que:veh 37 44 24 87 192 Max Que: ft 332 501 211 627 627 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:31:59 2001 LOS PM PEAK HOUR WITHOUT PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Input Worksheet Intersection # 0 - Area Location Type: NONCBD Key: VOLUMES -- > 261 265 198 1 WIDTHS 12.0 12.0 12.0 v LANES 1 1 1 \ 43 0.0 0 / 1 \ / -- 755 24.0 2 258 12.0 1 / + / 84 12.0 1 North 1287 24.0 2 -- \ I / 998 12.0 1 \ 290 95 73 Phasing: SEQUENCE 76 24.0 12.0 0.0 PERMSV NNNN LOSTTIME = 3.0 sec. 2 1 0 OVERLP NNNN LEADLAG LD LD Appr Grade % Heavy Veh. Adj .Pkg Bus Pk.Hr.Factor Conf.Ped Actuated Arr.Type RT TH LT Loc Nm Nb RT TH LT peds/hr RT TH LT RT TH LT N 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 E 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 S 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 W 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 Sq 76 I Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 Phase 4 1 Phase 5 Phase 6 * + + • * + + ++++ / \ 4. +> <++++ v **** ++++ v ++++ North <+ * *> ++++> ++++> 1 + * * **** **** * * v v G/C=0.182 G/C=0.116 G/C=0.063 G/C=0.104 G/C=0.369 G/C=0.000 G= 21.8" G= 13 .9" G= 7.5" G= 12.4" G= 44.3" G= 0.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 0.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=21.5% OFF=36.5% OFF=46.0% OFF=59.8% OFF= 0.0% C=120 sec G=100.0 sec = 83 .3% Y=20.0 sec = 16.7% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10 :31:59 2001 LOS PM PEAK HOUR WITHOUT PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Volume Adjustment Worksheet Appr Mvt Flow Lane Group No.of Lane Adj Prop.of -Mvt Vol PHF Rate Group Flow Lanes Util Flow LT RT -- vph -- vph -- vph - -- vph -- -- N-RT 231 0 . 90 257 RT 257 1 1.00 257 0 .00 1.00 N-TH 265 0 . 90 294 TH 294 1 1.00 294 0 . 00 0 . 00 N-LT 198 0 . 90 220 LT 220 1 1. 00 220 1. 00 0 . 00 E-RT 33 0 . 90 37 -- 0 0 1. 00 0 0 .00 0 .00 E-TH 755 0 . 90 839 TH+RT 876 2 1. 05 920 0 .00 0. 04 E-LT 84 0. 90 93 LT 93 1 1. 00 93 1.00 0. 00 S-RT 63 0 . 90 70 -- 0 0 1. 00 0 0.00 0. 00 S-TH 95 0. 90 106 TH+RT 176 1 1.00 176 0.00 0.40 S-LT 290 0. 90 322 LT 322 2 1. 03 332 1.00 0.00 W-RT 698 0. 90 776 RT 776 1 1. 00 776 0 .00 1.00 W-TH 1287 0. 90 1430 TH 1430 2 1. 05 1501 0 .00 0 .00 W-LT 258 0. 90 287 LT 287 1 1. 00 287 1.00 0 .00 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Saturation Flow Adjustment Worksheet Ap Lane No Adjustment Factors Adj pr Group Ideal of Sat- ch Mvmts Satfl Lns Lane Heavy Bus Ar Right Left Adj flow -- -- pcphg - Width Vehs Grade Parkg Block Loc Turn Turn Fact vphg N- RT 1900 1 1.000 0.980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1. 0 0 .850 1.000 1. 00 1583 N- TH 1900 1 1.000 0 .980 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1. 0 1.000 1.000 1. 00 1863 N- LT 1900 1 1.000 0.980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1.000 0 . 950 1.00 1770 E- TH+RT 1900 2 1.000 0 .980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.0 0. 994 1.000 1.00 3702 E- LT 1900 1 1.000 0 . 980 1. 000 1. 000 1.000 1.0 1.000 0. 950 1.00 1770 S- TH+RT 1900 1 1. 000 0. 980 1. 000 1. 000 1.000 1. 0 0 . 940 1. 000 1. 00 1752 S- LT 1900 2 1. 000 0. 980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1. 0 1.000 0 . 950 1.00 3539 W- RT 1900 1 1. 000 0 . 980 1.000 1. 000 1. 000 1.0 0 . 850 1. 000 1. 00 1583 W- TH 1900 2 1.000 0 . 980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1.000 1.000 1.00 3725 W- LT 1900 1 1.000 0 .980 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1.0 1.000 0 . 950 1.00 1770 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:31:59 2001 LOS PM PEAK HOUR WITHOUT PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Capacity Analysis Worksheet Ap Lane LT Adj Adj Flow Green Lane V/C Crit pr Group Phase Flow Satf1 Ratio Ratio Group Ratio Lane ch Mvts Type Rate Rate v/s g/C Capac v/c Grp -- -- -- vph vphg -- - vph N- RT 257 1583 0.162 0.190 301 0.854 N- TH 294 1863 0.158 0.190 355 0.828 N- LT Pri. 220 1770 0.124 0.190 337 0.653 E- TH+RT 920 3702 0.249 0.377 1397 0.659 E- LT Pri. 93 1770 0.053 0.071 126 0.738 S- TH+RT 176 1752 0.100 0.124 217 0.811 S- LT Pri. 332 3539 0.094 0.124 439 0.756 W- RT 776 1583 0.490 0.515 815 0.952 W- TH 1501 3725 0.403 0.515 1917 0.783 W- LT Pri. 287 1770 0.162 0.208 368 0.780 Cycle Length, C 120 sec Sum(v/s) = 0.805 Lost Time Per Cycle, L 12.0 sec Xc = 0.895 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC(Ver 1.20] - HCM Level-of-Service Worksheet Ap Lane Vol Green Unif Delay Lane Cal Incr Lane Lan pr Group Ratio Ratio Delay Fact Group Term Delay Group Grp Appr Appr ch Mvts v/c g/C dl DF Capac m d2 Delay LOS Delay LOS -- -- -- -- sec/v -- vph - sec/v sec/v - sec/v - N- RT 0.854 .190 35.7 0.85 301 16 14.15 44.5 E+ N- TH 0.828 .190 35.5 0.85 355 16 10.29 40.5 E+ N- LT 0.653 .190 34.1 0.85 337 16 3.10 32.1 D+ > 39 .4 D E- TH+RT 0.659 .377 23 .5 0.85 1397 16 0.82 20.8 C E- LT 0.738 .071 41.5 0.85 126 16 13.29 48.6 E+ > 23 .4 C S- TH+RT 0.811 .124 38.9 0.85 217 16 13 .67 46.7 E+ S- LT 0.756 .124 38.6 0.85 439 16 5.06 37.9 D > 40.9 E+ W- RT 0.952 .515 21.1 0.85 815 16 15.21 33 .1 D W- TH 0.783 .515 18.0 0.85 1917 16 1.55 16.8 C+ W- LT 0.780 .208 34.1 0.85 368 16 7 .04 36.1 D > 23 .9 C Cycle=120" Int Total 0.785 > 28.0 D+ NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:31:59 2001 LOS PM PEAK HOUR WITHOUT PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance Sq 76 I Phase 1 I Phase 2 I Phase 3 I Phase 4 I Phase 5 **/** * + + A . * + + ++++ / \ <* + +> <++++ V A **** A A ++++ V ++++ North <+ * *> ++++> ++++> + * * **** **** + * * v v G/C=0.182 G/C=0.116 G/C=0.063 G/C=0.104 G/C=0.369 G= 21.8" G= 13.9" G= 7.5" G= 12.4" G= 44.3" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=21.5% OFF=36.5% OFF=46.0% OFF=59.8% C=120 sec G=100.0 sec = 83.3% Y=20.0 sec = 16.7% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% MVMT TOTALS N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Int Param:Units RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total AdjVol: vph 257 294 220 39 881 93 70 106 332 776 1501 287 4856 Wid/Ln:ft/# 12/1 12/1 12/1 0/0 24/2 12/1 0/0 12/1 24/2 12/1 24/2 12/1 g/C Rqd@C:% 28 28 26 0 33 22 0 24 24 54 45 28 g/C Used: % 19 19 19 0 38 7 0 12 12 51 51 21 SV @E: vph 288 344 325 0 1397 106 0 198 427 815 1917 359 6176 Svc Lvl:LOS E+ E+ D+ C E+ E+ D D C+ D D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0.85 0.83 0.65 0.00 0.66 0.74 0.00 0.81 0.76 0.95 0.78 0.78 0.79 Avg De1:s/v 70.2 61.4 49.1 0.0 31.9 77.0 0.0 72.9 56.0 40.8 25.2 54.1 41.2 Tot Del:min 75 75 45 0 122 30 0 53 77 132 158 65 832 # Stops:veh 62 71 51 0 191 23 0 43 80 185 305 68 1079 Max Que:veh 14 16 12 0 38 6 0 10 19 25 49 15 204 Max Que: ft 351 401 300 0 483 146 0 260 245 635 615 383 635 APPR TOTALS Int Param:Units N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Total AdjVol: vph 771 1013 508 2564 4856 Svc Lvl:LOS D C E+ C D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0.79 0.67 0.77 0.83 0.79 Avg Del:s/v 60.8 36.0 61.9 33 .2 41.2 Tot Del:min 195 152 130 355 832 # Stops:veh 184 214 123 558 1079 Max Que:veh 42 44 29 89 204 Max Que: ft 401 483 260 635 635 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:28:23 2001 LOS PM PEAK HOUR WITH PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Input Worksheet Intersection # 0 - Area Location Type: NONCBD Key: VOLUMES -- > 261 270 198 I WIDTHS 12.0 12.0 12.0 v LANES 1 1 1 \ 43 0.0 0 / 1 \ / \ -- 755 24.0 2 258 12.0 1 / + / 85 12.0 1 North 1287 24.0 2 -- \ I / 1018 12.0 1 \ 300 97 74 Phasing: SEQUENCE 76 24.0 12.0 0.0 PERMSV NNNN LOSTTIME = 3.0 sec. 2 1 0 OVERLP NNNN LEADLAG LD LD Appr Grade % Heavy Veh. Adj .Pkg Bus Pk.Hr.Factor Conf.Ped Actuated Arr.Type - RT TH LT Loc Nm Nb RT TH LT peds/hr RT TH LT RT TH LT N 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 E 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 S 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 W 0.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 NO 0 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0- Y Y Y 3 3 3 Sq 76 I Phase 1 I Phase 2 ( Phase 3 I Phase 4 I Phase 5 Phase 6 * + + * + + ++++ / \ <* + +> <++++ v **** A ++++ v ++++ North <+ * *> ++++> ++++> 1 + * * **** **** * * v v G/C=0.179 G/C=0.115 G/C=0.062 G/C=0.104 G/C=0.373 G/C=0.000 G= 21.4" G= 13 .8" G= 7.4" G= 12.5" G= 44.8" G= 0.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 0.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=21.2% OFF=36.1% OFF=45.6% OFF=59.3% OFF= 0.0% C=120 sec G=100.0 sec = 83 .3% Y=20.0 sec = 16.7% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10 :28:23 2001 LOS PM PEAK HOUR WITH PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Volume Adjustment Worksheet Appr Mvt Flow Lane Group No.of Lane Adj Prop.of -Mvt Vol PHF Rate Group Flow Lanes Util Flow LT RT -- vph -- vph -- vph - -- vph -- -- N-RT 231 0 .90 257 RT 257 1 1. 00 257 0.00 1.00 N-TH 270 0 . 90 300 TH 300 1 1.00 300 0.00 0.00 N-LT 198 0. 90 220 LT 220 1 1.00 220 1.00 0.00 E-RT 33 0. 90 37 -- 0 0 1.00 0 0 .00 0.00 E-TH 755 0 . 90 839 TH+RT 876 2 1.05 920 0 .00 0.04 E-LT 85 0 . 90 94 LT 94 1 1.00 94 1. 00 0 .00 S-RT 64 0.90 71 -- 0 0 1.00 0 0 .00 0 .00 S-TH 97 0 . 90 108 TH+RT 179 1 1.00 179 0.00 0.40 S-LT 300 0. 90 333 LT 333 2 1.03 343 1.00 0.00 W-RT 718 0.90 798 RT 798 1 1.00 798 0. 00 1. 00 W-TH 1287 0.90 1430 TH 1430 2 1.05 1501 0.00 0.00 W-LT 258 0. 90 287 LT 287 1 1.00 287 1.00 0.00 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC [Ver 1.20] - HCM Saturation Flow Adjustment Worksheet Ap Lane No Adjustment Factors Adj pr Group Ideal of Sat- ch Mvmts Satfl Lns Lane Heavy Bus Ar Right Left Adj flow -- -- pcphg - Width Vehs Grade Parkg Block Loc Turn Turn Fact vphg N- RT 1900 1 1.000 0 . 980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 0. 850 1.000 1.00 1583 N- TH 1900 1 1.000 0.980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1.000 1.000 1.00 1863 N- LT 1900 1 1.000 0. 980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1.000 0.950 1. 00 1770 E- TH+RT 1900 2 1.000 0. 980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 0. 994 1.000 1.00 3702 E- LT 1900 1 1.000 0.980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 1. 000 0.950 1.00 1770 S- TH+RT 1900 1 1. 000 0.980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.0 0 .941 1.000 1.00 1752 S- LT 1900 2 1.000 0.980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.0 1.000 0. 950 1.00 3539 W- RT 1900 1 1.000 0.980 1.000 1. 000 1. 000 1.0 0 .850 1. 000 1. 00 1583 W- TH 1900 2 1.000 0. 980 1.000 1.000 1. 000 1.0 1.000 1.000 1. 00 3725 W- LT 1900 1 1.000 0 .980 1.000 1. 000 1.000 1.0 1.000 0. 950 1.00 1770 NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:28:23 2001 LOS PM PEAK HOUR WITH PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Capacity Analysis Worksheet Ap Lane LT Adj Adj Flow Green Lane V/C Crit pr Group Phase Flow Satf1 Ratio Ratio Group Ratio Lane ch Mvts Type Rate Rate v/s g/C Capac v/c Grp -- -- -- vph vphg -- - vph N- RT 257 1583 0.162 0.187 296 0.868 N- TH 300 1863 0.161 0.187 348 0.862 N- LT Pri. 220 1770 0.124 0.187 331 0.665 E- TH+RT 920 3702 0.249 0.382 1413 0.651 E- LT Pri. 94 1770 0.053 0.070 124 0.758 S- TH+RT 179 1752 0.102 0.124 217 0.825 S- LT Pri. 343 3539 0.097 0.124 438 0.783 W- RT 798 1583 0.504 0.519 822 0.971 W- TH 1501 3725 0.403 0.519 1933 0.777 W- LT Pri. 287 1770 0.162 0.208 367 0.782 Cycle Length, C 120 sec Sum(v/s) = 0.822 Lost Time Per Cycle, L 12.0 sec Xc = 0.913 SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - HCM Level-of-Service Worksheet Ap Lane Vol Green Unif Delay Lane Cal Incr Lane Lan pr Group Ratio Ratio Delay Fact Group Term Delay Group Grp Appr Appr ch Mvts v/c g/C dl DF Capac m d2 Delay LOS Delay LOS -- -- -- -- sec/v -- vph - sec/v sec/v - sec/v - N- RT 0.868 .187 36.0 0.85 296 16 15.88 46.5 E+ N- TH 0.862 .187 35.9 0.85 348 16 13.41 43.9 E+ N- LT 0.665 .187 34.4 0.85 331 16 3.43 32.7 D > 41.6 E+ E- TH+RT 0.651 .382 23.2 0.85 1413 16 0.76 20.5 C E- LT 0.758 .070 41.6 0.85 124 16 15.26 50.6 E > 23 .3 C S- TH+RT 0.825 .124 39.0 0.85 217 16 14.99 48.1 E+ S- LT 0.783 .124 38.8 0.85 438 16 6.17 39.1 D > 42.2 E+ W- RT 0.971 .519 21.3 0.85 822 16 18.15 36.2 D W- TH 0.777 .519 17.7 0.85 1933 16 1.45 16.5 C+ W- LT 0.782 .208 34.2 0.85 367 16 7.16 36.2 D > 24.8 C Cycle=120" Int Total 0.792 > 29.0 D+ NORMANDY RIDGE 12/20/99 SW 43RD STREET & TALBOT ROAD 10:28 :23 2001 LOS PM PEAK HOUR WITH PROJECT SIGNAL94/TEAPAC[Ver 1.20] - Evaluation of Intersection Performance Sq 76 I Phase 1 I Phase 2 I Phase 3 I Phase 4 I Phase 5 I * + + * + + ++++ / I \ <* + +> <++++ v A **** A A ++++ v ++++ North <+ * *> ++++> ++++> + * * **** **** + * * v v G/C=0.179 G/C=0 .115 G/C=0.062 G/C=0 .104 G/C=0 .373 G= 21.4" G= 13 .8" G= 7.4" G= 12.5" G= 44 . 8" Y+R= 4 .0" Y+R= 4 . 0" Y+R= 4. 0" Y+R= 4.0" Y+R= 4 .0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=21.2% OFF=36.1% OFF=45. 6% OFF=59.3% C=120 sec G=100.0 sec = 83 .3% Y=20. 0 sec = 16 .7% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0 .0% MVMT TOTALS N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Int Param:Units RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total AdjVol: vph 257 300 220 39 881 94 71 108 343 798 1501 287 4899 Wid/Ln: ft/# 12/1 12/1 12/1 0/0 24/2 12/1 0/0 12/1 24/2 12/1 24/2 12/1 g/C Rqd@C:% 28 28 26 0 33 22 0 25 24 55 45 28 g/C Used: % 19 19 19 0 38 7 0 12 12 52 52 21 SV @E: vph 282 336 319 0 1413 104 0 198 425 822 1933 357 6189 Svc Lv1:LOS E+ E+ D C E E+ D D C+ D D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0.87 0.86 0.67 0.00 0.65 0.76 0.00 0.82 0 .78 0.97 0.78 0 .78 0.79 Avg Del:s/v 75.1 68.7 49.8 0.0 31.4 81.3 0.0 76.1 57 .7 43 .7 24 .7 54 .4 42 . 6 Tot Del:min 80 86 46 0 120 32 0 57 83 145 154 65 868 # Stops:veh 62 73 51 0 189 23 0 44 83 193 302 68 1088 Max Que:veh 14 16 12 0 38 6 0 10 20 26 48 15 205 Max Que: ft 352 411 302 0 480 147 0 265 253 647 609 384 647 APPR TOTALS Int Param:Units N Approach E Approach S Approach W Approach Total AdjVol: vph 777 1014 522 2586 4899 Svc Lv1:LOS E+ C E+ C D+ Deg Sat:v/c 0.81 0. 66 0. 80 0. 84 0 .79 Avg Delis/v 65.5 36 .0 64 .0 33 . 9 42 .6 Tot Del:min 212 152 140 364 868 # Stops:veh 186 212 127 563 1088 Max Que:veh 42 44 30 89 205 Max Que: ft 411 480 265 647 647 HEATH AND ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.0b 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS December 08, 1999 01:37 PM C:\UNSIG3\TALB&ENT.INT TALBOT/ENTRANCE 2001 PM PEAK LOS WITHOUT PROJECT-ASSUME BURNSTEAD INTERSECTION GEOMETRY VOLUMES IN PCPH S=STOP CONTROL C (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) Y=YIELD CONTROL AND PREVAILING SPEED=30 MPH SATURATION VOLUMES -- Grade= 0% E— 442 1800 (2 LANES) SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. TALBOT 'EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE TALBOT 38 Grade= 0% TALBOT 1197 TALBOT NO RIGHT TURN LANE - <\ (NO ACCEL.LANE 58 r> NO RIGHT TURN RADIUS<50 ft 2 1 STOP OR YIELD SIGN Grade= X X SHARED LANES 6 7 NOTE: 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Saturation Volumes are used LARGE to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the POPULATION Major Street Left Turn Lane is shared. ENTRANCE ENTRANCE VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS TALBOT TALBOT ENTRANCE thru right left thru left right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 1077 52 34 398 26 17 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 .90 .90 .90 1.00 1.00 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 1197 58 38 442 26 17 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 1197 58 38 442 26 17 CAPACITY ANALYSIS ENTRANCE LEFT TURN RIGHT TURN Conflicting Flow: 1706 vph 1226 vph Critical Gap: 6.5 seconds 5.5 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 109 pcph 331 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.91 - Movement Capacity: 99 pcph 331 pcph LEFT TURN FROM TALBOT Conflicting Flow: 1254 vph Critical Gap: 5.0 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 433 pcph Movement Capacity: 433 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 91.2% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) NA SHARED LANE CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared Movements Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left From ENTRANCE 26 99 137 37.7 E-Very Long Delays Ave Delay 37.7 sec. X Right From ENTRANCE 17 331 137 37.7 E-Very Long Delays Left From TALBOT 38 433 - 9.1 B- Short Delays 0.7 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.2 seconds HEATH AND ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.0b 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS December 08, 1999 01:36 PM TALBOT/ENTRANCE 2001 PM PEAK LOS WITH PROJECT INTERSECTION GEOMETRY PREVAILING SPEED=30 MPH S=STOP CONTROL NORMANDY RIDGE • Y=YIELD CONTROL SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. Grade= SHARED LANES X X 0% RADIUS<50 ft S S S NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN NO ACCELERATION LANE J, NO RIGHT TURN LANE Grade= 0% TALBOT LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE EXCLUSIVE LEFT LANE LT SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. (2 LANES) TALBOT Grade= 0% NO RIGHT TURN LANE T (NO ACCELERATION LANE NO RIGHT TURN STOP OR YIELD SIGN S S S RADIUS<50 ft Grade= X X X SHARED LANES 0% SIGHT DISTANCE O.K. LARGE POPULATION BURNSTEAD VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS TALBOT TALBOT BURNSTEAD NORMANDY RIDGE left thru right left thru right left thru right left thru right UNADJUSTED VOLUMES 26 1077 52 34 398 17 26 0 17 8 0 13 PEAK HOUR FACTORS .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 .90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF ADJUSTED VOLUMES 29 1197 58 38 442 19 26 0 17 8 0 13 PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES 29 1197 58 38 442 19 26 0 17 8 0 13 VOLUMES IN PCPH NORMANDY RIDGE (PCE ADJUSTED VOLUMES) AND SATURATION VOLUMES 1 3 0 8 19 1200 442 1800 TALBOT 38 29 TALBOT 1800 1197 - 1200 58 T 2 0 1 NOTE: 6 7 Saturation Volumes are used to calculate Probability of Queue Free States when the Major Street Left Turn Lane BURNSTEAD is shared. HEATH AND ASSOCIATES WINUNSIG version 3.0b 1994 HCM UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ANALYSIS December 08, 1999 01:36 PM TALBOT/ENTRANCE 2001 PM PEAK LOS WITH PROJECT CAPACITY ANALYSIS RIGHT TURN FROM: BURNSTEAD NORMANDY RIDGE Conflicting Flow: 1226 vph 452 vph Critical Gap: 5.5 seconds 5.5 seconds Headway Gap: 2.6 seconds 2.6 seconds Potential Capacity: 331 pcph 817 pcph Movement Capacity: 331 pcph 817 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 94.9% 98.4% LEFT TURN FROM: TALBOT TALBOT Conflicting Flow: 1254 vph 461 vph Critical Gap: 5.0 seconds 5.0 seconds Headway Gap: 2.1 seconds 2.1 seconds Potential Capacity: 433 pcph 1034 pcph Movement Capacity: 433 pcph 1034 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: (exclusive) 91.2% 97.2% Probability of Queue Free State: (shared) NA NA THROUGH FROM: BURNSTEAD NORMANDY RIDGE Conflicting Flow: 1753 vph 1773 vph Critical Gap: 6.0 seconds 6.0 seconds Headway Gap: 3.3 seconds 3.3 seconds Potential Capacity: 131 pcph 128 pcph Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.89 0.89 Movement Capacity: 116 pcph 114 pcph Probability of Queue Free State: 100.0% 100.0% LEFT TURN FROM: BURNSTEAD NORMANDY RIDGE Conflicting Flow: 1750 vph 1752 vph Critical Gap: 6.5 seconds 6.5 seconds Headway Gap: 3.4 seconds 3.4 seconds Potential Capacity: 103 pcph 102 pcph Major Left,Minor Through,Impedance Factor(p"): 0.89 0.89 Major Left,Minor Through,Adjusted Impedance Factor(p'):0.91 0.91 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements: 0.90 0.87 Movement Capacity: 92 pcph 89 pcph SHARED LANE CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS X indicates shared lanes Shared BURNSTEAD Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 26 92 129 41.2 E-Very Long Delays Ave Delay X Through o 116 129 41.2 E-Very Long Delays 41.2 sec. X Right Turn 17 , 331 129 41.2 E-Very Long Delays Shared NORMANDY RIDGE Volume Capacity Capacity DELAY Level Of Service X Left Turn 8 89 89 44.6 E-Very Long Delays Ave Delay X Through 0 114 89 44.6 E-Very Long Delays 19.8 sec. Right Turn 13 817 - 4.5 A-Little Delay Major Street Left Turns Volume Capacity DELAY Level Of Service Ave Delay TALBOT 29 1034 3.6 A-Little Delay 0.1 sec. TALBOT 38 433 9.1 B-Short Delays 0.7 sec. Average Total Delay for the entire intersection: 1.4 seconds r, 1_ ,.i Ir • 1,114 7. G•od•,Unt�pnol'l•dIntcn•Uans' 4 1\;, t .« , , : pI - --•-4--444 —H-4 \ • .—_ S'Sto.ape Le npin R•Q��.d pe it 6 e• •_i T _ _• •. J. . . T—� .L��., ri. '''' •a%igy..' ;•' r.. Jk: .: :i t • Ne `:+ i;iP:y'bk:°o-ri.E'<:a: • `� �'>d 4i2:riiV2°}:a k? :xa p,• g. 1 -•�- • .. 1%'.:,•: ?:r :6:�' •i S ,itc<s`w,{.�.w�}> —1 I` . . _-�. —- > ,.. �: m viR i:,ii....i...• S/y,..y.jam .g; ...rr. �pM^e 4t•"`4"' Lee t 11►p•ke4 *Or::#: ;i' i"4 J3s5' . . _L .i — — • trnifk -gSi-'s.o:R:. °.1•'+i.:,:: ::;: :<' :�-?::?�:;;i e:'>S�u:czi:}>}{<:::. 'J..3::.p.,.'L:v:T::££.:?>a •—�.__—.�—— I • £;:'` :err ': `' - 2 ... .- 1 1_. , Y xo:>:��:. ::yy >,� jls� z�:.::y..:, :�.• ':uy� �b�`; ,�_ 1 1 - t- i 'ee sa'?.4 r''''',;' �.' :i'J';•:i. :.t:�'�v.K.:F1 : 01. :,+.�{,..S:Cvrt^4...,:%` 4 oY,n3 is �i:::M:' .iSt~. ,,,.,�iF,..r:.:>. K... .�,,,. RM 1 ,,=..k.. ,. r;. ."::<s s:of� f ate*>'#,..N siG 4tivg :`.«..-:i .,`.}"v`:R+ :»F.:c z,. _i_s__a ( j i .•.:gyp,:.t?+R:,4...L:„i.....,< :?:tye* w',1 -: J. a r... _ :.. - t a t� :i:�::�f:?:%fit%.`:::?"'::+'%iK ..a.. :3�:. t 1 w ilil • e as �« soe •oe ►oo •oe s.e •oe roe else wee V� w s•eaw/ lv•wt Figure 2. Warrant for left-turn s:orage lanes on two-lane highways. r1/